CONSTITUTIONALGOV.NET

I would love to know of all of the opponents out there of AZ legislation 1070, how many of them have actually read the legislation?  I’m tired of a bunch of people going on TV pontificating about how this legislation racially profiles, how this legislation will hurt Arizona, etc., etc., etc., and yet I cannot imagine that any of them have read the legislation because it doesn’t imply nor give explicit consent to do any of the things they fear.  The facts are this:  AZ S.B. 1070 is a simple piece of legislation that is quite clear and concise in what it attempts to accomplish.  First and foremost, the bill simply adds three amendments to existing AZ revised statutes.  In addition, the three amendments go to great lengths to ensure that they comport with federal law, and in numerous portions sites that it must be in adherence to existing Federal Law (pursuant to 8 United States Code sections of the federal law).  The bill appears to have four objectives in mind: 

Makes it illegal in the State of Arizona to setup sanctuary cities by conforming to federal law (Mesa and Chandler are already considered sanctuary cities; this would make it illegal for elected officials of those cities to continue to allow their cities to act as sanctuary cities).  (Page 2, 11-1051)

Seeks to reduce drug trafficking by illegal aliens by increasing the penalties for being here illegal if the person is trafficking drugs. (Page 3, 13-1509)

Adds to the existing legislation prohibiting the employment of illegal aliens by making it in essence illegal to hire a “day worker” by stating that it is illegal to transport an illegal alien from one location to a job site.  This amendment further states that you must be impeding traffic when you commit this act in order for there to be probable cause to pull you over and then determine if the person you are contracting for labor is here legally.  There is also a provision in this section to protect against entrapment. (Page 5, 13-2929)

Adds to existing legislation regarding unlawful human trafficking of illegal aliens.  This portion of the legislation states that it is already a misdemeanor to aid an illegal alien in being in the state illegally; however, this section includes making it a class 6 felony to participate in the trafficking of 10 or more illegal aliens. (Page 6, 13-2929)

With respect to the above stated goals of the legislation, each section states that it will be in conformance with existing federal law.  Does any of the above sound unreasonable to you?  Does any of the above sound like it is going to result in racial profiling?  In every instance of the legislation, probable cause of some sort of violation such as a traffic violation, or as a public official failing to enforce existing law must be adhered to before any of this new legislation’s provisions can be enforced.  Does any of the above sound like it is going to impact your civil rights?

On page 2 of the legislation, it clearly states the following:

J. THIS SECTION SHALL BE IMPLEMENTED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH FEDERAL LAWS REGULATING IMMIGRATION, PROTECTING THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF ALL PERSONS AND RESPECTING THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF UNITED STATES CITIZENS.

How much clearer could it be that everyone’s civil rights will be protected, or the person violating those civil rights will not be in conformance with the legislation?  I suggest that those of you who oppose this bill, read the bill, then please point to the sections that are in violation of existing federal law.  Please provide me the section that is in contradiction with the IV and V Amendments of the United States Constitution.  I’m tired of doing the homework for you liberals, so go ahead and read the bill yourselves, then show me the sections of the bill that trouble you and explain why.  Until you’ve actually read the bill, we can’t have an intellectual discussion regarding the legislation.

“The vast right-wing conspiracy theorists” is a phrase many on the left and in the media like to use, but I have news for them.  From this right-winger, I don’t believe in conspiracies.  I attribute them all to the ignorance of the American people, and I don’t use this phrase to disparage my fellow Americans as ignorant, stupid people, but rather to show that all of us are ignorant of some events.

The best example of this is the ignorance of most Americans as to the fact and then the significance of President Obama’s dual citizenship at birth.  His dual citizenship is no conspiracy theory, and yet no one in the main stream media, cable news networks (including Fox New), most radio talk show hosts, and almost every politician refuse to have an intellectual discussion on what President Obama’s dual citizenship at birth means, and how it makes him potentially a usurper of the Office of the Presidency.

Let’s begin with the facts.  President Obama was born to British citizen Barack Obama Sr. and American citizen Stanley Ann Dunham.  On one of Barack Obama’s official campaign websites, fightthesmears.com, he admitted that his Father was a British citizen in accordance with the British Nationality Act of 1948 and that his Father’s children were subject to that same Act.  Here it is in the exact words that were placed on his website during the Summer before his election:

When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children. [1]

Part II, Section 5 of the British Nationality Act of 1948 states that:

Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth. [2]

Mr. Obama admitted on his website that his father was a British subject* governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948. He states that the British Nationality Act of 1948 governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children, and the British Nationality Act of 1948 tells us that a person born to a father who is a citizen of the United Kingdom, is also a citizen of the United Kingdom.

I don’t really know how it could be any more straightforward than that?  Clearly according to British Law, Barack Obama was a British citizen at birth, so how is it possible for a British citizen at birth to be a natural born U.S. citizen?  More importantly, why is it impossible to get the media, pundits and our politicians to have an intellectual discussion on this matter?  The answer is not because of some wide spread conspiracy, but rather the ignorance of the players and more importantly most of the American people to entertain a discussion on this matter.

