|
nChrist
|
 |
« on: January 07, 2016, 06:06:52 PM » |
|
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 1-7-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________
Daily Digest
Jan. 7, 2016
THE FOUNDATION
“I suppose, indeed, that in public life, a man whose political principles have any decided character and who has energy enough to give them effect must always expect to encounter political hostility from those of adverse principles.” —Thomas Jefferson, 1808
FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
Is Ted Cruz Eligible to Be President?1
By Allyne Caan
If you thought the end of Barack Obama’s presidency would (thankfully) mark the end of controversy of a politician’s birthplace, think again. Thanks to Donald Trump, the issue has returned, though this time with a bull’s eye on Ted Cruz — not coincidentally one of Trump’s most formidable primary opponents.
Cruz was born in 1970 in Canada to a U.S. citizen mother. The Constitution requires that the president be a “natural born” citizen of the United States, and Trump suggested Cruz’s Canadian birthplace might imperil his presidential eligibility — or at least he suggested that other people might suggest it. Perish the thought.
Trump claimed2 Cruz’s birthplace was a “very precarious” issue that could be detrimental to Cruz should he cinch the nomination. “Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’ That’d be a big problem,” said Trump. He added that “a lot of people are talking about it,” and that he’d “hate to see something like that get in his way.” Yes, we’re sure he would simply hate that.
But is there any validity to Trump’s “concern”? In a word, no.
The Congressional Research Service, the arm of the Library of Congress which for more than a century has been tasked with providing (allegedly) non-partisan research and legal analysis to members of Congress, has described3 a “natural born” citizen as one who is a citizen “at birth” or “by birth,” as opposed to a “naturalized” citizen. According to the U.S. Code4, those who are citizens at birth include “a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.” Cruz’s mother was born and raised in Delaware and attended college in Texas, more than fulfilling this requirement.
Furthermore, Neal Katyal and Paul Clement wrote5 for Harvard Law Review last year, “Despite the happenstance of a birth across the border, there is no question that Senator Cruz has been a citizen from birth and is thus a ‘natural born Citizen’ within the meaning of the Constitution.” The pair liken the case to that of John McCain, who “was born outside the United States on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone to a U.S. citizen parent,” as well as Sen. Barry Goldwater and Gov. George Romney, who each ran for president without problems regarding their places of birth.
In short, despite Trump’s musings, Cruz is constitutionally and by statute eligible for the nation’s top elected office.
Still, it’s not surprising that Trump has summoned the ghosts of eligibility to haunt the campaign trail — conveniently blaming “other people” for raising the topic. What better way to stir up doubt among Cruz supporters in the weeks leading up to Iowa — where by the way Trump trails Cruz6 — than to use the Left’s typical tactic of passive aggressively wondering, “Nice candidacy you’ve got there; shame if anything happened to it.”
Indeed, although Trump still leads most polls, in Iowa as well as in delegate-dense California, Cruz is in front. For a campaign that’s big on splash and much smaller on substance, going after the birth issue is only par for the course.
It’s worth noting that Trump seems to be following7 the same political playbook as Obama, using radical leftist tactics drawn from Saul Alinsky for his own political gain. Suggesting Cruz’s ineligibility for the presidency, for example, aims to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty among the “enemy” — Alinsky’s third rule. Throw a grenade and watch the scramble.
In truth, Trump’s raising the citizenship issue says more about where his own campaign is heading than it does about Cruz’s eligibility. Next thing you know, Trump will be challenging the validity of the Constitution itself. Oh wait, he already has8.
Footnote: In addition to all the above considerations for Cruz’s citizenship, those of us who hold the life of unborn children sacred believe they have citizenship standing as well.
TOP RIGHT HOOKS
ObamaCare’s Impact on The Patriot Post9
In a 240-181 vote10, the House passed a reconciliation bill repealing ObamaCare and defunding Planned Parenthood, sending a bill that would defund Barack Obama’s signature legislation to his desk. Although this is the first time such a measure passed both chambers, Republicans in the House voted 50 times in the past to repeal ObamaCare. This bill faces certain veto, but it’s still a victory for Republicans, as it forces Obama to issue a veto days before his final State of the Union Address. Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) told reporters, “Any time that you make someone in elected office take a stance, it’s extremely valuable because the American people don’t watch too much until then. So [Obama] will absolutely say, ‘I refuse to understand that you as Americans are hurting because of this bill, that you’re losing your jobs, some of you have been cut back to part time … many of you now have lost the insurance that you’ve spent decades preparing for your family, and I, as the president of the United States, am going to tell you forget it, I’m going to veto it.’ I think that’s extraordinarily valuable in the political circumstances.”
Take The Patriot Post for an example of how ObamaCare is affecting small businesses. We just completed our year-end financial review and part of that was to see, again, that our health insurance premiums increased a whopping 25% last year — and that’s for a group of healthy professionals whose average age is a tick under 40. Next, the GOP must move beyond the critique of ObamaCare and work on a replacement11 to the health care boondoggle. Finally, after years of criticism, we’ll see just how well the Republican Party can lead by promoting policies steeped in conservative values.
NRA Declines Debate With Obama12
The question is this: Can the Second Amendment hold up before a freewheeling and possibly rigged debate? Should a defender of Liberty enter a situation where he or she is unfairly targeted and present their ideas to a potentially hostile audience, hopefully winning some over? While we believe that the truth ultimately prevails, the National Rifle Association declined to send a spokesman to defend its views on firearms to Barack Obama’s face. CNN is scheduled to hold a town hall event with the chief executive to talk about the issue of “gun violence” in Virginia Thursday night. But as the NRA told the network13 through its spokesman Andrew Arulanandam, “The National Rifle Association sees no reason to participate in a public relations spectacle orchestrated by the White House.” They’re absolutely right about Obama’s intentions, but perhaps this was also a jab at CNN, which regularly carries water for the administration. But in a way it’s a lost opportunity. Now, more than ever, Americans need to hear that owning a firearm is not only not bad, but good. It’s participating in American government. |
