This made me laugh out loud.
Perhaps because I know someone that has diligently been trying to get a job now for 2 years. This person is not and has not been on unemployment. Apparently MA degrees are a dime a dozen. The local Ross or TJ Max who are hiring are not interested. Those stores seems to be filled with kids who are either Hispanic or black, some speak with an accent.

No this someone does not qualify for welfare or food stamps or public aid.
I have suggested a trip to the courthouse and a change of name to Garcia.

An email sent to me last week.

I went down this morning to sign up my Dog for welfare. At first the lady said, “Dogs are not eligible to draw welfare”. So I explained to her that my Dog is mix in color, unemployed, lazy, can’t speak English and has no frigging clue who his Daddy is. He expects me to feed him, provide him with housing and medical care, and feel guilty because he is a dog.

So she looked in her policy book to see what it takes to qualify. My Dog gets his first check Friday.

Is this a great country or not?

On April 28th riot police and storm troopers were dispatched in Quincy, Illinois, in response to a Tea Party demonstration outside an Obama event. The Secret Service told black-clad riot cops to “push the crowd back as far as you can, out of sight” outside the the Oakley-Lindsey/Quincy Community Center.
“The Tea Partiers were walking down York after the president’s motorcade arrived when a Secret Service agent asked the crowd to move back to the north side of the street,” QuincyNews reports today. “As the crowd was moving back, the Mobile Field Force, adorned in full body armor, walked between the crowd and the building, then they turned and faced the protesters.”

April 25th:
They are also visible (though not in such full force) here.

Where is the main stream media and their bitching crew on this. Olbermann, Maddow? Anyone?

My suggestion for all of those who abhor the treatment of illegal aliens here in the USA they need to take a little trip back to Mexico and get a real dose of how illegals are treated.

I may not agree with everything Michelle Malkin thinks or says.
She however is accurate in her FACTS.
It is my opinion most of us are smart enough to research the information given and then make up our own mind on what is being offered.
Anyone NOT WILLING to do that is not worth the breath it takes to debate.
I tire of those who form their opinion on a line of now watered down or up opinions. To determine who knows what in life? Ask a simple question. Why do you think that. When the answer is “they” told me so … you have your answer.
Is it any wonder my regard for the 20 to 25 year old is less than zero?

By Michelle Malkin
April 28, 2010

Mexican President Felipe Calderon has accused Arizona of opening the door “to intolerance, hate, discrimination and abuse in law enforcement.” But Arizona has nothing on Mexico when it comes to cracking down on illegal aliens. While open-borders activists decry new enforcement measures signed into law in “Nazi-zona” last week, they remain deaf, dumb or willfully blind to the unapologetically restrictionist policies of our neighbors to the south.

The Arizona law bans sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws, stiffens penalties against illegal alien day laborers and their employers, makes it a misdemeanor for immigrants to fail to complete and carry an alien registration document, and allows the police to arrest immigrants unable to show documents proving they are in the U.S. legally. If those rules constitute the racist, fascist, xenophobic, inhumane regime that the National Council of La Raza, Al Sharpton, Catholic bishops and their grievance-mongering followers claim, then what about these regulations and restrictions imposed on foreigners?

– The Mexican government will bar foreigners if they upset “the equilibrium of the national demographics.” How’s that for racial and ethnic profiling?

– If outsiders do not enhance the country’s “economic or national interests” or are “not found to be physically or mentally healthy,” they are not welcome. Neither are those who show “contempt against national sovereignty or security.” They must not be economic burdens on society and must have clean criminal histories. Those seeking to obtain Mexican citizenship must show a birth certificate, provide a bank statement proving economic independence, pass an exam and prove they can provide their own health care.
The rest of the story…

As a native Californian I am well aware of the illegal alien problems. Our own southern border has been under siege for a long time. The closing of some of these gaps has enhanced the problem for Arizona.

I applaud Jan Brewer in her effort to keep her citizens safe when the government has refused to do the job they are getting paid for.
If you want to read the proposal it is HERE

It is more than predictable that President Obama is shouting “irresponsible” and “misguided.”
He thinks that will cover up the failure of the federal government to have addressed this issue already?
Is this a HOLY CRAP now is the time to push amnesty through before other states take up the gauntlet and follow Brewer?

