Daniel Pipes has written in the Philadelphia bulletin:
With Colin Powell now repeating the lie that Barack Obama has "always been a Christian," despite new information further confirming Obama's Muslim childhood (such as the Indonesian school registration listing him as Muslim), one watches with dismay as the Democratic candidate manages to hide the truth on this issue.
Instead, then, let us review a related subject – Obama's connections and even indebtedness, throughout his career, to extremist Islam. Specifically, he has longstanding, if indirect ties to two institutions, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), listed by the U.S. government in 2007 as an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas-funding trial; and the Nation of Islam (NoI), condemned by the Anti-Defamation League for its "consistent record of racism and anti-Semitism."
Read the whole thing here.
Showing posts with label presidential race 2008. Show all posts
Showing posts with label presidential race 2008. Show all posts
Friday, October 24, 2008
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Nancy Calls for Fast, Divine Intervention to Protest Obamfuscation
Aloha!
On 9/4, 10/4 & 11/4 I would like to call a corporate fast and prayer for God to intervene on our behalf to stop BHO. We've done all we can possibly do to stop him and we need divine intervention now... Just looking for others who would like to petition the gates of Heaven to repent and ask God to restore our Judeo-Christian foundation.
Each fast would start at 6 a.m. on the 4th and end at 6 a.m. on the 5th (24 hrs.) Water and/or grape juice only to represent Jesus Christ's life and sacrifice.
I know some of the Old Testament prophets would call the entire population to fast for an extended period of time, sometimes 3 days. The more people we can get onboard, the better!
If President Bush would call a fast, this would be preferred but I don't foresee this happening... so it seems it's up to us, the grassroots!!!
Hope it sounds good to you! Please pass this invitation on to your friends and family!
Thank you very much!!!
Nancy
On 9/4, 10/4 & 11/4 I would like to call a corporate fast and prayer for God to intervene on our behalf to stop BHO. We've done all we can possibly do to stop him and we need divine intervention now... Just looking for others who would like to petition the gates of Heaven to repent and ask God to restore our Judeo-Christian foundation.
Each fast would start at 6 a.m. on the 4th and end at 6 a.m. on the 5th (24 hrs.) Water and/or grape juice only to represent Jesus Christ's life and sacrifice.
I know some of the Old Testament prophets would call the entire population to fast for an extended period of time, sometimes 3 days. The more people we can get onboard, the better!
If President Bush would call a fast, this would be preferred but I don't foresee this happening... so it seems it's up to us, the grassroots!!!
Hope it sounds good to you! Please pass this invitation on to your friends and family!
Thank you very much!!!
Nancy
Monday, August 11, 2008
Definition of Natural Born Citizen
Two recent articles on citizenship suggest the chief issue is allegiance, not place of birth. Thus, dual citizenship calls into question Mr. Obama's eligibility to be president.
First, Judah Benjamin of Texas Darlin has an interesting post. The article begins:
"Barack Obama has been a citizen of multiple nations. And even if his citizenship outside the US was renounced, Article II of the U.S. Constitution prohibits him from being President, for the same reason that naturalized citizens are prohibited: divided loyalties."
and
"There is no way a person who has Dual Citizenship, or who has had Dual Citizenship, should be eligible under Article II."
Mr. Benjamin's reasoning is that the United States Naturalization Act of 1790, which was repealed in 1795, states that:
"The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens”.
Around the same time, John Jay wrote to George Washington:
"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American Army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”
Noting that the chief concern is with divided loyalty concerning defense, Benjamin adds:
"Note that what particularly concerned Jay was not a political issue but a military issue arising because the President is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. He was bothered by issues of National Security."
Benjamin then goes on to quote Supreme Court Justice Noah Haynes in United States v. Rhodes:
In United States v. Rhodes, Supreme Court Justice Noah Haynes Swayne (December 7, 1804 – June 8, 1884) addressed the issue as follows:
“All persons born in the Allegiance of the King are Natural- Born subjects, and all persons born in the Allegiance of the United States are Natural-Born Citizens. Birth and Allegiance go together. Such is the Rule of the Common Law, and it is the Common Law of this country…since as before the Revolution.”
Benjamin concludes:
"To be a Natural Born Citizen one has to be born in a State, or Condition of, Allegiance to the USA. A person with Dual Nationality due to having parents of differing Nationality, who both acknowledged the Birth, is not so born. Their Allegiance is, by definition, divided. Subsequent acquisition of Nationality produces the same problem."
