If you're a faithful reader of Sunnyeside I have a tip for you. I don't think it will cause a major panic because I'm not one of the top bloggers, so I'll tell you what the media won't.
There's a major shortage of gasoline at the pumps back East -- notably at the Virginia shore. Gas stations are running short and it's hard to fill your tank.
Possibly this isn't being reported in the national media for fear of causing a panic. I'm sure there's no need to panic but you few loyal souls who read me might top off your tanks and keep them filled for a while.
We've cancelled our road trip and have bought plane tickets for our planned trip to New York and points South to Virginia next month. We had planned to drive but it's senseless to do that if we might get stuck somewhere.
There certainly is no reason to panic but there's every reason to take precautions. Some of us remember the shortages in the '70s, so best be prepared this time. We have a month's supply of food on hand and tomorrow I'll stock up on water (a useful precaution in Tornado Alley, anyway). Then we'll just watch to see what happens.
Sunday, April 23
Tuesday, April 18
The 3/5 in Iraq
I don't know if this will copy as a live link or not. Please try it and see if it will work with your browser. It's the 3/5 Marines in Iraq.
http://media.putfile.com/Get-Some-77
The video is from my cousin. It simply shows what our media refuses to acknowledge
http://media.putfile.com/Get-Some-77
The video is from my cousin. It simply shows what our media refuses to acknowledge
Saturday, April 15
Click here to go to the web site.Here's a great idea. Congress (and President Bush) sometimes need "show and tell." Pity the poor postman, but postal prices far outreach the service provided anyway, so what the heck.
Friday, April 14
Musings
I've seen interviews and TV reports lately decrying the "racism" of Americans for standing against the patronization of illegal immigrants. What a crock! This country is the LEAST racist when it comes to immigration of practically any in the world.
We've welcomed immigrants from all nations all over the world with no comment. We've had veritable invasions from Cuban and Viet Nam with no objections from our citizenry for many years now. Those immigrants have come here, learned our language and used our capitalistic system to prosper.
And thereby lies the difference! They assimilated. They came her to become Americans and we welcome people who love freedom and want to learn our way of life and become part of our national community.
One idiot said that our government never turned away Scots, English, Irish, Germans -- in effect, white immigrants. That simply is not so. Some people from those lands were rejected for many reasonsillness, criminal backgrounds, quotas, to name a few.
America has welcomed Mexicans. Those who come here legally, who learn our language and who are willing to learn our history and participate in our way of life have been welcomed for years. In my own family, I have cousins who are grandchildren of Mexican immigrants -- and one is serving his third tour of duty with the Marines in Iraq right now. They are a loved and treasured part of our family.
Those who label the protests against illegal immigration know what they are doing. They know they are lying but they see more profit in divisiveness than in working for a viable solution.
One interesting result, however: falsely using the "racism" charge weakens the effectiveness of that charge in time. That certainly can do no harm in the long run.
We've welcomed immigrants from all nations all over the world with no comment. We've had veritable invasions from Cuban and Viet Nam with no objections from our citizenry for many years now. Those immigrants have come here, learned our language and used our capitalistic system to prosper.
And thereby lies the difference! They assimilated. They came her to become Americans and we welcome people who love freedom and want to learn our way of life and become part of our national community.
One idiot said that our government never turned away Scots, English, Irish, Germans -- in effect, white immigrants. That simply is not so. Some people from those lands were rejected for many reasonsillness, criminal backgrounds, quotas, to name a few.
America has welcomed Mexicans. Those who come here legally, who learn our language and who are willing to learn our history and participate in our way of life have been welcomed for years. In my own family, I have cousins who are grandchildren of Mexican immigrants -- and one is serving his third tour of duty with the Marines in Iraq right now. They are a loved and treasured part of our family.
Those who label the protests against illegal immigration know what they are doing. They know they are lying but they see more profit in divisiveness than in working for a viable solution.
One interesting result, however: falsely using the "racism" charge weakens the effectiveness of that charge in time. That certainly can do no harm in the long run.
Tuesday, April 11
An American Indian View of Immigration
By David A. Yeagley
As an Indian -- a direct descendant of the Comanche warrior Bad Eagle, 1839-1906 -- I've always been fascinated with foreigners. I've admired their great courage and determination. They made a perilous journey from their homeland. They learned a new language, and new ways, all in a new land. They brought the world to me.
("Indian"? Naturally, most tribes prefer their own name. But that’s in their own language, and no one but themselves would know of whom they speak. There is no collective name for "Indians" in any tribal language. The modern term "Native American," created in the 1970s by leftists, is ambiguous. Most Indian people don't use it -- only what I call the "university tribe," college-educated Indians led by white radical professors; and the would-be politically correct media. The name we first held, in the white man's eyes, was "Indian." That's what we have been since Columbus. That's what our most famous warriors were called. Believe me, Indians prefer the name "Indian." It is historically specific, whatever its origin. The name holds the emotional, psychological associations of the warrior. The Left, of course, wants to remove that. Hey, call me savage!)
Playing host to strangers has always been an Indian tradition -- as the Pilgrims so famously learned. However, some might say that we Indians were too hospitable for our own good.
America today is making the same mistake we Indians made nearly four centuries ago. America is letting in too many foreigners. And we Indians could end up losing this country all over again. It may come as a surprise to many white people who have been brainwashed by the media to see Indians as the ultimate liberals, but there are few groups in America today who take a dimmer view of mass immigration than the American Indian.
According to ProjectUSA.org, the U.S. population will double within the lifetimes of our children, as a direct result of the massive, uncontrolled influx of foreigners who began flooding our land after passage of the 1965 Immigration Act.
All Americans will suffer. But Indians will suffer most of all.
I'm not talking about competition for jobs, land, housing, energy, water and other finite resources—though these are all important. I'm talking about something deeper. The demographic destruction of Anglo-America will bring the final catastrophe on our people.
What catastrophe? The catastrophe of waking up one day and realizing that white people no longer control this country.
Now why should an Indian care about that? After all, white people are supposedly our enemies.
Well, yes, they were. But, as warriors, we found them to be worthy and formidable adversaries. Defeat is bitter. But when you respect your conqueror, it is a lot easier to swallow.
If Anglo-America turns this land over to blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Middle Easterners and other foreign peoples, for the Indian, it will be like losing this country for the second time. We have had generations to reconcile ourselves to white America. But we do not know these new people who are coming. We fought no battles with them, made no treaties with them, and have no reason to accord them any special respect.
If things keep going the way they are, we Indians could find ourselves bowing down to foreign peoples who never defeated our forefathers in battle -- and who certainly never could!
We Indians -- especially the more warlike tribes such as my people the Comanches -- recognize a kindred spirit in the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. He is like us in more ways than he knows.
The Comanches were one of the most intolerant of all Indian peoples. We had no use for anyone else, white, Mexican or Indian. When we came thundering down on the southwest plains, we took the land we wanted and ran everyone else off. We created the life we wanted, at the expense of other people.
The white man did the same. Only he did it on a grander scale.
In the old days, Comanches were known to honor strength in other people. Comanche warriors even adopted white captive boys, if they happened to show courage and fight.
In many ways, Indians see the white man as a kind of adopted son—naïve, reckless and destructive, at times -- but nevertheless cut from the same warrior cloth as we were.
We do not see blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Arabs and others in this light. These peoples may have their own virtues and traditions, but they have no history with us. They are strangers.
If they want to rule us, they must conquer us the way the white man did -- on the battlefield, by force of arms. That is the only honorable way for a warrior.
The white man seems to have lost his spirit, and we Indians see it. We see that he is giving this country away to others. And this fills our hearts with fear. For we are part of the land he is giving away. He is turning us over to strangers the way medieval barons turned over their serfs when they sold their land.
But we are not serfs. We are warriors. And we will not be ruled by people who have never fought us.
The white man must regain his warrior soul and take back his land.
In that fight, I will stand by his side and offer whatever strength I have to ensure his victory. Ha tu vi chat! *
* Comanche for, "It will all work out." Dr.David A. Yeagley is an enrolled member of the Comanche Nation, Elgin, Oklahoma. His articles appear in TheAmericanEnterprise.com, FrontPageMagazine.com and on his own Web site BadEagle.com. Dr. Yeagley is a regular speaker for Young America’s Foundation.
As an Indian -- a direct descendant of the Comanche warrior Bad Eagle, 1839-1906 -- I've always been fascinated with foreigners. I've admired their great courage and determination. They made a perilous journey from their homeland. They learned a new language, and new ways, all in a new land. They brought the world to me.
("Indian"? Naturally, most tribes prefer their own name. But that’s in their own language, and no one but themselves would know of whom they speak. There is no collective name for "Indians" in any tribal language. The modern term "Native American," created in the 1970s by leftists, is ambiguous. Most Indian people don't use it -- only what I call the "university tribe," college-educated Indians led by white radical professors; and the would-be politically correct media. The name we first held, in the white man's eyes, was "Indian." That's what we have been since Columbus. That's what our most famous warriors were called. Believe me, Indians prefer the name "Indian." It is historically specific, whatever its origin. The name holds the emotional, psychological associations of the warrior. The Left, of course, wants to remove that. Hey, call me savage!)
Playing host to strangers has always been an Indian tradition -- as the Pilgrims so famously learned. However, some might say that we Indians were too hospitable for our own good.
America today is making the same mistake we Indians made nearly four centuries ago. America is letting in too many foreigners. And we Indians could end up losing this country all over again. It may come as a surprise to many white people who have been brainwashed by the media to see Indians as the ultimate liberals, but there are few groups in America today who take a dimmer view of mass immigration than the American Indian.
According to ProjectUSA.org, the U.S. population will double within the lifetimes of our children, as a direct result of the massive, uncontrolled influx of foreigners who began flooding our land after passage of the 1965 Immigration Act.
All Americans will suffer. But Indians will suffer most of all.
I'm not talking about competition for jobs, land, housing, energy, water and other finite resources—though these are all important. I'm talking about something deeper. The demographic destruction of Anglo-America will bring the final catastrophe on our people.
What catastrophe? The catastrophe of waking up one day and realizing that white people no longer control this country.
Now why should an Indian care about that? After all, white people are supposedly our enemies.
Well, yes, they were. But, as warriors, we found them to be worthy and formidable adversaries. Defeat is bitter. But when you respect your conqueror, it is a lot easier to swallow.
If Anglo-America turns this land over to blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Middle Easterners and other foreign peoples, for the Indian, it will be like losing this country for the second time. We have had generations to reconcile ourselves to white America. But we do not know these new people who are coming. We fought no battles with them, made no treaties with them, and have no reason to accord them any special respect.
If things keep going the way they are, we Indians could find ourselves bowing down to foreign peoples who never defeated our forefathers in battle -- and who certainly never could!
We Indians -- especially the more warlike tribes such as my people the Comanches -- recognize a kindred spirit in the White Anglo-Saxon Protestant. He is like us in more ways than he knows.
The Comanches were one of the most intolerant of all Indian peoples. We had no use for anyone else, white, Mexican or Indian. When we came thundering down on the southwest plains, we took the land we wanted and ran everyone else off. We created the life we wanted, at the expense of other people.
The white man did the same. Only he did it on a grander scale.
In the old days, Comanches were known to honor strength in other people. Comanche warriors even adopted white captive boys, if they happened to show courage and fight.
In many ways, Indians see the white man as a kind of adopted son—naïve, reckless and destructive, at times -- but nevertheless cut from the same warrior cloth as we were.
We do not see blacks, Mexicans, Asians, Arabs and others in this light. These peoples may have their own virtues and traditions, but they have no history with us. They are strangers.
If they want to rule us, they must conquer us the way the white man did -- on the battlefield, by force of arms. That is the only honorable way for a warrior.
The white man seems to have lost his spirit, and we Indians see it. We see that he is giving this country away to others. And this fills our hearts with fear. For we are part of the land he is giving away. He is turning us over to strangers the way medieval barons turned over their serfs when they sold their land.
But we are not serfs. We are warriors. And we will not be ruled by people who have never fought us.
The white man must regain his warrior soul and take back his land.
In that fight, I will stand by his side and offer whatever strength I have to ensure his victory. Ha tu vi chat! *
* Comanche for, "It will all work out." Dr.David A. Yeagley is an enrolled member of the Comanche Nation, Elgin, Oklahoma. His articles appear in TheAmericanEnterprise.com, FrontPageMagazine.com and on his own Web site BadEagle.com. Dr. Yeagley is a regular speaker for Young America’s Foundation.
Saturday, April 8
Around The Nation With Illegal Immigrant Demonstrations
By Ben Johnson
BIG CORPORATIONS AND THE FAR-LEFT HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: both like to employ cheap illegal immigrants to do their heavy lifting.
The leftist media have tried to portray this weekend’s massive protests against House measures to curtail illegal immigration as the uprising of “The Other America”: forgotten, humble, hidden Hispanic members of the working poor simply demanding their “rights.” As events spanned from California to Detroit, Phoenix to Washington, D.C., the media kept up its anti-enforcement drumbeat. Although some have credited Latino DJs for the 500,000-strong illegal immigrant turnout in Los Angeles alone – and some credit is deserved – the real legwork was done by a more eclectic group of organizations: leftist labor unions, George Soros-funded agitators, Open Borders lobbyists, Roman Catholic clergy, and teachers unions.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles predictably had the largest turnout – and the most disruptive. Half-a-million people crowded the streets demanding the “right” to flaunt this nation’s immigration laws, and underage students ran onto a California freeway, risking their lives and shutting down interstate traffic.
Andres Jiminez, director of the University of California's California Policy Research Center, told the media, “It's not only Latinos who are marching in the streets, its unions too: firefighters, farm workers and Hispanic students who had thought of U.S. law as protecting them and are now starting to see it as a threat to their future.”
He was right about this much: Latino organizations did not act alone. The media has failed to report that organized labor directed the illegals and minors. The L.A. Times revealed the rally’s “security” was handled by a union identified only as “Local 1877.” That would be local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the far-Left union founded by New Left radical Andrew Stern, which called for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq in June 2004 and worked in concert with Ted Kennedy to roll back anti-terrorist Homeland Security measures. According to the L.A. Times, the SEIU’s goons kindly helped “herd marchers along the route.” That was not the extent of SEIU’s help, though. The union also “coordinated the more than 100 buses that dropped off marchers from throughout California, Las Vegas and a few Southwestern cities.”
In other words, the massive rally against Homeland Security – since that is what gaining control of America’s borders would promote – was staged by a leftist labor union and staffed primarily with illegal immigrants.
SEIU did not work alone in this. It was aided by other radical or left-wing political pressure groups, including:
· Southern California Human Rights Network (SCHRN), whose members are apparently affiliated with the International Socialist Organization. SCHRN drafted a resolution in Orange County declaring, “We believe that no human is illegal and oppose the criminalization, dehumanization, and exploitation of migrants, immigrants and or economic and political refugees, by means of media, legislation, ideology, rhetoric, etc. [This] includes augmenting border patrol units, commissioning other law enforcement agencies to work in conjunction with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and [includes] such policies as the Central American Free Trade Agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and other policies that exploit the indigenous, peasantry, and environments of countries abroad.” In other words, capitalism and any form of immigration laws are exploitative.
