Tag Archives: Marco Rubio

Rubio asked by Reporter to ‘Spit Rap Lyrics’

Rubio asked to Rap

While being interviewed on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Presidential Candidate Marco Rubio was asked to make a fool of himself.

The odd interaction started when the reporter said that he had “read in the Washington Post that your staff in 2010 was very impressed that you could spit rap lyrics.” And then asked if “we could get a demonstration.”

If nothing else, we did learn who two of Marco Rubio’s favorite new rap artists are.

GOP Candidates Continue to Toss Money Down Cornhole

Gilligan-s-Island-Mr-and-Mrs-Howell-classic-television-revisited-3727152-435-326The really big difference between Republican and Democrat handout recipients is their ability to be sympathetically photogenic. When pressed, the average Democrat welfare recipient can hide the flat–screen TV, stash the cellphone in a drawer and refrain from cigarette smoking. And it’s not too much trouble to pretend to fill out the job application or limp convincingly to prove the bad back disability claim as long as photographers and media are around.

The Republican dependency class is another genus entirely. Empathy generating photo shoots and news coverage for these check–cashers is simply a non–starter. Hiding the Rolex, wheeling the executive jet inside the hangar, displacing the butler from the servant’s quarters and convincing the first wife to pretend to supervise the caterer is just too difficult to organize.

If Democrat welfare beneficiaries can avoid arrest, making jihad videos and Judge Judy the money continues to arrive completely free of social disapproval.

Not so for GOP crony capitalists. These leeches fight a two front war: Prevent competition and confuse conservatives. They are loud and proud “job creators,” economic mainstays and incubators of breakthrough technology! All the favored crony industry requires for total success is billions of taxpayer dollars in perpetuity while the people who supply the tax dollars maintain a discrete and respectful silence.

And Republican officeholders must pretend the conservative market principles they espouse in campaign commercials somehow don’t apply to this particular crony.

A disappointing number of 2016 GOP presidential candidates recently did just that in Iowa during the quadrennial Pour Money Down the Cornhole Festival otherwise known as the Iowa Ag Summit.

There Republican presidential candidates worship the ethanol subsidy and praise ethanol entrepreneurs for their selfless addiction to subsidies and environmental fairy tales.

The Renewable Fuel Standards law requires all gasoline refined in the US be 10 percent ethanol. Ethanol is the wonder product, made from corn, which makes gasoline more costly while reducing miles per gallon and increasing wear on internal combustion engines.

Diluting perfectly efficient gas with ethanol is like forcing mom to add sawdust to her cake recipe to protect our valuable flour stockpile. Sure the additional roughage keeps dad regular, but wear and tear on teeth and the occasional oven fire — not to mention that Home Depot flavor — doesn’t come close to compensating for the missing wheat.

The same is true for ethanol, all at a cost to taxpayers of $6 billion a year in handouts.

Somehow those facts didn’t make it into the spiel GOP mega contributor and summit sponsor Bruce Rastetter made.

Ethanol supporters would have one believe that before the bill was passed requiring refineries to dilute your gasoline, corn grew wild in Iowa and no one was even aware there was a use for the weed, other than the occasional frontier corn fritter. And even after wise agronomists in Washington started throwing money at corn farmers the fuel market was controlled by sinister forces that prevented innovation.

Just like the whale oil cartel prevented widespread drilling for oil until the early 60’s.

As columnist Paul Driessen wrote Rastetter’s pitch to the assembled candidates was pointed and effective: Failure to support ethanol handouts in Iowa means no victory in the 2016 caucus and no chance for the GOP nomination.

Naturally Big Government Republicans didn’t require much in the way of pressure to crumble. Jeb Bush said corny gasoline reduces the demand for imported oil. Mike Huckabee said it’s a way for the nation to “fuel itself.” (No pun intended.) And Lindsay Graham solemnly stated “Every gallon of ethanol … is one less gallon you have to buy from people who hate your guts,” which makes you wonder when Obama started pumping gas.

Rick Santorum, trying to get someone to pay attention, thought the RFS means something besides oil and natural gas “are allowed into [the energy] stream.” And Scott Walker was a profile in cowardice as he abandoned his 2006 call for an end to ethanol subsidies.

Rick Perry split the difference and wanted to end federal ethanol subsidies, but said that individual states could choose to be a foster parent for corn, which is at least a Constitutionally valid stance and would exempt most states that don’t grow corn and corn lobbyists.

The only candidates claiming to be conservative supporters of market competition and having the courage to tell Iowa voters the subsidy spigot should be turned off were Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio — although Rubio did refer to corn as “maize.”

There’s an old song about moonshiners called “White Lightening” with a refrain that goes “Mighty, mighty pleasin’ my pappy’s corn squeezin’s.” Until Republicans can stop “pleasin’” crony capitalists with subsidies at the expense of the public, taxpayers will continue to be subject to regular “squeezin.”

Hypocrisy When It Comes To Obama

DonkeyHotey (CC)

The nation recently celebrated Martin Luther King’s million man march and famous speech in Washington D.C. in which he declared, ”I have  a dream where we judge a person not by the color of his skin ,but the content of their character.” Enter Barack Obama. Ask anyone why they voted for him and blacks say “Because he’s black”’ and whites say, ”because he’s the first black president,” even though nobody knew anything about him and the  media never properly vetted him. If you dare criticize Obama you are labled a racist. Today there are still many unanswered questions about him from who his real father is, his fraudulent birth certificates (he listed three versions), his fraudulent social security number (they claim it was a typo),his questionable college attendance since there are no records of him attending Occidental or Columbia and no pictures of him  in any yearbooks or newspapers and nobody remembers him at either college, and how a young kid fresh from Indonesia  with no job could afford both colleges and there is no record of him taking out any loans, but he’s the first black president so that’s all that matters and if you criticize him on any of these you’re branded a racist. What happened to judging a person by the content of their character and not the color of their skin? MLK must be turning in his grave. I wonder what these people think if they knew MLK was a republican?

Recently on his radio show, Rush Limbaugh said the reason republicans in congress are reluctant to criticize Obama with the exception of Rand Paul, Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio is because of being labeled a racist.

Well lo and behold, wonder of wonders, two leading Hollywood leftists, Ed Asner and  Mike Farrell are speaking out against their guy Obama on Syria and admit that Hollywood is not speaking out against Obama like they did with George Bush for fear of being labeled anti-black.

Another reason some Hollywood progressives have been reticent to speak out against war in Syria, according to Asner, is fear of being called racist.

“A lot of people don’t want to feel anti-black by being opposed to Obama,” he said.

Farrell and Asner both say that beating the war drums on Syria is one of many mistakes Obama has made.

“I voted for him, but I’m not proud. He hasn’t thrown himself on the funeral pyre. I wanted him to sacrifice himself. Instead, he has proved himself to be a corporatist, and as long as he’s a corporatist, he’s not my president,” Asner said. “A lot of people have lost hope — with the betrayals, the NSA spying … People aren’t getting active because ‘Who gives a shit?’ is essentially the bottom line.”

Adds Farrell: “I’m frankly deeply disappointed in the president’s foreign policy, war-making, his reliance on military rather than diplomatic responses, his use of drones, continued allowance of the Guantanamo prison. He’s a disappointment to me and other people I know.”

As much as Obama is loved by Hollywood power-brokers, Asner says he doesn’t fear backlash by speaking against the president.

“Hollywood can’t mobilize for that either,” he joked. “If they try to punish me, what are they gonna do? Take away my pension.

Another one speaking out against Obama going into Syria is his biggest cheerleader Chris Mathews. What’s the matter Chris, lose that Obama thrill running up and down your leg?

Many people are viewing  the attack on Syria as a beginning of biblical fulfillment of the coming  end of times with Damascus being leveled “Behold, Damascus is about to be removed from being a city, and will become a fallen ruin,” reads Isaiah 17, a passage some Christians say they believe details a horrific event that leaves the city uninhabitable and leads to worldwide tribulation and the second coming of Christ. Damascus is the Syrian capital and one of the world’s oldest cities.

Another passage in Isaiah 19 deals with civil war in Egypt and the rise of a “fierce king.”

Talk of those prophecies has intensified as President Barack Obama considers a U.S. military strike on Syria in response to what Washington says is evidence that the Syrian leadership used chemical weapons against its own people. In turn, Syria vows to retaliate against neighboring Israel if the U.S. strikes.

Speaking at a news conference in Paris, Sec.of State John Kerry said the videos make clear that the attack is not something Americans can ignore.

The United States has accused Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government of using chemical weapons in an Aug. 21 assault, and cited intelligence reports as saying it killed at least 1,429 people, including more than 400 children. The videos show the victims exhibiting what appear to be symptoms of nerve gas poisoning.

“Those videos make it clear to people that these are real human beings, real children, parents being affected in ways that are unacceptable to anybody, anywhere by any standards,” Kerry said. “And the United States of America that has always stood with others to say we will not allow this – this is not our values, it’s not who we are.”

Where was Kerry when Saddam gassed 5000 people in one day and killed a million of his own people. Kerry, Hilary, Harry Reid and I bet even Obama were castigating Bush for going into Iraq. Kerry bashed our troops just like he did in the 60’s saying “American soldiers were terrorizing Iraqui women and children in the dead of night kicking their doors down.” Now all of a sudden they want to do this “across the bow” strike on Syria that will open up a whole can of worms? Assad has Russia, Iran, and North Korea in back of him while all we have is “moral support” This can kick off  WW 111. Incidentally the so called stockpiles of gas Assad has are the WMD’s we were looking for in Iraq. Saddam had them shipped out before, during and after the war by Russian soldiers disguised  as Iraqis which is why we didn’t find them so Bush didn’t lie after all. Besides, Germany said Saddam had them, France said he had them, Britain said he had them and Saudi Arabia said he had them and he did have them until he shipped them out to Syria.

At a recent press conference Obama’s chief of Staff   Denis McDonough said Obama, Congress and the rest of the world no longer doubt the fact Assad carried out such horrific crimes against his people.” McDonough also said we have no military allies just  their moral support and don’t need them for just a missile strike.

As one commenter noted: “How can we believe ANYTHING, especially since this press conference was filled with BLATANT LIES…

LIE – “We feel very good about the support we have”
….REALITY – Obama et al are HORRIFIED at the broad coalition AGAINST their plans.

LIES – “Nobody now debates the intelligence” – “Everybody believes that Bashar al-Assad used chemical weapons against his own people”
….REALITY – Everyone doubts the intelligence. Many wonder whether the rebels themselves did this to bring us into the war.

LIE – “If chemical weapons are moved to the front lines, it means a greater risk of them being proliferated”
….REALITY – If chemical weapons are moved to the front lines, they will be USED, not “proliferated”

Columnist Kyle Smith in today’s N.Y.Post said,”Ruthless dictators who have been murdering their own citizens by the thousands aren’t likely to be scared by a pre-announced two day show of fireworks. Obama’s message that we should send  in a “clear and decisive very limited way”is another classic. Dictators don’t do limited.They do ruthless. That’s how they passed their final exam in dictator school.”

As columnist Charles Krauthammer  said, ”I say send a text. It’s less expensive.” :D

Ed Asner Explains Hollywood Silence: They 'Don't Want to Feel Anti-Black'...

Syria's 'rebels' and soldiers agree: Military strikes will change nothing...

Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate

OBAMA TO LINK SYRIA WITH IRAN?

Some see biblical visions of doom...

WorldTribune.com: UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD on eve of war

PAPER: Regime forces may have used gas without Assad's permission...

Rep. King: Obama Acting More Like ‘Community Organizer’

The REAL reason our Southern Border will never be secure

nicholasstixuncensored

The Senate on Tuesday by a vote of 54-39 rejected an amendment to the latest version of the Senate’s new immigration bill. The amendment offered by Senator John Thune of South Dakota should have been a no brainer to pass. The Thune Amendment simply called for the completion and funding of a 700 mile stretch of double tiered fencing along our Southern Border.

What was so surprising about the failure of this amendment was some of the reasoning for its failure. Most of the Senators that voted against it were Democrats; but there were also five Republicans, including all four members of the so called “Gang of Eight” that voted against the measure too. The so called Republicans were: Senator John McCain, Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Jeff Flake, and surprisingly even Senator Marco Rubio. The only Senator not part of the Gang of Eight that also voted against the measure was Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski.

Senator John McCain said he voted against the measure stating, “We should leave that issue (the border fence) to the best judgment of the Border Patrol.” This is the same John McCain who in a tough primary challenge in 2010 actually ran a campaign ad in which he says, “let’s build the dang fence!”

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina also voted against the measure which is not surprising because pretty much anything John McCain does Lindsey follows suit.

Senator Jeff Flake, who replaced a solid conservative in Jon Kyl, also voted against the measure. Unfortunately as of late Mr. Flake has been living up to his name when it comes to the immigration issue.

Alaskan Senator Lisa Murkowski, who routinely sides with the Democrats also voted against the bill. She was appointed in 2002 by her father, another Rino Republican Frank Murkowski who at the time was Governor of Alaska.

However the most surprising vote came from Senator Marco Rubio. As one of the leaders of the Gang of Eight he was supposed to be the Conservative voice of reason when it came to crafting the immigration bill. Mr. Rubio has been talked about as a possible contender for the Presidency in 2016. By voting against this measure he may have severely diminished any hopes he had at seeking the Republican Nomination for President in 2016.

So why did five Republicans vote against a measure that would have helped eliminate more illegal immigration? Don’t they realize that if they pass Amnesty they will be committing political suicide? Don’t they even question the motives of the Democratic Party who are so focused on passing Amnesty they are trying to rush it through as quickly as possible? Why are they afraid to make border enforcement an integral part of the process?

The short answer is they have bought into the Democratic Party’s scare tactics, and have misinterpreted the election results of 2012. They think that passing Amnesty is somehow going to ingratiate themselves into the majority of Hispanic voter’s minds and allow them to capture more of the vote share. This is a grave miscalculation. If we grant Amnesty to 11 million illegal immigrants the majority, over 60% of these new voters will be votes for the Democratic Party. Typically you dance with the person who brought you to the party and these new voters will be doing the twist front and center for the Democrats.

Republicans can win these voters with the right message and the right messenger. Granting Amnesty is not the solution unless they are interested in a government that will become a dictatorship under a one party rule.

So why is the Republican Party willingly putting themselves in a position that will lead to permanent minority status?

The long answer is the Republican Party of 2013 is no longer about limited government and individual freedom. The Republican Party of 2013 is about Globalism and the embracing of a New World Order.

For those of you who have never heard of the website SPP.GOV I implore you to Google it as soon as possible. SPP.GOV stands for the Shared Prosperity Partnership of North America. This is the real reason why you will never see a fence built on the Southern Border. The idea behind the Shared Prosperity Partnership is to create a North American Union similar to the European Union in Europe.

The North American Union, if it were ever to be implemented would combine Canada, the United States, and Mexico into one large Global Governance. In addition it would also change our currency from the almighty dollar bill into something called the Amero. Finally it would create a super highway that would start in Southern Mexico, run straight across the United States, and end somewhere in Northern Canada.

This is the true reason both parties are not serious about protecting our borders. This is why both parties want to pass Amnesty. This is why it is so vitally important that we fight this bill or any Amnesty bill now and in the future. If we somehow allow Amnesty to pass there is a real good possibility that a North American Union could be in our future.

Think about what a North American Union could do to our sovereignty rights? Think about what it could do to our Constitutional rights, especially our Second Amendment? Think about what it could do to our currency and our economy? Worst of all, think about what it will do to our deep rooted American pride? As Americans we are a very prideful people. We have always separated ourselves from the rest of the world based on our unique history and coveted status as the world’s most powerful superpower. Why would we ever knowingly want to give up that status or relinquish our standing in the world?

For America to remain a free country we must protect our borders. A country that does not protect its own borders will cease to be a country at some point. Any thought of legalizing illegal immigrants without first securing our borders could be a means to an end for America.

Solving the illegal immigration issue could be simple if we use some common sense.

First thing we should do is modify the birthright citizenship rule to only grant citizenship to the child being born on American soil. By eliminating citizenship to the parents of the child born here you send a clear message that just because your child was born here doesn’t give you the right to claim citizenship. If illegal immigrants knew that only their children who were born here could have automatic citizenship you would see a lot less illegal immigrants crossing the border to have children and abusing this law.

The second thing we could do is finally complete the fence across the entire border. Once the border is secure, we could build 2 or 3 maximum security correctional facilities in each one of the Border States right along side of it. We could even save the taxpayer’s in each respective Border State the cost of building these complexes by having the illegal aliens we capture help build them.

Finally, after we deport all the folks who have criminal records we give the remaining aliens a choice.

The first choice is immediate deportation or they would run the risk of being incarcerated in one of the maximum security correctional facilities they helped build.

The second choice would be to have them serve in our military. If they want to be Americans and truly love our country, than they should be willing to fight and die for it. After they have served in the military for a few years they should be granted full citizenship on the day they have been honorably discharged. At that point they should be entitled to every single benefit that natural born Americans have. That is how you fix the illegal immigration issue.

As a writer, commentator, and radio talk show host my job is talk about the important issues and offer common sense solutions. With all the dysfunction that permeates through Washington, D.C. it would be a miracle if any sound legislation ever was to pass. In the meantime it is imperative that we call our Senators and Congress members and let them know that we strongly oppose this bill. A majority in America and a minority in Congress can create a majority in Congress.

The Capitol switchboard number is (202)224-3121
John McCain: (202)224-2235
Lindsey Graham: (202)224-5972
Jeff Flake: (202)224-4521
Lisa Murkowski: (202)224-6665
Marco Rubio: (202)224-3041

Suggested by the author:

Dismantling Washington
Let’s all sue the Internal Revenue Service!
Why Attorney General Eric Holder is the worst in U.S. History
How the left uses identity politics and fear tactics to influence voters
www.joshbernsteinpoliticalwriter.com

Marco Rubio and the Magic Beans

Immigration-CautionShortly after last year’s presidential defeat and at the beginning of the Great Republican Panic of 2013, I wrote here about what a bad idea morally and legally amnesty for illegal aliens is. Guess what? It still is.

In a sane universe “immigration reform” would be specifically designed to benefit the citizens of the nation passing the law, rather than be a law that only benefits non–citizens who came here illegally at the expense of the citizens.

But that hasn’t stopped Sen. Marco Rubio (R–FL) from eagerly joining the Gang of Ocho’s efforts to pass a “comprehensive” amnesty bill. After being trapped in a room with both Sen. Chuck Schumer (D–Publicity) and Sen. John McCain (R–Media Loves Me, Unless I Run for President), Rubio has evidently developed Stockholm Syndrome. He claims this amnesty bill does not have any amnesty provisions. Instead is has a “path to citizenship” where the length of time before amnesty kicks in somehow makes amnesty more tolerable for conservatives.

Yet I have a simple test for supporters of any immigration reform bill. If removing the portions that deal with granting citizenship to people who came to the US illegally causes Democrat support to vanish, then what you have is an amnesty bill and not a “reform” at all.

During her testimony before Congress in support of the bill, Sec. of Homeland Security Janet Incompetano said the 844–page bill has many benefits, including stricter accountability for employers and improving border security. Yet you can accomplish both of those goals without legalizing 12 million illegal aliens and doing so might just reduce the number of illegals here now.

Opponents of actually enforcing immigration law claim the government can’t deport 12 million people, but no one I know is advocating that. In fact this is one of the areas where I prefer a libertarian solution: the illegals got here on their own without government assistance and they can leave on their own, too.

In a true magic beans moment, Rubio is so proud of the 13–year “path to citizenship” — as if a slow motion surrender to illegality is an improvement over an immediate surrender. Maybe he thinks during this cooling off period Republican outreach teams can contact the newly legal and persuade them they are really naturally conservative and should be voting GOP.

But I’ve got news for Marco: it’s not going to happen. His 13–year path is going to be the civil unions of the immigration fight. As soon as Rubio’s bill is passed Democrats will begin complaining about second–class citizenship for brown people. As Neil Munro has written, the bill already has 400 “exemptions, exceptions, waivers, determinations and grants of discretion and even better will be administered by the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION!

