CDR Kerchner (Ret) Responds to Professor Gutzman’s Dodgy Comments About Vattel

Emer d Vattel - Author of The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. Click on Image for More Details
Emer d Vattel – Author of The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law. Click on Image for More Details

CDR Kerchner (Ret) Responds to Professor Gutzman’s Dodgy Comments About Vattel

In the video below, listen to Professor Gutzman’s attempt to diminish the writings and words of Vattel as to the meaning of “natural born Citizen” in the presidential eligibility clause in  Article II of our U.S. Constitution, apparently in an effort to support the eligibility of Ted Cruz who was born in Canada to a non-U.S. Citizen father: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/confirmed-sen-ted-cruz-releases-canadian-birth-certificate-was-a-dual-citizen-at-birth-not-eligible-to-be-u-s-president/.  His position thus would also continue to support the eligibility of Obama who also had a non-U.S. Citizen father and whose exact and true birth location has been the subject of debate and discussion for the last 7 years. https://www.scribd.com/collections/3248475/Kenyan-Gov-Officials-African-Newspapers-Obama-1991-Bio-Barry-Obama-Obama-Family-Mbrs-and-other-Accounts-Reporting-Obama-is-Kenyan-Born. This 2013 interview of Professor Gutzman has been re-surfaced recently by Cruz supporters.  Join the discussion here http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/06/founders-tv-gotta-see-this-one-history.html and/or read my comments about Professor Gutzman’s remarks below.

https://youtu.be/a27RfN-ZIqQ

[Editor’s note:  Get a PDF copy of CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s response and article here:  https://www.scribd.com/doc/269216629/CDR-Kerchner-Ret-Responds-to-Professor-Gutzman-Video-Comments-on-Vattel]

I listened to Professor Gutzman’s comments in the above video. Here are my comments.

The purpose of having the term “natural born Citizen” as a constitutional requirement for future presidents and commanders in chief or our military was as a “strong check” against “foreign influence”, per John Jay’s letter to George Washington, on the person who would hold that office in the future. They wanted a person born with Sole Allegiance and Unity of Citizenship to the USA and only the USA. See this article for more on that point: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2009/04/article-ii-natural-born-citizen-means.html They would never have wanted a person born with dual or tri citizenship and attendant multiple allegiances and foreign influences on them at birth to ever gain command of our military. As with anything dealing with our Constitution, if you wish to understand terms therein we need to go back to original intent and understanding as to why the founders and framers chose the words they did. We need to understand the Who, What, When, Where, How, and Why the term “natural born Citizen” was chosen by the founders and framers. The Why was they wanted a person with sole allegiance to the USA at birth, and only the USA, for future commanders in chief of our military.

See: The Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizenship to Constitutional Standards: https://www.scribd.com/doc/185258103/Three-Legged-Stool-Test-for-Natural-Born-Citizen-to-Constitutional-Standards

Now some specific comments about what Professor Gutzman said and also what he omitted from Vol.1 Chapter 19 Section 212 of Vattel’s writings. First, he does not give the full name of Vattel’s book. And that is important to the debate on its content. It was titled The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law.  “Natural Law” is key to this debate because the term under scrutiny is a natural law term, “natural born Citizen”.  Any legal term with the word “natural” in it refers to Natural Law and not to positive, man-made law. Vattel’s book was a treatise on Natural Law. And Natural Law forms the foundation of other types of law. And the founders and framers where keenly interested and aware of Natural Law as evidenced by the opening of the Declaration of Independence wherein it specifically cites the “Laws of Nature”, i.e., Natural Law.  And the Law of Nations was mentioned in the Constitution also in reference to defining Piracy. So the founders and framers were keenly aware of Natural Law and the Law of Nations.  And Vattel was their number one choice and reference on those subjects.

I own both a French and English copy of Vattel’s “The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law”. Regarding the comment that Vattel’s treatise The Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law being written in French, the professor does not mention that most of the key founders and framers were multi-lingual and specifically they were fluent in French, which was the diplomatic language of that time frame.  The French were our allies in our Revolutionary War against England.  When he read part of the section 212 and he read the French word “naturels” he failed to acknowledge that that in 1781 the French word naturels, years prior to the writing of the U.S. Constitution in 1787, had been translated in treaty correspondence with the French to mean “natural born” in U.S. English. Thus the USA founders in U.S. English understood the term “the naturels” when used in the context of discussion of the matter of Citizenship in the USA or in the case of England being a Subject of the King, they translated the adjective and term and understood it to mean “the natural born”.  See:  https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2015/04/17/absolute-proof-the-founders-knew-and-accepted-vattels-french-naturels-to-mean-natural-born-before-constitution-was-written/ 

It also should be noted that the very title of Vol. 1, Chapter 19 in which “natural born Citizen” is defined, is “Des citoyens et naturels” which in the USA meant to the founders and framers, “The natural born Citizens”.  They got the idea and meaning of “natural born Citizen” from Vattel and other writers in Europe of the Enlightenment. They did not look to English Common Law to define and understand the citizenship terms in our new federal Constitution and Constitutional Republic. They discarded English Common Law when it came to Citizenship in the new nation. They looked to Natural Law and the Law of Nations to found our new form of government, a Constitutional Republic, and to determine who would be its initial citizens and the subsequent natural born Citizens, i.e., the children born in the country of citizens (both parents, born or naturalized).

The professor also neglects to read all of section 212 in which after Vattel states to be a “naturel” one must be born in the country of parents who are citizens, and since at that time married women could not have independent citizenship and the citizenship of the husband determined that of his wife and children, Vattel goes on to state that emphatically the father must absolutely be a citizen of the country for the child to be a citizen of the country at birth.  Vattel does not say the citizenship of the mother and place of birth do not matter. He clearly said it does in the prior clear cut definition of the naturel Citoyens, the natural born Citizens. But Vattel in the balance of section 212 further reinforces the importance of the citizenship of the father. Per Vattel not having a father who was a Citizen of the country you were born in absolutely precludes you from being a natural born Citizen of that country and that it is only your place of birth and not your country. The citizenship of the father controlled and determined the citizenship of his wife and his children. It takes two tigers to naturally create a tiger and two lions to naturally create a lion. Likewise it takes two Citizens of the country to procreate a natural born Citizen when the child is born in the parents’ country.

In the cases of Obama, Cruz, Rubio, and Jindal the citizenship of their father when they were born is clearly a relevant issue.  None of them had a U.S. citizen father at the time of their birth and thus they are not “natural born Citizens” of the USA to constitutional standards. In addition, for the case of Ted Cruz he was clearly and admittedly not born in the USA either in addition to not having a U.S. Citizen father when he was born. Thus Cruz misses natural born Citizen of the USA status on at least two counts.

Read and learn the constitutional citizenship status for all our Presidents since the U.S. Constitution was adopted: https://www.scribd.com/doc/48856102/All-U-S-Presidents-Eligibility-Grandfather-Clause-Natural-Born-Citizen-Clause-or-Seated-by-Fraud

Only the Laws of Nature can create a “natural born Citizen”. No man-made, positive law such as the Act of Congress Title 8 Section 1401, adopted pursuant to its naturalization power granted to it under our U.S. Constitution can do so. That law does not even mention “natural born Citizen” nor does the word “natural” appear in it anywhere. Those who conflate “Citizen” at birth created by man-made laws such as Title 8 Section 1401 with the natural law term “natural born Citizen” at birth, are being illogical and are spreading confusion and disinformation. See this link for more on that: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/

The professor in his 2013 interview was carefully picking and choosing words, and ignoring others, in his readings and discussions about Vattel’s book/treatise to try and make the case that Obama and Cruz are constitutionally eligible. They are not.

 As to English translations, there was a prior English translation of Vattel done circa 1759/1760 in England that Professor Gutzman did not mention. However, the 1797 is considered the better translation. But the founders and framers were using the 1775 edition edited by Dumas which was in French, as attested to by Benjamin Franklin. See: http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/benjamin-franklin-in-1775-thanks.html In regards to the 1797 English language translation which correctly translates Vattel’s des naturel Citoyen to “natural born Citizen”, the 1797 edition was just confirming and clarifying what the world at that time knew as to what Vattel meant and as was implemented in the U.S. Constitution several years before. And it was widely used in the new and great constitutional republic in the new world., the USA. And it was used to defend the rights of U.S. natural born Citizens in the disputes with England on the high seas leading up to the war of 1812.

Do words come into existence and meaning only by their instant creation in a dictionary or legal writings first and only then at the exact time of printing said book. Or were they there and understood before that print date and in use for some time in society? Use common sense.

 The 1797 translation of Vattel’s treatise into English simply was an improved translation from the original French and it confirmed and clarified to English speakers and readers what Vattel meant by his term “Des Citoyens et naturels” and/or naturel Citoyens, and his definition of same is therein clearly written. And the founders and framers knew and understood what it meant and that Vattel was their source when they chose the term, natural born Citizen. The 1781 treaty negotiations translation I mentioned previously prove that. When it came to the U.S. Supreme Court cases in the first 100 years of the USA they clearly looked to Vattel’s writings on issues of Citizenship, quoting him literally in a couple cases, and saying in at least one case that Vattel was the best on the matter of Citizenship issues.

