1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Thad Cochran's Voting-Rights Victory

anonymous Wrote: Jun 30, 2014 10:08 AM
Thank you for writing the truth.
In response to:

Thad Cochran's Voting-Rights Victory

anonymous Wrote: Jun 30, 2014 10:07 AM
This has got to be one of the most disgusting pieces I've ever seen here. Why would anyone concur with a sycophant for the GOP? I see Mr Jacoby writes for the Boston Globe so must be a liberal at heart because he sure writes like one. Cochran 'won' through deceit, tactics only a liberal could love and write glowingly about. I pray McDaniel fights and WINS because the GOP and its RINOS need to be taken down for good.
In response to:

Why We're No Longer Number One

anonymous Wrote: May 06, 2014 11:24 AM
I'll add another 'Reflect on this'... king10, have you never heard of President Eisenhower's warning? Quote: "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together." Today, America is a police state mirroring Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union and Stasi. There should be no place in America for a militarized police force compliments of a psychopathic Dept of Homeland Security fulfilling Odumbo's 'vision' of a domestic security forced just as strong and powerful as the military. We do not need any militarized federal government agencies like the BLM or IRS. Learn your history.
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 5:59 PM
Subverting the law doesn't make it right. You either follow the Constitution or you don't. You're voting to subvert the Constitution.
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 5:57 PM
Then the 2011 Congressional Research Service did NOT do its job! If they had checked the Congressional Globe Volume 66 part 4, 2nd Session pl 1639, Rep Bingham defined Natural Born Citizen when arguing for the 14th Amendment. He said, "The Constitution leaves no room for doubt upon this subject. The words "natural-born citizen of the United States" occur in it, and the other provision also occurs in it that "Congress shall have power to pass a uniform system of naturalization." To naturalize a person is to admit him to citizenship. Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the Republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth - natural-born citizens. There is no such word as white in your Constitution. Citizenship, therefore, does not depend upon complexion say more than it depends upon the rights of election or of office. All from other lands, who, by the terms of your laws and a compliance with their provisions becomes naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural-born citizens." Stop trusting government entities to do right by the Constitution when its aim is to subvert the Constitution. Plus, the Constitution is NOT a dictionary! The meaning came from Vattel's Law of Nations which John Jay used and it was John Jay who suggested the 'natural born citizen clause' be inserted into the Constitution. Why do you think they had to 'grandfather' everyone in? Research youself! Educate yourself!
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 5:49 PM
No, Cruz is INELIGIBLE. "The Constitution leaves no room for doubt upon this subject. The words "natural-born citizen of the United States" occur in it, and the other provision also occurs in it that "Congress shall have power to pass a uniform system of naturalization." To naturalize a person is to admit him to citizenship. Who are natural-born citizens but those born within the Republic? Those born within the Republic, whether black or white, are citizens by birth - natural-born citizens. There is no such word as white in your Constitution. Citizenship, therefore, does not depend upon complexion say more than it depends upon the rights of election or of office. All from other lands, who, by the terms of your laws and a compliance with their provisions becomes naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural-born citizens." Rep Bingham ARGUING THE 14TH AMENDMENT Congressional Globe Volume 66 part 4, 2nd Session pl 1639 So we have the definition in the Congressional Record, what all Congress knew at that time, the definition of a 'natural born citizen', which is someone who is born within the Republic - meaning born on American soil - os parents - plural - owing allegiance to no other nation, meaning both father and mother are American citizens either naturalized or by birth. No representative challenged Bingham's definition clearly evincing that they all understood that to be the meaning of Natural Born Citizen. This trumps your book excerpt every second of forever. Cruz was NOT born in the Republic and both parents were NOT citizens of the Republic.
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 5:29 PM
Thank you. You are absolutely correct. As for those who oppose you, it's apparent Townhall attracts low-information 'voters' who care nothing for following the rule of law, namely our Constitution.
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 9:11 AM
And if the GOP didn't commit election fraud all over the place with its algorithmic vote swapping program on all those black boxes, we'd have a President Paul right now instead of BO. But people like Star Parker don't really want to save America and instead support the U.S.' demise. How Ms Parker can promote someone so obviously ineligible, who wasn't even born on U.S. soil, is beyond me.
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 9:03 AM
Christie has a scathing expose out on him and Rubio is an ineligible RINO.
In response to:

Cruz and Carson in 2016

anonymous Wrote: Nov 04, 2013 9:02 AM
Citizen of what country? Cruz was born in Canada!
1 - 10 Next