<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Darrell Castle to address secure border activists</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/</link>
	<description>Covering America's third parties and independent candidates since May 2008</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 21:12:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: pdsa</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/comment-page-1/#comment-3849</link>
		<dc:creator>pdsa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:39:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=508#comment-3849</guid>
		<description>A political organisation that calls itself &lt;em&gt;&quot;The Constitution Party&quot;&lt;/em&gt;, and adamantly claims it desires a return to Original Constitutional Intent is playing dodge-ball with the truth,  when it openly supports anti-immigration initiatives.

Many of the Nation&#039;s Founders believed that expatriation was a natural right. Without a natural right to expatriation, The Declaration of Independence would not have been a revolutionary assertion of individual liberty, but instead only rebellious criminal subjects of the English Crown.

Not all of the Founders were willing to advance expatritaion to the reverent position of a Natural Right, but many were:
&lt;blockquote&gt;&quot;This involves the great question as to the right of expatriation, upon which so much has been said in this cause. Perhaps it is not necessary it should be explicitly decided on this occasion; but I shall freely express my sentiments on the subject. [p162] That a man ought not to be a slave; that he should not be confined against his will to a particular spot, because he happened to draw his first breath upon it; that he should not be compelled to continue in a society to which he is accidentally attached, when he can better his situation elsewhere, much less when he must starve in one country, and may live comfortably in another: are positions which I hold as strongly as any man, and they are such as most nations in the world appear clearly to recognize.&quot;  

&lt;b&gt;Supreme Court Justice James Iredell, Talbot v. Janson, 1795&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;
It should be self-evident what Thomas Jefferson believed about expatriation. The U.S. Government pressed the concept into international law forums in the mid to latter 19th century:
&lt;blockquote&gt;&lt;b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.bartleby.com/65/ex/expatria.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;expatriation&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/b&gt;: loss of nationality. Such loss is usually, although not necessarily, voluntary. Generally it applies to those persons who have renounced nationality and citizenship in one country to become citizens or subjects of another. According to U.S. law, for example, a citizen who becomes naturalized i.n a foreign state is automatically expatriated. . .The common law view that oneâ€™s allegiance cannot be renounced without the stateâ€™s permission prevailed until 1868 when the United States challenged this doctrine in order to protect its naturalized immigrants against the claims of their native states, which did not recognize the right of subjects to expatriate themselves. Congress declared voluntary expatriation to be â€œa natural and inherent right of all people,â€ and announced that the United States would protect its naturalized citizens abroad, even in their native countries. Great Britain abandoned the common-law interpretation in 1870.

The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A political organisation that calls itself <em>&#8220;The Constitution Party&#8221;</em>, and adamantly claims it desires a return to Original Constitutional Intent is playing dodge-ball with the truth,  when it openly supports anti-immigration initiatives.</p>
<p>Many of the Nation&#8217;s Founders believed that expatriation was a natural right. Without a natural right to expatriation, The Declaration of Independence would not have been a revolutionary assertion of individual liberty, but instead only rebellious criminal subjects of the English Crown.</p>
<p>Not all of the Founders were willing to advance expatritaion to the reverent position of a Natural Right, but many were:</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;This involves the great question as to the right of expatriation, upon which so much has been said in this cause. Perhaps it is not necessary it should be explicitly decided on this occasion; but I shall freely express my sentiments on the subject. [p162] That a man ought not to be a slave; that he should not be confined against his will to a particular spot, because he happened to draw his first breath upon it; that he should not be compelled to continue in a society to which he is accidentally attached, when he can better his situation elsewhere, much less when he must starve in one country, and may live comfortably in another: are positions which I hold as strongly as any man, and they are such as most nations in the world appear clearly to recognize.&#8221;  </p>
<p><b>Supreme Court Justice James Iredell, Talbot v. Janson, 1795</b></p></blockquote>
<p>It should be self-evident what Thomas Jefferson believed about expatriation. The U.S. Government pressed the concept into international law forums in the mid to latter 19th century:</p>
<blockquote><p><b><a href="http://www.bartleby.com/65/ex/expatria.html" rel="nofollow">expatriation</a></b>: loss of nationality. Such loss is usually, although not necessarily, voluntary. Generally it applies to those persons who have renounced nationality and citizenship in one country to become citizens or subjects of another. According to U.S. law, for example, a citizen who becomes naturalized i.n a foreign state is automatically expatriated. . .The common law view that oneâ€™s allegiance cannot be renounced without the stateâ€™s permission prevailed until 1868 when the United States challenged this doctrine in order to protect its naturalized immigrants against the claims of their native states, which did not recognize the right of subjects to expatriate themselves. Congress declared voluntary expatriation to be â€œa natural and inherent right of all people,â€ and announced that the United States would protect its naturalized citizens abroad, even in their native countries. Great Britain abandoned the common-law interpretation in 1870.</p>
<p>The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NewFederalist</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/comment-page-1/#comment-3844</link>
		<dc:creator>NewFederalist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:59:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=508#comment-3844</guid>
		<description>What is the status of Baldwin/Castle being on the CA ballot? I read on TPW that the AIP has disaffiliated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is the status of Baldwin/Castle being on the CA ballot? I read on TPW that the AIP has disaffiliated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Theodore</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/comment-page-1/#comment-3842</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Theodore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 05:01:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=508#comment-3842</guid>
		<description>All seems a little dusty to me.
Whatever that means.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All seems a little dusty to me.<br />
Whatever that means.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Trent Hill</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/comment-page-1/#comment-3841</link>
		<dc:creator>Trent Hill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=508#comment-3841</guid>
		<description>GE,

I actually considered it. Save Our State basically is &quot;Closed borders&quot;, but the rest are mostly &quot;secure borders&quot;--so it was a tough call. =)

Baldwin had like 5 campaign events this weekend, like 9 next week, and Darrell Castle had one this week and one next week--clearly the campaign actually IS finally launching. I think the strategy is interesting. Aiming for Ron Paul voters via Chuck Baldwin and veterans and anti-illegal immigration activists via Darrell Castle with support from Baldwin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>GE,</p>
<p>I actually considered it. Save Our State basically is &#8220;Closed borders&#8221;, but the rest are mostly &#8220;secure borders&#8221;&#8211;so it was a tough call. =)</p>
<p>Baldwin had like 5 campaign events this weekend, like 9 next week, and Darrell Castle had one this week and one next week&#8211;clearly the campaign actually IS finally launching. I think the strategy is interesting. Aiming for Ron Paul voters via Chuck Baldwin and veterans and anti-illegal immigration activists via Darrell Castle with support from Baldwin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G.E.</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/comment-page-1/#comment-3840</link>
		<dc:creator>G.E.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:51:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=508#comment-3840</guid>
		<description>&quot;Operation Close America Now&quot;? j/k</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Operation Close America Now&#8221;? j/k</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: G.E.</title>
		<link>http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/06/darrell-castle-to-address-secure-border-activists/comment-page-1/#comment-3839</link>
		<dc:creator>G.E.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:51:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/?p=508#comment-3839</guid>
		<description>Don&#039;t you mean &quot;closed border&quot; activists? :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Don&#8217;t you mean &#8220;closed border&#8221; activists? <img src='http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