Benjamin goes on to quote Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England:
"And this maxim of the law proceeded upon a general principle, that every man owes natural allegiance where he is born, and cannot owe two such allegiances, or serve two masters, at once.... To encourage also foreign commerce, it was enacted by statute 25 Edw. III. st. 2. that all children born abroad, provided both their parents were at the time of the birth in allegiance to the king, and the mother had passed the seas by her husband’s consent, might inherit as if born in England."
Benjamin also quote the US State Department:
"dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country"
He argues that:
"The whole point of Article II is that the President must have absolute and total Allegiance to the United States of America and no Foreign Ruler or Government, Church, or Political Entity...The purpose behind the exclusion of Naturalized Citizens is that the President must never even have had such an Allegiance in the past"
Moreover, under the law that governs naturalization, SEC. 337. [8 U.S.C. 1448], to become a citizen you are required:
"(1) to support the Constitution of the United States; (2) to renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which the applicant was before a subject or citizen..."
and
"Obama’s behavior in Kenya by campaigning actively for Odinga has to call his Allegiance into question. There is also reason to think that Governor Bill Richardson has the same problem, more or less. This is unprecedented and it should not be allowed to go unchallenged."
Miri sent me a related article by Edward Erler of Cal State San Bernardino that appeared Imprimis Magazine, published by Hillsdale College. Professor Erler points out that the Fourteenth Amendment states:
“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.”
The phrase "'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' meant 'not owing allegiance to anybody else and being subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States.'"
Professor Erler argues that the concept of "birthright citizenship" has feudal origins and was explicitly repudiated. An example is the use of the term "jurisdiction" in the Fourteenth Amendment. He adds that:
"the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment specified that those who are naturalized must owe exclusive allegiance to the U.S. to be included within its jurisdiction. And the citizenship oath taken today still requires a pledge of such allegiance. But in practice dual citizenship—and dual allegiance—is allowed. This is a sign of the decline of American citizenship and of America as a nation-state."
First, Judah Benjamin of Texas Darlin has an interesting post. The article begins:
"Barack Obama has been a citizen of multiple nations. And even if his citizenship outside the US was renounced, Article II of the U.S. Constitution prohibits him from being President, for the same reason that naturalized citizens are prohibited: divided loyalties."
and
"There is no way a person who has Dual Citizenship, or who has had Dual Citizenship, should be eligible under Article II."
Mr. Benjamin's reasoning is that the United States Naturalization Act of 1790, which was repealed in 1795, states that:
"The children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond Sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born Citizens”.
Around the same time, John Jay wrote to George Washington:
"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American Army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”
Noting that the chief concern is with divided loyalty concerning defense, Benjamin adds:
"Note that what particularly concerned Jay was not a political issue but a military issue arising because the President is Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. He was bothered by issues of National Security."
Benjamin then goes on to quote Supreme Court Justice Noah Haynes in United States v. Rhodes:
In United States v. Rhodes, Supreme Court Justice Noah Haynes Swayne (December 7, 1804 – June 8, 1884) addressed the issue as follows:
“All persons born in the Allegiance of the King are Natural- Born subjects, and all persons born in the Allegiance of the United States are Natural-Born Citizens. Birth and Allegiance go together. Such is the Rule of the Common Law, and it is the Common Law of this country…since as before the Revolution.”
Benjamin concludes:
"To be a Natural Born Citizen one has to be born in a State, or Condition of, Allegiance to the USA. A person with Dual Nationality due to having parents of differing Nationality, who both acknowledged the Birth, is not so born. Their Allegiance is, by definition, divided. Subsequent acquisition of Nationality produces the same problem."
Benjamin goes on to quote Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England:
"And this maxim of the law proceeded upon a general principle, that every man owes natural allegiance where he is born, and cannot owe two such allegiances, or serve two masters, at once.... To encourage also foreign commerce, it was enacted by statute 25 Edw. III. st. 2. that all children born abroad, provided both their parents were at the time of the birth in allegiance to the king, and the mother had passed the seas by her husband’s consent, might inherit as if born in England."
Benjamin also quote the US State Department:
"dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country"
He argues that:
"The whole point of Article II is that the President must have absolute and total Allegiance to the United States of America and no Foreign Ruler or Government, Church, or Political Entity...The purpose behind the exclusion of Naturalized Citizens is that the President must never even have had such an Allegiance in the past"
Moreover, under the law that governs naturalization, SEC. 337. [8 U.S.C. 1448], to become a citizen you are required:
"(1) to support the Constitution of the United States; (2) to renounce and abjure absolutely and entirely all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which the applicant was before a subject or citizen..."
and
"Obama’s behavior in Kenya by campaigning actively for Odinga has to call his Allegiance into question. There is also reason to think that Governor Bill Richardson has the same problem, more or less. This is unprecedented and it should not be allowed to go unchallenged."
Miri sent me a related article by Edward Erler of Cal State San Bernardino that appeared Imprimis Magazine, published by Hillsdale College. Professor Erler points out that the Fourteenth Amendment states:
“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.”
The phrase "'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' meant 'not owing allegiance to anybody else and being subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States.'"
Professor Erler argues that the concept of "birthright citizenship" has feudal origins and was explicitly repudiated. An example is the use of the term "jurisdiction" in the Fourteenth Amendment. He adds that:
"the framers of the Fourteenth Amendment specified that those who are naturalized must owe exclusive allegiance to the U.S. to be included within its jurisdiction. And the citizenship oath taken today still requires a pledge of such allegiance. But in practice dual citizenship—and dual allegiance—is allowed. This is a sign of the decline of American citizenship and of America as a nation-state."
Saturday, August 9, 2008
Obama's Dual Citizenship
Is it appropriate for the President of the United States to hold dual citizenship? Mr. Obama may believe himself to be a citizen of the world, but there is what economists call a principal-agent problem if the president has dual loyalties. This may or may not be relevant to the Article II issue. However (and h/t Larwyn), it would seem that the failure of the state and federal governments to establish a system whereby simple information about presidential candidates is made public seems to have shocked us a second time this year.
Gateway Pundit notes that Rocky Mountain News reports that he "(h)olds both American and Kenyan (since 1963) citizenship."
Gateway Pundit quotes Political Gateway's 2007 post.
“Under the Independence Constitution of Kenya, Obama became a Kenyan citizen on December 12, 1963. He has never renounced his Kenyan citizenship. On his senate web site, Obama tap dances around his own dual nationality when discussing his father. Obama obviously knows, because his father told him, that he also held/holds Kenyan nationality.
“Once again, we find Barry O concealing fascinating information about his identity. There is nothing unusual about dual nationality. Indeed, ancient Roman Law doctrines of jus sanguini and jus soli come into play, because both Kenya and the U. S. recognize dual nationality. Once again, the issue is not ‘legality.’ The issue is the cover-up; Obama’s concealment of his own identity. From us, and most of all from himself."
Yes, concealment is the issue, isn't it?
Gateway Pundit notes that Rocky Mountain News reports that he "(h)olds both American and Kenyan (since 1963) citizenship."
Gateway Pundit quotes Political Gateway's 2007 post.
“Under the Independence Constitution of Kenya, Obama became a Kenyan citizen on December 12, 1963. He has never renounced his Kenyan citizenship. On his senate web site, Obama tap dances around his own dual nationality when discussing his father. Obama obviously knows, because his father told him, that he also held/holds Kenyan nationality.
“Once again, we find Barry O concealing fascinating information about his identity. There is nothing unusual about dual nationality. Indeed, ancient Roman Law doctrines of jus sanguini and jus soli come into play, because both Kenya and the U. S. recognize dual nationality. Once again, the issue is not ‘legality.’ The issue is the cover-up; Obama’s concealment of his own identity. From us, and most of all from himself."
Yes, concealment is the issue, isn't it?
Friday, August 8, 2008
Seeking Associate in Missouri, the "Show Me" State
Dear Friends: I am seeking a resident of Missouri to send one letter each to the Missouri Secretary of State and the Missouri Board of Elections requesting that they take responsibility for investigation of citizens' questions concerning candidates' eligibility, including requests for birth certificates. If you are willing to send two letters (I will provide the templates) and you live in Missouri, please contact me at mlangbert@hvc.rr.com.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
We Need a McCain-Obama-Clinton Sit-Up Contest
The Web is abuzz with Barack Obama's embarrassing mistake(see John Amato's Crooks and Liars post here and Michael Goldfarb's Weekly Standard post here , hat tip Larwyn). Mr. Obama said that there are 57 states. Just prior to his confused statement he had attempted to smear Mr. McCain by suggesting that Mr. McCain had "lost his bearings", due to his age. But it is Mr. Obama who is less mentally and physically fit.
I am not a wellness fanatic and even wrote a small book years ago attacking the idea of wellness programs in labor-management administered Taft Hartley Plans. But I base my prediction on a 2007 wellness report in Seek Wellness.com, which asks whether as a smoker Mr. Obama is qualified to be president:
For the record, Senator Obama claims to be a "moderate" smoker who wants to quit. That's good. He has stated many times that he HAS quit, often, but tends to lapse, due to insufficient resolve. A member of AA might suggest, "That ain't quitting." The candidate made this statement in an interview published by the Chicago Tribune: "It's an ongoing struggle. I've been chewing Nicorette strenuously." Well, chew on this, Senator: We all have ongoing struggles. Lose the smoking habit!...Americans haven't elected an unabashed, out-of-the-closet cigarette-smoking president since Franklin D. Roosevelt.
