30 August 2007
29 August 2007
The second is the worst piece of pro-illegal immigration journalism I have seen in a while that makes the law breakers the victims of an evil Butler (OH) County "crackdown", or as you and I would call it, "law enforcement operation". So where does this article originate? Oh, it's Reuters. Wow, shocker. The whole article downplays the fact that 160, that's ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS were working at ONE factory in Fairfield, OH. The owner of course was floored to learn this.... Now here's the bias money quotes at work:
""I don't know if they ever got out, that's all I want to know," he said, gathering with friends at a neighborhood taco restaurant to rehash the trauma of the day and trade rumors about who will be deported."
Hopefully they all get deported, after all...THEY WERE HERE ILLEGALLY. Trauma? Trauma for our laws perhaps. However, perpetuation of a stereotype by hanging out at a Taco Restaurant is pretty funny....Taco flavored kisses for our darling illegals..
"Koch Foods is committed to complying with all immigration laws, and we look forward to resolving this matter quickly,"
Sure you are. Put your money where your mouth is, you pay for the gas, and I'll drive them back across the border. You hired 160 illegals, that's not a coincidence.
"Still, only 37 percent viewed deportation as a solution, while about one in four said workers should be allowed to stay if they have jobs and pass background checks."
Typical Media mind trick. For reference, 37 > 25, and that 25 percent is a maximum value, 23 percent is more like it, and 37 percent is over 50 percent greater than 23 percent. On a small scale, not a big deal, but at large numbers it's a huge difference. The trick here is to make it sound like 1 in 4 is a larger amount, hence it is not prefaced the the dreaded "only" that the larger value of 37 is given.
"I've been saying for two and a half years 'We're coming, ... don't hire illegals, don't violate the law,'" Jones said after the raid. "I personally have no sympathy for you whatsoever. None. Zero."
I like this Sheriff Jones, but he shouldn't have warned them. He also shouldn't have given a partisan journalist the opportunity to victimize a criminal by saying that he had no sympathy for them because they worded it in a horrible light for Sheriff Jones. Perhaps he should have said, "Well they broke the law, and we enforce the laws. People should not break the laws and expect to not have penalties." That would have been much more difficult to spin.
" A spokesman at Mercy Hospital in Fairfield said six people had been brought in with minor injuries including frostbite, and that all but one had been treated and released."
Oh that guy and his light coat really hosed over his friend. Why were they hiding though, they didn't do anything wrong right? Oh yea, they broke the laws of our nation. Actually I find a little humor in this even though I do feel bad they got frostbite. Really, I would have a lot more respect if they were just like, "Yes, I did it," and took their punishment like men rather than taking the "I'm not doing anything wrong" and then blaming others for the problems routine, ask Mikey Vick on that one.
"Everyone saw the raid on television, there is widespread fear, and now nobody wants to go out onto the street."
Well if you're that close to Cincinnati, you may not want to go out with the Bengals back in town anyway. Unless of course your buddies are talking illegal immigration at the local Taco Restaurant that is so tasty that you'd be willing to risk deportation. Mmmmm....forbidden taco...
To all those deported in this raid who knowingly broke our laws:
Now of course is the Liberals favorite line of "I question the timing." Well in this case it is appropriate. The arrest happened in late June but it comes out now, breaking in the middle of day on the same day these nuggets of illegal activity are slated to come out in the newspapers:
1. Hillary Clinton's main fundraiser illegally gave money to the Paw family so that they could donate money to her as well as other Democratic organizations and candidates. The Paws gave 100s of thousands of money to Democrats...on a household income of less than 70,000. Despite the revelations of illegal funds being transferred, HRC was going keep the money, that is until the it became apparent that gig would be up, but kept quiet.
2. Hsu, the fundraiser in question, is a felon....and a fugitive.
3. "Richardson's Donors Tied to Rail Prospects," which nicely show how Hilldog's future VP took kickbacks.
4. A George Soros group fined nearly 1,000,000 for illegal campaign activities.
5. Bob Filner (D-umbass) has his own little airport incident kept quiet for a while until, low and behold they answer questions right as the Craig story drops and he professes his guilt. His excuse for assault was his crankiness. Awww, poor baby.
6. MSNBC coming out and flat out stating that they are not going to be airing any pro-war ads on their network, taking it upon themselves to decide what should and should not be considered free speech.
