Read some of the meltdown in Freeperland! It's delicious.

[Kennah]

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3079928/posts

"Today brought me to a point I NEVER thought I would reach: I will vote democrat before I vote for a GOP not in the mold of Ted Cruz."

"We will make sure that every progressive republican is challenged and defeated."

"Let's create our own, then. Third party seems to be the way to go."

"Yes, I WILL knowingly vote for a dem, specifically to PUNISH a RINO - don't doubt that, and don't you dare doubt my loyalty to the conservative cause!"

[Skittles]

1. "progressive republican"

WE ONLY SUPPORT REGRESSIVE REPUBLICANS, BY GAWD

[uponit7771]

24. +1

[roamer65]

43. There is no such thing anymore...lol.

A "progressive republican" is today's DLC democrat.

[dchill]

57. That there oxy-moran just set off...

a screechingly discordant clanging in my head. It does not grok.

[Skittles]

64. I WILL GROK YOUR SCREECHINGLY DISCORDANT ASS

YES INDEED

[BluegrassStateBlues]

2. I, for one, welcome our new conservative underlords. nt

[freshwest]

8. Oooh, that took a while to sink in. Good one.

[Auntie Bush]

38. I look at that wave over and over trying to decide if he gets wiped out. I've decided

he survives and keeps going. Right?

[freshwest]

39. Yep, just surfing. It's amazing what they can do. And PBO can body surf, that's really something.

The surfer is in what some call the curl, constantly moving ahead and alert. That gif relaxes me.

[LongTomH]

21. Mmmmmmm.....DUuuzzzyyyy!!!!!!

[Amonester]

3. Watch just a few of the absolute damages their crazy lunacy causes to small businesses here (vid)

Report: Republican Shutdown Shuttered Businesses Permanently - Ted Cruz Tea Party Hero???

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017152460


Their "Zero" Just Inflated his bank account, while he and his crazies extorted $24 Billion from taxpayers for their other lunatic shutdown.

[Agnosticsherbet]

4. Teddy Roosevelt was the last Progressive Republican....

I had no idea he was still serving.

Herbert Hoover ran as a Progressive.

I had no idea he was still serving.

Who are these Progressive Republicans? I mean, they must be some kind of endangered fucking species.

[denbot]

5. Nom nom nom, their tears, they are so sweet, like angel honey..

[IMG][/IMG]

[Zorra]

6. They'll never even know that DU has infiltrated them deeper than

the FBI has infiltrated their neo-nazi kinfolk!

[freshwest]

7. That's some pretty batshit stuff there. Wanting a reactionary revolution, huh...

[Cha]

9. Oh, yeah.. you all got that right.. ted cruz is definitely

the way to go.

[Douglas Carpenter]

10. "They might as well merge like the Communists and Socialists merged to form the “Socialist Unity

Party” in the former East Germany."

So I guess some of them don't see any difference between the two parties either.

[Freddie]

14. They don't

"Given a choice between Democrat-Lite and Democrat, the real Democrat will always win"
I tried reading all 200+ comments in that thread...whew. "So you won't vote for the New Jersey Blimp either?" I have hope for this country now.

[Erose999]

69. Ah yes, the dreaded CommieNazis.

[joshcryer]

11. Please. GOD. PLEASE. Let them pick Cruz.

PLEASE. Holy shit PLEASE.

[nxylas]

15. This is the scenario I'd like to see

Last edited Fri Oct 18, 2013, 03:25 AM - Edit history (1)

Cruz runs for President. The State Department objects on the grounds that he was born in Canada. Cruz, as a publicity stunt, produces an obviously fake American birth certificate, which his good ol' boy supporters think is a real funny joke, cuz, y'know, that's exactly what the Kenyan Muslin Socialist did. Then the State Department disqualifies him from running because it has to be a real US birth certificate, like the one President Obama showed them. Cue wailing and gnashing of teeth from teabaggers about how the State Department is overrun with leftists.

[jeff47]

18. Minor problem

People born to US citizens are Natural-born US citizens, no matter where they were born. Cruz was born to a US citizen.

[Nevernose]

20. That sure as hell doesn't stop

Obama's birthers

[jeff47]

22. Well, he was born in US territory

The citizenship of his parents isn't relevant.

But he's...you know.....(whispered) black

[Kelvin Mace]

52. Actually...

He was born in the U.S. Hawaii was a state at the time Obama was born.

[IronLionZion]

53. McCain was definitely born in Panama without a doubt

and that seemed legit enough in spite of some question on whether he was born inside the navy base or not.

[Art_from_Ark]

62. From 1903 to 1979, the Panama Canal Zone was considered American territory

so it wouldn't have mattered whether he was born on or off the navy base, as long as he was still in the Zone.

[nxylas]

25. So...Obama would have been eligible even if he *had* been born in Kenya?

Wow, birtherism is even stupider than I thought.

[jeff47]

26. Yep.

The best the birthers have is a claim that Obama's mother wasn't old enough for her son to have citizenship if he was born in Kenya - the law when Obama was born had separate requirements for mothers.

The thing is that law was changed, and the changes were retroactive.

[Jim Lane]

65. Nope.

Although the Constitution doesn't define "natural-born citizen", I think the most obvious interpretation is that the person is a citizen at birth, without regard to subsequent legal actions, be they naturalization proceedings or statutory changes.

If Obama had been born in Kenya, he would not have been eligible. Cruz, however, is eligible, because his mother was old enough under the law in effect at the time of his birth.

Anyway, the whole Obama birtherism thing, never a serious issue to begin with, doesn't even rise to sideshow status now that the courts have rejected all challenges and Congress will not again have the opportunity to consider whether to count electoral votes cast for him. Our main point now should be graciously conceding that Cruz is eligible. Not only is it true, but it's to our advantage. Give us Palin/Cruz at the top of the ticket and the Kochs won't be able to elect a Republican as Third Assistant Dogcatcher.

[jeff47]

66. Double nope.

I think the most obvious interpretation is that the person is a citizen at birth, without regard to subsequent legal actions, be they naturalization proceedings or statutory changes.

You're welcome to your opinion.

But basically it comes down to "not a naturalized citizen". Which Obama would qualify for even if he had been in Kenya.

Cruz, however, is eligible, because his mother was old enough under the law in effect at the time of his birth.

Cruz was born in 1970. The law had already been changed.

[Jim Lane]

67. "Not a naturalized citizen" is not the standard.

If that's what it meant, it would have said so (although as I noted the whole provision isn't a model of clarity in the first place). By your logic, Congress could just change the law now and make Schwarzenegger retroactively eligible. I think his eligibility (or, alas, Jennifer Granholm's) would require a Constitutional amendment.

Some of the birthers try to write their preferences into the Constitution. They've argued that "natural-born citizen" means that the birth was in the United States and that both parents were citizens. The real hard core deny the eligibility of Obama but also that of McCain, Jindal, and Cruz. Frankly, I think your argument does the same thing although in the other direction. You would expand eligibility while they would contract it, but both views are contrary to the actual text.

As for Cruz, I don't think the law was changed between Obama's birth in 1961 and Cruz's birth in 1970. IIRC he and Obama were born under the same laws so the same standards apply. Anyway, the trend over the years (the various changes in the law) was toward liberalizing citizenship at birth, so if there was an intervening change it was probably favorable to Cruz's eligibility.

The whole provision is kind of silly. Why should Granholm be ineligible just because she was born in Canada and came here when she was four years old? Why should someone else be eligible just because his noncitizen mother happened to be in the U.S. when she went into premature labor and delivered at a U.S. hospital? I would just say that to be eligible you must have been a citizen or at least 35 years, to track the age requirement. A reasonable alternative would be to abolish the requirement entirely and figure that the voters can weed out the Manchurian candidates.

[jeff47]

68. "Natural Born Citizen", unless you're a birther

means someone who was born a citizen. And that means a retroactive change in the law can make someone born a citizen.

Arnold can't be made a natural born citizen unless Congress declares all Austrians to be US citizens and makes it retroactive.

As for Cruz, I don't think the law was changed between Obama's birth in 1961 and Cruz's birth in 1970.

Coverage of the incident says the law was changed shortly after Obama's birth, but I really don't care enough to dig it up.

[Jim Lane]

70. I'm not a birther and I have Orly Taitz's disdain to prove it.

On her website she called me a "Marxist thug" based on what I'd written on the subject. I'd give you a link but her site is frequently infected with malware.

I disagree with you about the Constitution. Someone is "born" a citizen if he or she is a citizen at birth. That's the most natural meaning of the phrase; in the absence of any evidence that the Framers intended to include retroactive redefinitions of citizenship, I'd go with the obvious meaning.

I also disagree with you about the statute. You assert that changes were retroactive. I thought that was wrong but didn't get around to looking it up. Now I have -- and it's wrong. What was made retroactive in the 1986 amendment was a proviso that was applicable to members of the armed forces, employees of the United States Government, and employees of certain international organizations. Time spent abroad in one of those capacities counts as time spent in the United States for this purpose, and that method of counting was made retroactive to 1952, but that proviso doesn't affect Obama or Cruz.

The broader view of retroactivity that you rely on may have come from a law professor, Eugene Volokh, who's studied the subject in detail and gave a newspaper interview espousing that view. Thereafter, however, he reread the 1986 statute and concluded that he had been wrong about retroactivity. See his post titled "Correction About Natural-Born Citizen Law".

Anyway, it seems you and I are in agreement that Obama and Cruz are both eligible. We should not dampen the Cruz supporters' ardor by suggesting that they're being inconsistent on the natural-born citizen issue. As to the merits, I don't think they are inconsistent -- they're just wrong about where Obama was born. Furthermore, a Cruz candidacy would be such a boon for the Democrats that we should not want to hinder his campaign for the nomination.

[kestrel91316]

29. There is actually some question as to whether he qualifies. Something about

his mom and her US residency or some form that had to be filed in Canada?

[jeff47]

35. His Mom's age.

The law at the time required the mother to be older for the auto-citizenship-if-not-born-in-US-territory. The law was changed, and that change was retroactive.

Still a moot point since he was born in US territory.

Edit to add: If you were meaning Cruz, the controversy there was Cruz was also a Canadian citizen (dual citizenship, since he was born in Canada). He hadn't renounced his Canadian citizenship, and had to file a form to do so.

[Barack_America]

36. Calgary is US territory?

Please expand on this.

Or are you talking about Obama instead of Cruz?

[jeff47]

37. Talking about Obama. (nt)

[kestrel91316]

48. Cruz was NOT born in US territory. And Canada has not accepted his renouncement of

Canadian citizenship because he has not provided them with the necessary proof that he is unquestionably a US citizen.

That's the story I heard.

[dchill]

59. AFAIK, natural-born US citizenship is NOT a requirement...

for a Republican candidate. In that party, it is a mere quibble. They are from where they SAY they are from.

[kestrel91316]

60. True enough. Their only requirement seems to be the willingness

to put church before country.

[ohheckyeah]

56. "lie the one President Obama showed them"......

you might want to fix that.

[nxylas]

63. Oops

Fixed it now.

[jberryhill]

27. Hey, are you looking for a job as a stenographer?

Have I got an opening for you....

[joshcryer]

45. "God" in that instance was more of a plea...

...as opposed to actually asking God for this.

[nikto]

12. I'm thinkin'...

Palin/Limbaugh
in
2016


Unbeatable combination.

We Liberals would shake in our boots.


And please, don't throw us into that briar patch.

[nikto]

13. FYI...

http://www.fluther.com/73358/what-does-the-expression-dont-throw-me-in-the-briar-patch/

[Maeve]

34. I am pleased to see a folk story reference--sorry it needs explaining

Like a fish asking not to be tossed in that lake to drown...

[nxylas]

16. And then when they lose

"The GOP needs to stop selecting RINOs like McCain, Romney and Palin, and choose a real conservative instead". = all Freepers.

[Laelth]

17. Here's what some of them think of Speaker Boehner:

[img][/img]

Fascinating.

-Laelth

[NuclearDem]

19. Yummy! Yummy tears!

[B Calm]

23. The Republican party is destroyed

[calimary]

33. I wish! Sadly, no. But one can hope!

[Jamaal510]

28. So by RW logic,

voting for Democrats (the less conservative party) will punish Republicans and somehow make them more conservative?
[IMG][/IMG]

[Kennah]

40. If I send $20 to Rimjob at FR, will they promise to follow through with their plan?

[LAGC]

61. That site has done more to help defeat Republicans than MoveOn or any other liberal organization...

For at least the last couple presidential election cycles.

As Obama said during the debates: "Please continue."

[kentuck]

30. Sounds like an incredible victory!

[Initech]

31. Who needs butter? I've got plenty!

[toddwv]

32. Hmmm, new tactic. Let those bottom-feeders turn on the GOP.

They are eating them from the inside anyways...

