Friday, December 31, 2010

Here's To A Great New Year!



Wishing All A Happy, Healthy, and Prosperous 2011

From the Birthplace of Independent Conservatism

Rational Nation USA

Rule By Bureaucratic Regulatory Fiat

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism


Certainly there is much truth in the old saying, "where there is a will there is a way." The ever-growing statist bureaucracy, aka the United States Government, continues to circumvent the will of the people.

The provision in ObamaCar - Section 1233 - that would have mandated government payment for end-of-life counseling is back. Coined "death panels" by Sarah Palin, this onerous provision created such public concern over the possibility of rationing that it was dropped from the final bill.

However, not to be deterred, the provision found its way back -- this time buried in new Medicare regulations. The regulation provides for end-of-life counselling during regular annual wellness visits. The regulations were issued a month ago but kept quiet until just recently.

Author of Section 1233, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) was delighted. Here is what he had to say:
"Mr. Blumenauer's office celebrated 'a quiet victory,' but urged supporters not to crow about it," reports the New York Times. Deathly quiet. In early November, his office sent an e-mail plea to supporters: "We would ask that you not broadcast this accomplishment out to any of your lists . . . e-mails can too easily be forwarded." They had been lucky that "thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have discovered it. . . . The longer this [regulation] goes unnoticed, the better our chances of keeping it."

It is resoundingly clear that we no longer have a government that represents us, but rather a regulatory giant that is capable of forcing whatever the state wishes to use to increase its power down our throats. Bureaucratic regulatory statism at it worst, right here at home in the good ole USA!

Charles Krauthammer has an excellent article in Today's Washington Post, you can read it here.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel.

Via: Memeorandum

Thursday, December 30, 2010

Further Exposing the Left

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism



I find myself once again amazed by the liberal progressive lexicon. WaPo in today's article entitled 'Don't ask, don't tell' has been repealed. ROTC still shouldn't be on campus' further exposes the liberal mindset for what is is. 
Now that asking and telling has ceased to be problematic in military circles, ROTC has resurfaced as a national issue: Will universities such as Harvard, Yale and other Ivy League schools be opened to Reserve Officers' Training Corps since colleges can no longer can argue that the military is biased against gays and therefore not welcome?


At Notre Dame, on that 1989 visit and several following, I learned that the ROTC academics were laughably weak. They were softie courses. The many students I interviewed were candid about their reasons for signing up: free tuition and monthly stipends, plus the guarantee of a job in the military after college. With some exceptions, they were mainly from families that couldn't afford ever-rising college tabs.


To oppose ROTC, as I have since my college days in the 1960s, when my school enticed too many of my classmates into joining, is not to be anti-soldier. I admire those who join armies, whether America's or the Taliban's: for their discipline, for their loyalty to their buddies and to their principles, for their sacrifices to be away from home. In recent years, I've had several Iraq and Afghanistan combat veterans in my college classes. If only the peace movement were as populated by people of such resolve and daring.


ROTC and its warrior ethic taint the intellectual purity of a school, if by purity we mean trying to rise above the foul idea that nations can kill and destroy their way to peace. If a school such as Harvard does sell out to the military, let it at least be honest and add a sign at its Cambridge front portal: Harvard, a Pentagon Annex.
H/T's: Weasel Zipper and AoS

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel.

Via: Memeorandum

Liberals Just Can't Grasp the Constitution

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism


The left, as educated and intellectual as they see themselves apparently have great difficulty understanding the United States Constitution. Why? Because it is over 100 years old. Could it be it is just to simple for their superior minds?





Example, the first amendment. Now this is as confusing as anything anybody could image.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

h/t Eye Blast

What country am I living in? Scratch... What planet am I living on?

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel.

Via: Memeorandum

FOX is Tops

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism



The 2010 results are in, and once again FOX News captures the top rating slot. After nine years of doing so it should be relatively clear, at least to the rational mind anyway, that America finds FOX  fair and balanced. But you can rest assured that the liberal progressive mindset is going wacko over this report and will spin it in the typical and usual liberal progressive fashion.

Fox, owing to its typically conservative leanings, draws the ire of the political left. The elitist of the progressive left simply refuse to accept the wisdom of the American people, ie: middle class.
The Nielsen numbers are in for 2010, and in the battle for cable news ratings supremacy, Fox News took the title for the ninth year in a row -- bludgeoning the competition for another year.

The blowout comes on the heels on Fox News’ surging 2009, when the News Corp.-owned channel posted its highest-rated year in the network’s 13-year history. (Overall, cable news audiences were down across the board -- though FNC's decline was from a high-water mark.)

Among the other 2010 highlights:

>> MSNBC, which in 2009 boasted its first full-year primetime win over CNN in the 25-to-54-year-old demographic, did so again, while beating CNN in total day “demo” viewers and average total viewers in primetime – both firsts for the network.

>> CNN had its lowest rated year in 14 years in primetime, both in terms 25-54-year-old viewers and average total viewers. And barring a breaking news event in the next few days, the network will at least tie its lowest rated year ever (1999) in total day “demo” viewers.

For average primetime and total viewers in 2010, Fox News beat its cable news competitors (CNN, MSNBC and HLN) combined in total viewers -- and we outslugged CNN and MSNBC combined in “demo.”

More here.

FOX News and commentary is obviously what the discerning American viewer finds to be accurate and balanced reporting. Naturally the American intellectual elite, aka he liberal progressive statist, will continue to use their usual and customary ways to discredit that which the majority of Americans see as rational and objective reporting.

The progressive left continues to not get it.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel.

Via: Memeorandum

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Illegal Aliens... A Difficult Concept for Liberal Progressives to Comprehend

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism


Lets get real for just a moment. Of course to do so pre supposes the liberals ability to think rationally. In the video following a very rational and reasoned Megyn Kelly offers what any thinking mind would quickly grasp and embrace.



Of course the liberal progressive Society of Professional Journalists supports using the the politically correct and apparently unoffensive {at least to the illegal alien anyway} phrase of undocumented immigrant. Perhaps it is only the opinion of this independent conservative but Megyn Kely is spot on. Anyone who thinks otherwise has been infected by the virulent liberal progressive brain disorder.

Write up from the left leaning TPM.

Plenty of conservatives are pretty upset over a campaign by the Society of Professional Journalists to convince reporters to stop using the terms "illegal aliens" and "illegal immigrants" in favor of "undocumented immigrant." But none are as livid as perpetually outraged Fox News host Megyn Kelly, who on Wednesday afternoon asked if journalists were going to start calling rapists "non-consensual sex partners" next.


"You could say that a burglar is an unauthorized visitor. You know, you could say that a rapist is a non-consensual sex partner which, obviously, would be considered offensive to the victims of those crimes," Kelly said. "So how far could you take this?"


"What if there was a push by the criminal defense... bar to re-brand the use of the word rapist to nonconsensual sex partner?" Kelly asks her guest. Jehmu Greene, the former president of the Women's Media Center, said that was like comparing "apples and oranges."


Kelly also expressed frustration over the politically correct language dominating American culture.


"You know, we did a segment earlier in the year on how little people find the term midget offensive, and so you can't say that anymore," Kelly lamented. "There's so many words that are suddenly becoming hurtful, and part of the group thinks it's hurtful, and the other group doesn't, and you're left as a journalist saying, I don't know what to do."

I for one am  beginning to think a "Kelly for President" movement might have merit. She certainly has the looks. And she has the brains to go along with them.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel

Via: Memeorandum

Liberal Moonbat Meme of the Day: Conservatives Motivated by "Fear and Large Amygdalas"

by the Left Coast Rebel

An enlarged amygdalas has nothing to do with one's prostate (or other body part), rather it's the newest suspect in a long list of leftist attempts to connect the dots and offer an explanation on the motivations of anyone that prefers limited government to statism, freedom to socialism and human liberty to collectivist slavery.

The amygdalas region of the brain is responsible for "fear and primitivism" and a new study out of the UK shows that the cavemen/women on the right have a super-large amygdalas:

(Raw Story) A study at University College London in the UK has found that conservatives' brains have larger amygdalas than the brains of liberals. Amygdalas are responsible for fear and other "primitive" emotions. At the same time, conservatives' brains were also found to have a smaller anterior cingulate -- the part of the brain responsible for courage and optimism.

If the study is confirmed, it could give us the first medical explanation for why conservatives tend to be more receptive to threats of terrorism, for example, than liberals. And it may help to explain why conservatives like to plan based on the worst-case scenario, while liberals tend towards rosier outlooks.

"It is very significant because it does suggest there is something about political attitudes that are either encoded in our brain structure through our experience or that our brain structure in some way determines or results in our political attitudes," Geraint Rees, the neurologist who carried out the study, told the media.

Rees, who heads up UCL's Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience, was originally asked half-jokingly to study the differences between liberal and conservative brains for an episode of BBC 4's Today show that was hosted by actor Colin Firth. But, after studying 90 UCL students and two British parliamentarians, the neurologist was shocked to discover a clear correlation between the size of certain brain parts and political views.

The point to this story should not be that conservatives do or do not have enlarged amygdalas's but rather than those on the left are so close-minded and stupid as to grant clemency to the notion that caveman-esque conservative behavior is explained by this underappreciated lobal region.

What underdeveloped section of the liberal brain grants clemency to the most horrid ideas ever known to mankind, ie. "socialism and communism has never worked because America never gave it a proper shot"?

I know that this graphic is all over the net but I have to post it here, regardless; the liberal brain:
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_bstXBEDnG9w/TRufZ5MMWWI/AAAAAAAAEXM/ZP_m2MylnLQ/s1600/liberal-brain.bmp

And the conservative/libertarian/Objectivist/limited government advocate/Goldwater Republican brain:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_bstXBEDnG9w/TRufaFgxPwI/AAAAAAAAEXU/mwO4dg5z50A/s1600/Brain_Capitalist_550.gif
Exit question - If conservatives are driven to madness by their amygdalas then doesn't that mean that they are not responsible for their actions (according to the liberal worldview?).

Thus, should conservatives and their belief system be part of the left's protected class system?

Cross posted to LCR.

More Liberal Gibberish Yet Once Again

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Before I get into the the issue first let us understand what fascism is. It is an economic and political system that allow for the private ownership of property and business however both are highly regulated by the state. As in Fascist Italy and Nazis Germany to point to just two fascist states of the 20th century.

Fascism is not, as departing Congressman John Hall D-NY understands it to be. I do not know what school he attended but I am sure glad I was not among his classmates. He attributes his understanding of fascism to his school days stating that; "I learned when I was in social studies class in school that corporate ownership or corporate control of government is called Fascism. As can clearly be seen from the prior paragraph {be sure to checkout the link}this soon to be retired congressman does not know what he is talking about.
In a wide-ranging interview before he prepares to leave the House of Representatives, Hudson Valley Congressman John Hall warned that the nation could quickly descend into Fascism if more is not done to curb the influence of corporate money in politics.

Speaking about the Citizen's United decision, which allowed unregulated flow of cash into campaign coffers, Hall said, "I learned when I was in social studies class in school that corporate ownership or corporate control of government is called Fascism. So that's really the question— is that the destination if this court decision goes unchecked?"

Hall said that the flow of corporate dollars is why he and the Democrats lost control of Congress.

"The country was bought," he said. "The extremist, most recent two appointees to the Supreme Court, who claimed in their confirmation hearings before the Senate that they would not be activist judges, made a very activist decision in that it overturned more than a century of precedent. And as a result there were millions of extra dollars thrown into this race."

The extra money floating around, he said, compounded the Democrats weaknesses on the economy, unemployment and the mortgage crisis. And he said that for of the accomplishments of the lame duck Congress, their failure to pass the Disclose Act—which would have at least forced corporations to reveal who they were donating to—stood out a black mark on the session.
Read more here.

If there is a threat of creeping fascism it is likely it come from the left. Of course the Democrats will point to the Supremer Court decision as being responsible for this alleged creep to fascism in America. This amounts to nothing more than smoke and mirrors and it is a lie.

I point you to the book by Jonah Goldberg "Liberal Fascism" The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Change. It is the Democrats (liberal progressives) that want and fight for more Government control and regulation of our lives and businesses. If we allow the liberal progressives to have their way we will become a more highly regulated society and our economic system will become much like the ones the soon to be ex congressman warns against. But of course that is the liberal progressive plan isn't it?

The progressive left continues to use the same old tactics of attempting to confuse the truth with their desired fantasy that they call reality. And they are betting on the long haul and that Americans educated in the progressive public school system will soon not be able to tell the difference.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel

Via: Memeorandum

Time to Replace the GOP Chair in Massachusetts

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


I just received the following urgent message from Iron Mike of the Rabid Republican Blog.
I think this needs attention from REAL Republicans...