If we as a nation continue to refuse to discuss this matter logically and rationally, then we will deserve everything that will come as a result.  If we are going to continue to be ignorant of our history, ignorant of why the provision was put in our Constitution in the first place, namely, that our President must be a “natural born Citizen,”[3] then the result remains the Constitutional crisis we now find ourselves in.  We can lament that this issue should have been resolved during the election, and it absolutely should have, but it wasn’t.  To continue to ignore the issue now is a travesty to our system, and is so intellectually dishonest and such a threat to our nation that I cannot fathom how many in this country can continue to remain silent.

It is about time we spoke up on this matter and brought it to the forefront of our political discourse.  Our country as a nation of laws and as a Constitutional Republic hangs in the balance on this issue.  As Glenn Beck’s new call to action states: “”Not Racists, Not Violent, No Longer Silent,“[4] I ask Mr. Beck, when is he going to remove his silence on this issue?  Until as a nation we begin to discuss this matter intellectually and honestly, it will not go away.  It is long past time that we bring resolution to this matter.

---

* His father was actually a British citizen, not a British subject in accordance with the British Nationality Act of 1948.

On most conservative talk radio programs (and television programs) aired Monday, the predominant theme was playing the sound bites of the left (from former President Clinton to Joe Klein) where they accused the likes of former Governor Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Michelle Bachmann, and Rush Limbaugh of seditious speech.  The act of sedition is a serious offense.  The left which constantly speaks in pejoratives has now added sedition to their lexicon (see Joe Klein writing the definition of sedition on a napkin which he then read on Chris Matthews’ program).   Quite frankly, this was the last straw for me.  I’m tired of the false memes spread by the left, and I don’t care to hear any more sound bites from them.  In fact, I would appreciate it greatly if talk radio would stop playing sound bites from the left altogether. 

The simple fact is we already know the ideology of the left.  I don’t need to hear it from their own mouths, and I certainly don’t need to hear them spew further invectives.  Most of the left wing politicians and pundits are disingenuous at best, intellectually dishonest, and morally bankrupt.  Listening to them, honestly, brings negativity into my life day after day.  We aren’t a negative people, and we don’t need to be brought down everyday listening to them.

What we need to do is focus on our message which is a simple one.  As a God fearing, God loving nation, we have faith in our Creator.  We know that our Creator has blessed us with certain rights.  No government has the authority to take those rights from us.  As a result, we have become one of the most prosperous nations in history, if not the most prosperous nation in history.  While the economy continues to struggle, and many of our fellow Americans continue to struggle, we must be focused on spreading a positive message and spending our time being charitable to our fellow Americans who are less fortunate than ouselves right now.  If you know a neighbor who is out of work invite them over for dinner.  If you know someone working long hours just to make ends meet, think of a way you can help ease their burden, maybe cut their lawn for them.  Why remain mired in the negativity of the left?  I for one refuse to waste any more time listening to them.  If all talk radio is going to do is play sound bites from the left, then it’s time to get back to listening some music.

In our spare time, we should continue to be engaged in the political process and ensure that we elect honest, limited government candidates to office.  The same old sorry politicians will not do.  Let’s find people who truly want to lead, people who are not part of the establishment, and then let’s spend the rest of our time helping each other.

With the recent eruptions of the Eyjafjallajokull volcano in Iceland, volcanic ash is playing havoc across Europe.  As a result, air travel has been disrupted and in Europe, completely shutdown, for days now.  However, the more interesting effects of the volcano’s eruptions may not be in the ash spreading across Europe and the air travel cancellations, but rather the effects on the weather.  Volcanic ash helps to blot out the sun’s rays presenting temporary global cooling.  In 1816, Mount Tambora in Java erupted unbeknownst to Americans.  On June 6, 1816, it snowed in the Northeastern United States and continued to snow through July and August.  Will it snow in May of 2010 and continue to snow through the summer due to the eruptions of the volcano in Iceland?  Only time will tell, but given the economic recessions around the globe, cooler temperatures right now may cause a further economic catastrophe.  Such an event would place citizens already on edge around the globe into a greater sense of anxiety potentially to the point of civil unrest.  Unfortunately, I have little confidence in the world’s governments to deal with this crisis successfully.  While the earth may begin to cool due to the volcano’s eruptions, society may begin to meltdown as a result of this event.

After attending “Glenn Beck’s American Revival” held in Glendale (not Phoenix) Arizona yesterday, I left wondering, are there really a majority of Americans willing to make the hard choices?  The hard choices as I believe Glenn has been espousing for some time can be summarized as losing benefits (often government entitlements) that almost all Americans participate in, in some form or another.  Glenn clearly thinks we can, the attendees at yesterday’s seminar clearly think we can and want to, but I’m still not so sure a majority of Americans are on-board.  Before delving into this topic further, let me share a little bit of my experience at the revival.