Now we hear San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom has imposed an immediate moratorium on city-related travel to Arizona?
A boycott?

Leave it to San Francisco to lead such a stupid charge.
I have a suggestion.
All of the USA BOYCOTT San Francisco until they dump Nancy Pelosi out of office on her foolish butt?
I agree the immigration problem needs to be solved. Closing our eyes to the illegal immigrant and rewarding them for their effort IS NOT THE ANSWER!

It’s pretty much out of the closet now. For those not paying attention Florida Republican Governor Charlie Crist is gay. The guy is still in the closet but he has been ousted a long time ago by many others including the gay guys up in Chicago at Hillbuzz. Charlie is most famous for his drag appearances at the Green Iguana in Tampa, Florida as “Sweet Charlotte, Belle of the South”. Normally this would be just another Mark Foley or Eric Massa story but Crist is going to run as an independent for the Florida Senate seat.

Florida Governor Charlie Crist

With Crist as an independent he gets 32% of the vote, Rubio 30% and Meeks left in the dust. A very bad outcome for the Democrats in a key swing state. Not only that but a lot of disenchanted Democrats, independents and some Republicans would look at Snitker as a viable alternative.

Libertarians appeal to thinking liberals who hate the police state. Meeks will get the black vote from the Democrats because his skin color but a lot of white traditional liberals might be attracted to Crist or Snitker. Most likely Crist.

This presents the Democrats with quite the dilemma. Should they secretly support Crist and hope he keeps his secrets in the closet while undercutting Meeks? Undercutting Meeks would leave a very bitter taste in black voter’s mouths. Here is Florida’s Obama gubernatorial candidate and the DNC cuts the legs right out from under him? Something tells me that will not happen. Without the Negro vote the Democratic Party is history and they know it. The Democrats are now forced to be racist every election if they want to win from now on since they have abandoned the elderly vote with health care reform. In the past the Negro vote could be taken for granted, not now. Look for the Democrats to throw Crist under the bus.

Libertarian Senate Candidate Alex Snitker

Look for Libertarian Snitker to do the most damage to Rubio’s campaign and Crist. Meeks will be a side note in this campaign. He will get the black vote because he’s black. The real fighting will be between the DNC, Crist and Rubio. In the end look for Rubio to prevail out of this little Florida civil war. He’s got the Latino vote and an abundance of charisma. He is polished and smooth. The only hope Crist has is if the Democrats throw their support behind him alienating the black vote. Either way Republicans win. If Democrats hoped to divide and conquer it will back fire on them.

Those of us from my era truly understand the sacrifice of our military. There is not a day of my life that I am not grateful for their sacrifice. A sacrifice most people do not even think about most of the time. Today’s young do not have a clue what living without freedom means. They TAKE FOR GRANTED the right they have for the FREE SPEECH they abuse daily.

I am thrilled that EX Military Nick Popadich has decided to fight for the 51st District seat. CA has the same illegal alien issues that Arizona is suffering under. Someone willing to take a hard stance on this issue is welcome.

So who is Nick Popaditch?

He is a decorated Marine veteran, 42, a gunnery sergeant who was famously photographed smoking a cigar after the fall of Baghdad, fought in Operation Desert Shield, Operation Desert Storm and, more recently, Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Well everyone in my books that is enough to give him a chance in the seat he seeks.

But there is more!

He’s hoping to win a seat in California’s mostly Democratic 51st Congressional District – a district that runs along the border between California and Mexico – as a conservative Republican. The incumbent, Democrat Bob Filner, has held the seat since 1992.

In 2003, Popaditch’s unit helped topple the Saddam Hussein statue in Baghdad’s Firdos Square. He was awarded the Silver Star for combat action in Fallujah after he was hit in the head by a rocket-propelled grenade and blinded in one eye on April 7, 2004, during Operation Vigilant Resolve. The blast left him with only eight percent vision in his other eye.

Popaditch, nicknamed “Gunny Pop,” had been engaged in combat inside the terrorist stronghold for 36 hours before he was severely wounded, disoriented, blind, deaf and covered in blood. Video of the attack is available at the website for his book, “Once a Marine.” He was medically retired from the Marines in 2005.

“Hey, I’m a lucky man,” he told the National Enquirer. “I’m happy to be alive.”

A proud Marine, Popaditch now sports a prosthetic eye emblazoned with the Marine Corps’ eagle, globe and anchor logo.

Popaditch is now campaigning on limited government, strong national defense and secure borders.

“Since returning home, I’ve seen our liberties under assault and our children’s future being sold away by an expanding government that limits individual freedom and responsibility,” he said upon announcing his candidacy.

Popaditch lives in San Diego, Calif., with his wife, April, and two children, Richard and Nicholas.

“I’m a rookie to this,” he told Fox News. “I’ve got to be honest with you. I’m not a politician; I’m a citizen. I’m a citizen who loves his country.”

Popaditch said he believes his chances for winning are excellent.

“We don’t get in a fight to lose it,” he said.

Thank you WND for sending this information my way.

Campaign Website
YouTube Channel

First: All of you who are UNITED for REAL CHANGE in our great nation?
Please feel free to add any or all of this information to your own blogs.

Apparently its time to revisit the who is qualified to be in congress and who do we actually want in congress and why?

I am going to start here in CA because the totally incompetent or corrupt we have running this state have bankrupted us years ago. Today that fact is beginning to dawn on most Californians. So true change is on the horizon.

Here in California as a start we need to elect someone who can pass 7th grade math. Applying that logic a 7th grader should replace every person in the CA legislative branch immediatly.
WE ARE BANKRUPT! Because of them.

Finally the whole of California is getting tired enough of business as usual here in this state that we are finally primed to toss the bums out.

Now for people who represent California on the Federal Side?
Boy have we failed on that level.
Everyone knows Barbara Boxer is in the run for her political life and probably will lose to Carly Fiorina or Chuck Devore since Tom Campbell the 3rd challanger for the seat refused to take the ATR’s (Americans for Tax Reform) Taxpayer Protection Pledge. That was an eye opener for me because I was leaning in his direction. The teaparty momement and his failure to sign on to the TPP sealed his NO VOTE on my ballot.
As the race heats up I will no doubt post more on this subject.

We are all painfully aware that polititions words are not the best (YES THEY LIE) but if they refuse to sign the pledge to start? … well we at least have a clue where they are headed next.

You can see who has signed and who has not signed the TPP HERE.

I have 3 targets today.
The Ms. “address me as senator not mam” Barbara Boxer, the “I LOVE HUGO CHAVEZ” Maxine Waters and well what can I say about San Fran Nan that is worse than what is written about her daily?
NOTHING! Other than she needs to be gone!

Well today a boot mark on Pelosi’s behind is the agenda.
I will be more than happy to promote that action in any way I can. Personally tar, feathers and an old time pillory might be good. If I were in charge I would be welcoming donations for those items right now … but ALAS justice of old has been abandoned today.
PITY!

So I will start with the man who has vowed to do the pillory thing in a civil manner.
Clean her clock at the voting booth!

John Dennis, businessman and real-estate investor, libertarian conservative has declared his plans to “take out Nancy Pelosi” in the 2010 election to stop her from devastating the nation.

Dennis, a businessman and real-estate investor in California’s 8th Congressional District, told WND, “I’ve decided to run because the statist Pelosi agenda will destroy America.”

Rep. Pelosi’s district covers most of San Francisco, and Democrats have held the seat since 1949. Since first winning the House seat in a 1987 special election, Pelosi, 69, has breezed to re-election 10 times. President Obama received 85 percent of the vote there in 2008.

What gives Dennis hope for 2010?

“I think we can build a very sturdy case for taking out Pelosi,” he said. “I find most of the people on the left find that she’s not their cup of tea. She engages in a lot of class warfare, and there are a lot of folks on the left who are disaffected by her and disaffected with her. We’re going to leverage as many of those relationships as we possibly can.”

Dennis, son of a longshoreman and a city hall clerk, grew up in a Jersey City, N.J., housing project. He graduated from Fordham University with a degree in business administration and co-founded Humanscale, one of the world’s top 10 design firms, specializing in office ergonomics. He later created Foundation Real Estate, a San Francisco-based investment company. In 2008, he served as Phonebank and Get Out the Vote director for Ron Paul’s presidential campaign in San Francisco.

“I became actively involved in politics about two years ago,” he said. “I was frustrated with everything – even my own party and the lost opportunities we had to put a cap on spending and the growth of government. I was looking for good candidates to support, and I just finally decided to be a candidate myself.”

Dennis is founder of the San Francisco chapter of the Republican Liberty Caucus, board member of the Republican Liberty Caucus of California and has served as an alternate on the San Francisco Republican Central Committee.

He expressed deep concern over the “looming dollar crisis,” the nation’s “mountain of debt” and what he considers the federal government’s unconstitutional expansion of power.

Dennis blasted Pelosi’s “disastrous” legislative agenda advocating government-run health care, cap and trade and the Cybersecurity Act of 2009, a bill that would give the president “emergency” control of the Internet.

“Everything that Nancy Pelosi has her hands on is anti-liberty and pro-government power,” he said, with a laugh. “I defy anybody to show me a speech or a press release that says she’s going to somehow protect their liberties and reduce the size of government.”

Dennis said he often asks people, “What’s the one thing about Pelosi that bothers you most?”

“A lot of times, truth be told, people respond, ‘Everything,’” he said. “Aside from that response, people say her holier-than-thou attitude, her above-it-all unresponsiveness.”

Pelosi professes to have sentiments of being for the people, Dennis said, but her actions speak volumes.

“Her lifestyle doesn’t support any of those positions,” he said. “I think people in this district are getting just as sick of her as everyone else.”

Thank you WND for the research on Dennis.

Below you will find video 1 in a series of 7 with John Dennis and his opponent Dana Welch for the Pelosi seat.
Note at the top of this video when it starts to play you can click a box to watch the whole debate. Worth the time if you are going to be involved in this particular race. Very interesting!

John Dennis campaign website

I received your campaign literature in the mail today and disapprove of you using taxpayer money for propaganda proposes. I know most Democrats think like mobsters looking for money or are useful idiots so let me be up front with you. I am a member of the Libertarian Party, the most educated political group in America by far. Propaganda doesn’t work and I am not that emotional. Unless you kill a baby I really don’t tear up that much.

Suzanne Kosmas thinks I am a dumb as my dog

Second I am not an economist, well maybe I am, but if you take $500 billion from Medicare how will those recipients not lose access to services? Do you have a pile of Obama cash somewhere you pay doctors under the table with? Please don’t insult my intelligence. You need a better education than you have if you believe seniors will not suffer under this reform. If you lower payments to doctors some, not all, will choose to not see Medicare patients. This will reduce the supply of doctors and services available. You will need to import doctors from India and Arab countries to make up the difference. Same a Britain and Canada. Me I like American doctors whose first language is English educated in American medical schools. Cheap imported doctors is not what I would call a gift to our seniors. Hell why not just ship them over to Mexico for treatment?

Sebastian is a great dog but he does not listen to me when I tell him not to defecate in my neighbor’s yard. He is not a complex thinker and cannot foresee the unintended consequences of his actions. I end up cleaning up after his mess and he hardly notices. He and my Congresswoman Kosmas are similar in IQ and behavior.

So our small businesses get a tax credit of up to 35%? Well golly gee I guess that $150 bucks a month make the $5,000 expense of a new employee worth it? Really? Did they teach this in real estate class? Next time give the 35% write off to individuals who buy their own health insurance. Better yet allowing 35% write offs for Health Savings Accounts. I bet that would be popular with the young people. Just a guess.

So the pre-existing condition people get a special pool. And what is to stop people from dropping their coverage and waiting until they need insurance to sign up? That $700 dollar IRS fine verses a $8,000 health care plan? Are you really that stupid Mrs. Kosmas? There is a reason the free market works better than the government. They have IQ’s over 100 and they don’t have a pool of Obama money waiting to dip into when things don’t balance out.

Requiring “free” preventive care for private plans and Medicare. Free? Free? Really? Is it that Obama stash of money somewhere paying the doctors and staff for the “free” preventive care? Why did I even read this? Nothing is free. Private health care plans will raise cost to cover the “free” preventative care or cut back services in other areas. The stupidity of Democrats is just mind boggling. Why do I even bother? It’s like convincing my dog shitting in someone else’s yard is not good. He smiles at me and seems to agree but still shits in my neighbor’s yard whenever we go for a walk leaving me to clean up the mess.

There are some other points like lower the age of eligibility for Medicare down to 55, banning limits on coverage and ending pre-existing conditions for children. Really is there a problem with children getting coverage with pre-existing conditions? Is there one sick child in America that cannot enter any hospital anywhere with a serious illness and be refused treatment? I don’t think so. This is not England or Mexico. Most Americans including doctors have common sense and compassion.

Extending coverage through parents up to age 26. Hell when I was 18 I wanted out of the house and joined the Air Force. My kid went into the Army when he was 18. Do people really live with their parents at age 26? I say give them mom’s health insurance coverage up to the age of 65 as long as they get a vasectomy and don’t reproduce.

So Mrs. Kosmas we don’t see eye to eye. I like you just like I like my dog. You smile just like him and have about the same intellect as my beloved Schnauzer. I know the real motive is control over the peasants and to create another flow of revenue to politicians. As with GM things will get propped up and lies told but the people will still flock to Toyota for their cars. People don’t like working for free. Not even doctors. So please save the taxpayers money and resign yourself to the fact that Karen Diebel will be taking your place soon. She’s a really nice mother and has a business degree! I have even heard rumors she can do arithmetic and complex business type of things. So as you become just an average citizen again in less than a year be assured Karen and others will clean up your mess and you will not be doomed to government rationed care in your golden years.

I spend a good deal of time in political forums when I have time to spare. Inevitably comments regarding the qualifications to be a citizen of the USA and that of natural born citizen arise. What usually follows is a “knock down drag out” on Obama meeting or not meeting the “natural born citizen” qualification for President of the USA.

It is staggering how many people seem to believe Juan and Rosita Valdez from Mexico stepping across the border to have baby Juan Jr. now have a “natural born citizen” in tow.

Another comment that is common is “there is nothing defining natural born citizen in our original documents”.
There is information on the subject for anyone choosing to ferret it all out. The problem is few are willing to put in that effort.
The most prevalent logic seems to be that if no one has done anything about this situation there must be no problem.
Believe me I have asked the same questions.
Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck both with the best research teams have not found the information below?
I have heard Andrew Napolitano a Constitution expert say nothing about this.
I have to wonder why? There has been enough flap in the media over the Obama BC. Why no comments about this apparent breech to the Constitution from the people who claim to be fighting for the preservation of it?

Read below and judge for yourself.
Clearly with all of the controversy surrounding Barack Obama at some point (probably after he is voted out of office in 2012) this issue will be visited and settled again in another landmark case by the SCOTUS.
Meanwhile?

“Republished with permission of The Post & Email.”

IRREFUTABLE AUTHORITY HAS SPOKEN
by John Charlton

(Oct. 18, 2009) — The Post & Email has in several articles mentioned that the Supreme Court of the United States has given the definition of what a “natural born citizen” is. Since being a natural born citizen is an objective qualification and requirement of office for the U.S. President, it is important for all U.S. Citizens to undertsand what this term means.

Let’s cut through all the opinion and speculation, all the “he says”, “she says”, fluff, and go right to the irrefutable, constitutional authority on all terms and phrases mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: the Supreme Court of the United States.

There are 4 such cases which speak of the notion of “natural born citizenship”.

Each of these cases will cite or apply the definition of this term, as given in a book entitled, The Law of Nations, written by Emmerich de Vattel, a Swiss-German philosopher of law. In that book, the following definition of a “natural born citizen” appears, in Book I, Chapter 19, § 212, of the English translation of 1797 (p. 110):

§ 212. 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 French original of 1757, on that same passage read thus:

Les naturels, ou indigenes, sont ceux qui sont nes dans le pays de parents citoyens, . . .

The terms “natives” and “natural born citizens” are obviously English terms; used to render the idea convyed by the French phrase “les naturels, ou indigenes”: but both refered to the same category of citizen: one born in the country, of parents who were citizens of that country.

In the political philosophy of Vattel, the term “naturels” refers to citizens who are such by the Law of Nature, that is by the natural cirumstances of their birth — which they did not choose; the term “indigenes” is from the Latin, indigenes, which like the English, “indigenous”, means “begotten from within” (inde-genes), as in the phrase “the indigenous natives are the peoples who have been born and lived there for generations.” Hence the meaning the the term, “natural born citizen”, or “naturels ou indigenes” is the same: born in the country of two parents who are citizens of that country.

Vattel did not invent the notion “natural born citizen”; he was merely applying the Law of Nature to questions of citizenship. In fact the term first appears in a letter of the future Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, to George Washington during the Constitutional Convention, where the Framers were consulting 3 copies Vattel’s book to complete their work (according to the testimony of Benjamin Franklin).

Let take a brief look, now, at each case. For each case I include the link to the full text of the ruling.

The Venus, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 253 253 (1814)
The first was decided in A.D. 1814, at the beginning of the republic, by men who were intimately associated with the American Revolution. In that year the following men sat on the Supreme Court:

Bushrod Washington, (b. June 5, 1762 — d. Nov. 26, 1829), served Feb. 4, 1799 til Nov. 26, 1829.

John Marshall (b. Sept. 24, 1755 — d. July 6, 1835), served Feb. 4, 1891 til July 6, 1835.

William Johnson (b. Dec. 27, 1771 — d. Aug. 4, 1834), served May 7, 1804, til Aug. 4, 1834.

Henry Brockholst Livingston (b. Nov. 25, 1757 — d. Mar. 18, 1823), served Jan. 20, 1807 til March 18, 1823

Thomas Todd (b. Jan. 23, 1765 — d. Feb. 7, 1826), served May 4, 1807 til Feb. 7, 1826.

Gabriel Duvall (b. Dec. 6, 1752 — d. Mar. 6, 1844), served Nov. 23, 1811 til Jany 14, 1835.

Joseph Story (b. Sept. 18, 1779 — d. Sept. 10, 1845), served Feb. 3, 1812 til Sept. 10, 1845

Nearly all these men either participated in the American Revolution, or their fathers did. Joseph Story’s father took part in the original Boston Tea Party. Thomas Todd served 6 months in the army against the British; and participated in 5 Constitutional Conventions from 1784-1792. During the Revolutionary War, Henry Brockholst Livingston was a Lieutenant Colonel in the New York Line and an aide-de-camp to General Benedict Arnold, before the latter’s defection to the British. William Johnson’s father, mother, and elder brother were revolutionaries, who served as statesman, rebel, or nurse/assistant to the line troops, respectively. John Marshall was First Lieutenant of the Culpeper Minutement of Virginia, and then Lieutenant in the Eleventh Virginian Continental Regiment, and a personal friend of General George Washington; and debated for ratification of the U.S. Constitution by the Virginian General Assembly. Bushrod Washington was George Washington’s nephew and heir.

Being witnesses and heirs of the Revolution, they understood what the Framers of the Constitution had intended.

The Venus case regarded the question whether the cargo of a merchantman, named the Venus, belonging to an American citizen, and being shipped from British territory to America during the War of 1812, could be seized and taken as a prize by an American privateer. But what the case said about citizenship, is what matters here.

WHAT THE VENUS CASE SAYS ON CITIZENSHIP

In the Venus Case, Justice Livingston, who wrote the unanimous decision, quoted the entire §212nd paragraph from the French edition, using his own English, on p. 12 of the ruling:

Vattel, who, though not very full to this point, is more explicit and more satisfactory on it than any other whose work has fallen into my hands, says:

“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 indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.

