The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Don’t Let The Gills, Scales & Fins Distract You–Nothing Fishy In Trumpistan

Posted on | February 10, 2016 | 124 Comments

by Smitty

Byron York almost doesn’t seem to notice:

There really were a lot of Trump voters out there, and party officials could not, or did not want, to see them.

And what an astonishingly varied group of voters Trump attracted. At his victory celebration in Manchester Tuesday night, I met a young woman, Alexis Chiparo, who four years ago was an Obama-voting member of MoveOn.org. Now she is the Merrimack County chair of the Trump campaign.

I sure would like to know how many other core leaders in Trump’s campaign cut their teeth working for the Commies. I don’t know the lady–her support could be sincere. Or not.

Category: Donald Trump

Comments

124 Responses to “Don’t Let The Gills, Scales & Fins Distract You–Nothing Fishy In Trumpistan”

  1. Daniel O'Brien
    February 11th, 2016 @ 8:30 pm

    That’s because ¡Jeb! is an idiot…

  2. Noted blogger: If it sells like a rotten fish……… – If You're Left
    February 11th, 2016 @ 8:46 pm

    […] Oh no, Smitty, of The Other McCain fame has cast some doubt on Trump’s Conservative legitimacy,  guess that means Smitty is no longer a “real” Conservative right? […]

  3. Ilion
    February 12th, 2016 @ 7:55 am

    Translation: I *will not* think about evidence that counters what I want to be true.
    How are you different from a leftist? How are you not, even now, under the control of the RINO Establishment? Back before Obama was “elected”, and when Cruz was still one of their ethnic golden boys, the Establishment sent the word out that no one was to seriously think about what the Constitution means by “natural born citizen”, and so, all the “conservative” pundits of Conservative, Inc, dutifully told “the masses” what to not-think … and here we are,and you are *still* following their marching orders.

  4. Ilion
    February 12th, 2016 @ 7:56 am

    I have already shown, and you *will not* see.

  5. Ilion
    February 12th, 2016 @ 8:02 am

    “First, it’s not “natural born US citizen” and “US citizen,” it’s “natural born Citizen” and “Citizen of the United States.” Let’s stick to the proper phrases, shall we?”

    Let’s be intellectually honest, shall we? I know that’s a stretch for you.

    This is what the Constitution says — “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

    So, the “proper phrases” are “natural born Citizen of the United States” and “Citizen of the United States” … which, of course, English allows to be rendered as “natural born US citizen” and “US citizen.”

  6. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 9:26 am

    So sorry, the phrase “natural born Citizen of the United Sates” does not appear in the U.S. Constitution.

    That illustrates my reason for insisting on the “proper phrases.” This is a possible technicality, a bit of rules lawyering utterly dependent on a highly subjective interpretation.

    All this really serves to do is “disqualify” Cruz without listening to what he says.

    It has nothing to do with the qualifications for the office. It’s about silencing dissent.

  7. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 12:04 pm

    It’s not “elitism””, as in, “you’re not as good as us”. If that was the case, you’d have that requirement for every Federal elected position in Congress. It’s for the President, because you didn’t want anyone with any foreign affiliation of any kind commanding the military. It’s not whether you or I agree with that, I’m saying that’s the way it is, and if you want to change it, you have to amend the Constitution to do it.

  8. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 12:06 pm

    So the legal question becomes, what effect does renunciation (at that late date, or ever) have on NBC citizenship, when Cruz (or anyone so situated) had 2-3 NB citizenship for 2-3 countries? Is it enough to renounce 5 minutes prior to election? Is this “last rites deathbed repentance” rules or what?

  9. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 12:10 pm

    “All this really serves to do is “disqualify” Cruz without listening to what he says.”

    Frankly, that’s stupid. Cruz is a sitting US Senator. He can say whatever he wants as a naturalized citizen and a Senator, but he’s running for President, and you have to be qualified for the office you are running for, no matter what it is. At best, the whole NBC is unsettled simply because there is an original interpretation and then 200 years of reinterpretations on both sides. There is evidence and cases supporting both sides. Frankly, it begs for the SCOTUS or an amendment to clear it up.

  10. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 12:17 pm

    Thanks. For the record, my point of concern wasn’t for the “rights of women”, my point was even if the father’s rights or political status was considered paramount, you still had the day to day, actual real life influence of the other parent (mother) on the child, and you’d think Jay’s concern would take that into consideration in addition to any legal rights, etc. implicated by dual citizenship (which was resolved by adopting the father’s position). In other words, a kid that was really a “mama’s boy” say, for culture, upbringing, etc., but utilized his father’s socio-political/legal standing.

  11. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:18 pm

    There you go moving the goalposts.

    Cruz was NEVER a naturalized citizen. He was born an American citizen under US law with an American mother.

    You know that there is a difference between speaking as a Presidential candidate and speaking as a wanna-be.

    Now I’m willing to be that all sorts of lawyers have been all over this since at least 2014 and probably longer. There’s a reason it hasn’t become an issue in the campaign it can’t be proved that Cruz is not a natural born Citizen.

  12. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:21 pm

    According to all the news stories I found, he renounced his “Canadian citizenship” when he discovered he still had it. Cruz thought it had been taken care of years before. He thinks he’s an American.

  13. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:27 pm

    Do you wish to purge the military of all foreign born nationals? Because that’s the only way you’ll stop ” anyone with any foreign affiliation of any kind commanding the military.”

    I guess you meant the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. See, pesky phrasing again. You might try saying what you mean so that there is a clear interpretation with no misunderstanding.

  14. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:29 pm

    Mark Levin, a lawyer and big Cruz supporter, refers to him as Natualized. Because he is – an act of law makes him a US citizen when his birth alone didn’t . He just argues that the Naturalization by operation of law also makes him NBC. That’s the dispute.

    The fact that there is numerous, lengthy case history says it can be addressed, but no one wants to.

  15. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:39 pm

    Mark Levin, himself a Cruz supporter, and a lawyer, calls him naturalized, because he is. An act of Congress grants him citizenship since birth alone did not. Levin thinks that equals NBC. Others don’t. That’s the dispute. Saying Cruz isn’t NBC doesn’t mean he’s not a US citizen.

  16. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:42 pm

    You don’t want SCOTUS involved but you’re invoking the lawyers?

    See, this is why sometimes I feel that the whole thing should be junked as we should wait a couple of thousand more years for the conditions to be right again.

    For every one person you find who says that Cruz is not a natural born Citizen, I can find one person who says that he is. All we end up with is a bunch of people arguing over technicalities.

    Meanwhile we’re literally printing money with nothing to back it up. The government has been lying about economic figures and global warming for eight years. We have troops deployed all over the globe with no clear mission. The Federal government is sacrificing your liberty every minute. And all we can do is argue over who gets to sit at a fancy desk in an oval room.

  17. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:43 pm

    Again, its not my wish, its simply how it is. You are arguing what you want it to be. President is a civilian commander, separate from the actual military. He doesn’t need military service to serve. And people eligible for military service may not be eligible for higher rank.

  18. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:50 pm

    All that bad happens BECAUSE we ignored plain language and power limits so as to achieve the results we want, not what the law is. The SCOTUS is supposed to interpret the Constituion and opine on disputes like this according to original intent, but they prefer a living document that allows them to, wait for it, do whatever they want. That’s why I keep saying it should really be formally Amended.

  19. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:51 pm

    But you weren’t clear in your phrasing. And that’s the same technicality you’ve been arguing.

    The duties of the President are immaterial to your argument.

    It’s all about the interpretation.

  20. NeoWayland
    February 12th, 2016 @ 1:56 pm

    Tell you what.

    I’ll agree to an amendment on two conditions. First, that the “natural born Citizen” rule applies to all members of Congress and all Presidential appointments.

    Second, that the members of Congress are subject to the same term limits as the President.

  21. Saltyron1977
    February 12th, 2016 @ 2:09 pm

    I’d agree to that. Amend the Constitution and that makes it so.

  22. Quartermaster
    February 12th, 2016 @ 3:06 pm

    Go back and read my previous posts. I see no reason to say anything further. You’re simply raving at this point and not responding to what I have actually said.

  23. Ilion
    February 12th, 2016 @ 4:03 pm

    Go wag your hypocritical finger at someone who is impressed by it.

  24. Quartermaster
    February 12th, 2016 @ 6:25 pm

    I don’t waste my time attempting to impress someone that is so impressed with himself. Go back and read what I wrote and respond to what I wrote. Whether or not you are impressed is immaterial to me.