Illegal Immigration Article Roundup

The Senate passed its unbelievably ridiculous bill today - during Mexican President Vicente Fox's visit to California - proving beyond any doubt how out-of-touch this body is with the American public. Only the House of Representatives stands between us and our continued - possibly accelerated - spiral down into oblivion.

For the life of me I cannot understand how so many Republicans could possibly vote for such an asinine piece of legislation.

Republicans have had control of both houses of Congress since 1994, and the Executive branch since 2000. Yet liberal legislation like this nonsense continues to get passed. Who is voting for these people? BOTH senators from Alaska voted YES. John McCain teams up with TED KENNEDY?? What is the world coming to?

One of the humdingers in this legislation include a provision that Republican Arlen Specter allowed in, which says the U.S. must consult with Mexico before building any kind of barrier at the border. It's this kind of un-serious legislation that will doom our country. Either terrorists will waltz through the border and start blowing up random shopping malls, or 15 million poor illegal Mexican immigrants will get amnesty (or continued lack of enforcement - same thing), have "anchor" children here, bringing more relatives and much larger families in with them, while sending billions of American dollars south to support Mexico's economy. All while continuing to turn the United States into a third-world country.

Michelle Malkin has a nice roundup of comments on the bill here and the "consultation" language here.

Charles Krauthammer, excellent as always:

...is it just conservatives who think the United States ought not be gratuitously squandering one of its greatest assets — its magnetic attraction to would-be immigrants around the world? There are tens of millions of people who want to leave their homes and come to America. We essentially have an NFL draft in which the United States has the first, oh, million or so draft picks. Rather than exercising those picks, i.e., choosing by whatever criteria we want — such as education, enterprise, technical skills and creativity — we admit the tiniest fraction of the best and brightest and permit millions of the unskilled to pour in instead.

South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint has a great "Top 10 Reasons to Oppose the Senate Amnesty Bill" list on his website.

ExposeTheLeft.com has audio and a transcript of a brilliant debate between Rush Limbaugh and Tony Snow, now the White House spokesman, on the bill.

The Washington Times ran an article on the bill's passage:

The leaders of both parties hailed the 62-36 passage as a historic success. Majority Leader Bill Frist said the vote represented the "very best" of the Senate.
"This is a success for the American people," the Tennessee Republican said. "It is a success for people who hope to participate someday in that American dream."

One wonders what could be further from the truth, or just how much worse of a Majority Leader we could possibly get in the Senate. Frist has been spineless every single day he's held that title.

And Mark Steyn, always good, writes about the Senate wanting to give illegal immigrants social security benefits for the work they did while illegal (i.e. using fraudulent social security documents). On John McCain's complaint on the Senate floor about his colleagues continuing to refer to his bill's provisions as "amnesty", Steyn made this brilliant observation:

"Call it a banana if you want to," he told his fellow world's greatest deliberators. "To call the process that we require under this legislation amnesty frankly distorts the debate and it's an unfair interpretation of it."

He has a point. Technically, an "amnesty" only involves pardoning a person for a crime rather than, as this moderate compromise legislation does, pardoning him for a crime and also giving him a cash bonus for committing it. In fact, having skimmed my Webster's, I can't seem to find a word that does cover what the Senate is proposing, it having never previously occurred to any other society in the course of human history.

I'm giving myself a headache. I'm going to bed. More this weekend. It's MEMORIAL DAY! PUT UP YOUR FLAG!

Gay Crusade Continues in California

The California State Senate this week passed a bill submitted by Sheila Kuhl, of ultra-liberal Santa Monica, that would mandate by law that any textbooks used by children in California include the contributions of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender (GLBT) people in history. This, whether those people had anything noteworthy to contribute or not. So we're getting to the next step in what I call the Gay Crusade. Rewriting history, bringing people from history out of the closet posthumously, and writing about gay people who might have been completely marginal in every other respect, simply because they were (supposedly) gay.

If this bill passes the State Assembly (and it will), it will go to Governor Schwarzenegger's desk to be signed into law, and he has not taken an official position on this, yet. He has signed other pro-homosexual legislation in the past, though, so conservatives are rightly concerned.

I call it the "Gay Crusade" because it needs to be made obvious to people who haven't connected everything together, yet, that this is a master plan we're watching unfold, here. Up until 30 years ago, homosexuality was shunned by society as a perversion. When the AIDS crisis first broke out, people from all walks used to comment that it was God's punishment to gays for their behavior. When enough of this started happening, people started sympathizing more with homosexuals and, I believe, the door was opened for activists to begin parlaying that into real change in the culture. They argued, at the time, for common decency toward homosexuals, and simply to be left alone and not mistreated.

If it had stopped there, we might be somewhere today. But it did not. Once they won majority agreement to be left alone, they pushed for acceptance. This push for acceptance has been going on ever since. Acceptance of homosexuality as completely equal to heterosexuality is a done-deal as far as our media goes. Gay characters have been on television and in the movies for decades, now, and we are at the point in the gay lobby's "acceptance" campaign where we are now also supposed to completely accept homosexual unions. In other words, we've now gone beyond acceptance of each individual homosexual's choice of lifestyle, to accepting the homosexual relationships themselves. Gay relationships are depicted on mainstream television shows like "Will and Grace" in an effort to say, "we're exactly the same as you."

Recently we went beyond the "accept that the relationships are the same" argument and moved into "accept that the loving is the same" phase, where we were treated to watching homosexual kisses and even sex scenes in series like HBO's "Six Feet Under" and in the movie "Brokeback Mountain."

Amid all this insanity, we get Sheila Kuhl's "promote historical gay people" bill, which doesn't even limit itself to gay people. She has included transgenders, as well. People who change their sex or pretend to be the opposite sex. And this, regardless of whether the people actually contributed anything of historical value. And, whether those people were, in fact, GLBT, or alleged to have been so (a judgement call by the publishers).

But wait, it gets better. It doesn't only demand rewritings of textbooks. It also outlaws any activity that could be deemed hurtful or deragotory toward GLBT's on school campuses. So no judgement as to the morality of homosexuality at all. In fact, many have pointed out that this will no doubt lead to such things as King- and Queen-free proms and homecoming events, since that makes an assertion that the heterosexual union is the "normal" one. Make your own guesses as to other situations that could be equally ridiculed or shut down.

As absurd as this all sounds, it is really happening in the state of California. And if you don't live in California, you still should be concerned. Because California buys more books than any other state in the country, unless book publishers want to make "California" versions of their books (they won't), they will have to institute these changes in all their textbooks.

So there is a "master plan" at work, here, and this is just the latest salvo. How much further can it go?

What no one ever points out is that the Left, which runs this campaign, constantly characterizes their position as the one of "tolerance." The conservatives who oppose this sort of thing on moral grounds are the intolerant ones because we don't accept the Left's idea of sexuality. But this characterization is utterly and demonstrably false. Conservative people believe that the Bible is the word of the creator of the universe, God, and that His laws are to be taken seriously. He says unequivocally in several places in the bible that homosexual sex is a perverted action that leads to Hell, period. Man and Woman were made by God to be put together. Man and Woman, together, make the image of God. Even if you are not a religious person, you can easily see that men and women's genitalia were made to fit together, and for the purpose of procreation -- the perpetuation of the species. Yet the Left completely ignores all of these issues and belief systems in pursuit of its own agenda. That is the definition of intolerant. They do not tolerate everyone else's understandings of the way the world is. They are every bit as intolerant as they claim we are. In short, I will agree that I am intolerant of certain behaviors (and I make no apologies for it), but the Left will not admit this. They are hypocrites or ignorant, take your pick.

The Catholic Church has this to say about homosexuality:

Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

Yet all you hear from the Left is rhetoric about how "intolerant" we are and how tolerant they are. Don't believe it. In fact, we need to be fighting it hard, now more than ever. Just imagine where we'll be in 10 more years.

Today's Townhall Readings...

Some great work being done, as usual, over at Townhall. Doug Giles explains why no self-respecting Christian can vote the liberal ticket. Here are a few choice quotes:

Secularism to be continually mainlined into our public school system. Thanks to rabid, vapid secularism, our public schools and universities would rather you be a Rocky Horror super freak than a Christian. If your beliefs run to the bizarre or the banal; or if you want to smoke the same philosophical crack that Caligula, Nero, Castro or Lenin freebased, they'll accommodate you...Our schools are totally open to anyone and to anything, unless, of course, you're a Christian. And if that's the case, then you're likely to get more sympathy from a badger with minimal sleep than you will from liberal educators who are hard at work making your life hard.

The continued media endorsement of the same putrid, hedonistic stuff that sunk ancient civilizations. With the liberals in place, expect more weird crap in movies and on television. Expect to see more paintings of Christian symbols and saints smeared with elephant dung. Expect Christianity to be bashed and vilified and Christians made out to be buckled-shoed morons with three teeth and an IQ of 50. Expect the culture to coarsen. Expect your kids to continue to be exposed to things that only rock stars see backstage with groupies.