Iron Mike of course is referring to the Boston Herald article covering Republican Party Chief Jennifer Nassour's plea to save her job.

Following a disastrous election cycle in which the party she is the nominal head of suffered a proverbial wipe out in both congressional and statewide races she is under fire. Certainly the results of the 2010 elections were very disappointing especially coming on the heals of the Scott Brown Senate win that captured the seat formerly held by the late Democratic Senator Ted Kennedy.

Perhaps what is most disturbing is Nassour's refusal to accept any responsibility for the shellacking the GOP suffered in the Bay State. AKA the Socialist Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Perhaps Nassour's support for establishment Republicans partially explains her troubles. During a time when the rest of the nation was focused on changing the course of government it seems Nassour was content with the status quo.

Excerpt from the Boston Herald article....
The embattled head of the Bay State’s beleaguered Republican Party made an impassioned New Year’s plea yesterday to keep her job as she tries to beat back a move to oust her after the GOP’s astonishing election-year wipeout in the congressional and statewide races.


“Don’t give up on us,” Jennifer Nassour implored the state’s GOP faithful yesterday in an interview with the Herald, pointing out that the number of Republican seats in the state Legislature has nearly doubled since she began as chairwoman in January 2009.


“You’re always going to have your ups and downs, so every victory should be celebrated. This is a phenomenal opportunity for us to move forward,” Nassour said.


She also argued she’s the best person to keep an eye on the Democratic political machine during an expected contentious redistricting process after the state lost one of its 10 congressional seats.


“It’s a really important time to have someone who is already a strong party chairman,” Nassour said of the inside power plays as lawmakers redraw voting districts across the state. “I’m the perfect person to be that watchdog.”


But Worcester state committeeman Bill McCarthy — who tried to oust Nassour in November and is running to replace her in a Jan. 6 party election — said she didn’t score enough wins this year.


“We didn’t win any statewide or congressional seats, and I believe I can take a grassroots approach and win more seats,” McCarthy, 45, said.


He also faulted Nassour for funneling too much party money to failed GOP gubernatorial candidate Charlie Baker. “We lost that race miserably,” he said.


Republicans had high expectations after U.S. Sen. Scott Brown’s upstart win in a January special election. Nassour recruited 138 GOP candidates for last election, including presumed strong challengers such as state Rep. Karyn Polito for state treasurer and former Turnpike board member Mary Connaughton for auditor — both open seats.


But Democrats made a clean sweep in the 10 congressional races and all six constitutional offices....

It is time independent Republicans and Tea Party activists gained control of the Bay State's GOP. In so doing the Republican party may actually give the voters of the Bay State a clear choice in future elections.

The alternative? The status quo. More of the same.

Find the full text of the article here.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

More Crumbs for Thought

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Pearls of wisdom from a rational thinker born of the Age of Reason.
"But if we are to be told by a foreign power ... what we shall do, and what we shall not do, we have independence yet to seek, and have contended hitherto for very little." George Washington, letter to Alexander Hamilton, 1796


"Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all." George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

Do leaders such as Washington even exist in this day and age? One can't help but wonder.

The Dangers of Internet Regulation

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Rasmussen Reports confirm the majority of Americans favor free market competition over government control believing the market will protect internet users more than governmental regulation.

Additionally they fear governmental regulation will lead to the ultimate pushing of a political agenda. Obviously the fear here is that the political ideology and agenda of the party in power would be what would get pushed at the expense of censorship of opposing thought.

American voters believe free market competition will protect Internet users more than government regulation and fear that regulation will be used to push a political agenda.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that only 21% of Likely U.S. Voters want the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to regulate the Internet as it does radio and television. Fifty-four percent (54%) are opposed to such regulation, and 25% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

The survey was conducted shortly after the FCC decided on a party line vote to impose so-called “net neutrality” regulations on the Internet world. Republicans and unaffiliated voters overwhelmingly oppose FCC regulation of the Internet, while Democrats are more evenly divided. Those who use the Internet most are most opposed to FCC regulations.

By a 52% to 27% margin, voters believe that more free market competition is better than more regulation for protecting Internet users. Republicans and unaffiliated voters overwhelmingly share this view, but a plurality of Democrats (46%) think more regulation is the better approach.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters believe that the FCC would use its regulatory authority to promote a political agenda. Half that number (28%) disagree and believe the commission would regulate in an unbiased manner. The partisan divide is the same on this question as the others. A plurality of Democrats sees an unbiased regulatory approach, while most Republicans and unaffiliated voters fear a political agenda.

As you would expect, there is a huge gap between the Political Class and Mainstream Voters on this topic. Most Mainstream voters see free market competition as the best way to protect Internet users, but most in the Political Class prefer more regulation. Seventy-eight percent (78%) in the Political Class believe the regulations would be handled in an unbiased manner, while 72% of Mainstream voters believe they would be used to promote a political agenda.

It all makes sense to those who truly are desirous of free and open communication where all thought is available to the public. Only those who want to stifle opposing views {from their own} and wish to control information {propagandists?} will support internet regulations such as the FCC has decided is neccessary.

The full article here.

Via: Memeorandum

Is The Conservative Movement To Become History?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Being the father of independent conservative thought I find myself awestruck by the position of the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America. The two groups announcement that they will not attend CPAC's February conference strikes me as being driven totally by idealogical beliefs rooted in the dark ages.

While they may claim the reason for their refusal to participate is due to the organizations "financial mismanagement and movement away from conservative principals" the true underlying reason rests in CPAC's invitation to GOProud, a homosexual activist group, to attend the conference.

Having been a young man in my late twenties and early thirties {I was an independent conservative even in those days} I recall the idealogical dark age mentality of one Anita Bryant who railed against homosexuality because it would be the destruction of the family and family values as the religious right believes they ought to be .
Penny Nance - The New Anita Bryant

I am sure this is no news flash, but the family today is threatened by far less because of homosexuals amongst us than it is by the lack of parental guidance and the failure to teach the truth that hard work, perseverance, and diligence is the bedrock of a happy and successful life. Rather than focusing on the principles that help to insure family values and success some on the right {exception being the independent conservatives} seems intent on reverting back to the dark ages when the only accepted beliefs was that of flawed religious mysticism.

Given we now are living in the 21st century it is incredulous to the thinking mind that such bigotry still exits. But given the irrationality of religious mysticism of all faiths I suppose it should not be surprising.

Here are some excerpts from the WND article.
Two of the nation's premier moral issues organizations, the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America, are refusing to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference in February because a homosexual activist group, GOProud, has been invited.