So none of these stories that have been brewing for quite some time were brought to the public for this long for what reason? Is it just a coincidence that these stories dropped in near silence due to the MSM uproar over Sen. Craig being gay? Fair media indeed.
As has been documented over and over again on the blogosphere and even admitted to, grudgingly, by the Liberals, is the successful military gains that the Surge has brought, and yes, the fruits of political reconciliation that are being fostered and developed. Read these two pieces by Mario Loyala, an embedded reported in Iraq, "Operation Phantom Strike" and "Desperados." In these pieces Loyola details, first hand, how the military is "demolishing" al-Qaeda as well as how local tribesmen continue to turn from al-Qaeda and in fact fight them along with the United States. They have taken ownership of the situation and are engaged in the destruction of al-Qaeda in Iraq while starting to reach out to the Iraqi government.
The Liberals know that the tremendous political capital they put on the line here in their pursuit of fulfilling their own goals and their severe infliction of Bush Derangement Syndrome has pretty much doomed them for generations to come should the Iraq conflict be resolved in an acceptable fashion to the American people. Yes, even the people over at The Boston Globe will acknowledge as much. Perhaps this why President Bush took full advantage of the situation to say that we will stand behind al-Maliki because he is the democratically elected leader of Iraq. Perfectly sane and logical, as well as respectful of the democratic process, the same process the Moonbats have cried foul over during the last two presidential cycles. Worse for the Democrats, Hillary Clinton tried to appeal to her base by attempting to subvert the will of the Iraqi people who elected al-Maliki. al-Maliki fired back. This is the new Democratic gambit, knowing that military gains are being made and the Surge is indeed working, they point to the national government's inability to solve all problems are a reason to abandon Iraq to genocide and get their precious votes. It will fail, and the Democrats will fail. Worse for them, Bush has one upped them again and in the process turned the tables on the Democrats who consistently say that Bush usurps the will of an electorate by doing just that in Iraq. Even as our allies in Europe and Asia grow closer to us, it is the Democrats who are crying foul over the policies that are, in fact, strengthening our bonds overseas all the while setting themselves up for more failure and truly dividing us from our allies. The Democrats would rather be closer with Cuba and Venezuela rather than Britain and Japan.
Truly it is their own ideology that is blinding them from gains made on the local level. How arrogant and truly ignorant one must be in order to believe the top of the period must be hoisted high up in the air without a base being built first. Yes, the war was mismanaged at first, but what is happening since Gen. Petraeus has taken charge has been nothing short of remarkable. In time, if given the time our soldiers and our national defense interests deserve, as well as the rights for which we stand to defend need, the end game will be near in what is in the best interests for us and for the human rights of the Iraqi people. For them, a chance to choose the government that they want for themselves. For us, a technical knockout blow to al-Qaeda, a strong ally in the Middle East to help counter the Iranian scourge, and rock solid proof that we will fight to defend our beliefs.
Even further proof of the evidence that is starting to breach the flood gates that the Mainstream Media has erected to protect their Liberal buddies' interests, is that a massive problem has been solved. al-Sadr's Mahdi Army quit, supposedly for six month, but they quit altogether in the face of the Surge, and the MSM is not covering this they way it should. They treat this with a ho-hum despite the ENORMITY of the development. Investment is pouring into Iraq at a tremendous rate, and even now, we prepare for the "Made in Iraq" label to be supplied to the U.S. Sure, it starts off small, much like the textile orders in the previous article, the momentum is at the local level, but it's a base, it's building, and getting stronger. It's military progress, it's the thrashing of al-Qaeda, and the building of relationships with a focus on keeping Iraq secure and peaceful, the keystones toward building a strong government. It's what is best for America. It is what is worst for the Liberals from the Democrats to the Media, and the lid is about to blow off the pot of true knowledge that is boiling over, and the Moonbats are about to get third degree burns.
28 August 2007
"I go to all the little living rooms in New Hampshire and Iowa. And you know what people say to me? They say they want somebody to inspire them. They want somebody that will say: "hey, collectively we need to do things together as a country, instead of this individualism. You know the president has these wars that don't go through the budget, the tax cuts for people that don't want 'em."