The Democratic Party's liberalism has degenerated over the last 40-50 years in regard to its view of Christianity and Christian rights. This party, which formerly embraced and protected our nation's great Christian heritage and teachings, no longer does so. Thus, today the Christian is between a rock and a hard place: he can either be a Christian or a liberal—but he cannot be both.

The whole thing is pretty aggressive; good reading. I read through a few other articles there, but most were not particularly powerful. Charles Krauthammer, however, never disappoints. His take on illegal immigration, which he's been writing quite a bit about lately, is dead-on. Today he's talking about the illegals' marches looking more American (fewer Mexican flags, more white t-shirts, etc.) and peaceful. The illegals are now comparing themselves to the blacks of the 60's. But Krauthammer, of course, isn't buying it:

Americans instinctively know the difference between these two civil rights crusades. Blacks were owed. For centuries they had been the victims of a historic national crime. The principal crime involved in the immigrant crusade is the violation of immigration laws by the illegals themselves.

Krauthammer sees the solution to this problem to be a tight border (for the first time), followed -- NOT preceded -- by amnesty. Here's the gist of his argument:

If you find a stranger living in your basement, you would be far more inclined to let him stay if he assured you that his ultimate intent is just to improve his own life and not to prepare the way for his various cousins waiting on the other side of your fence.

And that's the critical issue that the demonstrators and their supporters ignore. Is the amnesty they are demanding/requesting the beginning or the end? Is it a precedent or a one-time -- last time -- exception? Are they seeking open-ended immigration or do they agree that they should be the last wave of illegals?

So many big history-changing movements going on right now. Iran, illegal immigration, the liberal agenda. You really need to keep your eyes open in an environment like this.

Hilarious Comments on McKinney

The Ace of Spades blog has a short piece on U.S. Congresswoman McKinney's run-in with the Capitol police. But I thought the comments section below the piece was the real entertainment. Here are a few selections:

Cynthia McKinney shouts racism when there aren't enough pepperoni slices on her X-large from Papa John's. And once again, fellow readers, I have to apologize on behalf of the state of Georgia and the human race for this galactic embarrassment of a person.

---

I read their filing an amended complaint to add a charge of attempted "talk to the hand."

---

Based on her "new look" at the press conference, I'm guessing that the quality of the crack she's doing with Marion Barry has dropped off. That would explain the paranoia.

---

Did the bad white police man guy do that to her hair, too? The first thing I thought of was that SideShow Bob and Buckwheat had a child.

---

It is of essence for members of the Congress to 'b*tche slappe' the constabulary when they interfere with the business of serving the citizenry.
- Stuff Jefferson Said, Vol. V
(to be published in June, 2006)

---

Ms. McKinney, Macy Gray called and wants her hair back. Oh, and the bong, too.

---

"What's up with the "backup" that you frequently see when black people give press conferences? All the other people in the background? Why are they there?"
That's the "amen" corner. "uh-huh" "that's right" "you go girl" etc. The men are also wannabe secret service agents/bodyguards and look around for any potential assassins. Of course, they'd be the first to duck in any such event.

---

This is all Bush's fault. If he hadn't been president, 9/11 wouldn't have happened, which means that we wouldn't need metal detectors in our buildings which means that our allegedly intelligent (smirk) elected officials wouldn't be required to remember something as complicated as putting on a lapel pin to walk through the security. OR...If Bush had just signed the Kyoto Treaty, the ozone layer wouldn't have disappeared and the sunrays would have filled Ms. McKinney with the high volume of brain cells required to remember to wear her lapel pin so as to avoid public humiliation. OR if Bush had bothered to pour billions of dollars into the levis in New Orleans, there would have been no flooding ergo, Ms. McKinney wouldn't have been so distracted worrying about them that she forgot to put on her lapel pin...or so distraught that she naturally reacted by hitting a uniformed law enforcement official in her distress. See? No matter how you look at it, it's Bush's fault (sigh).

---

Maybe it's just me, but this week has just plain sucked. Between the mexicans and George Bush telling us we're occupiers of America and McK telling us that in spite of the Civil War, Affirmative Action, Voting Rights Act of 1965, and being not only elected and rejected, but re-elected, she's still a victim of the whiteys. Personally, I've about had it with these douchebag politicians, professional race hustlers, and angry dwarves.

Wait a minute. Angry dwarves? That must be a new pressing grievance for NEXT week. Sorry. I am ever prescient. But I'm just saying...
Angry black mexican dwarves will rise up and challenge our very democracy because they, too, are aggrieved. They don't like the fact Cyntihia McKinney has an Irish name, just like they do. Next thing you know she'll be singing that Lucky Charms song. Magically delicious.

F---ing EVERYBODY is aggrieved.
When is it my turn?

What Planet Am I Living On?

I'm looking at the front page of Fox News's website tonight and I hardly know what to think anymore. The headline article shows a bunch of hoodlum high school students carrying a Mexican flag in front of them, protesting against the evil United States in a march. Where is this happening? In Mexico? NO! This is in Las Vegas. They're protesting for "an end to anti-immigrant legislation." Carrying the Mexican flag. Carrying the flag of another country, a country which millions have fled because of its corrupt government and crippled economy. They protest under the protection of taxpayer-funded police officers, squad cars, and a helicopter. On safe and clean streets, skipping taxpayer-funded school classes, all of which are available to them thanks to the hard work of American citizens and legal immigrants, all of whom built this great country with blood, sweat, and tears over several hundred years. These ingrates come here and squat, then start demanding rights they're not entitled to while carrying the flag of a foreign country. And the media and educational systems (i.e. liberal establishment) back them up 100%.

Below that photo is a caption referring to Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean's comment that the GOP needs to "reign in their extreme right-wingers." This from the extreme left wing leader of the DNC. And again, he gets the airtime. All this while President Bush is meeting with Mexican president Vicente Fox in Cancun, Mexico! The president not only doesn't get people's feelings on this matter; he is WAY behind these illegal immigrant protestors, to the point of visiting their country and laughing it up with their corrupt president, no doubt patting each other on the back for their great humanitarian work in solving Mexico's poverty problem (by transporting it to the U.S.).

To the left of all this nonsense is a collection of pieces about U.S. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, who assaulted a Capitol police officer the other day when he tried to stop her from walking into the Capitol building without going through security. She was not wearing her congressional identification pin (and we're told she is notorious for doing this, despite being told to numerous times) and when she skirted the metal detectors, she was told 3 times by an officer to stop, all of which she ignored. Then when the officer caught her arm, she wheeled and punched him in the chest with her cell phone in hand.

Interesting story, right? She's probably in big trouble, right? The article mentions the arrest warrant she might be served with next week one time. The rest of the article is a collection of quotes from all kinds of nut job anti-American racists like Danny Glover and Harry Belafonte, plus her lawyers. Yeah, she "lawyered up". These quotes are truly galling. Check this out:

Her lawyer said she was "just a victim of being in Congress while black. Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney [is] a victim of the excessive use of force by law enforcement officials because of how she looks and the color of her skin."

Racist Harry Belafonte:

"In America and Washington, D.C., issues of race have always been at play and have often been central to justice miscarried."

and the head of the NAACP in Georgia (where her district is):

"The mistreatment of Cynthia McKinney at the hands of Capitol Hill Police is a tragedy of major proportion and points to the vigor of outright disrespect for women and people of color,"

For her part, she's saying she did nothing wrong. She says the officers ought to recognize her and if they don't, that's basically their problem. She said so what if she doesn't wear her pin; supposedly many congress members don't. No idea if that's even true, but WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES THAT MAKE? Rules exist for a reason, you big dope. In this case, those rules are FOR YOUR PROTECTION, so that someone doesn't come in and fake their way around the metal detectors, get into the Capitol, and blow the place up! How difficult is this to understand?

But all the congresswoman can do is point fingers at everyone besides herself. She says they didn't recognize her because she just had a makeover. "It is ... a shame that while I conduct the country's business, I have to stop and call the police to tell them that I've changed my hairstyle so that I'm not harassed at work." HARASSED! Unbelievable. And this is an elected member of Congress. She helps pass this country's laws!!! This is not some random woman off the street.

Here is the bottom line: In this country people are free to express themselves, and generally people are welcomed from all over the world. It is the greatest country the world has ever known, without question. This is not even debatable. People flock here from every country on the planet because we have built a model free, democratic republic. Yet for some reason, there are classes of people who feel like they haven't got as much as they deserve, and so they speak up and start blaming everyone else for their perceived problems. They play the race card at the drop of a hat (as though an elected member of the United States Congress had a leg to stand on in that department); and for some reason, the media pays attention to these offensive people. They scream RACIST at the top of their lungs without any kind of support for their claim, or any argument on their own behalf, and lawmakers listen. We have atheists out there trying to kill off Christmas and Easter, the two most meaningful Christian holidays of the year, and lawmakers listen, essentially agreeing that it's okay to persecute non-Atheists.

What is going on in this country? Where are we heading? When will this insanity stop? Or is this society about to implode?