Best Ladeeenyo president: W.
Best Pali/Nork president: Jimmuh.
Worst US president: Tie.
Redeploy US troops out of Iraq. Straight to the Mexican border!
What’s holding up the impeachment? If we keep Bush on the run he’ll be too busy to plan any more attacks on the US.
In the middle of our nation’s “great debate” over its immigration policies Venezuela reminds us of two recurring themes in Latin politics: dictators and marching mobs.
Not that we should need reminders. Surly mobs march in our streets several times a year now. One of the many joys of multiculturalism. We’ll find out if we have a dictator in about 18 months.
Speaking of reminders, Lawrence Auster put his finger right on the problem:
We know the pattern. London, Fort Dix, JFK, and each subsequent event will be treated as though it were something “shocking,” new, and unique, because our liberal belief system refuses to recognize the transcendent reality that we have an enemy, that the enemy is among us, and that he is among us due to one cause and one cause only: immigration. There is therefore only one way to end Muslim terrorist attacks in the West, and that is to keep Muslims from entering the West and to initiate a steady out-migration of the Muslims who are here back to their native countries. Sixty-five percent of the Muslim population in the U.S. are immigrants.
Once everybody’s a zitizen the media will have a much easier time selling their “home-grown terrorist” whitewash. Just some “random” Americans planning “random” attacks. You have to be a racist who doesn’t want what’s right for the country to think our double plus wonderful open border policies are in any way to blame.
Video: WSJ editorial board gleefully slanders conservatives
“It’s all about culture. But they can’t say that.”
Memo to the WSJ editors, in case nobody has told you this yet:
I don’t want to live in a filthy violent Third World shithole with a banana republic government whose politics are dictated by mobs in the streets. We are being invaded and I expect my government to protect its territory and its citizens, not to side with the invaders.
I’m also having a problem understanding why we’re letting so many free-speech-hating jihad-prone Muslims in.
Is that cultural enough?
Friday night Bill O’Reilly said: “I agree with Tony Snow, the federal justice system could not possibly deport 12 million people.” “That’s insane, never gonna happen.”
For some reason neither Snow nor O’Reilly applied that same argument to the even larger bureaucracy that will be required to administer Z visas and background checks and fines and the rest of the Senate amnesty bill. That, apparently, is perfectly doable. Why?
Nobody asks. Nobody explains.
O’Reilly also asserted: “The California economy would implode.”
Implode? How could losing 5-10% of the least skilled, below-average educated, above-average unemployed, above-average criminal portion of our society cause the economy to implode? Even if they go gradually?
Nobody asks. Nobody explains.
What about the benefits of losing that 5-10%? Less crowding. Less crime. Less burden on our schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure. Less pollution. Less mobs in the streets.
Nobody asks. Nobody explains.
The problem is these big city know-it-alls aren’t troubled by shitholes. They live and work in the skies above the country’s biggest shithole, New York City. They made their peace with it long ago. They don’t care what their open borders idealism costs the rest of us.
The cost of replacing their servant class, on the other hand – their nannies, housekeepers, landscapers, valets, doormen, waiters, cooks – with more expensive and uppity natives…well, that’s just too barbaric to even consider. It is literally unthinkable.
It’s all about their servants. But they can’t say that.
Here are samples of some more or less popular mainstream conservative pundits and their audiences, many of them loyal and long-time Bush supporters, who are just beginning to realize how completely our country has been betrayed. Their cognitive dissonance is palpable, though many have yet to accept the full extent to which their worldviews have been shaken.
Audio: Laura Ingraham unleashes on the amnesty bill
Linda Chavez: If you’re against open borders, you might be a Nazi
In that last link, after noting just how absurd the pro-amnesty open-border lies have become, Rich Lowery asks:
How stupid do these people think we are?
The answer is: very stupid. And I have to agree. What they know is that the good and righteous people of the law-and-order variety can be distracted indefinitely with the right mix of “you’re a raaaaaaacist” shaming and pseudo-intellectual theatrics.
Many of these pundits never cared much about immigration. They can’t see the effects, or have friends they don’t want to upset. They’re fond of saying they’re “pro-immigrant” and only oppose the illegal variety. They’re displeased at having to discuss the subject, and look forward to returning to the partisan snark they’re so much more comfortable with.
They have yet to fully absorb the implications of current events. POOF! It’s legal. Now what’s your argument racist? What part of usurpation don’t you understand?
Some legislators had also mentioned to us (oftentimes laughing) how they had “defanged” or “gutted” anti-immigration bills and measures, by neglecting to fund this program or tabling that provision, or deleting the other measure, etc. “Yes, we passed that law, but it can’t work because we also…” was a usual comment to assuage the Mexican delegations.
The Founding Fathers also prescribed a cure for usurpation. Hopefully the American people will not apply it so literally, for the sake of those legislators.
Consider me thoroughly radicalized.
Bush Attacks Immigration Deal Opponents
GLYNCO, Ga. (AP) – President Bush attacked opponents of an immigration deal Tuesday, suggesting they “don’t want to do what’s right for America.”
“The fundamental question is, will elected officials have the courage necessary to put a comprehensive immigration plan in place,” Bush said against a backdrop of a huge American flag.
He described his proposal—which has been agreed to by a bipartisan group of senators—as one that “makes it more likely we can enforce our border—and at the same time uphold the great immigrant tradition of the United States of America.”
No. The fundamental question is: why has our government for so long done such a poor job enforcing our borders? Followed by the second most fundamental question: why would anyone but an idiot or liar ignore that truly fundamental question? Followed by: why, after very similar promises to “enforce the border” have been made and broken over and over and over again, would anyone but an idiot/liar ever make such arguments again?
“Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don’t like,” the president said. “If you want to kill the bill, if you don’t want to do what’s right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it.
“You can use it to frighten people,” Bush said. “Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all.”
The bill would give temporary legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants, provided they came forward, paid a fine and underwent criminal background checks. To apply for a green card, they would have to pay another fine, learn English, return to their home country and wait in line.
I for one find the entire premise of the bill flawed, not some little details.
What good are new laws when existing laws go unenforced? What good are “requirements” that nobody but idiots or liars would say will actually be followed? Why would anyone but an idiot want to become a citizen when it affords no additional rights and only more responsibilities? And finally, how can a nation full of wealthy well-educated people improve itself by absorbing millions of the world’s poorest, least educated people?
Who doesn’t think the millions of irredentist losers this country has already absorbed are something to be frightened of? Who isn’t frightened at the prospect of absorbing millions more sure to come once they get the good news that we think we have no right to refuse them? What part of any of this makes any sense?
In the “America” I used to fantasize existed the president would have recognized that the “right thing” would be to fearlessly advocate for and protect the interests of his country and its lawful residents. He would denounce subversives who put their ethnicity above the law and eject them from government. He would confront rogues who offer sanctuary to invaders. He would root out and expel the invaders.
The “America” Bush represents is obviously totally different.
He’s right about one thing. The Senate plan will “solve this problem once and for all”. By obliterating any remnant of the old fantasy America. Then, maybe, he and his friends can finally admit out loud that their America doesn’t really have any borders. Or immigration laws. Or citizens. You see, our all-powerful overlords no longer need the antiquated notions of the nation-state. All they require are workers who will migrate and serve wherever the overlords require them.
America is dead. Welcome to Zamerica.