"Plus we can actively work to destroy the GOP. OMG--I relish that thought almost as much as I would anything else. I salivate typing those very words. I want their entire ruination.

hell, if we are going to lose elections we can, at least, make it fun. How much ore fun would the returns be on election night "

[ballabosh]

41. After the vote passed last night,

I turned on Fox, just to see how they were imploding. Hannity was in head-explode mode. The conservo he had on mentioned that he had spoken to the cameraman before they went live and his (the camerman's) rates were going way up under Obamacare. Hannity ate that up. And I was thinking, "Isn't this camerman a Fox employee?"

Says more about Fox than Obamacare to me.

[Kennah]

42. This one is too good to pass up commenting on

"Although all socialist programs -- such as obamacare -- eventually fail on their own (economic reality will not be denied no matter what the Democrat Socialists say), the process of failure is often slow (back to the boiling frog analogy). So the quickest way to bring the system down is to put the Democrat Socialists in charge for a few election cycles. People -- especially taxpayers -- will sure as hell notice -- and they will notice the changes much more quickly than if we continue on our present course of expecting (hoping and praying is more accurate) RINOs to represent traditional American values and preserve the Constitution."

I'm not aware of any nation that adopted universal healthcare and then abandoned it. [Yes, I know the ACA isn't real universal healthcare, but we're on the road.] It may have happened, if only once, but it's not the norm. NHS UK is 65 years old. This twit probably also wants the government out of his Medicare.

"People -- especially taxpayers" seems to imply the belief that there are those who pay NO taxes. Well, I guess the homeless don't pay any taxes. Might be someone living in the woods in a state with no sales tax who manages to avoid paying any taxes. This is definitely a very small number of people.

Elect Democratic Socialists and notice the change? OK, you're proposal is accepted.

[Liberal_in_LA]

44. lol

[TeamPooka]

46. But they will all vote for a Bush again if you gave them a chance. nt

[NYC_SKP]

47. Some are calling for armed insurrection:

To: INVAR; Absolutely Nobama; Jack Hydrazine; Jeff Head; EternalVigilance; dfwgator; riri; gitmo; ...
INVAR gets it. Others of you get it. Nobama is getting it, he's just been mugged.

I've said this and more, on plenty other threads.

The time of the ballot box is over. So many people still cling to the quaint belief that everything will be restored to sunshine and candy skies, if we just get "our people" selected in the next cycle. When election fraud and voter intimidation on a national scale goes unchallenged, the defrauded party is only two things: either unable to fight, or unwilling.

The time of the mail box and the soap box is also over. Do people honestly think that letters to their selected officials get read? Or that email rants are read? As Heinlein observed, "What right does a drowning man have in the middle of the sea? The ocean will not hearken to his cries." FReeps and protests make for good copy and great pics, but it's all kabuki theater. Your voice will not be heard through the doors of power.

The time of the jury box has had its last hurrah. The Zimmerman Trial was an aberration, a fluke. What redress do you think the black-robed priests will offer you? One intimidated judge declared that Odinga found a loophole in the Constitution and helped tip this nation over the precipice.

That leaves only one box left.

Get yours, while there's still time. You are up against a political ideology, foreign to these shores and alien to the good of Mankind, who have demonstrated they have more backbone and resolve than you do. As Chuckie Schumer said, "We're united, you're not."

They are willing to weaponize a segment of the population against you, and the merest threat of that weapon has already changed the course of two elections and this last (and probably final) attempt to stop Odingacare. This conflict within our borders can only be resolved "by other means".
164 posted on Thu Oct 17 05:17:01 2013 by Old Sarge (And Good Evening, Agent Smith, wherever you are...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

[MFrohike]

49. Article 3, Section 3

What else needs to be said?

[NYC_SKP]

50. I'll be a witness if you'll be a witness.

It only takes two, or a confession.

[MFrohike]

54. Deal

Granted, I figure they're too busy playing internet revolutionary to bother, but I have no problem doing it. I just wonder if they have any clue what it means to "pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor." Whenever I think about what it means, that's a pretty terrifying commitment. I just don't see a bunch of deluded whiners finding that kind of dedication.

[Nevernose]

55. Wow,they brought up two of my favorites

"Election fraud and voter intimidation."

When literally the only election fraud caught in 2008 was either Republicans trying to cheat, or a couple of nonagenarians who were confused.

And the entire extent of the the voter intimidation is ONE picture of a black guy in Philly.

[nyquil_man]

51. Of course they want a party in the Ted Cruz mold.

They're too scared to actually govern. Every time they've tried, they've failed miserably.

[dchill]

58. "We control government funduing and...

we are going to exercise that control."

Does that involve melty-cheese and long Forky things? If so, let's go!!!