Will CNN “flunk” the Latinos’ National Citizenship Test?
Will CNN “flunk” the Latinos’ National Citizenship Test?
Here in the Sonoran Desert, we, the Native Americans, African-Americans and Chicanos, have a considerable and well-developed skill set for the “smell test” that passes for politics among the Republican aspirants for either Elective or Appointive Office. Consequently, “citizenship” is easily bandied about by the folks who can be found among the “last refuge of scoundrels” while those of us and who have worn our nation’s uniform, have a well-honed eyeball for this trenchant hypocrisy. Therefore, the Latinos’ National Citizenship Test was established to flush out these scoundrels and shine the proverbial illumination onto their well-worn and useless camouflage, given that none are white knights and their value to our public discourse contains little if any value whatsoever. As such, our Choice is either for Ostracism or Marginalization and we have chosen Marginalization.
Beyond the ‘feature’ that was “Boycott Arizona” of two years ago, my home state, Arizona is now going to get much greater exposure, both nationally and internationally, given that CNN will be hosting a Republican presidential debate in Phoenix and which is scheduled on the first day of December. Because Arizona’s is the focal point for Apostasy, Immigration and Citizenship, it’s incumbent that we all understand and assess whether CNN will “flunk” this presumptive Test on Citizenship? Therefore, today’s definition of Citizenship must include a simplified three-part discussion as to whether the Rule of Law will be applied correctly or not and will determine our Shame or our Honor, and where we intentionally re-affirm Honor in which our Honor is achieved, acknowledged and reciprocated.
First and foremost is the factual history of a citizenship born in New Mexico, and who eventually became a religious cleric and self-designated his name to be Anwar al-Awlaki and which, taken together, led to his assassination via a decision taken by our national security apparatus and perhaps to include the Oval Office. And this assassination has been justified on “security grounds” and yet, nowhere can it be found in the public domain that the “authority” to render this decision has been in keeping with our Rule of Law. Take, for example, the SCOTUS has defaulted, given its political peccadilloes of the day, in its interpretation of Congress regarding the authority to declare certain acts as constructively renouncing citizenship. In 1958, it said that Congress could. And in 1967, it said that Congress couldn’t. However, in 1980, the SCOTUS said that assent had to be proved for citizenship to be revoked. Moreover, Congress has defined a self-renunciation of citizenship and where the equivalent is deemed as voting in a foreign nation’s election system. Conversely, there is no equivalent for revocation of citizenship, excepting in war time and relative to sedition, and where a military court or a civilian court is the only source for this revocation. And that’s where we stand today, provided we discount a ‘secret’ Panel of Experts and for whom recommended to the Oval Office that al-Awlaki could be assassinated and therefore bypassing the “prerogative” of Congress. To wit and in this instance, this application of the Rule of Law as annunciated by SCOTUS in 1980 was not applied and subsequently, we experienced the Construct for a “criminal enterprise” and where even RICO can be applied onto the decision-makers, since Congress will not institute any hearing relative to “high crimes and misdemeanors” and in order to ‘recapture’ America’s well-defined sovereignty as well as our Dignity and Honor that is the premise of our citizenship. Furthermore, all political rationales for the “destruction” of citizenship is prohibited within the Rule of Law and as such, this constant and consistent behavior inculcates that a citizen be required to be indicted, apprehended and tried in the appropriate legal jurisdiction. And to clarify further, the Authority to Use Military Force (AUMF) did not politically perpetuate or legally exempt the Executive Branch in the “destruction” of citizenship via the use of military force. But the Executive Branch will defend itself with their legally prescribed medical “mota” and say otherwise. [i.e., translated as “marijuana” or “bush” as in George W. Bush]
Second and unfortunately, Arizona has become the nation’s focal point relative on immigration and in keeping with Arizona’s SB 1070, and which is the “state’s rights” approach for defining the difference of a “civil violation” versus a “criminal violation” and further, the utilization of “probable cause” versus a “reasonable cause” is that when this logic for state’s rights is applied, will lead to racial profiling, as well as prohibiting certain business transactions, at a minimum, and leading to the permanent loss of Freedom and Opportunity. And yet, waiting off-stage at Arizona’s State Legislature, is legislation already crafted and in final form, but the political timing must be determined to be appropriate and when this occurs, this legislation will be delivered into the legislative hopper. Long story short, this legislation will establish a “paramilitary force” and “managed” by the Governor’s Office and where the sole purpose and intent is to seek out Brown People and where this affective skin pigmentation is the premise for the presumptive identification for any anticipated lawbreaking. Therefore, the Rule of Law is expected to cavalierly dismiss or even out rightly reject a ‘first class’ citizenship while establishing a new status quo for a “second class’ citizenship attributable to Brown People. Consequently, where the congressional process will not accomplish, the state’s rights rubric, is intended to circumvent any application for constitutionality.
And the third “imperative” of the Latinos’ National Citizenship Test consists of our “littlest citizens.” These are children born here in the United States and to the designated Undocumented Immigrant parents, and whence repatriated to the parents’ nation of origin, by our immigrant enforcement systemic, these citizens are “lost” to us as a nation. And in our cavalier dismissal of these citizens, our elected and appointed officials are unable to tell us with any certainty as to whether these children are a) living in a hovel, b) accessing decent medical care, c) receiving three meals-a-day, d) enjoying an educational opportunity, whether this experience being measured either qualitatively or quantitatively, or both, and e) reimbursing the taxpayers of these ‘nations of origin’ for the costs incurred by our “littlest citizens.” And historically speaking, our foreign aid does not address our continued re-enforcement for perpetuating our citizenship. Yet, our collective leadership from across both sides of the political aisle, cannot bring themselves to acknowledge our “littlest citizens” out of shame and subsequently, do not expect the Latino community, writ large, to raise this “blue flag” for refusing to genuflect to the status quo that is our national embarrassment when it comes to Citizenship. As such, the mantra for “If you don’t like America, get the hell out” is only for the amateurs with a vociferous and obnoxious voice that we see and view as a self-demeaning sound of fury.
In closing, CNN will be selecting the Moderator(s) as well as selecting the questions to be utilized, and therefore, it’s incumbent that CNN present the questions in the context and content of Citizenship. And if not, the anticipated discussion of economic theory will prevail and obviously, Honor, Justice and the Rule of Law, will be effectively dismissed, and much to our continued chagrin. Conversely, we, the Latinos, will make our decision as to whether our hard-earned advertising/consumer dollars, as well as our eyeballs will accrue to the benefit of Spanish-language television and the ever-present noticias y novellas. Summarily, we are all going to find for ourselves, if CNN is willing and capable of elevating their existing skill set for practicing Journalism that meets our much higher standard for equating Citizenship and Civic Engagement to Honor, Justice, and the Rule of Law.