John Bolton just gave an “Axis of Evil” speech about Latin America
The US will now go after a so-called “Troika of Tyranny”: Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
You can read the rest @
https://www.vox.com/world/2018/11/1/18052338/bolton-cuba-venezuela-nicaragua-speech-troika-tyranny
We used to have a "good neighbor" policy toward Central and South America. But we really weren't very good neighbors, were we?
Is there anybody the US doesn't hate [other than maybe Israel]?
Friday, November 2, 2018
Thursday, November 1, 2018
Birthright Citizenship
Here is the only recent balanced essay I have found on the subject of "birthright citizenship":
But what was it that Donald Trump had done this time? What had inspired such “fear and loathing” in all those denizens of the lunatic Left ... and, yes, in the Establishment GOP (including a fatuous and obviously self-serving, utterly stupid statement by outgoing House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan)?
Very simply, the president had said he was seriously considering issuing an Executive Order to both clarify the application of the 14th Amendment and, essentially, end birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens who have come across the US border, many specifically to have children who then, as if by magic, become American citizens. That is, he was going to do exactly what President Obama had once boasted he would do with a “pen and telephone,” and for which he was praised by the Mainstream media and academia for his statesmanship and his understanding of the real meaning of Constitution.
Recall that the 14th Amendment was enacted after the War Between the States to guarantee the rights of citizenship to manumitted slaves and their offspring. And, indeed, there is a serious legal question about whether the amendment itself was ever legally and legitimately ratified. But be that as it may, it has applied ever since 1868.
Here is how Section 1 of the 14th Amendment reads:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
As I watched David Crabtree in his most officiously sanctimonious manner lecture his local television audience about the president’s desire to clarify the amendment’s actual legal application, like other members of mainstream commentariat he quoted the first section thusly: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Notice the difference; notice the essential phrase he left out, either by mistake or by design: “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
It’s a key phrase, critical to understanding what the authors of the amendment intended and what for nearly 100 years was accepted law up until the 1960s when leftist lawmakers got into the act simply by de facto practical applications. In other words, between the very clear and forthright intention of its authors that the 14th Amendment only applied to slaves and their offspring born in the United State who are necessarily “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” and the slyly imposed practice we now have which enables a foreign woman to illegally slip across the Rio Grande and have a child who then, mutatis mutandis, becomes a citizen and an “anchor baby,” permitting usually its illegal relations to all come across—between these two interpretations and applications there is an absolute irreconcilable difference.
You can read the rest @
http://www.unz.com/article/birthright-citizenship-the-constitution-and-the-subterfuge-of-the-left/
Note well that Obama ad-Dajjal could do what Trump is now not allowed to do.
This whole issue is a red herring, and as I have written before the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is the key to its resolution:
https://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2016/10/us-constitution-trump-vs-hillary.html
Once again, Trump appears to be right and the left is full of crap. To them the constitution only applies when and how they want it to.
But what was it that Donald Trump had done this time? What had inspired such “fear and loathing” in all those denizens of the lunatic Left ... and, yes, in the Establishment GOP (including a fatuous and obviously self-serving, utterly stupid statement by outgoing House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan)?
Very simply, the president had said he was seriously considering issuing an Executive Order to both clarify the application of the 14th Amendment and, essentially, end birthright citizenship for children of illegal aliens who have come across the US border, many specifically to have children who then, as if by magic, become American citizens. That is, he was going to do exactly what President Obama had once boasted he would do with a “pen and telephone,” and for which he was praised by the Mainstream media and academia for his statesmanship and his understanding of the real meaning of Constitution.
Recall that the 14th Amendment was enacted after the War Between the States to guarantee the rights of citizenship to manumitted slaves and their offspring. And, indeed, there is a serious legal question about whether the amendment itself was ever legally and legitimately ratified. But be that as it may, it has applied ever since 1868.
Here is how Section 1 of the 14th Amendment reads:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
As I watched David Crabtree in his most officiously sanctimonious manner lecture his local television audience about the president’s desire to clarify the amendment’s actual legal application, like other members of mainstream commentariat he quoted the first section thusly: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Notice the difference; notice the essential phrase he left out, either by mistake or by design: “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
It’s a key phrase, critical to understanding what the authors of the amendment intended and what for nearly 100 years was accepted law up until the 1960s when leftist lawmakers got into the act simply by de facto practical applications. In other words, between the very clear and forthright intention of its authors that the 14th Amendment only applied to slaves and their offspring born in the United State who are necessarily “subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” and the slyly imposed practice we now have which enables a foreign woman to illegally slip across the Rio Grande and have a child who then, mutatis mutandis, becomes a citizen and an “anchor baby,” permitting usually its illegal relations to all come across—between these two interpretations and applications there is an absolute irreconcilable difference.
You can read the rest @
http://www.unz.com/article/birthright-citizenship-the-constitution-and-the-subterfuge-of-the-left/
Note well that Obama ad-Dajjal could do what Trump is now not allowed to do.
This whole issue is a red herring, and as I have written before the phrase "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" is the key to its resolution:
https://sainthoward.blogspot.com/2016/10/us-constitution-trump-vs-hillary.html
Once again, Trump appears to be right and the left is full of crap. To them the constitution only applies when and how they want it to.
Wilderness Disappearing
This report claims that 70% of the world's remaining wilderness is in only 5 countries:
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/wilderness-areas-world-wildlife-pristine-biodiversity-conservation-climate-change-capitalism-a8611521.html
Even if you do not believe in the Bible, you have to admit the end of the world is nigh. We (humanity) are killing off everything.
https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/wilderness-areas-world-wildlife-pristine-biodiversity-conservation-climate-change-capitalism-a8611521.html
Even if you do not believe in the Bible, you have to admit the end of the world is nigh. We (humanity) are killing off everything.
How Satan Succeeds
The growing popularity of "New Age" beliefs likely stems in part from fewer Americans following traditional religions, according to political analyst Ruy Teixeira.
"The data suggests this is the fastest growing religious group in America, are people who don't hold any firm religious beliefs," Teixeira, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, said Wednesday on Hill.TV's "What America's Thinking."
"Perhaps these New Age beliefs are in a sense, at least partially, a reflection of more and more people not having an orthodox religious set of beliefs," he added.
Teixeira was discussing a recent Pew Research Center poll that found 62 percent of Americans hold New Age beliefs, such as astrology and the presence of spiritual energy in trees or mountains.
Seventy-eight percent of those who held at least one New Age belief said they did not affiliate with any particular religion.
The survey also found that those who identify as Christian were more likely than atheists and agnostics to hold at least one New Age belief.
You can read the rest @
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/414129-analyst-says-new-age-beliefs-are-partially-a-reflection-in-more
No "Christian" would hold such beliefs, since Jesus specifically said they should not.
Note that Satan is not mentioned even once in the report. He's behind this "new age" crap, and you cannot make him go away by ignoring his presence.
"The data suggests this is the fastest growing religious group in America, are people who don't hold any firm religious beliefs," Teixeira, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, said Wednesday on Hill.TV's "What America's Thinking."
"Perhaps these New Age beliefs are in a sense, at least partially, a reflection of more and more people not having an orthodox religious set of beliefs," he added.
Teixeira was discussing a recent Pew Research Center poll that found 62 percent of Americans hold New Age beliefs, such as astrology and the presence of spiritual energy in trees or mountains.
Seventy-eight percent of those who held at least one New Age belief said they did not affiliate with any particular religion.
The survey also found that those who identify as Christian were more likely than atheists and agnostics to hold at least one New Age belief.
You can read the rest @
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/414129-analyst-says-new-age-beliefs-are-partially-a-reflection-in-more
No "Christian" would hold such beliefs, since Jesus specifically said they should not.
Note that Satan is not mentioned even once in the report. He's behind this "new age" crap, and you cannot make him go away by ignoring his presence.
Bogus Google Walkouts
According to reports like this one, Google employees are conducting a mass walkout to protest company wrongdoing:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/matthewchampion/google-walkout-sexual-misconduct
This is some kind of sick joke, right? Mr. Rubin will get to keep his $90 million and will never be punished, let alone prosecuted, for anything he allegedly did.
And it's unlikely Google will change one iota.
So, what's the point ... other than to stage a global PR event to persuade us rubes that Google has a conscience?
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/matthewchampion/google-walkout-sexual-misconduct
This is some kind of sick joke, right? Mr. Rubin will get to keep his $90 million and will never be punished, let alone prosecuted, for anything he allegedly did.
And it's unlikely Google will change one iota.
So, what's the point ... other than to stage a global PR event to persuade us rubes that Google has a conscience?
Not Just Semantics
According to this report, half of the people in Afghanistan live "outside government control":
https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2018/10/afghan-population.php
For us democracy loving peoples, wouldn't the correct phrase be "outside government protection"?
But unfortunately, it is CONTROL that interests us ... control which brings STABILITY ... which will allow the robber barons to strip mine the wealth of that primitive land.
And that stolen wealth will benefit NO ONE other than the rich.
Wake up, people. We're wasting trillions of dollars there for no purpose other than the further enrichment of the few. The Taliban and bin Laden were just the pretexts for our illegal intervention.
https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2018/10/afghan-population.php
For us democracy loving peoples, wouldn't the correct phrase be "outside government protection"?
But unfortunately, it is CONTROL that interests us ... control which brings STABILITY ... which will allow the robber barons to strip mine the wealth of that primitive land.
And that stolen wealth will benefit NO ONE other than the rich.
Wake up, people. We're wasting trillions of dollars there for no purpose other than the further enrichment of the few. The Taliban and bin Laden were just the pretexts for our illegal intervention.
The Story Of The Gatling Gun
Here is the interesting saga of the Gatling gun:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/might-most-dangerous-apos-gun-143200314.html
It is ironic that Dr. Gatling invented this deadly machine because of a sense of compassion for men wounded in the US Civil War.
There is a lesson here - you cannot make war obsolete by creating more deadly weapons. Our bloodlust for killing each other FAR outweighs any feeling of compassion, logic, and even common sense. [Example - calling what we did to Libya and Syria "humanitarian intervention"]
And unfortunately this is a lesson our leaders have yet to learn.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/might-most-dangerous-apos-gun-143200314.html
It is ironic that Dr. Gatling invented this deadly machine because of a sense of compassion for men wounded in the US Civil War.
There is a lesson here - you cannot make war obsolete by creating more deadly weapons. Our bloodlust for killing each other FAR outweighs any feeling of compassion, logic, and even common sense. [Example - calling what we did to Libya and Syria "humanitarian intervention"]
And unfortunately this is a lesson our leaders have yet to learn.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)