ChangingWind.Org

We've been told it's wrong to criticize American Progressive/Liberal hating of America, their belief, their right and all that, which, though this latter fact is true, requires there is no proof to the contrary. You see, the whole point in the right is that they are American, our most recent examples of why this is important are the Christians abroad beheaded for their Christian views, or burned alive, and that's after an ordeal of being kidnapped, sometimes raped and tortured as well. Freedom of Religion, Press, and Expression aren't together in the First Amendment for them being unrelated, they are entirely related in every way.

So let us begin with the certainty America from its discovery has been a Christian Nation, noting that it was Feudal Spain who began settlement of America after a war for a Spanish province known as Granada that had been taken by the Moors, the highest of the hierarchy of Islam in what is called the Reconquista, in English the re-conquest, which is what brought about the Crusades, and the Conquistador, conqueror (this is the actual Spanish translation of the word), with sole purpose almost entirely to obtain booty and the use of force to get it. This is the way feudal kingdoms and empires ran. This is why Europe was in war after war that our history books tout as a nation at war, when it was a crown (the State) pursuing its own purposes and viewing the people as an expendable luxury of royal prerogative and whim.

“A successful voyage by Columbus would steal a march on the Portuguese, and might conceivably bring riches to an empty treasury. Above all – at least as far as Isabella was concerned – the project could be of crucial importance in the crusade against Islam. A successful voyage would bring Spain into contact with the nations of the East, whose help was needed in the struggle with the Turk. It might also, with luck, bring back Columbus by way of Jerusalem, opening up a route for attacking the Ottoman Empire in the rear. Isabella was naturally attracted, too, by the possibility of laying the foundations of a great Christian mission in the East. In the climate of intense religious excitement which characterized the last months of the Granada campaign even the wildest projects suddenly seemed possible of accomplishment. The close coincidence [in an age of communications by courier, no Internet, no phones, etc.] between the fall of Granada and the authorization of Columbus's expedition would suggest that the latter was at once a thank-offering and an act of renewed dedication by Castile to the still unfinished task of war against the [muslim] infidel.” -- Imperial Spain 1469 – 1716 by J. H. Elliott, copyright 1963, pg 49.

Funny how our teachers failed to teach us this part of the story out of a commitment to Political Correctness and those who sue if public schools are seen as teaching a religion in violation of the First Amendment establishment clause. But this is how blindness, better known as ignorance, is created in a mass of people, transplanting the notion of students gaining knowledge with gaining an agenda for future use. Of course, there will be those who say “I knew that,” while their actions and beliefs are assurance that they then didn't act on their own mind but acted on what they were taught as more than a guide, more like a mandate, as though fictional Jean Luc Picard following the just as fictional Prime Directive. This is the Progressive/Liberal value of impression, the undermining of individual thought, of individual deliberation and consideration at its finest.

To be sure, Genoese Columbus set sail for their Catholic Majesties Ferdinand and Isabella for sake of God and Kingdom to assure domination over Islam and the muslim infidel.

And now here comes, for this article, one of the Progressive/Liberal hypocrisies that, well maybe you have to hear this first to refresh recent memory:

The persistent shaming of Americans over what happened to the Native American – Though not even bought by the Native American, but that'd be another article since the thrust of exploiting the Native American cause is to attack wealth and the wealthy, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1weILTPEUS0, and is in fact another Progressive/Liberal effort at carrying on the slave traditions of Columbus by slavery to political party, of creating a division amongst Americans that enables this to occur.

“The years 1519-1540 represented the final, heroic phase of the conquista – the years in which Spain won its great American empire. This empire was built on the ruins of the two native empires of the Aztecs and Incas. The conquest of the Aztec empire of Mexico was undertaken from Cuba in 1519 by Hernan Cortes with a brilliance and a daring which was to fire the imagination both of contemporaries and of future generations; Pizaro's destruction of the empire of the Incas, in fact, proved almost a carbon copy – sadly blotted in its later stages – of triumph of Cortes a decade before.” -- Ibid, pg 51.

