Rubio Is The Republican Obama

With the recent endorsement of Fla. Senator Marco Rubio by the National TEA Party to be the possible running mate for the Republican Presidential Nominee Mitt Romney  I feel like I’m watching a bad b-rated TV series’ second season.  In the first season the supposed villain does an unforgivable act that increases his villain credibility.  But, now the second season is previewing a supposed hero who presents basically the same unforgivable disposition that made the villainous character in the previous season the villain, yet he is the one to save the day so everyone is acting like the 3 monkeys – hear no evil,see no evil , and by all means speak no evil.

The main issue regarding Mr. Obama, that of many, that has dogged him since taking the seat of U.S president is not whether or not he was or was not born in Hawaii truly, but whether or not both of his parents were themselves U.S Citizens; therefore qualifying or dis-qualifying him to be president, constitutionally that is.  Though there is no doubt of Obama’s mother’s national status of being American, the same most certainly cannot be said of his paternal father.  It is greatly believed that Obama, Sr. was either a British Citizen, by Kenya before it gained its independence; but definitely not a citizen of the United States.  This is why the issue of Junior’s Birth Certificate has been such an critical persistent 4 yearlong issue of major importance.  It’s not just a question of Constitutional integrity, but one of principle and honesty at our nation’s highest levels.

But here comes the Establishment Media’s pick for the Republican savior as number two man on the presidential ticket, Marco Rubio.  But if the Republican Party hopes to show themselves as the party of integrity it will look in another direction.  Because according to’s May 22, 2011 issues, Now popular Republicans ‘not natural-born citizens‘, like Mr. Obama, both of his parents were not U.S Citizens at the time of his birth neither.  But too, like with Obama, neither the Media nor any one of the elite political complex seem to be overtly disturb by the fact.  Or maybe they are waiting for Rubio to become officially the V.P to be, maybe.

Like in the case of Obama’s birth, it is not like no one was there when he was born.  There was the doctor, or hospital employee, and the mother.  The information is out there.  It’s just that for some inexplicable reason both the Establishment Media and the elite political complex seem to be jointly complicity derelict regarding the crucial matter of these two presidential candidate’s qualifications, being a  Constitutionally mandated “natural-born citizens”, of not just Obama, but Rubio, as well as another potential V.P candidate Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jinda who too was born onto non-U.S citizen parents.  Regarding Marco Rubio, according to WND,  has not released his birth certificate for view by the public, and  what is even more incredible his press secretary Alex Burgos has already admitted that the senator’s parents “were permanent legal residents of the U.S.” at the time Marco was born in 1971, not naturalized citizens of the U.S. His parents didn’t become naturalized U.S. citizens until four years later.  Mr. Jindal’s press secretary Kyle Plotkin too has publically admitted “that both of his parents were permanent legal residents and not naturalized U.S citizens at the time of his birth”.

There is a clear distinction between a natural-born citizen, one who is born of two U.S Citizen, and a naturalized citizen, one who is granted citizenship by the government of the United States by fulfilling a requirement, such as being born on U.S soil or by passing a test for citizenship. It is largely understood by Constitutionalist that the Founders never intended for someone of possible dual allegiances to a foreign power to become the President of the United States.  Doesn’t that make sense?

The Founders being such learned Biblical individuals it should come as no surprise that Deuteronomy 17:15 speaks of choosing a leader, “you shall surely set a king over you …, one from among your countrymen you shall set as king over yourselves; you may not put a foreigner over yourselves who is not your countryman.”  Mr. Obama’s actions regarding America’s world standing and position has been unprecedented for a U.S president, in an extraordinary bizarre way.  His actions may be understood better if viewed from a position of someone with confused or conflicting loyalty regarding a nation that he boastfully promised to “fundamentally transform”.  He has acted with indifference to longstanding allies, such as Israel and Britain, and has acted vindictively towards nations that didn’t present any threat to America, such as, Egypt and Libya, while literally and figuratively bowing to traditional enemies and entities who act in opposition to American interests, such as Communist China, Russia, Venezuela, Hamas, via the Muslim Brotherhood, and Iran. And I didn’t even include what extremely destructive economic and social actions he has taken domestically, such as immediately piling trillions of debt on the citizens of the United States, via Obamacare, financial reform act, his antagonistic posture with States regarding oil and gas exploration and development, the invasion of illegal immigration of Mexicans, and traditional American religious view on homosexuality.

Given that we have viewed this presentation with stunned amazement to the fact that this is actually happening and are now looking forward to the end of this grueling 4 yearlong series, do we look forward to a possible recasting of a similar plot this time with someone with possible dual allegiances only centimeters from the presidential seat? Are we not a nation of laws? And if we the people choose to allow exceptions at the highest levels of our government to the most fundamental tenants of our laws, are we not placing ourselves and posterity on a slippery slope toward tyranny and anarchy? The choice is ours to whether or not do an unforgivable act, to settle for a rerun.

Obama has no need to respect law

The current occupant of the White House seems to have a serious issue with dealing with right and wrong – particularly when it comes to abiding to the laws of the United States regarding illegal immigrants.  Many of us have heard of his aunt who has been in the country for years illegally. As evident by his silence and inaction he sees nothing wrong with it.  Ever since claiming the seat as head of the United States’ Executive Branch Mr. Obama has done everything to further  weaken and outright subvert the Constitution and federal laws pertaining to immigration to favor Mexican nationals who are in the U.S illegally that was started by G.W Bush; only with unprecedented vigor. 

On June 15th with just the swipe of his pen he created law granting millions of young Mexican/Latino nationals who are in the country illegally virtual amnesty by amending the Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agency [I.C.E] by unilaterally, without any vote of the Congress, removing the enforcement element of the agency regarding young illegals.  ICE will no longer look to deport young illegals between the ages of 15 and 30 years of age who have been in the country illegally for as little as 5 years without committing a serious crime, outside of being in the country illegally.

While many of us may get emotionally lost in the haze of not punishing the young for the possible sins of their parents for coming and staying in the country illegally, we should not lose sight of the real issue of the moral integrity of those entrusted to make our nation’s laws and those who are to enforce them.  Is it right under any circumstances for the President of the United States, or any legislature, to ignore established law for political expediency?  Do the American people or U.S citizenry no long require their elected official to be of the highest ethical and moral character, to be able to tell right and wrong?

In previous generations it was said that two wrongs don’t make right.  Though one could argue whether it is right or wrong to punish the child of a parent who does something illegal.  But, the very word illegal states that something has been done against the law.  There is established law already on the books.  The Federal Immigration and Nationality Act [FINA] Section 8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)(iv)(b)(iii), definitively states, “Any person who . . . encourages or induces an alien to . . . reside . . . knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that such . . . residence is . . . in violation of law, shall be punished as provided . . . for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs . . . fined under title 18 . . . imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.” Under Section 274A(a)(1)(A) of FINA,“A person (including a group of persons, business, organization, or local government) commits a federal felony when she or he  assists an alien s/he should reasonably know is illegally in the U.S. or who lacks employment authorization, by transporting, sheltering, or assisting him or her to obtain employment, or encourages that alien to remain in the U.S. by referring him or her to an employer or by acting as employer or agent for an employer in any way, or knowingly assists illegal aliens due to personal convictions.”  Should not someone be punished; if not the children of the lawbreaker, then the actual lawbreaker-the parent, or whomever brought him into the country, housed him, and give them aid and comfort?  Does the law matter anymore really?  In fact the Obama edict does state the illegal immigrant youth has to be a child of an illegal immigrant, between the ages of 15 and 30 and at least 5 years presence, illegally, within the U.S.  So therefore, the youth come have crossed the border at the age of 17 or 25 to become eligible for Obama’s amnesty.  Is this right or just?  What are the consequences to be on a national economy that’s already suffering from high unemployment and unprecedented federal deficit?  I can tell you that it won’t be good.

The actions of Executive Branch creating de facto law and circumventing the constitutional law-making authority of the Congress for no reason other than to garner political favor from a segment of the population should make us all pause with great concern.   The famous French classical liberal theorist, political economist of the 1800’s Frederic Bastiat said once, “No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree.”  If the Executive Branch can do this just on the whim of what it perceives just and right could it not create laws to release the nation’s natural resources to make us energy independent, cut corporate and personal taxes to make the nation the investment destination of the world and economic powerhouse, or make government schools graduates proficient in reading, writing, the sciences, and civics /America history to be in the to five academically worldwide again?  Or could it too create laws to lock-up, or kill,  Americans for just looking wrong or saying something politically unpopular, transfer American wealth and infrastructure to foreign lands and hands, or maybe increase taxes and regulations on the citizens and corporations to make us insolvent, irregardless of the people’s opinion?  Think about that. What laws are to be respected by those who are in charge of executing and enforcing them?  Should each branch of the government start acting as though it is not answerable to the other? The Constitution was created by the Founders to restrain the powers of the branches of the federal government through “check and balances”, but if the final checker of power the people of America and the United States are unable themselves to differentiate between what is right and wrong they cannot demand that from their elected representatives.

Why is the Establishment Media so disinterested in Obama’s past?

Though the Establishment Media seems to be all to eager and willing to dive head on into the past of the Republican Candidates such as, Herman Cain’s over 15 year old conduct toward a woman or two, what possible ethical charge that was made against Newt Gingrich he was Speaker of the U.S House of Representatives in the 1990’s, or even what likely Republican Nominee Mick Romney did when he was a young teen, they are mum and seem grossly disinterested and unenthused when it comes to asking comparatively piercing questions of the man who has been the most unvetted and least publicly known individual to be president of the United States and seeks another four year term-Mr. Barack Obama.

Here are just a few taboo questions never to be asked of Obama:

  • During his radio interview in Chicago in 2001 you stated that the U.S Constitution is a “document of negative laws”. Do you still fill that way?
  • During that same interview, you stated, “that the Supreme Court missed the opportunity to greatly restructure the country socially”.  Is that your opinion today?  What do you think that the Court misses today?
  • On the eve of your election in 2010 us said at rally that you were going to “fundamentally change the United States of America.”  What exactly did you mean? What is that you see is fundamentally wrong with this nation?
  • During the debate over “Cap and Trade” you stated in a interview that under your proposal “energy cost in America would necessarily increase.”  With your actions regarding energy involving virtually eliminating American oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and other government controlled areas, the imposition of restrictive regulations on the coal industry, at a time that it has been widely reported that this nation has generations worth of natural gas, oil, and coal, do you truly favor high energy cost as a way to push Americans towards “alternative” energy choices, such as solar and wind?  If so, do you truly look for this nation to stay energy competitive while other nations such as Communist China, Brazil and Russia are rushing to develop oil and natural gas sources all around the world?
  • In your book, “The Dreams of My Father”, you stated that while as a young man you were drawn to communist and Marxist ideology and persuasions.  Has that position change?  And if it has, when did it and how so?
  • You had two fathers, one from Kenya and the other from Indonesia.  Both of them had anti-western philosophies.  Coupled with the fact that you never actually step foot on the American mainland till you enter college, how has their beliefs influence your view of America and the west?
  • Many view your economic posture as Keynesian, in that you see massive government and high government spending as good for the nation even in times of unprecedented economic depression.  Can you name a country or time that such a economic philosophy has been prosperous for a nation?
  • Is it true that you declared yourself as a foreigner when applying to Occidental College?
  • How could spend 20+ yrs in Rev. Wright’s church and visit his home on a regular basis and yet honestly claim that you weren’t aware of his extreme views regarding America and race?
  • What is your relationship with Bill Ayers, the man who once sought the destruction of America and whose home you kicked off your presidential campaign?

It is not frivolous to ask such questions of a man who is now President of the United States and who seeks four more years unrestrained by having to seek the blessing of the voters for another term thereafter.  Nor more than it is to ask similar questions of those who seek the such a high position for the first time.  It is most criminal a dereliction of duty of the Media, and the American people therefore, not to.  The real question is why is the Media doing its best not to ask these such crucial questions.

Obamanation Is Setting The Stage For Another Orchestrated Election

As I witness this year’s presidential election process I can’t help getting the feeling that I have seen this pattern regarding Mr. Obama before.  And I do fear greatly for the future of this nation.  Obama is the political version of Moses as unknown forces part the political Red Sea to allow him to reach his objectives unscathed.  The extraordinary lack of critical examination and investigation of this man either by the so-called opposition party, the Republican Party, or by what are supposed to be the people’s gatekeepers, the Establishment Media is only seconded by the lack of demand of it from the American people.

But this theater performance has been played out with Obama before.  From the start of his political career when he was elected to the Illinois Legislature the first time virtually by the elimination of his Democratic opposition due to supposedly not achieving the required number of petition signatures.  That left him running against two very light-weight opponents,   David Whitehead, the Harold Washington Party candidate, 61-year- homebuilder, real estate broker and salesman who had lost 3 previous election, and Rosette Caldwell Peyton, the Republican Party candidate, 67-year-old first-time candidate who was a teacher at Kozminski Community Academy during the lowest voter turnout in history.  He was then re-elected running again unopposed in his party and facing another newcomer Republican opponent, Yesse Ben Yehudah, 50-year-old founder and executive director of F.O.R.U.M (Fulfilling Our Responsibilities Unto Mankind).

He was re-elected for a 3rd time, this time unopposed in both his party or from the Republican Party.  He did have a hiccup when he lost his 2000 Democratic U.S House primary battle against four-term incumbent U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush.  Lighting did strike yet again for Obama when he defeated seven other minor Democrats and then defeated not Jack Ryan who won the Republican primary, due to the fact that he had to unexpectedly withdraw from the race under some suspicious circumstances, but former Diplomat Alan Keyes who was chosen by the Illinois Republican State Central Committee at the very last-minute to become the U.S Senator from Illinois.   And then without completing one term in the U.S Senate he most ambitiously targeted to become the President of the United States.  Now doesn’t every congressman and senator want to do that after only being in their seat for a year?  Being a literal unknown to the American people, he defeated the greatly favored and powerful Hillary Clinton in the Democratic Primary.  He then faced moderate Republican Arizona Senator John McCain, a man who though caused another moderate former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney to inexplicably quit early during the primary, did not have the support of the majority of his party nor was he truly engaged to attack Obama’s weaknesses – his severe lack of any experience in Congress or being executive, never work in the private sector, his time at Harvard and Occidental where in his book “the Dreams of My Father”  he found comfort with Marxist ideology and he expressly refers to “Frank” Marshall Davis, a devoted communist, who was his childhood mentor, to win.  Not to mention that Mr. Obama was the first truly African- American presidential candidate to reach the General Election process in the age of hyper race guilt and political correctness, and the liberal Establishment Media made attacking him even more problematic.  So McCain lost – Big!

To put Mr. Obama’s communist relationship issue into perspective, if you were to do a web search for President Ronald Reagan + Communism you get about 9 million results.  But if you search for Barack Obama + Communism you would get over 23 million results. The stark difference in the two is that Reagan results have to do with him defeating Communism, Obama’s is about him being a communist.  It is not as though some American people are most interested in this man who seats in the most powerful position in the world.  It is just that seemingly the elite of the media and major politicial parties are working overtime to make him and his past the most under-reported issue in history.  To this point, only Alan Keyes has dared to openly call Mr. Obama on his Marxist card head to head when he referred to him as “hard-core academic Marxist” during his run against him for the Ill. Senate seat.  I don’t believe that any person with such blatant Communist/Marxist affiliations could ever gotten through their party’s vetting, let a lone the media’s scrutiny, as recent as the 1980’s when the words socialist and communist were still four letter words to many Americans.  But yet, here we are in 2012 faced with actually re-electing such a man.  I believe that you would be hard pressed to name a highly popular entertainer or athlete whose background the majority of Americans knows or that has been reported on less the man who sits as the President of the United States.  Think about that.

Even after three plus years of the worst economic downturn that this nation has ever experienced, with over half of the able-bodied workforce unemployed, under-employed, and unemployable, due to inadequate skills, over half of  Americans receiving some sort of government assistance for the first time in history, the piling on of more debt in his first two years than all of the previous Presidents back to Washington combined,with no end in sight, on his eagerness to add even more,  the drastic weakening of our international position – economically and militarily -, and the majority of Americans believing that the country is going the wrong direction, not one member in the entire Democratic Party is running against him in this presidential primary.  Leaving him once again unvetted and free from the bright lights of scrutiny of a Primary Election process. Even as flawed as President Jimmy Carter was going into his re-election he had Ted Kennedy to challenge him from the Democratic Party.   Obama will once again face another moderate Republican opponent, probably former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney who as of yet has displayed the fired to excite the party’s base, or another opponent without balls or the directive to truly challenge Mr. Obama not just on his atrocious record as President, both domestic and foreign, but his Communist/Marxist ideology of the past and whether or not he still subscribes to them today.

It is as though the Establishment Media and elites of both major political parties have made a pact with the Devil to ascend the first Communist to the seat of the Presidency of the United States and stop at no cost to conceal as much of his true identity and actions from the majority of the American people as possible and clear the path needed for him to drive the final stake into heart of America and complete the transformation the greatest nation of economic freedom and individual liberties into a nation of a nanny socialist state with a crushing debt to be born to generations far to come.  Should Obama get re-elected no one can say it is due to he being unknown and without a record to evaluate, as during his first presidential election, but due to the greatest political rigging and subterfuge in American political history.

Questions Still Unanswered About September 11, 2001

With so much emotional fervor surrounding this date ten years later there are still some serious questions still unanswered, such as:

  • Are we to believe that anyone who’s barely trained to fly a Cessna can fly a commercial jetliner doing sophisticated aerial maneuvers into skyscrapers?
  • Who aimed the cameras up at the Towers just as they were hit?
  • Why NORAD and none of the other air defense measures followed standard procedures?
  • Why was there no response from local Air Force bases?
  • Who was held responsible for allowing the worse attack on American soil?
  • Are we to believe the jet fuel from the top of the skyscrapers, that have industrial reinforced steel throughout, brought the Towers and at least 2 other buildings, unconnected, straight down to the bottom?
  • Unlike pictures of the remains of the recent Russian Airliner that crashed, and other plane crashes, you can see clear reminisce of a plane; why is there no such evidence of a plane at the Pentagon or in the fields in Pennsylvania?
  • How did cell phones work from over 20,000 ft. on the airplanes when ground towers don’t reach to the height?
  • How and why was Atty. Gen. Ashcroft, and others, warned not to fly on that day?
  • If all of the supposed hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, why wasn’t Saudi Arabia targeted in response by the U.S?
  • What was, and is, the relationship between the Bin Laden family and the Bush’s?
  • Why aren’t the close circuit videos surrounding the Pentagon still not available to the public?
  • What happened to the “black boxes” from the airliners?
  • How were the names and photos of the supposed hijackers so readily available soon after the events?
  • Was the extension of a pipelines across Afghanistan the real reason for the invasion and occupation?
  • and more…….

I do believe that for all of the Americans who have given so much in blood, honor, and liberties due to this tragic event, deserve real honest answers.