Sorry Jeb, We Want Ted

Image Source: New York Post
Image Source: New York Post

As Senator Ted Cruz shrugs off the GOP establishment, some of whom actively, loudly and publicly fought against him this past weekend in his effort (along with others, notably Senators Mike Lee and Jeff Sessions) to force a vote on Obama’s disregard for immigration laws, the mainstream media again offered themselves up on the alter of Elizabeth Warren, who will likely be the presidential candidate for the socialist Democrat party.

In the meantime, Jeb Bush is positioning himself to run for president. The CBS affiliate in Washington reported Monday that Bush believes he would be a “good president.” The comments at the article say it all. At the time of this writing, not one positive comment was posted. Most of the comments indicate their distrust with the mainstream media and the establishment GOP.

“Here comes another presidential election where the corrupt MSM will work along with the corrupt DC establishment…” one commenter writes. Another laments, “We need a straight-talker who can out-shout the entire big media establishment and progressive influencers and speak directly to the people about rebuilding the country.” Still another asserts, “Another moderate republican? No thanks. They have done enough damage to the country along with the democrats…” This sentiment repeats itself over and over again.

It is clear that the unpopular GOP establishment is actively thwarting the efforts of those who are genuinely interested in restoring a limited government as envisioned by America’s founding fathers, despite the fact that Americans have been consistently saying that they believe government has gotten too big. In a very real way, the so-called “RINOs” are even more frightening then the socialist Democrat party, with their big government, nanny state promoting, race-baiting, identity politicking and social engineering ways.

At least Americans know the Democrats put party over principle.

Jeb Bush, an advocate of Common Core, who evidently met with the unpopular John McCain to strategize about how to run for President “without pandering to the party’s conservative base,” is a carbon copy of George W. Bush, who added trillions to the national debt. It should be noted that President Obama added an additional 70 percent to the national debt. President Obama once called Bush’s contribution to the national debt “unpatriotic.” President Obama voted against a raise in the debt ceiling in 2006, along with Harry Reid.

It is always infuriating when the federal government squanders tax-payer money. This unsustainable rate of spending is gross negligence and this author would say, treasonous.

More on Jeb Bush here, and the author will leave you with a speech Ted Cruz gave on the Senate floor on Friday, along with Jeb Bush’s declaration that illegal immigration is “an act of love.”

This article has been cross-posted at Broadside News.


Author: Admin

Related Articles

5 thoughts on “Sorry Jeb, We Want Ted

  1. Sorry, Ted is not a Natural Born Citizen (Vattel’s Laws of Nations, book 1 section 212)and is not able to be President.

  2. Ted Cruz is NOT a United States Natural Born Citizen and like Obama, would be just another USURPER to the Presidency of the United States in LAWLESS Defiance to the Constitution! What the hell is wrong with you illiterates? You look for “rock star” personalities, and would demand an Adolf Hitler II if he could wrap himself in an American Flag, and say, “I will save you!”, as you refuse to look into who and what he is, and what the law is.

    “No Person except a Natural Born Citizen…shall be eligible to the Office of President….”
    US Constitution: Article 2, section 1, Clause 5

    “…the term ‘natural born citizen’ is used and excludes all persons owing allegiance by birth to foreign states.”
    The New Englander and Yale Law Review, Volume 3 (1845), p. 414

    Ex Parte Bain, 121 U.S. 1 (1887) @ page 12
    “It is never to be forgotten that in the construction of the language of the Constitution here relied on, as indeed in all other instances where construction becomes necessary, we are to place ourselves as nearly as possible in the condition of the men who framed that instrument.”

    GIBBONS V. OGDEN, 22 U. S. 1 (1824) @ pp.188-189
    ” …the enlightened patriots who framed our Constitution, and the people who adopted it, must be understood to have employed words in their natural sense, and to have intended what they have said. If, from the imperfection of human language, there should be serious doubts respecting the extent of any given power, it is a well settled rule that the objects for which it was given, especially when those objects are expressed in the instrument itself, should have great influence in the construction.”

    Thomas Jefferson, in his letter to William Johnson, dated June 12, 1823 from Monticello, wrote:
    “On every question of construction [of the Constitution] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or intended against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

    Holmes v. Jennison, 39 U.S. (14 Peters) 540 (1840)@ pp. 570-571
    “In expounding the Constitution of the United States, every word must have its due force and appropriate meaning, for it is evident from the whole instrument that no word was unnecessarily used or needlessly added. The many discussions which have taken place upon the construction of the Constitution have proved the correctness of this proposition and shown the high talent, the caution, and the foresight of the illustrious men who framed it. Every word appears to have been weighed with the utmost deliberation, and its force and effect to have been fully understood. No word in the instrument, therefore, can be rejected as superfluous or unmeaning, and this principle of construction applies …”

    What was a Natural Born Citizen from the Founders perspective? When the Constitution was passed and ratified, only men, age 21 and above, had the right to vote and TRULY be established in the sphere of Governments, taking their rightful places in society as its true citizens. The power was in the man, age 21 and above, to confer certain extensive rights and privileges of citizenship not otherwise available. They followed John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government, Chapter 6: ‘Of Paternal Power’ §. 59 When discussing the principle of “all the laws a man is under, whether natural or civil”, John Locke explains that it is the FATHER who passes, by natural (think “seed” or “sperma” to be planted and grown) and civil law, the natural born citizenship, in which a child is exclusively reared up in the citizenship of his father in the country of his father, until he comes of age (age 21) and takes his place in society that same as his father does or did. Ted Cruz was born a citizen of Cuba via his father, in a foreign land of Canada. Constitutionally speaking, even with a U.S. Citizen mother, Ted Cruz has no legal right to run for the Presidency of the United States. NONE!!!

    Question, Sherlock. Did Ted Cruz EVER formally renounce his jus soli birth acquired Canadian Citizenship? As of the first half of 2014, he still had current possession of an active foreign citizenship. What did John Jay warn “His excellency George Washington” regarding this, or don’t you know?

    New-York, 25th July, 1787.
    …Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen.”

    Ted Cruz is a foreigner, who happens to have a United States Citizenship as his THIRD Citizenship. He was born with a foreign national for a father in a nation in which the United States of America, if that isn’t enough for you, that has a Treaty with Ted Cruz from ever legally being in any remotest way, “a United States Natural Born Citizenship” by Treaty.

    For example: the N. Y. Times, May 26, 1949, p. 26, columns 3 – 4, has an article which tells us that the legal experts of the New York Times, the attorneys at law (as well as those who were of the DNC for that matter who ended up concurring with their legal opinion some time later after the article was published), that Franklin D. Roosevelt, Jr., third son of the late President, “never can carry that great name back into the White House” since his birth on August 17, 1914, was at Campobello Island, New Brunswick, Canada, home of a Roosevelt Canadian summer estate.

    F.D.R. Jr. born to 2 United States Natural Born Citizens as his parents at the time of his birth in Canada, and magically you go “poof!”, Ted’s mama was a U.S. Citizen, and therefore his birth in Canada was more qualifying? B.S.!

    By supporting Cruz, you promote TREASON against the Constitution of the United States and its permanent removal and cessation, and the tyranny and permanent removal of the United States as an economic and Free Republic from the face of the Earth by such actions of supporting what the Constitution of the United States forbids.

    1. also check out Vattel’s Laws of Nation (book 1, section 212), which the founders actually mention in their papers as the source for NBC clause. It is all about allegiance to the Nation. We are NOT based on British Law as some want to teach, we had just broken away from Brittian over their domineering laws! Black’s or Blackstone is NOT America’s laws….using them is seditious and tacking the B.A.R is also.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *