Time To Inspect Ted Cruz's Canadian 'Birth Certificate,' Obviously

Now that Ted Cruz has declared himself our next president, the 2016 election is pretty much wrapped up, right? He just has to get those laughably low approval numbersfrom his own partyup to something above negativeteen, beat [insert name of a Democrat, any Democrat], and then Snowflake, the family puppy, "will finally get a back yard to pee in." (Texas, it turns out, is a small state that doesn't have a lot of space for back yards.)

Oh, and there's just one more thing, a tiny detail, really, that almost isn't worth mentioning: He has to prove he is a Real and Legitimate U.S. American. Because, in case you'd forgotten -- and that's why we're here to remind you, because we are servicey like that -- Ted Cruz was not actually born in U.S. America.

Ted Cruz was born in Canada , which is a fact, and Canada is not even the United States, which is also a fact. Sure, Ted Cruz's mother was a U.S. citizen, but that doesn't mean that he is too, does it? (Well, yes, but maybe not? WHO CAN EVEN SAY?) Besides, if Cruz really is an American citizen, why has he been trying so hard to cover up his Canadian birth by repeatedly claiming he doesn't even WANT to be Canadian, ugh, that place is gross, he sure wishes he could be un-Canadian, except the form is super tricky. But he persevered and officially told Canada to fuck itself, hooray! But does THAT make him more American than Barack "Not Even Born Here Except For How He Was" Obama?

[contextly_sidebar id="23EY8AAaIYB88fDwdBz4WuIgapfLBAYf"]

So many questions. So much mystery. Some dirty blogger at the far-left Cato Institute assures us that it's really quite simple, ACTUALLY:

I looked at the whole “natural-born citizen” requirement a couple of years ago and concluded that Cruz’s eligibility for the presidency is an easy legal call.

Why, yes, that last link IS that same dirty blogger explaining why it's a whole different question when it comes to Barack Obama's so-called eligibility, or "brouhaha about where Obama was born" -- maybe Hawaii, maybe Kenya, maybe Indonesia -- because it's different, see? Get it? DIFFERENT, asked and answered, the end.

But is it REALLY that quite simple? As The Former Stupidest Man On The Internet points out:  

There are several Americans, both conservative and liberal, who believe Cruz is not eligible because he was born in Canada.

So, obviously, it's not so simple after all. Because if some Americans believe it, man, it's at least worth investigating, isn't it? Of course it is!

Besides, the Washington Post says that maybe it is not 100 percent for certain guaranteed that Cruz is eligible after all:

Cruz, like a couple of presidential candidates before him, faces a potential hurdle to running for president in that it's not 100 percent clear that he's a "natural-born citizen," as the Constitution requires presidents to be.

Cruz's mother was a U.S. citizen when he was born, and current U.S. law extends citizenship to anyone born to a U.S. citizen, regardless of where the birth takes place. The question is whether citizenship is the same thing as being a "natural-born citizen."

OK, fine, the Post admits, most legal experts agree that it's the same thing and no big deal, just like when John McCain -- also not born in America and therefore not a True Patriot -- ran for president, and no one was concerned about his eligibility because they were too busy studying globes to determine where the hell this "Hawaii" place even is. But do we not have a duty to at least make absolutely sure that Ted Cruz can even be president? Pffft, no.

And for the few in the birther community, they see hypocrisy. Why are the media not denouncing those who question Cruz's eligibility in the same way they have denounced the so-called "birthers" who continue to question Obama's?

The reason? Because about the only thing these two situations have in common is that they involve a birth certificate and a presidential candidate.

Questions about Cruz's eligibility have everything to do with interpretation of the law; the questions about Obama's eligibility had everything to do with a dispute over the underlying facts -- more specifically, conspiracy theories about whether the president was actually born in the United States, as he claimed, and whether he somehow forged a birth certificate that said he was born in Hawaii.

So, see, it's different ... somehow. Members of the "birther community" were simply doing their due diligence in investigating whether Barack Obama was born in the Unites States, because if he wasn't -- and they can prove it, they really can, they've got the evidence RIGHT HERE -- then he is not eligible to be president, he is a liar and a thief, he should be impeached and deported. But Cruz admits he was not born in the Unites States, so legally, nothing to see here move along.

But come on, birthers, COME ON. Have we not learned from our mistake of electing "President" Obummer, twice!, that it is very EXTREMELY critical to Vet The Prez and make sure all of his paperwork is in order -- maybe get a look at his official birth certificate and perhaps some college transcripts -- to avoid accidentally inviting a secret sleeper Muslim or perhaps Canadian terrorist into the Oval Office? Just to be on the safe side this time around? After all, fool me once, can't get fooled again.

[ Cato Institute / WaPo ]