In defense of the constitution

  1. boudica-uslogo-left

I did not write this but took from facebook.

Sorry, I had to post this essay I wrote in answer to a writer’s op-ed about Me and you–the supporters of Trump: Two major points wrong with Mr. Ignatius’ op-ed. We are smarter than he is because we have arrived at the conclusion that what is happening to America is NOT any kind of immigration. According to the world university “old School” English Dictionary, definition or sense 2) in order for a person who enters another country as an immigrant, he or she must, “enter during a set period of time,” to be called or qualify as an immigrant. And, according to definition, or sense, 10) “An immigrant is a person who enters another country UNDER SET CONTROLS.” In case you don’t know what that means Mr. Ignatius, that means that the set controls, or US immigration laws (or set controls) must have been used or applied to these people’s entry into the US, or THEY DO NOT QUALIFY TO BE CALLED ANY KIND OF IMMIGRANT. So, what do these so called “illegal” immigrants” qualify to be called under the English Dictionary? Well, fist the word “illegal” means, or is defined, as meaning a “criminal.” This means Clinton and the Pro-Open Border Supreme Court Judges, and you, are allowing Criminal immigrants to enter the US, which according to US immigration laws, says these people can never be allowed to stay or get green cards as the US immigration laws read, or say. Second, the US Constitution is an essay written using both Persuasive, or Expository writing style, and Descriptive writing style. The authors of the Constitution used these two styles to first persuade the new independent separate colonials to accept the US Constitution, and second used the Descriptive style to both show the readers from the colonies how the Constitution worked and how to apply it when they accepted its use. And, since the US Constitution is an essay, these means the Constitution has a thesis where it says who this Constitution was written for, and who it serves, or protects. So, who does the US Constitution, and the Civil Rights, and Bill of Rights protect or cover? Well, according the Constitution’s thesis, it covers ONLY, “We the People of the United States (means legal US Citizens or legally naturalized ones two) do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Note Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Ignatius, and Supreme Court Justices there is no mention of “world Citizens, Mexico’s Citizens, or any other countries’ citizens, who have not gone through our US Immigration application laws. Finally, Mr Ignatius, this year, two professors (one a renowned law professor of the US Constitution, and the other an English Professor) used two different avenues, or approaches and came to the same conclusion, that there is NO Birth Right CITIZENSHIP clause written into the US Constitution. That means that Section 1 of the 14 Amendment is being misread or interpreted wrong on purpose by those who want to keep American’s borders open to any, and all, Criminal “illegal” trespassing invaders. By the way, these people who enter the US without permission do qualify under a word of the English dictionary. The word they fall under via their own actions, and disdain for law and order of the US Immigration laws is an “invader.” Look up the definition of the word “invader,” and you will see I am right. We stand with Mr. Trump because he is the only candidate that is calling a spade a spade, as we used to say in the “old days when America was a land of law abiding people, and had a Government that enforced American laws and used them to protect its legal, vested US Citizens. Still think we are blind, and ignore the facts and real truth, Mr. Ignatius? I think it’s you, Mrs. Clinton–who should take a lie detector test on her e-mail and Benghazi, President Obama, Paul Ryan, all of those Republican Politicians against Mr Trump, and the US Median who are blind to the truth.Ì

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Boudica BPI, government, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to In defense of the constitution

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s