Trump's Inauguration: Patriotism without Prejudice?

I hope you enjoy this guest article by our dear friend, Robin Keorner. ~ KrisAnne

Robin Koerner was a British citizen but is now a proud legal citizen of Washington, Unites States of America. He was educated at Cambridge University, from which he holds three degrees. Having taken graduate degrees in physics and philosophy, he never expected to find himself at the cutting edge of American politics.  Learn more about Robin and his mission at http://robinkoerner.com/

 

A New Citizen and a New President

For me, the inauguration of President Trump is particularly poignant, as the outgoing President was the one under whom I became a citizen,
while the new President was elected in the first election in which I was also able to participate as a new American.

Born British, I moved to the USA when I was 29. In 2009, I became a permanent resident, and last year, after a 12 year odyssey through a Kafkaesque immigration system, I became a citizen.

In my heart and soul, however, I was American a long time ago – a fact of which I became conscious in two experiential flashes. The first made me realize that I was no longer “just” a Brit. After the second, I knew I was American, even though I didn’t yet have the passport to prove it.

Becoming American

The first occurred in Phoenix. I was in the city with a friend when we heard of a liberty-oriented political conference that was being held in the Sheraton hotel there. Being political types, we quietly went down there, and let ourselves into the back of the hall. Scanning what at that time was for me a rather unusual environment, I noticed a participant who was prominently sporting a side-arm.

I was only five years out of Britain at that time, and the instinctive reaction of most Brits, in whose country even the police don’t carry guns, to such a thing would typically be some combination of horror, perplexity and even derision. At the very least, the sense of cultural dissonance would be instinctive. But for me, somewhat surprisingly, that was not the case. Even though I had never shot a handgun, nor had had any interest in firearms, not only did I feel at ease with that man’s carrying his weapon in an indoor environment in which he was not threatened, but – much more than that – I understood why he was doing it, and that the reasons were, of course, decidedly American. The idea that rights un-asserted are lost over time and that a lethal means of self-defense is a right are alien to British culture, so the fact that I didn’t feel in that moment that the carrier of that gun was of a different species — let alone a different culture — was enough for me to register that I my national identity was already becoming more complex, more layered.

However, the moment I knew that I was American was altogether stranger. I was at the top of a mountain in Kyrgyzstan, sitting in a room in a run-down building that had been converted to a classroom for a week. I was there with others to share some of the principles of political and economic liberty with a group young adults whose formative years had come of age in a former Soviet republic. At the time, one of my colleagues, an opera singer, was giving a class. After loosening up the extremely bright but highly skeptical students by getting them to discuss and then sing the Kyrgyz national anthem, he proceeded to sing the American anthem.

The tears started rolling down my face, and they would not stop.

Not only have I never cried for the British anthem: I cannot even imagine any Englishman doing so. Yet, there I was, with nowhere to hide in the front of this rectangular room, crying for the anthem of a country to which technically I did not yet fully belong — but with which spiritually I resonated at the deepest level.

I was taken aback by my deeply emotional response but perhaps should not have been. After all, there were many occasions in the preceding five years of a brutal legal immigration process when it would have been emotionally, financially and practically much easier just to have just given up, but on those occasions I always returned to the simple fact that I already felt at home, and after all, one’s feelings are the language of one’s soul.
In any case, on that day, on a mountaintop in Kyrgyzstan, I knew that, while I was British, I was also an American.

A few months later, I was back in Phoenix, and went to support an Italian friend as he became an American citizen. I imagined myself going through the same ceremony four years later with my own kith and kin in the audience.

I smiled through the whole thing, sharing fellow-feeling with all of the new citizens — not just as Americans, but as people who had overcome similar stresses and uncertainties to achieve their goal of becoming once and for all American.

Yet, one part of the ceremony gave me serious pause. The oath taken by new citizens includes the words,

I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen.

Imagining my mother in the audience, my stomach knotted at how upset she’d be if I renounced where I had come from and the land with which she shall always identify.

I was sufficiently perturbed by the implications of that renunciation that I started googling when I returned home to see what it really meant.

Becoming A Bipatriot

I have no reservation in my commitment to the USA. In fact, I have already done more to “support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America” than many born-and-bred Americans, and I love doing it, because I believe deeply in the founding principles of the United States and the American project. I would take up arms for the USA and I would fight as hard to defend my fellow Americans as I would for my fellow Brits.

Indeed, to me, my British-to-American narrative is a rather special one in that it follows America’s historical narrative, and to me, much of what is best about the American character and foundation is an evolution, perhaps even a higher expression, of British values and political traditions. (In his poem, “England and America in 1782“, Tennyson explains it better than I can.)

Indeed, my pride in those British gifts underpins my pride in the Americans who fought the revolution and wrote the Constitution to save and improve on those same gifts as they were being trampled in “the motherland”.

Britain formed me. America is what I have chosen to do with how I am formed. Renouncing one for the other would be like renouncing being a son to become a husband — or like renouncing my first child when my second is born. Doing either would be absurd and false. As with two sons, so with two countries: I love both, delight in the success of both, am pained by the falling short of both, and get to celebrate the fact that love is not diluted when it is doubled.

For those reasons and others, I was glad to learn that my renunciation of Britain in the USA carries no weight in Britain, and that even in American law, I can be both American and British.

Thank God for that. I am impatient to embrace America fully, and commit to my new countrymen, but if I really had to choose between an American identity and a British one, I’d be overwhelmed by the unreality of that choice.

So I am a bipatriot, if I might coin a term, and it is a wonderful thing to be.

Just as people who can think in different languages benefit from a certain intellectual and emotional abundance, so do we bipatriots. We have an enriched identity, a more colorful sense of self. We get to see issues — especially political, philosophical and cultural — in very different ways, but in each way clearly. Not only is that exciting; it hopefully gives us something different to contribute to our adoptive country.

Happily, another British-born Americaphile inadvertently helped me understand why bipatriotism makes sense: Daniel Hannan, a British Member of the European Parliament has said,

Patriotism is what makes people behave unselfishly. It’s the basis of our sense of obligation to those around us. A patriot doesn’t belittle other countries: he cheers their sense of national pride, and values their freedom.

Indeed. And I am blessed, like the parent of two children, to have twice the pride

But the skeptical reader might still ask whom would I support in a world-cup soccer final between the US and the UK (choosing soccer only because it’s one of the few team sports that are seriously played by both nations), as the answer to that question would no doubt cut to my deepest allegiance. Upon introspection, I am delighted to find that in that game, my team never loses.

Prejudice Against Patriotism Is as Damaging as Patriotism with Prejudice

I didn’t vote for the President who was sworn in today, and I was not expecting to be much taken by his speech – but I was struck by one line in particular:

When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.

That made me recall Hannan, above, and it is the kind of patriotism of which my bipatriotism is made. It is also the patriotism of individual liberty on which our nation – my new home – was founded.

I hope it truly is the patriotism of our new President, and of those who have supported him. Our future depends heavily on it.

But just as importantly, I hope that those who have justified their opposition to our new President as a way of expressing, so they say, their lack of prejudice, will extend that lack of prejudice to those who are inspired by country, its history, and its founding ideals, and so call themselves patriots. Our future depends heavily on that too.

 

Fighting Trickle Down Tyranny

2 stories that you will not want to believe are true…but they are.  Will we stand in defense of Liberty with these people, or will we surely hang separate?

Alderman Scott Levin

630-530-3000

https://www.elmhurst.org

Mark O’Connell, President

Kellogg Community College

450 North Avenue

Battle Creek, Mi 49017

269-965-3931

Alternatively you can listen to “Fighting Trickle Down Tyranny” by KrisAnne Hall on YouTube

The Inauguration of Trump

While the nation is transfixed on the upcoming inauguration of Trump it is important that we do not forget that cabinet appointee’s and the President are meant to be our humble servants  dedicated to the protection and preservation of the people’s liberty. It is time that we begin to demand this kind of service and this kind of adherence to the principles of the Constitution.

Guilt, Malice, or Folly?

Today’s #Point2Ponder:

I just want to put politicians on notice. They seem to use words that don’t mean what they think they mean. So, let’s clarify:

Just because you are a Republican, doesn’t make you a conservative.
Just because you are a conservative, doesn’t make you a Constitutionalist.
And just because you went to law school, have read the Constitution, or have taken an oath with the word Constitution in it, doesn’t mean you understand it enough to defend it.

Too many of our elected employees make promises impossible for them to keep. They do not understand what they promise and they are too focused on self and pride to admit it. They would rather cling to what they know, regardless of how destructive it might be.

But here is the problem… these politicians have learned that if they give a rip-roaring speech, quote a founder or two, perhaps they are a member of a minority group, former military, or even all of the above, the PEOPLE will ignore their ignorance and tolerate their destruction.

Isn’t it about time we require something more?

Let me enlighten… If they voted for:

NDAA (since 2012)
Federal Building and Ground Improvement Act
Smith-Mundt Modernization Act
Food Safety Modernization Act

Patriot Act
Farm Bill… (to name a few)

If they support or continue to fund the ATF, EPA, HHS, DOE, BLM, Dept Ed, US participation in the UN, TPP, TPA, Iran Deal, etc…

If they have and continue to vote for a “continuing resolution” instead of demanding a Constitutional spending budget

***Know who actually controls the federal budget: https://goo.gl/0oLWLq***

If they want to have a “common sense debate on gun control”
If they enforce gun permits

If they are for any form of “Amnesty”
If they will not disarm, defund, dissolve all the unconstitutional Executive Agencies
If they supported funding Egypt or arming Syrian Rebels
If they STILL fund Obamacare or talk about a “repeal & replace”
And the list goes on and on…

James Otis, Jr. said in 1761:

“I have learned to despise those whose guilt, malice, or folly has made them my foes.”

Do you believe there are people in government voting for these unconstitutional bills and destroying our Liberty because they are simply ignorant and don’t know any better?  Perhaps they believe that they must “compromise” these principles to have a properly functioning government?  Maybe there are some who are simply wicked and evil and want to destroy our Liberty?  James Otis is reminding us that at the end of the day, their motivation is irrelevant because the result is exactly the same; they are destroying Liberty and the Constitution.   That should make them your enemy.

It doesn’t matter if they give a good speech.  It doesn’t matter if they attend your church or your Rotary Club.  It doesn’t matter if they are members of your political party.  We must remember that through their actions they have classified themselves.  If we want our children to have Liberty we need to stop making excuses for these people.  We need to stop acting like friends and treat them like foes.  They are NOT defending the Constitution and they MUST be STOPPED.

How The Government Goes Wild

Today’s #Point2Ponder:

This is how the federal government gets out of control: http://goo.gl/rnO1iZ

1. Congress creates an Act that expands federal power beyond the limits of the Constitution:

For example: The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. This Act limited the area of land a farmer could devote to the production of wheat. The purpose was to manipulate the economy by “stabilizing” the price of wheat by controlling the amount produced.

2. Mr. Filburn grows wheat on his own property for his own private consumption. The federal government claims violation of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938.

3. The Supreme Court then fabricates a justification using previous case law and expansive logic to break Constitutional boundaries. (Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942))

a. The Supreme Court decided that since the Commerce Clause states that the federal government has authority to “regulate commerce…among the several States” that equates to manipulating prices of commerce.

b. The Supreme Court then decides that since the Commerce Clause gives the federal government authority to “regulate commerce…among the several States” they also have the authority to manipulate pricing of that commerce.

c. The Supreme Court then claims that since the federal government has the “authority” to regulate and manipulate “commerce among the States” that means they have the authority to regulate commerce WITHIN the States.
d. The Supreme Court then “reasons” that since the federal government has the authority to regulate commerce and manipulate prices of goods within the State, the federal government also has the authority to tell private land owners what they can and cannot do on their own land.

4. For decades the Supreme Court uses their own opinions, outside the Constitution, to create greater expansions of federal power, creating an unlimited authority of the Supreme Court over all aspects of State, personal, and private property. (Not just wheat but anything we make, grow, or consume)

5. Government schools from K12-Law School teach the unquestionable authority of the Supreme Court (an authority created by the Supreme Court of their own volition see Marbury v Madison).

6. States no longer exercise exclusively “powers reserved to the States, respectively” but defer to the federal government for their own authority (contrary to the Constitution). Therefore States are no longer sovereign, but now operate as colonies in the federal kingdom.

7. After decades of errant education, unlimited and unfettered authority in the Supreme Court create by the Supreme Court, we now are ruled by an Oligarchy of 9 Kings and Queens, elected by no one.

a. “Educated” people call Supreme Court Opinions “rulings.”
b. “Educated” people claim that Supreme Court Opinions are the “law of the land.”

And that is how free people become ruled by Kings & Queens.http://goo.gl/rnO1iZ

What the GOP Promises for 2017

Now that the GOP has a majority in both houses and a Republican in the White House will they finally follow through on their past promise for a more Constitutional government? It is time for feet to be held to the heat of the fire. No more excuses GOP.

Alternatively you can listen to “GOP Promises 2017” by KrisAnne Hall on YouTube

Yes- I Am An Attorney

Today’s #Point2Ponder:

Yes I am an attorney.  But, do not quote to me “the law” to justify your position.  If your justification for your position is “the supreme Court says so,” then you have no position.

Just because it is the law doesn’t make it lawful.  Just because it is the law, doesn’t make it reasonable or logical.  Just because it is the law doesn’t make it moral.  Just because it is the law doesn’t make it just.  Just because it is law doesn’t make it Constitutional.  Just because the court issues an opinion doesn’t make it legal, moral, or Constitutional.

“But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions.  And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters.  The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose.
The law has been used to destroy its own objective:  It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect.  The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others.

It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder.  And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.”  Frederic Bastiat, The Law

The problem? When you stand for what is lawful, moral, reasonable, and just, those who obtain power from the unjust laws will call you names; “you are a purist, you are an Utopian, you are a subversive.”  They make morality treason and justice unlawful and they make you the enemy.  They end up declaring the unlawful, immoral, unjust, and unreasonable legal to support their power and control.

After all, we are talking about a legal system that claims that corporations are persons in the eyes of the law, but unborn babies are not.  It was the supreme Court, not the Constitution, that declared that men are property in the Dred Scott case.  It was the supreme Court that opined that it was Constitutional for the federal government to arrest and indefinitely detain Japanese Americans (yes, American citizens) without any due process, just because we needed to feel “safe.”

I will consider truth, reason, morality, and the Constitution before I ever consider supporting the law or the courts.  That is not anarchy.  That is not lawlessness.  That is being a reasoned, rational, and moral human being that recognizes that the law was created to secure my Rights, not oppress them.  Anyone arguing the opposite has classified themselves as either a tyrant or a slave.

Nullifying Slavery

In 1850 the Federal Government passed the “Federal Fugitive Slave Act” requiring states to return slaves who escaped to their owners. However, some states believing this law to be unconstitutional exercised their right to nullify this law. Maybe Kansas should take a page out of the American history book and step up and support Cox and Kettler. The precedent has been established. Time to follow the wisdom of our history.

Alternatively you can listen to “Nullifying Slavery” by KrisAnne Hall on YouTube

KrisAnne Hall Speaks Out in Support of Cox, Kettler

 

https://youtu.be/3oWo9hpS0dk

Is the 2nd Amendment important do you and do you believe states are sovereign? If you answered yes, then watch this video and take a stand. Your voice needs to be
heard today. Not tomorrow, not next week, but today.

 

The 10th Amendment Says

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

In 2013 Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback signed into law House Bill 2199, also known as ‘The Second Amendment Protection Act’ which states – that any federal gun control laws that may be passed are not valid in the state of Kansas under the new law. The bill also prevents any federal agent from enforcing federal gun control laws within the state, as well as allowing prosecution of federal officers who try to enforce such laws within the state’s borders.

Additionally, the statute purportedly exempts from federal gun-control laws the firearms, accessories and ammunition manufactured commercially or privately in Kansas and kept within the state’s borders. The Kansas act made it a felony for a federal official to enforce certain directives of Congress regarding firearms.

But………………Citizens Get Thrown Under the Bus

Prosecutors for the Federal Government have charged Shane Cox, owner of Tough Guys gun store in Chanute, of illegally making and marketing firearms, specifically sound suppressors. Prosecutors as well have accused Jeremy Kettler, a disabled U.S. Army veteran, as a Tough Guys client who acquired a “silencer” from Cox and filmed a live-fire test of the gear. Everything these men did were supposed to be protected by the Kansas 2nd Amendment Protection Act, but Gov. Brownback has not come to their defense and neither has their Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt.

Jeremy Kettler as you’ll see at the end of this video is a young man, with a young family and young children. He has never been charged or convicted with a crime and everything he did, he did based on the belief that his behavior was completely lawful, based on Kansas law and with the expectation that if need be the state of Kansas would step in on his behalf to defend his rights.

Well the Federal Government in a brutal and sadistic act of shameless authority and disregard for the 2nd Amendment, Kansas law and this young man’s family, wants to put him in jail.

Please watch this video from start to finish and then make the choice to stand by this young man and his family by contacting the office of the Governor and the Attorney general. Their contact information is below

Contact Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt
(785) 296-2215
1-888-428-8436

Email: https://ag.ks.gov/about-the-office/contact-us/email-us

Conact Kansas Governor Sam Brownback
(785) 296-3232 –

Email: https://governor.kansas.gov/serving-kansans/constituent-services/legislation-and-policy-issues/

Contact The Prosecutor Hathaway, Richard L.

U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Kansas

444 S.E. QuincySuite 290Topeka, KS 66683

Phones: (785) 295-2850
Fax: (785) 295-2853
Contact the Judge, Chief Judge J. Thomas Marten
Phone: 316-315-4300
Fax: 316-315-4301
 Contact the Kansas State Legislators

PS: Attached below as well is Zip format is an excel spread sheet that enumerates the name, email and phone number for each and every one of the Kansas state representatives and Kansas state senators. Please download it and get in touch with each and every one of them. Let them know that they should stand by this young man and his family.

Kansas State Legislature Spread Sheet Zip File – Right click and select “Save Link As”