Despite the White House billing Tuesday night’s State of the Union address as President Obama’s last, conservative radio talk show host Glenn Beck has his doubts.
“Mark my words,” Beck said on The Glenn Beck Radio Program Tuesday morning. “Next year, he will deliver another State of the Union.”
In a tradition dating back to Ronald Reagan, outgoing presidents have deferred to the incoming Chief Executive to set the agenda for Congress, which is primarily what the address seeks to achieve . . .
“The last president to deliver an end-of-term State of the Union address was President Jimmy Carter on Jan. 16, 1981, days before President-elect Ronald Reagan was sworn into office,” TheBlaze reports. “However, it is important to note, Carter’s final address was not delivered verbally but sent to the U.S. Congress via a written report, which was the standard for all State of the Union addresses until President Woodrow Wilson in 1913.”
Beck believes that Obama will not be able to resist offering a final State of the Union before he leaves office, though it will likely be in writing like Carter’s. The talk show host argues the reason the date was moved up to January 12 this year, from its usual time window later in the month, is because Obama wants to deliver another in early January of next year, before he leaves office. (Read more from “Glenn Beck Just Made a HUGE Prediction About Obama’s ‘Final’ SOTU Speech – ‘Mark My Words…'” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:26:102016-04-11 10:53:54Glenn Beck Just Made a HUGE Prediction About Obama’s ‘Final’ SOTU Speech – ‘Mark My Words…’
Credit – Getty ImagesRepublican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz responded Tuesday night to an apparent jab President Barack Obama took at him in his final State of the Union address.
In his speech, Obama said the answer to defeating the Islamic State would not merely be “tough talk or calls to carpet bomb civilians. That may work as a TV sound bite, but it doesn’t pass muster on the world stage.”
The reference to carpet bombing appeared to be a slight jab at Cruz. The Texas senator had previously attracted attention for saying at campaign events he would “utterly destroy” the Islamic State and “carpet bomb them into oblivion” . . .
“In the speech, I think we all agree that the president essentially called you out…what was your response to that?” [“NBC Nightly News” reporter] asked.
“Well listen, I will apologize to nobody for my commitment to kill the terrorists,” Cruz replied. “And in this speech President Obama once again refused to even say the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism’ — much less demonstrate any clarity, any vision, any plan to destroy them.” (Read more from “After Obama Seemingly Takes a Jab at Him in SOTU Speech, Ted Cruz Responds — and Doesn’t Mince Words” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:24:162016-04-11 10:53:54Watch: After Obama Seemingly Takes a Jab at Him in SOTU Speech, Ted Cruz Responds — and Doesn’t Mince Words
If Nidal Hasan had not committed his heinous crime, could he have been President?
Yes, according to conventional political wisdom.
For the sake of argument, let’s make a hypothetical comparison between Nidal Hasan and Marco Rubio, who are of similar age and backgrounds in terms of Presidential eligibility.
Nidal Malik Hasan was born on September 8, 1970 in Arlington, Virginia. According to the New York Times, Hasan’s parents emigrated to the U.S. from a small town near Jerusalem, were presumed to be Jordanian citizens, became permanent U.S. residents and, before their deaths, became U.S. Citizens.
On November 5, 2009, Hasan reportedly shouted “Allahu Akbar” (or “God is Great”) and opened fire in the Soldier Readiness Center of Fort Hood, located in Killeen, Texas, killing 13 people and wounding over 30 others in the worst shooting ever to take place on an American military base.
Senator Marco Antonio Rubio (R-FL) was born on May 28, 1971 in Miami, Florida. His parents, Mario and Oriales, emigrated to the U.S. from Cuba in 1956, were both permanent U.S. residents when Senator Rubio was born and became U.S. citizens in 1975.
[Constitutional Law Expert KrisAnne Hall, Esq. discusses presidential eligibility at 18:15 below]
Senator Rubio is now a candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination.
What is the difference between Nidal Hasan and Marco Rubio in terms of Presidential eligibility according to the conventional political wisdom?
None. They are both considered “natural born citizens” and both are eligible for the Presidency.
Article II Section I Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which proscribed Presidential eligibility states:
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
What was the original public meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen” that establishes the eligibility for the office of President of the United States?
“There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a ‘natural born citizen.'”
What is then the difference between Nidal Hasan and Marco Rubio in terms of Presidential eligibility according to an originalist interpretation of the Constitution?
None. Neither are “natural born citizens” and neither are eligible for the Presidency.
To understand who is a “natural born citizen” according to the original intent of the Framers of the Constitution, one needs to refer to the republican principles expressed in Emer Vattel’s, “Law of Nations,” with which the Framers were intimately familiar.
Pundits of the conventional political wisdom often mistakenly refer to “natural born subjects” in English common law as the source of the concept of “natural born citizen.” There is a difference between English common law, from which the American colonists broke away, and the republican principles espoused in Vattel’s “Law of Nations”, that is, monarchies have subjects, republics are formed by citizens. Natural-born subjects are born within the dominions of the crown of England and subject to the king, whereas, our Constitution created a federal government which was subject to us, the citizens of the republic.
Vattel says in “Law of Nations”, Book I, Ch. XIX:
§ 212: Natural-born citizens are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.
The republican concept of “natural born citizen” is radically different from the feudal notion of “natural born subject.” Under English common law merely being born in the domains of the King made one by birth a “natural born subject”. In Vattel’s model and in our constitutional republic, citizens are “natural born” only if they are born of citizens.
In addition, having just separated from Great Britain and fearing foreign influence on the President and Commander in Chief of the American military, the future first U.S. Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, on July 25, 1787, asked the convention presiding officer George Washington to strengthen the requirements for the Presidency:
“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”
It is important to note that pundits of the conventional political wisdom make two other errors when attempting to define “natural born citizen:” (1) the “one-parent” argument for “natural born citizen” only began in 2008 to accommodate the eligibility of Barack Obama and (2) statutory law, that is, laws passed by Congress may only define the manner in which one becomes a citizen, per Article I Section VIII of the Constitution; not the concept of “natural born citizen,” which can only be changed by Constitutional Amendment.
Senator Ted Cruz, for example, claims to be a “natural born citizen” because he was a “citizen at birth” through his one-parent US citizen mother.
If the Framers of the Constitution meant the eligibility requirement to be “citizen at birth,” why didn’t they write it that way?
In a letter written to James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton had suggested that “born a citizen” be used:
“No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.”
Such phrasing was known at the time of the writing of the Constitution and it was rejected.
It appears that our corrupt political-media establishment does not wish the American people to understand to true intent of the Framers of the Constitution, when they created the eligibility requirements for President of the United States. (For more from the author of “Is the Fort Hood Shooter a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ and Eligible for Presidency?” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:23:532016-04-11 10:53:54Is the Fort Hood Shooter a ‘Natural Born Citizen’ and Eligible for Presidency?
President Obama, with an eye on cementing his legacy and countering the narrative on the Republican campaign trail, used his final State of the Union address Tuesday night to defend his economic record – and, in stark language, downplay the threat from the Islamic State.
“Over-the-top claims that this is World War III just play into their hands,” the president said, arguing that ISIS fighters “do not threaten our national existence.”
The remarks on ISIS are sure to rile Republican critics who say the president’s strategy for confronting the group is inadequate – particularly just hours after ISIS was blamed for another deadly attack, this time in Istanbul.
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, one of the leading candidates for the GOP presidential nomination, tweeted afterward that the address was “less a State of the Union and more a state of denial.”
The backdrop of the address undeniably was election-year politics, though Obama is not on the ballot. Throughout the speech, the president took several implicit jabs at the GOP candidates competing for his job, and in doing so sought to shore up his own legacy. (Read more from “Address of Defiance: Obama Downplays ISIS Threat, Defends Economic Record” HERE)
Photo Credit: National ReviewMost acts of terrorism in America are committed by white men who are “religiously motivated and politically conservative,” a psychology professor recently taught his students, adding that “9/11 is basically the only act of foreign-born terrorism that has ever happened in the United States.”
The “Introduction to Psychology” lesson was given by Dr. Ross Avilla, a lecturer at the University of California-Merced, who backed up his argument by telling his class about a white Christian man who shot up the Texas statehouse with an AK-47 – an incident which in fact never took place.
“Ninety percent [of U.S. terrorist attacks] are from these white Caucasian men,” Avilla told his class. “And by the way I am not saying white men are evil – but that is what we should be thinking about. Usually they are people who are religiously motivated and politically conservative.”
The psychology scholar couched his statements in a lesson on heuristics, defined “as a mental shortcut that allows people to solve problems and make judgments quickly.” He essentially argued many Americans wrongly believe Muslims make up the vast majority of U.S. terrorists because they have not thought long and hard on the matter.
A portion of the lecture was recorded by two students in the class who provided it to The College Fix. The lesson took place in mid-October, just a few weeks before UC Merced student Faisal Mohammad stabbed four people on the Northern California campus. (Read more from “College Students Supposedly Taught What a Real Terrorist Is… This Is Ridiculous” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:19:272016-04-11 10:53:54Watch: College Students Supposedly Taught What a Real Terrorist Is… This Is Ridiculous
Kim Davis, the Kentucky clerk who refused to issue marriage licenses for homosexuals, commented on what she considered to be President Barack Obama’s legacy just prior to the his final State of the Union speech, telling CNSNews.com, “I think he has chipped away at American Christian values piece by piece, and I hope and I pray that he garners some light at the end of this dark tunnel that we’ve been in.”
The Rowan County, Ky., clerk was briefly jailed last year following the Supreme Court ruling that legalized homosexual “marriage” for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because it went against her Christian beliefs.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) invited Davis to the State of the Union, who spoke with CNSNews.com on Capitol Hill Tuesday evening.
The invitation is “a great honor,” said Davis.
CNSNews.com asked Davis, “How does it feel representing those who believe marriage is between a man and a woman and are standing for this belief the way you have?” (Read more from “Christian Values Being Threatened by Obama’s Final Speech at State of the Union” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:18:382016-04-11 10:53:54Christian Values Being Threatened by Obama’s Final Speech at State of the Union
Dear President Obama, my prayers are with you as I write this letter today, anticipating your State of the Union address.
Sir, you recently tweeted: “If there’s even one thing we can do, if there’s just one life we can save—we’ve got an obligation to try.” Your appeal seemed to be directed at gun control. Yet, the one life chord is vibrating on a frequency that embraces not just victims of gun violence, but even reaching the innocent lives in the womb . . .
As you may know, I am a pro-life activist. I am concerned about all human lives. I write to you today because, like you and so many other Americans, I am concerned about the growing violence in America. But I am also concerned over the millions of lives lost to the violence of abortion.
Mother Teresa once said, “I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself.”
I’m writing today to appeal to your compassion for those lost to violent acts, and I ask you to consider that what our world needs is not just gun control but violence control. We need to turn to LOVE for the answer. (Read more from “Alveda King’s Open Letter to Obama: ‘Are the Babies in the Empty Chair?'” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:16:542016-04-11 10:53:55Alveda King’s Open Letter to Obama: ‘Are the Babies in the Empty Chair?’
Police fear a gang-rape phenomenon known as ‘taharrush gamea’ in the Arab world and seen in attacks on women across German cities at the New Year has now spread to Europe.
The name of the practice translates to ‘collective harassment’ and is carried out by large groups of men who sexually assault lone women, either by groping, or in some instances, raping them.
The men first surround their victim in circles. Some then sexually assault her, while others not directly involved watch or divert outsiders’ attention to what is occurring.
Sometimes the terrified victim – in a state of shock and unable to respond – is also robbed during the ordeal.
And the attack usually goes unpunished because the large number of perpetrators and chaos of the attack means authorities are unable to identify those involved. (Read more from “The Arabic Gang-Rape ‘Taharrush’ Phenomenon” HERE)
A day after a suicide bomber killed at least 10 people in a brazen attack, few ventured into Instanbul’s central tourist district.
Street vendors and shopkeepers opened for the day, but had little business.
A makeshift memorial formed at the site of the attack. People laid red roses in the shadow of the city’s world-famous Blue Mosque.
The people of Istanbul began to regroup as Turkey’s prime minister promised the nation’s resolve to fight terror remains unchanged.
“We will continue our fight against terrorism with the same resolve, and will never take a step back,’ Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said, according to Turkey’s semi-official Anadolu news agency. (Read more from “Turkey Promises to ‘Never Step Back’ From Terror Fight After Blast” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:12:002016-04-11 10:53:55Turkey Promises to ‘Never Step Back’ From Terror Fight After Blast
Rock legend David Bowie passed away at 69 on Sunday, but not before creating a music video, reflective of the death he faced.
In the song entitled Lazarus, from the Blackstar album released on his birthday last week, Bowie sings as he’s pulled from a hospital bed:
Look up here, I’m in heaven
I’ve got scars that can’t be seen
I’ve got drama, can’t be stolen
Everybody knows me now…
The story of Lazarus is synonymous with death and resurrection, based on the biblical account in John 11. Though he healed many, Jesus delayed going to see his very sick friend Lazarus of Bethany, because he had another plan in store. “This sickness is not unto death,” Christ said, “but for the glory of God, that the Son of Man may be glorified through it.”
Lazarus, in fact, died four days before Jesus arrived in Bethany. The teacher told Lazarus’ sister Martha not to be fearful, “I am the resurrection and the life. Do you believe this?” He then went to the tomb, where her brother was buried, and called out, “Lazarus, come forth!” His friend emerged from the tomb in grave clothes to the astonishment of the crowd on hand. (Read more from “Watch: The Incredibly Haunting Video David Bowie Released Just DAYS Before His Death” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2016-01-13 00:11:392016-04-11 10:53:55Watch: The Incredibly Haunting Video David Bowie Released Just DAYS Before His Death
