It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ted Cruz, Longtime Foe Of NASA And Science, Will Oversee NASA And Science In New Congress

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Southern Guardian




Sure he was buddy. And Ted Cruz is eligible to be president right?


It doesn't matter where on the globe Obama or Ted Cruz were born if one of their parents was a US citizen at the time of their birth. Way to many people don't understand the difference between a natural-born citizen and a naturalized US citizen.

Anyone who is a US citizen who had their citizenship automatically at the time of their birth and never had to go through the US naturalization process for citizenship is a "natural-born citizen". There are only two kinds, natural-born and naturalized.




edit on 13-1-2015 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I will make a prediction and hope I save some rich PAC contributor some money. If Ted Cruz were born on the Fourth of July, and named Yankee Doodle Dandy, he will never be president. No one will without democrat voters. That is the one time the lazy democrat voters get out.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod






Somewhere there has to be someone taking bets on the 2016 POTUS candidates.


It's illegal to bet on election results in Vegas but there are plenty of bookies out there that will take your action!

Of course you can bet on anything in Britain. odds makers there have ....

Hillary at 6/5
Bush at 9/2
www.oddschecker.com...

As it gets closer to the election, the odds on bush will get close to even....so you can bet $111.11 and not even make enough to buy a cup of coffee.

As Amirillo Slim says...."if you can't spot the chump at the table....it's you"

edit on 13-1-2015 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Southern Guardian




Sure he was buddy. And Ted Cruz is eligible to be president right?


It doesn't matter where on the globe Obama or Ted Cruz were born if one of their parents was a US citizen at the time of their birth. Way to many people don't understand the difference between a natural-born citizen and a naturalized US citizen.

Anyone who is a US citizen who had their citizenship automatically at the time of their birth and never had to go through the US naturalization process for citizenship is a "natural-born citizen". There are only two kinds, natural-born and naturalized.


Just like spanking kids asses, right?

The truth is, no one knows what it means, because the Supreme Court hasn't ever ruled on it.

Stop speaking like you have an authoritative source instead of merely your own opinion on the subject.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: seabag
a reply to: TheArrow

I bet you'll be devastated when he takes over the White House in a couple years, huh?

LOL!!


The GOP isn't to fond of Hispanics. I'll place a sizable wager that it's Bush in 16!! The neocons are still in control and Obama did everything they told him to do.

Sadly I think you are right.

I think we're all going to get a big unwanted heap of JEB BUSH and HILLARY.

The parties are so predictable! LOL

[I only LOL to keep my sanity]
edit on 13-1-2015 by seabag because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Yes let's put someone anti science in charge of science.

Will our political stupidity never end?



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
a reply to: Southern Guardian




Sure he was buddy. And Ted Cruz is eligible to be president right?


It doesn't matter where on the globe Obama or Ted Cruz were born if one of their parents was a US citizen at the time of their birth. Way to many people don't understand the difference between a natural-born citizen and a naturalized US citizen.

Anyone who is a US citizen who had their citizenship automatically at the time of their birth and never had to go through the US naturalization process for citizenship is a "natural-born citizen". There are only two kinds, natural-born and naturalized.


Just like spanking kids asses, right?

The truth is, no one knows what it means, because the Supreme Court hasn't ever ruled on it.

Stop speaking like you have an authoritative source instead of merely your own opinion on the subject.


Wow you fail, the Congressional Research Service published a report about this in 2011 after Obama was attacked for having an American-born mother and a foreign-born father:




The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth,” either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.” Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen.


Fas.org (PDF)

Ted Cruz never had to go through the naturalization process for his US citizenship, his mother was a US citizen born in Delaware at the time of Ted's birth. There are only 2 kinds of US citizens:

1. Naturalized US citizens
2. Natural-born US citizens




Cruz -- full name: Rafael Edward Cruz --was born in Canada in 1970 because his father was working for the oil industry there. The senator’s recently released birth certificate shows his mother was born in Delaware and his father was born in Cuba. The Cruz family left Canada a few years later. Cruz grew up in Texas and graduated from high school there, later attending Princeton University and Harvard Law School. By virtue of his American-born mother, Cruz, 42, considers himself a natural born citizen and eligible to run for president. So is he eligible? The vast majority of legal thought and arguments indicate he is.


Politifact.com


edit on 13-1-2015 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
I blame the Democrats.

If they can't run a candidate to beat Ted Cruz, who's fault is that?



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1
I blame the Democrats.

If they can't run a candidate to beat Ted Cruz, who's fault is that?


Don't forget they get the assistance of a Praetorian media.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
The vast majority of legal thought and arguments indicate he is.


The last line evidences my entire point.

It's all opinion until the SCOTUS rules.

Stop acting like it's set in stone. It makes your entire point look weak if you can't even concede that its speculation.



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 08:03 PM
link   
I would laugh but when I look at congress, both democrats and republicans, I let nelson muntz take over.




posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
The vast majority of legal thought and arguments indicate he is.


The last line evidences my entire point.

It's all opinion until the SCOTUS rules.

Stop acting like it's set in stone. It makes your entire point look weak if you can't even concede that its speculation.


It's not "speculation", Congress authorized and funded a research of the very matter in 2008 and the report/findings were released in 2011. Right now the weight rests with Congress' Research Service's report released in 2011. I linked te PDF of the entire report above. Key finding of the report:




The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth,” either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth.” Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. citizen.


So again, any US citizen who never had to participate in or complete the naturalization process for their citizenship is a natural-born citizen. Much like if any of our parents were on vacation abroad and birthed us we would also be US citizens at the moment of our birth. Natural-born has nothing to do with geographic location, but the legal status at the time of birth.


edit on 13-1-2015 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
Right now the weight rests with Congress' Research Service's report released in 2011.


That's not a law, it is an opnion from a government think tank.

The Judicial Branch is the only branch of government that with the legal authority to interpret the Constitution, and they haven't weighed in.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   
I love America and all the characters in it! .......so, I present (with apologies to Dr. Suess)


The Wacko Bird :

We have a paper
We have a plan
It's called the
Constitution

It does not mention space
It does not mention Mars
So no money Uncle Sam should spend
Above this ground of ours

We have faith
We have God
Science is baloney!
Love the markets
Love Ayn Rand
NASA will get no money!


Actually, Ted has spoken quite elegantly, using his passion for outer space

"I am perfectly happy to compromise and work with anybody: Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians - I'll work with Martians if - and the if is critical - they're willing to"

"With a possible exception of the moon, the moon might be as intimidating as Obamacare cut spending and reduce the debt."



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: desert




"I am perfectly happy to compromise and work with anybody: Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians - I'll work with Martians if - and the if is critical - they're willing to"


OMG! Ted Cruz accidentally reveals the truth! THERE'S LIFE ON MARS!


I knew it!



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: TheArrow
www.huffingtonpost.com...




Following the ratification of Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) as chair of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committtee last week, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) was named chair of the Subcommittee on Space, Science and Competitiveness, where he will oversee NASA and science programs.




(Didn't find this in the search, and I can't believe it isn't here somewhere, so if it isn't please link me in the thread so I can comment there.)



I weep for our country, not because of partisan crap, but because this man is admittedly anti-science.


That's exactly why he was appointed. He'll be sure of following the conservative's script and quashing any research showing that the earth is more than 5,000 years old and Christ wasn't riding around on the back of a dinosaur.


And the solid evidence for that is what?



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

And the solid evidence for that is what?


Which part, the Earth is more than 5,000 years old, or that Christ wasn't riding around on the back of a dinosaur?
edit on 14-1-2015 by TheArrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: NOTurTypical
The vast majority of legal thought and arguments indicate he is.


The last line evidences my entire point.

It's all opinion until the SCOTUS rules.

Stop acting like it's set in stone. It makes your entire point look weak if you can't even concede that its speculation.


The supreme court HAS ruled on this:



Supreme Court decisions

The correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment is that an illegal alien mother is subject to the jurisdiction of her native country, as is her baby.

Over a century ago, the Supreme Court appropriately confirmed this restricted interpretation of citizenship in the so-called "Slaughter-House cases" [83 US 36 (1873) and 112 US 94 (1884)]13. In the 1884 Elk v.Wilkins case 12, the phrase "subject to its jurisdiction" was interpreted to exclude "children of ministers, consuls, and citizens of foreign states born within the United States." In Elk, the American Indian claimant was considered not an American citizen because the law required him to be "not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction and owing them direct and immediate allegiance."

The Court essentially stated that the status of the parents determines the citizenship of the child. To qualify children for birthright citizenship, based on the 14th Amendment, parents must owe "direct and immediate allegiance" to the U.S. and be "completely subject" to its jurisdiction. In other words, they must be United States citizens.


An illegal immigrant is still under the jurisdiction of their home country, having permission neither to leave their home country nor arrive in the US and thus, according to the supreme court, are not citizens of the US. That the SCOTUS has not since ruled to the contrary since then means that this is still the correct interpretation, even if it is roundly ignored.

[url=http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html]http://www.14thamendment.us/birthright_citizenship/original_intent.html[/ url]

Also see:


In 1889, the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case10,11 once again, in a ruling based strictly on the 14th Amendment, concluded that the status of the parents was crucial in determining the citizenship of the child. The current misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment is based in part upon the presumption that the Wong Kim Ark ruling encompassed illegal aliens. In fact, it did not address the children of illegal aliens and non-immigrant aliens, but rather determined an allegiance for legal immigrant parents based on the meaning of the word domicil(e). Since it is inconceivable that illegal alien parents could have a legal domicile in the United States, the ruling clearly did not extend birthright citizenship to children of illegal alien parents. Indeed, the ruling strengthened the original intent of the 14th Amendment.


According to the Supreme court, if your parents are citizens, you are a citizen, regardless of where you are born. It is the status of your parents, not the geographical location that is the deciding issue.
edit on 14-1-2015 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: NavyDoc

And the solid evidence for that is what?


Which part, the Earth is more than 5,000 years old, or that Christ wasn't riding around on the back of a dinosaur?


He said that Christ rode a dinosaur our are you being disingenuous again? Let's have a citation please.



posted on Jan, 14 2015 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: TheArrow

originally posted by: NavyDoc

And the solid evidence for that is what?


Which part, the Earth is more than 5,000 years old, or that Christ wasn't riding around on the back of a dinosaur?


He said that Christ rode a dinosaur our are you being disingenuous again? Let's have a citation please.


I don't think the bible says anything about Christ riding a dinosaur, so I'm not familiar with that particular story. Anyone know where the Christ riding a dinosaur story comes from? Is it Apocrypha?



new topics




 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join