That's the “Aztec empire of Mexico...” meaning all these folks, especially with Spanish surnames, showing up at our border are the descendants of those who killed entire Native American empires below our southern border! For brevity I'll just explain that killing wasn't all, for the smaller Native American tribes found were used as slave labor and deported to Spain to be sold as slaves – Ferdinand and Isabella took steps to stop this, so save your righteous blame of Christianity, which had been attacked and provoked by Islam's Moors prior to all of this.

So here's the burning question: How is it that the Liberal agenda is so forgiving of Spain's descendants who destroyed two Native American empires and made every effort to enslave the rest until stopped by the Spanish Crown? America's Constitution included clauses to stop slavery, per James Madison in Federalist 42, http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fed_42.html, yet no one taught us this in school, and instead a perpetuation of “uncaring white slave owners” is promoted, while “they stole the land from the Native Americans” is a part of the so-called “education” that's proven to be pure Progressive/Liberal agenda anti-American rhetoric when one takes a look at the history.

If you're too blinded by your hatred, a hatred ginned up by a Progressive/Liberal education (see http://web.archive.org/web/20090423190627/http://www.nea.org/tools/17231.htm taken down prior to the 2012 endorsement of Barack Hussein Obama), then please understand that was the whole point of the education you actually received; that your choices of hatred for Individual Liberty or erroneous belief our Freedom is prescribed by the Constitution, your hatred for American Institutions, for Capitalism (the objective instrument of governing resources so they aren't all used up) and the idea that the Constitution was written to limit the government, then please take refuge in the following as a stable solid ground to raise your head high:

“Alongside this geographical concept of Spain there also existed in certain limited circles an historical concept deriving from the old Roman Hispania; a vision of the time when Spain was not many provinces but two, Hispania Criterior and Ulterior, united beneath the rule of Rome.” – Ibid, pg 7.

So now, about that “taking us backwards” so-called “Progressive” touted line of reasoning, I submit to you, oh Progressive/Liberal, oh hypocrite, that your desire to centralize power and place it above the Individual is Rome all over again and that use of the term “Hispanic” is to restate this humanist religious objective, that led to Rome seeking refuge in Catholicism after its fall. Your reality is you respect the descendants of Spain who continue the reconquista in invading America as a genetic trait of right while claiming Americans should be ashamed of a heritage that it didn't carry on for long and was sparing as to enslavement, to eventually treat these people as sovereign nations – another denied right to the American under Progressive/Liberal government!

I'd say more but I believe history has explained the epitaph of Progressive/Liberal views as the hypocrisy they are, entire propaganda talking points of fiction intended to centralize and control, to enslave us all to absolutely non-existent political correctness by feigned care and sensitivity – a sociopath socialist psychodrama – and nothing more.

God Bless you and thank you for reading and sharing this,

Toddy Littman

It's no secret that almost 80% of Latinos voted for Barack Obama.

However, what they might not know is that U.S. Senator, Barack Obama from Illinois, voted against the 2007 Immigration reform bill, and it is noteworthy that Senator Menendez, joined Senator Obama in making an Amendment to change the 2007 efforts at comprehensive immigration reform.

It's clear that the “guest worker program” is viewed as a form of amnesty, and I submit that I agree with this fact.

However, Barack Obama did not disagree with the 2007 Immigration Reform Act because of the guest worker program, as some have said. Instead, and to me this is worse, Barack Obama opposed the program because it would use a points system to value skill and that immigrant's value to the economy in the legal immigration system (the current pathway to citizenship) to determine who to issue a visa to. Thus, Obama's objection was about the visa program, that it would move away from the emotional appeal of immigration, to unify families, and instead would be used for the more realistic purpose of immigration: to have people who fulfill skills in jobs America needs done, and that, so far, Americans haven't been pursuing employment in, at least not at the wages an immigrant worker will work for.

One can easily see how the immigrant is a slave of sorts, especially the illegal one, and yet, it must be recognized that this was true of many an Americans' ancestry, many during the 1600's and 1700's coming to this country as an indentured servant, with a 7 year contract to do whatever they were told by another person in exchange for that person taking them to America. Of course the literally, and legally existing, slave, a remnant and holdover of the Feudal Institution of it by Europe, is another example, though not a voluntary immigration, it remains an immigration for the children of slaves.

Indians were never of this class, an amazing recognition of their assertion of certain sovereign rights, rights that they apparently abandon the moment they have land that they didn't go find themselves, nor fight other Indian Tribes to keep. A self-imposed destitute condition due to a reliance on treaties with the U.S. Government, and amazingly ignored as another time Government promises aren't kept, and illustrating a long history of Washington D.C. incompetence, long enough to explain it cannot be fixed by elections.

Now, returning to Barack Obama and the 2007 Immigration Reform that would have had a guest worker program 5 years earlier and provided a pathway to citizenship then, below I give you some excerpts from his speech. I have been looking for the whole thing, but ended up with this editorialized version being all I can find, so far anyway, here's a few passages from it, link to “the whole thing” as far as I can find, is at the end:

“I have serious concerns about this new experiment in social engineering, not only because of the lack of evidence that it will work, but because the bill says that the new points system cannot be changed for fourteen years.

“For that reason, I come to the floor today, joined by Senators Menendez and Feingold, to offer amendment 1202 to sunset the points system after five years. I am pleased that immigration experts, religious organizations, and immigrant advocacy organizations have all endorsed our amendment.”

And...

“And they support the amendment because the new points system shifts us too far away from the value we place on family ties and moves us toward a class-based immigration system where some people are welcome only as guestworkers, but never as full participants in our democracy.”

And...

“Our current immigration system delivers the lion’s share of green cards – about 63% -- to family members of Americans and legal permanent residents, while roughly 16% of visas are allocated to employment-based categories.

“The bill before us would reduce visas allocated to the family system in order to dramatically increase the proportion of visas distributed based on economic “points.” Once implemented, these new economic points visas would then account for about 40% of all visas, while family visas would account for less than half of all visas, with the remainder going for humanitarian purposes.”

Lastly, but most importantly....

“We are Americans. We do not have a caste or class based society, and we do not need a caste or class based immigration system. -- http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/ObamaImmi_2.htm

First, to the illegal immigrants, I want to apologize for now President Obama's focus on legal immigration (some 200,000 to 400,000 visas issued annually) during this 2007 effort at immigration reform, and his ignoring the 10+ millions of immigrants who are not legally in the United States of America and violated our Sovereignty, but have affected the cost of the nation and government so as to require being addressed with a special, one-time opportunity to be legally present in the United States of America. This, apparently, was not as important to Senator Barack Obama as those applying for visas, and his effort to change the point system by an amendment that was defeated became the reason Barack Obama voted against the bipartisan (12 Senators, 6 from both sides) effort at immigration reform, which would have made it politically neutral if done. Understand I do not agree with this approach, and though Obama helped this fail in 2007, he didn't agree with me to do it. I explain my position here, http://changingwind.org/index/comment.php?comment.news.194.

One must note the heinous hypocrisy that while Americans are going to be subjected to Obamacare, a law that wasn't even read by half the people who voted for it while the President will say “we are a nation of laws” in regard to what the government does regarding Citizens of the United States, that then this same government, including President Obama, are willing to set aside the law that government imposes on those who come to our country without our permission, illegally crossing our borders.

What must be said: ANY amnesty/path to citizenship causes a slavery effect, intended or not, to the party that made it happen. Thus Obama's denial of immigration reform in 2007 was for party, his speech was about the visas issued and Obama did not (in what I can find of his speech) speak to the 10+ million illegal immigrants that the People of this nation are affording out of America's humanity. Again, I am not for Amnesty [slavery] of any kind. The point of this article is to explain Obama has been for it all along, but, for all you Illegal Immigrants Obama's caveat to Immigration Reform is: so long as it is his party alone that does it, that gets all the credit for it. There is an essential need in Liberalism that is based in socialism (not the original Liberation from government) to keep a crop of “minorities” consistently supporting the Democratic Plantation, irrespective of it only acting for the ideological agenda of socialism, without any concern for these “serfs,” these “slaves” -- their perfect caste system, the same one Karl Marx envisioned of “worker” and “Communist.”

You see, Barack Obama explains “We do not have a caste or class based society” to attack any effort to reach immigration reform that wouldn't have been bipartisan because Obama wants the Latinos voting for Democrats (and I am not a republican, but an Independent Conservative, yeah a Tea Party Conservative).

When you return to the debates put forth in the 1st term of Obama's Presidency you find efforts at universal healthcare taking precedence over Immigration Reform, particularly when the President had super majorities in both houses. This also stands true for the failure of the President to cause policies out of Washington that reduce uncertainty and aid businesses in having rational purposes to invest, to pursue their self-interest and create many many many more jobs.

I say “rational purpose” because Obama's articulations of “the 1%” and “the rich” or “those making over $250,000 a year” is the very revealing articulations of Obama asserting a personal, self-made, not “with a single hearing or public examination” (keep reading) “points based system” of judgement of those people that Obama has caste in a negative light for their willingness to be wealty. Whatever the criteria, by percentage division, using a term of class separation, or the numeric tally of the income someone makes being thrown in others faces, they all are an effort to stimulate anger from jealousy. It appears that President Barack Obama reserves the right to have his arbitrary, capricious, arrogant, and personally chosen points based system as the sole criteria for who should pay more or less taxes, or who should have their deductions reduced in half to pay for Obamacare. Yet, in perfect hypocrite fashion, Obama is stating above, in 2007, that these things don't exist and how they shouldn't for legal immigration, while ignoring those who are here illegally entirely.

Therefore, and thank you for reading to this point in this article, to tie this all together neatly I must close with this quote from the same speech, one that I find should be haunting Barack Hussein Obama every day of his life from now on:

“Religious organizations and immigrant advocacy groups also have endorsed my amendment because the decisions about what characteristics are deserving of points -- and how points are allocated for those characteristics -- were made without a single hearing or public examination.” -- Emphasis mine, Ibid.

Excuse me,...Mr. President, what about the lack of public hearings of umpteen provisions of the 2000+ page Obamacare? What about the lack of any “hearing or public examination” of the deserving of Nebraska of exemption, or Louisiana's payoff, or the voluminous bureaucratic waivers given to Big Labor and Big Business? None of these, was heard in public forums, the criteria of any of it remains undisclosed, seeming to be of “top secret” clearance, to which none will “confirm or deny” except that the payoff for a vote happened. Yet, I shouldn't be surprised now should I since few, if any, read Obamacare from beginning, voting for their political agenda, http://changingwind.org/index/comment.php?comment.news.155, irrespective of the fact they are our representatives carrying on an unconscionable act that will be enforced on Americans, http://changingwind.org/index/comment.php?comment.news.210.

Please understand Mr. President that if you had put this all on C-span as you promised, and if you had told your party to read the bill as the American People demanded, then you would be consistent with your gripe about the 2007 Immigration points system, at least as stated. But no, you failed Mr. President, and this whining in 2007, almost prophetic when viewed with your whining that's gone on the last 4 years and continues over every issue that's important to socialist agendas, has led me to understand the new Obama “Campaign d'Socialist America,” that your tactic is to be....Drumroll please....: Emo-In-Chief.

The kids know the knee-jerker who is making more out of things than they need to, and simply out of a need to feel powerful and control something, you Mr. President have proven by this consistency of your personal emotional hypocrisy being regularly on display for the world to see to be the absolute best emo, so long as it meets your political ideas, Constitution, Truth, Honor, be damned, oh great emo master. Now realize, it's another first, no other President has been Emo-In-Chief, you should be proud.

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman

P.S. Longer than I wanted this to be but I must add, the only thing “cool” about Barack Obama is his lack of interest in illegal immigrants, except as a political resource to embarrass his opposition. Those who come to America from Cuba, Venezuela, and other socialist countries may be well familiar with this Obama tactic. Might be time to stay in your own country and take a stand there, just ask and I am sure America and Americans will be glad to help you have your nation in the freedom your people demand and deserve.

When the peasant worked his land for a Noble who would take the crop according to a charter issued by the Crown of his nation, to then hand back a small portion of it so the farmer peasant could survive to repeat this again, you see the true meaning of this generosity: to perpetuate the station of each in the scheme of things. And in further diminution of the peasant, the Noble makes this effort with full knowledge it will be received as a generosity, spread as a story amongst other farmers, which both assures the following generations of this peasant to remain thankful for those over them as long as possible, and that other Nobles will react the same, not in equilibrium or to keep a revolution from occurring, but instead to assure that the historical record shows their benevolence as a class, as though this type of generosity is the regular occurrence, which is an absolute lie.

This is the picture surrounding subject servitude, the slavery of being a subject beholden to those who show you any value of your station in life, who provide the means to feed your family, irrespective of them providing nothing more.

In time, of course, this subject servitude form of slavery was replaced by African slavery, as Muslims sold Africans into slavery for the most part, and which continues to this day, (see the end of “Who Do You Think You Are” – Emmitt Smith episode, where he discovers this truth after going to Africa in following his family tree).

And now, today, we're again exploiting a group of people due to their legal designation, though this time it's as a lawbreaker, an illegal immigrant. The foundation of this rests in the fact they broke the law to come here to work, even if it means they are paid less than an American Citizen. That is an obvious agreement to be in bondage, in slavery, to be in the same scheme of things as the peasantry of any European Fief or Feud.

Our hand is out bearing the gift of Amnesty, while also saying “we'll now be able to tax you,” and “you're job in menial labor to feed your family is secure.”

In our history there's been a need for a particular skill set in the immigrants coming from all over the world as a part of what has made America great, that these came with other immigrants, and that this portion was enough to afford the entire group's addition to our nation's population and has been a wonderful thing.

But in this idea, Amnesty, we embark on a dark path, one that destroys the very idea of citizenship in America that is a grant of membership in the Sovereign Authority of the people over their government. Everywhere else in the world the people remain subjects under their government, look at Egypt, even Iraq, their governments writing their constitution, unlike the Founding of this nation, and the republican ratification process in its first institution. The steps to freedom are important, and they cannot be steps at all if the government is writing its own charter, the bias extraordinary and suffices to demonstrate why only Americans are not subject-citizens but constituent-Citizens – we did the constituting of the government, not the government constituting us as subjects, as it is everywhere else.

It is a sad day indeed to see our National Government, in the interest of what appears to be politics alone, take up legalizing the holders of millions of jobs that Americans could have. Of course there are many who will argue “but these are menial jobs with low wages that Americans just won't do,” to which I say “See the first paragraph above.” Slavery can take many names and many forms, and is wrong in all of them, at least in America where the Citizen is the Master and the government the servant, (see http://govote.avoiceofthepeople.com/quoting-the-founders/james-wilson-signatory-to-declaration-of-independence-the-us-constitution/ with citation to the original works by the Honorable former Supreme Court Justice James Wilson who signed both the unanimous Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for the United States of America).

I submit for candid consideration that we review the idea of Amnesty with the backdrop of the prohibition of slavery and involuntary servitude in the 13th Amendment, and remembering the Constitution is what constituted the government, that this thereby establishes that it is government who is, first and foremost, prohibited from causing slavery or involuntary servitude. A government granting Amnesty is a government granting food and shelter, no less than a Noble or a Crowned Head of Europe, nor a pre-Civil War slave owner, a government creating an underclass beholden to them – a slave. I wonder if this is what then Senator Obama meant when he said, “fundamentally transform America?” This is consistent with Obama's view that the Constitution is “what the government can do for you,” (see http://audio.wbez.org/Odyssey/CourtandCivilRights.mp3 to hear the original full interview).

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman

P.S. Slavery is an abomination of our race, noted in the notion of it being “mankind,” and when we are ready to do some “benevolent” act that only results in a diminution of our nation's principles from inception, then we have given up on Freedom and denounced all kindness except as a matter of procedures and policies by politicians, better known as patronage/personal government. The idea of “amnesty” is never a solution when in government's hands, but a tool that tells the people government isn't governing at all but would rather focus on politics and parties, that government's primary criteria to “solve problems” is to provide opportunities for their party and policy changes in favor of government power and expansion. When we get this principle through our heads of how government “intervention” works we'll begin to get an inkling of why Our Founders established the United States of America by requiring ratification by the people of the document, Our Written Constitution, constituting a government of enumerated, and thereby limited, powers.

The Problem

“Let’s Make a Deal” is the immigration game we play today, being caught up in the politics of the moment, and this is where Newt Gingrich, and the rest of the candidates, need to provide a certain clarity, something with absolutely zero ambiguity.

It is no secret, to the illegal hordes swarming the border, that reality has taken the form of Uncle “Monty Hall” Sam saying, “Door number 1 has a fence. Door number 2 has electronic surveillance. Door number 3 has a bureaucracy and an average 7 year waiting period. All paths will get you at least residency, and, likely, eventual citizenship if enough of you pick the same door and are willing to wait long enough.” Ignored is the fact that this is merely America catering to a typical Progressive tactic of overwhelming the system, only this time it is by those who aren't even American Citizens. Without any reservation, I will state that I believe it is high time We, The People, the American Citizen who financially, and in patience, have afforded politicians the luxury of seeking ways to gain this new group as a constituency, put our foot down!

Newt has mentioned his plan is “not citizenship,” “not amnesty,” on numerous occasions, his explanation of his stance attempts to explain his view, though there remains am ambiguity, as at no time is an absolutely unequivocal certainty articulated, relying on one deriving the conclusion citizenship is not included in Newt's position due to absence or subtle mention regarding a particular aspect of his plan, http://www.newt.org/solutions/immigration.

Point 2 sounds good at a glance, but then narrows its point:

“2. Under no circumstance can a path to citizenship be created which would allow those who have broken the law to receive precedence over those who patiently waited to become residents and citizens via the legal process. Those who adhered to our immigration law cannot be usurped by those who violated it.” -- Emphasis mine, Ibid.

In reality, residency of some 11 million (and likely more like 30 million people), will eventually become a Left talking point due to the desire to have this number of people as a voting block, suggesting that residency is tantamount to a form of slavery. This is the way of the Left and what has become their most certain legislative means of destroying the republic, the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This is the fallout of the Civil Rights Movement becoming a mouthpiece of political power and a tool of Progressive assertion of socialism, long after the rightful claims for “equal rights” in Freedom, and their meaningful exercise, even in the 1920s by those who didn't allow race (nor gender, for that matter) to be an obstacle to their asserting freedom, http://womenshistory.about.com/od/business/p/maggie_walker.htm.

In fact, this Civil Rights government expansion tactic was recently being used by our illustrious Progressive-Terrorist-In-Chief in the American Jobs Act, as a means to make being unemployed an activity protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, http://changingwind.org/index/news.php?extend.181.2.

Proposed Solution

Thus, I have no room for vague and ambiguous, by absence and omission of terms, translation methods as the means to derive conclusions regarding immigration, and this is because it is a 200+ year old Constitutional Mandate upon Congress, a mandatory non-discretionary duty:

“To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,...” -- Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html

Instead, I submit, it is clearly beyond the point in time that there is “an uniform Rule of Naturalization” and I propose the following law:

“We The People of the United States of America do hereby reject the continuing subjection of ourselves, our children, and those who wish to come to America to live in Freedom, and no longer will afford the parallel continued encroachment on Our Nation's, Our State's, and Our own personal Sovereignty as American Citizens, and hereby demand that Congress enact simple legislation stating the following as an uniform Rule of Naturalization, which we believe will cause Citizenship to be the Holy Grail of coming to America legally:

“That Citizenship, and the certain benefits thereof, are denied to any and all who come to the United States illegally. Congress retains exclusive Constitutional Authority over this Act.”

I take this stand because each Unalienable Right I have is also a Property I Own; that I and every single American have these rights as a matter of Our Founders, who fought and took on a completely different system of government where the People are over a servant magistracy. This is a foreign idea to many who come here, and a particular incident to American Citizenship that makes the people Supreme, the absolute “buck stops here” Sovereign of the United States of America, a principle well recognized by Supreme Court Justice and Founder James Wilson, who signed both the Declaration of Independence and Constitution For The United States of America, a principle that has never been disputed by any other founder, Federalist or Otherwise:

“Permit me to mention one great principle, the vital principle I may well call it, which diffuses animation and vigor through all the others. The principle I mean is this, that the supreme or sovereign power of the society resides in the citizens at large; and that, therefore, they always retain the right of abolishing, altering, or amending their constitution, at whatever time, and in whatever manner, they shall deem expedient.” James Wilson, Founding Father, Lectures on Law: Volume 1 Chapter 1 page 17.” -- cited per http://govote.avoiceofthepeople.com/quoting-the-founders/james-wilson-signatory-to-declaration-of-independence-the-us-constitution/

This principle, that an American is not in subject servitude to their government, is the epitome of American Exceptionalism at its root.

I further submit that a law banning Citizenship to those who came here illegally will draw a bright line as to who is coming here for the right reasons, and who isn't, as it will cause a certain focus to be known to any who come here illegally, that they deny themselves Citizenship by coming to America illegally. Thus, those who come here using the legal process will more likely be coming here for the right reasons, and less put off by the process of becoming an American. Please note that I'd like to streamline this process, to a minimum of 3 years, but leaving room for some to take far longer.

I'll further submit that this type of legislation allows for Congress to then amend the act with waivers, amendments that will have been well considered, debated, and thought out because those wanting them will have to earn it through making their case to Congress and the American People as part of the process of getting such waivers enacted, or we'll be exercising our term limit prerogative, and any other remedies to enforce the Constitution on government, en masse. This is the beauty of our Constitution, and what makes American Citizenship so valuable, that it is an instrument to be enforced upon government by We The People, and it seems we're finally comprehending this aspect of Our Founders' work.

Progressives love to say “The Constitution is outdated and things have changed,” I do not agree with this for often it's merely that a part of the Constitution wasn't actually followed as the mandate or prohibition on Government's actions that Our Founders' intended, leaving the means of measure and conclusion, accordingly, a Progressive inaccuracy. The Constitution, as a legal instrument, a regime of limitation on government put in place by We The People, hasn't changed one jot or tittle, yet those seeing the Constitution as a living document that grants rights to the people, as though the Soviet Constitution, http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/36cons04.html, will do so in the interest of undermining the very foundation of Freedom, to change the way we comprehend it, for their own purpose of destroying the republic and establishing a democracy on the road to Communism.

Immigration is one of the Constitutional mandates ignored, at least according to the actual evidence at the border today and estimated populations of illegal immigrants in the country from all over the World. Thus, the policy I suggest establishes a uniformity of punishment, a blanket policy applicable upon all who fail to come to America Illegally, and thereby would establish they do not have a presumption of good intention, irrespective of many a personal, and generally subjective, anecdote to the contrary. Please understand this isn't a game or a debate, as some political football, nor ideological point of opportunity for any side, and is instead a matter of national security. This is the reason we must remove, cease from applying, the presumption of good intention, and the follow-up assumption of demonstrating our benevolence to those here illegally, and instead apply this particularly to those who apply for citizenship after we've established a uniform policy regarding illegal entry into the United States of America, one that results in the punishment of being barred from ever becoming an American Citizen. If everyone loved us, if the view from wearing rose-colored glasses were the view when you take them off, and this were Utopia, none of this would be necessary. Instead, because America has unrelenting enemies outside the United States who see our border as an opportunity to do harm, imposing a necessary duty to protect ourselves is imperative.

When Our Founders initially considered Immigration, explosives were nowhere near capable of Hiroshima and Nagasaki catastrophic damage and heinous death that lasted for decades after the fact. Today this threat is at our doorstep, via Hugo Chavez, Hezbollah, and Iran, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/30/trouble-to-the-south/.

Either we are an exceptional nation who recognizes the unique quality of American Citizenship, or, we're ready to diminish the value of American Citizenship to just another form of subject servitude at the hands of an oppressive government. It's up to us, the Sovereign, to decide, at least for now, and let us hope we decide before the decision is made for us by Washington, D.C.

Thank you for reading,

Toddy Littman