***REVISED*** Anti-McCain Flier!
Posted February 26th, 2008 by fanofwalt
output
***New and improved revised edition now available, in two versions!!***
THE TWO-THIRDS CANDIDATE!
Inspired by this post and the successes discussed here, I have made a new anti-McCain flier for anyone's use.
It's actually a double flier -- hey, it's a LOT of information to pack in -- so you can print out pages 1 & 2 back to back, pages 3 & 4 back to back, staple together, and voila you're good to go.
This is what I plan to pass out to those homeschooling moms I spoke with who had heard of InSane's alleged indiscretions, but didn't know anything about the FEC issues or the little fact of his ineligibility to be president of our country.
Feel free to print out and distribute at will -- now, in two great flavors!
Revised, with mention of Ron Paul
and
Revised, without mention of Ron Paul
Take your pick! But, as before, be sure to set your margins at their smallest setting to print properly.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Revisions Complete
(Just wanted to put that here, to bump "still revising" out of the way...)
Still Revising
Not all the way done yet, but wanted to give an update...
Still waiting to hear whether terms such as jus soli should be italicized only at the point of initial definition, or throughout the document. I really don't know which would be correct.
In addition to the corrections previously noted in the comments below, I've now made the following corrections:
Throughout the document, the United States is sometimes referred to as the US (no periods) and sometimes as the U.S. (with periods). I am implementing the long-standing norm of using periods for the abbreviated notation of the United States -- i.e., U.S. instead of the commonly accepted US -- unless there is some major outcry against this decision.
neither shall any Person be eligible
--in the Constitution, the word "person" is not initial capped in this instance (referencing my CATO institute pocket Constitution)
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to...
--there is no comma after "States" in the Constitution
From Article II, it's clear that to be President one must be...
--offset "to be President": ...it's clear that, to be President, one must be...
To be complete, first we must answer the question
--changed to: To be complete, we must first answer the question
whether or not John McCain is in fact a citizen.
--changed to: whether or not John McCain is, in fact, a citizen.
and lex soli do) except through applying
--changed to: and lex soli do), except through applying
and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;”
--dropped the erroneous quotation marks at the end (they're not in the actual Code)
If you look at 8 USC 1403(a), it addressed McCain’s situation
--changed to: If you look at 8 USC 1403(a), it addresses McCain’s situation
[using the present tense!]
***Special Note To Tannim! ***
Because 8 USC 1403(a) uses the term “is declared to be a citizen” (emphasis added),
--this is directly from Tannim's post, and I don't see any special emphasis. It seems odd to say "emphasis added" when there's no underline or bolding or italicizing. Should "declared" be put in bold type for the flier?
And, I think it might better read: uses the phrase "is declared to be a citizen" -- using the word phrase instead of term.
***
naturalization and not by birth since it is
--changed to: naturalization and not by birth, since it is
So, at 16 years old John McCain was naturalized
--changed to: So, at 16 years of age, John McCain was naturalized
[you don't say someone is "at" X years "old"]
the Supreme Court, and pointed out
--changed to: the Supreme Court and pointed out
[no comma in list before the word "and"]
in a letter from 25 July 1787.
--changed to: in a letter dated 25 July 1787.
that argument does not work because it
--changed to: that argument does not work, because it
military installation aboard as
--changed to: military installation abroad as
and therefore children born there
--changed to: and therefore, children born there
The term “United States”,
...which was changed to: The term “United States,”
[because commas go within quotation marks]
...has been changed back to: The term “United States”,
with the comma on the outside of the quotation marks -- because this is how it actually appears in the United States Code, and we are quoting the actual code
this is only an indicator and not conclusive.
--changed to: this is only an indicator, and not conclusive.
his Secretary of State John Hay.
--changed to: his Secretary of State, John Hay.
Stay tuned -- more (surely!) to come!
Sorry, was downloading a McCain in the bathroom. :)
The emphasis I added was an underline to the word "declared". Somehow that got lost in the post here, but it is on my blog at http://muddythoughts.blog....
I also used the italics for the Latin terms throughout since they are not English. Ditto for the USC, Constitution, FAM, and treaty cites to clarify them as different from the narrative. I also indented them, but I don't know how that would look on your flyers. That last part is just stylistic and not technical.
Cato's "person" reference is inaccurate. I took my own quotes from Constitution.net and cross-referenced them with the National Archives and my copy of Madison's notes as applicable (Article II).
I'm not going to get into the comma-inside-quotes debate again.
Rest are fine, and are legitimate errors I missed. I'll be updating the blog and the secure copy with these.
Further Revisions
First off: LOL!! I cracked up at your headline, above!
Okay, further revisions:
- The word "declared" has been underlined.
- All references to the Latin terms have been italicized.
- The USC, Constitution, FAM and treaty citations are all now in a serif font to offset those sections from the rest of the text (sans serif).
- I re-capitalized Person, trusting in your astute research!
- Left the comma / quotes as previously updated.
Here are the rest of the items I caught.
It does NOT say it cedes that land to the United States, not does it say
--changed to: It does NOT say it cedes that land to the United States, nor does it say
ownership of the land to the United States, just use and control
--changed to: ownership of the land to the United States; just use and control
real estate, and therefore Panama
--changed to: real estate, and therefore, Panama
then this clause would not be necessary as they could build
--changed to: then this clause would not be necessary, as they could build
from the original treaty the Canal Zone
--changed to: from the original treaty that the Canal Zone
the peaceful use of the land and water areas that it has
--changed to: the peaceful use of the land and water areas which it has
[actual wording from the treaty uses "which", not "that"]
of citizenship. Therefore a person
--changed to: of citizenship. Therefore, a person
And now, I'll post the location for folks to get their hands on the revised flier.
* Whew! *
OK,, worked those in
And did a little rework of some clunky areas as well.
You should remove any reference to Ron Paul
This is not an argument that he is making and it contradicts his positions. You are free to make your own argument if you wish but not to link it to Ron Paul.
By the way, all that crap about Panama not being part of the US is not relevant. It doesn't matter if you are born on a base, in a foreign hospital or in a taxi cab in Paris. You are still a natural born citizen if your parents are Americans.
The topic is better discussed in Wikpedia than in these posts, maybe you should just cut and paste that.
Free and Brave
or Cradle to Grave
You can't have both
Wrong. Wikipedia is unreliable in the first place
And who are you going to believe, cited law, or wikipedia?
Lots of typos actually.
have someone proof it for ya.
Okay...such as??
First, to be clear: you are referring to the PDF flier format referenced in the main post of this thread -- not the text entered here at DP by Tannim -- correct?
All I did was cut and paste Tannim's excellent work. If you don't see typos in his presentation, they should not be present on the flier.
I haven't yet personally re-read the entire flier document, as I am mostly tied up this morning and early afternoon with homeschooling my children, and I want to be able to devote undivided time when proofreading the text (unlike spare moments when I can dash in here and check DP for a couple minutes at a time).
However, I have done a MicrosoftWord spell check on the document used for the PDF. I've also made the minor corrections noted by healthnuttie and another commenter -- these changes will be uploaded later today.
But I am beginning to wonder whether the "typo" issue could be simply a formatting issue? Such as when text shows up as, oh, say, (&20% when one is typing an em-dash? Is it that kind of thing you're seeing?
EDIT: Ah; just found one: first paragraph -- "bit" should be "but". I will be able to give this the full proofread starting in the next 30-40 minutes.
We know what ya mean
The bit and the but thing is understandable... I call it fat fingering and do it allot. Both words are spelled right and will fly by a spell check. If ya look though on a "qwerty" keyboard that most everyone uses, the letters i and u are located next to each other.. All I know is you've done great work and I'd like to say, Thank Yoi :-)
Remember the past as you look forward to today...
what the federal regulatory
what the federal regulatory policy is on the issue, and the legal status of John McCainʼs place of birth.
--no comma before "and the legal status..."
You either combine the list with a comma OR the conjunction "and"
(not both as they are mutually exclusive, more on that below).
--do I have to point this one out?
The answer and its references also help answer the natural born question as well.
--comma before "as well."
In legal circles the Latin terms of reference
--Comma after "In legal circles"
In legal circles the Latin terms of reference are jus soli
jus soli should be italicized.
and jus sanguinis
and lex soli
And therein is the question: Is a citizen
--Comma after "And"
So at 16 years old John McCain was naturalized as a citizen by legislation, that legislation being the INA.
--Comma after "So."
(question: was that law retroactive?)
But is there anything more concrete than that?
--Comma after "But." ALWAYS a comma immediately after "But" and "And" when they are the first word of a sentence.
(38) The term “United States”, except as otherwise specifically herein provided,
--The comma is DEFINITELY inside the quotes.
Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.
--no comma after Guam
Note the Canal Zone is not listed.
--It's either...
Note: The Canal Zone is not listed.
or
Note that the Canal Zone is not listed.
This is not a full list. I just quickly scanned through the article.
Corrections
Thanks, Tracy, for the leg wor-- er, eye work!
Before manually proofreading it all the way myself, I have first put in the corrections you noted. All are completed as suggested, and specific changes and notations on certain items are noted here (in bold):
(not both as they are mutually exclusive, more on that below).
--do I have to point this one out?
Changed to: (not both, as they are mutually exclusive; more on that below).
In legal circles the Latin terms of reference are jus soli
jus soli should be italicized.
and jus sanguinis
and lex soli
Done, done, and done -- QUESTION: should these words be italicized throughout the document, or only in their introductory definitions?
So at 16 years old John McCain was naturalized as a citizen by legislation, that legislation being the INA.
--Comma after "So."
(question: was that law retroactive?)
DONE -- and, that's a good question you pose.
(38) The term “United States”, except as otherwise specifically herein provided,
--The comma is DEFINITELY inside the quotes.
Okay; I struggled with this one, because we are defining the term United States -- not United States, (that is, the term itself does not contain the comma). But keeping the comma within the quotation marks is, indeed, grammatically correct. So: DONE.
Note the Canal Zone is not listed.
--It's either...
Note: The Canal Zone is not listed.
or
Note that the Canal Zone is not listed.
Went with "Note that..."
Now that Tracy's corrections have been input, I'm giving the document my own once-over as well. Anyone else with keen eyes, speak up! I hope to have the "refurbished" version of the PDF flier up this evening.
Can I say how proud I am of such a group effort?
To answer the question
INA was not retoractive if you read the langauge. It did use retroactive dates in the language of specific sections, but it was not retroactive in the entire bill or its effective date.
Got that last one. Bring them on so I can fix them.
And thanks for the second set of eyes on this, too! :)
I think the article is well thought out...
...don't get me wrong. He just doesn't know how to use punctuation. LOL. And instead of taking some advise, he's arguing his case like it makes him right.
I have better things to do, so here's a link to Purdue.edu. Have at it.
http://owl.english.purdue...
Nah, I know how. I went to Catholic schools.
And was taught by an OSB nun with a PHD and 40+ years of teaching experience, including some textbook authoring and proofreading. She is a bonafide expert on the issue. I trust her judgement without question.
BTW, she teaches the British system, which is consistent with technical writing and software development, which is what I do, and what I use.
It's also what makes logical sense. If Tracy has a BS in English then she should be aware of the Chicago Manual of Style and the Fowler Brothers' The King's English.
Just one typo
Hi:
This is great. I only saw one typo. It was Under The U.S. Code, the first sentence. The sentence states "A quick look at 8 USC 1400 appears to answer(s) the question." What should be "answer" is "answers." Also, I understand that a period is to be inside the quote, also the comma. Unless the rules of grammar have changed (I am a University Professor who has to grade papers according to APA guidelines) then your "in the United States", should be "in the United States." Also, your "United States", should be "United States,"
Anyway, not to be nitpicky but just wanted to point these out so everything will be perfect. You did an amazing job!
Healthnuttie for Ron Paul
That's a good catch.
Fixing it in all copies...
Thanks
Thanks, healthnuttie! On the flier, I have changed "answer" to "answers" -- good catch! I'm still going to give the whole document my own final once-over later today, and will then repost the PDF with the corrections.
I do know that a comma is to be kept inside of quotation marks when quoting, and I struggled with this decision, too. However, I think that, because we are discussing specific terms here, and the identifying term of "United States" itself does not contain a comma, then it's best in this case to leave such commas outside of the quotation marks.
I think we need to keep the actual term "United States" distinctive, which would (for this situation) supersede the grammar rule, IMHO.
The comma goes inside the quotes...
under every circumstance, and does not necessarily mean a comma was used in the actual statue, amendment, etc. It is understood that a comma may or may not be in the actual document as it is ending a quote to provide for correct grammar.
Not following correct punctuation rules will limit your credibility and you should rethink your position about creating your own guidelines that no one else regularly follow.
Not necessarily
In a direct quote the comma oinly goes inside the quote if it is part of the quote. Or at least that's what my PHD OSB nun English Comp teacher taught me in college...
Well...
According to my B.S. in English, it doesn't. And to prove it, go check any direct quote from any newspaper!
Here's one from today's New York Times...
4th-grade-level newspapers are a bad source
And besides, that's a personal quote, not a quoted cite from a document.
But in any case, it's not a big deal.
Citing a document or a person uses the same rules.
It is a big deal, because the writer of the article is obviously uneducated (or dyslexic) by his lack of grammar skills and should enlist the help of a proper editor to proof-read the work. If the person is not educated enough to write, how can I trust his legal research?
That writer is ME, duh!
And just because you have a B.S. in English doesn't mean I want fries with that.
And don't call me uneducated--I'm a college graduate with experience in aerospace in areas that you can't begin to understand even if you had the clearances. Get off your high horse.
I think what you are talking
I think what you are talking about is a short quote inside a sentence that proves your point.
For Example:
But, when you do this, you have to use a comma:
See, even the "..." are in the quotes. The Constitution actually says:
"We the people [no comma here] of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
See comment above
Your BS in English misses some history of the language and differing styles.
I live in the highly technical world of software and aerospace. We use the British style in that world.
I LOVE IT! AWESOME!
Dude, you ROCK!
Mispellings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Good information but..
Thanks for the information, I opened it looked quickly & posted it to our meetup group - our members already pointed out a lot of typos - could you spell, grammer check & reload the pdf??? Please -
SPH Org/ronpaul.meetup.com/926
Which Typos??
Please advise ASAP so I can make needed corrections on the flier! The basic text was cut / pasted from Tannim's original text; the front page with InSane's image and the callout items in boxes throughout the text were my additions -- please indicate which page, column, etc. you found items needing correction. You can contact me via email by clicking on my screen name.
Typos? Send me a list, please, and I'll fix them!
I thought I had spell-checked that thing 8 ways to Thursday...
tannim123@yahoo.com
You Did!
I just performed a spell-check as well, and there were NO typos found by Word. I'll still give it an eyeball check later today.
The only change I just made (and it's pretty nit-pickey) is this, found on page four of the flier, bottom of first column:
"The Republic of Panama guarantees to the United States of America the peaceful use of the land and water areas that it has been granted the rights to use..."
It previously read, "water areas which it has been..."
I am really wondering what typos the meetup group found...
Slim Jims
First - excellent work fanofwalt on McCain flyer!!!
Can anyone tell me how they print slim jims? Print side one and feed bact into printer for side two and then trim? Or do you take them and have them printed?
This is the Slim Jim link I am talking about:
http://www.ronpaul2008.co...
thanks...
Whew
Now that was a lot of work! Great job.
I have to add because of your flier, there is a team of lawyers (I believe 5-7 of them) here in my state that believe they have a case. They will be submitting their report soon (they estimate within 30 days) to the courts to request the release of our state delegates based on McCains ineligibility. This is being filed so it will set a precedence for other states to follow. I know all this because they are involved with our meet-up.
Let's face it, if we don't try this the Dems sure will. Why should we wait for them to do it after the nomination when it only benefits them. We need this now so we are going ahead with it. There will be more to come, I'll keep you posted.
One question: WHERE???
Where is this happenning?
Credit Where Credit Is Due
Thanks for the accolades, but the credit rightly goes to Tannim for the majority of the content. All I did was copy & paste, do a little formatting, toss in a few caption boxes to break up the columns of unending text, and made sure the name RON PAUL was clearly visible on the back! Then I created a somewhat humorous -- yet accurate! -- front cover to catch attention. The concept came to me when I was (why does it always happen this way?) in the shower, of all places.
Ewww....showering and InSane in the same thought process? I think I just grossed myself out.
If you think that project was work, just wait'll those lawyers see what's awaiting them! ;) Go, you Law Dogs; GO!!!
Thanks!
But, look at it this way, my best ideas happen while on the toilet (fill in punchline here), so why not the shower?
Besides, you were cleaning up while thinking about cleaning up the nation. Makes perfect sense.
If you go by this argument, then Barak Obama.......
isn't eligible to run for president, either!
"The history of Hawaii's transition from sovereign nation to a state of the United States is a history of crime after crime after crime, of policy put forward by proclamation and reinforced by American weapons of war, of military incursion, of violations of international law and treaties then in effect. None of the events which turned Hawaii from a sovereign nation into a part of the US was legal and above board. It was robbery, by anyone's definition of the word, with the justifications and excuses made up after the fact to make the affair palatable to an American public that still wanted to view its government as fair, just, and honorable."
"In 1988, a study by the United States Justice Department concluded that Congress did not have the authority to annex Hawaii by joint resolution. The ersatz annexation was a cover for the military occupation of the Hawaiian islands for purposes related to the Spanish American war."
"On November 23, 1993, President Clinton signed United States Public Law 103-150, which not only acknowledged the illegal actions committed by the United States in the overthrow of the legitimate government of Hawaii, but also that the Hawaiian people never surrendered their sovereignty. The latter is the most important part of United States Public Law 103-150 for it makes it quite clear that the Hawaiian people never legally ceased to be a sovereign separate independent nation. There is no argument that can change that fact."
"United States Public Law 103-150, despite its polite language, is an official admission that the government of the United States illegally occupies the territory of the Hawaiian people."
I"n 1999, the United Nations confirmed that the plebiscite vote that led to Hawaii's statehood was in violation of article 73 of the United Nations' charter. The Hawaii statehood vote, under treaty then in effect, was illegal and non-binding."
So if he was born in Hawaii, and Hawaii technically isn't a U.S. state, then what does that make Barak Obama?
Here is the link to this article in it's entirety...
http://whatreallyhappened...
Regards,
Phaedrus08
OK, then what about Texas, and all of the Louisiana Territory?
The exercise is left to the reader.
TARGET: McCain candidacy. ORDERS: KILL. EXECUTE!
Since when do we care...
about a United Nations Charter??? if it goes against our Constitution...it is an enemy (foreign or domestic) it did not matter with the Indians did it?
Flier
fanofwalt, you did good !
Great ad copy. Could you
Great ad copy.
Could you send me an email. I'd like to have you make one small change so we can run it in newspapers. Thank you.
America_Freedom@comcast.net
Very good flier !
What is the small change you want? If it's worthy for your newspaper run, then it's got to be worthy for the rest of us to print.
-
People worldwide support Dr. Paul too :-)
http://www.pollingmatrix....
Just 'paid for by...'
Just 'paid for by...'