First, the presenters:  David Barton, David Buckner and Judge Andrew Napolitano were all fabulous. One has to ask oneself how many times in your life will you have the opportunity to hear a presentation from a man who holds the largest pre 1812 American historical writings and collections of the Founders, a Columbia economics professor and a rabble rousing former Federal judge educate in a 7 hour period for a pittance of a price?  That was the greatest benefit those in attendance yesterday received.  It was truly a well rounded educational exercise.

David Barton can be characterized as a fast talking wealth of information on our Founders.  For many of us, we couldn’t come close to rattling off more than a few of the Founding Fathers that signed the Declaration of Independence, while Mr. Barton has numerous facts about the lives, the political philosophies, theology and writings committed to memory about each and every one of the Founders.  His historical knowledge of our Founders makes him one of the premiere sources we should turn to in obtaining further knowledge about our Founders.  I thoroughly enjoyed his quick repertoire and feel fortunate that my knowledgebase was increased immeasurably thanks to his teaching yesterday.

David Buckner, whom many of us remember from his infamous appearance on the Glenn Beck program in early 2009 where he feinted, provided a reality check for all of us on the state of our economy.  The gist of his presentation is to stop allowing falsehoods to be told to us.  Without the truth of our true economic situation, we will never make the choices we need to make to set our country back on a path to prosperity.  This subject will come up in more detail when I later look at answering the question presented in the title to this post.

Judge Andrew Napolitano, whom many of you know from watching Fox News where he is a contributor, is far more entertaining in person than on television.  Although, I’ve always enjoyed watching Judge Napolitano, he appears to restrain himself a bit in his television appearances.  No such restraint exists when you get to see him speak in person.  His speech held back nothing.  A true Constitutional originalist, Judge Napolitano spoke to the limits on government, he spoke to our rights coming from God, and how the government is only enacted to secure those rights.  Judge Napolitano, quite frankly, is my new hero.  He speaks truth, and he speaks with candor and passion.  He is as against the former administration’s Constitutional transgressions (i.e. The Patriot Act and bailouts) as he is against the present administration’s Constitutional transgressions (i.e. bailouts and Health Care) all for the same reasons.  These acts by the Federal Government are un-Constitutional and limit the freedoms man inherits through his Creator via the laws of nature.  And he is incensed that the Federal Government continues to thwart those freedoms.

But now back to the question, will the American Revival succeed? Will Americans be willing to make the tough choices and give up benefits in order to right the American ship of state?  I fear that a majority of us will not.  Let’s look at the choices we are going to have make.  First and foremost, we are going to have to dramatically alter a benefit program we all participate in, i.e. social security.  We must first remember that social security was originally setup as a safety net.  It was never intended to provide for your full retirement benefits, and yet, many Americans make no additional provisions to provide for their retirement.  Why is that?  Do you not have a duty to yourself and your family to provide for yourself?  You can argue that you are providing for your retirement by contributing throughout your life to social security expecting that benefit when you retire, but why in the world would you trust the government to manage your retirement money better than you could manage it yourself?

Social Security was not intended to be paid to retirees for decades.  When the actuaries came up with the retirement age for Social Security of 65, life expectancy rates did not exceed 65.  Do you really think the government ever expected to pay you back the money they took from you in Social Security?  The answer is no.  They expected to receive more money from you in Social Security, then they expected to pay you back, that’s how the program would remain solvent.  That is not what has come to fruition, and even by the most conservative of estimates, Social Security is trillions of dollars underfunded.  The only way to make the program work in its present state is to raise the retirement age.  Are you going to be willing to support your Representative or Senators who vote to raise the retirement age?

The States are going to have to reassert their sovereignty and quit sucking from the government teat.  That means a dramatic decrease in Federally funded programs at the State level:  education, health care benefits, etc.  Are you going to be willing to allow your State Representatives to cutoff these Federal dollars?

State services will have to be dramatically reduced for our States to become solvent.  Are you going to be willing to reduce teachers, police, fire fighters, funds sent to State Universities, etc. in order to reduce State budgets?

I believe the majority of Americans are too accustomed to the benefits they receive from both Federal and State governments.  Most Americans aren’t willing to care for themselves anymore.  More importantly, if we continue as a secular society, a society without faith in God, we can’t possibly be a moral society capable of caring for one another through charity without allowing government to do it for us which cannot be characterized as charity.

I left yesterday’s revival with optimism.  It was inspiring to see like minded people who wish to return to Constitutional governance, but I fear a majority of Americans are not willing to do what it takes, to give up enough things, to return to personal responsibility, to enjoy the freedoms granted them by God to produce the prosperous and moral society necessary to live under our Constitutional Republic.  I remain hopeful because I have faith in God, and I pray he guides us, and the majority of Americans listen and do what is necessary to right the ship of state that we all call America.  My faith makes me believe it will happen, but that stubborn logical side of my mind fears it will not.