Poorhouse Dad

Liberals Misunderstand America's Melting Pot

2012-01-14T19:29:00.000-08:00

The melting pot is just an implement. It brings to mind a stew, since it has been contrasted with a salad bowl. However, I think the correct image comes from metallurgy, where various ingredients should blend to form an alloy such as steel.

Staying with the stew pot (I think more people can relate to cooking than to metallurgy), we have three cooks brewing a terrible mess.

One cook, the conservative, wants to maintain the stew's distinctive balance of flavors, the recipe that made the stew a distinctively American stew.

The second cook, the newcomer, comes in numbers that upsets the balance of flavors and, in fact, refuses to abandon the flavor that he left behind. He sees only the rich nutrient content of the American stew and fails to value the recipe that made it great. That is, he brings the values that caused the conditions from which he fled and clashes with values that made America great. While conservative cooks welcome newcomers, an excess of newcomers can turn the stew into a completely different dish.

The third cook, the liberal, rejects the Judeo-Christian broth on which the soup was based. He waters down and neutralizes the distinct American flavor. He tries every other continent's distinctive dish; after all "change is good." Doing so, he leaves a hole into which the newcomers add the flavors of their impoverished, oppressed, corrupt, fan-ruled countries of origin.

We don't have a situation where we neutrally teach children about other cultures' recipes. Liberals rule the State Church (the education system). They use their power to belittle and suppress the conservative flavor. In its place, they teach the recipes of materialistic humanism and even the recipes of the newcomers. Thus, we see generations of agnostics, pictures of schoolchildren bowing in Muslim prayer, and children becoming "gay" before it is even developmentally appropriate for them to know about sex.

By suppressing the conservative values that redirected rights from the state toward the individual and by encouraging those whose native cultures produce totalitarianism, liberalism -- both political and religious -- threatens to destroy American and that for which she stands -- or used to stand.

The analogy holds up for the metallurgical melting pot, too. With the right ingredients, the product can resist oxidation, spring back into shape, or separate a nucleus from its cell's membrane. With careless formulation, it can be easily dulled, can oxidize overnight, or can even be toxic -- but that's assuming you're willing to separate it from all the unmelted dross. And liberals aren't willing.

Birthers May Finally Get Their Day in Court

2012-01-14T11:26:00.001-08:00

The question may turn out to be, “Which Republican candidate can best beat Hillary?”

According to an action letter from Proof Positive via Conservative Contacts and the web site of Attorney OrlyTaitz, a Georgia Judge has issued a subpoena demanding Barack Obama appear in court January 26 and produce his original long form birth certificate, passport records, college registration records, and more.

Georgia became the first state to pursue Obama ineligibility complaints, and the end result may keep Barack Obama off the Georgia 2012 ballot. A number of Georgia voters filed lawsuits questioning Barack Hussein Obama's eligibility to appear on the Georgia Presidential ballot.

Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp's office decided to pursue five of the ineligibility complaints. Each complaint argues that Barack Hussein Obama II is ineligible to appear on the 2012 Georgia Presidential ballot. Secretary Kemp assigned 5 different hearings under five different judges so that the complaints could move forward.

Failure to appear on the Georgia ballot could bring Obama devastating media and cost him 15 electoral votes.

Dr. Orly Taitz, attorney for one of the plaintiffs in the Georgia eligibility cases working their way rapidly through the courts, posted a copy of what is reportedly a subpoena, issued by Judge Michael Malihi of Georgia.

Georgia Judge Michael Malihi ordered Obama's attorneys to appear in court January 26, holding that, according to state law, every federal and state candidate must prove eligibility for office – including Barack Obama.

The White House's badly forged "birth certificate" has not ended the debate on Barack Obama's eligibility. Rather, it has opened the door for further allegations of fraud and ineligibility. The subpoena demands that Barack Obama personally appear in court on January 26 and bring with him a a "birther's" dream list of official documents that will prove or disprove his eligibility for office.

Unlike previous cases, where only certain documents were requested or discussed, this subpoena issued by Judge Malihi includes every document that serious eligibility experts have been discussing from the beginning.

The list requires Obama to produce each of the following:

Any and all certified birth records including a long form birth certificate.
Certified school/university registration records. Certified immigration/naturalization records.
Certified passport records
Redacted certified Social Security card applications for each of the aliases and other legal names used by Barack Obama, including but not limited to his legal surname when adopted by step-father Lolo Soetoro

In addition, Judge Malihi has reportedly also subpoenaed Hawaii Health Department officials and commanded them to produce an original certified copy of Obama's long form birth certificate.

In an order written January 3, 2012, Malihi ruled that Georgia state law is very clear – any candidate for federal or state office must meet the qualifications of that office and that Georgia electors have the right to challenge those qualifications in court. Accordingly, Malihi flatly denied Obama's motion to dismiss and scheduled a hearing for January 26.

Obama has some of the highest-rent attorneys in the country working to keep the question of his eligibility for office out of court. And no wonder, because whether he was born in Hawaii or not, according to binding precedents laid out by the Supreme Court, Barack Hussein Obama II does not qualify as a natural born Citizen.

Georgia resident Kevin R. Powell wrote in his complaint, "Barack Hussein Obama II has publicly admitted his father Barack Obama Sr. was a Kenyan native and a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. Barack Obama Sr. never became a U.S. citizen. Therefore, Barack Hussein Obama II is not now and never can be a natural born citizen of the United States…"

The U.S. Constitution very clearly requires, in a unique usage and application of the term, that the president must be a "natural born Citizen" to be eligible for the nation's highest office. "Natural born Citizen" is demonstrably held by the Founders in Article II, Section 1 as distinct and different from "Citizen" and even "native born Citizen" – that is, born under jus soli, on native soil.

In the Founding era, the common law view held that a natural born Citizen was born within United States territory to parents who were themselves United States Citizens.

In the 1875 unanimous Supreme Court ruling of Minor v. Happerset, the Supreme Court explicitly held a "natural born Citizen" to be a Citizen whose parents were both U.S. Citizens at the time of the person's birth.

This finding was, and continues to be, fully consistent with U.S. history in Supreme Court case decisions and with laws enacted and enforced by the United States Congress.

By Barack Obama's own admission, his father was a native of Kenya and was NEVER a U.S. Citizen. Therefore, Barack Hussein Obama II would, under long-standing custom, common law, and Supreme Court precedent, automatically be ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States.

The January 26th hearing should be a blockbuster. It is the first in the nation that proposes to consider on the merits whether Barack Hussein Obama II is eligible to be President of the United States of America.

This article was re-written from a letter from Americans United for Freedom,

http://www.AmericansUnitedForFreedom.org.

New Word: Cacostocracy

2011-12-19T01:26:00.000-08:00

An acquaintance asked me if I could beat a forwarded definition of an ineptocracy. It wasn't bad, but I don't give the crooks and traitors in charge of the White House and Senate enough credit to call them merely inept.

Coincidentally, I was thinking about my own word, cacostocracy, that morning while listening to Whistle-blower Wednesday during KSFO's morning commute show. I guess it's about time I defined it.

cacostocracy (cack'-o-stock'-ruh-see), from Gk. kakos "bad, evil":

A political process of putrefaction in which pernicious politicians

for personal empowerment, pursue profane payments proffered by the powerful for propitious and partial treatment, and

pawn profitable persons' futures to finance the favor of degraded, desperate, and dumbed-down demographics, thereby

protecting prolonged, perverted "progress"

- by proliferating the pampered,
- by planting pestiferous policies to oppress productive people, and
- by paring proletarian producers into dispossessed, dis-empowered, dependent peasants.

Review: Living with Confidence in a Chaotic World by Dr. David Jeremiah

2011-10-05T02:19:00.000-07:00

"Living with Confidence in a Chaotic World" is not really a book about living in the end times. While Dr. David Jeremiah discusses the "chaos" of modern times, as well as Christ's return plenty, his book comes across more as a book on living out the Christian faith — a how-to book, you might say. But Jeremiah goes much deeper than your typical how-to book, providing thought-provoking truths and using Scripture to remind readers of what it means to be a Christian.

Jeremiah asserts that, although the world may seem chaotic, Christians should stay calm, show compassion and love, stay constructive (that is, build each other up as the body of Christ), stay challenged and diligent in the faith, stay connected in a Christian community (there's no excuse for skipping church), stay centered on Christ, stay confident in the Bible and in faith (and don't be afraid to preach it), stay consistent (abide in Christ), stay committed and stay convinced (have patience, for Christ promised to return in God's perfect timing).

Jeremiah's writing is much more convicting that his book title makes it out to be. And although a lot of what he writes is obvious, it never bores. This is a must read for any Christian.

* Disclaimer: I received this book for free from BookSneeze.com in exchange for my honest review of it.

Review: The Butterfly Effect by Andy Andrews

2011-10-02T12:02:00.000-07:00

Book: The Butterfly Effect
Author: Andy Andrews
Genre: Table/Gift Book

Rating: 2.5 out of 5 stars

Summary: Motivational speaker and writer attempts to drive home the point that any small action can have an eventual huge effect. He demonstrates this with one longer story of Colonel Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain, who helped win the Civil War and saved thousands of lives. But there were other people who made Chamberlain's life possible - others effected those others, as well, as so it goes on and on.

Review: While it's an interesting concept, The Butterfly Effect really didn't do anything for me. It doesn't make for a very good table or gift book. It's short and easy to read, which can be a plus, but it's not something I would ever want to read again. Much of it is exactly the same as the children's book version, "The Boy Who Changed the World," and I enjoyed the children's book much more. At least it has colorful pictures to make me happy. I'm just not a huge fan of pointless gift books. But if that's your cup of tea, you'll enjoy this book.

*Disclaimer: I received this book from BookSneeze.com in exchange for my honest review of it.

Does the Good That Catholicism Does Outweigh the Bad?

2011-07-23T17:35:00.000-07:00

This post replies to an article (included, below) sent to me by a sweet Roman Catholic lady. The article, written by a Jewish author, excuses the Roman Catholic Church from the actions of a few bad apples. The author advises Catholics to ignore the attacks from leftist media and hold their heads high over the good things their church does.

My Reply:

Dear H_____:

I've come to the conclusion that every good organization does no better than the sort of members it it has. If it has human members, it has weaknesses that will eventually corrupt its practices, its message, and its reputation.

Human history, as recorded in the Bible and as interpreted through biblical principles, reveals a pattern of waves of God mercifully setting up ways for us to govern ourselves. Humans subsequently overwhelm each system with a tsunami of failure, demonstrating again how man's fallen nature permeates and overwhelms everything he touches.

Judaism, in particular, demonstrated the failure of a representative form of salvation. Priests mediated between sinners and God and enforced a code of righteousness. God gave that code not to justify man, but for the dual purposes of guiding man to the knowledge of his utter inability to achieve righteousness and of symbolizing the ultimate source of righteousness. "Universal guide to human behavior" was only secondary. The Jews, however, failed to recognized the Source, when He came, because they set about to achieve righteousness on their own. They focused on the code instead of on the Giver of the code.

Some such Jews became the church's "Judaizers" that Apostle Paul opposed, from the provinces to the council of the apostles. They wanted to continue the failed systems of human-earned righteousness that had failed in Judaism. For example, they interpreted circumcision as a gateway to God's grace, just as many feel that baptism or other human actions convey God's grace today. They failed to grasp that God bestows His grace Himself, not through the hands of the recipient or any other human intermediary. Paul had to correct even Peter for such errors.

I could argue against the Roman Catholic institution on the basis of its history. The gospel of liberty as taught by the apostles survived centuries of oppression by the institution set up by a Roman emperor who straddled the factions of Christianity, preferring not one most likely to serve God's Kingdom, but one most likely to further Rome's empire. Despite political, unjust civil, and military actions against biblical believers, the spiritual church survived countless reinventions of its human facade.

Even from a post-Protestant perspective, one can see a history of institutions wandering from the truths that originally set them apart, making necessary the departure of believers, faithful men who believed the Word of God rather than the words of men, to set up new institutions.

Having to allow for the corruption that comes with every human presence, I must instead judge the works-based gospel that catholicisms spread. (Not to get off topic, but, yes, the plural is intentional.)

I have seen enough human failure everywhere I've gone, including in my own footsteps, that I will take pride not in myself, nor in my efforts, nor in any human organization, but in the God who freely bestows His grace and who graciously sets up His works among men.

I send this to my non-Catholic friends just to set the record straight. Thanks for understanding. Love, H_____
---------------------
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Excerpts of an article written by non-Catholic Sam Miller - a prominent Cleveland Jewish businessman:
"Why would newspapers carry on a vendetta on one of the most important institutions that we have today in the United States, namely the Catholic Church?

Do you know - the Catholic Church educates 2.6 million students everyday at the cost to that Church of 10 billion dollars, and a savings on the other hand to the American taxpayer of 18 billion dollars. The graduates go on to graduate studies at the rate of 92%.

The Church has 230 colleges and universities in the U.S. with an enrollment of 700,000 students.

The Catholic Church has a non-profit hospital system of 637 hospitals, which account for hospital treatment of 1 out of every 5 people - not just Catholics - in the United States today.

But the press is vindictive and trying to totally denigrate in every way the Catholic Church in this country. They have blamed the disease of pedophilia on the Catholic Church, which is as irresponsible as blaming adultery on the institution of marriage.

Let me give you some figures that Catholics should know and remember. For example, 12% of the 300 Protestant clergy surveyed admitted to sexual intercourse with a parishioner; 38% acknowledged other inappropriate sexual contact in a study by the United Methodist Church, 41.8% of clergy women reported unwanted sexual behavior; 17% of laywomen have been sexually harassed.
Meanwhile, 1.7% of the Catholic clergy has been found guilty of pedophilia. 10% of the Protestant ministers have been found guilty of pedophilia. This is not a Catholic problem.

A study of American priests showed that most are happy in the priesthood and find it even better than they had expected, and that most, if given the choice, would choose to be priests again in face of all this obnoxious PR the church has been receiving.

The Catholic Church is bleeding from self-inflicted wounds. The agony that Catholics have felt and suffered is not necessarily the fault of the Church. You have been hurt by a small number of wayward priests that have probably been totally weeded out by now and a number of bishops who failed to act.

Walk with your shoulders high and your head higher. Be a proud member of the most important non-governmental agency in the United States.

Then remember what Jeremiah said: 'Stand by the roads, and look and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is and walk in it, and find rest for your souls'. Be proud to speak up for your faith with pride and reverence and learn what your Church does for all other religions.

Be proud that you're a Catholic."

Harmony Wheeler: Professional Writer: Chorale conductor honors soldiers and families wit...

2011-03-17T10:14:00.000-07:00

Harmony Wheeler: Professional Writer: Chorale conductor honors soldiers and families wit...: "“Love and Honor” tour inspired by bravery, loss and sacrifice. After her brother was deployed to Iraq last August, Chorale conductor Shawna St..."

2011-02-18T15:00:00.001-08:00

Electricity out. No heater. No lights. No web. No stove. Putting food out in snow. Snowing again. Wood stove is warm. Paradise!

The "Scientific" Laws of Islam

2010-12-18T12:09:00.000-08:00

Reference: Iingam, Rama. Iddat, a Scientific Concept in the Islamic Law to Identify the Paternity. factoidz.com. Downloaded 18 December 2010.

Something surprised me while I looked at writing samples from a web site that pays writers for short articles. The article is Iddat, a Scientific Concept in the Islamic Law to Identify the Paternity. The web site identifies writer Rama Iingam as its #4 expert in Divorce and Family Law.

The writer wishes to convince readers that many of [Muslim Law's] concepts are logical, reasonable and above all... scientifically based and have withstood the test of time.

Before we proceed, we need to define Iddat:

Iddat is quite scientific and it is helpful to identify the paternity of a child. Iddat is nothing but a period of probation a Muslim woman has to undergo immediately after she was divorced by her husband or on his death.

By probation, he means isolation. The law prevents confusion over paternity by ensuring that no child is conceived immediately after divorce or after the death of a husband. Here's the interesting part:

When a Muslim wife below the age of 8 who is under the menopause stage, even if her marriage is consummated, she need not undergo Iddat, when she is divorced or when her husband died.

How many 8-year-olds have undergone menopause? Hopefully, the author meant 'puberty;' so we will let that slide.

I admire Rama Iingam's courage to expose Islam's allowance for consummation of pre-pubescent marriage. Or, I am thankful for his naive exposure of a law, Iddat, that should be spelled Idiot.

What kind of culture condones consummation of marriage to a little girl who is only seven years old, or even younger? Muslims get quite worked up over others' sacrilege toward their false god. Perhaps they should concern themselves more with the blasphemy that is Islam.

Censorship

2010-12-13T11:02:00.000-08:00

Blanket, unqualified condemnation of censorship promotes verbal and visual anarchy.

Anarchy can work only in a society of perfect people.

I have yet to learn of any such culture.

Artsy-Fartsies Upset over "Censorship"

2010-12-05T02:38:00.000-08:00

References

Bigley, Michael. Artistic Censorship in DC. Washington Grantmakers Daily. (Undated; downloaded 4 December 2010).
Starr, Penny.Smithsonian Christmas-Season Exhibit Features Ant-Covered Jesus, Naked Brothers Kissing, Genitalia, and Ellen DeGeneres Grabbing Her Breasts. Penny Starr. CNSNews.com. Monday, November 29, 2010.

Recap: One (1) display that displays intolerance toward the religious beliefs of many Americans gets pulled from a Smithsonian exihibit full of (debatably) pornographic displays; and we are supposed to feel threatened by this "censorship."

What does the above have to do with the Grant Applications and Philanthropic Revenue Streams LinkedIn forum on which it was posted? Let me rescue the author. If public reaction surprised the partnership -- that is, assuming the grant makers, the artists, and the Smithsonian did not intentionally bait the public -- the story illustrates a grant partnership that failed to recognize the environmental constraints of the project, undoubtedly due to the artistic fringe's insensitivity to, or disrespect for, the public.

Is this childishness hypocrisy or just faux indignation? Grown-up people get censored every day to protect the feelings of the Left. For example, I cannot fully expressing my opinion about the display's iconoclasm (to put it euphemistically) because it could cost me future employment. Do the artsy-fartsies think they have been censored? Awww, poor babies!

Is it "censorship" to refuse to force taxpayers to fund a venue for propagandists who have many alternate venues? Would it be "censorship" not to facilitate the violation of community standards of decency? Is it "censorship" to stop facilitating propaganda hostile to many citizens and to their religion?

If this is censorship, then at least some censorship is good.

I Hit a Deer

2010-10-22T11:46:00.000-07:00

I hit a deer. I slowed to miss a fine, 3-prong buck. As he stopped on my right and turned to look back at me, I started out again. Suddenly, from my left, a doe trotted onto the road, only a few feet in front of my car, following the buck. I braked, but we collided. She tumbled into the dirt, but scrambled to her feet and ran away.

I saw no scrapes on the doe and my car shows no damage. But I learned that, where there's one deer, instead of focusing on it, I should look around for others.

And in life, when you avoid one danger, you should look around for other dangers.

Quote: Choice, not circumstances, determines your success. But to what degree?

2010-10-09T00:49:00.000-07:00

Choice, not circumstances, determines your success. So goes a famous quote from an unknown source.

The quote incorrectly assumes an either-or, cause-effect relationship.

Luck is a pattern of circumstances that seem non-random. It is a pattern of values falling outside the expected limits.

Circumstances result from chance, previous circumstances, and choices that exercise partial control over the creation of future circumstances. Luck, therefore, is a seemingly non-random pattern resulting from unusual, random chance (coincidence), a lack of change to the circumstances, or control resulting from choices made.

Luck is an interpretation of current circumstances. Neither can be changed. Choice can be uneducated and driven by emotion, or it can be informed and considered. The quality of a choice (the selection of one option from two or more) can be controlled.

Since true coincidence is more likely to end than to continue, it disappears from the equation.

Two things result in a greater likelihood of "bad" luck: adverse circumstances and uneducated choices. Two things result in greater likelihood of "good" luck: favorable circumstances and educated, considered choices. Educated, considered choices can change circumstances or can prepare to expand the impact of advantageous circumstances when they occur.

We cannot control circumstances. Choice, however, influences future circumstances.

I disagree with the literal sense of Choice, not circumstances, determines your success. It ignores that success or lack thereof depends on both circumstances and on choices.

The quote also ignores the process of setting the goals that define success. We can choose either probably attainable goals, unrealistic goals, or no goals at all.

Circumstances set the most probable default outcome, but our choice of goals and our choice of actions to change or take advantage of circumstances influence the probability of success.

We are not responsible for circumstances' effects on our degree of success, but we are responsible for our choices' effects. Choose realistic goals that will define you as successful. Change the circumstances that you can. Prepare to take advantage of favorable circumstances.

We may receive from the hands of others the clay with which to create our victory cups; but the cups are ours to design and to shape.

For persons of faith, I will draw out another factor that I silently lumped in with circumstances, above. I believe in a personal, planning Creator. I don't believe in a universal fatalism, but I do believe that the Creator intervenes to bring about certain things.

Most of us set goals for ourselves first in this world, and after that for the next world. The Creator prioritizes goals for us first for the spiritual dimension, and after that for the physical world. If we don't achieve our goals, we must cut ourselves slack because we may have attained the Creator's greater goals without knowing it.

We who value the will of our Creator should strive to align our goals with what we know of the Creator's goals and to allow for unexpected ones. Victory cups of His making outshine any that we could ever design.

Copyright 2010, Richard Wheeler. Free to use for non-profit purposes.

If the Old Mainstream Is "Extremist," then I'm Happy to Be Extreme

2010-08-30T02:32:00.000-07:00

Is it a coincidence that all the tea party candidates have overtly extreme outrageous policies?
Answers.Yahoo.com

It's hard to say which one of their whacked ideas is the most extreme because they're all up there. But Angle's "same sex couples should not be allowed to adopt children" is one of the wackiest. Talk about STEPPING on Americans "rights"! Pffft! And why does Mike Lee want to change the 14th amendment after it's been in PLACE all these CENTURIES?! That amendment, is how HIS ancestors from Europe or wherever, became citizens! And "REPUBLICANS wrote it back there in 1868! Talk about somebody not doing his homework!

"As part of Reconstruction, the first clause of 14th Amendment states "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

It's a matter of perspective.

The tea party candidates' stands were mainstream a generation or two ago, and many of those positions remain mainstream. Like the Constitution, they have not changed. Political correctness, for example, has only forced approval (first it was tolerance, then it was acceptance; now it is approval, and next it will be affirmative action) of homosexuality during the last generation. Applying the label of extreme to the straight-parenthood lobby demonstrates a misinformed (or dishonest), extreme perspective. Moreover, for an extreme leftist to call a centrist position "extreme" adds hypocrisy to the previous faults.

The country has moved miles to the left since the 1960s. From the perspective of the left, therefore, those actually in the former center now appear to be on the right, and to those on the extreme left, those in the former center appear to be on the extreme right. This serves their purposes by grouping the center with the real extreme right. To those in the mainstream, however, opposition to adoption by homosexuals remains neither extreme nor wacky.

The left began using terms such as 'extreme' in order to demonize and marginalize the center-right. Such ad hominem attacks alleviate any need to deal honestly with the issue and to argue the unsupportable. They are intended to elicit over-reaction from opponents in order to discredit them. The are also intended to whip up often-violent fervor in their allies. Such verbal aggression has polarized the public, agitated emotional responses on both sides, and inhibited reasoned discussion. Hypocritically, the left is usually the first to protest against accurate labels such as liberal, radical, socialist, and Marxist.

The questioner states that Mike Lee's ancestors became citizens by virtue of the 14th Amendment, which granted citizenship to former slaves. Lee is Caucasian. What was that about doing one's homework?

Congress intended the 14th Amendment to prevent denying citizenship to former slaves, not to bestow citizenship on children of illegal aliens.

The author of the Citizenship Clause, Sen. Jacob M. Howard, stated..., 'This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the family of ambassadors, or foreign ministers....'

"In 1873, The United States Attorney General ruled the word "jurisdiction" under the 14th Amendment meant... 'absolute and complete jurisdiction.... Aliens, among whom are persons born here and naturalized abroad, dwelling or being in this country, are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States only to a limited extent.'" (Wikipedia)

Note that even though such persons were born in the US, they were considered aliens.

This did not change until United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, in 1898, when the Supreme Court ruled that a child born to non-citizen parents legally and permanently in the US was a citizen. That still did not give birthright citizenship to children of illegal aliens. (Wikipedia)

Even Native Americans, considered subjects of "Indian" nations, did not receive citizenship until the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924. The Supreme Court had ruled in 1884 (Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94) that American Indians born in the United States could not claim citizenship because they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the US.

Birthright citizenship for illegal aliens today exists as a de facto practice without major legal precedent. Many falsely claim that 1982's case Plyler v. Doe conferred citizenship on children of trespassing aliens. Plyler v. Doe merely extended equal protection and required the states to provide free benefits to such children.

According to Congressional Research Service, "The courts apparently have never ruled on the specific issues of whether the native-born child of illegal aliens... may be a U.S. citizen."

Congress has responsibility to interpret "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in order to enforce it. People like Mike Lee remaine completely within the legal and social mainstreams for wanting to refine the provisions of the 14th Amendment.

The original intent of the 14th Amendment clearly excluded children of legal aliens from citizenship. It therefore excluded the children of trespassing aliens. What the questioner claims has existed for "centuries" came about only recently.

The mainstream and historical positions of tea party candidates are extreme only to those on the extreme left, outrageous only to those with an un-American perspective, and 'whacked' only to those with fractured knowledge of history. The question is truly a case of the iron pot calling the stainless steel kettle 'black.'

Source(s):

Birthright citizenship
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_citizenship_in_the_United_States

Precedent concerning citizenship for children of illegal aliens
http://www.ilw.com/immigrationdaily/news/2005,0926-crs.pdf

1982's Supreme Court case, Plyler v. Doe (No. 80-1538)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0457_0202_ZO.html

"Will there be sci-fi super nerds in Heaven?"

2010-08-19T16:05:00.000-07:00

Randy Alcorn speculates on the questions,

Will there be sci-fi super nerds in Heaven?
Will we all get together and build the Enterprise?

It should go without saying that being a Trekker has nothing to do with going to heaven, so long as you don't make an idol of it and the belief in ETs doesn't hinder faith in Christ as Savior. It also goes without saying that heaven's attractions such as the gates like pearl, the sea like glass, the great throne, the altar, the angels, the streets of gold, historical figures, meeting all our believing ancestors and dearly missed loved ones -- not to mention God Himself -- will, in comparison, relegate the sci-fi universe to irrelevance. However:

Foster-adoptive parents reared me, and I don't remember my birth mother. Were she still alive and were I to find her, I imagine that at our meeting, we would spend part of our time looking at her photo albums and at the works of her hands. Not that her job, arts and crafts, or photos of her trip to the Worlds Biggest Ball of Rubber Bands in Lauderhill, Florida, would be all that interesting, but they would tell me about her; they would share with me pieces of her life.

Heaven may be like that. I remember my dad (foster-adoptive) teaching me to build balsa wood, model airplanes. Living with our Father, we might spent a lot of eternity building models together -- maybe even functioning models of Constellation-class starships, Klingon warbirds, and X-wing fighters -- as He teaches us the correct science about interstellar travel, transporters, and light sabers. Naturally, we'll spend parts of eternity watching flashbacks of times He intervened in human lives and molded our characters, and of course, visiting the Universe's Biggest Ball of Burning Hydrogen.

And it will all be cool because we'll be doing those things with Him.

Overwhelming the System

2010-07-28T19:57:00.000-07:00

This article needs to circulate widely. Please click the link to read the whole article. I disagree on a major point, however: Occupant Obama lacks the intelligence to master-mind the Cloward-Piven plan. The "Progressives" (meaning, progress towards international socialism) have refined the plan over the last century. Occupant Obama serves only as a script-reading figurehead.

Overwhelm the System WAYNE ALLYN ROOT

...Barach Obama... is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.

...Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government....

* Universal health care... had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions)....

* Cap and trade.... has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors....

* Make Puerto Rico a state... to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

* Legalize 12 million illegal immigrants... adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security.

* Stimulus and bailouts... went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions.... The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means.

* ...Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition.

With the acts outlined above, Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system....

Team Democrat is a gang of monetary drug dealers who want you hooked and dependent on them. Yes, half of the Republicans share the Democrats' "progressive" (that is, Marxist) goals and will bump the country over the edge, sending us to hell in a hand-basket; but Democrats will intentionally send us there on a greased firepole. I "vote the candidate," but a candidate who belongs to Team Democrat will never, ever, ever! get my vote.

Review: A Time To Dance

2010-07-22T12:49:00.000-07:00

Expecting only the very best from Karen Kingsbury, I sat down to enjoy a pleasant read of her book "A Time To Dance." I did not find the very best, however. While her characters are realistic and her story is intriguing, the book goes on for too long without any progress. The story, which follows a couple as they put off a divorce for the sake of their daughter, who is getting married, is heartfelt and moving, but some readers may want to skip the majority of the book and go straight to the end. The plot is slow moving and makes for an even slower read, a boring read, at that. Only in the last quarter of the book do things get interesting enough to keep the reader's attention. That said, it's still a pleasant read overall. If you can get through the slow parts, you'll find yourself at a wonderful, inspirational ending.

I received a free copy of this book from BookSneeze.com in return for my honest review.

Interviews: Gaps in Your Knowledge

2010-07-08T12:56:00.000-07:00

Sometimes interviewers want to know whether you meet minimum requirements, but sometimes they just want to know what bonus skills you might have that would give them greater flexibility or that might interest another hiring manager. Lavie Margolin addresses the best response when a hiring manager asks a question about an area in which you lack knowledge.

Margolin advises saving your time and theirs by answering plainly that you don't have that answer but have a plan to learn about that area. That's OK as far as it goes, but you need a bit more.

Use discernment about how hard to sell yourself. Are they asking you about required, desired, or non-advertised skills? Time pressure might force them to choose between candidates who meet 80% of the requirements, so your can-do answer may give you the edge.

A better answer...

admits that you don't have that knowledge
shows that you are interested in the topic
relates how you previously delivered value in a new area.

My first two bullets match Margolins' answer, although I generalize the point about interest. Having a plan is only one possible way to demonstrate interest. You might demonstrate interest by asking a question about the topic or by stating that you have studied it but not developed experience in it. My third point drives home your credibility with respect to the second point. It turns a dry, hypothetical answer into a concrete narrative.

For example,

"I haven't worked in [topic], but I enjoy reading about [related issues] and would LOVE to get my hands dirty in it. One time, my director needed someone to deal with [relevant topic], which none of the departments covered. My supervisor asked me if I could help, so I hit the internet and the library that night, and came back with a tutorial the next day that the director liked so much, he expanded our department's charter; and naturally, my boss put me in charge of it. I know you'll be pleased with how I can help you."

Obviously, you can't give long-winded answers like this if they ask about multiple knowledge areas you don't have.

Review: Love on a Dime

2010-06-17T12:34:00.000-07:00

I can't help but love a good story about a writer. After all, I'm a writer, myself. Therefore, Cara Lynn James' new novel "Love on a Dime," which follows a society lady named Lilly secretly writing dime novels with moral twists, had my attention from the very beginning. And it kept my attention, too.

While some of the dialogue was less than natural, the story, itself, kept me intrigued throughout, and the faith of the main characters felt natural. It took far too long for the final, inevitable result to come about, but Lilly's efforts to keep her identity a secret from her fans, her publisher (and former lover), and, most of all, her family, as well as her efforts to find a true love that will please her parents makes for a good novel that I highly recommend, especially to my fellow writers.

Disclaimer: I received a free copy of this book from BookSneeze.com in return for my honest review.

Writing: A Little Perspective Can Bring Out the Relevance

2010-05-28T21:32:00.000-07:00

[Somebody tried to start the following off-topic discussion in a writers' group on LinkedIn, a social networking site organized by occupation. One writer responded, equally off-topic. Naturally, I just couldn't resist putting in my 200 cents.]

Original post: Heather Crouse
Executive Vice President at Ferrellok Life Sciences, LLC.

As a country, can we truly afford all of these outrageous bills the Obama Administration keeps pushing through?

The Obama Administration is constantly pushing bills costing billions and trillions of dollars. The last administration spent trillions on oil and war. Can we afford to keep borrowing money against ourselves?

Response: Grant Steen
Owner, Medical Communications Consultants, LLC

I dropped off the Ferrellok Life Sciences discussion group because this kind of useless political garbage kept popping up. Are you trying to trash another discussion group?

For the record, the Obama Administration was stuck with a broken country and a huge bill because George Bush tried to fight two wars while cutting taxes and deregulating industry. All of our problems right now are the result of moronic Republican policies. Get a grip!

Fifth Response: Richard M. Wheeler
Systems Engineer -- Available Now

Grant Steen, thank you SO MUCH for legitimizing Heather Crouse's off-topic message by turning it into a discussion.

For the record back at you, Mr. Genius: If Bush AND the Democrat House AND the Democrat Senate used our children as colateral, the Obama Administration hocked our grandchildren AND our great-grandchildren AND our great-great-grandchildren. Even Republicans pinched their noses when voting for Bush, so grip some perspective! You're smarter than to pass the buck with such a moronic, moral-equivalence-of-darts-and-bullets argment.

Heather Crouse, this is not the place, even if you're right. Better (and more relevantly phrased) questions to ask would include

o Besides watching only MFNBC, what is the best way to train for a lucrative and rewarding career at Czar Sunstein's Ministry of Information?

o How can writers stay motivated while writing laws that they know their bosses won't even bother to read?

o Can freelancers cash in on the boom in Democrat-media agit-prop?

o What is the best software for writing a 1,500-page bill to take over the rest of the economy?

o Is the Associated Press Style Guide the best reference when hiding subversive provisions in a reform bill?

o What great logician said, "You will never be... at the mercy... of a principled... uh... argument... uh... uh... when-you-can-come-back-with-a-tear-jerking-story"?

o How are writers enjoying the new Health Care Benefits that they are paying for?

See? You just have to put things in perspective.

Review: Embracing Your Second Calling

2010-05-27T15:27:00.000-07:00

"Embracing Your Second Calling: A Woman's Guide," by Dale Hanson Bourke, has plenty of insights to offer, even to a man. Bourke uses her own experiences and stories from the Bible to show that the older person can find purpose in the faithful life, focusing on God instead of on the highs of the past. The best is yet to come, and as long as you're alive, God can still use you.

As a younger person, I couldn't get into this book. I found myself wondering why I have to wait until later life to focus on God and my faith life. The sidebars, while helpful, proved distracting. I did, however, get something out of Bourke's use of the Bible to get her points across, and there's still a lot for the reader to learn, no matter what age.

Definitely a book I'll come back to when I've gotten a little older.

I received a free copy of this book from BookSneeze.com in exchange for my honest review.

Nothing New about Blind Politicians

2010-05-27T01:09:00.000-07:00

Reference: I Kings 20. For context, see

II Samuel 7
I Kings 11-12
start at I Kings 16:23 when you read chapter 20

God is pro-death penalty. In fact, God once pronounced the death penalty upon a politician when he made a treaty instead of executing a captured invader.

You can find more than one situation like this in the Bible, but today I focus on Ahab from my daily reading in I Kings 20. Ahab descended from a split and broken line of heretical politicians that started with Solomon.

All this rebellion, destruction, and death started with an interfaith marriage. King David had unified Israel and passed it along to his son Solomon in 1015 BC. We think the "fundamentalist" Mormon cults in the Rocky Mountain states are bad, but Solomon left them in the dust with his 700 wives and 300 concubines. God never explicitly judged anybody for having multiple wives -- perhaps He sees the resulting family conflicts as judgment enough. Polygamy -- more specifically, interfaith political marriages -- led to something far worse: apostacy, breaking up with God.

Solomon's wives, many being from other nations (one nation being Sidon) and other religions, convinced him to worship the gods of their homelands. I suppose a thousand of the most beautiful women in the known world could do that to the average guy. Way to man-up, Sol.

God responded to this spiritual adultery by filing for divorce. God could not remove Solomon from office because He had given His word to David that his son would sit on the throne after him. So the divorce came posthumously in -975 AD. Like a judge who gives the girls to the wife and the boys to the husband, God divided Israel.

Solomon's son Rehoboam got to keep the south while a rebel, Jeroboam, got to take the north. The area of one tribe, Judah, made up the south, while the areas of ten tribes made up the north. (The twelfth and priestly tribe of Levi dispersed among the other eleven tribes.) Naturally, Judah became known as... Judah; and the ten tribes got to keep the family name of Israel. In the successions of rulers, north and south, few learned their lessons.

Ahab had no excuse for not believing God. Ahab ("father's brother") grew up in the home of his idolatrous home of his father, but he also knew of the Torah and had exposure to the prophets of God. As we approach I Kings 20, we find three events that should have convinced anybody:

He had lived through a drought that the prophet Elijah had declared (I Kings 17:1).
In a competition between 850 prophets of idols and one prophet of God, he had seen Elijah pray down fire from God to devour water-drenched sacrifices (18:17-39).
He saw the drought end per Elijah's declaration (18:41-45).

But Ahab perfectly illustrated Jesus' saying, "If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead." (Luke 16:31)

When Ahab married Jezebel, he followed Solomon's error by marrying into the family of the King of Sidon, the capitol of Phoenicia. Ahab had grown up in a house that worshipped foreign gods with fornication and sodomy among their sacraments. Mr. and Mrs. Ahab and Jezebel, however, topped this. They added Baal-worship with its sacrament of infant sacrifice to Israel's sins.

According to I Kings 19:1, after the second and third events listed above, Ahab went home and told Jezebel about the signs God had shown. Jezebel responded by putting out a hit on Elijah. Considering that Ahab had converted once for love's sake, what might have happened if Jezebel had said, "Surely, the Lord is God!" like all the witnesses to the fire did?

Wives, don't underestimate your influence over your husbands. Behind every succussful man is.... Well, if you can make 'em, you can break 'em, too. He may one day give account for his leadership, but you will one day account for how you used your influence.

Meanwhile, back in today's reading (chapter 20), King Ahab finds himself quivering in his fortress as King Ben-Hadad ("son of Hadad," the Syrian sun-god) musters the army of Syria outside.

First Ben-Hadad orders Ahab to surrender all his silver, gold, wives, and children. Ahab agrees to comply.

Don't pretend shock. You already know that he practices infant sacrifice. In accordance with custom, Ben-Hadad would probably take the wives for his own and send the children to the best Syrian academies to eventually represent him in the conquered territory of Israel. With wives like Jezebel, Ahab probably thought he got the better end of that bargain. And winding up in the house of a mighty king like Ben-Hadad, Jezebel probably thought she was getting the better deal, too. It was a win-win-win.

However, Ben-Hadad changes the deal. He orders Ahab to let his soldiers pillage the city. Now, surrendering his money and his family is OK with Ahab, but surrendering his favorite stuff went just too dern far! Ahab ends the parleigh saying, "Let not one who puts on [as in donning armor for battle] boast like the one who takes [as in removing armor after successful battle]." In other words, don't count your chickens before they're hatched.

The king had put his foot in it. As shown in verse 14, he had no idea how he would defend against Ben-Hadad. God sends a prophet to Ahab to tell him that God will deliver the enemy into his hand, that Ahab may know that God is God.

At the prophet's direction, Ahab musters his little army of 7,000 men and marches out of the city to face Ben-Hadad's army of over 127,000. (How do I get that number? Ben-Hadad returned the following year with an equal number (vs. 24-25). More on that, later.)

In this battle, every Israelite "killed his man," so that's at least 7,000 Syrian foot soldiers. Then Ahab led an attack against Ben-Hadad's chariots, "and killed the Syrians with a great slaughter." Ben-Hadad and his army flee.

Things start to look up for Ahab. God fights on his side. Maybe he will start turning to God.

After the first battle, the prophet warns Ahab, get ready because they'll be back! Sure enough, spring comes and the prophecy holds true. Ben-Hadad returns, but with a new strategy.

The Syrian tacticians decide that the loss happened because God is a hillbilly. That's what you get when your tacticians worship heathen gods. Actually, chariots don't work well in hills country like that around Ahab's capital, and Israel's capitol gives them the high ground, so moving the battle to a plain makes a lot of sense. Once again, Ben-Hadad has vastly overwhelming numerical superiority. Enjoy the word picture:

Now the children of Israel encamped before them like two little flocks of goats, while the Syrians filled the counrtyside.

Military (or religious) tactics and numerical superiority do not stop God, however. A prophet tells Ahab,

Thus says the LORD: Because the Syrians have said, "The LORD is God of the hills, but He is not God of the valleys," therefore I will deliver all this great multitude into your hand, and you shall know that I am the LORD.

The battle begins. The little army of Israel kills 100,000 foot soldiers (vs. 29), the rest flee, and God kills another 27,000 in an "accident" (vs. 30). That's where I got the 127,000 for the first battle.

Ahab has seen miracle after miracle. Do you think maybe this trip from doom to miraculous victory would crack open Ahab's heart? Not a chance. When Israel captures Ben-Hadad, he and Uncle Ahab call each other "brother" and make a treaty. 127,000 men dead and they just walk away.

God hates false religions and false gods to which people give honor that belongs to Him alone. False gods keep people condemned and separated from God. God delivers into Ahab's hands the ruler of a region that God had once given to Israel, a man that oppresses Israel, a man with the conceit to call himself the son of a god, a man who insults God... and Ahab lets him go.

A prophet calls him on it, saying,

Thus says the LORD: Because you have let slip out of your hand a man whom I appointed to utter destruction, therefore your life shall go for his life, and your people for his people.

God signed Ben-Hadad's death warrant and Ahab failed to execute the sentence. Doing so, Ahab signed his own death warrant.

Of all the lessons in I Kings 20, this one stands out to me tonight: One day, our judges, the politicians who appointed them -- and the people who elected the politicians -- will answer to God for the murderers, rapists, and traitors they allowed to live and even released to repeat their crimes. The jurisdiction to exact justice lies with God, not us. But, whether in this life or in the next, they will pay.

Copyright Richard Wheeler 2010. Permission granted for personal or non-profit use.

Review: How Should A Christian Live

2010-04-29T11:44:00.000-07:00

I really should stop reviewing books and devotionals aimed at younger audiences. "How Should A Christian Live," a devotional for teenagers, is yet another example of an easy to understand yet lacking in depth read. Even as a teenager, I longed for something deeper than this. Maybe I'm alone in that, but I've always thought that Christians, no matter how young or old, should desire the deepest possible relationship with God. Plus, is the Bible really meant to be entirely easy to understand? Isn't that why we have the Holy Spirit to help us understand?

Anyway, back to my review. "How Should A Christian Live" has some great material, although entirely cliche material that I've heard many times before. It's organized with short sections within sections including definitions, Get It, Grab It, Hold It, Live It, and Give It, as well as several word games that are there just for fun. I suppose the games would hold a younger person's attention and get them to actually read some verses, but the games seemed pointless, boring, and easy to me. The devotional also includes a CD with select scripture readings on it. Unfortunately, my copy wouldn't work (there goes another star in my rating).

So, overall, this devotional makes a good read for its targeted younger audience, excluding a younger me. I'll give it 3 out of 5 stars for that.

I received a free copy of this book from BookSneeze.com in exchange for my honest review.

Review: Chronological Guide to the Bible

2010-03-28T21:53:00.000-07:00

True to its title, "Chronological Guide to the Bible" goes through Biblical events in chronological order, providing historical insight and background. Unfortunately, rearranging things to fit a historical order makes for a confusing format. The book's cover claims it "works with any translation," but with its confusing format and lack of organization, readers will find it difficult to look up the many suggested passages or navigate their way through the book when looking for specific events.

Divided into nine epochs, the book includes book summaries and outlines, time lines, maps, reading guides, and random side bars (if you can even call them that). Colored pictures and informational facts make the read a bit easier, but the overall layout is too random and has too much white space.

That said, "Chronological Guide to the Bible" still makes an interesting reference book if the reader is willing to wade into the book and find its hidden gems. If the reader has time, he may also read the book straight through, which allows the book to flow more easily.

I received a free copy of this book from BookSneeze.com in return for my honest review.

Review: "Kaleidoscope" by Patsy Clairmont

2010-02-28T11:25:00.000-08:00

Leave it to Patsy Clairmont to create a book with a cover as cute as she is, a length as tiny as she is, and chapters as short as she is.

Beautiful cover and all, Kaleidoscope fails to connect. Chapters, each based on a single verse from Proverbs, come across as devotional stories. While one or two chapters may hit individual readers hard, most readers will have to either dig deep or read only one chapter per day/week and truly commit to thinking as hard as Winnie the Pooh to get something out of this book.

Mind you, the stories Clairmont tells are delightfully funny, but that doesn’t compensate for lack of depth in the Word. I have yet to read a book by a Women of Faith Speaker that truly dives into God’s Word. Some pointless questions and a few verses to reflect on after each chapter are the closest Clairmont comes to covering readers with the water of the Word of God.

On the bright side, she does bring some clear understanding to a few confusing proverbs, but, as lovely as its cover is, Kaleidoscope does not “find inspiring reflections of the divine that bring clarity to our world.”

*Quote from the book jacket’s description.

Book Summary:

Acclaimed author and Women of Faith speaker Patsy Clairmont causes womens' hearts to leap and their hopes to lift in this quirky, straight-to-the point look at the Proverbs.
Understanding the Christian life and the Bible can be a daunting task. But maybe God didn't mean it to be so hard. In Kaleidoscope of Proverbs, Patsy Clairmont pieces together some powerful messages from God and reveals new facets of beauty, inspiration, and instruction. Written for busy women, Patsy offers brief, powerful chapters that address the key aspects of their lives, hearts, and relationships.
In the Proverbs, God gives us small gems of hope and truth, and in Kaleidoscope of Proverbs, Patsy Clairmont unveils them for readers with her trademark humor and insightful teaching.

* I received a free copy of this book from BookSneeze.com in exchange for my honest review.