Citizenship for Sale

by: the Common Constituionalist

Remember back in the good old days, during the George W. Bush era? You recall don’t you? Back when we only had a big government progressive Republican in the White House? Yeah, Obama kingthose were the days. Also remember how often he was called a fascist, a dictator or King? Ah,  the days of innocence and ignorance. Thankfully, we now see what a real aspiring dictator looks like, instead of just some wanna-be.

Now recall what some far left liberals, like that big ball of hate Alec Baldwin said. If Bush wins reelection, he would pack up and leave the country. Sadly for the rest of us, he didn’t.

If I recall correctly, it was either Limbaugh or Hannity that even offered him a first-class, one-way plane ticket to anywhere he wished to go. Now Mr. Baldwin may have balked at the offer because it was difficult and could be quite expensive to become a citizen of another nation.

Well evidently, at least the citizenship portion of the relocation has been solved and one does not have to be a gazillionare to accomplish it. The tiny island nations of Dominica, St. Kitts and Nevis in the Eastern Caribbean have developed a relatively reasonable price for citizenship.

Other countries offer citizenship by-ins. They are called “investor visas”. Countries that offer them include Great Britain, Ausst-kitts-nevistria, Canada and even the United States.

The U.S. program allows visas for a $1 million investment in a U.S. business employing at least 10 people or $500,000 in designated economically depressed areas. The investor can apply for permanent residence in two years and seek citizenship after five more. Demand in Canada is so great that the country stopped accepting new applications in July of 2012.

Unlike these developed countries, the citizenship process for these Caribbean islands is much faster, less expensive and relatively simple. A foreigner can qualify for citizenship in St. Kitts with a $250,000 donation to a fund for retired sugar workers or with a minimum real estate investment of $400,000. The minimum contribution in Dominica is only $100,000. The whole process, including background chinvestor-visaecks, can take as little as 90 days in St. Kitts. And there’s no need to ever live on the islands, or even visit.

The programs have become quite popular to those with means in the Middle East and North Africa as things become more tumultuous and unpredictable. In that region, some are looking at this as a way to more easily escape if regional conflicts deteriorate further.

It’s such a booming business that a Dubai-based company is building a 4 square mile community in St. Kitts where investors can buy property and citizenship at the same time. In its first phase, some 375 shareholders will get citizenship by investing $passport-for-sale400,000 each in the project, which is expected to include a 200-room hotel and a mega-yacht marina. Others will get passports for buying one of 50 condominium units.

“The more they fight over there (the Middle East), the more political problems there are, the more applications we get here,” said Victor Doche, managing director of another company that offers for condominium projects where approved buyers are granted citizenship in St. Kitts, which is less than twice the size of Washington DC.

American author Neil Strauss, who resides in Los Angeles, wrote of securing citizenship in St. Kitts in his 2009 book on survivalists preparedness, “Emergency: This Book Will Save Your Life.”

Strauss said, “The same way we have a backup drive on her computer in case the hard drive explodes, I just felt like I wanted a backup citizenship in case the same thing happened to my country.” Like most economic citizens of St. Kitts, he rents out his island property.

Antigua and Barbuda is launching its own citizenship program. The island of Grenada has hinted they may revive their program, which was suspended after September 11, 2001.

So fear not conservatives. You may stop asking yourselves, “Where will we go when the country eventually sinks into the socialist abyss that it is fast tracking toward?

Just print out a map of the Caribbean, pin it up on the wall, grab a dart, close your eyes and throw.

 

Attribution: David McFadden, Associated Press

Immigration Transformation

by: the Common Constitutionalist (special thanks to Mark Levin)

We are a nation of Immigrants. Of course, so is almost every other nation. So what?

That is the line and argument for a “Comprehensive Immigration” policy, is it not. This throwaway line comes not only from the left, but the right.

They say that even those who founded are nation were immigrants. Yours and my forefathers were immigrants. True enough. Again, so what?

One has to make a giant leap to arrive at the conclusion that there is therefore a moral equivalent between legal and illegal immigration. But the leap is made nonetheless.

Mark Levin reminds us to always go back and look at our founding documents for guidance. The answer is usually there. And of course it is. The Declaration of Independence states, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”

Can anyone tell me who amongst the legally governed, other than our Dictator in chief, consented to defacto blanket amnesty for 1 million or so illegals by Obama’s decreed “deferred action”?

As an aside, bully for Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona for standing up to this tyrant.

The Declaration also gives a handy little solution to this dilemma. “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” That’s the crux of this upcoming election. We can take a big step toward the abolition of the current governing body this November.

The progressives, both left and right, tell us that today’s illegal immigrants are the moral equivalent to all other immigrants that came before. As Levin says, the illegal is portrayed as somehow being more virtuous than even American citizens. They are people of faith, hard working and strong in family values. Traits not shared with us citizens, apparently.

So how did we get here? What was the genesis of this upside down thinking?

It was 1965, during the Lyndon Johnson administration. Like his progressive predecessors, Johnson’s “Great Society” would fundamentally transform this nation, forever altering immigration policy in this country.

Johnson signed the Hart-Celler act in 1965. It was to be the beginning of the “new” immigration structure. Johnson claimed in his signing speech that, “When the earliest settlers poured into a wild continent there was no one to ask them where they came from. The only question was: Were they sturdy enough to make the journey, were they strong enough to clear the land, were they enduring enough to make a home for freedom, and were they brave enough to die for liberty if it became necessary to do so?” He neglected to add that we were not yet a nation with an elected government charged with protecting and defending our borders. But hey, what do I know.

He added, “This bill says simply that from this day forth those wishing to immigrate to America shall be admitted on the basis of their skills and their close relationship to those already here.”

Our old buddy the late senator Ted Kennedy added on the floor of the senate, that, “Our cities will not be flooded with a million immigrants annually.” He added, “The entire mix of this country will not be upset.”

He, of course, was either wrong or intentionally lying. I vote for the latter.

The 1965 act abolished national quotas in favor of what we call chain-migration. This gave preference to relatives of residents (family unification) over applicants with special skills.  Facts are facts and the facts are that since 1965, immigrants to the United States are poorer, less educated & less skilled, and those are the legal immigrants.

This liberalization of our immigration policy gave rise to an increase of illegal immigration.

Cesar Estrada Chavez was an American farm worker, labor leader, and civil rights activist who, with Dolores Huerta, co-founded the National Farm Workers Association, which later became the United Farm Workers. Believe me, he was no conservative.

In the sixties Chavez strongly opposed illegal immigration saying that it undermined his ability to unionize farm workers, improve conditions and wages for the American worker. The union would even report illegals to the feds. How far we’ve come in a short 47 years, eh?

In 1969, Chavez along with Walter Mondale (yes, that Walter Mondale) organized a march on the southern border protesting farmers’ use of illegals. Imagine that happening today. That’s progress, I guess.

Then there is the misuse of the 14th amendment to the Constitution, they always cite. It states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside…” The Statists (as Levin calls them) always neglect the, “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” part of the amendment. The amendments purpose was to grant citizenship to the emancipated slaves, who were born here and owed sole allegiance to this country. The American Indians did not have the same right, due to their allegiance to tribal jurisdiction. They were excluded by the 14th amendment.

One cannot be conferred citizenship by their mere presence. Diplomats and other foreign visitors to this country who happen to give birth here are not granted automatic citizenship. Why? Because the parents aren’t subject to this country’s jurisdiction and owe no allegiance to the U.S. They, of course, are subject to the jurisdiction of their home country.

The illegal or even the legal immigration problem we have today can be summed up this way. Statists in the sixties are really no different than the ones that rule us today. Whether it is through healthcare or as this article documents, immigration, it’s always the same, the unending want to fundamental transform America.  They will bend and pervert the Constitution and rule of law however they need to, to accomplish it.

Attribution: Mark Levin

Let My People Vote!

by: the Common Costitutionalist

The Huffington Post writes that Attorney General Eric Holder told members of the Congressional Black Caucus and the Conference of National Black Churches last Wednesday that the right to vote was threatened across the country.

“The reality is that in jurisdictions across the country, both overt and subtle forms of discrimination remain all too common and have not yet been relegated to the pages of history,” Holder told the audience, made up of black church and political leaders, during a faith leaders summit in Washington.

Foul! Foul! Separation of Church & State! Sorry; couldn’t resist.

“If a state passes a new voting law and meets its burden of showing that the law is not discriminatory, we will follow the law and will approve that change,” Holder said. (comment: which would be never) “When a jurisdiction fails to meet its burden in proving that a voting change will not have a racially discriminatory effect, we will object.” (comment: which would be always)

Once again, as it always is with this administration, it’s all about race.

HuffPo continues by stating that Voter ID laws, which require voters to present official government identification before they cast a ballot in an elections, have become a hot-button issue this election cycle.

Ooh; official government identification.What is this, Nazi Germany; “Papers Please”. You mean like a driver’s license or non-drivers state I.D.? That official identification?

HuufPo claims that critics of the voter I.D. laws say that the groups most likely to be harmed by the rules — blacks, Latinos, the poor, and college students — are groups that are key parts of the Democratic voting bloc. Name one college student that doesn’t have a photo I.D.?

A study of “Voter Disenfranchisement” was done by the ultra-liberal Brennan Center for Justice. What a shocker, I know. I bet they found all but white males are “disenfranchised”.

Their “study” found the restrictions fall into five major categories: (1) requirements that voters provide specific kinds of government-issued photo ID to vote or have their votes counted; (2) requirements to provide documentary proof of citizenship in order to register and vote; (3) new restrictions on voter registration; (4) cutbacks on the availability of early and absentee voting; and (5) actions permanently depriving previously incarcerated citizens of their right to vote.

So, first you have to prove who you are by showing a photo I.D. Tragic! Get your butt down to the DMV and get an I.D. It costs less than a couple of packs of smokes these days. Heck, some states are starting to give them out. All you have to do is get there.

Second: You have to actually prove that you are a citizen to vote? Those bastards!

Does this sound as asinine to you as it does me?

Third: The new restrictions are that states are finally figuring out the “Same day Registration” nonsense. It makes it harder to cheat when they have time to check. States are also wising up to the phony “ACORN” type registration drives, where dead people,  Mickey Mouse & Abe Lincoln are mysteriously registered to vote.

Fourth: Early voting is a complete crock. It’s not as if election day just sneaks up you. You should kinda know when it comes around. Do voters have no responsibility in this country?

Fifth: They describe it as “incarcerated citizens”. Call them what they are, felons, and almost all can regain their right to vote after they’ve done their time.

The bottom line is, these so-called advocates for the “disenfranchised” just want the right to continue to cheat if they so choose and we are racists if we stand in their way. If any citizen is “disenfranchised”, it is because they choose to be.

I’ve compiled a list of things, off the top of my head, for which one would need a photo I.D. I’m sure there are many more but here are some that come to mind.

To get a job, many employers require to see a photo I.D. You need an I.D. to test drive and purchase a car, to open a bank account, to close a bank account, to buy a house, to rent an apartment, to apply for any loan, to buy booze, to buy cigarettes, to receive welfare, unemployment or food stamps.

 I think that covers folks in all three of the classes in which we like to lump our citizens; Upper class (the evil rich), the sacred middle class and the disenfranchised lower class (the poor).

 As long as one never has to do, or purchase, any of those things, I guess they wouldn’t need an I.D.

Voting should be treated as a privilege in this country. I’ve spoken to more than just a few immigrants from communist countries about this subject. They tell me it’s absurd that so many in this country take the vote for granted. They’re right!