Elizabeth Warren of the Red Herring Tribe vs President Donald J. Trump

Did you know that president wannabe Elizabeth Warren’s maiden name is Herring?
 
Elizabeth WarrenNo doubt she was a member of the Red Herring tribe.
 
She’s also a lawyer. The LAST thing America needs in government is yet another damned lawyer.
 
Lawyers are good at writing law. They are absolutely horrible, however, at fixing things. Writing law very rarely fixes anything. Even after Trump spends four or possibly eight years at the helm, there will always be things that need fixing.
 
Successful CEOs are good at fixing things, particularly in larger environments with a lot of people where they can resist the temptation to try and fix things themselves. Instead, they’re managers. They manage other people who are either good at fixing things, or in larger corporations, who are also good at surrounding themselves in their own departments with those who are good at fixing things.
 
All CEOs and other chief officers of a corporation have to be good at fixing things as corporations have many of the same problems as a country. They need to be productive. They need to make a profit, ensuring that income exceeds all expenses. They need to keep their workers healthy, happy, and most importantly, productive. They need to deal with their enemies, both externally and internally. And finally, they need to grow, change, adapt, and even forge new paths through to the future while dodging the complex minefield of the business/international world.
 
The United States of America is a very big, very complex organization. It is not a corporation, but the set of skills required to successfully run a large, global corporation are the same set of skills requires to successfully run the United States of America.
 
Donald Trump has those skills.
 
Elizabeth Warren DOES NOT.
 
Comparing the two are like comparing One World Trade Center with an outhouse. Both are buildings. Both are fairly narrow, roughly square in shape. Both stand upright on their own. Beyond that, the comparison fails, with Pocahontas taking a back seat — a very distant back seat — to President Donald J. Trump.

Donald J. Trump, the 45th President of the United States of America

As President Trump began to speak, it began to rain.  In the Bible, torrential rains are a curse.  Light, even rains are a blessing.

I will make them and the places all around My hill a blessing;
and I will cause showers to come down in their season;
there shall be showers of blessing. – Ezekiel 34:26

The rain that fell on President Trump and the others in attendance today was light.  It was sweet.  It was cool, but not cold.  It was refreshing, almost as refreshing as the words uttered by our new President.

The rain was a blessing, as were the words spoken by Donald J Trump, 45th President of the United States of America:

Full Transcript

Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow Americans and people of the world, thank you.

We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people.

Together, we will determine the course of America and the world for many, many years to come. We will face challenges. We will confront hardships. But we will get the job done.

Every four years we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power.

And we are grateful to President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition.

They have been magnificent.

Thank you.

Today’s ceremony, however, has a very special meaning because today we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another or from one party to another, but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the people.

For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have bore the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered but the jobs left and the factories closed.

The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs. And while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.

That all changes starting right here and right now, because this moment is your moment.

It belongs to you.

It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America.

This is your day.

This is your celebration.

And this, the United States of America, is your country.

What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.

January 20th, 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.

The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer. Everyone is listening to you now. You came by the tens of millions to become part of a historic movement, the likes of which the world has never seen before.

At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction that a nation exists to serve its citizens. Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families and good jobs for themselves.

These are just and reasonable demands of righteous people and a righteous public.

But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists.

Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities, rusted out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation.

An education system flush with cash but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge.

And the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential. This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.

We are one nation, and their pain is our pain.

Their dreams are our dreams, and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home and one glorious destiny.

The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to all Americans.

For many decades we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry, subsidized the armies of other countries while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military.

We’ve defended other nations’ borders while refusing to defend our own. And we’ve spent trillions and trillions of dollars overseas while America’s infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay.

We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength and confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon.

One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers that were left behind.

The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world. But that is the past, and now we are looking only to the future.

We assembled here today are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital and in every hall of power. From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land.

From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first, America first. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs will be made to benefit American workers and American families. We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our product, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs.

Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength. I will fight for you with every breath in my body, and I will never ever let you down.

America will start winning again, winning like never before.

We will bring back our jobs.

We will bring back our borders.

We will bring back our wealth, and we will bring back our dreams.

We will build new roads and highways and bridges and airports and tunnels and railways all across our wonderful nation.

We will get our people off of welfare and back to work, rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor.

We will follow two simple rules: Buy American and hire American.

We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.

We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example.

We will shine for everyone to follow.

We will re-enforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth.

At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America, and through our loyalty to our country we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.

When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.

The Bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. When America is united, America is totally unstoppable. There should be no fear. We are protected and we will always be protected. We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement. And most importantly, we will be protected by God.

Finally, we must think big and dream even bigger. In America, we understand that a nation is only living as long as it is striving. We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action, constantly complaining but never doing anything about it.

The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action.

Do not allow anyone to tell you that it cannot be done. No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America. We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again.

We stand at the birth of a new millennium, ready to unlock the mysteries of space, to free the earth from the miseries of disease, and to harness the energies, industries and technologies of tomorrow.

A new national pride will stir ourselves, lift our sights and heal our divisions. It’s time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget, that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots.

We all enjoy the same glorious freedoms and we all salute the same great American flag.

And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky, they fill their heart with the same dreams and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty creator.

So to all Americans in every city near and far, small and large, from mountain to mountain, from ocean to ocean, hear these words: You will never be ignored again. Your voice, your hopes and your dreams will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way.

Together we will make America strong again, we will make America wealthy again, we will make America proud again, we will make America safe again.

And, yes, together we will make America great again.

Thank you.

God bless you.

And God bless America

~ ~ ~

Franklin Graham was one of three individuals who gave the closing prayer.  He shared an appropriate and relevant verse for our nation’s new leader:

“I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people—for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.  This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” – 1 Tim 2:1-4

VOTE TRUMP

A former United States Navy Pilot (Naval Flight Officer/Aviator) asks Hillary Clinton a VALID question.

As a former United States Air Force Navigator (Air Force Flight Office/Aviator) with nearly identical training, background and security clearance, I wholeheartedly concur with the point he makes: “As a Naval flight officer I held a Top Secret Compartmentalized Information (TS/SCI) clearance that provided me access to materials and information hHillary Clintonighly sensitive to our warfighting capabilities. Had I communicated this information not following prescribed protocols, I would have been prosecuted and imprisoned. Secretary Clinton, how can you expect those such as myself who were and are entrusted with America’s most sensitive information to have any confidence in your leadership as president when you clearly corrupted our national security?

Her response DOES NOT MATTER.

What matters is her disdain and the vitriol painted all over her face. This military officer raises a perfectly valid point to which Hillary’s only response is utter disdain. If that’s her BEST response to our nation’s military in a public forum during during an election year, immediatly prior to the election, how do you think she will respond to valid military advice once in office?

She doesn’t care. She ALONE thinks she knows better than the MILLIONS of American members of the Armed Forces, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the National Security Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and all other highly trained people with exceptional skills and experience in all our agencies entrusted with such information.

SHE JUST DOESN’T GET IT. She is oblivious to the fact that certain information MUST be protected at all costs, that both American and foreign lives are at stake should that information get out, and that some information, if released, could lead to war, costing tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, and even millions of American lives.

SHE DOESN’T GET IT. She is absolutely CLUELESS, and the lives of our sons and daughters (if not our own) hang in the balance.

Her own attitude and rampantly criminal behavior has utterly disqualified herself from having access to ANY classified information, yet she wants to be the President of the United States? Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces?

She is utterly, absolutely PATHETIC. Totally unqualified for the position. In fact, forty years of her own experience and behavior DISQUALIFIES her, beginning with her being FIRED from the Watergate investigation for “gross ethical violations” to her being fired, by Obama, no less, for the same damned thing as Secretary of State. If she were to apply for a job involving access to classified information in ANY country, no country in the WORLD would EVER hire her, including the United States of America.

If you’re voting for Johnson, STOP. The goal is no longer about voting for your favorite candidate. The goal is to prevent Hillary from getting into office AT ALL COSTS. She absolutely can NOT be entrusted with classified information, much less the vaunted and critical position as the executive office of the world’s most powerful country.