“The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers who are permitted to settle and stay in the country. Bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it…

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 242 242 (1830)
In 16 years later the Supreme Court heard the case regarding the dispute over the inheritance received by two daughters of an American colonist, from South Carolina; one of whom went to England and remained a British subject, the other of whom remained in South Carolina and became an American citizen. At the beginning of the case, Justice Story, who gave the ruling, does not cite Vattel per se, but cites the principle of citizenship enshrined in his definition of a “natural born citizen”:

Ann Scott was born in South Carolina before the American revolution, and her father adhered to the American cause and remained and was at his death a citizen of South Carolina. There is no dispute that his daughter Ann, at the time of the Revolution and afterwards, remained in South Carolina until December, 1782. Whether she was of age during this time does not appear. If she was, then her birth and residence might be deemed to constitute her by election a citizen of South Carolina. If she was not of age, then she might well be deemed under the circumstances of this case to hold the citizenship of her father, for children born in a country, continuing while under age in the family of the father, partake of his national character as a citizen of that country. Her citizenship, then, being prima facie established, and indeed this is admitted in the pleadings, has it ever been lost, or was it lost before the death of her father, so that the estate in question was, upon the descent cast, incapable of vesting in her? Upon the facts stated, it appears to us that it was not lost and that she was capable of taking it at the time of the descent cast.

Minor v. Happersett , 88 U.S. 162 (1875)
This case concerned Mrs. Happersett, an original suffragette, who in virtue of the 14th Amendment attempted to register to vote in the State of Missouri, and was refused because she was not a man. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in that year, wrote the majority opinion, in which he stated:

The Constitution does not in words say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents.

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
In this case, Wong Kim Ark, the son of 2 resident Chinese aliens, claimed U.S. Citizenship and was vindicated by the court on the basis of the 14th Amendment. In this case the Justice Gray gave the opinion of the court. On p. 168-9 of the record, He cites approvingly the decision in Minor vs. Happersett:

At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children, born in a country of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

On the basis of the 14th Amendment, however, the majority opinion coined a new definition for “native citizen”, as anyone who was born in the U.S.A., under the jurisdiction of the United States. The Court gave a novel interpretation to jurisdiction, and thus extended citizenship to all born in the country (excepting those born of ambassadors and foreign armies etc.); but it did not extend the meaning of the term “natural born citizen.”

CONCLUSION
Finally it should be noted, that to define a term is to indicate the category or class of things which it signifies. In this sense, the Supreme Court of the United States has never applied the term “natural born citizen” to any other category than “those born in the country of parents who are citizens thereof”.

Hence every U.S. Citizen must accept this definition or categorical designation, and fulfil his constitutional duties accordingly. No member of Congress, no judge of the Federal Judiciary, no elected or appointed official in Federal or State government has the right to use any other definition; and if he does, he is acting unlawfully, because unconstitutionally.

© 2009, The Post & Email, Inc. All rights reserved internationally, unless otherwise specified. To read more on our copyright restrictions, see our Copyright notice on the subheader of every page, along the left margin.

We all remember the campaign of 2008 when the going got tough for Obama. He was ousted for attending a Marxist Black Liberation Theology church with Pastor Jeremiah Wright of “God Damn America” fame. The weasel came back with the infamous “grandma “speech where he threw grandma under the bus for some political points. Obama accused her of being a racist confiding to the press grandma “once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.” Of course now we know blacks are 6.5 times more likely to end up in jail and commit 59% of the homicides in America while making up only 13% of the population. Sounds like grandma had some common sense. For Obama throwing grandma under the bus to deflect criticism of his belonging to a Marxist church for 20 years made it all worthwhile. The press bought it and he is president.

Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein

Really is anyone surprised? Did Joseph Stalin show any loyalty to the Jews that helped build up the USSR in the 1920’s and 30’s? The same Jews and communist that helped kill 7 to 10 million during the Great Ukrainian Famine of 1932-33? The same year the USSR exported grain to Western Europe? Hell no. As soon as Hitler had enough power after 1933 and prior to Germany’s invasion of the USSR on June 22, 1941 Stalin was shipping Jews over to German authorities as fast as the trains could carry them. With communist there is no such thing as loyalty. Only the dictator and party count. Goldman Sachs just relearned a lesson form history. Obama has shown he has no loyalty to anyone but himself and his communist ideology. Need more proof?

All Obama’s legislative proposals are death to Democrats except one. Financial reform against the evil Wall Street greed monsters. So write up the take over of another industry, throw your friends under the bus, show the Jews once again how much you despise them and move the dictatorship forward another step. Did I get it right Mr. Axelrod?