The matter ought to be resolved with a sit-up and push-up contest. Instead of televised debates that skirt important issues, the three candidates should be lined up to compete to see who is physically younger. Chronological age can be quite different from physical age. My prediction:
Sit ups: McCain: 550, Clinton 80, Obama 14
Push ups: McCain: 40, Obama 18, Clinton 2
Jogging: McCain: 1 hour, Clinton 1/2 hour, Obama, 8 minutes.
Let the contest begin!
I am not a wellness fanatic and even wrote a small book years ago attacking the idea of wellness programs in labor-management administered Taft Hartley Plans. But I base my prediction on a 2007 wellness report in Seek Wellness.com, which asks whether as a smoker Mr. Obama is qualified to be president:
For the record, Senator Obama claims to be a "moderate" smoker who wants to quit. That's good. He has stated many times that he HAS quit, often, but tends to lapse, due to insufficient resolve. A member of AA might suggest, "That ain't quitting." The candidate made this statement in an interview published by the Chicago Tribune: "It's an ongoing struggle. I've been chewing Nicorette strenuously." Well, chew on this, Senator: We all have ongoing struggles. Lose the smoking habit!...Americans haven't elected an unabashed, out-of-the-closet cigarette-smoking president since Franklin D. Roosevelt.
The matter ought to be resolved with a sit-up and push-up contest. Instead of televised debates that skirt important issues, the three candidates should be lined up to compete to see who is physically younger. Chronological age can be quite different from physical age. My prediction:
Sit ups: McCain: 550, Clinton 80, Obama 14
Push ups: McCain: 40, Obama 18, Clinton 2
Jogging: McCain: 1 hour, Clinton 1/2 hour, Obama, 8 minutes.
Let the contest begin!
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Barack Obama and the Republicans
Following three decades of Republican complicity with leftist occupation of our educational system, these spring chickens are coming home to vote for Barack Obama.Lance Fairchok of American Thinker has an excellent blog (hat tip Larwyn) about Barack Obama's advisors. Barack Obama is not just a befuddling liar. Most twenty-first century politicians can be so described. What distinguishes Mr. Obama is his close association with a catalog of extremists, to include his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, who is obsessed with identity politics, and William Ayers, a founder of the Weathermen in the 1960s.
As I have previously blogged, the close association between Obama and the identity politics fringe of the Democratic party is important because he will select high level staffers from among his extremist catalog. Fairchok performs a public service by pointing out that Obama is:
-supported Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua
-associated with Frank Marshall Davis who is in turn associated with the Communist Party USA
-has hired Sam Graham Nelson, a writer for Socialist Viewpoint, to run an Obama blog
None of this surprises. If you catalogued the staff members of the Democratic Party state assemblies around the country, or catalogued the leadership of various education departments around the country, you would find similar kinds of economic illiterates in important government jobs.
The problem is with the Republican Party as much as the Democratic. I attended a meeting of a Department of Education accrediting agency several years ago and was dismayed to find the Bush administration's Department of Education dominated by the very kind of extremists who would look to a Bill Ayers for guidance. Rather than terminate the Department of Education as any competent conservative would, three Republican presidents, Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, have used it as a patronage plumb and have permitted left wingers to dominate its culture.
Rather than insist that colleges teach more than the left wing version of social science, Republicans have remained mostly indifferent to the occupation of our universities by extremist kooks like Ayers.
Rather than appoint Diane Ravitch to an important policy position, the Republicans have remained silent as left wing indoctrination occurs in elementary schools around the country, specifically to include New York's. I am intimately familiar with New York's because I teach in a public New York university, and if you have any doubt that large numbers of New York City elementary school students have been brainwashed in stupid, Marxist lies rather than educated please allow me to quell your doubts.
The Republicans have remained silent while the left has occupied our cultural institutions. Instead of complaining, the Republicans have viewed the left wing imperialism as a foundation to expand patronage opportunities.
With Barack Obama, the chickens are coming home to roost. America's public has NOT been educated in the founding principles. The concept of limited government is alien to most American school children. The concepts of self reliance and individualism on which progress depends have been neglected. America's young believe that the way to succeed in life is to steal. As a result, they flock to the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
By its indifference to the domination of our political institutions by left wing thugs and criminals the Republican Party has fostered the situation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
