Friday, June 29, 2007

Another Democrat Debate or Another Voyage into Lunacy

One can only wonder about the hypocrisy of the Democratic debate last night. Speaking about diversity at Howard University, an all black university, the candidates did nothing but pander to their Black audience. Clinton basically blamed the Bush administration for racism on its funding of AIDS.

The New York Times reported May 30th, 2007

The United States’ current campaign against AIDS, with $15 billion in committed spending, has made possible the treatment of 1.1 million infected people in 15 countries, most of them in Africa — an achievement Mr. Bush called “a promising start.” If America steps up its commitment to $30 billion, 2.5 million people can be treated and as many as 12 million cases of infection can be prevented, Mr. Bush said.

So who is Clinton kidding?

Biden said he and Obama were both tested for the AIDS virus. How Sweet! I wonder if they made the appointment together. I can honestly say that I have never been tested – maybe it’s because I don’t engage in sexual practices that would be conducive to getting the virus. "I just want to make clear I got tested with Michelle” Obama said referring to his wife. Hmmm – maybe they are swingers?

They all lambasted this week’s Supreme Court decision by Chief Justice Robert, (schools cannot use race to assign students). Obama said, "If it were not for them," he said referring to race-based preferential treatment, "I would not be standing here." And my answer to that is, is that a bad thing? Of course, here you have all candidates speaking about diversity at a school where there is no diversity.

"This issue of poverty is the cause of my life," said John Edwards. Yeah, I wonder if anyone has seen his 28,000 square foot newly built house in front of a trailer park. Edwards has never visited the trailer park, and the tenants of the trailer park have expressed disdain towards him. I wonder if his 400 dollar haircuts are also evidence of “poverty as the cause of his life.”

USA reports:

Edwards' new house in North Carolina has become a symbol of what some see as a contradiction between his political image and the way he conducts his life. His challenge is to ensure that voters don't decide that it negates his populism.
Aerial photos of the 102-acre estate show a 28,000-square-foot home that's worth about $4 million and includes a recreation building with basketball and squash courts and swimming pool.

And, of course - not one question on the failed immigration bill, the most important news item facing this country in the past several months - go figure!

So what can we expect from all of these scary Democratic candidates

1) Higher taxes and the repeal of Bush’s tax cuts
2) Socialized health care – look to Europe or Canada if you want to see what a disaster that is, or take a stroll to your local clinic with Medicaid patients.
3) The legalization of half of Mexico.
4) The growth and strength in the ferocity of Al-Qaeda
5) A sympathetic ear to the plight of your local dictator (Chavez, Ortega, Ahmadinejad)
6) The beginning of a new censorship with The Fairness Doctrine . Top leading Democrats are supporting it. These so-called advocates of free speech cannot compete in the marketplace of ideas on talk radio, so they use the government to suppress it.

I cannot understand how anyone can be a Democrat. It falls in the face of all logic.

Monday, June 18, 2007

Wall Street Journal Agrees with me

I have been saying that Ortega represents a threat to the United States. Apparently, columnist Mary Anastasia of the Wall Street Journal agrees with me as she stated on June 18th. I would argue however with her assertion that it was a fair election. See my post Jihadists and the other Americas on why this is so.

See video

Friday, June 15, 2007

Ode to my Dad

Since Sunday is father’s day, I thought it befitting to write something about my Dad. You might not believe it, but there was a period in my life that my dad, now an octogenarian, and I didn’t get along. I surmise those difficult years began when I was ten years old until about the age of 23. Of course, if you ask him, he would say I am still rebelling. I can recall my father coming for a visit one cool spring day, and upon opening the door, the volume from my state of the art surround sound stereo equipped with home theater speakers with sub woofers the size of a pair of small asteroids echoed across the atmospheric continuum at sixteen octaves louder than the average person could bear. I have always liked my music loud not that any of my family has ever noticed, but my father in his infinite wisdom looked at me and said with somewhat of a sardonic look in his eyes, “I thought you grew out of that.” That is my father, a staid, staunchly conservative Catholic Republican from whom I have garnered much of the values I have today.

As a teenager of the 70s, I always tried to impart to him the wisdom of my youth. I tried to explain to him the greatness of the Rolling Stones, the wonders of Woodstock, and how great it was just to sit back and listen to the entire side of the rock group Rare Earth’s “Get Ready” with their ten minute drum solo. But, did he get it? No! Or, maybe he just wasn’t listening. I would complain to him the misery of having to take history, oh – how I hated history; learning about all those dead people. What was the point? I would tell him why our generation was so much better than his and why Vietnam should not have been fought. I even told myself I would raise my children differently than the way my parents raised kids. I asked my Dad to which political party he was affiliated, he said, “Republican” and immediately I went down and registered, “Democrat.” I have since learned the error of my ways. I didn’t realize or maybe I wasn’t paying attention that I was talking to a man who survived the Great Depression, who was a veteran of World War ll, whose father died when he was in high school, who lost two brothers from tuberculosis, whose house burnt down, and who had to work out of necessity to help his family through the Great Depression. At the time, I didn’t realize it, but my father was already wise beyond his years.

I remember my delinquent years when teenage logic ruled the roost. I can recall the night when my cabal of teenage friends sauntered over to our house in Los Gatos through the back way while my parents were asleep around midnight. My one closest friend convinced me to leave the comfort of my bed on some mysterious journey in the pouring rain to Oak Meadow Park for the sole purpose of throwing garbage cans down some manhole covers. I don’t think that was our original intent, but that is what we ended up doing. Every fiber of my being told me not to go, but somewhere in the recesses of my tumultuous youthful mind, teenage logic won the day, and I joined my fellow hooligans in pursuit of youthful indiscretion. How was I supposed to know someone would be working in some shanty shack on the park grounds near the very manhole covers that proved to be our downfall? As we were performing our dirty deeds, some unsavory character exited the shack and said he had the police on the phone. What were we going to do? We couldn’t run. There is not much four teenage rebels can do when each one is holding a full-size metal garbage can in his arms. We were escorted to the police station. The police called my father and my dad was forced to interrupt his sleep to come and retrieve me. I was petrified. He looked at me and said, “You will never learn!” He always loved those curt sentences that comprised four or five words but told you in no uncertain terms what the near future was going to be like. My mother saved and later gave to me that little piece of yellow paper the police gave my father, awkwardly torn from the pages of some official notepad, where someone had scribbled, “arrested for miscellaneous mischief.” I still have it to this day. Just those two words said it all – teenage logic requires an arrest warrant for “miscellaneous mischief.” I still wonder how my father survived those years.

Vacations were also a memorable experience. Every year my father took a week off from work to take his fourteen bumpkins on some camping trek; Lassen Volcano, Yosemite, and other sundry vacation sites. Those were the days – before seatbelts. Fourteen (maybe a few less since some may not have been born yet) kids heaped one upon the other, each one trying to vie for attention as “Sing along with Mitch” song books were passed out, and we attempted to sing not quite in unison some of the songs such as, “Bye Bye blackbird.” If the trip were eight hours away, it would take us sixteen hours, because there were the pit stops, the car trouble, and the stopping every fifteen minutes to spank all the kids who were misbehaving. Needless to say, I think I was spanked every fifteen minutes. I wondered sometimes if my dad enjoyed those vacations as much as we did.

I look back on my youth as I raise my own kids. I have tried to rectify the way my parents brought us up, but to no avail. I see those same rebellious attitudes in my kids that I once embodied. I think we are in some cosmic universe where every generation comes full circle. My children make the same comments I once said. My daughter wants to know the reason she needs to study history – I mean all those dead people. My son already has planned out a better way to raise his kids. I once again try to impart my wisdom to my kids, but I am finding the same roadblocks I had when I tried to impart my wisdom to my parents only now it’s in reverse. Maybe this is what unconditional love is; raising children the best you can and realizing that someday, perhaps decades away, that children, in God’s infinite wisdom, will learn to understand the wisdom of their fathers.