We will be lucky if the 13–years lasts 13 months.

Democrats will get their immediate temporary permanent status for the illegals and the increased border security will never happen. The same goes for employer sanctions.

We heard the amnesty and border security shuffle when Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million (Gee, wasn’t he a Republican?). Amnesty was immediate and border security was absent, which is why we are preparing to legalize 12 million now.

The fines Rubio dreams of (much like the $1,500 fines the Commonwealth of Virginia was going to impose of indigent drunk drivers) will never be collected and the English proficiency test will be found to be culturally insensitive. Instead, illegals will get a waiver for the fine and if they can look at two photos and distinguish George Washington from Simon Bolivar their English is good to go, too.

You think I’m exaggerating? Ha! The Democrats in charge of the District of Columbia are preparing to introduce legislation that would require pharmacies, and possibly doctor’s offices, to provide translators — at business expense — for any customer or patient who does not speak English. That in a nutshell (apt phrasing, that) is the Democrat philosophy on immigration.

And by the way, I was being conservative when I said 12 million illegals would join us. According to NumbersUSA it will be more like 33 million, because “comprehensive reform” doesn’t manage to reform one of the major failings of current immigration policy called “family reunification.”

You probably think unifying families makes sense, because parents should be able to bring their children into the country. But you are wrong, that policy would be the reform. Current Democrat policy defines “family” as grandfathers, grandmothers, uncles, aunts, cousins, kissing–cousins, step–relatives and BFFs. So 33 million may be a conservative estimate.

Tea Party favorite Rubio is flacking for a bill that will only encourage more illegal immigration in the future, will not provide increased border security, will cost taxpayers billions, will depress wages for lower income workers, will burden the welfare system and — according to a report from Emily Schultheis in Politico — give Democrats 11 million so new voters, which is about the voting population of Ohio.

This leaves conservatives with a choice of opinions regarding Marco Rubio. One, he’s either too gullible to ever be allowed in the Oval Office or two, he’s a Democrat sleeper agent.

Hey Marco Rubio! After Boston Do You Still Want to Legalize Foreigners With Questionable Backgrounds?

Boston-Marathon-bombing-victim-John-Tlumacki

 Boston-Marathon-bombing-victim-John-Tlumacki

 

Senator Marco Rubio and his Gang of Eight, which should be renamed “Gangsters of Eight,” wants 12 million illegals granted amnesty, i.e. citizenship, because they’ve lived and worked in America for five years or more. Rubio knows many illegals have turned out to be violent criminals crowding U.S. prisons, but he is ignoring that as well as the fact that over the years many foreigners living in America have bombed America in an act of Islamic jihad like the two Boston bombers, granted citizenship right after 9/11, despite their background.

America welcomes people from across the globe, but leaders like the Gang of Eight seem more interested in grabbing immigrant votes than saying no to uneducated, low-skilled immigrants, as well as people from questionable countries where Islamic terrorism reigns.

Explosions At 117th Boston Marathon

First: Many illegals south of the U.S. border are proven to be low-skilled and uneducated, and that downs the American economy.

Second, the problem with legalizing 12 million illegals is many are violent criminals now filling our prison systems.

illegal criminals

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office

At the federal level, the number of criminal aliens incarcerated increased from about 42,000 at the end of calendar year 2001 to about 49,000 at the end of calendar year 2004–a 15 percent increase. The percentage of all federal prisoners who are criminal aliens has remained the same over the last 3 years–about 27 percent. The majority of criminal aliens incarcerated at the end of calendar year 2004 were identified as citizens of Mexico. We estimate the federal cost of incarcerating criminal aliens–Bureau of Prisons (BOP)’s cost to incarcerate criminals and reimbursements to state and local governments under SCAAP–totaled approximately $5.8 billion for calendar years 2001 through 2004.

 

The next problem is assimilation.

According to the Department of Justice:

[I]n fiscal year (FY) 2010, slightly less than 1 percent of the 40,651 foreign national inmates from treaty nations in federal prison were transferred to their home countries.”

The DOJ says its reason for low transfers back to native countries is many illegal criminals cant speak English, therefore:

insufficient translation services may keep some inmates from fully understanding and participating in the program.” As a result, “Overall, [the Bureau of Prisons] BOP and [International Prisoner Transfer Unit] IPTU, combined, rejected 97 percent of requests from foreign national inmates because they determined the inmates were ineligible or not suitable for transfer. Specifically, from FY 2005 through FY 2010, the BOP rejected 67,455 of 74,733 (90 percent) transfer requests.

In other words, it pays for criminal illegals not to assimilate and speak English, that way they can stay in the U.S, on the taxpayer’s dime where they will be well taken care of, on the taxpayers dime.

The biggest threat is terrorism: We have foreigners, both legal and illegal from Islamic countries with connections to Islamic terror. Despite those threatening connections, the word “racism” has forced the government and Americans to express apologetic tolerance to anyone connected to Islam, even when they have YouTube and Face Book pages demanding jihad against “infidels,” whom they believe must be exterminated.

As a result, we are faced once again with terrorism in our nation committed by two foreign nationals from an Islamic terrorist nation—Chechnya.

Dzhokhar Tsarnaev

The Boston Marathon Bombers were brothers who arrived in America after 9/11. 26 year-old Russian-born Tamerlan Tzarnaev, the suspect police killed, has been a legal permanent U.S. resident since 2007. His younger brother Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, a 19-year-old, also reported as living here legally, was born in Kyrgystan or Chechnya. Before coming to the United States, both men attended school in Dagestan, which Russian journalists say contains an Islamism extremist insurgency. It is also reported the two brothers came to the U.S. on grounds of asylum and had difficulty assimilating and making friends.

But was it really difficulty assimilating or refusal to become Western, because their social media pages show growing anti-American Islamic extremism.

Just because some immigrants cannot make friends has nothing to do with Americans not welcoming people. Americans welcome people from all over the world. Those who do not assimilate do not want anything to do with this country’s culture. Those who say they do not have any friends after 10 years do not want friends and that right there is a sign that something terribly wrong with those individuals.

Were the brothers connected to Islamic terror? Yes.

Tamerlan’s Youtube page features Islamist terror videos by Sheikh Feiz Mohammad who “urges Muslims to kill the enemies of Islam and praises martyrs with a violent interpretation of jihad.”

In Tamerlan’s YouTube profile he states he is Muslim and doesn’t drink or smoke anymore because “God said no alcohol,” and he believes “There are no values anymore…people can’t control themselves,” and as a Muslim “I’m very religious.”

If this bombers had talked about purchasing AR-15’s and posted Rand Paul videos, they would have been incarcerated long-ago on the grounds of terrorism.

More Islamic terror connections: The Boston bombs are the same as IEDs used by jihadists in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Times Square Bomber used a similar pressure cooker bomb; bombs jihadists can learn how to build at home with instructions from the Al Qaeda magazine Inspire. But that doesn’t matter to the left-wing media who are disappointed the bombers were not “far right-wing American militia nuts” with Sarah Palin bumper stickers and reading NRA magazines.

For the left-wing media, it’s a huge disappointment to hear Islam is still terrorizing America when too many white men continue to vote Republican!

Never mind the two Boston bombers are white. The fact they are Islamist terrorists makes them off limits.

Facts are facts: These Islamic connections should have been a heads-up warning with U.S. immigration when the two men arrived after 9/11. The YouTube pages by these men should have been a signal to the government that these men posed a national threat, but the government is more interested in spying on innocent, law-abiding Americans, who, heaven forbid, may legally own firearms for sport, hunting, and protection from violent criminals.

Tolerance must come first above the security of American lives.

And Rubio still wants to legalize 12 million illegals? We must ask important questions to Marco Rubio and the Gang of Eight:

1. Should these two Chechens have been granted citizenship? They were from an Islamist terror nation with radical beliefs and became more threatening over the years. They plotted and bombed marathon spectators and then killed a cop in and high speed car chase.

2. Should America legalize illegals demanding citizenship because they live in this country five years or more?

3. Do Americans owe foreigners citizenship just because they demand it and Washington leaders need votes to remain in office until we watch their feet leave office first?

4. How many illegals waiting for amnesty in this country are violent criminals?

5. How many illegals from Islamic countries are living here with dangerous plans for America?

Thanks to vote-grabbing politicians, we don’t know until it’s too late.

Rubio on CBS: Hey, I Wasn’t Even Around for DADT…

Marco_Rubio,_official_portrait,_112th_Congress

senator rubioIn a follow up interview from his Republican Response speech, Marco Rubio had an opportunity to explain further some of his personal positions. In this CBS Morning clip the senator acknowledges that he, like many, agree with some of the president’s comments from the State of the Union address, including finding actual solutions for gun violence. However, he noted strong disagreement with many of the president’s proposals particularly raising the minimum wage.

On a personal note, I had to chuckle when Rubio took Norah O’Donnell to task after her criticisms were shown to be without merit. Maybe Ms. O’Donnell will get her facts straight next time.

And yes, the senator did laugh at his awkward water moment.

Rubio to Give GOP Address Feb. 12

senator rubio

Speaker Boehner and Senate Republican Leader McConnell announced today that Senator Marco Rubio would be giving the Republican Address in response to the State of the Nation on February 12. This is the first time the young senator will take the national stage representing the conservative party.

Senator Rubio, now in his third year in the U.S. Senate, has been a champion of growing the American middle class through limited government and free enterprise policies, making him a natural choice to outline why the Republican vision can help Americans rise above their current circumstances in the Obama economy.

“Marco Rubio is one of our party’s most dynamic and inspiring leaders. He carries our party’s banner of freedom, opportunity and prosperity in a way few others can. His family’s story is a testament to the promise and greatness of America,” said Speaker Boehner.  “He’ll deliver a GOP address that speaks from the heart to the hopes and dreams of the middle class; to our party’s commitment to life and liberty; and to the unlimited potential of America when government is limited and effective.”

“Marco Rubio embodies the optimism that lies at the heart of the Republican vision for America. On Tuesday, he will contrast the Republican approach to the challenges we face with President Obama’s vision of an ever-bigger government and the higher taxes that would be needed to pay for it,” said Senator McConnell. “Marco’s own experience as the child of immigrants has always informed his belief in limited government and free enterprise, which is why he has helped lead the fight against out-of-control spending and job-destroying tax hikes that continue to hold our economy back and stifle opportunity for millions. He was a natural choice to deliver the Republicans’ alternative to the administration’s reliance on government and debt.”

“I’m honored to have this opportunity to discuss how limited government and free enterprise have helped senator rubiomake my family’s dreams come true in America,” said Senator Rubio.  “Limited government and free enterprise are the very foundation of what makes America special and separates us from the world, particularly through our strong middle class.  I look forward to laying out the Republican case of how our ideas can help people close the gap between their dreams and the opportunities to realize them.”

The address will be delivered in both English and Spanish and comes the same week that TIME Magazine will feature the Florida senator on their cover.

Won’t You Come Home Bill Bolling?

Hugging Obama: the first step toward renouncing the Republican party.

Virginia’s Lt. Governor Bill Bolling is going to have to lose a considerable amount of weight and drastically increase his time on the tanning bed to physically resemble Charlie Crist, but Bolling’s ideological transformation is coming along nicely.

For those who don’t follow Florida politics, Charlie Crist is the former Republican governor who intended to be the state’s new US senator in 2010. When Crist announced he was well known and could raise money — music to establishment Republican ears. Crist was immediately endorsed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee in an effort intimidate potential primary competition.

Life was good! Crist had essentially been handed the nomination. Time to order some staffer to start measuring for new drapes in his senate office. Except Marco Rubio decided to enter the race. Rubio had everything going against him but the voters.

Crist wasn’t worried at first. But as the campaign continued, FL voters decided Crist was too cozy with Obama and lacked conservative commitment. Rubio won the primary and in a fit of pique, Crist changed his registration to Independent and ran as a spoiler.

Rubio beat him and the Democrat both.

Really angry and wanting to “lash out” (thank goodness there weren’t any “assault rifles” handy!), Crist endorsed Obama in 2012. And he just made the news by changing his party affiliation to Democrat. Proving Republican voters were correct all along.

Bolling’s situation is quite similar. In 2009 he was in his first term and Bob McDonnell was the Attorney General. Both wanted to run for governor, but Bolling didn’t want a fight — something that appears to be characteristic. As Pope Alexander IV divided the world between the Spanish and the Portuguese — McDonnell divided the top Virginia offices between himself and Bolling. McDonnell ran for governor and promised to support Bolling in 2013.

Unfortunately, the nomination is not McDonnell’s to confer. The wealthy may be able to hand political office from relative to relative in Massachusetts, hence the “Kennedy” senate seat, but Virginian’s don’t cotton to inheriting office.

Like the English in Pope Alexander’s time, Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli ignored an agreement he was not party to and worked to secure the nomination. He packed the GOP central committee with his supporters. After Cuccinelli announced, the committee changed the nomination process from a primary election to a convention.

At which point Bolling avoided another fight and dropped out in the belief he could not win a convention in which strong grass–roots support is a crucial factor.

Cuccinelli is not without sin in this saga. Ken initially promised voters he would run for re–election, which I thought was an excellent idea. He broke that promise when he announced for governor, but as former Texas Gov. Bill Clements once said in connection with a lie he told, “Well, there never was a Bible in the room.”

Few Republicans are as popular with liberals and their media choir as establishment Republicans defeated by a conservative. All it took for Bolling to become a statesman was for Cuccinelli to run him out of the primary. Now he is another unfortunate establishment moderate who — according to the media — is the best general election candidate. Unfortunately he can’t win a primary dominated by the right wing.

What’s wrong with mouth–breathing TEA party types? Didn’t they see how successful Republicans were with John McCain, George Allen and Mitt Romney?

Predictably, Bolling is now “growing in office” as he starts emerging from his “Cristsalis.” Bolling has come out and opposed uranium mining in Virginia because he agrees with “environmentalists” that it will create a hole in the ground. After the Newtown elementary school shooting, Bolling broke with McDonnell and opposed even researching the possibility of arming school staff. And Bolling warns he will be an “independent voice” during the 2013 gubernatorial campaign.

All that’s left for Bolling is to “evolve” his views on homosexual marriage and schedule a big hug photo op with Obama. Then he’s free to enter the race as an independent and undermine Cuccinelli’s candidacy.

Only Bolling won’t really be running as an Independent. He’ll be running as a Petulant. Nothing prevented Bolling from putting his supporters on the central committee. He wasted eight years instead of building a strong grass–roots organization. Bolling’s problem isn’t Cuccinelli or conservatives; it’s inertia.

Marco Rubio RNC Speech

Florida Senator Marco Rubio delivers his RNC speech

Remarks prepared by the Republican National Convention

In 1980, I watched my first Republican Convention with my grandfather.

He was born to a farming family in rural Cuba. Childhood polio left him permanently disabled.

Because he couldn’t work the farm, his family sent him to school, and he became the only one in the family who could read.

As a boy, I would sit on our porch and listen to his stories about history, politics and baseball while he puffed on one of his three daily Padron cigars.

I don’t recall everything we talked about, but the one thing I remember, is the one thing he wanted me to never forget. The dreams he had when he was young became impossible to achieve.

But because I was an American, there was no limit to how far I could go.

For those of us who were born and raised in this country, it’s easy to forget how special America is. But my grandfather understood how different America is from the rest of world.

Tonight, you’ll hear from another man who understands what makes America exceptional.

Mitt Romney knows America’s prosperity didn’t happen because our government simply spent more. It happened because our people used their own money to open a business.

And when they succeed, they hire more people, who then invest or spend their money in the economy, helping others start a business and create jobs.

Mitt Romney’s success in business is well known. But he’s more than that.

He’s a devoted husband, father, and grandfather. A generous member of his community and church.

Everywhere he’s been, he’s volunteered his time and talent to make things better for those around him.

We are blessed that soon, he will be the President of the United States.

Our problem with President Obama isn’t that he’s a bad person. By all accounts, he too is a good husband, and a good father … and thanks to lots of practice, a pretty good golfer.

Our problem is he’s a bad President.

The new slogan for the President’s campaign is “Forward”.

A government that spends one trillion dollars more than it takes in.

An 800 billion dollar stimulus that created more debt than jobs.

A government intervention into healthcare paid for with higher taxes and cuts to Medicare.

Scores of new rules and regulations.

These ideas don’t move us “Forward”, they take us “Backwards.”

These are old, big government ideas.

Ideas that people come to America to get away from.

Ideas that threaten to make America more like the rest of the world, instead of helping the world become more like America.

Under Barack Obama, the only “Change” is that “Hope” has been hard to find.

Now millions of Americans are insecure about their future. But instead of inspiring us by reminding us of what makes us special, he divides us against each other.

He tells Americans they’re worse off because others are better off. That people got rich by making others poor.

Hope and Change has become Divide and Conquer.

No matter how you feel about President Obama, this election is about your future, not his. And it’s not simply a choice between a democrat and a republican.

It’s a choice about what kind of country we want America to be.

We should remember what made us special. For most of history almost everyone was poor. Power and wealth belonged to only a few.

Your rights were whatever your rulers allowed you to have. Your future was determined by your past.

If your parents were poor, so would you be. If you were born without opportunities, so were your children.

But America was founded on the principle that every person has God-given rights.

That power belongs to the people.

That government exists to protect our rights and serve our interests.

That we shouldn’t be trapped in the circumstances of our birth. That we should be free to go as far as our talents and work can take us.

We’re united not by a common race or ethnicity. We’re bound together by common values.

That family is the most important institution in society. That almighty God is the source of all we have.

We’ve never made the mistake of believing that we are so smart that we can rely solely on our leaders or our government.

Our national motto “In God we Trust” reminding us that faith in our Creator is the most important American value of all.

And, we’ve always understood the scriptural admonition that “for everyone to whom much is given, from him much will be required.”

We are a blessed people. And we have honored those blessings with the enduring example of an exceptional America.

I know that for so many of you, these last few years have tested your faith in the promise of America.

Maybe you are at an age when you thought you would be entering retirement. But instead, because your savings and investments are wiped out, you have to go back to work.

Maybe, after years of hard work, this was the time you expected to be your prime earning years. But instead, you’ve been laid off, and your house is worth less than your mortgage.

Maybe you did everything you where told you needed to do to get ahead.

You studied hard and finished school. But now, you owe thousands of dollars in student loans. You can’t find a job in your field. And you’ve moved back in with your parents.

You want to believe we’re still that place where anything is possible. But things just don’t seem to be getting better. And you are starting to wonder if things will ever be the same again.

Yes, we live in a troubled time. But the story of those who came before us, reminds us that America has always been about new beginnings.

If we are willing to do for our children, what our parents did for us, life in America can be better than it has ever been.

My mother was one of seven girls, whose parents went to bed hungry so their children wouldn’t. My father lost his mother when he was nine. He left school, and went to work for the next seventy years.

They emigrated to America with little more than the hope of a better life.

My Dad was a bartender. My Mom was a cashier, a maid, and a stock clerk at K-Mart. They never made it big. They were never rich.

And yet they were successful. Because just a few decades removed from hopelessness, they made possible for us all the things that had been impossible for them.

Many nights I heard my father’s keys jingling at the door as he came home after another 16-hour day. Many mornings, I woke up just as my mother got home from the overnight shift at K-Mart.

When you’re young, the meaning of these moments escapes you. But now, as my own children get older, I understand it better.

My Dad used to tell us: “En este pais, ustedes van a poder lograr todas las cosas que nosotros no pudimos” “In this country, you will be able to accomplish all the things we never could.”

A few years ago during a speech, I noticed a bartender behind a portable bar at the back of the ballroom. I remembered my father who had worked so long as a banquet bartender.

He was grateful for the work he had, but that’s not the life he wanted for us.

He stood behind a bar in the back of the room all those years, so one day I could stand behind a podium in the front of a room.

That journey, from behind that bar to behind this podium, goes to the essence of the American miracle… that we’re exceptional not because we have more rich people here.

We’re special because dreams that are impossible anywhere else, come true here.

That’s not just my story. That’s our story. It’s the story of your mother who struggled to give you what she never had.

It’s the story of your father who worked two jobs so doors closed for him would open for you.

The story of that teacher or that coach who taught you the lessons that shaped who you are today.

And it’s the story of a man who was born into an uncertain future in a foreign country. His family came to America to escape revolution.

They struggled through poverty and the great depression. And yet he rose to be an admired businessman, and public servant.

And in November, his son, Mitt Romney, will be elected President of the United States.

We are all just a generation or two removed from someone who made our future the purpose of their lives.

America, is the story of everyday people, who did extraordinary things. A story woven deep into the fabric of our society.

Their stories may never be famous, but in the lives they lived, you find the living essence of America’s greatness.

To make sure America is still a place where tomorrow is always better than yesterday, that is what our politics should be about.

And that is what we are deciding in this election.

Do we want our children to inherit our hopes and dreams, or do we want them to inherit our problems?

If we succeed in changing the direction of our country, our children and grandchildren, will be the most prosperous generation ever, and their achievements will astonish the world.

The story of our time will be written by Americans who haven’t yet been born.

Let’s make sure they write that we did our part.

That we chose more freedom instead of more government.

We chose the principles of our founding to solve the challenges of our time.

We chose Mitt Romney to lead our nation.

And because we did, the American Miracle lived on for another generation to inherit.

 

RNC Schedule: Final Day

After a very successful convention, the final day is here. The climax of today’s events and the entire convention is going to begin at 10pm, when Florida Senator Marco Rubio introduces the 2012 GOP nominee, Gov. Mitt Romney, and will shortly be followed by Romney’s acceptance speech.

Thursday, August 30, 2012

  1. 7:00 p.m. Convention convenes
  2. Call to order
  3. Introduction of Colors US Central Command Joint Forces Color Guard Team
  4. Pledge of Allegiance by Dylan Nonaka
  5. National Anthem sung by SEVEN
  6. Invocation byKen and Priscilla Hutchins
  7. Remarks by U.S. Rep. Connie Mack (FL)
  8. Reagan Legacy Video
  9. Remarks by Newt and Callista Gingrich
  10. Remarks by Craig Romney
  11. 8:00 p.m. Remarks by Governor former Jeb Bush (FL)
  12. Remarks by Bob White, chairman of Romney for President campaign
  13. Remarks by Grant Bennett
  14. Remarks by Tom Stemberg
  15. 9:00 p.m. Remarks by former Massachusetts Lt. Governor Kerry Healey
  16. Remarks by Jane Edmonds, former Massachusetts Secretary of Workforce
  17. Remarks by Olympians Michael Eruzione, Derek Parra and Kim Rhode
  18. 10:00 p.m. Remarks by U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (FL)
  19. Remarks by presidential nominee Mitt Romney
  20. Benediction by Archbishop Timothy M. Dolan
  21.  Speaker Boehner declares convention adjourned

2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa Bay, FL

Olympic Medal Winners Face a Tax Hit

In his third Olympic Performance, Michael Phelps won a total of six medals: four gold and two silver. His performances in the thirtieth Olympiad is sure to bring big financial awards, but his performances are also going to cost him.

Every American who won a medal in the London Olympics will receive cash rewards from the U.S Olympic Committee. Each gold medal winner will receive $25,000, each silver medal winner will receive $15,000 and each bronze medal winner will receive $10,000 respectively. This means when Michael Phelps returns to the states, he will be collecting a healthy $130,000 from the USOC.

Phelps with his record breaking 19th Olympic Medal

However, Phelps will also be taxed for each medal he received. For each gold medal, Phelps will have to pay the IRS approximately $9,000, for each gold, $5,400 for each silver, and if he would have earned a bronze, $3,500.

Soon after stories surfaced about U.S. Olympic athletes facing deep financial hardship, some Washington politicians have offered and supported a bill that would offer the athletes a reprieve.

Republican law makers led by Florida Senator Marco Rubio, and Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown introduced a bill named Olympic Tax Exemption Act last week. The bill has already gained the support of President Barack Obama.

“Our young athletes endure years of grueling training and make enormous sacrifices so they can represent our country on the national stage and make us proud. Our thanks should not come in the form of a giant tax bill from the IRS.” Brown said when asked about the bill.

Follow Me on Twitter @chrisenloe.

Did ABC Fabricate Rubio Story?

Sen. Marco Rubio

Sen. Marco Rubio

Erin Haust posted this story earlier today concerning ABC’s Jonathan Karl’s column about Sen. Marco Rubio not being considered for the VP spot.  He hasn’t been asked to turn over documents used in the vetting process.  Karl stated:

But knowledgeable Republican sources tell me that Rubio is not being vetted by Mitt Romney’s vice presidential search team. He has not been asked to complete any questionnaires or been asked to turn over any financial documents typically required of potential vice presidential candidates.

Although it is possible that Rubio may yet be asked to go through the vetting process, it has been nearly two months since Romney named his long-time aide Beth Myers to run his vice presidential search. The fact that Rubio has not been asked to turn over any documents by now is a strong indication that he is not on Romney’s short list of potential running mates.

Officially the Romney campaign has no comment

As Haust noted earlier today, “so because he hasn’t submitted reports and the campaign refuses to say anything publicly, Rubio is automatically off the short list?  It’s only June… Karl has successfully created a news story out of thin air. Asking leading questions and making insinuating remarks is not “news.” ABC has committed journalistic fraud by asserting there is a story where there is none.” As a result, ABC’s political blog, seems to be lusting for a quote about the matter and sort of backtracked on the story  about Rubio’s non-vetting and focusing solely on whether he is on the short list or not.  A far cry from saying that there is a “strong indication that he is not on Romney’s short list of potential running mates.”

To add insult to injury, Catalina Camia of USA TODAY posted on June 19th that “Mitt Romney told reporters in Michigan that Florida Sen. Marco Rubio is being looked at as his possible running mate, adding that a news story out today about the Tea Party favorite not being vetted was “entirely false.”

“Marco Rubio is being thoroughly vetted as part of our process,” Romney said during a campaign stop in Holland, Mich.

ABC News reported this morning that the freshman senator was not being vetted to be Mitt Romney’s running mate. The report cited “knowledgeable sources.”

The ABC report said Rubio “has not been asked to complete any questionnaires or been asked to turn over any financial documents typically required of potential vice presidential candidates.” It went on to say that it was “possible that Rubio may yet be asked to go through the vetting process.”

“There was a story that originated today apparently at ABC based upon reports of supposedly outside unnamed advisers of mine. I can’t imagine who such people are,” Romney said. “But I can tell you this: They know nothing about the vice presidential selection or evaluation process. There are only two people in this country who know who are being vetted and who are not, and that’s Beth Myers and myself.

It looks like ABC was just making stuff up with more than shaky sources.  Nice job dead tree media.  Two gold stars for you!

(H/T Erin Haust)

Birther Nonsense

Obama 2

While I’m not a fan of Stand Up! with Pete Dominick on Sirius XM, he’s always good to get the center-left angle on politics.  In addition, I’m a self-diagnosed politics junkie who was stuck in the wonderful Beltway traffic so I guess you can say I didn’t have a choice in the matter.  Pete’s guest, John Avalon, made a critical point today stating how significant Mitt Romney’s nomination really is to American politics.  He is the first Mormon to be nominated by a major party and the first non-protestant to be nominated by Republicans.  This comes after Mitt’s pervasive hammering surrounding his not so stellar conservative credentials.  The base may have been skeptical about him, but in the end, they choose him over the other clowns who vied for the Republican nomination. However, the mainstream media is not pushing that narrative.  Instead, they’re focused on Donald Trump’s birther nonsense.

Now, I know we should all focus on the economy and other key issues in this upcoming election, but this birther issue does get under my skin.  First of all, it’s beyond absurd.   Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and is a “natural born citizen” who is eligible for the presidency.  Even Andrew Breitbart thought this whole charade was a losing issue.  No one cares! No one cares because the narrative these people are trying to push is not grounded in reality.  It is something akin to an Alex Jones “theory”, who feels that al-Qaeda is an arm of the U.S. intelligence network, or a person who has watched Three Days of the Condor, The Manchurian Candidate, and The Parallax View one too many times.  No doubt shady stuff occurs in Washington, but birthers are so ludicrous it makes me want to hug them in empathy.

My first taste in blogging was for Western Journalism, which reports heavily on the subject.  I cannot bash the folks at Western Journalism too much, since some of them are very professional and cordial, but as the months progressed; I found myself unable to be associated with an organization that peddles, excuse me, this gross propaganda concerning Obama’s eligibility.  It’s been three years folks.  If you haven’t been able to convince the base, the heavyweights in the conservative media, and the American people, you probably don’t have the “explosive find” which you regard as the holy grail of political malfeasance.

Furthermore, like liberals, birthers get agitated, petulant, and downright nasty when people dismiss them and their ideas.  It is a temper tantrum on steroids. An excerpt from a piece on Western Journalism detailed the open letter Breitbart’s Senior Staff released surrounding their legitimate vetting of Obama which, needless to say, didn’t bode well with this writer.

Andrew Breitbart was never a ‘Birther,’ and Breitbart News is a site that has never advocated the narrative of ‘Birtherism.’”

Reading this makes me want to ask in bemused wonder:  How old are you?  (I could, of course, ask the same question of Anderson Cooper, Bill O’Reilly, Mark Levine, Neal Boortz, or Glenn Beck – who are clearly much older to a man.)  But seriously, how immature – or insecure, at least – must one be to be so concerned with what the cultural elites think of them?  Young Ben Shapiro (twenty-eight, and reportedly the youngest nationally syndicated writer in the country) went to Harvard Law. One wonders if he had been president of the Law Review if we would have ever seen one of his publications…but I digress.  Joel Pollak…sure enough, went to both Harvard and Harvard Law – just as I had expected.

While I must congratulate the two on emerging from that milieu with any non-collectivist values, it seems that neither of them escaped with a penchant for identifying and confronting the Alinsky staple of marginalization…or, they accept the practice so fully that they simply can’t bear the thought of being on the receiving end thereof.  Well, grow up, boys!  If what Media Matters says about you is a concern (and it clearly is), then perhaps you should choose another line of work.

I think someone misplaced their pacifier.

The real comical element about this whole movement is that there is no concrete legal definition of the term “natural born citizen.”  They have no cornerstone.  I’ve always thought that the term applied to any citizens born on American soil.  Indeed, I would stand corrected. Byron York wrote a great piece in The Washington Examiner since the rude resurrection of this issue thanks to Donald Trump, who Geogre Will aptly called a bloviated ignoramus last Sunday.  York wrote:

The Constitution specifies that a president must be a “natural born citizen” of the United States, but it does not define the term. The Supreme Court has never clarified the issue, but there is a law, 8 U.S. Code 1401, that spells out in detail who is a citizen.

The law uses the phrase “citizens of the United States at birth” and lists categories of people who fit that description.

First, there are people born inside the United States. No question about that; their citizenship is established by the 14th Amendment.

Then there are the people who are born outside the United States to parents who are both American citizens, provided one of them has lived in the U.S. for any period of time. And then there are the people who are born outside the United States to one parent who is a U.S. citizen and the other who is an alien, provided the citizen parent lived in the United States or its possessions for at least five years, at least two of them after age 14.

Since they are all “citizens of the United States at birth,” the question is, does that also mean they are “natural born citizens” in the constitutional sense?

Birthers believe a natural born citizen is a person born to two parents who were citizens of the United States at the time.  Hence, the reason why birthers have Marco Rubio, the crown prince of the Tea Party movement, in their crosshairs if he should ever be chosen as Romney’s running mate.

Well, according to Theodore Olson, Bush’s former solicitor general:

“My conclusion would be that if you are a citizen as a consequence of your birth, that’s a natural-born citizen…[Olsen] defended John McCain in a 2008 lawsuit alleging McCain was ineligible to be president. McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 while his father served in the U.S. Navy there. Even though the area was under American jurisdiction and both McCain’s parents were U.S. citizens, some Democrats alleged McCain was ineligible to be president. McCain won the case, if not the presidency.

The law is really quite lenient, especially for those born outside the United States. If a child were born today in, say, Kenya, to a Kenyan father and an American citizen mother who had lived in the United States for at least five years, at least two of them over the age of 14 — that child would be a “citizen of the United States by birth” and be eligible for the White House.

However, this hasn’t stopped people like Joseph Farah of World Net Daily, who vociferously pushes the birther issue and has gone on record to say Rubio is ineligible for the VP slot due to his parents not being citizens at the time.  Washington lawyer Matthew McGill, who York cites in his column, states  “I am not aware of anyone who has contended that someone could be born in the United States and be a citizen by virtue of the 14th Amendment and nevertheless still not be a natural-born American citizen…if he is born in the United States, his parentage is not of consequence.”  No to mention that there is incontrovertible proof that Rubio was born in Miami, Florida.

In the words of John Adams, “facts are stubborn things.” Barack Obama is eligible for president, he is the president, and now we must focus all of our efforts in voting him out of office come November.  We have no time to theorize absurd notions about the “origins of his birth.”  This is time to get serious about the fate of our republic and our economy and we have zero time for sophomoric conspiracy theories whose footnote page is no longer than a kindergartner’s book report.  However, this is a free country.  You have every right to keep your opinions, no matter how insane, but I intend, along with other serious conservatives, to do everything possible in order to restore honor and dignity to the White House.  It’s game time and birthers have come unprepared.  They’re still coming down from their Paxil binge.

« Older Entries