Ted Cruzs Ambitions are Not Right for America.

Ted Cruz Decides to Run for President
– Two Constitutional Wrongs don't make the Texas Senator’s Presidential Aspirations Right for America.

Two Constitutional Wrongs Don’t Make One Constitutional Right!

By Scott Rohter, March 2015

“Ambition is a tricky little animal to tame. It is very skillful at concealing itself from its master.” – Thomas Jefferson

“Just because the government makes something legal doesn’t make it right!”  - Unknown

The law and the Constitution are two quite different things really. Our sixth President, John Quincy Adams had this to say on the subject… “The law is an artificial human construct, quite arbitrary, and of absolutely no use anywhere else but in a court of law”…  He also said this,“Our Constitution rests upon the good sense and the respect of the American people.” - John Quincy Adams 

What he means is this… If we have no respect for the Constitution and for the Original Intent of the Founding Fathers who signed it then the cornerstone of America ‘s representative democracy is of no significance anymore in contemporary American politics. That would be the death knell for our Constitutional Republic…. Consider this. Almost seven years after  moving into the White House our current President still has serious unanswered questions regarding his constitutional eligibility to even be our 44th President, but now a freshman Republican Senator from Texas named Ted Cruz is similarly being prepared for a run at the White House in 2016. Prepared by whom?  Well that’s the problem. We just don’t know yet, but here is Ted Cruz position on fast-tracking the Trans Pacific Partnership for Barack Obama.  In this bill there is a backdoor way to flood America with more illegal immigrant migrant workers similar to the  process by which migrant workers are free to flow between the countries of the European Union. It sounds to me like the brilliant lawyer who graduated cum laude from Harvard is either poorly informed about the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal or else Ted Cruz is just shilling for the same big business interests that the Clinton’s and the Obama’s are shilling for.

Ted Cruz has been positioning himself to be our 45th President ever since he arrived in Washington a little over a year ago. The paint on his Senate office walls had barely even dried before the junior Republican Senator from Texas was putting himself before the T.V. cameras and all over the news playing up to the conservative base of the Republican Party. He has just declared his intention to run for the Republican Presidential nomination in 2016. I think this is a bad idea and I want to be one of the first to say why. In a word his candidacy  is going to be divisive. It will split the conservatives over the question of his eligibility to be our next President since he was not born in the United States. He was born in Canada, and his candidacy will only further split the conservative vote between him and Rand Paul and Marco Rubio and Scott Walker and it will allow Jeb Bush to win the Republican nomination.  Ted Cruz’s bid to become America’s next President is not constitutionally permissible. Therefore his campaign for the nomination and his presidential ambitions are not right for America.

James Madison

The principle architect of the Constitution and America’s fourth President, James Madison said this, “Freedom has more often been lost in small steps by progressive incrementalism than it has been lost by catastrophic upheavals such as violence or war.”

Having said that I would like to point out that Ted Cruz makes a wonderful Senator and he should stay right there and try to become the next Senate Majority Leader. What is so wrong with that? I applaud all of his efforts in the United States Senate. If I lived in Texas I would have voted for him in his successful campaign to defeat Lieutenant Governor David Dewhurst and become the junior Senator from Texas.  I would vote for him a thousand times for Senator but I will not vote for him even once in his attempt to become America’s 45th President. He is just as constitutionally unqualified to be our next President as Barack Obama is and for exactly the same reason.  Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the Constitution says that in order to be our President one must be a natural born citizen of the United States. It doesn’t actually say “the United States”, but we all know what it means. By the same token the Constitution doesn’t actually say what a natural born citizen is. There is no definition of the term given in the Constitution, but we know what it means.  The Founding Fathers referred to Vattel’s treatise… THE LAW OF NATIONS.  The Founding Fathers understood a natural born citizen to be someone who is born in the United States and whose parents are American citizens. In addition to being born in Canada, Ted Cruz’s parents were not both American citizens at the time of his birth. That is why Ted Cruz is not constitutionally qualified to be our President. His parents were not both Americans at the time of his birth. That is the same reason Barack Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be our President .

We are a Constitutional Republic and without respect and adherence to the Constitution upon which our country is founded we will remain neither. Ted Cruz was born in Canada and his father was a refugee from Castro’s Cuba who immigrated to Canada in 1957. Ted’s father was not an American citizen at the time of his son’s birth. He was a Cuban, Canadian, or both. In fact Raphael Cruz just became a naturalized American citizen in 2005 when Ted was 35 years old. Between 1957 and 2005 he was either a Cuban, Canadian or both. Furthermore Ted Cruz just renounced his own Canadian citizenship last year in 2014 at the age of 44 in order to run for President.  That is pretty convenient, don’t you think?

Well you can change your citizenship on paper but you can never change your actual place of birth.. Ted Cruz was born in Canada. He can be anything he wants to except the President of the United States. He is a natural born Canadian and he will always remain a natural born Canadian who became an American citizen much later in his life, and then finally at the age of 44 he renounced his Canadian citizenship in order to run for President.  That sounds pretty self-serving to me. Why did it take Ted Cruz so long to give up his Canadian citizenship? We will never know, but Ted Cruz will never be a natural born American and two constitutional wrongs don’t make his presidential ambitions right for America. If Barack Obama was constitutionally ineligible to be President than Ted Cruz is constitutionally ineligible as well. It is precisely because of his birthplace and because of his father’s Canadian citizenship that Ted Cruz is not a “natural born citizen of the United States”.  

John McCain

Ted Cruz supporters frequently argue that the consensus among most legal scholars and so called “constitutional experts” is that he is eligible to be President. That is simply not true. Here is proof positive that the majority of members of Congress from both political Parties know that if you were born in a foreign country than you are not a natural born citizen of the United States and you are not in fact eligible to be President. Here is the proof that our elected leaders know that Ted Cruz is not eligible to run for the highest office in the land. The proof is found in a little known Senate Resolution SR 511 passed by Congress in 2008 which conferred upon John McCain (who was born at a hospital in Panama outside of the actual Canal Zone) all the rights of natural born citizenship so he could run for President. If he didn’t need to be born in America in order to run for the office of President than why did it take a special Act of Congress to make him eligible to run? This is the proof that Canadian born Ted Cruz is ineligible to be your President… and it also proves that members of Congress know it. One interesting side note of this special Senate Resolution conferring upon John McCain all the rights of natural born citizenship is that one of its principle sponsors was the current President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama.

There has been a long standing argument in America about what it means to be a “natural born citizen”. This phrase is used only once in the Constitution. It is used only when it comes to the qualifications for the office of President. It is not used anywhere else in the entire Constitution. It is not mentioned when it comes to the qualifications to be a member of the House of Representatives or the Senate. The phrase “natural born citizen” is unique to the qualifications for the office of the Presidency and as such it should be handled with extreme care. It should not be bandied about with irreverence like the Democrats did in 2008 by nominating Barack Obama and like some Republicans are willing to do right now by supporting Ted Cruz in the Republican Presidential Primary. I prefer to understand the phrase “natural born citizen” it in the strictest sense of the term, not in the loosest sense of the term or in the least restrictive way possible.

I will always support Ted Cruz as a United States Senator but I am opposed to him running for President. My position does not depend on which side is right in the long running debate over the meaning of the phrase, “natural born citizen”. It does not even depend on Emerich de Vattel ‘s treatise The Law of Nations which was used as reference material by our Nation’s Founding Fathers. I  believe that the definition of a Natural Born Citizen is a gray area of constitutional law that may never be definitively settled as long as people are free to think differently. The Supreme Court of the United States said as much in 1875 in a case called Minor v. Happersett. In their decision the Court issued the following opinion, “It was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens the children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first class. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient for everything we have now to consider that all children born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction are themselves citizens.”

Since that opinion was issued by the Supreme Court in 1875 modern day law and those who practice it have been hard at work trying to undermine the Constitution and the idea of Original Intent. Some Universities don’t even bother teach a course on Constitutional law. In any case it would be correct to say that modern day law and lawyers are no friends of the Constitution or of Original Intent.. Chief among the transgressors would be Harvard followed by Princeton and Yale.

Just because the Democrats played foot loose and fancy free with the Constitution in 2008 when they nominated Barack Obama, it doesn’t mean that the Republican Party should do the same thing with Ted Cruz in 2016.  Just because the Democrats nominated someone who had a Kenyan father doesn’t mean that the Republicans can nominate someone who was born in Canada who had a Cuban/Canadian father. Two wrongs don’t make a right. The debate about Ted Cruz qualifications to be our next President is not about his resume, his loyalty, or his conservative credentials. This debate is about the next foreign born national who wants to be the President of the United States whose father or uncle might be the President of Iran or whose brother in law could be the King of Saudi Arabia because we have opened the door and established a legal precedent for that to happen.

In light of the Obama Administration’s recent nuclear negotiations with Iran let me point out that there would be no legal way to prevent the Iranian born son of an American mother and the President of Iran… or the Saudi born son of an American mother and a royal Saudi prince from becoming the President of the United States if we don’t slam the door shut on anymore foreign born nationals and the children of foreign born nationals from becoming President. If all you need to be the President of the United States is just one American parent then something like that could happen. It isn’t  idle speculation. We have never been more at risk in our nation’s history. We can’t do much about Barack Obama right now, but we can stop the slide down this slippery slope by stopping Ted Cruz. It is much easier to stop Ted Cruz from becoming President than it is going to be to undo everything that Barack Obama has been able to accomplish as President in the last eight years.

FACT: The wife of King Hussein of Jordan (now deceased) is Queen Noor. She is an American by birth… If Barack Obama and Ted Cruz are both eligible to be President and if all it takes to be President of the United States is just one American parent then by what legal means could you prevent Queen Noor’s Jordanian born children from running for President if they wanted to?  She has four children.

It’s really quite  simple. Ted Cruz was born in Canada and his father was either Cuban, Canadian, or both. Ted Cruz is not a natural born citizen of the United States and neither is Barack Obama. We must stop interpreting the Constitution liberally and start interpreting it literally, the way that it was meant to be understood. A natural born citizen is someone who was born in America to American parents. That is what Vattel said in his treatise, The Law of Nations. That is what the Founding Fathers understood to mean. That is what the early Supreme Court ruled in their Minor v Happersett opinion in 1875, and that is precisely what it should still mean today.

We are a Constitutional Republic and without respect and adherence to the Constitution upon which our country is founded we will remain neither. Ted Cruz’s father was not an American citizen at the time of his birth.. He was a Cuban, Canadian, or both. In fact Raphael Cruz just became a naturalized American citizen in 2005 when Ted was 35 years old. Furthermore Ted Cruz just renounced his Canadian citizenship last year in 2014 at the age of 44 in order to run for President.

John Ellis Bush (Jeb)

I have heard the argument that anyone who doesn’t support Ted Cruz in his attempt to become America’s next President is buying right into the liberal’s agenda. That is not true. On the contrary, the progressives in the Republican Party are actually very happy that Ted Cruz has thrown his political hat into the ring because his candidacy will only divide conservatives over the issue of his eligibility to run and it will further split the conservative vote ensuring that no conservative candidate will get a majority of the votes and thus it will allow Jeb Bush to win the Republican nomination in 2016. Ted Cruz’s campaign for the Republican nomination will prove to be the divisive wedge that allows Bush to win. Even if Cruz never says a single bad word about any of the other candidates in the race his campaign will still be divisive.

Ted Cruz is a good man and a good conservative and he should remain in the United States Senate where he could do an outstanding job. That is where we need him and that is where God has placed him. I hope he will reconsider what he is doing and remain in the Senate so he can become the next Senate Majority Leader one day replacing the aging Mitch McConnell instead of trying to use his newly acquired Senate seat as a spring board to the White House.

My personal opinion is that anyone whose constitutional eligibility is even slightly questionable under Article II Section 1 should not seek the highest office in the land nor trouble the country the way that Barack Obama has done in the last two elections. It only reinforces a precedent for further disregarding the original intent of the Founding Fathers and it imposes a liberal interpretation of the Constitution upon the whole country. I prefer to err on the side of safety when handling something as important as the qualifications for the office of President which cannot be definitively  agreed upon one way or the other. I would also like to point out that modern day law and lawyers as a rule are no friends of the Constitution or of the concept of Original Intent. Most legal decisions concerning the Constitution since it was ratified in 1789 have sought to water down the original intent of the Founding Fathers. As proof of this consider the direct taxation of individuals by the Federal Government, the direct election of Senators, the creation of the Federal Reserve Board, the Patriot Act and the Affordable Care Act which are all violations of the Constitution… yet they are all perfectly legal and they have all been signed into law and upheld by the United States Supreme Court over the years. When descending down a slippery slope it is wise to chose your steps carefully.

Anyone who wants to be the President so bad that he is willing to put our Nation and the Constitution through another test like the one that Barack Obama put us through twice in the last two Presidential elections over his constitutional eligibility to run for that office is not worthy of holding that office no matter how conservative he is… A love and respect for the Constitution is of the utmost importance to me when I make my next choice for President of the United States of America.

HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO;

Cruz manages to get past the primary season with a win. The first problem comes; “will the GOP establishment” go along with the “peoples” choice of the nominee or will they seize control of the convention and force a Jeb Bush nomination because of Cruz’s birth issues? This is a very real issue because even the “Tea Party Constitutional Purest” are questioning whether he can legitimately be President.

Now for the second problem. Let us assume for a moment that Cruz blows past all of the above landmines and actually wins the general election against Hillary. Hillary (and we know what she is like) will no doubt file lawsuits against Cruz’s legitimacy as being Constitutionally legal to be President. This creates an actual “Constitutional Crises” for America. Do we have a President that is even legal? I know what you’re thinking; well heck Ken, we have not a legal one for over 6 years now!

This is different because Obama claimed to be born in America and the media and records (even though they were forged) backed him up. The other issue with that was the McCain was unwilling to challenge him in court. Hillary will not be so polite, particularly because it is widely known that Senator Cruz was actually born in Alberta. This would no doubt cause a legal suite that would end up in the Supreme Court. Then what happens?

If the court ruled that Cruz could not be President, do we have another election? Does Hillary become President because she was 2nd in the vote count? Can you see the can of worms this opens up if Senator Cruz does manage to dodge all those mines and become victorious in his bid?

I honestly believe these are questions that are no doubt going to crop up on the campaign trail.

IGNORANT AMERICAN VOTERS NOW GREATEST THREAT TO AMERICA