My father has taught me the love of God, the love of family, the importance of country (being a Republican that is). In the end, I guess that is all one can really hope for.

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Ortega's new buddy

The Marxist-Socialist anti-semite and the newly elected Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega met with Ahmadinejad. He boasted with Ahmadinejad that "Israel was a created state." Of course, Ahmadinejad doesn't recognize the holocaust. Let's not forget the pogroms against the Jews that occured decades earlier in Russia that started the political movement "Zionism." Israel was barren before the Jews emigrated to Israel. Iraq was also a created state. Can anyone guess to which direction Nicaragua is headed?

In "El Nuevo Diario" Carlos Tünnermann Bernheim writes (translation below Spanish) in his article "El futuro del país no puede ser regresar al pasado" or "The future of the country cannot be to return to the past."

Ahora, nuevamente, pareciera que se cierne el peligro de ingresar en otra confrontación, por la manera como se está manejando nuestra política exterior y los acuerdos que firma el Presidente, que incluyen no sólo cooperación económica sino también política...

Now, once again it seems the danger of joining another confrontation is hovering over us, by the way our foreign policy is being managed and from the agreements our president is signing, which include not only economic cooperation but also political cooperation...

It does seem Nicaragua is going backwards. When Ortega took power in 1979, he shut down the major newspaper of Nicaragua, "La Prensa." which at the time was anti-sandinista. I wonder how long it will take before Ortega starts censuring the press like his friend Hugo Chavez.

Ortega only won with a 38% margin, far from a mandate. And it was only through backroom deals that he only needed a 38% margin to win. From the blogs in Nicaragua, and the posts to particular articles, one gets the feeling, that the Nicaraguans are scared. They see what path Ortega is taking in Nicaragua, and they see visions of the past. In the previous election, Ortega's opposition placed banners that read, "Remember the past." The problem is much of the electorate was too young or not of voting age to remember the past. So far, it does not look good for Nicaragua.

We can thank Jimmy Carter for both of these despots, Ortega and Ahmadinejad. It was Carter who didn't look at the hostage crisis as an act of war, and instead of invading Iran, he let the hostage crisis drag on for 444 days, and it was Carter who was responsible for Ortega's rise to power in 1979 by removing support from the Somoza regime and giving support to the Sandinistas. But, what can you expect? Liberals love cozing up to dictators, and everything to them is a "police action." They don't even think that a "war on terror" exists. The planned attacks on Fort Dix and JFK airports were concoctions drummed up by the Bush administration.

The only thing that will convince the liberals will be perhaps a nuclear bomb detonated in a couple major cities, but then again that might not even wake them up.

Just one last statement, "Bush close the borders!" Pay attention! This is a national security issue.

Tuesday, June 12, 2007

It was twenty years ago today.

It was twenty years ago today Ronald Reagan gave his speech in Berlin. That almost sounds like the opening of Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Heart Club band, “It was twenty years ago today, Sgt. Pepper taught the band to play.” The speech below and the actions of Ronald Reagan led to the end of the cold war and the fall of the Berlin wall.

It is my contention that one of the greatest presidents of the twentieth century was Ronald. Reagan. Today marks the twentieth year since Reagan’s famous speech at the Berlin wall eliciting Reagan’s vision for the future – the fall of the Soviet Union. “Tear down this wall” vociferated Reagan as if Mikhail Gorbachev, the General Secretary of Russia, were standing on the Eastern side of the Berlin wall. These words were meant to be eliminated from the speech, but Reagan kept putting them back in. The words have emanated through the years to all those who yearn for freedom. He gave his speech so those on the Eastern side of the wall could hear every word. Reagan was a visionary.

Liberals to this day will say that Reagan had nothing to do with the fall of communism, and the Soviet Union would have imploded by its own weight. It is true that the Soviet Union was having economic problems at the time, but Reagan was the instrument that hastened the Soviet Union’s demise. In 1983, Reagan called the Soviet Union “the evil empire” against the advice of his advisors. Reagan used current technology such as Radio Free Europe and the voice of America to foment discontent among the populace under Soviet rule. He started a new arms race tripling the deficit. He understood that the United States could afford it; the Soviet Union could not. This was a race the Soviet Union could ill afford. It caused the Soviet Union to remove its troops from its Eastern Bloc countries because it needed the financial resources at home. This loosened the iron grip Russia held on the Eastern bloc countries. One by one, the communist countries began to fall, and Russia began to implode from within. Reagan was the symbol of freedom and anti-communism.

