![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
CFR
49p6 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0
12 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - The Suicide Caucus · 0 replies · +2 points
You need to take some time and read Chris Jacobs excellent piece titled "Defunding Obamacare: The Next Best Option". The commentary can be found at Heritage . org. One of you is much less correct than the other on this topic. Of course you always have the less than principled conservatives on your side.
12 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Where Is Marco Rubio? · 0 replies · +2 points
Neither of Rubio's parents were US citizens at the time of Rubio's birth. In 1875 the Supreme Court in the Minor v. Happersett case defined a natural born citizen as a person born in the US and both parents were US citizens at the time of birth. The precedent established by the Minor v. Happersett finding exist today.
CFR
12 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Rubio, Ryan and the Ex... · 0 replies · +2 points
This is the same 700 miles of fencing that Congress has promised more than once in the past. As of today it has not yet been delivered.
How many times do you believe Congress will try to sell this fence to an unbelieving public?
CFR
12 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - Immigration Foes Donâ€... · 0 replies · +10 points
I would not put too much confidence in the CBO report. Are you familiar with the continuously changing CBO reports concerning the cost of Obamacare; hardly a confidence builder.
Besides this CBO estimate does not include any of the costs that the states have to bear. States incur immigrate related costs in the following areas: medical and hospital, safety and law enforcement, education, housing and welfare. These costs add up to a lot of money for the states each year.
CFR
13 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - The Complicated Questi... · 0 replies · 0 points
In 1875, the US Supreme Court in Minor v. Happersett decided in a precedent setting decision that for a citizen to be a natural born citizen, as required by Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, that person must have been born in the US and both parents must have been US citizens at the time of birth.
Thus Cruz is not eligible to hold the office of POTUS. For that matter neither is Obama. (Who the heck cares where he was born.) Obama acknowledges that his father was BHO Sr., a British subject. Obama, Jr. was born a British subject and does not meet the natural born citizen requirement of the Constitution.
CFR
13 years ago @ Commentary Magazine - The Ted Cruz Political... · 0 replies · +1 points
According to E. Vattel (The Law of Nations) and the US Supreme Court's precedent setting decision in Minor v. Happersett (1875) neither Cruz or Rubio or Jindal are eligible to hold the office of POTUS (Article 2, Section 1, Caluse 5 - Natural Born Citizen). Cruz was not born in the US. Neither of Rubio's or Jindal's parents were US citizens at the time of their birth.
This is at least the second post from Tobin suggesting that one of the three might be a Republican candidate for President in 2016. One has to wonder what his game is?
CFR
Invention