I sit at my desk, pondering this pickle We the People are in, and I don't like pickles. I realize things have to change. The diminishing returns of trying to fix this "pickle we're in" with traditional methods has failed. Let's talk about pickles for a moment. I can deal with a pickle on my burger once in a while, and if they get mine wrong, I don't always make them fix me a new burger. I'll just either eat it, or compromise, and de-pickle my burger myself. Nobody's perfect. We all make mistakes.

However, if I keep going back to the same fast-food restaurant, and they keep messing my order up, I'll eventually get tired of the poor service, and accept the fact that they either aren't listening to me when I place my order, or they don't care. Maybe it's not just the guy at the window today, cause this happened before, with a different employee working the drive-thru. Maybe it's the management.

I still don't say anything. I'm busy. Gotta run. But then I come back some time later, and it happens again. I had forgotten how poor the service was. "Oh, yeah." I tell myself. "This is that place they always screw up my order. I won't be back here anytime soon," I remind myself again," trying to mask my obvious insanity.

You see, Benjamin Franklin said "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different outcome."

I'm sick of pickles that I never order. Even when I tell them specifically, "NO PICKLES!" They get it wrong. So, I then start looking for options to resolve this "pickle" I find myself in... AGAIN!

More time passes. I like the food here, when they get it right. It's why I subconsciously block out the "pickle problem." Well, I'm not gonna give up just yet. I'll dine in next time. That way I can tell them face-to-face exactly what I want. Then they'll get it right. So, off I drive, thinking I've resolved the problem for next time.

Wrong. The same thing happens when I dine in. Pickles on my burger. Argggh! Sigh. I guess I'll vote with my dollar. I'll eat somewhere else, maybe then they'll start listening.  I fill out a customer service survey I found on the table, and drop it in the box on the wall, hoping to redress my grievances against the pickle. Customer service polling explains why sales have been dropping off. Poor service. The manager gives me a coupon for a free meal next time, if I'll just overlook this pickle problem.

They should listen to customers, the true employer. Ask any businessman. When people start courting their competition, they try to figure out why, and fix it, or make it better. But they don't fix the problem. Well. I still like their food. I'll just live with it, thus lowering my expectations. I grow to except that I get pickles when I don't want them, no matter what I do. I keep finding myself in a pickle.

After a while, I quit complaining even to myself about the pickle problem. I also don't eat there as often, but when I do, I've now learned not to expect much. Well, I don't get much either, and certainly not what I want, what I should be able to expect, especially since I'm paying for it. But wait, I AM paying for it. I'll vote with my dollar. I'm done with this restaurant. Drive thru sucks. Dine in sucks. The food sucks too now, because I'm disgusted with the futility of trying to get something as simple as a burger with "NO PICKLES, PLEASE!"

I do go back by at some point, and use my coupon for a free meal to make up for a service-connected disability with my burger. Just because it's free, doesn't make it better. It doesn't make it good. I still get a pickle on my free meal, and what's worse, since they know they aren't gonna make anything off this, they skimp on the lettuce and tomato, and my fries are cold, and the drink is flat. Arrgh! Okay. I give up, but you don't win. I do. I'm voting with my dollar, because I live in a free country, where I can do that. Or at least that's what I tell myself.

Once they miss my dollars enough, and those of the other customers who eventually got fed up, and ate elsewhere, justice will be done. They'll either straighten up, or go out of business. That's the free market. Competition in a capitalistic economy drives inovation, and encourages competitors to produce a better product or service. It goes back and forth over time. Each burger joint trying to keep their customers from going to the competition. Quality goes up all around. Satisfied customers tell their friends. More people eat at your burger joint. Business makes more money, and can pay its employees better. That makes them happy. Customers are happier too. They get burgers with no pickles, if that's what they want. Quality of life goes up. Successful pursuits of happiness achieved. Don't you love the simple logic of that?

Let's recap. I don't like pickles on my burger. If I can't get what I want in a hurry at the drive-thru, and can't get it inside, face-to-face, I vote with my dollar. Bad burger joint closes. Justice is served, and nobody's in a pickle, unless they want to be. I scratch my head. Seems like common sense to me, but I digress.

So, I'm sitting at my desk, going through my emails, and I run across one about the internet, and the plans for a new and improved internet. "Cool," I think to myself as I read further, I'm a techy. It seems the government has a new website to promote a new idea for the internet. It's called http://www.openinternet.gov. Nice looking site. FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has a video posted, to "communicate" to me how a "federal commission" is going to make the internet the best thing since sliced bread.

This federal commission in charge of "communications" has this heartwarming message that I am part of something big. It says,

"Welcome to OpenInternet.gov. Together we can preserve a free and open Internet to promote greater innovation, job creation, and a more connected America."

Wow! That does sound like the best thing since sliced bread. We're together, free and open. It's gonna promote innovation, and create jobs, and best of all, make us a more connected America. Well gee. Who wouldn't want that? Sign me up. But wait a minute. This sounds too good to be true. I remember being in a pickle before, when I thought I was getting what was advertised; what I was paying for.

I was about to go throught the drive thru. This looks and sounds like what we need, but I've been in a pickle before because I took the drive thru. Maybe I should go inside, and dine in. So I watch the video of FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski. Hmm...  sounds like the burger joint manager, who can't really explain why I keep getting pickles that I don't want. What the burger joint manager said sounded nice too, but didn't communicate anything that mattered. FCC Chairman Genachowski's video communicates NOTHING of substance. Well, ain't this a pickle.

Where's that customer service card? They had one at the burger joint.  Hey! They want me to join the discussion. So, I click on the button under the ridiculous video, under the heartwarming message. I type in my two-cents worth, and am about to hit send, but it won't. They want to know my email address. Why does the FCC need my email address to post a comment on a "free" and "open" internet. Isn't that like a poll tax, or something?

I remember the cash-for-clunkers fiasco, where you effectively gave the government "ownership of your computer, now and forever, and everything on it." NO PICKLES, PLEASE!  I've seen management at this burger joint in action before. If I give them my suggestion, and its the next best thing since sliced bread, then they can just take the message. Why do they need to identify the messenger?

If they were sincere, it wouldn't matter who the messenger was. They didn't ask me to join a mailing list. They asked for opinions. It won't let me just leave a message. Now, I've seen how this government treats people with views that are contrary to their agenda. Talk radio. Lou Dobbs. Glenn Beck. Fox News, in general. Even the insurance company Humana got a pickle they didn't want on their burger when they warned their customers about Obamacare.

Well, I don't need to post my message on their site. They won't like what I have to say. Besides, I might end up on their hit list for daring to point out the obvious. Keep your hands off the internet. You're obviously not qualified, or motivated to do what's in MY best interest. That's my free speech you're messing with. I don't trust you to control it. You've forgotten who the customer is: WE THE PEOPLE.

Gee, this sounds like my "single-payer," government-run VA Medical Care. You've heard of that right? It's for our veterans who find themselves in a pickle, that need healthcare. And if you're in a pickle, and go to the management, don't expect much. Read my blog entry titled "VA Leaves Combat Veteran Stranded 150 Miles From Home" further down, to get the full effect of what I'm trying to say here.

Our corrupt government doesn't even read the Constitution, their "employee handbook." I'll just post it on the FIRE Coalition Blog, or on my PatriotWatchdog blog at MySpace. I don't need their permission there. I don't have to give them my email address to speak my mind. I'm a free man with a Bill of Rights. I'm the employer, not the employee.

So, I go to log into our blog at http://blog.firecoalition.com, and what do I see? Not our blog. I see a big, scary window, warning me that "this might be an attack site."