Reagan’s Speech

Thank you very much. Chancellor Kohl, Governing Mayor Diepgen, ladies and gentlemen: Twenty-four years ago, President John F. Kennedy visited Berlin, speaking to the people of this city and the world at the City Hall. Well, since then two other presidents have come, each in his turn, to Berlin. And today I, myself, make my second visit to your city.
We come to Berlin, we American presidents, because it's our duty to speak, in this place, of freedom. But I must confess, we're drawn here by other things as well: by the feeling of history in this city, more than 500 years older than our own nation; by the beauty of the Grunewald and the Tiergarten; most of all, by your courage and determination. Perhaps the composer Paul Lincke understood something about American presidents. You see, like so many presidents before me, I come here today because wherever I go, whatever I do: Ich hab noch einen Koffer in Berlin. [I still have a suitcase in Berlin.] Our gathering today is being broadcast throughout Western Europe and North America. I understand that it is being seen and heard as well in the East. To those listening throughout Eastern Europe, a special word: Although I cannot be with you, I address my remarks to you just as surely as to those standing here before me. For I join you, as I join your fellow countrymen in the West, in this firm, this unalterable belief: Es gibt nur ein Berlin. [There is only one Berlin.]
Behind me stands a wall that encircles the free sectors of this city, part of a vast system of barriers that divides the entire continent of Europe. From the Baltic, south, those barriers cut across Germany in a gash of barbed wire, concrete, dog runs, and guard towers. Farther south, there may be no visible, no obvious wall. But there remain armed guards and checkpoints all the same--still a restriction on the right to travel, still an instrument to impose upon ordinary men and women the will of a totalitarian state. Yet it is here in Berlin where the wall emerges most clearly; here, cutting across your city, where the news photo and the television screen have imprinted this brutal division of a continent upon the mind of the world. Standing before the Brandenburg Gate, every man is a German, separated from his fellow men. Every man is a Berliner, forced to look upon a scar. President von Weizsacker has said, "The German question is open as long as the Brandenburg Gate is closed." Today I say: As long as the gate is closed, as long as this scar of a wall is permitted to stand, it is not the German question alone that remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind. Yet I do not come here to lament. For I find in Berlin a message of hope, even in the shadow of this wall, a message of triumph.
In this season of spring in 1945, the people of Berlin emerged from their air-raid shelters to find devastation. Thousands of miles away, the people of the United States reached out to help. And in 1947 Secretary of State--as you've been told--George Marshall announced the creation of what would become known as the Marshall Plan. Speaking precisely 40 years ago this month, he said: "Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine, but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos." In the Reichstag a few moments ago, I saw a display commemorating this 40th anniversary of the Marshall Plan. I was struck by the sign on a burnt-out, gutted structure that was being rebuilt. I understand that Berliners of my own generation can remember seeing signs like it dotted throughout the western sectors of the city. The sign read simply: "The Marshall Plan is helping here to strengthen the free world." A strong, free world in the West, that dream became real. Japan rose from ruin to become an economic giant. Italy, France, Belgium-- virtually every nation in Western Europe saw political and economic rebirth; the European Community was founded. In West Germany and here in Berlin, there took place an economic miracle, the Wirtschaftswunder. Adenauer, Erhard, Reuter, and other leaders understood the practical importance of liberty--that just as truth can flourish only when the journalist is given freedom of speech, so prosperity can come about only when the farmer and businessman enjoy economic freedom. The German leaders reduced tariffs, expanded free trade, lowered taxes. From 1950 to 1960 alone, the standard of living in West Germany and Berlin doubled.
Where four decades ago there was rubble, today in West Berlin there is the greatest industrial output of any city in Germany--busy office blocks, fine homes and apartments, proud avenues, and the spreading lawns of parkland. Where a city's culture seemed to have been destroyed, today there are two great universities, orchestras and an opera, countless theaters, and museums. Where there was want, today there's abundance--food, clothing, automobiles--the wonderful goods of the Ku'damm. From devastation, from utter ruin, you Berliners have, in freedom, rebuilt a city that once again ranks as one of the greatest on earth. The Soviets may have had other plans. But my friends, there were a few things the Soviets didn't count on--Berliner Herz, Berliner Humor, ja, und Berliner Schnauze. [Berliner heart, Berliner humor, yes, and a Berliner Schnauze.]
