Bernardo de La Paz
Bernardo de La Paz's JournalYes. Cruz was not natural born, but was naturalized instantly at birth by his mother's citizenship.
It's an odd quirk of US citizenship law.
If you are born on US soil (regardless of parentage), you are "natural born" and a US citizen that way and eligible for the Presidency.
If you are born off US soil to a US citizen parent, you are "naturalized" a citizen at birth by that fact, but not natural born and thus ineligible.
If you are born off US soil to no US citizen parent, but immigrate into the US and fulfill legal obligations such as period of residency, then you become "naturalized by law" and also ineligible.
In McCain's case, he was born on US soil (Panama Canal Zone at the time) and thus natural born and eligible.
Obama was born on US soil in Hawaii and obviously eligible.
George Romney (Mitt's parent) was naturalized at birth in Mexico City and thus ineligible but nobody raised the issue at the time and his failed presidential campaign made the issue moot.
Ted Cruz is naturalized but not natural born. Ted Cruz is ineligible for the Presidency.
Rubio was natural born on US soil. He is eligible.
Yup. Most of conservative base is Authoritarian Follower, fearful, & seeks affirmation, not reality
[font color="blue" size = "+1"]Does the future Threaten You, or does the future Thrill You?[/font]
If you are fearful of muslims, fearful of change, fearful of "losing", fearful of old white America disappearing, then you are likely a member of the Republican / Tea / Conservative base.
The authoritarian mindset includes the follower mind set, which may mouth stuff about the Constitution, but basically likes to follow a strong-man, and likes having one state religion (christian fundamentalist / evangelical) to follow. This is why you see Trump followers often expressing admiration for Putin, for example. Their base warps the Constitution so they believe it advocates christianity over everything else and thus they see a "war on christmas / christians" all around them.
The conservative mindset seeks simple solutions. It is more likely to indulge in binary thinking, boiling down complex issues to yes/no answers. Republicans are famous for saying "We don't do nuance". Hence the appeal of Trump's blustery over-the-top nonsense like building a wall and making the Mexicans pay for it. They think that simplistic stuff like putting "god" into the Pledge of Allegiance and (christian) prayer back in schools will solve lots of problems.
Both bases profess admiration for the truth, but the conservative base seeks evidence to shore up / buttress their world view / narrative and writes off conflicting evidence: witness the success the Kochs et al have had pushing the "man-made global warming is a hoax".
The progressive / scientific mindset takes the opposite approach and seeks evidence to destroy its theories so that any theories that survive are stronger. Thus, for example, in the US, non-christians and atheists often know more about the bible and christianity than christians. Progressives are more likely to read rightwing sites occasionally than RW are to read progressive sites occasionally.
The Republicans sell fear. Hence they heighten the sense of America surrounded by enemies (build a wall, see Russia from front porch, muslim invaders, etc.) and amp up war fever (even calling them crusades). They whip up fear of immigrants stealing jobs. They build on fear of change by harkening back to the past: TheRump's "Make America Great Again" (note the "again" which is all important to the base) and Rubio's "Morning in America Again" ad.
If you are thrilled by diversity, thrilled by new developments in tech / arts, optimistic about winning in new ways, thrilled by multiculturalism, then you are likely a member of the Democratic / Progressive / Liberal base.
The United States is basically, and always has been, forward looking and progressive. That's how Obama won big with Hope and Change.
Profile Information
Gender: Do not displayMember since: Fri Jul 16, 2004, 11:36 PM
Number of posts: 48,999