"We've been very involved in CPAC for over a decade and have managed a couple of popular sessions. However, we will no longer be involved with CPAC because of the organization's financial mismanagement and movement away from conservative principles," said Tom McClusky, senior vice president for FRC Action.

"CWA has decided not to participate in part because of GOProud," CWA President Penny Nance told WND.

FRC and CWA join the American Principles Project, American Values, Capital Research Center, the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, and the National Organization for Marriage in withdrawing from CPAC. In November, APP organized a boycott of CPAC over the participation of GOProud

The American Conservative Union, longtime organizers of CPAC, disclosed just before Christmas that GOProud would be considered a "participating organization," the second highest level of participation. As a "participating organization," GOProud has a voice in planning the conference.

The decision followed two hotly contested CPAC board votes over GOProud. The first vote ended in a tie. The outcome of the second vote has not been officially disclosed, but a source at ACU leaked the decision favoring GOProud to the media.

The American Conservative Union, longtime organizers of CPAC, disclosed just before Christmas that GOProud would be considered a "participating organization," the second highest level of participation. As a "participating organization," GOProud has a voice in planning the conference.

The decision followed two hotly contested CPAC board votes over GOProud. The first vote ended in a tie. The outcome of the second vote has not been officially disclosed, but a source at ACU leaked the decision favoring GOProud to the media

ACU is also currently struggling through an embezzlement scandal, in which the ex-wife of ACU Chairman David Keene is suspected of stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from the organization. Diana Carr, ACU's former bookkeeper, was fired in January 2010.

Nobody from ACU was available to comment, as the organization's offices are closed for the holiday season.

"By bringing in GOProud, CPAC was effectively saying moral opposition to homosexuality is no longer welcome in the conservative movement," said LaBarbera. "Would CPAC bring in an organization specifically devoted to promoting abortion and pretend it's conservative?" LaBarbera has formerly participated in CPAC, but said he may protest the conference this year.

"Shame on CPAC for defending the absurd proposition that one can be 'conservative' while embracing moral surrender – in this case the idea espoused by GOProud of the government granting 'rights' and benefits based on sinful sexual conduct long regarded as anathema to biblical and Judeo-Christian values," LaBarbera added.


For those who wish to read more of this dark age philosophy please visit here.

If the conservative movement hopes to have a chance of surviving it must begin to accept it is past time to recognize principles and values that are based in logical and rational thought rather than mysticism. Failing the ability to do so will eventually ensure the demise of conservatism.

Having said the above I remind all that religion has over the course of time has been responsible for untold numbers of unjustified deaths, and been responsible for the misery of many untold souls. An understanding of  history will bear out these statements.

Via: Memeorandum

Monday, December 27, 2010

Somalian Insurgents Threaten US

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Excerpts from the Washington Post.
MOGADISHU, Somalia -- A leader of Somalia's Islamist insurgency threatened to attack America during a speech broadcast Monday.

"We tell the American President Barack Obama to embrace Islam before we come to his country," said Fuad Mohamed "Shongole" Qalaf.

For those on the left, this is a direct threat. It is worded in such a way so as to follow Islam's three tier methodology of converting infidels to the faith of Mohammed.

First tier.... Attempt to convert the infidel to the faith willing as is alluded to in remark meant for Obama.

Second tier.... Failing #1 subvert the infidel(s) to Islamic Sharia law.

Third tier.... Failing #2 kill the infidel(s)

More....

Al-Shabab has not yet launched an attack outside Africa but Western intelligence has long been worried because the group targeted young Somali-Americans for recruitment. About 20 have traveled to Somalia for training and at least three were used as suicide bombers inside Somalia.


Al-Shabab holds most of southern and central Somalia and has the support of hundreds of foreign fighters, mostly radicalized East Africans...


Obviously Al-Shabab is effectively recruiting extremists to the cause of Jihad in East Africa and the tentacles of this evil has taken hold in western societies as well. The United States of America is undoubtedly the most hated and targeting recruits from America (Somalians residing in America) is no doubt a priority.

More....

The al-Shabab militia launched coordinated suicide attacks in Uganda in July that killed 76 people. It has also announced its allegiance to al-Qaida and is believed to be harboring a mastermind of the twin 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed 224 people.


This of course is further indication the worldwide poisonous web of Islamic extremism is growing and allegiances to al-Qaida are strengthening as well. The threat to liberty posed by this 7th century religion is real and it is great. Extreme Islam knows no tolerance and accepts nothing but complete and total allegiance to Islam. Refer to tiers 1-3 above.

More....

The radio message was recorded in the town of Afgoye, near the Somali capital, during a meeting of Shongole and Sheik Hassan Dahir Aweys, formerly the leader of insurgent group Hizbul Islam. The two insurgent groups had clashed several times previously but announced a merger last week. Aweys said his group will fight under al-Shabab's command.


"We have united for the sake of our ideology and we are going to redouble our efforts to remove the government and the African Union from the country," said Aweys on Monday.


Forces have "united for the sake of our ideology" which of course means the forced rule of Islamic Sharia law over all inhabitants of the region. The goal is domination of Islam locally, regionally, and internationally.

Finally....

Analysts fear that al-Qaida linked insurgents are also gaining ground across the Gulf of Aden in the unstable nation of Yemen. If Yemen fell, that would mean failed states on either side of the shipping route leading into the strategically vital Suez Canal, the route taken by a substantial portion of the world's oil shipments.


One of the strategic goal of Islamic extremists is to cripple the economies of the western world. Choking off the supply of oil is certainly one of their main objectives, and should they gain control of shipping routes to the Suez Canal they will succeed in doing so. For a time at the very least.

If anyone, on the left or the right, doubts the global intent of extreme Islam to control not only religious dogma, but the liberties free people everywhere enjoy they are naive or nuts. The greatest danger the world faces, right behind the possibility of economic collapse is the threat of extreme Islam.

So as we consider Mosques dotting our landscape it is prudent to consider what may be being taught behind the walls of these religious structures.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel

Via: Memeorandum

Sunday, December 26, 2010

Israel Under Attack From Leftists in the USA

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


I find myself totally upset over the willful ignorance of some people. I specifically refer to the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign, a pro Palestinian propaganda add campaign that was slated to be waged against Israelis and their nation. Fortunately the ad campaign this pro Arabic leftist group was sponsoring was canceled. The Seattle Times carried an article covering the issue. Here is a short excerpt:


In a reversal of an earlier decision, Metro Transit said Thursday it would not allow a bus ad alleging "Israeli war crimes," saying a flood of comments has convinced officials that service could be disrupted.