In the 1950s, Khrushchev predicted: "We will bury you." But in the West today, we see a free world that has achieved a level of prosperity and well-being unprecedented in all human history. In the Communist world, we see failure, technological backwardness, declining standards of health, even want of the most basic kind--too little food. Even today, the Soviet Union still cannot feed itself. After these four decades, then, there stands before the entire world one great and inescapable conclusion: Freedom leads to prosperity. Freedom replaces the ancient hatreds among the nations with comity and peace. Freedom is the victor.
And now the Soviets themselves may, in a limited way, be coming to understand the importance of freedom. We hear much from Moscow about a new policy of reform and openness. Some political prisoners have been released. Certain foreign news broadcasts are no longer being jammed. Some economic enterprises have been permitted to operate with greater freedom from state control. Are these the beginnings of profound changes in the Soviet state? Or are they token gestures, intended to raise false hopes in the West, or to strengthen the Soviet system without changing it? We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace.
General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!
I understand the fear of war and the pain of division that afflict this continent-- and I pledge to you my country's efforts to help overcome these burdens. To be sure, we in the West must resist Soviet expansion. So we must maintain defenses of unassailable strength. Yet we seek peace; so we must strive to reduce arms on both sides. Beginning 10 years ago, the Soviets challenged the Western alliance with a grave new threat, hundreds of new and more deadly SS-20 nuclear missiles, capable of striking every capital in Europe. The Western alliance responded by committing itself to a counter-deployment unless the Soviets agreed to negotiate a better solution; namely, the elimination of such weapons on both sides. For many months, the Soviets refused to bargain in earnestness. As the alliance, in turn, prepared to go forward with its counter-deployment, there were difficult days--days of protests like those during my 1982 visit to this city--and the Soviets later walked away from the table.
But through it all, the alliance held firm. And I invite those who protested then-- I invite those who protest today--to mark this fact: Because we remained strong, the Soviets came back to the table. And because we remained strong, today we have within reach the possibility, not merely of limiting the growth of arms, but of eliminating, for the first time, an entire class of nuclear weapons from the face of the earth.
As I speak, NATO ministers are meeting in Iceland to review the progress of our proposals for eliminating these weapons. At the talks in Geneva, we have also proposed deep cuts in strategic offensive weapons. And the Western allies have likewise made far-reaching proposals to reduce the danger of conventional war and to place a total ban on chemical weapons.
While we pursue these arms reductions, I pledge to you that we will maintain the capacity to deter Soviet aggression at any level at which it might occur. And in cooperation with many of our allies, the United States is pursuing the Strategic Defense Initiative--research to base deterrence not on the threat of offensive retaliation, but on defenses that truly defend; on systems, in short, that will not target populations, but shield them. By these means we seek to increase the safety of Europe and all the world. But we must remember a crucial fact: East and West do not mistrust each other because we are armed; we are armed because we mistrust each other. And our differences are not about weapons but about liberty. When President Kennedy spoke at the City Hall those 24 years ago, freedom was encircled, Berlin was under siege. And today, despite all the pressures upon this city, Berlin stands secure in its liberty. And freedom itself is transforming the globe.
In the Philippines, in South and Central America, democracy has been given a rebirth. Throughout the Pacific, free markets are working miracle after miracle of economic growth. In the industrialized nations, a technological revolution is taking place--a revolution marked by rapid, dramatic advances in computers and telecommunications.
In Europe, only one nation and those it controls refuse to join the community of freedom. Yet in this age of redoubled economic growth, of information and innovation, the Soviet Union faces a choice: It must make fundamental changes, or it will become obsolete. Today thus represents a moment of hope. We in the West stand ready to cooperate with the East to promote true openness, to break down barriers that separate people, to create a safe, freer world. And surely there is no better place than Berlin, the meeting place of East and West, to make a start. Free people of Berlin: Today, as in the past, the United States stands for the strict observance and full implementation of all parts of the Four Power Agreement of 1971. Let us use this occasion, the 750th anniversary of this city, to usher in a new era, to seek a still fuller, richer life for the Berlin of the future. Together, let us maintain and develop the ties between the Federal Republic and the Western sectors of Berlin, which is permitted by the 1971 agreement.
And I invite Mr. Gorbachev: Let us work to bring the Eastern and Western parts of the city closer together, so that all the inhabitants of all Berlin can enjoy the benefits that come with life in one of the great cities of the world. To open Berlin still further to all Europe, East and West, let us expand the vital air access to this city, finding ways of making commercial air service to Berlin more convenient, more comfortable, and more economical. We look to the day when West Berlin can become one of the chief aviation hubs in all central Europe.
With our French and British partners, the United States is prepared to help bring international meetings to Berlin. It would be only fitting for Berlin to serve as the site of United Nations meetings, or world conferences on human rights and arms control or other issues that call for international cooperation.
There is no better way to establish hope for the future than to enlighten young minds, and we would be honored to sponsor summer youth exchanges, cultural events, and other programs for young Berliners from the East. Our French and British friends, I'm certain, will do the same. And it's my hope that an authority can be found in East Berlin to sponsor visits from young people of the Western sectors.
One final proposal, one close to my heart: Sport represents a source of enjoyment and ennoblement, and you may have noted that the Republic of Korea--South Korea--has offered to permit certain events of the 1988 Olympics to take place in the North. International sports competitions of all kinds could take place in both parts of this city. And what better way to demonstrate to the world the openness of this city than to offer in some future year to hold the Olympic games here in Berlin, East and West? In these four decades, as I have said, you Berliners have built a great city. You've done so in spite of threats--the Soviet attempts to impose the East-mark, the blockade. Today the city thrives in spite of the challenges implicit in the very presence of this wall. What keeps you here? Certainly there's a great deal to be said for your fortitude, for your defiant courage. But I believe there's something deeper, something that involves Berlin's whole look and feel and way of life--not mere sentiment. No one could live long in Berlin without being completely disabused of illusions. Something instead, that has seen the difficulties of life in Berlin but chose to accept them, that continues to build this good and proud city in contrast to a surrounding totalitarian presence that refuses to release human energies or aspirations. Something that speaks with a powerful voice of affirmation, that says yes to this city, yes to the future, yes to freedom. In a word, I would submit that what keeps you in Berlin is love--love both profound and abiding.
Perhaps this gets to the root of the matter, to the most fundamental distinction of all between East and West. The totalitarian world produces backwardness because it does such violence to the spirit, thwarting the human impulse to create, to enjoy, to worship. The totalitarian world finds even symbols of love and of worship an affront. Years ago, before the East Germans began rebuilding their churches, they erected a secular structure: the television tower at Alexander Platz. Virtually ever since, the authorities have been working to correct what they view as the tower's one major flaw, treating the glass sphere at the top with paints and chemicals of every kind. Yet even today when the sun strikes that sphere--that sphere that towers over all Berlin-- the light makes the sign of the cross. There in Berlin, like the city itself, symbols of love, symbols of worship, cannot be suppressed.
As I looked out a moment ago from the Reichstag, that embodiment of German unity, I noticed words crudely spray-painted upon the wall, perhaps by a young Berliner: "This wall will fall. Beliefs become reality." Yes, across Europe, this wall will fall. For it cannot withstand faith; it cannot withstand truth. The wall cannot withstand freedom.
And I would like, before I close, to say one word. I have read, and I have been questioned since I've been here about certain demonstrations against my coming. And I would like to say just one thing, and to those who demonstrate so. I wonder if they have ever asked themselves that if they should have the kind of government they apparently seek, no one would ever be able to do what they're doing again.
Thank you and God bless you all.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

Immigration Bill Killed

Michelle Malkin has been liveblogging this flawed Immigration Bill all day. A second attempt at cloture failed. Senator Jeff Sessions from Alabama lists twenty flaws he saw with the bill Its good to know there are still some who are not RINOs. I wonder what spin President Bush will use now? How will he blame his Republican base? Will it have been empty Rhetoric filled with empty platitudes or some nonsensical slogan?

The fear is now that this bill will be resurrected only worse if Hillary Clinton takes the white house. Expect another massacre of Republicans in the Senate again in 2008 with so many Republicans siding with Kennedy and as Michelle Malkin coined, "This Shamnesty Bill." Can't these people see what the liberal immigration laws are doing to Europe.

Sarkozy is clamping down on illegal immigration through incentives and quotas. He plans to expel thousands of immigrants a year.

Imagine what will happen with the chain migration when Bush starts bringing over the Iraqui refugees, and the future Jihadists that will come with them.

I ask my daughter, "Do you know why you don't have to buy a lottery ticket to win the lottery?" She responds, "Why?" and I answer, "Because by being born in this country, you have already won the lottery." Let's keep in that way.

Until there is a fence, and proper security, there should be no talk of amnesty. Plug the sieve first, and then let's sit down and talk about controlled migration, and a guest worker program.

Some Final thoughts from Michelle Malkin

As annoying as Reid's refrain was, he is right: This was the president's bill. This was the monstrous sham that President Bush tried to ram through the Senate with his pal Teddy Kennedy--subverting the committee process, attempting to cram it in before the Memorial Day holiday, rushing to limit debate, and then complaining about delays. This was the bill President Bush sent conservative-bashing bureaucrats like DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff to peddle on CNN. This was the bill President Bush championed while deriding critics as fearful bigots and running away from building the fence he promised to build.

If the White House thinks conservatives are going to forget whose bill this was and the tactics the White House used in its failed attempt to ram it through Congress, they better think again.

If Lindsay Graham and John McCain think their abominable behavior is going to be forgotten, they better think again.

All is not lost within the Republican Party, though. Watching the floor debate closely the past week, I can tell you that we have three staunch, eloquent conservative defenders in Sens. Sessions, DeMint, and Coburn (though I'm not sure why Coburn didn't vote on cloture). Unlike President Bush and the pro-amnesty Republicans, these three Republican senators stand out in their understanding and appreciation of the rule of law, the past historical failures of shamnesty bargains, and the vital nexis between border security and homeland security.

I can't let the night end without also noting the Democrats who defied Reid. Without their votes, shamnesty would be alive and thriving. Whatever their reasons, they chose the right side

Final Roll Call: (click to view larger image)

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Remembering D-Day 63 years ago today

This is the last generation that knew how to fight a war, and when we weren't afraid to invoke the Lord's name. Imagine if this were to happen today. Today's Democratic party and the ACLU would be up in arms. No, Hillary Clinton, Iraq is not Bush's war, it is an American war. The following is FDR's address to the nation at the commencement of D-day when Americans understood the difference between good and evil. Notice, Franklin Delano Roosevelt calls D-day a crusade - Wonder how that would go over today?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt June 6, 1944

My Fellow Americans:

Last night, when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at that moment that troops of the United States and our Allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far.

And so, in this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer:

Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith.

They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Success may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest -- until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, for their return to the haven of home.

Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom.

And for us at home -- fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas, whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them -- help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves in renewed faith in Thee in this hour of great sacrifice.

Many people have urged that I call the nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

Give us strength, too -- strength in our daily tasks, to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our armed forces.

And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons wheresoever they may be.

And, O Lord, give us faith. Give us faith in Thee; faith in our sons; faith in each other; faith in our united crusade. Let not the keeness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment -- let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogances. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace -- a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

Thy will be done, Almighty God.


Tuesday, June 5, 2007

Jihadists and the other Americas

During the 1970’s, Daniel Ortega was a central figure in Nicaraguan politics. Ortega, the head of the Marxist-Leninist Party, FSLN (Frente Sandinista Liberación Nacional) was brought to power as a result of President Jimmy Carter’s failed policies in the region. After Carter helped Ortega gain power in 1979, Ortega quickly became an enemy of the United States, and an ally of the Soviet Union. Ortega’s tenure proved to be a disaster to the Nicaraguan people.

In 1984, Ortega called for free elections knowing he would win a majority, but in 1990, Ortega lost his election bid to Violeta Chamorro. He also lost his election bids in 1996 and 2001 to Arnoldo Aleman and Enrique Bolaños respectively. Understanding that the Cold War had ended, Ortega began to mollify his rhetoric on his prior Marxist policies in favor of a more moderate democratic Socialism.

The former president Arnoldo Aleman was under house arrest because of corruption in the Aleman administration. Ortega made a pact with the PLC, (the Partido Liberal Constitucional), the party of Aleman which would give Aleman a seat in the “Asamblea” and thereby granting him immunity from further prosecution. The pact involved a split in the PLC. This split allowed Ortega to win by almost the same percentage that he lost the prior two elections, 37.99%. Jimmy carter went to oversee the elections. Carter said the elections were fair. Don’t you just love Latin American politics especially with Carter in charge? Both Chavez and Castro called to congratulate Ortega. Had this pact not occurred, Ortega would not be president today.

Today, according to La Prensa, two congressmen Ron Klein and Connie Mack, both from Florida declared that Iran, Nicaragua and Venezuela are, "a Trio of Tyrants", and that they were disappointed in Ortega's recently annouunced trip to Iran. But, who would have expected any differently?

What does this have to do with the United States? Well, a lot!

La Prensa of Nicaragua reports

Ortega will visit his friends

President Daniel Ortega begins his international tour which includes state visits to the most controversial figures today, like Hugo Chavez, Muammar, Al-Gadafi and Mahmoud Ahmadneyad, head of states of Venezuela, Libya and Iran, respectively.

Sandinista Radio has already made it known that the Nicaraguan head of state arrives today, to back Chavez for not renewing the transmission licenses of Radio Caracas Television, (RCTV), an action that seen by various sectors as an attack of Freedom of Expression.

In spite of all of Ortega’s rhetoric, his views have not changed. He is still a Marxist-Socialist and he will welcome into his country Jihadists who want to harm America. Ortega did change his stripes, but not in the direction that would be amicable towards the United States.

Jonathan Schanzner reports in National Review of the threat in South America where he concludes:

A history of tolerance notwithstanding, this weekend’s disrupted plot demonstrates that U.S. counterterrorism and intelligence agencies must cast a wide net, one that includes even the tiny nations along the northern coast of South America.

Few analysts have ever thought about a terrorism nexus in South America apart from the Tri-Border area (a lawless area between Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina), where Hezbollah and Iran are known to operate. It’s time to start looking at other South American states that may be inadvertently hosting terrorists. Guyana and Trinidad were put on the map this weekend. Let’s not forget about Suriname

What does this mean? This means that where once an Ocean separated us, this may no longer be the case. Ortega will push his country more to the left and more to a dictatorial regime given the opportunity, and he will become the tyrant that is innate in his personality. Ortega has proven to be a savvy politician and understands the machinations of Latin American politics. Ortega will now embrace those who want to kill us. Iran, Venezuela, and others will take place of the Soviet Union. We must therefore look beyond the Middle East and monitor our own backyard, Central and South America, because with this new immigration bill, you can bet there will be a Jihadist or two entering our borders.

Monday, June 4, 2007

Thompson gives speech

I heard Fred Thompson on C-Span today on a speech he gave in Richmond, and I liked what he said. You can read about his speech here . I wish he would hurry up and enter the race
Republican Party Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory DeeperLeft member