Sure. We need to collectively (aka socialism/communism) solve problems instead of, you know, taking ownership of the problem and finding solutions to problems ourselves. I suppose if my car were to ever catch fire, I can just sit there and collectively wait for others to come to my rescue instead of getting out before it blows up. Of course the wars don't go through the normal budget, it's called Emergency Defense spending for things like defending human freedom and human rights. Of course, the grand little tidbit here is the "tax cuts for people that don't want 'em." Because nobody wants tax cuts so that they have more money in their pockets to fuel the U.S. Economy. Of course by listening to John "Ambulance Chaser" Edwards, everyone is poor and the Liberals say that Bush has enacted policies that force more people to be poor. Then again, POVERTY IS DECLINING SHARPLY, a good portion due to more more money being pumped into the economy and investments due to the tax cuts that were across the board, you know, the same tax cuts Democrats decry. The only people who don't' want tax cuts and individualism are the Liberals. Taking money out of the government's hands and empowering the people to have control over their own lives cuts right against the vein of the very political ideology. Of course, the AP article is very bias against Bush, as we all fully expect anyway. They note that manufacturing jobs are on their way down. Of course they are, as wages rise the price for goods rise which in turn makes our domestic products more expensive and the law of economics will show rational consumers purchasing lower priced products with the same level of quality. Democrats hate this and push protectionism while at the same time hypocritically saying that we need to be more engaged with other nations and follow their lead. It's just another example of what I mean by the Democrats "FENCE STRADDLING", adopting policies that let them say they are always on both sides of an issue while all the while pushing towards a Marxist society in America.
Let's look at Hillary Clinton now. Hillary is a lock for the Democratic Nomination. I have been saying for a while now that Richardson will be her running mate in order to pimp him to get Latino votes. Anyway, Hillary comes down squarely on both sides of an issue by insisting that a National Smoking Ban is a policy she will push for if elected. First of all, all smoking bans are stupid, and goes back to Richardson's quote. Richardson is portrayed as a moderate Democrat in the first place which is like saying that a Jalapeno pepper is a moderate spice. Let's say you pay for a bar, put in all the work, get all your paperwork then, and them BAM, the government steps in and say, no one can smoke in your bar. It is idiotic at best. The fact that an entrepreneur puts all their time money and dreams into a bar should be enough to allow for an individual to make the decision as whether their patrons should be able to smoke in a bar. If the owner says lights out, that's fine, I just go another bar where smoking is allowed. It enables the people and the bar owners individual choices of how they are going to spend their time and provides them ownership of the issue. Banning smoking at all bars is a COLLECTIVE decision forced upon all that is counter to the reasoning and all that makes capitalism the great system that it is. Freedom of Choice is paramount towards keeping our society to be, well, free. The Democrats insist on telling you what you can and cannot do, in fact, creating a police state where all you do is determined by what is best for the masses. This is not capitalism. To further compound the issue, the Liberals want everyone to stop smoking, that is their tenant on the issue. There is no room for dissent with them. When proposed with a rational argument such as allowing for choice they get beyond upset. Now the larger point to the argument is that if everyone stops smoking the tax revenues goes way down and the Liberals will not have this. If smoking were to be phased completely out, rest assured the tax money would be made up and them some if they Liberals control the Legislative Branch for long. Hillary is not a moderate as she is trying to portray herself, and the only reason that the Liberals attack her, but not viciously, is so that in the General Election, she can point the slight ribbing (most likely a planned action) as proof that she is moderate, which of course is a bold faced lie.
John Edwards exploits are legendary. The guy is a completely scum bag. Fortress, his old company, is foreclosing on homes in New Orleans like they were going out of style, and ol' Silky Pony throws a few bucks at the families to show how much he cares. Sure. He also has a history of attacking his neighbor who dares to be a Republican. Of course pretty much everything this guy does is shameful. When he started his campaign in New Orleans by waging class warfare and saying that Bush is the cause of all their problems, he fails to explain why, as a MEGA millionaire he did nothing after Katrina. He did not send in money, did not take displaced families in, etc. Admittedly not many people did, but then, not everyone is running a campaign to show how hard they will fight for the poor. Hey John, watching the disaster on TV and Saying how bad it is, is not fighting for the poor. Now he outlines his new plan to defeat cancer. The synopsis, use Lance Armstrong as a symbol, expand the government's role in taking over all research, and increase the current plans the government runs. Because that has been so effective up till now. How about this for a plan, lower the government's role in the issue, guarantee a patent for an extended time period, say for 15 years, and put a bin Laden-like bounty on the disease, and then see what happens. When was the last time the government found a cure for any disease? Go ahead, keep thinking. Private investment and research is what will cure diseases, pointing to a large dollar sum the government is spending does nothing. Private companies get results, government programs get nothing but employees who are practically impossible to fire if they are incompetent, bureaucratic tape to run through, little to nothing to answer for because the Government does nothing to resolve issues rather than pass the buck and find a scapegoat. When was the last time a government agency actually solved problems or found innovative and cost effective methods to run a tight ship? The definition of insanity is to keep trying the same thing over and over and expecting different results, and this is the Liberal plan in a nutshell, but it sounds good and they hope to sucker in the voters with these insidious lies.
Further exacerbating the issue, and illustrating the idiocy of the Liberal agenda is yet another story on Hillary Clinton, where she is upset about the expenditure on National Defense and the empowerment of the individual in the form of tax cuts. As an incentive, read this article to see how many times John Edwards can say "conservative" in one paragraph. Hillary is upset that the expenditures on the War on Terror and tax cuts have decreased the government's control on every aspect of society and as such, promises a "lot of cleaning up" after Bush is gone. She invokes stem-cell research to spread fear and show President Bush as being backwards, but the argument he makes is based on morals and the fact that as I have previously mentioned, the position of conservatives is that when stem-cell research is allowed for in an ethical manner (i.e protect life from the start while protecting life while alive, the moral acquisition of stem cells in so much that no scientist encourages the death of a baby in order to further their studies in order to derive the benefits of curing infectious and debilitating diseases) that research ought to be done in the private sector. There is no reason for the government to run all health research. Where in our Constitution is the Federal Government afforded the powers to run every aspect and industry in American Society? What is the Liberal attack front doing to Alexander Hamilton's Federals Society as spelled out in the greatest documents ever ignored in our society, The Federalist Papers?
What is being done in today's Democratic Party is for the advancement of the Socialist cause. This is not a "Progressive" movement, but rather a regressive movement as the Democrats are moving towards a system that is proven to fail society and cause misery all the while assaulting the Constitution that founded our nation. The attacks are apparent from a multitude of angles, be it from the ones I have spelled out in this text, or to the advanced evidence of their outright refusal to allow the Christian faith to breathe (much like the Soviet Union had done) to the disassembling of the cultural melting pot into the farce that is multiculturalism in order to exploit differences and foster fear in order to secure votes. They are shifting further and further to the left and decrying anyone or anything that is sane, pragmatic, or non-communist in nature. This is particularly evidenced by the creation of Kos, which is being used a fear tactic to shun the freedom of expression and individualism even among their own party who they callously crucify for doing what they believe is right, rather than towing their party's line, it is a bloodless Stalinist purge, and much like the obedient Liberal media who said nothing was going wrong and that everything was rosy in the Soviet Union, the press is immune to the steps currently being taken by the Liberal Socialists here in America.
22 August 2007
Leftist in ______ (Criticize, Express Caution/Outrage Over) _________ With/In The United States.
The difference between a nuclear program in India and one in Iran of course is transparency, a willingness and an invitation to have the IAEA involved in the program as well as having their representatives present at all nuclear negotiations with rock solid evidence of all activities and purchases. Huge difference. However, I wish the Indians well in dealing with the moonbats of their nation. I also commend greatly the great nation of Japan. On another note, please note how the Liberals kept saying how horrible our relationships with other nations were with other countries that were traditional allies thanks to President Bush. I'd like to point out our relationship with France has not been this strong is a long, long, time, Germany, Britain, Japan, India, and Australia have never been closer and that President Bush has very good relationships with Canada, and for better or worse (because of the immigration insanity) a very close relationship with Mexico. He also seems to have a good report with the Russians despite their inching back towards their former roles during World War II, but for the issues of comparison the friendship between Putin and President Bush is not just based on that of alcohol and women like Yeltsin and Clinton.
2. Congressional approval ratings are at all time lows, again. 18% of our citizens approve of Mega Liberal Nancy "Blinky" Pelosi's congress. Yes, they have been halved in just 8 months since the Liberals took over. It took them all of 8 months to become the least effective, least productive congress ever. That's shocking. I figured it would take them at least 1 year.
Math time: 1 + 2 = Most Americans do not know what is going on politically but they know that it has gotten tremendously worse since the Liberals took charge, indicating a strong position of having buyer's remorse. The Dems ran as centrists and are diddling their time in leadership by doing nothing but investigating President Bush which has resulted in? Absolutely nothing. The public also seems to be keenly aware that things are getting better in Iraq, so much so that Democrats themselves acknowledge this and have since changed the goal posts and painting the successful General Patraeus as a tool of the President. This will go over well with the public. All this in the face of extreme media bias and vitriol from the left so hardcore that a scorpions venom can be viewed as an antibiotic. Now based on the last time the Congress hit rock bottom like this the Democrats got ousted, and seeing as how they are not even pretending to be centrist, no amount of spin will be able to get them out of hard left land in the public eye. The Republicans on the other hand are actually in a very strong strategic position to oust a do nothing ultra liberal Congress and/or the Presidential elections in one fell swoop. A Giuliani-Huckabee nomination will crush almost of the old rhetoric the hard left uses on the Republicans and the GOP comes off looking pretty centrist with a pro-gay right, pro-abortion nominee at the head of the ticket and a small government former minister who is focused on restructuring the homeland and helping the average man and woman in the nation since he has been there himself and still conducts himself in the average person's mold. A centrist Republican ticket on the races in 2008? Possible, and if it happens, I think we realistically have a great shot at getting back both the Presidency and the Congress.
"In early August, the Bush Administration moved unilaterally to stiffen enforcement, with Department of Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff announcing more fines and penalties for employers who knowingly hire illegals as well as an increased border crackdown."
Well imagine that, the Executive Branch enforcing a law. That's their job, it's spelled out in the same Constitution that these illegal aliens spit on upon entering our nation illegally. Unilaterally? Again, that's the Executive Branch of the Government's responsibility, brush up on Constitutional Law. The aim here of the author, of course, is to apply this word in an obvious attempt to bash President Bush as the word "unilateral" has taken on a connotative meaning meant to conjure up the false image that President Bush somehow skirted and fooled Congress into going to war in Iraq, which is utterly untrue, but apparently such a common tactic by the left that it is sickening.
"She was the pro-immigrant caucus's poster alien, their best chance to highlight the cruelty of the current status quo."
The cruelty of the current status quo? You mean administering justice as spelled out under the laws of our nation? The cruelty that exists when law and order have a say in how society is governed? How else are we to defend our national sovereignty? What these idiots want is an open border where our nation can be trampled. The heart of their argument is not legal immigration where people are coming here with the intent to become citizens but their intent is to remain loyal to a foreign government while taking food and health care out of the mouths of all our citizens through our tax dollars. They show utter contempt for our nation. Here's another little gem, this one a quote from "The Rev. Alexia Salvatierra", even more vile than the ones the author included:
"The blood of the martyrs," says Rev. Salvatierra, quoting old scripture somewhat extravagantly, "is the seed of the church."
First of all, she is not a martyr, she didn't get so much as a bruise on her when we enforced our laws, what kind of parallel can be drawn here? Secondly, and most important, for a priest, a Reverend, or any person who is charged with overseeing faith based practices, how dare the "Rev. Salvatierra" compare this woman to a martyr. How dare they compare her to Jesus, who was martyred for our sins, and the numerous saints in our Church. This is easily the most offensive thing I have seen in years, and it is near blasphemy.
Really, they have no respect for our nation and laws whatsoever. Does this look like the work of people who respect our nation? How hard is it to fill out some paperwork, or work in the NAFTA zone is they want to work in the United States? No, it's not enough, they need to shamelessly violate our great nation. Packing 54 illegals into a motor home and trying to sneak them into the United States is not respect, it's illegal, premeditated, and a crime against our entire citizenry and a massive slap in the face of those who come here legally. Look, I'm not anti-immigrant, far from it. Do it legally. We are the melting pot, not the multicultural disaster that is brewing thanks to the far left. My ancestors (well not that old, I'm only third generation) came here legally as did most of the people born here. We demand respect for our laws and we will respect them and support them as they seek a better life. However, an illegal act deserves no respect, no support, except for supporting the Executive Branch for supporting our laws and shipping them back home. Furthermore, Americans are demanding further action on protecting our sovereignty which Democrats will not do, and in fact are shameless (surprise surprise) doing the opposite in order to gain more votes while selling all respect for our laws and the future of our nation down the river. What's even more laughable is the economic argument that leftists use in saying how we need illegal immigrants in order to have our economy thrive because the demand is so high for their work that we will suffer when it is not done. Well since James Carville, a massive Liberal Tool, said "it's the economy stupid," perhaps you should know something about the economy. Now what happens if the borders are enforced and suddenly there is a giant void of laborers in the agriculture and landscaping industries (stereotype I know, but I'm simplifying here) and these business need to fill the slots. High Demand for Labor, Low Supply of Labor = Higher Wages...that go to legal Americans that will help fix the problem of these low wages that exist in these industries due to an artificial and illegal influx of supply that prices those playing fair out of the market. That's an economic truth, but far be it for Dems to even consider the beauty of a self-correcting free market.
21 August 2007
Being Mike Huckabee by Salena Zito
The Next Huckabee Surprise by David S. Broder
Hybrid Huck by Jim Geraghty
Huckabee Says that Iowa Showing Gives Chance to Keep Thompson at Bay by Heidi Przybyla
Stay tuned folks, we're only just building momentum on what will be the one of the biggest coups in political history.
"Whenever your enemy is saying something bad about an organization, it shows that the organization has been effective."
Hmmm. The organization has been effective you say, perhaps by training Shiite militias and supplying them with weaponry? He is all by saying, "So what," to the international community and the US in general. Secondly, lets look at another full proof piece of evidence of what Iran is up to. This article appeared in the Guardian of all places. In the northern part of Iraq where the Kurds reside, Iran is blatantly and viciously shelling villages. Here's a very important part of the equation:
"If this escalates it could pose a real threat to the Kurdistan region, which is Iraq's most stable area," said Mr Yawar, who said he expected the Iraqi government and US officials in Iraq to make a formal protest to Tehran about the "blatant violation of Iraqi sovereignty".
What makes this extremely important of course is the timing of the shelling and the increase of Iranian tactics in the south as well which are undermining the Iraqi government ahead of the Progress Report in September. While the Surge has been extremely effective, you can see almost instantly that now that violence is down and the Liberals in the United States are trying to move the goal posts and completely ignore the military successes in Iraq while trying to focus on the political nature of Iraq, Iran apparently is watching alot of CNN. Why do I say this? Well let's see, they have tried their tactics in the South and it is not working to their liking, but if they can bring a little turmoil to "Iraq's most stable area," the Democrats of course will jump all over this and continue their defeatist cries. Now the question is whether the Bush Administration can keep up the pressure and beat this information in the general public's heads that this is what is happening, a very daunting task indeed as we all know how far to the left the mainstream media resides.
1. "She is ready to continue the struggle against the separation of families from the other side of the border."
Translation: She will sneak over the border again. Here's a grand idea, take your child with you back across the border to your homeland. I've said it before and will say it again, end the loophole by changing the law that states you are a citizen if you are born here to read, you are citizen of this nation if your parents were born here. No more issue for this criminal to cry over.
2. "I either go to my country, Mexico, or stay and keep fighting. I decided to stay and fight."
Translation: I will sneak over the border again and again. Here's the true nature of the issue, if she really wanted to be a citizen and wanted to be American than why is saying Mexico is her country? Right there she states that she has no respect for our laws, desire to follow them, or support our nation. Civil Rights Activist? Hardly. She simply is following her own self greed and has no qualms about violating our national laws. She doesn't care about America. Further more, under what conditions does an illegal alien who does not want to be American fall under the category of American Civil Rights activist? She's a liar and criminal, plain and simple.
3. "How dare they arrest this woman?".
Translation: How dare the United States enforce its laws. How dare anyone pose this question is more like it. That quote right there should tell you all you need to know about the illegal immigration issue in America. Its high time we stopped this insane system where people outside of our nation dictate how we enforce our own laws and drain on the taxpayers while refusing to even attempt a legal path toward citizenship or even an atomic level of respect for our nation.
15 August 2007
-Illegally Entering the United States and being deported
-Illegally Re-entering the United States
-Obtaining and using a false Social Security Number (which also means defrauding the American people)
She also told authorities she would surrender to authorities before hiding out in a Methodist Church (uninvited I'm sure, after all it's not every day you hear about the vast number of La Raza Methodists). She's been getting even more free stuff from the Church ever since. So now she feels like she's special for going to Washington on September 12th, which I'm sure at no point will anyone say something along the lines of "The tragedy memorialized here yesterday......insert idiotic pro-law breaking rhetoric here.....is not unlike the tragedy of enforcing your laws upon me." At the heart of the debate is that she snuck into the country illegally and had a child, so she says that she is entitled to be a citizen because of this. No, you're not a citizen. You're a criminal from another nation. As such, I have two proposals to fix this dilemma.
1. Change the law to state that children are citizens of the nation of which their parents hold citizenship.
2. Adopt the Mexican rules for immigrants who come into their nation, posted by Jay over at Say Anything Blog.
We need to enforce the laws and now. It's a joke that one of the "benchmarks" in Iraq that amnesty loving Lefties keep throwing around is even taken seriously when they don't even pretend to do anything about our borders here, even promising amnesty and pandering the people in nation illegally, essentially opening our borders and undermining our own political process, which is a total slap in the face of every citizen who either are in this country LEGALLY or whose forefathers came here legally.
Finally, Elvira Arellano states, "If this government would separate me from my son, let them do it in front of the men and women who have the responsibility to fix this broken law and uphold the principles of human dignity." Well please refer to my prior area. I do not advocate separating you from your son. I advocate sending both to make a different kind of run for the border. Under my rule you will both be deporting because you're right, the law is broken and we must not separate you from your child. As far as upholding, are you saying that the Mexico does not have any room for human dignity. I see upholding the laws that you knowingly broke, for your selfish reason, in blatant disregard for the honor and wishes of the citizens of our nation as disrespecting human dignity. The situation is a joke and pandering politicians are making it worse. Build the fence, build a moat, do something to enforce our laws, but do it, and do it now or we are heading down such a path that it may not be recoverable for when the violators of all laws get to choose whether it should have been a law in the first place how long will it be before all crimes are no longer enforced?
"I'm going to try to see if we can't shift the attention of the American people from the report on the military situation to a report on the political situation since everybody acknowledges that it's the failure of the political arena and the political areas that are the cause of the ongoing violence in Iraq."
Shift the attention of the American people from the military situation (going so well that Gen. Petraeus is actually considering suggesting scaling down the number of troops) onto the political situation (that is starting to improve). The main idea here for the Dems is that by showing how the political process is not on par with the military success (which they previously chided as being failed, but is now turned around) that the war is lost, as they have been saying pretty much since the first casualty in the war. Of course logic and all sense dictates that in order for an orderly, politically evolved society to exist the safety of the citizens comes first. After all, show me an effective government operating at full political organizational capacity that is not secure. Just name one...... Exactly. Doesn't happen. Security comes first. Once the violence dies down, rational behavior and dialogue kicks in, except in this case, the Democrats last hopes for not being proven to be the weak cowards that they are on National Security this can not happen. If this does happen, it's game over for the Left. When we win this war after they pinned all their hopes and political dreams on its failure, its Lights Out for the Donkeys. For a further examination of the just how pathetic the Left is in regards to this war read Tony Blankley's "Democracts' Disgrace," published in the Washington Times. So yes I question their patriotism and I'll debate any Lefty on this issue anytime, anywhere.
08 August 2007
02 August 2007
Sure, they say it's ethics reform. However, any earmark reform that gets the A-OK from Robert "KKK" Byrd (D-eez Nuts), rest assured is not a true reform bill. Please refer here for bios on all members of Congress who attempt to "Bring Home the Bacon". Here's all you need to know. Harry Reid and the Committee Chairpeople each get to decide if the earmarks need disclosing. How nice. I'm sure they won't abuse that, not in the least. Of course Mitch McConnell didn't oppose it either, so at least there is one non-partisan issue, the bilking of taxpayer money for moronic reasons.
Here's what my personal political hero, Sen. Coburn has to say:
“Rather than opening the secret chambers of government to the public, this new Congress has opted to change the locks. This bill, which was negotiated in secret, guts key earmark reforms that both houses of Congress approved overwhelmingly. Unfortunately, this process shows that Congress’s 28 percent approval rating is well-deserved,” Dr. Coburn said.
“The problem in Washington is not lobbyists, but members of Congress. This bill solves the wrong problem and creates new ways to hide earmarks. For example, it is ludicrous to give the Majority Leader of either party, not the objective Senate parliamentarian, new unilateral powers to police earmarks. It is also obscene that the Senate gutted a key reform preventing senators from directing earmarks to family members. The new language mirrors existing Senate rules which have done nothing to prevent these serious conflicts of interest,” Dr. Coburn said.“In the last election, the American people said they wanted the earmark favor factory to be shut down, not turned over to new management. As our Republican majority learned, breaking promises has consequences. Congress first broke its promise to impose an earmark moratorium by offering 32,000 earmarks. Now Congress has signaled its determination to continue the secretive earmark favor factory."