The ad, purchased by the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign, ties alleged Israeli war crimes to U.S. military aid. The ad had been set to run for a month on the sides of 12 buses starting next week.

Metro also rejected proposals for two counter ads.

"The escalation of this issue from one of 12 local bus placards to a widespread and often vitriolic international debate introduces new and significant security concerns that compel reassessment," said King County Executive Dow Constantine.

Metro spokeswoman Linda Thielke earlier this week said lawyers had advised Metro that it couldn't refuse to accept the "Israeli war crimes" ad under current agency policy.

Metro policy restricts advertising that, among other things, can be reasonably foreseen to result in harm to, disruption of, or interference with the transportation system.

"When we accepted the ad from Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign, we didn't have any information to cause us to reasonably foresee that there could be a disruption to transit service," Thielke said.

That changed once media locally, nationally and internationally ran the story and the comments started coming in, Thielke said. Metro customer service has received about 3,000 e-mails, and local elected officials thousands more.

What amazes me is that the attorneys advising Metro Transit were so clueless. But then again considering the likelihood they were all left-leaning ACLU type maybe I shouldn't be so surprised. Read the rest of the article here.

I provide only the link to the vicious Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign for my readers to access because I refuse to post such slanted and largely untrue garbage on the pages of Rational Nation USA and LCR, even in small excerpt form.

Israpundit gives what I consider a relevant, rational, and accurate counter argument to a disgraceful and propaganda filled one by the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign.


The Palestinians are, by Arab design, an open wound in Israel’s body that the Arabs and their left-wing enablers deliberately keep open to bleed Israel dry no matter how many years it takes. Israel needs to close this wound by removing a good two out of three Palestinians from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, with the minority that is willing and able to live in peace being allowed and even encouraged to remain.

Most of the world already falsely accuses Israel of ethnic cleansing and other atrocities. If the world is going to punish you unjustly for something you didn’t do, you may as well do that something and it is past time for Israel to take off the gloves. Ethnic cleansing or even genocide is a crime against humanity only if you end up on the losing side. Hitler was unfortunately right when he said, “Who remembers the Armenians?” and it is telling that Abraham Foxman’s Anti-Defamation League, a group that should have been foremost in the exposure and denunciation of genocide, recently did its best to get the world to forget the Armenians. This shows that expulsion of the Palestinians should be practical; more importantly, expulsion or deportation of an ethnic group to protect one’s citizens against an ongoing litany of mindless violence from the group in question is not a crime against humanity or anybody else, just as it is not a crime to disable or even kill another human being to stop him from killing you or somebody for whose safety you are responsible.

In his book What about Germany?, Lochner offered the following English translation of the document then in his possession:

Genghis Khan led millions of women and children to slaughter—with premeditation and a happy heart. History sees in him solely the founder of a state. It’s a matter of indifference to me what a weak western European civilization will say about me. I have issued the command—and I’ll have anybody who utters but one word of criticism executed by a firing squad—that our war aim does not consist in reaching certain lines, but in the physical destruction of the enemy. Accordingly, I have placed my death-head formation in readiness—for the present only in the East—with orders to them to send to death mercilessly and without compassion, men, women, and children of Polish derivation and language. Only thus shall we gain the living space (Lebensraum) which we need. Who, after all, speaks to-day of the annihilation of the Armenians?

Well, Abraham Foxman of the ADL certainly did not want Congress to speak of the annihilation of the Armenians lest it offend Israel’s “ally” Turkey. (How did that work out for you, Abe?) There are meanwhile statues of Genghis Khan in modern Mongolia, so the unpleasant truth is that mass murder and even genocide are crimes against humanity only if you lose. The Nazis were punished at Nuremberg only because they were on the losing side. General Tomoyuki Yamashita was executed because of atrocities some of his soldiers committed without his approval or even his knowledge, but Soviet generals who allowed their men to rape German women were never held accountable–nor was the Soviet Union ever held accountable for its unprovoked invasions of Poland and Finland.

I suspect you can see where Bill Levinson is going with this, nonetheless here is the rest of the story.

Israel has every right to be recognized. It has every right to expect its citizens to live without constant fear of extinction by insane morons, and it certainly has the right to defend itself from the same. The people of the tiny nation of Israel deserve the support of the American people. Their nation deserves the support of the United States Government.

Cross posted to Rational Nation USA

Via: Memeorandum

Napolitano on TSA Body Scans and Pat Downs

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


The slow indoctrination continues. Objectively it is fine to pat down, or subject travelers to full body scans according to Janet Napolitano of Homeland Security. Soon we will witness the same on every form of public transportation. It is only a matter of time. From the Hill this Sunday morning.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Sunday that controversial new airport security procedures are likely to remain in place since they have been effective.


Some airline passengers and lawmakers have objected to the new Transportation Security Administration (TSA) policy, which includes full-body scans and pat-downs.


Asked on CNN's "State of the Union" if anything is going to change with the pat-down program, Napolitano said, "Not for the foreseeable future."


The secretary called the procedures "objectively safer" for airline passengers and said they are part of a broader security strategy that involves cooperation with intelligence agencies, commercial airlines and international airports.

Napolitano is of course singing the song of bureaucrats everywhere. Just a bit of intrusive governemnt policy to.... insure the safety of the individual and general public. Of course a cursory understanding of governemnt and the power it holds leads us to realize government and its power never seems to shrink. What shrinks is our liberties.

I am reminded of Benjamin Franklin who said: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." He was right when he made the statement and objectively his words remain true today.

Read the rest of the article here.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel

Via: Memeorandum

Saturday, December 25, 2010

Crumbs for Thought

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA

A few quotes, all which have wisdom that if applied to present thinking and the behaviors of our current leadership may have significant beneficial consequences for our aging nation.
"My ardent desire is, and my aim has been ... to comply strictly with all our
engagements foreign and domestic; but to keep the United States free from political
connections with every other country. To see that they may be independent of all,
and under the influence of none. In a word, I want an American character, that the
powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in
my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home." --George
Washington, letter to Partick Henry, 1775

"There can be no greater error than to expect, or calculate upon real favours from
Nation to Nation. 'Tis an illusion which experience must cure, which a just pride
ought to discard." --George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

"We are firmly convinced, and we act on that conviction, that with nations as with
individuals our interests soundly calculated will ever be found inseparable from our
moral duties, and history bears witness to the fact that a just nation is trusted on
its word when recourse is had to armaments and wars to bridle others." --Thomas
Jefferson, Second Inaugural Address, 1805
Merry Christmas and a Happy and Prosperous New Year!

Thursday, December 23, 2010

A Jingle for Christmas...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


The following short statement was just e-mailed to me by none other than my father, Les Carpenter Jr. A retired businessman and co owner of Barb's Sport Center (Barb being my mother)prior to them closing the store some time ago.

He tells me the words just popped into his head, not at all surprising given he has done his share or writing over the years. It seems he was thinking about the current state of our union and the foregoing is the summation of his thought.

I hope you enjoy this little ditty as much as I do.
IT'S TIME FOR A STAND

Tis the day before Christmas
And all through the land,
The politicians are figuring
How to take from our hand,
All the rights that were won
By the brave and the true,
You can lose or fight back
The results we receive are left up to you.

Take a stand to deny that the majority should lose,
To a handful of those who try to abuse.
Those folks who work
For the things they get,
It's time to quit taking from the feds
All their dirty shit.
Amen 

Great wisdom in a simple poem. Of course as I read it several times I could not but help replace the "dirty" with "collectivist" in my mind, but I guess that's just me.

Merry Christmas One and All ... Wishing  You a Happy and Prosperous New Year

700 Club's Pat Robertson for Marijuana Legalization?

by the Left Coast Rebel

You just know that times-are-a-changing when you come across a headline that seemingly points to 700 Club's Pat Robertson as favoring the legalization of marijuana. Perhaps it should come as no surprise since more and more Americans favor legalization these days (as I wrote here), despite California proposition 19's failure in November as well.

I think that the Tea Party movement plays a big part in today's America in questioning the inner workings of our overbearing Federal government. And it's not that Tea Partiers favor marijuana or drug legalization per se, it's that they question the Federal government's ability to carry out a campaign like the "War on Drugs" or the "War on Poverty" without actually exacerbating the targeted issue instead of "solving" it.

Melissa Bell in of all places, the Washington Post points to this:
Robertson's position is not as unusual as you might think. Support for legalizing marijuana has been growing amongst conservatives, who cite legalization as an answer to the "narcoterroism" in Mexico and the overburdened jail system. In October, Newsweek looked at the GOP's relationship to marijuana, saying that although only 25 percent of Republicans favor legalizing marijuana (as compared to 55 percent of Democrats), the number has jumped seven points since 2005. The article credits the influence of the anti-government-intervention Tea Party:
It's becoming increasingly hard for conservative candidates and lawmakers to square libertarian Tea Party catchphrases like "fiscal responsibility" and "limited government" with the government's war on drugs, especially when their constituents might prefer to see a war on joblessness.

I have to add that the Newsweek article above gets it totally wrong on the Tea Party preferring a "War on Joblessness" campaign from the Federal government in lieu of the war on drugs. That is unless such a war would be would involve simply stopping every single thing that the progressive overlords in the Congress/Dirty Fed and White House are doing and then putting everything the Federal government does on the chopping block then scaling things back to a sensible, limited scope of government.

That would indeed be the ultimate "War on Joblessness".

Here's the video where Pat Robertson expresses support for marijuana legalization:



Via Memeorandum, here

Updated: :
I have to commend his call for the legalization of marijuana. Moreover, he cites several good reasons for this stance, including the high cost of prohibition, and the fact that imprisonment of small-time drug dealers and users is “ruining young people.” I suspect that Robertson has begun to realize that the War on Drugs is bad for family values. It will take a lot of good works to make up for all the ridiculous and offensive things that Robertson has said over the years. But helping to end the War on Drugs would be a good start.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Santa Sending Washington a Clear Message

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Its been a tough year for certain. Santa has it pretty much summed up, and of course Santa is yet again right. We can all hope the incoming 112th Congress is paying attention. And brushing up on Hayek and Rand.



Anybody going to be holding their breath?

Via: Bankrupting America - h/t the Left Coast Rebel

Palestinian Untruths

by:Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


The Palestinian Authority, despites the "official" position by it's Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to world leaders that Palestine recognizes Israel's existence the reality is it does not.

The Palestinian Authority actively disseminates the message through media sources to its people that Israel does not exist. It presents the notion that all Israel land, and Israel cities and regions are Palestinian. The PA uses television, one source of many to spread their propaganda and incite unrest in the Palestinian population.






The videos clearly demonstrate the true position of the Palestinian Authority and thereby exposes the lie being told by the Chairman of the PA. Anyone with a cursory knowledge of Islam will know that lying to infidels to create a false sense of reality for the pursuit of achieving Muslim dominance {in this case to lull the world's leaders into believing the PA recognizes Israel's existence} is acceptable and indeed virtuous.

Indeed the war of propaganda being waged by Islam against the west has many forms and faces. Unfortunately many in the west, including the United States refuse to look the threat squarely in the eye and confront it. Doing so would be considered intolerant by the seemingly dominate left.

For more detail visit Palestinian Media Watch.

Cross posted to the Left Coast Rebel

Discussion @ Memeorandum

UPDATE 12/23/10: I went over to Pam Geller's site, Atlas Shrugs today. Up top was her post on the work she has been involved in to counter the anti Israeli propaganda in Seattle Washington, my old stomping grounds. Beyond that she provides information that ought to give us all pause. Her article is another example of the Muslim and Palestinian extremist's evil that is growing more prevalent in our world. A brief excerpt from the article:
As for the Jewish blood libel being sponsored by the notorious antisemite Ed Mast, Seattle Mass Transit is having second thoughts.


"It's not clear if the ad campaign will run as scheduled. It was supposed to roll out on Dec. 27. Metro is scrambling to re-assess its advertising policies before next week."


If they ran that poison, they will run the truth.


Metro considers changing policy over anti-Israeli bus ads NWCN.com


SEATTLE -- Calls and emails continue to flood into King County as Metro deals with a political firestorm over its bus billboard policy.


An anti-Israeli ad campaign is scheduled to appear on buses starting Dec. 27. A group called the Seattle Mideast Awareness Campaign is behind the ads. It's the two-year anniversary of Israeli military action in Gaza, aimed at stopping rocket attacks on Israeli citizens.


Metro is considering changing its ad policies for non-commercial groups, but says it could be costly and tricky. But if they ban the anti-Israel ads, they might have to ban ads for causes that have public appeal, such as the Boys and Girls Club, Puget Sound Blood Center and United Way.


