About Me

Name: Mike
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Is America Worth Saving?

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, November 10, 2009 3:09:41 PM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
Austria, although suffering the ravages of Allied bombardment, was spared the degradation of communism because of the Austrians strictly adhering to their Christian traditions. The German speaking peoples of central and eastern Europe were forcibly expelled and many suffered death as well as losing their homes and possessions, and many also were given a new lease on life in free Europe and other countries of the world.

Will Americans and Europeans be so lucky if the trend toward Islamicization continues in the West as it has over the last decade?

Quibbling about whether Hasan, the Fort Hood killer, just went over the top, or was engaging in jihad, does nothing to fix the problem. Then there is the D.C. sniper, also a Muslim, who is scheduled for execution tonight. Prisoner abuse by our enlisted soldiers is a sign of declining military discipline and morale. In sacrificing our cherished traditions on the altar of capitalism, we as a nation risk destruction.

At some point, it becomes too late to change a culture save by miraculous intervention. Has America reached that point yet? Have the envious cynics already won the culture war?

The strength of Islamic extremism is that it holds a trump card. Either do what they want or get blown up. When Christians become so lukewarm in their faith that tolerance is exalted above objective truth, then the Muslim moral absolutes, no matter how flawed, prevail, just as communism once did.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Was It the Forty Virgins?

Posted by Mike on Saturday, November 07, 2009 10:19:08 AM
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
Speculation continues as to what could have possibly motivated Major Nidal Malik Hasan MD to open fire in Fort Hood, killing 13, most of whom being active duty service men and women, and wounding 31 others. Obviously, Hasan was distraught over his orders to deploy to Iraq after Thanksgiving. He gave away many of his personal belongings stating that he was being deployed three weeks ahead of schedule, obviously not expecting to live much longer. One clue may be found in the Qur'an itself. As in the case of the 9/11 hijackers, it may be that Hasan, a devout Muslim, was expecting his reward of forty virgins in Paradise for waging jihad against the infidel.

Medical doctors are called to heal, to save lives, not to kill human beings. If Hasan survives, he will learn this vital lesson, hopefully being confined to the military brig for the rest of his earthly life. Abortionists had better take notice.

So much for the virgins.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What about Those Born on US Soil?

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, October 14, 2009 10:51:24 PM
Good question.
http://westernperspective.blogspot.com/
Think about it a minute. Everyone knows that most, if not all, of the 9/11 hijackers were here in America legally. Let's just suppose hypothetically that one of these hijackers, say Mohammad Atta, was instrumental in conceiving a child later born in Florida. Would the mere fact that the child was born on US soil give that illegitimate child an entitlement of eligibility to one day occupy the highest office in the land, that of President of the United States? Same situation as Obama. Father being a Muslim foreigner, enters the US legally, gets his girlfriend pregnant. (Remember, Barry's father was still married to the woman in Kenya at the time).

The short answer is no. Merely being born on US soil does not confer an entitlement to someday being eligible to be President. That was the reason why the Framers put in the words "natural born" before "citizen" in reference to qualifications for the office of President, whereas they just specify that Senators and Congressional Representatives be ordinary citizens. Likewise, a mere congressional resolution that someone who was not born on US soil but whose parents are US citizens is henceforth a natural born citizen does not confer on that person any entitlement to eligibility to be President.

Confusion may arise because at the time the Constitution was ratified in 1789, there was no Fourteenth Amendment, so all future citizens born after 1789 were either natural born citizens following the English common law criteria, or became citizens through the process of naturalization. The Fourteenth Amendment to protect the Negroid extended citizenship to all those born in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, whether or not their parents were citizens. This leaves open the question of whether a child, one or both of whose parents are here illegally, who happens to be born in the United States, is or is not a citizen, which depends on whether the child falls within the jurisdiction of the United States or that of a foreign power. If we use the same criteria that all citizens are either those that are natural born citizens or those that are naturalized, we run into problems because the Framers clearly never intended that all persons born on American soil would be natural born citizens and so eligible to hold the office of President.

The court is asked to decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment is an assertion that all those who are now citizens by virtue of being born on US soil, but who would not have been natural born citizens in 1789 by virtue of either one or both parents not being US citizens at the time of their birth, but rather subjects of a foreign power, automatically acquire eligibility to hold the office of President, which would not have been the case had they been born in 1789 as they would not have been natural born citizens at that time as required in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.  This may be a case of first impression.

This case will probably reach the US Supreme Court. Obama is too arrogant to do the right thing and resign like Nixon did in 1974.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »