can honestly say I no longer live in the country where I was born. I was born in the United States of America. Today, I live in the United States of America. The street names look the same as they did when I was a child. And so does the mighty river called the Mississippi that chops the eastern third of the nation from rest of America from a rocky creek in Itasca, Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico like a knife separating the social progressive liberal union States in the East from Middle America where old-fashioned values have not yet been corrupted by Machiavellian, greedy opportunists who sold their souls and sold out their country to those who are determined to destroy the island of liberty to make sure that those trying to escape tyranny had no place to flee. When there is no hope, it is easier to shackle humanity to the yoke of servitude. When there are no inalienable, God-given rights, then all rights are owned by the masters of the universe who will then possess the power to dole them out to the obedient human chattel and deny them to those deemed not loyal to the New World Order.The America I remember as a boy was one in which the Bill of Rights still worked because the New Deal-era social progressives who caused the Stock Market crash of 1929 that triggered a decade-long depression were forced back into their closets at the end of World War II. They stayed off the radar screen until an unknown peanut farmer-slash-governor of Georgia, Jimmy Carter, sold his soul to oil magnate and global financier David Rockefeller for 30 pieces of silver and ran for the job as President of the United States in 1976. Carter was the perfect Manchurian Candidate. 
He projected the simulacrum of being an honest, God-fearing Baptist Bible-thumper—which was good for votes in the South. And, it was good for votes in the farm States. Most of all, Carter's appearance as a Christian conservative was good for holding the swing votes that Christian Republican candidates usually pull from left of center Democratic candidates—which Carter was, only he didn't have enough of a track record in Georgia for the nation to see at the time. Evidence exists that Carter was actually the first presidential wanabee who left political footprints to verify that he actually applied for the job of President of the United States—to the world's most powerful political puppeteer. In July, 1972, Rockefeller formed what would become the Trilateral Commission. An exploratory meeting of the Trilateralists was held at Rockefeller's very private Pocantico Hills estate in New York's Hudson Valley. Two hundred-fifty industrialists and bankers, most with interlocking Bilderberger memberships, attended the first meeting.
Sometime between July, 1972 and the spring of 1973, Carter, the Governor of Georgia, joined the Trilateral Commission. Just as Bill Clinton's "interview" for the job of President of the United States with Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands was staged by Washington-insider Vernon Jordan in June, 1991 at the 37th Annual Bilderberger Conference in Baden-Wertenberg, Trilateralist Zbigniew Brzezinski arranged Carter's interview with Rockefeller. Since the money barons have the ability to manipulate the voting process and pull any rabbit they want from the ballot boxes, all Rockefeller had to do was get Carter known well enough to create the illusion that he was popular enough with the common people to win a national election when, in fact, no one actually knew who he was, let alone what he was. The voters thought he was a Christian peanut farmer from Georgia. He was the third Manchurian Candidate to reside in the White House. The fourth one, Barack Husein Obama, not only would not be an Article II natural born citizen, it appears now that, by accident of birth and circumstance, he might not even be a citizen of the United States. My world, as a very young boy, evolved in the aftermath of World War II. For a brief moment in time, between August, 1945 and June, 1950, there was a calming peace in the world as Americans mourned their losses and prayed to Almighty God for a world that learned from the consequences of war. In 1945, America was the savior of the free world. It would not become the villain of World War Ii for another two decades.
I remember pulling my brother's Radio-Flyer wagon down the street on August 14, 1945 when the sirens announcing the end of World War II went off. The wagon was my brother's birthday present from our parents. He let me pull his wagon down to the corner and back. World War II had just ended. I didn't even know the world had been at war although I remember older kids talking about some guy name "Tojo" (Hideki Tojo was a general in the Imperial Japanese Army before becoming the 40th Prime Minister of Japan). He authorized the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor. When the war ended, Prime Minister Hideki Tojo attempted to commit suicide, but failed. He recovered from his wound and was tried for war crimes on Nov. 12, 1948. He was executed by hanging on Dec. 23, 1948.
About the only thing I remember about Aug. 14 that year was that it was my brother's birthday. I remember wondering if they were going to blow the sirens on my birthday, too. There was still a national innocence in America in 1945 that had not yet been corrupted by crooked, greedy politicians and the even more corrupt and greedy princes of industry and barons of banking and business. The United States, to most of the human chattel in the rest of the world, was a mythical paradise beyond their comprehension or grasp. It was land of plenty where people did not fear their government.
In the 48-star America, people still trusted their elected officials. And they trusted the industrialists who provided the blue chip, blue collar jobs. They trusted their neighborhood banker because behemoth, transnational banks were outlawed in the aftermath of the Great Depression and the face of the bankers they knew were neighbors. And, most of all, they trusted their local merchants—even the big, national chains like Sears & Roebuck, J.C. Penney, Montgomery Ward, F.W. Woolworth's and of course, S.S. Kresges in the days before the birth of the discount store which spawned companies like K-Mart, Woolco, Target, T.J. Maxx, Marshalls, Hecks, Family Dollar, Ben Franklin and, of course, the late bloomer from Bentonville, Arkansas, Wal-Mart. Small town America not only shopped there, they worked there.
America, in 1945 was still two years away from Everson v Board of Education (330 USC 1, 18) and three years from McCollum v Board of Education (3233 USC 203). In Everson, the Supreme Court, politicized with New Deal socialists, ruled that the Constitution constructed a "wall of separation" between the Church and State. It did. But, the wall the Founding Fathers actually constructed was designed to prevent the government from interfering with the rights of the people to worship their God in whatever manner they chose—without any interference from the State.
The verbiage in the First Amendment is not ambiguous. Nor is it complicated enough for even a stupid lawyer to trip over—unless they want to. The First Amendment begins: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." What ultimately abrogated the most basic right man possesses—his right to pay homage to his God—were the post-WWII, post-United Nations globalists who needed to erase the Bill of Rights in order to equalize the liberty granted to Americans under the Bill of Rights with the conditional rights granted the citizens of all of the other nations under UN Declaration on Human Rights and under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which has now been artfully woven into the Bill of Rights by social progressive federal judges. Article 18 §3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights says: "Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others."
The problem here is twofold. First, while they are doing so, the Constitution cannot be amended through juryrigging by federal magistrates who do not have the constitutional right to legislate. The job of the federal judge is to be an unbiased third party who's sole responsibility is to make sure the laws "on-the-books" are being enforced precisely how Congress intended them to be enforced when they were enacted—and that the laws do not violate the Bill of Rights. The federal courts do not have the authority to change the meaning of the Bill of Rights to dovetail with social progressive edicts emanating from the Congress—or the liberal penchant of some federal magistrate.
Second, the 1st Amendment cannot be amended or repealed since it prohibits any lawmaking body from constructing any law which abridges the right of the People to worship God as they see fit. Thus, no entity within the government hierarchy of the United States has the authority to create a law that infringes on the right of the people to worship God as they see fit—nor do they who disagree with the religious beliefs of those whose rights they wish to abrogate.
What it appears to boil down to is this: the social progressives who are attempting to institute, by fiat, a new utopian world order feel it is unfair that the people of one nation—the United States—should enjoy rights the rest of the world does not possess.
That point was stressed by George Soros-funded British antigun advocate Rebecca Peters to then National Rifle Association Vice President Wayne LaPierre when she argued that she "...favors global standards" on gun ownership. No one should be allowed to own them. "No one," of course, excluded nations the UN could not bully, like terrorist nations, China, North Korea or the rapidly reemerging Soviet Union. 
As Peters knocked the right of the American people to own firearms by implying that today, instead of redeeming pop bottles, Americans in need of quick cash between paydays buy guns from legal gun dealers and sell them to street gangs and traffickers in guns to Mexican drug cartels. Peters told LaPierre that her organization, the International Action Network of Small Arms, was working for a total ban on gun ownership worldwide. LaPierre said, "If you can't bring yourself to respect the Bill of Rights, at least keep your hands off of it." Why is it so important to the Utopian left to disarms every citizen in the the United States? It's not to protect them. It's to subdue them. The princes of industry and the barons of banking who masterminded the scheme to create a world government controlled by them knew they could not succeed until every citizen in every nation in the world was disarmed.
Quoting George Orwell's Animal Farm, Peters replied: "...all animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others. Mr. LaPierre," she noted, "would say that Americans are created even more equal. No. Americans are people just like everyone else on Earth. They should abide by the same rules as everyone else...American citizens should not be exempt from the same rules that apply to the rest of the world," adding that the Bill of Rights should be repealed because, she concluded, "...Americans should have rights not possessed by everyone else in the world." I mention Peters' only remark because it explains the motive for the US federal judiciary climbing into bed with the international judiciary emanating out of the Hague. The globalists behind the New World Order need to "equalize" civil rights around the world—by diluting the rights of the American people whom they feel have more "rights" than society can afford to allocate.
The radical changes in the America I knew as a boy came subtlety, one eraser mark at a time over decades as America's Rip Van Winkles slept away their freedom, still trusting the men and women who took bribes from the princes of industry and the barons of banking and business to win election, and repaid their wealthy donors by giving them the keys to Congress. The abrogations of liberty in the United States, which occurred over decades a microscopic inch-at-a-time, were suddenly noticed when inherent rights suddenly became conditional rights, and the Bill of Rights evolved into the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
As a boy in a public school classroom in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, I recited the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. With hand-over-heart, I said, "I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
My country. My flag. My God. Every morning, when every public school student in the nation recited those words, they were pledging allegiance to their country. And the pledge breathed patriotism into the hearts of yesterday's school children. Today, our school systems are filled to overflowing with illegal aliens. The pledge of allegiance, recited like a prayer to the nation, is no longer a daily ritual in America's school systems. Patriotism is now construed by the taskmasters of Utopia as a form of radicalism in a nation that is rapidly erasing its national borders by forcing the people of various nations—who do not want any part of Utopia—to partake in the metamorphosis of globalism.
When I was a boy living on the US-Canadian border, residents of Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan and Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario traveled back and forth between the Twin Cities—in different countries, effortlessly. While there were different exchange rates, Canadians spent their dollars in the United States and Americans spent US dollars in Canada. But, for all the transnational camaraderie, the Canadians remained distinctly Canadian and US citizens remained distinctly American. To the peoples of both nations, the dividing line—the national border that separated them served not to keep the citizens of either nation from entering the other.
The US-Canadian border works pretty much the way the borders between the parliamentarian nations of western Europe work—to check who is entering and leaving, and why they are doing so—and to make sure they are not carrying "tariff goods" from one country to the other with paying the required fees. The border between the United States and Mexico is not quite that cordial. The reason it is not is because the nation below us is not that cordial.
In 1952, the Democratically-controlled 82nd Congress, concerned about an extreme influx of illegal aliens crossing America's Southern border and infiltrating US communities in the Southwest, enacted the Federal Immigration & Nationality Act (also known as the McCarran-Walter Act). Public Law 82-414 restricted immigration into the United States while it ultimately provided natural born citizenship rights to those born on American Samoa, Guam, Swains Island after Dec. 24, 1952. To get the bill enacted over a Presidential veto, the Democratic sponsors had to add provisions that would gain the support they needed to enact it. The Democrats got a caveat—new Democrat voters in those WWII US possessions. So did Republicans. They got language added to the bill that barred several well-known communists (such as authors Graham Greene, Dennis Brutus, Farley Mowat, and Kobe Abe; Nobel laureates Pablo Neruda, Carlos Fuentes and Pierre Trudeau (who would become the Prime Minister of Canada) from entering the United States.
In addition to making caretakers of illegal aliens financially liable for any crimes committed by illegals they shelter, Public law 82-414 allowed the US government to deport naturalized citizens or immigrant residents who were engaged in subversive activities (which, today, would include every member of the Congressional Black Caucus, most of whom are "fellow travelers" in the global communist movement that is, once again, gaining political momentum in the United States through billionaire George Soros).
Even though President Harry S. Truman vetoed the McCarran-Walter Act, it was enacted over his veto. Neither his Administration nor the Administrations of any of his successors did anything to enforce it. When you find "scholarly" references to McCarran-Walter, they generally refer to the bill as "...a national embarrassment because it mandated that the government deport 'foreign visitors'." 
One media wordsmith referred to McCarran-Walter as "...a relic of McCarthyism," as though to imply that Sen. Joe McCarthy [R-WI] authored the bill. The bill was authored by Sen. Pat McCarran [D-NV] and Congressman Francis Walter [D-PA]. It was enacted because the citizens of the United States wanted it enacted. Sadly, their government nullified the law by choosing not to enforce it. (McCarthy was likely the author of the provision in the bill that denied entry visas to well-known communists or fellow travelers.) Under the Federal Immigration & Nationality Act of 1952 (Section 8 USC 1324[a](1)(A)[iv][b](iii)) persons, groups of persons, businesses, corporations, advocacy groups, or any social engineer that helps an illegal alien has committed a Section 274 federal felony any time they assist an illegal alien. (Just between you and me, let's drop the phony politically-correct rhetoric that refers to illegals as "undocumented immigrants." Granted, they are undocumented. But, they are not immigrants. They are invaders who do not belong here. They are criminals who violated US immigration law. And, they are thieves attempting to steal what does not belong to them—defacto citizenship.) Anyone who assists an illegal alien by employing them, providing them with shelter, transporting them from one place to another, or even assisting them in gaining employment, or even by encouraging an illegal to remain in this country, is guilty of a crime.
This crime is punishable by a fine of $10 thousand per infraction, or imprisonment in a federal penitentiary for not more than five (5) years—or both. In the case of politicians, the Constitution requires, first, that they be impeached and removed from office, then charged with the crime they committed. Back in 1952, when I was just a runt kid who had just discovered girls, politics was the last thing in my mind. But I sense that, back then, politicians were not immune from the laws they wrote. Today they are.
Under the Federal Immigration & Nationality Act of 1952 persons caught assisting illegals in their quest to remain in the United States, would also forfeit any assets owned by them to assist those here illegally, such as having the automobile they used to transport the illegal seized, losing their home if it was used as a sanctuary for one or more illegals. If the sheltered illegal commits a crime, those sheltering him or her can be held liable for the financial losses suffered during those crimes by those sheltered illegals. The Federal Immigration & Nationality Act of 1952 provides for treble damages to victims of those types of crimes—from the individuals, groups of individuals, advocacy groups, business owners, corporations or, sanctuary cities themselves if they open the door of hospitality to illegals aliens for whatever reason.
The biggest problem with the Federal Immigration & Nationality Act of 1952 was that it properly identified the nature of the problem—why illegals were flocking across the border in the middle of the night—and addressed the problem by correctly punishing those who profit from the illegals at the expense of everyone else. The bill was never enforced because the princes of industry and the barons of banking and business who need the cheap labor without the expensive fringe benefits that US employers have provided to their employees since the New Deal Era—to keep the government from mandating them—no longer wish to provide generational benefits to either new hires or to the career employees who built their employer's family-owned corporations into behemoth transnational entities that no longer feel an obligation to recognize the contributions of the baby boomers who now survive on pensions the princes of industry no longer wish to provide.
The world you and I grew up in has changed—radically. And, as we sleep away our freedom, it continues to change—always for the worst—with each passing year. It is changing because we—the People—have become fat, apathetic and downright lazy. The merchant princes are providing us with all of the distractions they need to steal our liberty by erasing the Bill of Rights as we watch the Super Bowl, the World Series or the NBA playoffs. We have one honest TV News channel and over 2,000 sports channels. What's wrong with that picture?
We elect to public office men and woman who are easily corrupted, and who should be in our jails, not our legislative bodies. We let those "legislators" enact laws which allow them to accept bribes and call them campaign contributions. Then we leave it up to them not to repay the "bribes" with legislative quid pro quos (i.e., earmarks) that cost the taxpayers billions of dollars which their children, grandchildren and great, great grandchildren will be forced to repay as Congressmen and Senators become millionaires providing the princes of industry and the barons of banking and business with the quid pro quos they have demanded to create their utopian, seamless society—a global nation without borders.
Today, as we awaken prematurely from our "long winter's nap," we are discovering that while we slept, Barack Hussein Obama gave us the Christmas present that no American wanted— the not quite so subtle erasing of our borders with both Mexico and Canada under a Hillary Clinton instigated State Department protocol entitled "United States-Mexico Partnership: A New Border Vision," that will challenge the traditional views held by most Americans of static national borders. With eyes wide open, we are now about to see the naked reality spawned by Bill Clinton's North American Free Trade Agreement which contained the framework of what is now identified as the Bush-43 Administration's Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. It was this agreement that has forced open the borders between Mexico and the United States. This broad grant of access applies not only to transcontinental truckers traveling up and down Interstate 35, the NAFTA superhighway (more commonly known as the Texas Transcorridor that parallels I-35 from the Mexican border below Larado, Texas on US 59 to the Oklahoma border via I-35), but also for illegal aliens entering the country in their quest for jobs—your jobs and mine.
About the same time the media in the United States reported on Obama's new "border vision" with Mexico and Canada, which is unencumbered by such things as physical borders, the Canadian CTV News said they had obtained a draft copy of another protocol between the United States and Canada. The document was entitled "Beyond the Border: A Shared Vision for Perimeter Security and Competitiveness" authored by a newly created joint US-Canadian advocacy group called "Beyond the Border Working Group." BBWG is just one of about 30 working groups that tumbled from the pages of the Council on Foreign Relation's 2005 Report, "Building A North American Community," which was the blueprint for the gradual erasing of the borders between the United States, Mexico and Canada, and the creation of a North American Commission whose job it will be to structure the new North American Union, create a North American Parliament and, of course, a North American Court on Trade and Investment which will litigate all economic issues in the Americas and erase all trade barriers between the Americas which actually was created under NAFTA on Jan. 1, 1994.
This is no longer my America. It is an illusionary fabrication created by the princes of industry, and the barons of banking and business who needed to recast America to protect their ability to profit from the human capital which has, once again, become the chattel of the rich. This is not the America I remember as a boy. And, it is not the America I want my children to inherit, nor to be forced to have to rationalize to their children how Mom and Dad's generation lost the greatest nation on Earth. We lost it because we were too busy enjoying the good life to pay attention to what the prostitutes of Pennsylvania Avenue were doing.
Doing to the Constitution of the United States. Doing to the Bill of Rights. Doing to our money—and doing with our money. Doing to the shattered remnant of the Republic. Ask any American male who won Super Bowl XLIV, and nine out of ten of them will correctly say the New Orleans Saints. And, half of them can probably still tell you their favorite Super Bowl XLIV commercial. But, I'd guess that less than 25% of them can tell you the name of the mayor of their home town, and even less who can name their US Congressman, both US Senators and/or the names of their Assemblymen or Delegates to their State legislature.
Today we are living in the social progressive's politically-correct version of America. This is no longer Norman Rockwell's America. If you are looking for that, try your local flea market. Search for old copies of the Saturday Evening Post. Or, better yet, look for old, pre-1950 history books or encyclopedias. When you find them, grab them quickly. You are about to experience an eye opener because in this instance, old is better than new. The flea market books which have been relegated to the dustbin of history actually contain a more accurate accounting of "history" than the history books and encyclopedias used by our children in America's classrooms today. The pre-revisionist textbooks and encyclopedias depict a more accurate view of America and the principles which made the United States the greatest nation on Earth. Today, the socialist academicians who write the textbooks and edit the encyclopedias have made the United States the world's villain. Think about that today when, with eyes wide open, you look at what's wrong with America.
An election for President and Commander in Chief of the Military must strive to be above reproach. Our public institutions must give the public confidence that a presidential candidate has complied with the election process that is prescribed by our Constitution and laws. It is only after a presidential candidate satisfies the rules of such a process that he/she can expect members of the public, regardless of their party affiliations, to give him/her the respect that the Office of President so much deserves.