This isn’t a popularity contest, people. This issue is extremely serious and the stakes are very, very high. You own lives, and the lives of millions of other Americans, including your children are DEFINITELY hanging in the balance.

We live in a global economy. Trump has already established good relations with both Russia and China. His unparalled successs with 515 successful businesses and just 5 failures is absolutely unheard of in the business world, where less tha 20% of all ventures succeed. Trump’s success rate blows past all odds at 99.029%, putting him well into the top 1% of most successful businessmen of all time. By comparison, all Hillary has “accomplished” is the widespread, wholesale, and TRAITOROUS trade of American favors compromising our national security in exchange for millions, if not billions of dollars in foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative. If you don’t believe me, just go to YouTube and search Clinton Cash for the scathingly detailed and accurate revelation of Hillary’s and Bill’s horrendous violations of our nation’s most precious endeavors (it’s called “traitorism,” people). Alternatively, just follow the link: https://youtu.be/7LYRUOd_QoM

Hillary Clinton absolutely MUST be stopped AT ALL COSTS, and you can NOT acomplish that by voting for Johnson.

Only Donald J. Trump has the backing to win this election, but ONLY if you actually get out and VOTE for him.

We’ve been down this road not once, but FIVE TIMES in the last forty years, and it has ALWAYS gotten us NOWHERE. It’s time to GET OFF the madness train and do something RIGHT for a change. VOTE TRUMP.

Thank you.

Second Amendment Definitions: Well Regulated – Militia – Arms – Shall

Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court have continually tripped over the meaning of these four simple words:
well regulated
militia
arms
shall
Their ineptitude astounds me.  The only plausible explanation is that instead of examining what the words actually mean, and supporting and defending them as required by their oaths of office and the trust of the American people, they instead decided to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms and have spent the better part of more than two centuries in a mind-numbing attempt to deprive the American people of their God-given right to keep and bear arms for the purposes of hunting, self-defense, and protection again criminals, despots, and tyrants — basically, any use envisioned by the people themselves, provided such use did not infringe upon the rights of others.
The question remains, what did our Founding Fathers mean by the term “well regulated?”  To answer that, we only need turn to the Oxford English Dictionary and bracket in time the writing of the Second Amendment:
 
1709: “If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations.”
 
1714: “The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world.”
 
1812: “The equation of time … is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well regulated clock and a true sun dial.”
 
1848: “A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor.”
 
1862: “It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding.”
 
1894: “The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city.”
 
The phrase “well-regulated” was in common use long before the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to “the property of something being in proper working order.” Something that was well-regulated was “calibrated correctly, functioning as expected.”
As for the term “militia,” the 1982 Congressional Report on the Right to Keep and Bear Armso revealed the precise meaning intended by our Founding Fathers.  They considered every man, woman, and child able to carry arms as part of the “militia” (p. 16).  Another section from this report specifically distinguishes the difference between the militia and the National Guard:
national guard
What about the term, “arms?”  What was meant by that?  Did they mean to say “firearms” and somehow just screwed up?  Or did they mean the proper definition, “a means (as a weapon) of offense or defense” (Merriam-Webster).  If the latter, then a slingshot would be an arm, as would knives, sticks, spears, hand guns, long guns, cannon, and mortar.
Again, the intent of our Bill of Rights wasn’t to limit the right of the people, but to limit the power and authority of the government.  In the case of the First Amendment, it was to absolutely and unequivocally prevent the government from infringing on the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press (two different things), the freedom of religion, and the right of peaceable assembly.  In the case of the Second Amendment, it was to prevent any and all entities, including — but not limited to — all levels of government from local through federal levels.
The phrase, “shall not be infringed” isn’t an option.  It’s an absolute mandate, one without recourse or avenue of redress:
second amendment
This graphic makes it clear that any infringement on our right to keep and bear arms is absolutely forbidden, whether that be a waiting period, a permit fee or a denial.  Our Founding Fathers held the right of the people to keep and bear arms as an absolute right, one in which no entity had any business meddling.

When our Founding Fathers wrote our Second Amendment, they had absolutely zero intention of establishing any sort of government oversight of the people’s arms.  Instead, the intent behind their use of the phrase in the Second Amendment was — precisely — to render the government powerless to have any such authority whatsoever. 

Bottom line:  According to the U.S. Constitution and the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment itself is the only gun “permit” required of “the people” (U.S. Citizens), and all other permits, restrictions, fees, and denials of ownership (“keep”) and any type of carry (“bear”) are an infringement against our right to keep and bear arms.

Tell your Congressmen, your President, and the U.S. Supreme Court to…

BACK OFF!

 

And YES, Armed Citizens really DO stop mass shooters!  In fact, for each one of these ten events, there’s probably another ten that flew under the radar.

Ted Cruz – “Not Eligible” means NOT ELIGIBLE!!!

Preface to the Preface, because people are STILL getting it wrong:

The question isn’t whether Cruz is a “citizen” or “natural born American.” It’s whether or nor he is a “natural born citizen” of the United States of America as specifically and immutably required by the U.S. Constitution.  But first, please review this timeline.
 
The Constitutional requirement for President is that one be a “natural born citizen.” The ONLY relevant question for meeting this test is, “Was Ted Cruz born on U.S. soil?” If the answer is “no,” then he is NOT a “natural born citizen.”  It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the status of his parents.  One cannot “become” a “natural born citizen.”  It’s determined solely by one’s location at birth, and for Ted Cruz, that location was in Canada, not the United States of America.
 
Since Ted Cruz was born in Canada, 142.8 miles north of the U.S. border, he is NOT a “natural born citizen” of the United States and is therefore NOT eligible to be a U.S. President.

Preface:  This passage seems to be widely misunderstood.  It’s not because it’s complicated.  It’s actually quite straightforward.  It’s because people fail to take the time to read it.  Therefore, before we continue, we’re going to read it together in full, then piecemeal — item by item.

In full:

“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.” – Article II, Section 1, United States Constitution

Piecemeal:

  1.  “No Person…” – This means there are no exceptions, other than the two listed below:
    1. “except a natural born Citizen,”  The term “natural born Citizen” means a person who was born within the physical confines of the United States of America.  Whether you were bone to one American parent, two, or none has absolutely zero bearing on the meaning of this term.  If you were born in the Territory of Hawaii in 1957, prior to its becoming a state on August 21, 1959, then you are not a “natural born citizen.”1
    2. “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution,”  As of this writing, those people would be at least 240 years old or older, so this clause no long applies.
  2. “shall be eligible to the Office of President;”  This means that if you don’t meet one of the above two exceptions, you are not Constitutionally eligible to be a U.S. President.
  3. “neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall”  This clause established two additional restrictions on becoming a U.S. President.
    1. “not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years”  If you’re thirty four years or younger, you are not eligible to become a U.S. President.
    2. “and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”  If you haven’t resided within the United States for a period of fourteen years or more, you are not eligible to become a U.S. President.  The term “resident” does not including having a residency status.  Rather, it refers to physically residing in the United States, i.e. 5,114 days with feet on the ground within the United States of America.

1Exception in Federal Law:  U.S. Code allows for — and the U.S. Supreme Court agrees — that children born to one or more parents temporarily stationed outside the United States of America on official government business are considered “natural born citizens” provided the parents of the child resided in the United State of America prior to their assignment and at least one citizen-parent and the child returned to the United States following the assignment.  This law was enacted under the recognition that when the Constitution was created, exceedingly few parents of child-bearing age ever left the United States.  As transportation became faster and much more accessible, U.S. parents of child-bearing age were increasingly stationed outside the United States on official government business, including as ambassadors, members of U.S. embassies, and other State Department personnel, as well as members of the U.S. military and their families.  Historically, such families would bear their children overseas either in or near U.S. embassies, which are considered under international law to be “U.S. soil,” thereby meeting the requirement for “natural born citizen.”  It is important to note the intent of this regulation was never to cover U.S. citizens living abroad of their own volition, for commercial or personal reasons.  Rather, it only covers those personnel in the employ of the U.S. government stationed overseas on official government business.

I began this article with the express hope of proving that Ted Cruz was indeed eligible to become a U.S. President.  Why?  Because I like the guy.  He’s exceptionally well-educated, very smart, and appeared to hold unswervingly true to solid Constitutional and Christian values.

Sadly, it was not meant to be.  Not only does he not meet the Constitution’s eligibility requirements, but over the course of the last half of 2015, and on into 2016, he’s shown his true colors, most notably that of Constitutional hypocrisy.  As note by his former law school professor:  “Ironically, the kind of justices he says he wants are the ones that say he’s not eligible to run for president,” Tribe said Monday night. “This is important because the way this guy plays fast and loose with the Constitution, he’s a fair weather originalist.” (Source)

I quickly discovered that the Constitutional requirement of “natural born citizen” applies only to those individuals actually born within the United States of America, that very few exceptions are allowed by federal law (U.S. Code), and that Ted Cruz meets NONE of those exceptions.  I don’t know how to make it any more plain than to say, “Ted Cruz is not Constitutionally eligible to be the President of the United States of America.”  Electing him would be a mistake of disastrous proportions as Democrats would invariable launch 11th hour sanctions against him that would doom the GOP ticket to abysmal failure.

Ted Cruz revealed what he thinks:  “The Internet has all sorts of fevered swamp theories, but the facts are simple,” Cruz told CNN’s Jake Tapper in an interview set to air on Sunday on “State of the Union.” “My mom was born in Wilmington, Delaware. She was an American citizen by birth. She’s been an American citizen all 81 years of her life. She’s never been a citizen of any other place.”

Sorry, Ted.  That makes you a U.S. citizen.  it does NOT, however, make you a “natural born citizen” as required by the United States Constitution.

I really like you, but the facts as you state them are indeed “simple,” and they simply do not meet the requirements as stated in both the Constitution and subsequent federal law.

Let us next examine a popular internet website that’s being used to argue that Ted Cruz is eligible.  Here’s the complete text of the short video:

“Texas Senator Ted Cruz was born in Canada, but he was always an American.  The Senator, who on Monday became the first official candidate for the 2016 Presidential race, was born in Calgary, with an American mom and a dad who was from Cuba, although he became a U.S. citizen in 2005.  Cruz was raised in Houston.  The United States Constitution grants American citizenship to anyone born to at least one parent who is also a U.S. citizen, so long as the parent spent five years inside the country, and two of those years came after the parent’s fourteenth birthday.”

Let’s examine the requirements together, and see whether or not Mr. Cruz meets them:

A great many people, myself included, have claimed that Ted Cruz is not eligible to be a U.S. President.  Arguments generally sound something like this:  “Because he was born in Canada, Ted Cruz does not meet the “natural born Citizen” requirement of the U.S. Constitution to be either President or Vice President of the United States of America.  As required by various acts of Congress, he wasn’t born in any of the United States, nor was he born in D.C., Guam, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands and the U.S. Virgin Islands, or the former Panama Canal Zone with one or more parents as a U.S. Citizen.”

Let’s see what the law has to say about it, beginning with “the supreme Law of the Land:

“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.”

According to the Constitution itself, Ted Cruz meets all requirements except that of “natural born Citizen.”

However, most political commentators refer to a 2011 Congressional Research Service report that concluded:

“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.”

I highlighted these clauses for closer scrutiny, as they appear to unlawfully expand the scope of the U.S. Constitution.  Indeed, our Founding Father’s intent behind their use of the term “natural-born Citizen” wasn’t ethereal.  It was very clear:  Someone physically born in the United States of America.  They allowed for “recent” (by 1787 standards) immigrants by adding, “or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution.

Thus, the only people meeting the original Constitutional requirement were those who were physically born in the United States of America or those who were a U.S. citizen when the Constitution was adopted on September 17, 1787.

Sadly, Congress can’t stop churning out legislation, even when clearly not needed.  So, in 1940, they passed an act on the subject they creatively entitled, “The Nationality Act of 1940.”

Among other things, this act laid out a very long, convoluted, and confusing set of definitions as to what constituted “Nationality at Birth” (Chapter 2).  Ted Cruz appears to one of those definitions, Chapter II, Section 201(d):

A person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who resided in the United States or one of its outlying possessions prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States.

He also appears to meet the requirements specified in 201(g).

To see how he meets these requirements, we need only three details from his family status:

1.  Senator Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, on December 22, 1970, and immigrated to the U.S. in 1974.

2.  His mother was born and raised in Wilmington, Delaware.

3.  His father was born in Matanzas, Cuba, in 1939, and immigrated to the U.S. at age 18 in 1957.

Given the timeline, Ted Cruz does NOT meet the requirements for “national citizenship” as defined by the Nationality Act of 1940, because his father was NOT a “national” of the U.S. at the time he was born.  He was a national of Canada.  Both he and Ted Cruz’s mother were living in Canada when Ted was born.  Another article confirms this critical piece of information slam-dunks the fact that Ted Cruz is NOT a “natural born citizen.”

The problem is that while “nationality at birth” and “natural born citizen” are closely related concepts, they are not identical concepts.  On the other hand, Sec 201 begins:

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:  (a) A person born in the United States…

Clearly, the Nationality Act of 1940 was trying to establish that “natural born citizen” and “nationality at birth” are synonymous.

Could that be true?  Are these two terms actually synonymous?

The answer is NO, they are not.  The only proper definition for “natural born citizen” is the one where the individual was born in the United States of America.  The term “national” refers to those who have citizenship status at the time of birth by some other means.  By comparison, “naturalized citizens” are those who, after living here a while, studying for and taking a test, and taking an oath, are allowed to become U.S. citizens.

But make no mistake about it:

Natural Born Citizen DOES NOT EQUAL Nationality at Birth

Even though he was born outside the United States, John McCain met the letter of the law as both parents met the requirements of federal legislation.  Ted Cruz claim of eligibility fails, because the status of his mother and father do NOT meet the requirements of the law.

Another regulation, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, organized a variety of statutes governing immigration and nationality under one roof.

Yet another regulation, the Immigration and Nationality Services Act of 1965, along with the Immigration and Nationality Act of 2011…

Naturally, the introduction and revision of all these acts raises the question as to why most commentaries refer to the Nationality Act of 1940, most of which is now out of date and has been superseded.

PolitiFact adhere’s to Blackstone’s interpretation. The problem is, our Founding Fathers, the same ones who penned the term “natural born citizen,” rejected Blackstone’s interpretation. Instead, they held true to Vattel’s definition, widely known throughout the colonies leading up to 1776. Here’s an excerpt from the best and most accurate treatise written on the subject to date:

Before the Constitution the closest reference we have to Natural Born Citizen is from the legal treatise “the Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758. In book one chapter 19, § 212. Of the citizens and natives:

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

The bottom line is that while these acts do establish Ted Cruz as a U.S. citizen, as well as having “nationality at birth,” they do not magically transport him into the U.S. during the time of his birth.

It’s upon this fact, along with the status of both his parents, that Ted Cruz fails the test of “natural born Citizen” as required by the U.S. Constitution.

If people continue to blindly stumble down this road, here’s what will happen:  The Demoncraps WILL wait until it’s too late for the GOP to find a replacement, at which point

It’s a shame, too, as I really would like to have seen Ted Cruz behind the Resolute Desk.  I think he would have made a great president!

My sworn duty to the U.S. Constitution, however, along with my honor and my integrity, but mostly my love for my country, prevents me from sitting idly by as idiotic Ted Cruz lovers continue blithely down the campaign trail, unaware that supporting Ted Cruz is a fateful trap.  Once sprung, the Democrats will sweep him into the ineligibility penalty box, leaving the GOP without ANY candidate, and shoeing in Hillary Clinton for yet another four years of Democraps at the helm.

Please – I beg of you!  Do not walk into that trap!  Do NOT be that stupid!

Thank you.

PS:  Four Supreme Court Cases define “Natural Born Citizen”

How I Voted in the 2014 Elections

“…a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” – Martin Luther King

The 2014 elections are by far the most important elections to date of this century.  Despite governmental reassurances to the contrary, America is tottering over the brink of economic collapse.  Vote wrong, and we most certainly will lose.  Vote right, and we might be able to haul her back from the edge.

As a registered Independent, I spent all afternoon Sunday reviewing not only the positions, but also the voting records of allMartin Luther King, Jr. 21 positions (42 candidates — half Republican, half Democrat) on my ballot. Given my “preaching” here on Facebook, I wanted to be absolutely certain I was electing the best candidate for each position, and not just “voting party line.”

I based my decisions mostly on their voting records. The criteria was simple: Had they supported and defended the Constitution,
voting records“the supreme Law of the Land,” as per their oaths of office? Or were they perverting our government by actions which undermined our Constitution and the rights and freedoms it recognizes and protects?

It was close in only 5 of the 21 open positions. The other 16 positions were slam-dunks.

In ALL cases, however, the records of the Republican candidates made it clear they stood for our rights and freedoms, while the records of the Democrat candidates made it clear they stood for bigger government at the EXPENSE of our rights and freedoms.

Sunday’s exercise was yet another of countless confirmations that the Democrat Party itself is no longer American, that it has been usurped by a mix of communists, fascists, socialists, muslims, opportunists and just plain idiots, to be used solely for the purpose of pulling the wool over the eyes of mostly lower to middle-class voters in order to remain in power, raise taxes, and siphon off a great deal of our hard-earned tax dollars into their own pockets and those of their friends.

To be fair, some Republicans are doing this, too, but I continually find they’re doing so to a far lesser extent.

Bottom line: I remain an Independent voter, yet cast all my votes towards the Republicans. My decisions were not based on the color of their party, but on the content of their character.

I’ll leave you with one last observation.  Five years of digging into what goes on behind the curtains in both parties have lead me to conclude what the Democrats say about the Republicans are largely lies, often made up on the spot, and that the elements in the following graphic are largely true:

Truth

 

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican, not a Democrat, and for many very good reasons which are even more sound today than they were back then.

UN: Control Ebola or Face an “Unprecedented Situation”

As reported by Fox News on October 15, 2014, the United Nations has issued an ultimatum to the United States of America: Control Ebola or face an unprecedented situation.

What the UN means by “unprecedented situation” can be found on the UN website (http://un-influenza.org/?q=content/un-response),ebola in their response plan for the Avian Flu, under Objective 6: Continuity Under Pandemic Conditions: “Ensuring the continuity of essential social, economic and governance services, and effective implementation of humanitarian relief, under pandemic conditions.”

UN World Control

Reading between the lines, as well as observing their response throughout other nations, this includes the mandatory implementation of the UN’s other agendas, most notably confiscating all firearms for the “safety of all response workers.”

Similar indications can also be found on the World Health Organization’s website, in their Global Alert and Response (GAR) whopage (http://www.who.int/csr/en/): “Coordinate and support Member States for pandemic and seasonal influenza preparedness and response.”

Again, reading between the lines, the WHO brings the doctors, while it’s parent organization, the UN, brings the muscle.

This is further echoed in their August 28, 2014 Ebola Response Roadmap (http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/131596/1/EbolaResponseRoadmap.pdf?ua=1).

This document clearly states it’s purpose on page 5: “To assist governments and partners in the revision and resourcing of country-specific operational plans for Ebola response, and the coordination of international support for their full implementation.”

While they tie their “country-specific operational plans” to the “Ebola response,” the fact remains that an OPLAN is an OPLAN. It’s an Operational Plan. That’s military lingo for how an organization intendeds to accomplish its mission, and their specific intent for the United States of America comes through rather glaringly in Objective 2 on the same page:

2. To ensure emergency and immediate application of comprehensive Ebola response intervention in countries with an initial case(s) or with localized transmission.

The key activity of Objective 2: “Coordinate operations and information across all partners, and the information, security, finance and other relevant sectors.

The most alarming aspect of this document, however, involves their definition of “security:”

Security: where necessary, and particularly in areas of intense transmission and short term extraordinary containment measures, national/local authorities must plan for and deploy the security services necessary to ensure the physical security of Ebola facilities. National/local authorities must give particular attention to ensuring the security of the staff working in Ebola treatment centres, Ebola referral/isolation centres, laboratories and, if required, for teams working at the community level to conduct surveillance, contact tracing and safe burials.”

I have no problem with ensuring the security of Ebola treatment facilities. The question is, under Obama’s management, will it ever stop there? What legislation is in place to prevent overbearing law enforcement from pulling the same crap as the New Orleans Police Department pulled on American citizens immediately following Hurricane Katrina?

Since Day 1 at their training academies, American law enforcement officers have been taught to “control, control, control.” When you put them into a widespread situation, many of them are overwhelmed. They fall back on their training without any regard for the Constitutional implications that what they’re doing is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. It might be suitable for a localized riot. It is NOT suitable for widespread chaos. This was most dramatically exhibited when SWAT teams busted down door after door after door in Boston immediately after the marathon bombing.

Did they respect our Constitutional rights? No. THEY BLEW RIGHT PAST THEM.

Again: What U.S. Federal Legislation is in place to ensure that NEVER happens again? What penalties are in place for local, county, state, and federal law enforcement officers, as well as augmenting forces like the National Guard, to prevent them from crossing the line?

Comments within the document such as “repurpose existing programmes [sic] to support control efforts” with respect to “security” indicate they have ZERO intention of respecting our Constitution.

un gun controlWhat’s next?  The widespread confiscation of firearms “for your safety?”

Here’s a thought: Instead of assuming Americans are idiots, let’s try another route: Education. Let Americans do what we do best: Control ourselves.

In 2012, immediately following the Mountain Shadows flare-up of the Waldo Canyon fire, I and all other residents of my apartment complex were denied access to our domiciles for five full days, despite the fact that residents in homes on either side of us were allowed to return after just TWO days. We were told it was for our “safety,” despite the fact we were no less safe than those homeowners.

THAT CRAP HAS GOT TO STOP.

Again, Congressman Lamborn: What legislation, specifically, do you have in place to ensure these rampant denials of our Constitutional rights NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN?

With few exceptions, We the People are perfectly capable of controlling ourselves. We’re well aware of the risks to both ourselves and others, regardless of what Obama is saying to the contrary.

All we need are clear and unambiguous guidelines. We don’t Obama lying to us in pathetic and misinformative attempts to calm our nerves. Older generations grew up during the Cold War. Younger generations watch The Walking Dead every week. Let’s get real!

As a retired USAF Officer, I remain well-trained in CBRNE operations. Most of my neighbors do not have my training, but given the fact this is a military town, there are a LOT of us scattered throughout the community who do.

Even those who are untrained, however, know the risks. If they’re told to limit travel for food and work, use hand sanitizer or wear and discard gloves, keep their shoes in the garage, and wipe down all doorknobs and other touched surfaces with a soap/water/bleach solution, I’m pretty darn sure they can handle that!

I can’t help but wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the United States of America.

By refusing to close our borders and by bringing in infected individuals, Obama is INVITING a UN takeover of our country. He’s long been looking for a way to either ditch or circumvent our Constitution, and I believe he may very well have found it.

UNLESS, of course, laws exist which clearly limit the scope of his many executive orders, most of which were drafted during his first term, yet clearly targeted to give him absolute dictatorial authority over our nation in times of crises — whether those crises were unavoidable, or, as many of us believe, manufactured by Obama himself.

On October 15, Dr. Ben Carson said, “We’ve known for a long time that [Ebola] has this kind of potential. That’s the reason that several weeks ago I said it was a real mistake to bring infected people in to this country in any way.”

Indeed it was. Yet Obama continues to allow it.

My question to you, Sir, is WHY?

Sincerely…