- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
Start looking and get back with us when you find one--and I do mean one that is pro-2A, not an appeaser of Fudds.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Judge Scalia RIP
- Thread starter indyjs
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Start looking and get back with us when you find one--and I do mean one that is pro-2A, not an appeaser of Fudds.
And in the meantime, I still have to vote. So until I find this unicorn candidate, I'm still going to have to prioritize, because I can't have it all my way all the time.
I for one refuse to participate in tactical voting. I vote for the individual that I feel is best suited for the job. If I feel nobody is up to the task I walking into my polling place and turn in a blank balot. Obtaining is a valid choice. If this race turns into Hillary v. Trump I won't be checking either. Hopefully the libertarians kick up somebody decenot this year.
The constitution matters more than your selfish progressive desires.
If you want to vote in favor of more executive power, you have just signed the death warrant for our country.
Staying on track for this thread... Lets be reminded of something:
So Repubs take off the gloves and refuse ANY nominee the Dear Leader puts forth? What happens then?
The lower courts' rulings stick. Most of the lower courts are heavily biased towards liberal. Not good.
The hardcore right gets a woody.
The hardcore left gets a woody.
Everybody in the middle gets more disgusted.
I got news for INGOers that may come as a shock to some, the unprincipled, kool-aid drinkers already outnumber the principled, well informed by a WIDE margin. Those people who you look on with such derision elect the president. Not the looney left or the rabid right.
If you think this is the time to go all, last stand of the 300, have at it. Maybe you'll move enough sheeple over to tilt the balance towards a President Trump or Cruz, but I personally wouldn't bet the next 30 years of an unbreakable liberal SC majority on it. And that's exactly what will happen if Queen Hillary or Bernie wins.
i know this is a thread drift, but this is a point of contention that I have. My favored GOP candidate so far is Cruz, but he is Canadian born.The constitution matters more than your selfish progressive desires.
If you want to vote in favor of more executive power, you have just signed the death warrant for our country.
Staying on track for this thread... Lets be reminded of something:
As for the republicans digging in and blocking any nominee from King Barack, go back to 2007 and Chuck Schumer stating that he would do everything possible to block a Bush nominee. What's good for the goose is good for the other goose.
As for not voting because you don't like the republican candidate, who is most likely to stand up for our second amendment, I once made the mistake of not voting for a republican, George Bush the First as I could not stand what he did to the NRA and our gun rights with his executive order demanding ATF follow the sporting purpose clause of the new second amendment, so I voted for H. Ross Perot, and thanks to people like me, we got 8 years of william jefferson clinton. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
As for not voting because you don't like the republican candidate, who is most likely to stand up for our second amendment, I once made the mistake of not voting for a republican, George Bush the First as I could not stand what he did to the NRA and our gun rights with his executive order demanding ATF follow the sporting purpose clause of the new second amendment, so I voted for H. Ross Perot, and thanks to people like me, we got 8 years of william jefferson clinton. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Rafael was elected to the senate in 2012, he renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2014.
You tell me?
Keeping with the thread, I find it strange that the leading constitutional authority just happens to be found dead with a pillow over his face, unwrinkled clothes, and with no autopsy being performed. But I guess some circles would consider me crazy.
Rafael was elected to the senate in 2012, he renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2014.
You tell me?
Renouncing his Canadian citizenship doesn't make him a US citizen anyway. According to the .gov there are two ways to be a US Citizen: by birth or by applying for naturalization and going through the process and being approved. Cruz never applied for naturalization. Yet he is a US Senator. A US Senator is required to be a US Citizen either by birth or naturalization. How is that possible if he's not a citizen by birth, or by naturalization? Do the birthers think no one vets Senate candidate citizenship? As contested as that race was, wouldn't his opponent have jumped all over that?
If the courts determine that Cruz is not a US Citizen then he'll need to resign from the Senate, the USCIS will need to change their citizenship requirements on the website, and many, many people who thought they were US Citizens and also regarded by the US government as citizens will need to make arrangements to leave or gain some kind of legal status.
He is required to be a US citizen either by naturalization or by birth to be a Senator. To be president he would have have citizenship by birth. If Cruz is not a citizen by birth, then he's not a citizen at all. He never applied for and went through naturalization.
Correct, because his mom was American. Just like Obama. Cruz was born in Calgary. There are many constitutional scholars that are arguing the what the term "natural born citizen" means. I have always held it t the highest standard that one has to be born on US soil. This was the same argument many had for why Obama was not legally eligible to become president.
I'm not going to pretend to be the authority on the matter, I'm just thinking Scalia knew more about the constitution than I do.
Just like what was pointed out above, jus soli is what Scalia believed to be the requirement of a "natural born citizen". Take McCain for example. He is eligible because he was born on "US soil". So to answer your question, yes, children born abroad in US government hospitals are born on US soil.
