The Great Freeper Birther Purge of 2013 is still going on over at Free Republic. The forum owner, Jim Robinson has decreed that Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen and eligible for the presidency. He has put up another post, his second so far, about the issue. This latest one, cited to the Dallas Morning News, adds no new scholarship to the conversation.
Is he a natural-born citizen or isn’t he? The question has been a nagging part of Barack Obama’s life ever since his first presidential campaign. No amount of birth certificates and sworn statements from state officials in Hawaii, his birthplace, seemed capable of putting the issue to rest. The “birther” movement continues pressing the question even today, five years after Obama’s election to the presidency.
The question nags anew, but this time Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz is the focus because he was born in Canada to an American mother and Cuban father. By law, his mother’s U.S. citizenship automatically confers natural citizenship to Cruz, just as — for those who continue to doubt the location of Obama’s birth — the citizenship of Obama’s American mother conferred it to him.
This is such a nonissue, regardless of whether the candidate is Republican or Democrat. Nevertheless, narrow-minded individuals, including some prominent personalities such as billionaire former presidential contender Donald Trump, are doggedly trying to concoct controversy and introduce doubt where there should be none.
These men have been natural U.S. citizens from birth and have every right to seek the nation’s highest office. Article II of the Constitution sets out three eligibility requirements to be president: that the person be at least 35 years old, a resident within the United States for 14 years and a “natural-born citizen.”
Robinson is making it clear that the Free Republic birthers had better not latch on to any Ted Cruz threads to spread their quackery. However, Robinson’s position on Obama is still unclear. He does not appear to be too well versed on the whole issue and has just decided to accept Mark Levin and Ted Cruz’s assurances. However, Robinson did make this comment, at number 103:
Of course I believe in the constitution. Cruz was born to a qualified American mother while temporarily working in Canada. He meets all the legal requirements. Don’t know if that same standard can apply to Obama (if he was not born in the US). His mother does not qualify (according to some of the posts on these threads).
103 posted on Monday, September 02, 2013 9:14:12 PM by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
And, by way of update, he made this comment at 35:
That’s true, but they are leftists.
And unfortunately, there are lots of folks who have too much invested emotionally in Obama’s ineligibility, that they’re afraid Cruz will destroy their case. But I don’t know. As they’re pointing out on this very thread, Ann Dunham was not old enough at Obama’s birth to satisfy the law. [if Obama was born outside the country.]
35 posted on Monday, September 02, 2013 7:16:33 PM by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
And, on a different thread, at comment #94:
Conservatives to Cruz: ‘Run, Ted, run’
Monday, September 02, 2013 12:15:45 PM 94 of 275
Jim Robinson to Col Freeper
I suspect some posters don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to the actual law and the constitution but they have so much invested emotionally in the crackpot birther conspiracy theory that they’re caught in a trap of their own making. Gonna have to chew their own leg off to get free.
I am still waiting to see if he ever fully addresses the last five years of the Freeper Birthers dissembling about the need for Obama to have two citizen parents. It seems too much to just sweep under the rug. If Cruz decides to run, the question of his citizenship is certainly going to come up. Mario Apuzzo, Esq. is certainly not going to let go of the issue. Nor will CDR Kerchner. How much credibility is Jim Robinson and Free Republic going to have in that battle with other conservative types?
Probably none. Walter Scott provided the reason why in his poem, Marmion:
Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive!
Note 1. The Image. This is from the B.C. comic strip by Johnny Hart. My father used to have a lot of his paperback books, including The Wizard of Id. I loved them! Here is the original strip before I did my thing to it:
Note 2. Marmion. I never read the poem, but it sounds like a real drama-fest. Wiki says,
Marmion is an epic poem by Walter Scott about the Battle of Flodden Field (1513). It was published in 1808.
Scott started writing Marmion, his second major work, in November 1806. When Archibald Constable, the publisher, learnt of this, he offered a thousand guineas for the copyright unseen. William Miller and John Murray each agreed to take a 25% share in the project. Murray observed: “We both view it as honourable, profitable, and glorious to be concerned in the publication of a new poem by Walter Scott.” Scott later said that he thoroughly enjoyed writing the work. He told his son-in-law, Lockhart, “Oh, man, I had many a grand gallop among these braes when I was thinking of Marmion.”
In 1807 Scott practised manoeuvres with the Light Horse Volunteers (formed to defend an invasion from France) in order to polish his description of Flodden. Marmion was finished on January 22 and published on 22 February 1808 in a quarto first edition of two thousand copies. This edition, priced one and a half guineas, sold out in a month. It was followed by twelve octavo editions between 1808 and 1825.
The poem tells how Lord Marmion, a favourite of Henry VIII of England, lusts for Clara de Clare, a rich woman. He and his mistress, Constance De Beverley, forge a letter implicating Clara’s fiancé, Sir Ralph De Wilton, in treason. Constance, a dishonest nun, hopes that her aid will restore her to favour with Marmion. When De Wilton loses the duel he claims in order to defend his honour against Marmion, he is obliged to go into exile. Clara retires to a convent rather than risk Marmion’s attentions.
Constance’s hopes of a reconciliation with Marmion are dashed when he abandons her; she ends up being walled up alive in the Lindisfarne convent for breaking her vows. She takes her revenge by giving the Abbess who is one of her three judges documents that prove De Wilton’s innocence. De Wilton, having returned disguised as a pilgrim, follows Marmion to Edinburgh where he meets the Abbess, who gives him the exonerating documents. When Marmion’s host, the Earl of Angus is shown the documents, he arms De Wilton and accepts him as a knight again. De Wilton’s plans for revenge are overturned by the battle of Flodden Field. Marmion dies on the battlefield, while De Wilton displays heroism, regains his honour, retrieves his lands, and marries Clara.