The American Civil Liberties Unions is urging Metro to run the ads, saying they may offend people but they should be protected under the First Amendment.


News of the ads has led to tighter security at the Jewish Federation in downtown Seattle. Four years ago, a mentally ill man claiming to be angry at Israel broke into the building, shot and killed a woman and shot five others. The fear is an ad campaign could fuel more violence.


"We're always on a heightened sense of awareness in the Jewish community and this heightens it," said Richard Fruchter with the Jewish Federation.


"Mentally ill man?" He was a Muslim slaughtering Jews. It was jihad. Here's what was presented in the jihadi's prosecution:


Prosecutors opened their case against a man accused of opening fire on a Jewish Federation office by playing a tape of the gunman who called 911 as he held a pregnant woman hostage at gunpoint."I have this gun pointed at her head," said the man, who identified himself as Naveed Haq. Haq told the person handling the call that "I just want to get us out of Iraq," and that he was upset by U.S. policies that left Muslims "repressed."Haq, 32, has pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity in the shooting rampage that killed one woman and injured five other women at the downtown office of the Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle on July 28, 2006.In her opening statement Monday, King County Deputy Prosecutor Erin Ehlert told jurors that Haq carefully planned the attack, making four trips to gun shops and using the Internet to map the route from the Tri-Cities to Seattle.Haq is charged with murder, attempted murder and other crimes.Haq railed against the Iraq war and Israel during the call, telling a woman on the other end of the line that "Muslims are very upset about you sending bombs to Israel. And that we're very upset that you stay in Iraq, and that you follow foreign policies where we are repressed."


SEATTLE – King County Councilman Peter von Reichbauer is calling for a review of proposed advertising on Metro buses that blasts Israel and the U.S., claiming U.S. tax dollars support war crimes.

Pam's tireless work in defense of the Israeli people and nation is admirable and honorable. Rational defense of truth, and a people that want nothing more than to live peaceably in their historically homeland deserves the support of the American people.

Please take the time {if you haven't already} to visit Atlas Shrugs and read her entire article and see the adds she has submitted to counter the anti Semite treachery growing around the world.

One for Barney

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA



A fascinating exchange between gay Representative Barney Frank D-MA and a CNS reporter. Barney certainly captured the upper hand {quickly} and never lost it. My take, don't send an obvious wet behind the ears reporter to pose questions with respect to an ethical issue with a seasoned BS'er. Especially when the obvious underlying purpose is to put the feet of the interviewee to the fire.

Irrespective of ones beliefs in regards to the DADT repeal one has to agree "ole Barney" won the debating points on this one.

Discussion at Memeorandum

Just Wacky Enough to be True

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


This story is so bizarre one could not make it up if one tried. A group of ten high school students that formed a Christmas Sweater Club to spread Christmas cheer and tidings find themselves in trouble.

h/t: The Blaze


There is something seriously wrong in this nation. It's called political correctness that fosters intolerance of traditional American values.

Read the story here.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Immigration... Will We Make the Right Decision?

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA


Immigration continues to preoccupy political considerations in our nation. For the rational and thinking individual it is laughable at best and dangerous at its worst. We indeed are a nation of immigrants, from our very beginnings as a colonial extension of the British Empire we drew peoples from Europe notions. This diversity was a positive then and remains so today.

Having said this, we must remember that we are now a nation of some 234 years. We have well defined borders and a well defined culture. It is resonate {at least to rational thinking individuals} that we preserve the culture this nation has established over the course of time. We are strong because of our ability in the past to unite behind shared values and principles.

Immigrants that came through Ellis Island {or other points of entry} assimilated with the uniquely American culture, gained U.S. citizenship and even fought for the freedoms we all cherish. These immigrants were integral to the strength that is and always has been America.

Countries the world over have restrictions on immigration. This is as it should be. Every nation has the right, indeed the obligation, to preserve its culture and heritage for future generations. Immigration, while an important consideration with respect to a countries growth should be monitored and effectively controlled. Even the father of American Progressivism, President Theodore Roosevelt understood this fact. In a 1907 speech on the issue of immigration he said the following:
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American who assimilates to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American... There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
In today's environment are we prepared to heed the words of a rational progressive or are we to succumb to the political correctness and pandering of our modern progressive collectivist times?

Allow me to share with you the words of the current chief executive officer of these United States. For those who find the babble intolerable feel free to skip to the closing comments.
Immigration reform is no exception. In recent days, the issue of immigration has become once more a source of fresh contention in our country, with the passage of a controversial law in Arizona and the heated reactions we’ve seen across America. Some have rallied behind this new policy. Others have protested and launched boycotts of the state. And everywhere, people have expressed frustration with a system that seems fundamentally broken.

Of course, the tensions around immigration are not new. On the one hand, we’ve always defined ourselves as a nation of immigrants — a nation that welcomes those willing to embrace America’s precepts. Indeed, it is this constant flow of immigrants that helped to make America what it is. The scientific breakthroughs of Albert Einstein, the inventions of Nikola Tesla, the great ventures of Andrew Carnegie’s U.S. Steel and Sergey Brin’s Google, Inc. -– all this was possible because of immigrants.

And then there are the countless names and the quiet acts that never made the history books but were no less consequential in building this country — the generations who braved hardship and great risk to reach our shores in search of a better life for themselves and their families; the millions of people, ancestors to most of us, who believed that there was a place where they could be, at long last, free to work and worship and live their lives in peace.

So this steady stream of hardworking and talented people has made America the engine of the global economy and a beacon of hope around the world. And it’s allowed us to adapt and thrive in the face of technological and societal change. To this day, America reaps incredible economic rewards because we remain a magnet for the best and brightest from across the globe. Folks travel here in the hopes of being a part of a culture of entrepreneurship and ingenuity, and by doing so they strengthen and enrich that culture. Immigration also means we have a younger workforce -– and a faster-growing economy — than many of our competitors. And in an increasingly interconnected world, the diversity of our country is a powerful advantage in global competition.

Just a few weeks ago, we had an event of small business owners at the White House. And one business owner was a woman named Prachee Devadas who came to this country, became a citizen, and opened up a successful technology services company. When she started, she had just one employee. Today, she employs more than a hundred people. This past April, we held a naturalization ceremony at the White House for members of our armed forces. Even though they were not yet citizens, they had enlisted. One of them was a woman named Perla Ramos — born and raised in Mexico, came to the United States shortly after 9/11, and she eventually joined the Navy. And she said, “I take pride in our flag and the history that forged this great nation and the history we write day by day.”

These women, and men and women across this country like them, remind us that immigrants have always helped to build and defend this country -– and that being an American is not a matter of blood or birth. It’s a matter of faith. It’s a matter of fidelity to the shared values that we all hold so dear. That’s what makes us unique. That’s what makes us strong. Anybody can help us write the next great chapter in our history.

Now, we can’t forget that this process of immigration and eventual inclusion has often been painful. Each new wave of immigrants has generated fear and resentments towards newcomers, particularly in times of economic upheaval. Our founding was rooted in the notion that America was unique as a place of refuge and freedom for, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, “oppressed humanity.” But the ink on our Constitution was barely dry when, amidst conflict, Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, which placed harsh restrictions of those suspected of having foreign allegiances. A century ago, immigrants from Ireland, Italy, Poland, other European countries were routinely subjected to rank discrimination and ugly stereotypes. Chinese immigrants were held in detention and deported from Angel Island in the San Francisco Bay. They didn’t even get to come in.

So the politics of who is and who is not allowed to enter this country, and on what terms, has always been contentious. And that remains true today. And it’s made worse by a failure of those of us in Washington to fix a broken immigration system.

To begin with, our borders have been porous for decades. Obviously, the problem is greatest along our Southern border, but it’s not restricted to that part of the country. In fact, because we don’t do a very good job of tracking who comes in and out of the country as visitors, large numbers avoid immigration laws simply by overstaying their visas.

The result is an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States. The overwhelming majority of these men and women are simply seeking a better life for themselves and their children. Many settle in low-wage sectors of the economy; they work hard, they save, they stay out of trouble. But because they live in the shadows, they’re vulnerable to unscrupulous businesses who pay them less than the minimum wage or violate worker safety rules -– thereby putting companies who follow those rules, and Americans who rightly demand the minimum wage or overtime, at an unfair [dis]advantage. Crimes go unreported as victims and witnesses fear coming forward. And this makes it harder for the police to catch violent criminals and keep neighborhoods safe. And billions in tax revenue are lost each year because many undocumented workers are paid under the table.

More fundamentally, the presence of so many illegal immigrants makes a mockery of all those who are going through the process of immigrating legally. Indeed, after years of patchwork fixes and ill-conceived revisions, the legal immigration system is as broken as the borders. Backlogs and bureaucracy means the process can take years. While an applicant waits for approval, he or she is often forbidden from visiting the United States –- which means even husbands and wives may be forced to spend many years apart. High fees and the need for lawyers may exclude worthy applicants. And while we provide students from around the world visas to get engineering and computer science degrees at our top universities, our laws discourage them from using those skills to start a business or power a new industry right here in the United States. Instead of training entrepreneurs to create jobs on our shores, we train our competition.

In sum, the system is broken. And everybody knows it. Unfortunately, reform has been held hostage to political posturing and special-interest wrangling -– and to the pervasive sentiment in Washington that tackling such a thorny and emotional issue is inherently bad politics.

Just a few years ago, when I was a senator, we forged a bipartisan coalition in favor of comprehensive reform. Under the leadership of Senator Kennedy, who had been a longtime champion of immigration reform, and Senator John McCain, we worked across the aisle to help pass a bipartisan bill through the Senate. But that effort eventually came apart. And now, under the pressures of partisanship and election-year politics, many of the 11 Republican senators who voted for reform in the past have now backed away from their previous support.

Into this breach, states like Arizona have decided to take matters into their own hands. Given the levels of frustration across the country, this is understandable. But it is also ill conceived. And it’s not just that the law Arizona passed is divisive -– although it has fanned the flames of an already contentious debate. Laws like Arizona’s put huge pressures on local law enforcement to enforce rules that ultimately are unenforceable. It puts pressure on already hard-strapped state and local budgets. It makes it difficult for people here illegally to report crimes -– driving a wedge between communities and law enforcement, making our streets more dangerous and the jobs of our police officers more difficult.

And you don’t have to take my word for this. You can speak to the police chiefs and others from law enforcement here today who will tell you the same thing.

These laws also have the potential of violating the rights of innocent American citizens and legal residents, making them subject to possible stops or questioning because of what they look like or how they sound. And as other states and localities go their own ways, we face the prospect that different rules for immigration will apply in different parts of the country -– a patchwork of local immigration rules where we all know one clear national standard is needed.

Our task then is to make our national laws actually work -– to shape a system that reflects our values as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. And that means being honest about the problem, and getting past the false debates that divide the country rather than bring it together.

For example, there are those in the immigrants’ rights community who have argued passionately that we should simply provide those who are [here] illegally with legal status, or at least ignore the laws on the books and put an end to deportation until we have better laws. And often this argument is framed in moral terms: Why should we punish people who are just trying to earn a living?

I recognize the sense of compassion that drives this argument, but I believe such an indiscriminate approach would be both unwise and unfair. It would suggest to those thinking about coming here illegally that there will be no repercussions for such a decision. And this could lead to a surge in more illegal immigration. And it would also ignore the millions of people around the world who are waiting in line to come here legally.

Ultimately, our nation, like all nations, has the right and obligation to control its borders and set laws for residency and citizenship. And no matter how decent they are, no matter their reasons, the 11 million who broke these laws should be held accountable.

Now, if the majority of Americans are skeptical of a blanket amnesty, they are also skeptical that it is possible to round up and deport 11 million people. They know it’s not possible. Such an effort would be logistically impossible and wildly expensive. Moreover, it would tear at the very fabric of this nation -– because immigrants who are here illegally are now intricately woven into that fabric. Many have children who are American citizens. Some are children themselves, brought here by their parents at a very young age, growing up as American kids, only to discover their illegal status when they apply for college or a job. Migrant workers -– mostly here illegally -– have been the labor force of our farmers and agricultural producers for generations. So even if it was possible, a program of mass deportations would disrupt our economy and communities in ways that most Americans would find intolerable.
For those who may be interested {if you made it this far} you can continue the progressive incoherent babble here. However, I warn you the Pontificator's incoherence continues for some time.

For the rest I am sure you can see the difference in the "Father of American Progressives" clear and definitive statement and that of our current "Progressive Pontificator in Chief's" pandering to his illegal Hispanic base. What we need is a national immigration law that mirrors Arizona's immigration law. We also need lawmakers with the proverbial balls to enforce a rational and just US immigration policy. One that is just for all LAWFUL U.S. citizens.

Via: Memeorandum

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails