There's more to this than the kenyan interloper just omitting the word 'Creator'. Read the following carefully
"And what was sustaining us was that sense that, that North Star, that sense that, you know what, if we stay true to our values, if we believe that all people are created equal and everybody is endowed with certain inalienable rights...
Do you see it? No? Okay.
Here it is:
"inalienable rights"There is a HUGH difference between unalienable rights, which is in the Declaration of Independence and we get from The Creator, and "inalienable rights" which Barry is saying. As 'inalienable rights' can be given or taken away - by THE GOVERNMENT!
That little fact is already part of Established Case Law in the USA thanks to SCOTUS . All it takes for one to lose his "inalienable rights" is one's (cough) 'consent' to relinquish his "inalienable rights" (thank you Google). And we know how Congress and Barry listen to We The People and get 'our consent' on a matter (SF Nan: We 'deem' that consent was given).
So while omitting the 'Creator' is big, changing unalienable to inalienable is HUGH! THAT is what we should be on guard for.
If he intentionally means what you say he means, and the words have EXACTLY the subtle difference that you state,
then indeed, he intends to “obtain” our consent to relinquish those rights.
A similar “word flag” is their new use of “freedom of WORSHIP” instead of freedom of RELIGION.
Freedom of worship means that you are free to worship as you wish BEHIND CLOSED DOORS.
Your “religion”, though, is HOW YOU LIVE YOUR LIFE.
They are telegraphing that they intend to restrict that.
You are correct. I pointed that out the last time he did this.
One cannot be taken or given away.
The other can.
He is not mincing words here, he is counting on people being ignorant.