Wake Up America...Let's Work Together!

Please don’t misunderstand simple politics with political systems. In the realm of “Pop Culture” today, the facts and the immediate change of capitalism versus socialism appears to me the most uneducated information going around.

Now, we place these incredible misnomers up to a wall for national security which is more than necessary and in our other instance of the problems that are being faced in the educational offices around the nation (see Chicago, Baltimore, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties). Let’s plain face it – Democrats are completely destroying this country by their tactics.

Nothing could be clearer than these headlines from the Western Journal. Trump’s Homeland Security Sec. Reminds Democrats They Funded a Border Wall in the Past, And It Worked.  President Donald Trump’s Homeland Security Secretary stated on Wednesday that she is “confounded” by Democrats’ resistance to building a border wall, given they funded one in the past and it worked.

“We know that you are adamant about that wall, just as much as the president,” Fox News anchor Sandra Smith said to Sec. Kirstjen Nielsen, and then asked, “When you hear Democrats so firmly against that, what are they getting wrong?”

“I’m a little bit confounded by that,” the secretary replied. “The wall works. We have evidence and figures that show that.”

“When the wall went up in Yuma (Arizona) and San Diego, illegal entries went down 95 percent,” Nielsen added. “I must remind the viewers that in 2006, it was a bipartisan approach to securing our country.”

The Trump official was referring to the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which passed both chambers of Congress by large majorities.

The following is a Response written by a reader of the periodical.” “I have worked for U.S. Army

counterdrug for 15 years building the wall. Democrats supplied the funding. All of a sudden, it costs too much, whatever. Desperate Dems need illegal votes to keep them in power, draining taxpayer funds. Do it the right way, or do not do it at all. Bunch of millionaire crooks. Deport. Guess they do not understand what Illegal is. They run on personal feelings above our laws. Dinosaur Democrats are coming.”

Furthermore, having 16-state legislatures wanting to get in on the act by waging a law-suit against President Trump and his administration continues to show what kind of human beings we are surrounded by. Ostensibly, it is the very same states who, when Barack Obama was in office sued on behalf of the “Invasion” clause in the Constitution.

If there are one or more individuals who do not understand that 22 million to 40 million people who have come into our nation illegally this constitutes an invasion! Why the Democrats are being reluctant to secure our border shows as Ann Coulter says, “It is being done to make the USA a third world banana republic.” Anyone disagree?

The FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT: Citizenship, Southern Hatred, and Hope

Most scholars look to the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution which was written as a bill to support the Civil Rights Act of 1866; this particular act dealt with all things post Civil War in order for the Union (the victors) to maintain some semblance of order with those states that seceded and wanted their statehood back as part of the Union. However, it was argued that those states that had seceded had indeed lost their loyalty and allegiance to the United States of America.

The actual language of the “Citizenship Clause” pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1 states that “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.”

Please remember why this amendment was a necessity to the U.S. Constitution and for what reasons it needed to be clarified from the original writing just shy of 100 years earlier.

Senator Jacob Howard of Ohio was the author of the ‘Citizenship Clause’ and defended the new language against the charge that it would make Indians citizens of the United States. Senator Howard assured skeptics that “Indians born within the limits of the United States, and who maintain their tribal relations, are not, in the sense of this Amendment, born subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.” (As a sidebar: Why would people from Middle or South America be construed as any different?)

Up to this point there has not been any mention whatsoever about those born on American soil would be Americas or American citizens – does it? We see this as the most egregious portion of the XIV Amendment insofar as 144 years later (inclusive) citizenship has been granted to babies and their respective families – in one way or another – without any professional leader, Congressional official, or President of the United States doing anything whatsoever to stop this ridiculous 28 word sentence to continue.

What is it that infuriates a politician more than everything else known to humankind? Think all you want however, we feel it has to be somewhere in the voting machinery, albeit, from ‘hanging and pregnant chads’ to being unable to read the ballot – both because of either one’s eyes, vision, or understanding of the English language. Ironically, this was not too much of a problem in post war politics insofar as either a person couldn’t read or made to do otherwise.

By the time the thirty-ninth Congress was seated in December 1865 their agenda resembled something along the lines of the following order: In every seceded state prior to the Civil War’s end their individual state legislatures had worked tirelessly adopting a legal code pertaining only to blacks that segregated the races, banned political participation, restricted social conduct, established severe vagrancy and labor laws that in turn created a peonage system and created extremely harsh criminal punishments.

Furthermore, the Senate and the House alike refused to seat the new southern representatives. Federal legislators quickly sought to strengthen the Freedmen’s Bureau to include utilizing the Army for protecting black civil rights. This particular measure failed in Congress by a margin of two votes to overcome a presidential veto!

By March 1866, Congress, aroused by the South, was ready to accept federal responsibility for guarding individual rights to make and enforce contracts, sue and give evidence, and own property. Despite initial hesitancy about intruding into what had traditionally been under the state’s authority the fed decided to push for the Civil Rights Act of 1866.

The battle over the Civil Rights Act of 1866 led directly to a campaign for a new constitutional amendment. The Joint Committee on Reconstruction understood that traditions and ways of life ran deep in the south and without an amendment there could never be rest or civil rights for more than just the black population, the entire nation whether 60 percent of it or 100 percent of it, were hell-bent on seeing to it that southern white hostility, the unrepentant southern states, would not be successful in undermining the north.

Therefore, the Joint Committee on Reconstruction's first amendment proposal sought to reduce proportionally the congressional representation of states that still denied the right to vote on the basis of race.

(End of Part 3)

The Birthright Citizenship Act

Some Members of Congress have introduced bills to eliminate birthright citizenship for the children of immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally or on temporary visas. The “Birthright Citizenship Act” (HR 1868), introduced by Rep. Nathan Deal (R-GA) has 91 cosponsors. A bill by Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-CA) would restrict birthright citizenship to the children “of a mother who is a citizen or legal permanent resident of the United States.”

Just about everyone who has read the Fourteenth Amendment can clearly see the politicking and potential corruption that could easily be caused by the amendments wording. Yet, we believe one still should see the entirety of the situation at the time of its writing to fully understand how Congressional elected officials could present and rush through a piece of legislation that in all seriousness – no one could be proud of authoring.

As most will admit the U.S. Constitution is more of how the federal government is supposed to limit itself, while producing guidelines on how to ensure safety, protection, laws, courts, and separation of powers within that government. The Constitution is a brilliant document that took a lot of men (and their women) years to produce; however, it was never intended to be scripture or Bible, Torah, or Qur'an like.

So many people revere the Constitution as if it were a holy book or artifact, when in reality it is not. There are clearly some needed changes; however, to get any Congress to do such is out-of-bounds or even reasonable. As we look deeply at the Fourteenth Amendment, hopefully it will become obvious just where changes are needed and why. Therefore, let’s look at some of the issues that the Thirty-ninth Congress had to address much sooner than later.

Of course the matter of Dred Scott v. Sanford needed to be cleaned up before anything else could reasonable get done. In 1857 the Supreme Court had ruled that no black of African descent (even a freed black) could be a citizen of the United States. Furthermore, even prior to the1860s blacks were counted as 3/5ths of a person.

Therefore the Fourteenth Amendment was necessary to over-turn Dred Scott and to settle the question of the citizenship of the newly freed slaves. Now imagine that – need some changes to an unethical law that is antiquated? Congress immediately went to work on it. It must be clearly noted that this was during the Reconstruction Era and the Congress had an enormous amount of matters to settle – especially since the nation had been broken into two parts with separate ideologies on how things were to be managed.

There is a cliché that states: “To the victors go the spoils…” ostensibly meaning if you’ve gone to war and won then you are entitled to take or gather what you want. This was not the case with the United States “Union” government; however, no mistake should be made – over 600,000 men, women, and children died as a direct cause of this war and of course the North wanted some reparations from the South.

If possible think of two separate nations deluxe with governments, legislatures, judiciary, even money designed in your country’s standards. As in all wars the winning side does not want their former enemies to rebuild – especially its war making equipment. Furthermore, think of the South as the agrarian labor intensive providers of the entire nation, who had racked up enormous war debts that they couldn’t pay and for having hundreds of thousands of slaves that instead of being paid for were able to go free. The South had suffered incalculable losses.

The North was bent on what all victors nearly die for – the admission that they had won the war. Moreover, the North wanted various and sundry punishments for those who had left the Union on the State level, Confederate level, including the Confederate president, generals, and other high-ranking men of war.

However, citizenship loomed over those who fought and were not free; Dred Scott needed overturning, and the Fourteenth Amendment needed to be cleared for the forthcoming Civil Rights Act of 1866. (End Part 2)