Well, ain't this a pickle. Did I mention I don't like pickles? At the FIRE Coalition, we actually do "question with boldness," and we actually do "speak without fear." We hold our elected officials feet to the fire with our 1st Amendment right to free speech. We don't just take the drive thru, we go inside, and meet with our Congressmen, Senators, etc... You know them right? OUR EMPLOYEES? Our humble servants with "honorable" at the beginning of their names?

Over the past two years, since I took on the role of National Director, whenever the FIRE Coalition pressured the government too hard, or told too much of the truth about the "pickle" We the People are in, we get attacked. Like that "Where's Waldo" game, you could almost just assume that I was in D.C., because our sites, and emails would come under attack, crash, get hacked.

I used to use that as a litmus test. Hey, we must be doing something right. We're angering some powerful people if they can get past the well-managed security on our sites, and email accounts. But since I don't advertise where and when I go, it really narrows the list of possible culprits. Now, my philosophy is that there are only two groups of people that we should be talking to about what's wrong with our country: We the People, and the people we elect. Period.

What that means is that I don't waste my time trying to argue the merits of defending Article IV, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution with the illegal alien foreign national invaders who comprise the largest invasion in world history. They are not the solution. They don't have a seat at the table, or shouldn't. They don't respect our laws, our sovereignty, our culture, our language. Nothing. So who would know where I am, if I don't advertise ahead of time where I am, except maybe some of those government officials whose feet I hold to the fire.

When I was in the military, I took an oath, just like our Members of Congress do, just like the President. If I betrayed my oath, I would on the carpet in front of my commander. I'd have some explaining to do. I might even go to prison for betraying my oath. If honor, loyalty, and sense of duty to your fellow countrymen wasn't enough to keep your attention to detail, the threat of going to Levenworth might do the trick. Wouldn't that be a pickle?

Well America, our government is being run like a poorly managed burger joint, with employees that can't read their "employee handbook," (the Constitution), that keep trying to shove pickles down our throat, no matter how often, or how loud we tell them, "NO PICKLES, PLEASE!"

Our burger joint employees won't read the complaint box either, (we have no redress of grievances), or listen to the customer satisfaction surveys. Like a large number of the illegal alien employees that don't speak the same language we do, (at OUR burger joint), they don't even read the bills their special interest salesmen write to get us out of the latest pickle. A pickle, I might add, that we wouldn't be subjected to in the first place if management had upheld the "employee handbook."

They just offer us a free burger to appease us. We go away. They can sit back and live fat off the stockholders of the burger joint. Things have gotten so bad, our burger joint is going bankrupt. We need new management. We tried that three years ago, when the House and Senate swapped hands, and got a whole new fresh set of empty promises. We were already in a pickle. The "change" we got was more pickles! Are we insane? No. We are not.

We the People have something most of the rest of the world does not, "a sleeping giant" that hates koolaid, but loves sweet tea. White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said, "Never let a crisis go to waste." Yesterday, President Obama declared the H1N1 virus a national emergency. If you listened to the donkey that's behaving like an ass, or the elephant who's lost his memory, you might have noticed the "triggers" that were put into place after 9/11/2001, and even more "triggers" when our poorly managed burger joint staff put the people in New Orleans in a pickle after Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast.

These "triggers" were just crisis management devices to solve a problem, but the real intent was to nibble away at our rights, our sovereignty, our Constitution, etc... After all, they gave us heart-warming rhetoric, to make us feel good about giving up a little liberty for a little more security.

Do not be so naive as to believe our President, Congress, and the rest of our burger joint employees at the top haven't read the Constitution, or the wisdoms left by the Founding Fathers. We the People advise each other that the Founders said, "Any people who will give up a little liberty for a little security will get neither. The traitors know that too. They also heard us advise each other about another Founding Father wisdom: When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.

The President and Mr. "Don't let a crisis go to waste" Emanuel want us afraid of them. They don't like us having liberty or freedom of choice. Foreign and domestic enemies of our Constitution and sovereignty create crises that will steer the sheeple towards the solution that will give them more power, and We the People less.

Eventually, if the foreign and domestic enemies of our Constitution get their way, we'll be too afraid to challenge them. Our apathy and pragmatic compromising have us in a real pickle. Our burger joint is in such a state of despair, with an ever-increasing onslaught of pickles we didn't ask for. They call tax increases an elimination of tax cuts. They call patriots racists. They call their customers potential domestic terrorists to both quiet the messenger, and marginalize the message.

When the formerly "sleeping giant" won't drink the koolaid, well gee, that's another crisis. They try to shut We the People up at every turn. Discredit the messenger, and you discredit the message. Nice try, pickle-pushers.

I have a question for FCC Chairman Genachowski. Who wrote that "non-communicative" koolaid commercial for you? George Orwell? Mr. Chairman, who crafted the imaginary crisis you aluded to, Aldous Huxley?

We the People can't survive on your animal farm, and this ain't 1984 either, no matter how much you may slobber over the concept. It's time for a stockholders meeting at "All-American Burger," to discuss the diminishing returns of the pickle-pushers before we have to shut down our burger joint. Wouldn't that be a pickle?.

By the way, here's what I would have contributed to your OpenInternet.gov site if it was the message you wanted, and not the messenger. 

The government can best preserve a "free and open" internet, whatever that means in government-speak, by keeping their hands off it.

If you really want to improve access and availability, how about holding those providers accountable that We the People gave billions in tax credits to, in order to help them expand their service to rural areas? They also got the benefit of expanding their business. That's how you sold it to We the People over a decade ago. But did you regulate or monitor our money? No. Did you make sure they kept their end of the bargain? No.

Can you explain why We the People should believe you this time? You attach words like "free" and "open" to give people a warm fuzzy while your real goal is to take control of the last bastion of free speech, fill the pockets of the "chosen ones" that will provide this new service, and goose-step that much closer to socialism and the total dissolution of the United States.

People used to vote with their dollar. What do you think they'll vote with when you take all their dollars?

Keep your hands off the internet. I watched the FCC video. FCC... stands for Federal Communication Commission. We the People would think that the Chairman of our FCC could actually "communicate" I'd be embarrassed. And because I believe Chairman Genachowski is a willing usurper, while we ARE at war abroad,

If the FCC can't even "communicate" using "common sense" language, with complete thoughts, and precise wording..., again, I have to ask, We the People should trust you why? We shouldn't. We don't. Mind your own business. Here's how you "play" with words:

Pretentious pickle-pimps pontificating pernicious propositions of peace and prosperity won't proselytize PatriotWatchdogs, Putz!

 

TRANSLATION: NO PICKLES, PLEASE!

I was watching C-SPAN2 today, as Members of the U.S. Sentate debated extending unemployment benefits. It is astonishing to watch Senators like Dick Durbin  and Patty Murray from Washington step to the podium, and give sob stories about Americans out of work.

Senator Durbin had the audacity to use "bankers" as his examples of why we should extend unemployment benefits. Senatos Durbin and Murray were two of the promoters of the Dream Act, and amnesty for millions of illegals. How can they with any credibility, argue for unemployment benefit extensions when they themselves are part of the reason so many Americans are out of work.

Today they may be listening to their constituents, but their aiding and abetting illegal aliens has been a driving motivator for more foreign nationals to illegally enter the United States and steal identities and jobs from Americans.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting they do or don't extend benefits to help previously hard-working Americans get by, but let us look at the big picture, and the real hypocrisy of these Senators.

If they care so much about the American worker, WHY are they still allowing over 1 Million foreigners to enter the United States each year? 

Why have they done NOTHING to stop the largest invasion in world history?

