Just so. I saw Rand Paul interviewed yesterday and he was complaining about how oppressive the pressure was to conform to the good old boy network. Also, that anyone, democrat or Republican, who has been there for awhile just seems to forget about states rights. It’s a powerful argument for term limits.

Cruz is most definitely a “natural born citizen.”

I am tired of having the definition of that phrase tortured into something it was never meant to mean. Please see the discussion in this post and thread. It’s quite lengthy.

Cruz was born to an American mother (American BORN mother) and a Cuban immigrant father while they were temporarily working in Canada. His mother’s citizenship caused him to be a citizen at birth, and therefore he never had to be naturalized. That’s what makes him a natural born citizen—meaning he was born a citizen and never had to be naturalized. There is no provision that a natural born citizen has to be born within the confines of this country in the geographical sense.

They’re both American (Cruz was born in Canada to an American citizen) with Cuban ancestry. But it would mean Cruz would have to pull “an Obama” and spend only a year and a half in the Senate before announcing run for Pres. Rubio chose to complete at least one term before running for anything higher — even V.P.

Then again, we have O. to look at to know where inexperience can get one in this day and age. (And where it’s taking the good “ol U.S. of A.)

For some reason, I thought he is older than he is. Guess my cynicism has taken over because I just assumed than being so articulate and straight shooting couldn’t possibly be from a “newbie?” But then, what was I thinking? That kind of communication CAN ONLY COME from a newbie when you are talking pols in Washington.

Memo to self: The newbies in DC are the ones who “get it” and intend to transform (a.k.a. fix) the system and the problems. It’s the ones that have been there awhile who learn that to stay, you must play and thus they become irrevocably corrupt. (And I hate to think that because one of my closest friends since grade school is married to one of those guys on the Hill, and he was always so nice and sweet and soft-spoken!) But rationality reminds me regularly that he did not get where he is being nice and sweet and soft-spoken.! She loves her husband, but recently told me that some time ago she realized she hated that town and most of the people in it and realized her only REAL friends are her oldest ones from childhood.
(She’s very, very, brilliant and accomplished in her own right. And I guess it shows she shares admissions like that)

2nd note to self: do not EVER again use the word “transform” as it is the word that self-appointed monarch Barack Obama uses to describe his intentions (i.e. wreak havoc and destroy) upon this beloved great nation of ours.
(Surely it must be on Greg Gutfeld’s (of “The Five” and “Red Eye” shows on FOx) quickly expanding Banned Words List (which he updates on “The Five” regularly.

Maybe that has something to do with why he is so outspoken. Whatever the reason, more please!

Holmes, “Basically, who is less dorky and would you like to hang out with? That’s our modern criteria for leadership.” Yes, it’s who would you most like to have a beer with, or something like that. And by that criteria, Bush easily beat Kerry (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/benedetto/2004-09-17-benedetto_x.htm)

I can’t imagine having a beer with Barack, or Romney either. But then maybe that’s because I can’t imagine Romney having a beer, even if he weren’t Mormon. A Chardonnay perhaps, but not a beer. And that was part of his problem as a candidate.