See: http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html for some example cases.

When the professor in the soft ball back and forth discussion in the video finally admits that he’s not sure and says “I don’t know”, he is in effect saying what we Constitutionalists all have been saying since 2008, we need the U.S. Supreme Court to decide this. And as Chief Justice Marshall said as to words and matters in the Constitution, … the U.S. Supreme Court should have taken up a case if it goes to the Constitution, as it does in this matter on the meaning of “natural born Citizen” to constitutional standards as it applies in Article II.  The U.S. Supreme Court should decide it once and for all instead of ducking the question for the last almost 7 years.  The U.S. Supreme Court should have taken up the Atty Berg case in the summer of 2008 and decided the question right then and there re Obama.  In my 2010 petition to the U.S. Supreme Court we specifically said the question would come up again in the future. See:  https://www.scribd.com/doc/38506403/Petition-for-Writ-of-Certiorari-filed-with-the-U-S-Supreme-Court-for-Kerchner-v-Obama-Congress

Now the Pandora’s box is open and we have people not even born in the USA and with non-U.S. citizen fathers and twisting words and conflating two different legal terms and arguing they are eligible to be President and Commander in Chief of our military.

For more on the term “natural born Citizen”, see the prior historical  and legal writings on the term and also my writings on that term at:  http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html and https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/  and https://www.scribd.com/collections/3301209/Papers-Discussing-Natural-Born-Citizen-Meaning-to-Constitutional-Standards .  Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ Also see these papers and writings on Vattel’s influence of the founders and framers: https://www.scribd.com/collections/3224507/Vattel-s-Influence-on-U-S-Founders-Constitution-s-Framers

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
http://www.ProtectOurLiberty.org
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com

ProtectOurLiberty WebsiteSpaceMy BlogSpaceDocs Collections Re Obama SpaceMy YouTube SpaceMost Recent Full Pg Ad SpaceAd Archives SpaceFliers/Handouts SpaceBlock Ads SpaceSheriff to Sheriffs – Sheriff Kit Project SpaceGet A Sheriff Kit SpaceInterviews-Audio/Print SpaceBooks SpaceGoat’s Ledge SpaceContact Me

Confirmed: Sen Ted Cruz Releases Canadian Birth Certificate – Was a Tri-Citizen at Birth – Did Not Have Sole Allegiance to the USA at Birth – Constitutionally Not Eligible to be U.S. President or Commander in Chief of Our Military

Click on image to learn what a
Click on image to learn what a “natural born Citizen” of the United States truly is. Ted Cruz is not one.
Ted Cruz
U.S. Senator Ted Cruz – citizen of Canada, Cuba, and USA at birth.

Confirmed: Senator Ted Cruz Releases Canadian Birth Certificate – He’s a Canadian Citizen to this Day – Was a Tri-Citizen at Birth – Not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States – He Did Not Have Sole Allegiance to the USA at Birth – Constitutionally Not Eligible to be U.S. President and Commander-in-Chief of our Military

While Ted Cruz was a “Citizen” of the United States at birth via his mother and thus eligible to be a U.S. Senator, he was also a “Citizen” of Canada at birth due to his birth in Canada and a Cuban “Citizen” at birth via his Cuban national father. Thus he was not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States at birth with sole allegiance and unity of citizenship to the United States and thus is NOT constitutionally eligible to be U.S. President and Commander-in-Chief of our military.  Ted Cruz was born with multiple and conflicting legal national allegiances and foreign influences on him via birth. Natural born Citizens are created by natural law and the laws of nature and nature’s Creator, not man-made laws such as USC Title 8 Section 1401 that allows a person born under certain circumstances to obtain a Citizenship Certificate from the U.S. government. Natural born Citizens, due to the facts and laws of nature at their birth, do not need to have a Citizenship Certificate issued by the U.S. government. That Title 8 man-made law does not even have the term natural born in it. Natural born Citizens don’t need said law to be recognized as being Citizens of the United States.  Man-made laws can only create Citizens, not natural born Citizens.  It takes two Citizens with their child born in the USA to create a natural born Citizen per natural law, as codified by Emer de Vattel in his book, Law of Nations or Principles of Natural Law which was used by the founders and framers to write the founding documents, which is a person born with sole allegiance and unity of citizenship at birth.  A dual or tri-Citizen at birth is not a natural born Citizen of any country.  If you don’t believe that the “laws of nature” were studied and used by the founders of our country, read the opening paragraph of the Declaration of Independence. 

”   IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.  We hold these truths to be self evident, … 

This nation and its founding documents to justify breaking away from England and to form our new national federal republican form of government were forged under the Laws of Nature and nature’s Creator, not English common law.  At the federal level we broke totally with England and English common law to establish a new nation with limits on federal power to guarantee the unalienable rights granted by nature and nature’s God to ‘We the People’.  Read the following:  Natural born Citizens are a subset of “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” but not all “born Citizens (citizens at birth)” are “natural born Citizens”: https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2012/06/20/of-natural-born-citizens-and-citizens-at-birth-and-basic-logic-trees-are-plants-but-not-all-plants-are-trees-natural-born-citizens-nbc-are-citizens-at-birth-cab-but-not-all-cab/ … AND …  the Three Legged Stool Test for Natural Born Citizen https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/2013/11/15/the-three-legged-stool-test-analogy-for-natural-born-citizenship-of-the-united-states-to-constitutional-standards/  … AND …  http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html  Also watch this video by the renowned constitutional scholar Dr. Herb Titus — Part I: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8 and Part II: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoaZ8WextxQ

UPDATE 1 – 19 Aug 2013:  News update about Ted Cruz’s citizenship status. Ted Cruz intends to renounce his Canadian citizenship:  http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2013/08/dual-citizen-senator-ted-cruz-will.html He can do this to help his current multiple-Citizen legal allegiance issues.  But it won’t change his birth status.  He still is not a “natural born Citizen of the United States” and is not constitutionally eligible to be President.  He was not born in the USA to two parents who were Citizens when he was born.  And we still await to hear from Ted Cruz as to his Cuban citizenship obtained from his father a birth.  Is Cruz renouncing that too? Is he doing that quietly in background since that question has not surfaced as clearly as his Canadian citizenship?  Ted Cruz is constitutionally not eligible to be President and Commander-in-Chief of our military.  And, of course, neither is Obama eligible since he was at best a dual Citizen at birth.  Obama may even be an illegal alien and not a U.S. Citizen at all.  That would depend on the final revealed true facts about his birth place and circumstances and early life, when the truth is fully, finally, and factually revealed due to an investigation conducted under the rules of evidence in a court of law or in a congressional investigation and forensically evaluated paper trail documentary proof is provided – not digitally alterable and altered, PhotoShop’d images on the internet.

UPDATE 2 – 07 Dec 2014:   Questions have arisen recently as to whether Ted Cruz’s mother ever even bothered to file for a Certificate of U.S. Citizenship  for Ted when he was born in Canada and thus perfect and register his U.S. Citizenship.  This is required for children born abroad to a U.S. Citizen to become recognized as a U.S. Citizen by Birth using the required Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA). The family lived in Canada for many years before coming to the USA. Requests to Ted Cruz for a copy of his CRBA issued Certificate of U.S. Citizenship have gone unanswered. Why is Ted not being more open and transparent about this?  See: http://www.birtherreport.com/2014/12/report-us-state-department-will-not.html

UPDATE 3 – 30 Dec 2014:  Other people mentioned and considered for U.S. President who are clearly not natural born Citizens and thus constitutionally not eligible to President and Commander-in-Chief:  Rubio, Jindal, and Santorum.

UPDATE 4 – 05 Oct 2015: See this 1961 U.S. Supreme Court case, Montana v Kennedy, re the importance of the citizenship of the father re Ted Cruz’s presidential eligibility status: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/366/308/case.html

CDR Charles Kerchner, P.E. (Retired)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the veil of indifference to their necessity to continually be “on watch” and at times to stand up and protect our U.S. Constitution from usurpation by progressive/marxist/radical politicians operating in relative secrecy protected by an enabling press and major media … thinking and saying it’s the job of someone else … and living their lives in general apathy about what the national government is up to, they will allow the adoption of every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s alert and paraphrasing earlier warnings about the socialist/progressives’ long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a top-down, central controlled, socialist form of government.

Natural Born Defined: Natural Born Citizen vs. British “Common Law” Natural Born Subject By T.J. McCann, III

Click on image to learn more about the founders and framers understanding and original intent that a natural born Citizen of the United States is one born in the country to parents who are both citizens.

Natural Born Defined:  Natural Born Citizen vs. British “Common Law” Natural Born Subject By T.J. McCann, III

Read the article and new paper on natural born Citizenship here:  http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2012/09/natural-born-defined-natural-born.html

# # # #

Also, read more about Obama’s Crimes and his Constitutional Ineligibility here:  http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the veil of indifference to their necessity to continually be “on watch” and at times to stand up and protect our U.S. Constitution from usurpation by progressive/marxist/radical politicians operating in relative secrecy protected by an enabling press and major media … thinking and saying it’s the job of someone else … and living their lives in general apathy about what the national government is up to, they will allow the adoption of every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s alert and paraphrasing earlier warnings about the socialist/progressives’ long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a top-down, central controlled, fascist-socialist form of government.

Justice Scalia flummoxed about natural born citizenship! — Exclusive: Attorney Larry Klayman asks justice for definition of term used in Constitution

Dear Justice Scalia: If you don’t know enough about the history and original intent of the “natural born Citizen” legal term of art in our Constitution, click on your picture above for a refresher course! Or were you just feigning ignorance when put on the spot?

Justice Scalia flummoxed about natural born citizenship! — Exclusive: Attorney Larry Klayman asks justice for definition of term used in Constitution

Read the article here:  http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/scalia-flummoxed-about-natural-born-citizenship/

My comment and open letter to Justice Scalia — Dear Justice Scalia: If you don’t know enough about the history and original intent of the “natural born Citizen” legal term of art in our Constitution, click on your picture above for a refresher course! Or were you just feigning ignorance when put on the spot by answering Attorney Larry Klayman’s question with a question?  I suggest you re-read the preeminent legal treatise on natural law of the founding era, used by the founders and framers, The Law of Nations or Principle of Natural Law, Vol.1 Chapter 19, Section 212.  Also the Federalist Papers and refresh your memory about the framers great concerns about foreign influence on a future president and their original intent to protect that office as much as possible from foreign influence and their assuring the public that they have taken precautions in the new Constitution to prevent that. You may remember that back in November of 2008 I sent you and all the other members of the court a copy of the Federalist Papers and suggested you all re-read it over the Thanksgiving break. You may wish to re-read John Jay’s letter to George Washington, the President of the Constitutional Convention, with Jay’s specific hint/suggestion to Washington that only a “natural born Citizen” be allowed to be President since he would be in command of our armies.  John Jay wanted a strong check against foreign influence. Being simply born a Citizen as Hamilton suggested was not enough.  They wanted a “natural born Citizen”. The adjective natural in that legal term means that this legal term of art comes from natural law.  A citizen at birth created by the laws of nature, not the laws of men. A person born in the country to parents who are both citizens of that country.  A person with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to only one country at birth.  The convention adopted Jay’s suggestion.  John Jay was an ardent user of Vattel’s Law of Nations and as you probably know became the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.   Think hard.  I’m sure you remember reading that letter from Jay to Washington.   Or if you wish, Attorney Apuzzo and I can come visit you and give you a short brief in private on the Who, What, When, Where, WHY, and How the “natural born Citizen” clause was put into Article II Section 1 Clause 5, the presidential eligibility clause, of the U.S. Constitution .  But really, somehow I think you already know all this but are quite nervous and afraid to face the question and answer with what you know the true answer is due to your fear of Obama and media criticism and Chicago style Saul Alinsky tactics and threats of dire consequences to silence the opposition. We the People know you and the rest of the court have been ducking the question.  Justice Thomas, the only brave soul on the court, told us as much.  You ducked the question and abrogated your responsibility to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.  The truth will come out some day.  It always does.  You sir will be judged by God, We the People, and history.  And the record you and the rest of the Roberts court have shown on this subject and matter will not be held in high esteem.  Of that you can be certain.  Sincerely, CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret),  Lehigh Valley PA

# # # #

Read more about Obama’s Crimes and his Constitutional Ineligibility here:  http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

CDR Charles Kerchner (Ret)
Lehigh Valley PA USA
https://cdrkerchner.wordpress.com/
http://www.protectourliberty.org/
http://www.scribd.com/protectourliberty/collections/

“The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the veil of indifference to their necessity to continually be “on watch” and at times to stand up and protect our U.S. Constitution from usurpation by progressive/marxist/radical politicians operating in relative secrecy protected by an enabling press and major media … thinking and saying it’s the job of someone else … and living their lives in general apathy about what the national government is up to, they will allow the adoption of every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation without knowing how it happened.” CDR Kerchner (Ret)’s alert and paraphrasing earlier warnings about the socialist/progressives’ long-term stealth agenda to transform the USA from a constitutional republic into a top-down, central controlled, fascist-socialist form of government.