If they really care about American jobs, they will secure our borders and ports of entry, put a moretorium on foreign worker visas, end the VISA-Waiver Program, and enforce the immigration laws already on the books to rid our landscape of the tens of millions of illegal alien foreign nationals stealing jobs from Americans.

It makes me sick to see these sappy-eyed politicians pretending to give a damn about the American worker when everybody who's honest with themselves KNOWS these Members of Congress don't give a crap about America, the American worker, or the future or your children.

We the People must hold our elected officials accountable, and retire those Members of Congress who, like Durbin and Murray, have betrayed their oath of allegiance, their oath of office, and that have failed to exercise a wholesome discretion in their public service.

Extending unemployment benefits for un-employed Americans might be necessary, and it might be a good idea, but if we don't get a grip on legal and illegal immigration, this will only be more money thrown down the rabbit hole, further indebting your children and grandchildren.

With six workers competing for every available job, does it make any sense whatsoever to continue to allow millions of illegal alien foreign nationals to stay in the United States, or to import over 1.4 million foreign workers this year? Any sense at all? 

Friday the 13th, March, 2009

Attorney General Suthers,

Your office sent the following to my staff in Colorado yesterday under the premise that you had already properly addressed attempts in Colorado to give in-state tuition to illegal aliens.

“As you can see, we addressed this issue in a 2006 Attorney General opinion: http://www.ago.state.co.us/agopinions/AGO_PDFs/AGO06-1.pdf” 

Your 2006 Formal Opinion as Colorado’s Attorney General does not address the real issue, nor does it give the proper guidance to citizens or elected officials, or efforts in 2009 on both sides of the issue would not be necessary. Your sworn duty in upholding the U.S. Constitution is to the legal citizens of Colorado, and of the United States and our posterity, and NOT to illegal aliens and their posterity. From your January 23, 2006 formal opinion as Colorado Attorney General:

"This opinion, requested by Executive Director Rick O’Donnell, concerns the authority of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education (“CCHE”) to grant in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens. 1 1 For purposes of this memorandum, the term “undocumented alien” means an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States. See generally 8 U.S.C. § 1623; Equal Access Education v. Merten, 305 F.Supp. 2d 585, 592 (E.D.Va. 2004) (referring to “aliens with undocumented status”). QUESTION PRESENTED AND CONCLUSION Question: Whether CCHE has the statutory authority to, by policy or regulation, grant in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens. Answer: No. CCHE lacks statutory authority to establish a policy or regulation granting in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens.”

With all due respect Mr. Suthers, you should have put an end to this absurdity three years ago by “informing their discretion” as the author of the Declaration of Independence Thomas Jefferson advised. It is not too late for you to inform all concerned what the Constitution says about aiding and abetting illegal aliens, and what it says about the citizens of the United States being guaranteed protection against invasion. You have the opportunity to do what countless officials across the country have failed to do for decades; you can lead by example and show them all what having a backbone looks like; what upholding your oath with due diligence and a wholesome discretion entails.

Correct Answer: No, The mere framing of the question violates the 14th Amendment, Section 3, if posed by an elected official. There is no such thing as an “undocumented alien” in the context of this question. Since elected and public officials in Colorado have already identified the demographic they are pandering to as non-citizens who are not here lawfully, then by definition they are ILLEGAL aliens. To call them “undocumented” is inaccurate, if not an outright diversion. The whole purpose of the CCHE request revolved around their desire to grant privileges to foreign nationals who are “documented” as being here illegally. How then can we call them “undocumented?” Is it an attempt to blur the line between legal alien and illegal alien; between citizen and resident? Citizens of foreign countries who are in the United States illegally and those that pander to them don’t like it when We the People correctly identify them as “illegal aliens.”

Regrettably, many of We the People’s “employees” (elected officials) are aiding and abetting illegal aliens. Elected officials that succumb to their pleas to be referred to as “undocumented aliens,” have also failed to take the advice of President George Washington, who warned us of the dangers of foreign influence, and the threat it posed to our Constitutional Republic in his farewell address. State government officials, who are also “employees” of We the People, have failed to exercise their authority to rein in the federal government. The 10th Amendment to the “employee handbook,” (the U.S. Constitution) clearly states the limitations of the authority of the federal and state governments. Your 2006 opinion as Colorado’s Attorney General cites in part U.S. Code, Title 8, as your reasoning for referring to illegal aliens as “undocumented” as if the federal government’s failure to uphold the Constitution grants you the right to do the same. Their failure makes your responsibility that much more important and urgent. The federal government exists to serve the states and the People, not the other way around. This cycle of perpetual folly and tom-foolery must end.

A state government which will not exercise a wholesome discretion to enforce the 10th Amendment by allowing the federal government to overstep its bounds is itself in violation of its own pact with the People, and that states’ sovereignty is in grave jeopardy. Citizens of the United States who conspire to pressure elected officials to refer to illegal aliens as “undocumented aliens” in an attempt to circumvent the letter and intent of the Constitution are courting with acts of sedition.

CCHE shouldn’t even be asking the question.

You shouldn’t be citing bogus, un-Constitutional federal laws as justification for CCHE not having the authority it seeks. To suggest that the reason CCHE can’t give illegal aliens in-state tuition unless the state approves it first, or because it might violate the equal protection clause has no merit, and is perpetuating the ignorance of some, and the lies of others. What message did you send the Colorado Legislature, and anyone else who was listening? You told them they couldn’t give aid and comfort to enemies of our Constitution via the methods they were trying to employ. You should have told them what they wanted to do required changing the U.S. Constitution, and that any other conspiracy to attempt to give illegal aliens the privileges of citizens violates federal law and the U.S. Constitution.

You should have told them you would defend the Constitution. You should have told them after having informed their discretion, that there would be consequences if you caught them conspiring to aid and abet illegal aliens in the future. By what Constitutional authority do you suggest that illegal aliens fall under the jurisdiction of the United States in the context of the civil rights and privileges guaranteed to citizens?

The 14th Amendment, Section 1 clearly states:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

According to the 14th Amendment, Section 1, to be a citizen of the United States, and of the state in which you reside you have to meet two basic qualifications:

1) Be a person born or naturalized in the United States, AND

2) Be subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

It doesn’t say one or the other. It requires both.

Illegal alien foreign nationals are not citizens, and since their children fall under the jurisdiction of the nation of their parents’ citizenship, they are not U.S. citizens either. Anchor-baby citizenship is a further perpetuation of the bastardization of the interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Their civil rights reside within the boundaries of their home country. The citizens of the United States are granted “equal protection” across the several states.

The Framers of the Constitution were not so arrogant or stupid as to assume they could grant that protection to the entire planet. By what authority do elected officials in Colorado and in the United States government ignore the Constitution in attempting to give the “equal protection” of citizenship to non-citizens? Legislators have no authority, right, or privilege to introduce legislation whose passage into law would undermine or circumvent the U.S. Constitution. The Colorado State Government lacks the statutory or Constitutional authority to grant in-state tuition to illegal aliens, period!

Aiding and abetting illegal aliens is a felony. Title 8, U.S. Code

Specifically, attempting to aid and abet illegal aliens by conspiring to implement legislation, policy, or regulatory changes to authorize granting illegal alien foreign national invaders of our sovereignty in-state tuition violates the intent, if not also the letter of the U.S. Constitution’s Article IV, Section 4, the 14th Amendment, Sections 3 and 4, as well as parts of U.S. Code, Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter II, Part VIII, 1324, Section (A)(v)(I & II), and Section (B), clauses (iii & iv), as authorized by the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, Section 5, which was ratified on July 9, 1868. This is not a news flash. It has been in effect 140 years! According to the Framers, the Constitution was written such that the common man would not need a constitutional lawyer to interpret it. Any man who spoke English, and was blessed with common sense, could interpret it on his own. The laws written to enforce the Constitution are also supposed to be written for the common man, devoid of double-speak and fancy rhetoric. We as citizens are often told “Ignorance of the law is no excuse.” Well, if that is true, then ignorance of the Constitution those laws are supposed to be written in compliance with is certainly no excuse! The complexity of Title 8 is indicative of the slick-tongued vernacular of barristers who failed to exercise their “wholesome discretion” as Thomas Jefferson advised.

Fortunately, the defining contractual agreement the states entered into in the founding of our Republican government, namely the U.S. Constitution, is quite clear.

Federal or state legislators who conspire to introduce legislation that is contrary to the contractual agreement between the states in forming a federal government are in act and effect undermining the Constitution, and our sovereignty as a nation of laws is jeopardized. If We the People don’t like what the Constitution says, the remedy is to amend it, not ignore or subvert it.

When elected officials, (federal, or state) attempt to grant in-state tuition, or any other “aid or comfort” to illegal aliens, they are committing a felony, to say the least. Human rights, yes. Civil rights, no! Equal rights? Never! In the case of elected officials who have taken an oath to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution, there are even more penalties.

Elected officials who aid and abet illegal aliens, or conspire to aid and abet illegal aliens in their insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution should be removed from office, forfeit the right to vote for President or Vice-President, and suffer a lifetime ban from ever holding public office again, in accordance with: Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which plainly states: "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a two-thirds vote of each House remove such disability."

The “Background” and “Discussion” sections of your January, 2006 formal opinion are riddled with examples of attempts and conspiracies to attempt to undermine, ignore, subvert, and render the U.S. Constitution irrelevant.

Repeated attempts by enemies, (foreign and domestic) over the years to make a lie a truth, and references to fraudulent legal precedent (as if it trumps Constitutional precedent) do not negate the supremacy of the Constitution, nor relieve you or any other elected official of your oath and duty to uphold and defend the Constitution.

In the “Conclusion” section of your January, 2006 formal opinion, you state:

“In sum, federal law requires that, in order for states to grant in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens, they must first affirmatively provide for such eligibility, and do so on a residency-neutral basis. Currently, state law provides in-state tuition status based on residency. Several bills have been introduced in the General Assembly that would eliminate residency classification and determine in-state tuition status based on residency-neutral criteria, but none has passed. The question posed by CCHE is whether it has the authority to make such a change, by policy or regulation. As set forth above, CCHE’s authority under the Tuition Classification Act is quite limited, and does not encompass authority to change the criteria by which in-state tuition status is granted. For this reason, I conclude that CCHE lacks statutory authority to establish a policy or regulation granting in-state tuition status to undocumented aliens. Rather, such a determination would require an amendment to the Tuition Classification Act by the General Assembly.”

You should have said, “In sum, despite the federal law that fails the burden of Constitutional adherence, Colorado will not aid and abet illegal aliens, and will not conspire to aid and abet corrupt or unscrupulous federal officials that are attempting to subvert the Constitution. It doesn’t matter whether tuition rates are “residency-neutral” or not, in respect to illegal aliens, since they can’t possibly have a legal residency in ANY state, and be an illegal alien at the same time. Illegal alien foreign nationals become insurgents when they conspire to undermine the laws of the country they have invaded. We have spent billions of dollars fighting illegal alien insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. Why on God’s green Earth should we encourage such behavior on American soil when our brothers and sisters, sons and daughters are risking their lives abroad under the guise of protecting our freedoms as U.S. Citizens? You should put every public official in Colorado on notice that you will uphold your oath and not tolerate any further nibbling of the Constitution. I remind you sir of the words of yet another of our Founding Fathers, our first Ambassador,

Benjamin Franklin, who said,

“A great empire, like a great cake, is most easily diminished at the edges.”

Take back Colorado, and put America and Americans FIRST! Uphold the Constitution, and stand firm against pandering jackals who are putting the jobs and lives of Americans at risk. Godspeed to you in your efforts to protect the citizens and lawful residents of Colorado.

Jeff Lewis

National Director

FIRE Coalition

Jeff@firecoalition.com

Phone: 252-876-9489

http://firecoalition.com

http://WeHireAliens.com

http://SendtheTaxman.com

http://OperationBodyCount.com

http://OperationFIREandICE.com

http://AmericaFirstBoycott.com

http://PatriotWatchdog.com

http://VOIAC.org

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter needs to read his "employee handbook." Patriotic Americans more readily refer it as the U.S. Constitution, but in the case of Governor Ritter, he apparently needs to be reminded of the employer/employee relationship that exists between We the People, and the people we elect.

According to Tim Hoover of the Denver Post, in an article published Friday the 13th of March, 2009 titled "Ritter would sign in-state tuition bill for illegal immigrants". Governor Ritter says he will sign Senate Bill 170 into law if Senator Chris Romer's bill passes as is.

What I find incredulous is that Governor Ritter is basing his decision on the popularity of a policy that he claims is "supported by prominent Colorado business leaders."

In Governor Ritter's "employee handbook," and the oath he took to uphold and defend that "handbook," Governor Ritter acknowledged that Colorado was part of a Constitutional Republic, whose laws and governance were to be guided by the U.S. Constitution, NOT the popularity of a policy, or even in an effort to provide "tuition equity as a matter of principle."

What Governor Ritter needs to be reminded is that we are a "nation of laws," not a nation of men, whim, or policy based on popularity.

Governor Ritter needs also to be reminded that granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens is "aiding and abetting" illegal immigration, which is a felony.

If Employee Ritter wants to hold office after his term as governor, he might consider reading the 14th Amendment, Section 3, in his "employee handbook."

Any elected official who has ever taken an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, who then proceeds to aid and abet, or conspires to aid and abet insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution (or laws written in adherence to it) are inelligble to EVER hold public office again.

I didn't write the Constitution, and neither did Governor Ritter, or Senator Romer, but we did all take an oath at one time or another to uphold and defend the Constitution. While my active duty service has been honorably discharged, their active commitment to We the People has not expired.  Governor Ritter has no right to ignore the Constitution he took an oath to God and Country to uphold.

Some refer to such actions of conspiring to undermine the Constitution by aiding and abetting illegal alien invaders and their illegal alien children, especially in a time of war, as TREASON!

If the good Senator Romer, and the good Governor Ritter want their terms of office to end "honorably" some day instead of in a cloud of shame and betrayal to the people that elected them to uphold and defend the Constitution, then they need to re-think the methods of their madness. I know the air is thin in Denver, but some of the excuses I'm hearing for betraying the citizens of Colorado coming out of the Governor's mouth and several Colorado legislators gives "Rocky Mountain High" a whole new meaning.

There is certainly a legal and moral venue Governor Ritter, Senator Romer and others might take instead of the felonious, un-Constitutional, and unethical criminal activity of "conspiracy to aid and abet" that they are currently engaged in.

Amend the Constitution. You can't ignore the parts you don't agree with, in the hopes that others will honor the parts that you do agree with, without marginalizing the entire fabric of our country.

As leaders, Governor Ritter and Senator Romer should be setting the example of what honorable statesmen do. It starts with keeping their oath. America is in the midst of the largest invasion in world history. Colorado's unemployment rate is nothing to brag about. Why would Governor Ritter think illegal aliens deserve the jobs Colorado has to offer more than the legal citizens and legal aliens?

Who does Governor Ritter represent? YOU or the illegal aliens, the "prominent" business leaders who profit from flooding a job market with excessive amounts of job seekers in a downturned economy? Who wins?

The legal workforce loses because wages fall as the supply of potential workers goes up. Big business benefits from paying lower wages. Illegal aliens send a good bit of their income out of the country. That doesn't help the economy of Colorado or the United States.

In addition, if you think you have an illegal alien crime problem now, just wait till (God forbid) SB 170 becomes law. Colorado's magnetism as a sanctuary for illegal alien activity will increase not just the studious who Governor Ritter claims he wants to help, but the drug cartels, the violent criminals from countries around the world will flood to Colorado.

Waving the white flag of surrender, betraying one's oath, allegiance, and debt to the tens of thousands of Americans who fought and died over the past few centuries securing his "liberty and freedom" shouldn't be Governor Ritter's first choice.

Another Senator who supports the bill, Senator Miklosi argues that it will costs too much to deport 15 million illegal aliens. Senator Miklosi suggests the costs to be in the range of $387 billion. Considering the costs of keeping them here is estimated at around $346 billion EACH YEAR, then our net costs the first year would be around $40 billion, and by year two, when the multi-trillion dollar stimulus hoax money kicks in, we'll see a net savings of $300 billion dollars in year two alone.

Add to that the 10 million Americans and legal migrant workers who could then find work, and even that extreme option starts to sound fiscally sound. Talk about stimulating the economy. Whew! 

I can have fun with numbers too, Senators, Governor, ...but let's look at this from the pragmatic view that you both claim are driving your decision-making processes.

Both of these gentlemen "inherited" their current positions from a body politic that often ignored the Constitution, states' rights, and individual rights for decades. The decisions of their predessors put them in the awkward position they find themselves in now. I feel their pain, but adding more un-Constitutional laws, or implementing policy based on personal views is just adding fuel to a fire that is burning up our freedoms, liberties, and Constitutional Republic.

"Attrition through enforcement" works. Remove the incentives that draw illegal aliens to the United States, and remove the rewards of aiding and abetting that invasion, and most illegal aliens will self-deport. Law enforcement will deal with the criminal element that decides to stay behind.

Governor Ritter needs to know that if he will support law enforcement through programs such as 287(g), and business by reducing taxes, and the children of Colorado's legal population, that school costs will fall, crime will fall, unemployment will fall, and he will be adored by all as a champion of the people... We the People.

Which will it be Governor? Will you betray everything you swore you would defend, spit on the graves of our fallen soldiers, and kick sand in the face of Colorado's posterity?

There are many more absurd rationales coming from pro-illegal alien sympathizers as to why they intend to betray their oath of office, but I haven't heard one yet that is justified. NOT ONE! Considering we lose EIGHT TIMES as many citizens at the hands of illegal aliens on American soil each year than we are losing to illegal aliens in Iraq and Afghanistan, I see elected officials who subvert the Constitution in favor of aiding and abetting foreign and domestic enemies of the Constitution as traitors.

30 Pieces of Silver donated to Governor Ritter's campaigns by illegal alien sympathizers and opportunistic business or globalists scalawags won't wash the blood off of his hands that is there because of the men, women, and children who died at the hands of illegal aliens he encourages to come to Colorado.

With rare exception, every citizen of Colorado that the FIRE Coalition state and national leadership are hearing from about this are OUTRAGED!!

Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence, and Founding Father of our country said two things Governor Ritter should consider:

Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe founded the State Legislators for Legal Immigration Coalition. At a Dec. 07, 2007  press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. I asked Rep. Metcalfe was he aware of, and how he felt about pending legislation in Congress that was un-Constitutional. Rep. Metcalfe is an honorable man whom I respect greatly. He personifies what a true statesman looks like. Rep. Metcalfe answered my question with the following unscripted words of wisdom, and I quote,

“I don’t believe there’s any legislator that’s involved with our coalition that would allow or be supportive of allowing the law to allow any American to aid and abet a criminal or an illegal alien invader, which is what they are. They’ve come here uninvited. They’ve come here unauthorized, and we should not allow any individual residing in this country to aid and abet someone who’s committing an act of invading our country.”  -Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, Butler, Pennsylvania

These are not partisan issues. No matter which side of the aisle we find ourselves on, or neither, we must stand united in defense of the Constitution, our sovereignty, and as Rep. Metcalfe says, National Security Begins at Home! Bring it home Colorado, and Godspeed!!

Contact Governor Ritter at:

Mail
Bill Ritter, Governor
136 State Capitol
Denver, CO 80203-1792

Phone
(303) 866-2471

Fax
(303) 866-2003

Contacting the Governor is easier than ever!

Write to the Governor here

Contact Senator Romer here:Chris.Romer.senate@state.co.us

Contact Senator Miklosi here: Joe@JoeMiklosi.com

Contact the Colorado Legislators who are also Members of the State Legislators for Legal Immigration Coalition here:

Sinister Intentions Indeed!

SPLC and Pew Hispanic Center Misrepresent the Truth

According to the Pew Hispanic Center, “Latinos, who are 13% of the U.S. adult population, accounted for 40% of all sentenced federal offenders in 2007—up from 24% in 1991.” They went on to say that the majority are NOT citizens, and while Hispanics are more likely to receive prison time, the prejudice, if any leans toward them receiving less time that blacks or whites.                         http://pewhispanic.org/topics/?TopicID=16

THE TRUTH: Hispanic illegal aliens are given special treatment by virtue of shorter prison sentences for the crimes they commit than do blacks or whites. If there is a prejudice here, Hispanics are NOT the victims of discrimination in U.S. courts. Other ethnicities are.

In December, 2005, Pew interviewed just under 5,000 mostly illegal alien migrants. The vast majority claimed to have had jobs before leaving their home country, and a failure to find work in their home country was NOT the primary reason for coming to the United States. What was? This report was based on a survey of mostly illegal aliens who were applying for “identity cards issued by Mexican consulates.”

 http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=58

According to a December, 2002 Pew Report, it is estimated that in 2005 immigrants, legal and illegal sent an average of $50 million every day back to their home countries.

http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=13

THE TRUTH: Illegal alien Hispanics are not coming here because they can’t find jobs in their own country. They come here illegally, take jobs from legal immigrants and citizens, and commit crimes at a rate 3 times higher than non-Hispanics,

So, not only are they taking jobs away from our citizens, they aren’t even spending the money here. Also, the identity cards Pew refers to are mostly the Mexican Matricula Consular card, a form of ID that the Mexican government does not accept in Mexico. These Matricula Consular cards are ONLY needed by illegal aliens. Unscrupulous American businesses accept it to allow illegal aliens to open bank accounts, gain home mortgages and credit cards, etc… According to the FBI, sanctuary cities and businesses’ acceptance of the Matricula Consular ID card encourages illegal immigration.

A June, 2005 Pew Report states, “Contrary to the stereotype of undocumented migrants as single males with very little education who perform manual labor in agriculture or construction, a new Pew Hispanic Center report shows that most of the unauthorized population lives in families, a quarter has at least some college education and that illegal workers can be found in many sectors of the US economy.”

 http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=46

THE TRUTH: Illegal aliens are not just stealing farm labor jobs, but also from many other sectors of the job market. They’re not just here to pick lettuce, or perform other farm labor, but are taking skilled labor jobs from Americans.

The Sept. 2008 Pew Hispanic Center Report, 2008 National Survey of Latinos: Hispanics See Their Situation in U.S. Deteriorating; Oppose Key Immigration Enforcement Measures states, “Half (50%) of all Latinos say the situation of Latinos in this country is worse than it was a year ago.” It goes on to state, “More than four-in-five Hispanics (81%) say that immigration enforcement should be left mainly to the federal authorities rather than the local police; 76% disapprove of workplace raids; 73% disapprove of the criminal prosecution of undocumented immigrants who are working without authorization; and 70% disapprove of the criminal prosecution of employers who hire undocumented immigrants. A narrow majority (53%) disapproves of a requirement that employers check a federal database to verify the legal immigration status of all prospective hires.”                         http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=93

THE TRUTH: Hispanics, by and large, according to Pew, don’t like enforcement of our immigration laws. What Pew doesn’t tell you is how many in this survey are here illegally. For Pew to suggest that the vast majority of Hispanics don’t want our immigration laws enforced is misleading. By their own admission, half the Hispanics interviewed are probably illegal aliens.

Pew also makes no comparison to non-Hispanics concerning how they feel about their situation in the U.S. I would imagine that most legal immigrants and U.S. citizens would say they feel their situation is deteriorating, duh. Pew is encouraging Hispanics to feel like “victims,” when the data does not support that they are any more disadvantaged than any other ethnic group.

If 53% in Pew’s survey oppose employers being required to verify prospective hires are here “legally,” then common sense begs the question “Why?” I would suggest the only reason to oppose employers making sure you are legal is because you probably aren’t!

 Is the Southern Poverty Law Center spreading “hate?” Are they guilty of playing the “victim” card and misrepresenting patriotic Americans, many of them veterans? In their 2009 “Intelligence Report,” the SPLC has labeled the FIRE Coalition and our partners as “nativist extremists.”            http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?sid=443

Is the SPLC engaged in disinformation and a smear campaign against the FIRE Coalition and other patriotic Americans? If so, why? In their ridiculous article, “Sinister Intentions,” the SPLC states,

“Many other growing nativist extremist groups — most notably the Federal Immigration Reform and Enforcement Coalition, or FIRE, which increased from two chapters in 2007 to 14 last year — largely steered clear of the border in favor of confronting immigrants with aggressive protests at day labor sites, which are safer, closer to home, and don't require spending hot days or cold nights in the desert.”

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?pid=1696

THE TRUTH: Really? The SPLC has not contacted the FIRE Coalition leadership, and its information is erroneous, to say the least. The FIRE Coalition had approximately 75 FIRE Teams in 2007. Last year that number surpassed 100, and is currently over 125 teams, with an additional 200+ individuals on a waiting list who desire to start FIRE Teams in their communities.

The FIRE Coalition is a non-partisan, non-profit 501(c)3 that works with Members of Congress, the nation’s largest group of state legislators fighting for enforcement of our laws (State Legislators for Legal Immigration), the largest veterans group (The American Legion), the largest women’s group, (Concerned Women for America), 60 other organizations as official partners, and tens of thousands of American citizens of all ethnicities. Are we to assume that the SPLC thinks these 3.5 million Americans are “nativist extremists” as well? The “sleeping giants” are patriotic Americans, not extremists.

In a 2005 article by Dustin Inman Society’s D.A. King,

What is the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)? Judging from pictures of their expansion, below, they are very well off, indeed. From the article Lump of Coal:

... human nature being what it is, there always seems to be a lump of coal lurking among the sugarplums. We were reminded of this unpleasant fact again by a Journal reader in Arlington who considered making a contribution to the Southern Poverty Law Center, listed as No. 0454 in the Combined Federal Campaign...

In fact, unknown to most CFC donors, the tax-exempt SPLC flunked an audit by the Arlington-based Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance, which requires that "a reasonable percentage, at least 50 percent of total income from all sources, should be applied to programs and activities directly related to the purposes for which the organization exists."

...SPLC...spent 89 percent of its total income on fund-raising and administrative costs...

Granted, administrative costs tend to run high when executive salaries are in the six-figure range. For example,... Morris Dees, SPLC's chief trial lawyer, pulls down a cool $280,699...

 ... give your hard-earned dollars to a real charity, not a bunch of slick, parasitic hucksters who live high on the hog by raising money on behalf of needy people who never see a dime of it.

http://www.thedustininmansociety.org/thousand_words/pics_splc_expands.html

Are the SPLC and Pew Hispanic Center spreading disinformation and outright lies? NO ONE at the FIRE Coalition draws a salary from the tax-deductible donations given to it. The SPLC and Pew can’t say that. We aren’t lining our pockets with six figure salaries for the cause we believe in, and by design, our national leadership and state directors are 100% volunteers.

The FIRE Coalition and its partners support the Constitution and the constitutional laws written from it. We do this openly. The SPLC calling us “extremists” for doing so is simply their being dramatic, trying to instill fear in the minds of the public. A query to the SPLC as to what criteria they used to compile the list has gone unanswered.

While many of our partners do actively seek out illegal alien hot spots, and rally in direct opposition to them, by and large the FIRE Coalition very rarely protests illegal aliens. Our leadership believes we only have two audiences: “We the People, and the people we elect.”

Illegal aliens are not part of the solution. They are a symptom of the problem. Our elected officials are failing to keep their oaths, and are failing to enforce our laws. We the People are guilty of allowing them to do so.

Like many unscrupulous politicians, groups such as the SPLC, Pew Hispanic Center, ACLU, National Council of “The Race,” are providing aid and comfort to illegal aliens, which is a felony. Homeland Security and the Justice Department should investigate them for acts of sedition, hate crimes, and conspiracy to aid and abet the largest invasion in world history. If these organizations are receiving any taxpayer monies, that should end ASAP! The 14^th Amendment of the Constitution, Section 4 states plainly that the United States cannot pay the debts of those that conspire to undermine our sovereignty and the Constitution.

The fact that the SPLC sought out Jim Gilchrist is laughable. Jim does not speak for the cause. Most patriotic Americans feel Jim has lost his way. Media whores eager for attention should show some restraint and stop pandering to foreign and domestic enemies of the Constitution and our laws. A little common sense goes a long ways.  

Jeff Lewis

National Director

FIRE Coalition

Jeff@firecoalition.com

"And then there's this..."

 In Providence, immigrants begin national rally for family unity

Saturday, February 28, 2009

By Karen Lee Ziner

Journal Staff Writer

PROVIDENCE — Close to a thousand people packed a Providence church last night to launch a national “family unity” campaign designed to draw attention to the disruptive effects of the country’s immigration policies. Organizers said their goal is President Obama’s signature on comprehensive immigration reform.

The 17-city “listening tour” is being led by Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. Conducted through faith-based organizations, the tour will gather “the human stories of the impact of immigration policies” on “mixed-status” families, including U.S. citizens, and bring them to Washington, D.C., in April.

“We have five million citizen children wondering whether their parents will be there when they get home from school” each day, Gutierrez told an overflow crowd at Trinity Methodist Church on Broad Street.

The congressman and other speakers said mass raids and deportations are tearing apart families whose members include a mix of citizens or legal residents, and undocumented immigrants. Gutierrez asked, “Which half [of the mixed family] are we going to deport? Which half isn’t really our concern? I think both are our responsibility.”

“We want President Obama to keep his promise … to bring people out of the shadows,” he said.

Eight-year-old Jeidi Par — one of three U.S. citizen children affected by parent deportations who spoke to the crowd last night — recounted how immigration agents “seized my father when he was taking out the trash” last September.

Her father, who had applied for asylum years ago but was rejected, has now been deported. The girl said she worries that her mother — who is also in the country illegally — could be deported.

“I beg that you ask President Obama to stop deportation of my mom, and bring my dad back,” Jeidi Par said.

Melissa Arias, 9, also spoke. Her father is facing orders to leave the country by June 12, after entering the country illegally years ago.

In a letter to Mr. Obama, Arias said, “We were a really happy family … why do they take him away if he is not a criminal? I am afraid immigration will go to his work and take him away. The only thing I wish is not to get separated from him.”

Gutierrez said he started the campaign in Rhode Island “because I kept getting told about the city’s large, faith-based immigrant community.”

The congressman said immigration reform should put people on a path to legality.

“That means if you are working hard and paying taxes, and have committed no crimes and you’ve never had any criminal contact with the law — other than your immigration status, we’re going to give you the opportunity to earn your legalization,” he said.

“We want people to take English classes, take civics lessons, get a good Social Security number and pay taxes. And after seven or eight years, if you do it right, then we will say, ‘Welcome.’ ”

The “family unity” campaign got under way amid national developments on the immigration front.

This week, Rep. Lucille Royball-Allard, D-Calif., introduced legislation to adopt “humane and legally enforceable standards” for immigration detention facilities. The American Civil Liberties Union cited the death of Hiu Lui Ng, a former immigration detainee at the Donald W. Wyatt Detention Facility in Central Falls, as one of three recent detainee deaths underscoring urgency for the bill

Gutierrez told the audience he spoke with new U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano after a raid in Bellingham, Wash., this week.

“She was a breath of fresh air,” Gutierrez said of Napolitano. “And you know what? She told me that raid was done with out her knowledge, and she was deeply disturbed because of that action. She’s going to take a complete review.” He said her response marked “a new time, and a new day.”

After last night’s program, volunteers took further “testimony” from families who may be at risk of deportation, and people signed a petition calling for comprehensive immigration reform.

“We are going to take these testimonies, and when they reach Washington, this is going to move a mountain,” said the Rev. Eliseo Nogueras, president of the Hispanic Ministerial Alliance of Rhode Island.

kziner@projo.com

http://www.projo.com/news/content/IMMIGRATION_CAMPAIGN_02-28-09_TBDG198_v14.378892c.html

PatriotWatchdog response:

This article and the conspiratory actions of Rep. Gutierrez to further undermine the Constitution of the United States are perfect examples of "give an inch, lose a mile."

The 14th Amendment never intended for the simple birthing of a child on American soil to garner automatic citizenship. Regretabbly, over the course of time the men and women entrusted with upholding the letter and spirit of the Constitution have failed to give due diligence to the requirements of the job they were hired to do. According to the Founding Fathers, the Constitution and the Amendments to it are supposed to be interpretted in the context of the dialog in which they were written and lawfully ratified.

The drafters of the 14th Amendment never intended to give citizenship to children born of illegal aliens. If the Ambassador of Spain has a child here, according to the Constitution, that child is a citizen of Spain, not the United States. If We the People didn't want to give that Ambassador's child U.S. Citizenship, do you think We the People would give citizenship to the child born of illegal alien foreign nationals?

The Ambassador is a guest in our country and we don't automatically give his child U.S. Citizenship.

Who in their right mind thinks we should give citizenship to the child of someone who is NOT a guest in our country?

Rep. Gutierrez would have you believe that the child of illegal alien invaders is special, privileged. He is not. Rep. Gutierrez is wrong.

American citizens whose state legislators voted to ratify an amendment that prohibited the Ambassodor's son from being a citizen, also prohibited the child of illegal aliens from being born a U.S. citizen.

There are a few lessons to be learned here. Because We the People have failed to enforce the 14th Amendment in the context in which is was ratified, people like Rep. Gutierrez have siezed the inch, and now want us to not only give the children born of illegal alien foreign nationals citizenship, but also the foreign national parents, whether they are here legally or not.

The problem with that is the child of a foreign national falls under the "jurisdiction" of his/her home country. Their "equal protection" is served by the Ambassador and the consulate of his home country. That is true whether he or she is here legally or not. The reason the consulate is a good idea is so that the laws of both countries can be respected and upheld with due diligence to the humanitarian rights of individuals, and to protect the separate, but not always equal sovereign rights of their respective citizens.

This arrangement makes for good neighbors on the global scale. If all the countries of the world had the same laws, there would be no foreigners, anywhere you went.

Our elected officials' failure to honor the letter and intent of the 14th Amendment is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It is probably true that Rep. Gutierrez knows that already. If we won't let a murderer profit from his crime by not allowing him to reap the rewards of writing and selling a book about the murder, why should we give the illegal alien the reward of being allowed to stay in our country simply because they've mastered the art of timely breeding?!

It is absurd. Since, in my humble opinion Rep. Gutierrez is a very smart and shrewd man, I'm going to give him credit that he knows damned well what the Constitution says, and what it means, but that he is choosing to water down the facts and fertilize the fiction of "anchor-baby" citizenship.

By doing so, he knowingly is violating Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. Luis Gutierrez is knowingly engaging in insurrection and rebellion against the Constitution, and is giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the Constitution, and is by definition a traitor. If his colleagues on the Hill had a spine, he would be impeached, and rendered inelligible to ever hold public office again. That is what the Constitution says.

14th Amendment, Section 3 states:

  "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a two-thirds vote of each House remove such disability."

 Why is this man still in office, one might ask?

The families he is SWORN to protect are U.S. Citizens, not foreign nationals. If he wants to help foreign nationals become citizens, there are legal and lawful ways in which he might try to do that. He could have chosen to lobby for amending the Constitution, or he could choose to lobby for amnesty for the entire planet, so that anyone could live here regardless of where they were born, merely because they like it here.

He could have done many things within the restrictions and guidelines of HIS employee handbook, namely, that pesky U.S. Constitution. Instead, Rep. Gutierrez, and many others have chosen to ignore the handbook, distort its meaning,  or plea to our humanitarian natures hoping we too will ignore the handbook,

If neither the employer (We the People) nor the employee (Rep. Gutierrez) are going to pay any attention to the employee handbook (the Constitution), then it isn't worth the paper its written on, and we'd just as well wipe our proverbial butts with it one last time before we flush it down the toilet.

Enforcing our laws only when they are convenient, or to satisfy special interests or agendas are how civilized nations become chaotic bastians of anarchy.

This sticky birthright citizenship issue keeps getting stickier by the minute the moment you buy into Rep. Gutierrez's misguided proclamation that the children born of parents illegally in our country are natural born citizens. No matter how many times he makes that claim, it will remain untrue.

If consenting adults whose citizenship is not of the same country have a child, how do they decide where the child lives? Should the child live in country A, or country B? The children born of illegal alien parents are not slaves. They are free to return to the sovereign country from which their parents came. Parents deported are free to take their children with them. In fact, they should.

If at some point in time, the citizens of the United States decide to alter the 14th Amendment to first allow children born of foreign nationals on our soil illegally to be automatic citzens, and to further allow their parents to stay here, then that would become the obligatory law of the land.

Currently, that is not the case.

If the only thing Melissa Arias wishes is, "...to not get separated from" her father, then the question she should be asking isn't can her dad stay, but "can she go with him?" Rep. Gutierrez is using this child, as is the church in the most shameful of ways in an attempt to usurp the law of the land, and the Constitution from which that law was derived.

Since President Obama is in such a budget-cutting mood that he's chosen to reduce or remove the tax-deductability of many charitable donations, then perhaps he should also remove the tax-exempt status of churches and other non-profits such as that of the Hispanic Ministerial Alliance of Rhode Island. They, along with Rep. Gutierrez have conspired to undermine and subvert the Constitution. Any monies that Rep. Gutierrez, (or anyone else for that matter) "earmarked" in legislation to support the Ministerial Alliance of Rhode Island, or groups like them, is a direct violation of the 14th Amendment's Section 4. You can not pick and choose which parts of the 14th Amendment you are going to enforce.

14th Amendment, Section 4 states:

The United States can not pay the bills for the usurpers and conspirators who seek to undermine the validity of the Constitution or the sovereignty of the United States. It says so in plain English. I didn't write it, but I READ IT.

According to the Founding Fathers, the Constitution, and the laws written from it are supposed to be written in a fashion such that the common man can understand it, and that we shouldn't need Constitutional lawyers to interpret it for us. All the Founding Fathers wanted us to need to have was common sense.

Does Rep. Gutierrez have any common sense at all? I think he does. I think he knows exactly what he is doing, as does the good Reverand Nogueres, president of Rep. Gutierrez's co-conspirator special interest group.

When the legal parents of a legal child find themselves unable to live with one another in this day and time, the child usually goes to one or the other parent, or they share joint custody. If they can't decide that amongst themselves, then, and only then, in the best interest of the child, the state steps in and ajudicates that decision.

If the parents happen to be citizens of different countries, then they, and they alone set themselves up for a problem about where the child might rest its head should the parents ever fall out of favor with one another. When those parents find themselves in a squabble over who gets custody of the child, and one or the other parents is illegally in the country in which they find themselves squabbling, or if the illegal parent is repatriated to the country he or she is actually a citizen of, then just as before, the parents, and the parents alone put themselves in that situation.

Why would any parent abandon his or her child and not take it with them when they left a country they have no right to be in?

If you went to France on vacation, and broke their laws while you were there, and they arrested you, and kicked you out, wouldn't you take your kids back home with you?  Would not France make sure your kid was safe and delivered to the airport, sea port, or border crossing where they repatriated the parent being deported?

Of course they would. And so does the United States of America. All this pandering sympathy by Rep. Gutierrez is a ruse, and a lie. He wants us all to believe We the People are the bad guys because we want our laws enforced, and our rights protected. He is spitting on the Constitution and his oath of office.

Luis would have you cry a river for a parent who would threaten abandoning their child in a foreign country rather than take it back home with them. Perhaps they should just hold their breath until they turn blue, like a spoiled kid wanting another piece of candy, or dessert before he finished his vegetables.

I have a message for Rep. Gutierrez. He should stop, read the Constitution he swore to God and Country he would uphold and defend, and then do his job. His job is not to subvert, undermine, or conspire to cause "insurrection or rebellion" against that document. He should not "give aid or comfort" to those that do.

That is his job. That is the oath he took. If Rep. Gutierrez wants to start a "family unity" campaign under the restrictions of the office to which he is sworn, in the context of reuniting families, he might consider going to the hardware store and buying 9,000 shovels.

It would take roughly 9,000 shovels to "reunite" all the American families with their loved ones who are dead and buried because he failed to protect the citizens of Illinois and the United States against invasion. The United States does not deport immigrants! Rep. Gutierrez should stop calling illegal alien foreign insurgents immigrants. That too is a lie. The blood is on his hands.

The Constitution guarantees us protection against invasion.

 Article IV, Section 4 states:

Had Rep. Gutierrez simply focused his energies on upholding that part of the Constitution, we might not have found ourselves in the 14th Amendment arena at all.

Surely anyone with two brain cells swirling around in their head can see the slippery slope we encourage when we ignore one part of the Constitution, and then another, and then another. We end up with chaos, anarchy, and loss of life, liberty, and any hope of happiness.

Benjamin Franklin said, "A great empire, like a great cake, is most easily diminished at the edges."

While the Illinois Legislature is in an "impeaching" mood, they should consider sending Rep. Gutierrez packing like they did former Governor Blago.

There is no difference between these two men. They both usurped the offices they were entrusted with by the lawful citizenry of Illinois.

Oh, and let's not forget Rep. "Lucille Ball" Allard from the article above. Lucy has introduced legislation after conspiring with the ACLU because three illegal alien foreign national insurgents died while in custody. While the deaths are sad, Rep. Allard has got to be joking.

Three? She's whining and introducing legislation because of three deaths of illegal alien criminals in custody simply because they are illegal aliens and happened to die in custody? Wow! I wonder how much legislation she'll introduce to stop the horrific loss of 65,000 Americans killed by illegal aliens since 9/11/2001 when she finds out about them?

In all fairness, if those three deaths were a result of mistreatment, or violations of those individuals "human" rights, then those responsible should be brought to justice.Where is Rep. Allard's and the ACLU's outrage over the tens of thousands of Americans who died at the hands of the same demographic she is introducing legislation to protect?

I would suggest she too should be impeached.

The President and Members of the United States Congress do NOT have the authority to grant special protection to illegal aliens. They DO have the privilege of granting special protection to their employer, We the People. Since reading is apparently dificult for them, I would suggest strongly that Reps. Allard and Gutierrez visit http://operationbodycount.com and http://voiac.org, and look in the faces of the American citizens who paid for the that betrayal with their lives!       

You can trust me on this one. They'll find more than three deaths they should be alarmed about. I know it says near the end of the oath of office "to the best of their ability," but if this is the best they can do, we should take the advice of North Carolina's favorite son.

Governor Zeb Vance stated in 1876,

 "When you find you have scoundrels and scalawags in office, you need to turn them out, and keep turning them out until you send honorable men to Washington."

We must have elected officials who unwaveringly put AMERICA FIRST!

Greetings!

As we near the 232nd birthday of our nation, I wanted to take some time to reflect on the founding of our great nation and what it will take to keep it sovereign.

Two-hundred thirty-two years ago, some very brave men gathered together to defy the foremost power in the world because they felt that "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" were "unalienable Rights."

Has anything changed?  Not in principle, but think about this: when you think of strong men of faith, character, and leadership from the founding era, I'll bet you could name 10-20 names in a manner of seconds--George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Hancock, Benjamin Rush, Charles Carroll, etc.
Back then it is estimated that we had only 3 million people living in the colonies.
Fast forward to today, with over 300 million (and counting), how many strong men of faith, character, and leadership could you name on the national scene? Um...Um...Um...you'd be hard-pressed to name just a few.
Think about why that is.  I will only propose a couple of reasons, though there are many more. 

1) In the 232 years since the founding of our nation, we have become less and less dependent on God and more dependent on Uncle Sam.

It was one of the wisest of our founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin, who said,

"I've lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing Proofs I see of this Truth — That God governs in the Affairs of Men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without his Notice, is it probable that an Empire can rise without his Aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings, that except the Lord build the House they labor in vain who build it. I firmly believe this, — and I also believe that without his concurring Aid, we shall succeed in this political Building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our little partial local interests; our Projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a Reproach and Bye word down to future Ages."

It is amazing that this man could so accurately predict the affairs of man more than 200 years in the future.  Or is it?  How did he know? Well he turned to the Book that men have turned to for centuries for wisdom; the Book which, if you read the writings of the authors and signers of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, they all used as inspiration for founding our nation.

2) In the 232 years since the founding of our nation, we have not maintained enough intestinal fortitude to stand up to the "small" evils that collectively have ushered in some semblance of tyranny in our own beloved nation.  These "evils" come upon us slowly, yet before you know it (like a boiled lobster--one degree at a time), we are almost cooked.
It is high time we began to realize that our founding fathers had it right--with the Declaration of Independence, with the Constitution, and with their willingness to sacrifice of self to fight evil where they saw it, no matter how small it seemed at the time.  Remember, at every attempt by the crown to place the colonies more firmly under his thumb, they rose in defiance--either in writing or in deed.

So this Independence Day, make a committment to yourself and to your family and countrymen: YOU be that leader of character and faith.  Even if no one around you is doing the right thing, stand up and say "no" to every evil you encounter.  You may surprise yourself. Don't be surprised, though, if others are drawn to you.  Lend each other mutual support and then lead together.

I wish you a safe and enjoyable holiday and please keep up the fight!

Jason Mrochek
Co-founder & Executive Director
FIRE Coalition