Wise, Good and Honest

Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; (D&C 98:10)

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Ted Cruz is a Natural Born Citizen

The particular case where a US citizen gives birth to their child in another country has not been ruled on by the courts. To my logic and that I discern from the founders, a US citizen giving birth to their child elsewhere is a naturalized US citizen.

The Illinois Board of Elections has ruled that he is a natural born citizen. This author thinks, "Congress and not the Supreme Court should be the final legal judge of Cruz's eligibility."

"Yes, Ted Cruz is a ‘natural born citizen’"

The Supreme Court has long recognized that two particularly useful sources in understanding constitutional terms are British common law and enactments of the First Congress. Both confirm that the original meaning of the phrase “natural born Citizen” includes persons born abroad who are citizens from birth based on the citizenship of a parent. 
As to the British practice, laws in force in the 1700s recognized that children born outside of the British Empire to subjects of the Crown were subjects themselves and explicitly used “natural born” to encompass such children.
No doubt informed by this longstanding tradition, just three years after the drafting of the Constitution, the First Congress established that children born abroad to U.S. citizens were U.S. citizens at birth, and explicitly recognized that such children were “natural born Citizens.” The Naturalization Act of 1790 provided that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States . . . .” ('On the Meaning of “Natural Born Citizen”'. Mar 11, 2015. Neal Katyal & Paul Clement. Harvard Law Review)

"Re-examining the Constitution's Presidential Eligibility Clause"

Sunday, November 22, 2015

On Not Being an Object Lesson

I went on a 20 mile hike with our by scout troop last Saturday. I have become an object lesson of what not to do to prevent and care for blistering feet.

Here are some things that I thought of afterward that would have prevented and minimized the blisters I got.

- Ensure that my shoes were snugly tied to minimize friction on my feet.
- Wear nylons and then sock over the nylons
- Bring extra pair(s) of socks to keep my feet dry.
- Use medical tape to wrap the toes I that have gotten blisters in the past.

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Rand Paul vs. Marco Rubio on wasteful government spending

("Rand Paul vs. Marco Rubio on wasteful government spending: Fox Business GOP Debate", 10 Nov 2015, YouTube.com)

PAUL: Neil, there's a point I'd like to make here about the tax credits.

We have to decide what is conservative and what isn't conservative. Is it fiscally conservative to have a trillion-dollar expenditure? We're not talking about giving people back their tax money. He's talking about giving people money they didn't pay. It's a welfare transfer payment.

So here's what we have. Is it conservative to have $1 trillion in transfer payments -- a new welfare program that's a refundable tax credit? Add that to Marco's plan for $1 trillion in new military spending, and you get something that looks, to me, not very conservative. Thank you.

RUBIO: So let me begin with this. I actually believe -- first of all, this is their money. They do pay. It is refundable, not just against the taxes they pay to the government, but also the -- on their federal income tax, it's refundable against the payroll tax.

Everyone pays payroll tax. This is their money. This is not our money. And here's what I don't understand -- if you invest that money in a piece of equipment, if you invest that money in a business, you get to write it off your taxes.

But if you invest it in your children, in the future of America and strengthening your family, we're not going to recognize that in our tax code? The family is the most important institution in society. And, yes...

PAUL: Nevertheless, it's not very conservative, Marco.

RUBIO: ... I do want to rebuild the American military.

PAUL: How is it conservative?

RUBIO: I know that Rand is a committed isolationist. I'm not. I believe the world is a stronger and a better place, when the United States is the strongest military power in the world.

PAUL: Yeah, but, Marco! Marco! How is it conservative, how is it conservative to add a trillion-dollar expenditure for the federal government that you're not paying for?

RUBIO: Because... PAUL: How is it conservative?

RUBIO: ...are you talking about the military, Rand?

PAUL How is it conservative to add a trillion dollars in military expenditures? You can not be a conservative if you're going to keep promoting new programs that you're not going to pay for.

RUBIO: We can't even have an economy if we're not safe. There are radical jihadist in the Middle East beheading people and crucifying Christians. A radical Shia cleric in Iran trying to get a nuclear weapon, the Chinese taking over the South China Sea...

RUBIO: ...Yes, I believe the world is a safer -- no, no, I don't believe, I know that the world is a safer place when America is the strongest military power in the world.

PAUL: No. I don't think we're any safer -- I do not think we are any safer from bankruptcy court. As we go further, and further into debt, we become less, and less safe. This is the most important thing we're going to talk about tonight. Can you be a conservative, and be liberal on military spending? Can you be for unlimited military spending, and say, Oh, I'm going to make the country safe? No, we need a safe country, but, you know, we spend more on our military than the next ten countries combined?

I want a strong national defense, but I don't want us to be bankrupt.

("The fourth Republican debate transcript, annotated", 10 Nov 2015, WashintonPost.com)

Closing Statement

PAUL: We're the richest, freest, most humanitarian nation in the history of mankind. But we also borrow a million dollars a minute. And the question I have for all Americans is, think about it, can you be a fiscal conservative if you don't conserve all of the money? If you're a profligate spender, you spend money in an unlimited fashion for the military, is that a conservative notion? We have to be conservative with all spending, domestic spending and welfare spending. I'm the only fiscal conservative on the stage.

From "How Rubio gave the most liberal answer of the debate", Jack Hunter, 11 Nov 2015, rare.us)

Paul agrees with Rubio that America needs to be the strongest military power in the world, but… 
With a $18 trillion national debt, how are we going to pay for it? 
Again, Rubio’s answer was the same as any liberal Democrat’s. 
When Republicans ask Democrats how they’re going to pay for Obamacare, Democrats accuse Republicans of not caring if people get sick
When Republicans ask Democrats how they’re going to pay for education, Democrats accuse Republicans of not caring about education
When Republicans ask Democrats how they’re going to keep paying for a broken Medicare system, Democrats accuse Republicans of wanting to push grandma off a cliff
When Republicans ask Democrats about how they’re going to pay for all of the big government programs Democrats are constantly promising, Democrats accuse Republicans of not caring about the poor, children, women, minorities and just about any other group you can imagine. 
Anytime Republicans want to cut spending anywhere, Democrats say Republicans don’t care. 
When Rand Paul asked Marco Rubio how he was going to pay for an additional trillion dollars in military spending, Rubio’s answer was to say Paul did not care about keeping the country safe. 
At no point in the exchange, did Paul say any such thing. Paul cares about keeping the country safe, but also cares how we pay for it. 
In fact, Paul said, “I want a strong national defense but I don’t want us to be bankrupt.” 
Rubio never answered how we would pay for a new trillion in military expenditures. He just kept repeating that Rand Paul doesn’t care about national security. 
Rubio tried to fear monger and scare people. That’s what liberals do. Conservatives ask how we’re going to pay for things. 
So congratulations, Marco Rubio, on giving the most liberal answer of the debate.

Monday, November 9, 2015

Do You Want To Be More Or Less Involved In Foreign Wars?

Rand Paul: Clinton & Rubio Are Like "The Same Person," Neoconservative Internationalists

45% of Repuplicans said they wanted to be more involved in foreign war
41% of Republicans said they wanted to be less involved

Where do you stand?

Rand Paul talking to President Obama:
When you ran for office, you said that no President can unilaterally go to war without the approval of Congress, unless there was an imminent danger. And he said, yeah there was, to Bengazi. I was horrified by the answer. You think that an imminent threat to a foreign country is enough for you to act unilaterally?

This is a big deal, our founding fathers never intended for a President to act unilaterally.