· Pomona Day Labor Center, which helps employers hire “day laborers.” One must presume this organization knows its employees are illegals.
· Central American Resource Center, which advocates for illegals and lobbies for the government to make a “‘presumption’ of hardship” for and grant “permanent residency” to Central American illegals.
· Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), founded in 1986 to “get as many people as possible through the amnesty program established” by Ronald Reagan.
The cause is being helped in another way by the Los Angeles Unified School District – where more than 25,000 walked out of classes: through taxpayer-subsidized lobbying courses. According to the district, students “would remain in their home rooms through the day for discussions on the immigration issue, how to influence lawmakers and the consequences of walkouts, said Rowena Lagrosa, executive officer for educational service.” (Emphasis added.)
Michelle Malkin obtained a copy of a letter Lagrosa wrote Monday to the students of the school district stating LAUSD would chauffer students to high school after they protested on the freeway. The letter states after the rally, the district “will provide buses to return students to schools when appropriate.” Moreover, “we will do everything we can to ensure that those students who do leave the campus are supervised as they leave the campus.”
The leftist groups, illegals, and teachers unions could count on the media to cover for them. Mickey Kaus pointed out in Slate that the L.A. Times wrapped the protestors in the American flag, erasing all references to the Mexican standard, although the Mexican flag was hoisted at least as often in the crowd as Old Glory.
Gone from the media coverage, too, was mention that these protests had all the hallmarks of leftist riots of bygone days. Although depicted as nonviolent and mainstream, FrontPage Magazine columnist Tammy Bruce noted Hispanic protestors burned American flags at the L.A. rallies. Michelle Malkin has preserved some of the protestors’ other extremist messages. L.A. protestors ran onto freeways and threw rocks and bottles. LAPD Chief William Bratton – who put his men on tactical alert – said the protestors diverted police resources from fighting crime in the City of Angels. Fights broke out at protests in Watsonville, CA, and police arrested 21 minors and three adults for riotous behavior, including assaulting a police officer, in Escondido, CA.
D.C.: “Clergy” Against the Law
On Monday, the “mainstream media” reported some 300 clergy met near the Capitol for a prayer service to support illegal immigrants. The rally flyer claims these concerns sacerdotal ministers objected to legislation that would “Deny basic civil rights to immigrants.” No outlet reported this meeting was organized by the far-Left Center for Community Change, a member of the United for Peace and Justice coalition, headed by atheist and Marxist Leslie Cagan. On the CCC Board of Directors are:
Former Rep. Ron Dellums, D-CA, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee 1993-7. A letter written by a Dellums staffer to Grenada’s Marxist dictator discovered by U.S. troops as they liberated the island stated besides that toppled Marxist, “The only other person that I know of that [Dellums] expresses such admiration for is Fidel [Castro]”;
Cecelia Munoz, VP of the National Council of La Raza;
Sara K. Gould of the Ms. Foundation for Women;
Peter Edelman, a professor at Georgetown Law School, former Clinton administration official, and board president of the New Israel Fund. Today, he is perhaps best known as the husband of Hillary Clinton mentor Marian Wright Edelman. ; and
Sandra L. Ferniza, Arizona State University’s director of the Office of Public Affairs.
CCC is generously funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the William Randolph Hearst Foundation, the George Soros-funded Open Society Institute, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Tides Foundation.
Other event sponsors include:
Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). A large, sometimes violent leftist organization with a history of invading welfare offices and intimidating left-wing groups it perceives as “rivals.” In 2003, the group supported a resolution condemning the U.S. liberation of Iraq. ACORN’s would-be platform calls for the establishment of socialism in the United States. It founded the socialist Working Families Party in 1998 and endorsed Hillary Clinton’s senate campaign two years later.
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Although it has long presented itself as a benign Quaker organization, the AFSC has a multi-decade history of supporting unilateral disarmament and aiding Communist regimes, even eulogizing the head of a Tanzanian Communist party 13 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. AFSC signed a document days after 9/11, saying the terrorist attacks should be treated as a police matter. It has for decades promoted the “rights” of illegal workers.
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). Steve Brown and Chris Coon reported, “José Velez, the head of LULAC 1990-1994 used his “special status with the INS” to submit false papers for over 6,000 illegals seeking amnesty.” LULAC is today associated with race-based Affirmative Action programs and often allied with Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition. As I noted in my book, 57 Varieties of Radical Causes, Teresa Heinz Kerry awarded a Heinz Family Foundation grant to MIRA. In June 2002, MIRA instructed its members, “Please do NOT aid people in applying with INS unless you are familiar with their immigration history and are certain they would not be at risk of deportation by doing so.” (Emphasis theirs.) Immediately after 9/11 a MIRA press release asked people to “Refer local Arab, Muslim, and affected groups to MIRA.” They also advocate for illegals to receive in-state college tuition rates.
National Council of La Raza, a race-based organization that signed the “Statement of Solidarity with Migrants,” calling on the government to recognize the contributions of illegal immigrants to the labor market. It calls reduced welfare payments (to illegals), ““a disgrace to American values” and has firmly opposed numerous Homeland Security measures; and
The Gamaliel Foundation, a leftist organization inspired by Saul Alinsky. In addition to lobbying for illegal aliens, this member of the “Religious Left” hosted a campaign event in 2003 featuring Sen, Russ Feingold, D-WI, and then-presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.
The event was another attempt for the Left to wrap its message in clerical garb, this time executed successfully.
Phoenix
Also on Monday, several hundred underage students in Phoenix staged a walkout that culminated with protests at the state Capitol. Underreported was the role played in the rallies by MEChA, a radical Hispanic organization demanding the U.S. government give the Southwestern portion of the United States “back” to Mexican-Americans for the establishment of a new state called Aztlan. MEChA promotes its agenda alongside the National Council of La Raza, Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), and the American Friends Service Committee.
A sense of MEChA-like entitlement pervaded the entire rally, as an illegal alien told the media:
I'm not a criminal. I'm a good person and I deserve a quality education. That's why I'm here. To show that I'm willing to work toward that goal and that I've earned that right.
She did not elaborate on how she “earned” the “right” to illegally cross the border and access taxpayer-subsidized services restricted to U.S. citizens.
Georgia
Last Friday, tens of thousand of Georgians, including not a few illegals, staged a “sick-in” to protest a bill that passed the state house the day before. CNN reported, “That bill, which has yet to gain Senate approval, would deny state services to adults living in the U.S. illegally and impose a five percent surcharge on wire transfers from illegal immigrants.” Not only do immigrants have the “right” to live in Georgia illegally and collect government services, they also have the “right” to use Western Union without paying an extra five cents on the dollar. That’s some willingness to contribute to one’s home country. These are supposedly the minority members willing to work tirelessly to help their host country at jobs no one wants.
FrontPage Magazine columnist Allan Wall – whose National Guard brigade recently returned from serving our country in Iraq – has pointed out the Georgia protest’s organizer, Teodoro Maus, acted as Mexico’s consul general in Atlanta for 12 years. During that time, this Mexican government official protested Georgia’s declaration of English as the state’s official language, opposed a talk show host who supported border enforcement, and petitioned the Peach State to issue drivers licenses to illegals. Maus’ involvement raises the question whether Friday’s unofficial labor strike had the sanction of the Mexican government.
Dallas-Ft. Worth
Yesterday, area school districts estimated 4,000 students walked out in Dallas-Ft. Worth alone, staging a violent and disruptive rally to sanctify their illicit status.
Media accounts specify: “At Kiest Park, about 1,500 students from Dallas and Grand Prairie schools demonstrated. Dallas police outfitted in riot gear moved in on the crowd after some of the students started throwing rocks and bottles at a woman who staged a one-person counterprotest.” (Emphasis ours.)
Protestor Francisco Rojas, speaking in Spanish, told The Dallas Morning News, “It's like an animal that's waking from many years of sleep. We are very strong, and right now is our opportunity.”
These minor students then processed into a city council meeting, waving Mexican and El Salvadoran flags. To her credit, Councilwoman Elba Garcia courageously commandeered a police PA system to tell the truants to go back to school (where Dallas school officials said this week’s walkouts will be an unexcused absence).The warning came too late for one girl, whose hand was severed as a result of an accident that took place at the walkout.
Undeterred by the violence and harm done to their children’s education, leaders in the Open Borders Lobby set out plotting their next move. “At a dinner meeting of the Latino group LULAC, leaders announced a major rally on April 9. ‘We are going to be having, hopefully it will be the largest civil rights demonstration in the history of Dallas, Texas – 100,000-plus,’ said LULAC representative Domingo Garcia.”
No word on how many lone women will be battered the next time Mexican citizens exercise American First Amendment rights.
The Impact
These massive gatherings of illegals, who denounced their government unmolested by police or immigration officials, had an immediate impact – on legislation and on border security.
Reporter Sara Carter of the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin says since these protests, border patrol agents have reported an explosion in illegal crossings from Mexicans (and others) keenly observing the Senate debate and emboldened by same. Some were under the impression amnesty had already been granted and hoped to be the first to take part in the second California Gold Rush. [1]
The rallies had a political impact, too. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-CO, stated on Monday:
The immigration rallies over this weekend and today show how disordered our immigration system has become. For years, the government has turned a blind eye to illegal aliens who break into this country. It isn’t any wonder that illegal aliens now act as if they are entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship.
As a sign of their political impact, Republicans immediately began discussing the potential threat their political careers face from an Hispanic backlash, should they have the temerity to pretend the United States is a sovereign nation with definable political boundaries.
Leftists and illegals began their massive protest – because they saw U.S. law “as a threat to their future” – the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill that would allow illegals to attain American citizenship without facing deportation by a 12-6 vote. John McCain joined forces with Ted Kennedy to promote this amnesty measure. “It is not amnesty,” said Ted Kennedy, who has a 41-year history of fibbing about immigration bills.
The Judiciary Committee yesterday approved Dick Durbin’s amendment granting amnesty to individuals and non-profits that provide non-emergency aid to illegal immigrants. The committee had previously approved Durbin’s amendment to drop illegal immigration to a misdemeanor offense.
These measures are at odds with the will of the American people. According to the Associated Press, 59 percent of Americans oppose laws allowing illegal immigrants to apply for guest worker status, and 62 percent oppose easing the path to U.S. citizenship for those who are here illegally.
Americans know illegal immigrants account for nearly one-third of all inmates in federal prisons and add millions of dollars to their tax load every year. Even Mother Jones magazine exposed the health dangers posed to border towns throughout America, as a result of uninsured illegals bankrupting local hospitals – six years ago.
Americans cannot comprehend why Congress feels a need to add a guest worker program to mollify these disruptive, violent, lawbreaking protestors, who are occasionally political radicals and overwhelmingly individuals who are in violation of U.S. immigration law. What makes Congressmen think those whose first action in this country was to break the law will suddenly obey their newest futile measure?
These illegals claimed they marched to demand their “rights.” Those would amount to the right to a speedy trial, followed by rapid deportation. Illegal aliens have no additional rights under our Constitutional system, nor should they be given any. A more inspired leadership, with a requisite number of border patrol agents and paddy wagons, would have made these massive rallies an instructive object lesson in the enforcement of immigration law. Instead, political cowardice has transformed them into international exhibits of American impotence and paralysis.
ENDNOTES:
1. “Scarborough Country,” MSNBC. March 28, 2006.
BIG CORPORATIONS AND THE FAR-LEFT HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: both like to employ cheap illegal immigrants to do their heavy lifting.
The leftist media have tried to portray this weekend’s massive protests against House measures to curtail illegal immigration as the uprising of “The Other America”: forgotten, humble, hidden Hispanic members of the working poor simply demanding their “rights.” As events spanned from California to Detroit, Phoenix to Washington, D.C., the media kept up its anti-enforcement drumbeat. Although some have credited Latino DJs for the 500,000-strong illegal immigrant turnout in Los Angeles alone – and some credit is deserved – the real legwork was done by a more eclectic group of organizations: leftist labor unions, George Soros-funded agitators, Open Borders lobbyists, Roman Catholic clergy, and teachers unions.
Los Angeles
Los Angeles predictably had the largest turnout – and the most disruptive. Half-a-million people crowded the streets demanding the “right” to flaunt this nation’s immigration laws, and underage students ran onto a California freeway, risking their lives and shutting down interstate traffic.
Andres Jiminez, director of the University of California's California Policy Research Center, told the media, “It's not only Latinos who are marching in the streets, its unions too: firefighters, farm workers and Hispanic students who had thought of U.S. law as protecting them and are now starting to see it as a threat to their future.”
He was right about this much: Latino organizations did not act alone. The media has failed to report that organized labor directed the illegals and minors. The L.A. Times revealed the rally’s “security” was handled by a union identified only as “Local 1877.” That would be local 1877 of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the far-Left union founded by New Left radical Andrew Stern, which called for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq in June 2004 and worked in concert with Ted Kennedy to roll back anti-terrorist Homeland Security measures. According to the L.A. Times, the SEIU’s goons kindly helped “herd marchers along the route.” That was not the extent of SEIU’s help, though. The union also “coordinated the more than 100 buses that dropped off marchers from throughout California, Las Vegas and a few Southwestern cities.”
In other words, the massive rally against Homeland Security – since that is what gaining control of America’s borders would promote – was staged by a leftist labor union and staffed primarily with illegal immigrants.
SEIU did not work alone in this. It was aided by other radical or left-wing political pressure groups, including:
· Southern California Human Rights Network (SCHRN), whose members are apparently affiliated with the International Socialist Organization. SCHRN drafted a resolution in Orange County declaring, “We believe that no human is illegal and oppose the criminalization, dehumanization, and exploitation of migrants, immigrants and or economic and political refugees, by means of media, legislation, ideology, rhetoric, etc. [This] includes augmenting border patrol units, commissioning other law enforcement agencies to work in conjunction with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and [includes] such policies as the Central American Free Trade Agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement, and other policies that exploit the indigenous, peasantry, and environments of countries abroad.” In other words, capitalism and any form of immigration laws are exploitative.
· Pomona Day Labor Center, which helps employers hire “day laborers.” One must presume this organization knows its employees are illegals.
· Central American Resource Center, which advocates for illegals and lobbies for the government to make a “‘presumption’ of hardship” for and grant “permanent residency” to Central American illegals.
· Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), founded in 1986 to “get as many people as possible through the amnesty program established” by Ronald Reagan.
The cause is being helped in another way by the Los Angeles Unified School District – where more than 25,000 walked out of classes: through taxpayer-subsidized lobbying courses. According to the district, students “would remain in their home rooms through the day for discussions on the immigration issue, how to influence lawmakers and the consequences of walkouts, said Rowena Lagrosa, executive officer for educational service.” (Emphasis added.)
Michelle Malkin obtained a copy of a letter Lagrosa wrote Monday to the students of the school district stating LAUSD would chauffer students to high school after they protested on the freeway. The letter states after the rally, the district “will provide buses to return students to schools when appropriate.” Moreover, “we will do everything we can to ensure that those students who do leave the campus are supervised as they leave the campus.”
The leftist groups, illegals, and teachers unions could count on the media to cover for them. Mickey Kaus pointed out in Slate that the L.A. Times wrapped the protestors in the American flag, erasing all references to the Mexican standard, although the Mexican flag was hoisted at least as often in the crowd as Old Glory.
Gone from the media coverage, too, was mention that these protests had all the hallmarks of leftist riots of bygone days. Although depicted as nonviolent and mainstream, FrontPage Magazine columnist Tammy Bruce noted Hispanic protestors burned American flags at the L.A. rallies. Michelle Malkin has preserved some of the protestors’ other extremist messages. L.A. protestors ran onto freeways and threw rocks and bottles. LAPD Chief William Bratton – who put his men on tactical alert – said the protestors diverted police resources from fighting crime in the City of Angels. Fights broke out at protests in Watsonville, CA, and police arrested 21 minors and three adults for riotous behavior, including assaulting a police officer, in Escondido, CA.
D.C.: “Clergy” Against the Law
On Monday, the “mainstream media” reported some 300 clergy met near the Capitol for a prayer service to support illegal immigrants. The rally flyer claims these concerns sacerdotal ministers objected to legislation that would “Deny basic civil rights to immigrants.” No outlet reported this meeting was organized by the far-Left Center for Community Change, a member of the United for Peace and Justice coalition, headed by atheist and Marxist Leslie Cagan. On the CCC Board of Directors are:
Former Rep. Ron Dellums, D-CA, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee 1993-7. A letter written by a Dellums staffer to Grenada’s Marxist dictator discovered by U.S. troops as they liberated the island stated besides that toppled Marxist, “The only other person that I know of that [Dellums] expresses such admiration for is Fidel [Castro]”;
Cecelia Munoz, VP of the National Council of La Raza;
Sara K. Gould of the Ms. Foundation for Women;
Peter Edelman, a professor at Georgetown Law School, former Clinton administration official, and board president of the New Israel Fund. Today, he is perhaps best known as the husband of Hillary Clinton mentor Marian Wright Edelman. ; and
Sandra L. Ferniza, Arizona State University’s director of the Office of Public Affairs.
CCC is generously funded by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, the Ford Foundation, the William Randolph Hearst Foundation, the George Soros-funded Open Society Institute, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Tides Foundation.
Other event sponsors include:
Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). A large, sometimes violent leftist organization with a history of invading welfare offices and intimidating left-wing groups it perceives as “rivals.” In 2003, the group supported a resolution condemning the U.S. liberation of Iraq. ACORN’s would-be platform calls for the establishment of socialism in the United States. It founded the socialist Working Families Party in 1998 and endorsed Hillary Clinton’s senate campaign two years later.
American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Although it has long presented itself as a benign Quaker organization, the AFSC has a multi-decade history of supporting unilateral disarmament and aiding Communist regimes, even eulogizing the head of a Tanzanian Communist party 13 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. AFSC signed a document days after 9/11, saying the terrorist attacks should be treated as a police matter. It has for decades promoted the “rights” of illegal workers.
League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). Steve Brown and Chris Coon reported, “José Velez, the head of LULAC 1990-1994 used his “special status with the INS” to submit false papers for over 6,000 illegals seeking amnesty.” LULAC is today associated with race-based Affirmative Action programs and often allied with Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition.
Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition. As I noted in my book, 57 Varieties of Radical Causes, Teresa Heinz Kerry awarded a Heinz Family Foundation grant to MIRA. In June 2002, MIRA instructed its members, “Please do NOT aid people in applying with INS unless you are familiar with their immigration history and are certain they would not be at risk of deportation by doing so.” (Emphasis theirs.) Immediately after 9/11 a MIRA press release asked people to “Refer local Arab, Muslim, and affected groups to MIRA.” They also advocate for illegals to receive in-state college tuition rates.
National Council of La Raza, a race-based organization that signed the “Statement of Solidarity with Migrants,” calling on the government to recognize the contributions of illegal immigrants to the labor market. It calls reduced welfare payments (to illegals), ““a disgrace to American values” and has firmly opposed numerous Homeland Security measures; and
The Gamaliel Foundation, a leftist organization inspired by Saul Alinsky. In addition to lobbying for illegal aliens, this member of the “Religious Left” hosted a campaign event in 2003 featuring Sen, Russ Feingold, D-WI, and then-presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich.
The event was another attempt for the Left to wrap its message in clerical garb, this time executed successfully.
Phoenix
Also on Monday, several hundred underage students in Phoenix staged a walkout that culminated with protests at the state Capitol. Underreported was the role played in the rallies by MEChA, a radical Hispanic organization demanding the U.S. government give the Southwestern portion of the United States “back” to Mexican-Americans for the establishment of a new state called Aztlan. MEChA promotes its agenda alongside the National Council of La Raza, Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), and the American Friends Service Committee.
A sense of MEChA-like entitlement pervaded the entire rally, as an illegal alien told the media:
I'm not a criminal. I'm a good person and I deserve a quality education. That's why I'm here. To show that I'm willing to work toward that goal and that I've earned that right.
She did not elaborate on how she “earned” the “right” to illegally cross the border and access taxpayer-subsidized services restricted to U.S. citizens.
Georgia
Last Friday, tens of thousand of Georgians, including not a few illegals, staged a “sick-in” to protest a bill that passed the state house the day before. CNN reported, “That bill, which has yet to gain Senate approval, would deny state services to adults living in the U.S. illegally and impose a five percent surcharge on wire transfers from illegal immigrants.” Not only do immigrants have the “right” to live in Georgia illegally and collect government services, they also have the “right” to use Western Union without paying an extra five cents on the dollar. That’s some willingness to contribute to one’s home country. These are supposedly the minority members willing to work tirelessly to help their host country at jobs no one wants.
FrontPage Magazine columnist Allan Wall – whose National Guard brigade recently returned from serving our country in Iraq – has pointed out the Georgia protest’s organizer, Teodoro Maus, acted as Mexico’s consul general in Atlanta for 12 years. During that time, this Mexican government official protested Georgia’s declaration of English as the state’s official language, opposed a talk show host who supported border enforcement, and petitioned the Peach State to issue drivers licenses to illegals. Maus’ involvement raises the question whether Friday’s unofficial labor strike had the sanction of the Mexican government.
Dallas-Ft. Worth
Yesterday, area school districts estimated 4,000 students walked out in Dallas-Ft. Worth alone, staging a violent and disruptive rally to sanctify their illicit status.
Media accounts specify: “At Kiest Park, about 1,500 students from Dallas and Grand Prairie schools demonstrated. Dallas police outfitted in riot gear moved in on the crowd after some of the students started throwing rocks and bottles at a woman who staged a one-person counterprotest.” (Emphasis ours.)
Protestor Francisco Rojas, speaking in Spanish, told The Dallas Morning News, “It's like an animal that's waking from many years of sleep. We are very strong, and right now is our opportunity.”
These minor students then processed into a city council meeting, waving Mexican and El Salvadoran flags. To her credit, Councilwoman Elba Garcia courageously commandeered a police PA system to tell the truants to go back to school (where Dallas school officials said this week’s walkouts will be an unexcused absence).The warning came too late for one girl, whose hand was severed as a result of an accident that took place at the walkout.
Undeterred by the violence and harm done to their children’s education, leaders in the Open Borders Lobby set out plotting their next move. “At a dinner meeting of the Latino group LULAC, leaders announced a major rally on April 9. ‘We are going to be having, hopefully it will be the largest civil rights demonstration in the history of Dallas, Texas – 100,000-plus,’ said LULAC representative Domingo Garcia.”
No word on how many lone women will be battered the next time Mexican citizens exercise American First Amendment rights.
The Impact
These massive gatherings of illegals, who denounced their government unmolested by police or immigration officials, had an immediate impact – on legislation and on border security.
Reporter Sara Carter of the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin says since these protests, border patrol agents have reported an explosion in illegal crossings from Mexicans (and others) keenly observing the Senate debate and emboldened by same. Some were under the impression amnesty had already been granted and hoped to be the first to take part in the second California Gold Rush. [1]
The rallies had a political impact, too. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-CO, stated on Monday:
The immigration rallies over this weekend and today show how disordered our immigration system has become. For years, the government has turned a blind eye to illegal aliens who break into this country. It isn’t any wonder that illegal aliens now act as if they are entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship.
As a sign of their political impact, Republicans immediately began discussing the potential threat their political careers face from an Hispanic backlash, should they have the temerity to pretend the United States is a sovereign nation with definable political boundaries.
Leftists and illegals began their massive protest – because they saw U.S. law “as a threat to their future” – the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee passed a bill that would allow illegals to attain American citizenship without facing deportation by a 12-6 vote. John McCain joined forces with Ted Kennedy to promote this amnesty measure. “It is not amnesty,” said Ted Kennedy, who has a 41-year history of fibbing about immigration bills.
The Judiciary Committee yesterday approved Dick Durbin’s amendment granting amnesty to individuals and non-profits that provide non-emergency aid to illegal immigrants. The committee had previously approved Durbin’s amendment to drop illegal immigration to a misdemeanor offense.
These measures are at odds with the will of the American people. According to the Associated Press, 59 percent of Americans oppose laws allowing illegal immigrants to apply for guest worker status, and 62 percent oppose easing the path to U.S. citizenship for those who are here illegally.
Americans know illegal immigrants account for nearly one-third of all inmates in federal prisons and add millions of dollars to their tax load every year. Even Mother Jones magazine exposed the health dangers posed to border towns throughout America, as a result of uninsured illegals bankrupting local hospitals – six years ago.
Americans cannot comprehend why Congress feels a need to add a guest worker program to mollify these disruptive, violent, lawbreaking protestors, who are occasionally political radicals and overwhelmingly individuals who are in violation of U.S. immigration law. What makes Congressmen think those whose first action in this country was to break the law will suddenly obey their newest futile measure?
These illegals claimed they marched to demand their “rights.” Those would amount to the right to a speedy trial, followed by rapid deportation. Illegal aliens have no additional rights under our Constitutional system, nor should they be given any. A more inspired leadership, with a requisite number of border patrol agents and paddy wagons, would have made these massive rallies an instructive object lesson in the enforcement of immigration law. Instead, political cowardice has transformed them into international exhibits of American impotence and paralysis.
ENDNOTES:
1. “Scarborough Country,” MSNBC. March 28, 2006.
Friday, April 7
The Annexation of the American Southwest By Mexico?
By Ronald F. Maxwell
April 6, 2006
Dear President Bush, Perhaps you know me from my work. I wrote and directed the movies "Gettysburg" and "Gods and Generals." Walking Civil War battlefields, soaking up the letters and diaries of that generation, re-creating the world of our ancestors -- all this has given me a deep appreciation for our country. My dad was with the Army Air Corps in North Africa while your dad was in the Pacific. My French mother was liberated in Tunisia and became a lawful immigrant to the United States. For an American, my story is unique and typical at the same time.
You probably don't need to be reminded of the hostility and animus directed your way by most of the Hollywood community. Then again, I'm sure you don't take it personally. After all, they held Ronald Reagan in equal contempt. As one of the very few directors of major motion pictures who sees you in a different light, I implore you to listen seriously to what I have to say.
What is happening on the southern border is unprecedented. Not only in our own history, but in the history of the world. No country at any time anywhere has sustained the influx of tens of millions of foreigners across its borders. A wave of anti-American leftism is sweeping Latin America. A socialist radical may soon be elected as the president of Mexico, a country which officially encourages its emigrants to vote in Mexican elections, urging them to think of themselves as Mexican first and perhaps only. The eventual outcome is plain for anyone with eyes to see. This is invasion masquerading as immigration.
It may already be too late to avoid a future annexation of the Southwest by Mexico or the evolution of a Mexican-dominated satellite state. This is not to say Mexican people are better or worse than any of God's children. It is to say that millions of ethnically and culturally homogeneous people will seek self-determination in a land they will increasingly feel justified in claiming as their own. Especially when the natural weight of demographic change is accompanied by the soundtrack of radical demagoguery which seeks to legitimize and moralize this phenomenon as a "reconquista." Many pundits claim you will be remembered in history as the president who won (or lost) the war in Iraq. I see it differently. I believe you will come to be seen, in the years and decades to come, as the President who saved (or lost) the Southwest of the United States.
Mr. President, this is a time for candor. Your immigration policy is viewed as captive to the cheap labor -- big business lobby and inimical to the survival of our country. It is splitting the party and draining away support for your presidency. We who understand the vital stakes will not be placated by rhetoric or slogans. The failure to recognize this growing and deep disaffection among Republicans, conservatives, independents and, indeed, many Reagan Democrats, is, in the short run, going to lead to a monumental defeat for your party at the polls in November.
The last two years of your presidency will be plagued with impeachment hearings, with pressures to diminish the war against terrorism, with the cutting off of funds for the war of liberation in Iraq for which so many of our brothers in uniform have paid the ultimate price. The American people will once again be forced to endure a painful repetition of the humiliating withdrawal from Vietnam. We will be dedicating yet another monument to brave men who gave their lives for honor, country and a lost cause.
I understand that in your heart you want to believe that the border should be an open place where goods and people can move freely back and forth for the good of all. I do not question your integrity or the goodness and decency of your motivations. Dear Mr. President, this is a utopian creed, which must be discarded before it is too late.
When I watched the Senate Judiciary Committee's one-day public session on immigration reform (I suppose we should be grateful that Sen. Arlen Specter devoted one whole day out of his busy schedule for the public discussion of a problem regarding 20 million illegal aliens) it was remarkable for the near absence of any senator speaking on behalf of the American people or their own constituents. It seems the overriding concern of most senators of both parties is for the illegal immigrant population. Perhaps these senators should be reminded that they are supposed to represent and defend American citizens, not foreign nationals, illegal aliens or indeed anyone else. Listening to the self-serving and pandering speeches, you'd think the senators were elected in Mexico or any other country on the globe except America.
Where was the concern for American schoolchildren forced to sit in overcrowded classes, for American patients forced to wait in overcrowded hospitals, for American workers whose wages are being undercut, for American drivers forced to sit in interminable traffic jams in over-whelmed freeway systems, for the victims of organized gangs, for the American college students who are turned away from publicly funded state universities, for many African Americans who are being literally displaced from their neighborhoods while being moved figuratively, once again, to the back of the bus, for those environmentalists and conservationists who want to protect open space and slow down urban sprawl, for the American taxpayers who have had to bear the burden of billions of dollars in increased welfare costs, over-burdened prisons, extra police and security and even, adding insult to injury, for bilingual education?
Where was the concern that we as a people are compelled to deal with these "in your face" issues which have been imposed upon us by external forces, instead of focusing our time, energies and capital on our own indigenous, urgent concerns, like for instance, the medical care for our own countrymen and women. Might it be irresponsible to mislead the 20 million illegal foreigners already here and might it be immoral to encourage the yearly arrival of millions more when we cannot even take care of our own millions of poor and sick and hungry and, yes, dare I say it, our unemployed?
Working as I do in Civil War history, I have had to explore the ugly depths of the American institution of slavery, and have been privileged to work alongside civil rights leaders and specialists in African-American history. For this reason it troubles me that we appear today to be importing a second virtual slave class of low-wage workers who are hired to replace or displace less-educated or privileged Americans -- including the very descendants of American slaves.
I agree with you that "no child should be left behind." But that is precisely what immigration advocates are doing to the children of America's working class -- by flooding the market with workers from a desperately poor country, who depress the wages of high school and even college graduates.
Little in the current situation resembles the immigration we knew and cherished while growing up in America prior to the '80s. The new and radically dislocating phenomenon we are enduring is not the old, familiar immigration of yesteryear -- gradual, orderly, assimilating and lawful. The numbers alone are unprecedented. The American people have been made the victims of monumental social engineering perpetuated upon them without their consent and against their will by an arrogant governing elite. Those who try to neutralize their justifiable instincts of self-preservation as a people and a sovereign nation by constantly invoking the mantra of "a nation of immigrants" are trying to pull the wool over their eyes.
The House immigration bill isn't perfect, but it is a firm and realistic place from which to build an effective policy for the survival of our country. The McCain-Kennedy bill looks like it was drafted by bureaucrats at the United Nations, not by representatives of the United States.
To do the right thing, to take the safe course for protecting our country, you will have to endure even more vilification from the left, you will have to watch large and increasingly violent rallies by those who don't want to abide by our laws or the will of the American people -- who think they are entitled -- who believe this country already belongs to them -- who believe the rest of us should just move aside, shut up and smile. To pretend this problem will go away by pandering to the illegal population, or to leave it for the next generation to solve is national suicide.
The moment has arrived. The Senate has already begun its bloviations and self-agrandizing platitudes, its morality play of good and evil wherein they the noble senators are cast as the redeemers of the entire world population seeking only to "live the American dream." We know by their coded words they will do nothing meaningful to really solve the problem or to defend America. If their actions of the past 20 years are a guide, they will only take the pose of pretending to do so. As a movie director I can see bad acting a mile away.
Today there are two Republican Parties. One is now seen correctly by most Americans as responsive first and foremost to the demands of multinational corporations, the agro-business and the Chamber of Commerce. The other, best represented by the embattled members of the House, represents grass-roots America -- we the people. In this debate you have the opportunity to make the party one and whole again, to regain its soul and return it to the service and the sovereignty of the American people.
Dear Mr. President, you must disenthrall yourself from the failed policies of the present. I implore you to rethink this issue and to change course. Millions of Americans, a great majority of your fellow citizens will be with you. Start speaking and doing the sensible, courageous and right thing. You will see your poll numbers turn dramatically around. You will save your country.
Ronald F. Maxwell, a writer and director, is currently working on a satirical motion picture about immigration into America.
April 6, 2006
Dear President Bush, Perhaps you know me from my work. I wrote and directed the movies "Gettysburg" and "Gods and Generals." Walking Civil War battlefields, soaking up the letters and diaries of that generation, re-creating the world of our ancestors -- all this has given me a deep appreciation for our country. My dad was with the Army Air Corps in North Africa while your dad was in the Pacific. My French mother was liberated in Tunisia and became a lawful immigrant to the United States. For an American, my story is unique and typical at the same time.
You probably don't need to be reminded of the hostility and animus directed your way by most of the Hollywood community. Then again, I'm sure you don't take it personally. After all, they held Ronald Reagan in equal contempt. As one of the very few directors of major motion pictures who sees you in a different light, I implore you to listen seriously to what I have to say.
What is happening on the southern border is unprecedented. Not only in our own history, but in the history of the world. No country at any time anywhere has sustained the influx of tens of millions of foreigners across its borders. A wave of anti-American leftism is sweeping Latin America. A socialist radical may soon be elected as the president of Mexico, a country which officially encourages its emigrants to vote in Mexican elections, urging them to think of themselves as Mexican first and perhaps only. The eventual outcome is plain for anyone with eyes to see. This is invasion masquerading as immigration.
It may already be too late to avoid a future annexation of the Southwest by Mexico or the evolution of a Mexican-dominated satellite state. This is not to say Mexican people are better or worse than any of God's children. It is to say that millions of ethnically and culturally homogeneous people will seek self-determination in a land they will increasingly feel justified in claiming as their own. Especially when the natural weight of demographic change is accompanied by the soundtrack of radical demagoguery which seeks to legitimize and moralize this phenomenon as a "reconquista." Many pundits claim you will be remembered in history as the president who won (or lost) the war in Iraq. I see it differently. I believe you will come to be seen, in the years and decades to come, as the President who saved (or lost) the Southwest of the United States.
Mr. President, this is a time for candor. Your immigration policy is viewed as captive to the cheap labor -- big business lobby and inimical to the survival of our country. It is splitting the party and draining away support for your presidency. We who understand the vital stakes will not be placated by rhetoric or slogans. The failure to recognize this growing and deep disaffection among Republicans, conservatives, independents and, indeed, many Reagan Democrats, is, in the short run, going to lead to a monumental defeat for your party at the polls in November.
The last two years of your presidency will be plagued with impeachment hearings, with pressures to diminish the war against terrorism, with the cutting off of funds for the war of liberation in Iraq for which so many of our brothers in uniform have paid the ultimate price. The American people will once again be forced to endure a painful repetition of the humiliating withdrawal from Vietnam. We will be dedicating yet another monument to brave men who gave their lives for honor, country and a lost cause.
I understand that in your heart you want to believe that the border should be an open place where goods and people can move freely back and forth for the good of all. I do not question your integrity or the goodness and decency of your motivations. Dear Mr. President, this is a utopian creed, which must be discarded before it is too late.
When I watched the Senate Judiciary Committee's one-day public session on immigration reform (I suppose we should be grateful that Sen. Arlen Specter devoted one whole day out of his busy schedule for the public discussion of a problem regarding 20 million illegal aliens) it was remarkable for the near absence of any senator speaking on behalf of the American people or their own constituents. It seems the overriding concern of most senators of both parties is for the illegal immigrant population. Perhaps these senators should be reminded that they are supposed to represent and defend American citizens, not foreign nationals, illegal aliens or indeed anyone else. Listening to the self-serving and pandering speeches, you'd think the senators were elected in Mexico or any other country on the globe except America.
Where was the concern for American schoolchildren forced to sit in overcrowded classes, for American patients forced to wait in overcrowded hospitals, for American workers whose wages are being undercut, for American drivers forced to sit in interminable traffic jams in over-whelmed freeway systems, for the victims of organized gangs, for the American college students who are turned away from publicly funded state universities, for many African Americans who are being literally displaced from their neighborhoods while being moved figuratively, once again, to the back of the bus, for those environmentalists and conservationists who want to protect open space and slow down urban sprawl, for the American taxpayers who have had to bear the burden of billions of dollars in increased welfare costs, over-burdened prisons, extra police and security and even, adding insult to injury, for bilingual education?
Where was the concern that we as a people are compelled to deal with these "in your face" issues which have been imposed upon us by external forces, instead of focusing our time, energies and capital on our own indigenous, urgent concerns, like for instance, the medical care for our own countrymen and women. Might it be irresponsible to mislead the 20 million illegal foreigners already here and might it be immoral to encourage the yearly arrival of millions more when we cannot even take care of our own millions of poor and sick and hungry and, yes, dare I say it, our unemployed?
Working as I do in Civil War history, I have had to explore the ugly depths of the American institution of slavery, and have been privileged to work alongside civil rights leaders and specialists in African-American history. For this reason it troubles me that we appear today to be importing a second virtual slave class of low-wage workers who are hired to replace or displace less-educated or privileged Americans -- including the very descendants of American slaves.
I agree with you that "no child should be left behind." But that is precisely what immigration advocates are doing to the children of America's working class -- by flooding the market with workers from a desperately poor country, who depress the wages of high school and even college graduates.
Little in the current situation resembles the immigration we knew and cherished while growing up in America prior to the '80s. The new and radically dislocating phenomenon we are enduring is not the old, familiar immigration of yesteryear -- gradual, orderly, assimilating and lawful. The numbers alone are unprecedented. The American people have been made the victims of monumental social engineering perpetuated upon them without their consent and against their will by an arrogant governing elite. Those who try to neutralize their justifiable instincts of self-preservation as a people and a sovereign nation by constantly invoking the mantra of "a nation of immigrants" are trying to pull the wool over their eyes.
The House immigration bill isn't perfect, but it is a firm and realistic place from which to build an effective policy for the survival of our country. The McCain-Kennedy bill looks like it was drafted by bureaucrats at the United Nations, not by representatives of the United States.
To do the right thing, to take the safe course for protecting our country, you will have to endure even more vilification from the left, you will have to watch large and increasingly violent rallies by those who don't want to abide by our laws or the will of the American people -- who think they are entitled -- who believe this country already belongs to them -- who believe the rest of us should just move aside, shut up and smile. To pretend this problem will go away by pandering to the illegal population, or to leave it for the next generation to solve is national suicide.
The moment has arrived. The Senate has already begun its bloviations and self-agrandizing platitudes, its morality play of good and evil wherein they the noble senators are cast as the redeemers of the entire world population seeking only to "live the American dream." We know by their coded words they will do nothing meaningful to really solve the problem or to defend America. If their actions of the past 20 years are a guide, they will only take the pose of pretending to do so. As a movie director I can see bad acting a mile away.
Today there are two Republican Parties. One is now seen correctly by most Americans as responsive first and foremost to the demands of multinational corporations, the agro-business and the Chamber of Commerce. The other, best represented by the embattled members of the House, represents grass-roots America -- we the people. In this debate you have the opportunity to make the party one and whole again, to regain its soul and return it to the service and the sovereignty of the American people.
Dear Mr. President, you must disenthrall yourself from the failed policies of the present. I implore you to rethink this issue and to change course. Millions of Americans, a great majority of your fellow citizens will be with you. Start speaking and doing the sensible, courageous and right thing. You will see your poll numbers turn dramatically around. You will save your country.
Ronald F. Maxwell, a writer and director, is currently working on a satirical motion picture about immigration into America.
Wednesday, April 5
Let's Celebrate Iraqi Liberation Day
When my son, Michael, left for Iraq, America was united in our determination to defeat the terrorists. We all supported the mission. Sadly, some Americans - fueled by a steady diet of media negativism - seem to have lost our resolve. Michael died on January 24, 2005 fighting for a cause he believed in. I know for a fact that he believed the cause was honorable because he told me so when he wrote a personal credo that explained, "I want to carve out a niche for myself in the history books. I want to be remembered for the things I accomplished. I sometimes dream of being a soldier in a war. In this war I am helping to liberate people from oppression. In the end there is a big parade and a monument to immortalize us in stone. Other times I envision being a man you see out of the corner of your eye, dressed in black fatigues, entering a building full of terrorists. After everything is completed I slip out the back only to repeat this the next time that I am called. I might not be remembered in that scenario, but I will have helped people."
The mainstream media may have lost faith in the mission, but I haven't forgotten that Michael - who's friends called him Shrek - died to "liberate people from oppression."
I am hopeful that the media will use Iraqi Liberation Day on April 9th to remember all of the good things Michael and our troops have done in Iraq.
I believe that if enough of us join together and speak out we can make sure that our servicemen and women abroad today know just how much we support them and their mission. Please visit http://ga3.org/ct/4pSC78p19X53/ and forward this letter to your friends; April 9th is just around the corner, so please act now.
Sincerely,
Merrilee Carlson, Shrek's Mom
Gold Star Mother and Chair of Minnesota Families United
St. Paul, Minnesota
The Laugh is on CNN
It's 6:34 pm CST out here in "fly-over land" and I just watched the most ridiculous report on CNN that probably has EVER broadcast over television (or probably any other media).
It seems William Buckley said that Hillary Clinton is a "political phenomenon." CNN interprets that as praise and did a whole 5-minutes on Buckley praising Clinton. Anyone who understands the English language, however, and who knows Bill Buckley (as CNN should since he's been around longer that CNN has) understands exactly what Buckley meant by that comment.
According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a phenomenon is 1. an observable event (nothing remarkable there -- everyone knows who the senator from New York, ex-first lady -- well, maybe not a lady in the true sense of the word -- is). Definition #2 says a phenomenon has to do with sensory perception and is therefore not applicable in any sense here. Definition #3 (which is obviously what Buckley meant) is that it is a rare or significant fact or event.
The first woman in history running a serious campaign for President of the United States quite obviously fits that last definition. And there is no praise for her in that statement, nor is there criticism. Most certainly it's not a comment worthy of an entire feature implying that Buckley supports Clinton's candidacy or that he said anything nice about her at all.
Truth is, the statement was pure pablum. Neither criticism nor praise.
I'm glad Buckley got the attention, though. I'm sure he's used to that kind of sheer stupidity (Wolf Blitzer certainly is not one of the nation's greatest intellects by a long shot) and I imagine he's rather amused at it.
Meanwhile, it gave his fans a chance to see that, in his 80s, he's still around and doing great. And it gives us a good laugh at CNN's expense.
It seems William Buckley said that Hillary Clinton is a "political phenomenon." CNN interprets that as praise and did a whole 5-minutes on Buckley praising Clinton. Anyone who understands the English language, however, and who knows Bill Buckley (as CNN should since he's been around longer that CNN has) understands exactly what Buckley meant by that comment.
According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, a phenomenon is 1. an observable event (nothing remarkable there -- everyone knows who the senator from New York, ex-first lady -- well, maybe not a lady in the true sense of the word -- is). Definition #2 says a phenomenon has to do with sensory perception and is therefore not applicable in any sense here. Definition #3 (which is obviously what Buckley meant) is that it is a rare or significant fact or event.
The first woman in history running a serious campaign for President of the United States quite obviously fits that last definition. And there is no praise for her in that statement, nor is there criticism. Most certainly it's not a comment worthy of an entire feature implying that Buckley supports Clinton's candidacy or that he said anything nice about her at all.
Truth is, the statement was pure pablum. Neither criticism nor praise.
I'm glad Buckley got the attention, though. I'm sure he's used to that kind of sheer stupidity (Wolf Blitzer certainly is not one of the nation's greatest intellects by a long shot) and I imagine he's rather amused at it.
Meanwhile, it gave his fans a chance to see that, in his 80s, he's still around and doing great. And it gives us a good laugh at CNN's expense.
Monday, April 3
I Don't Care, I Don't Care. . .
The following letter is Pam Foster of Pamela Foster and Associates in Atlanta. She's been in business since 1980 doing interior design and home planning. She recently wrote a letter to a family member serving in Iraq Read it!
WHAT'S ALL THE FUSS?
"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11.2001? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?
And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all.
I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.
I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.
I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling, slashed throat.
I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.
I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.
I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.
In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.
When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care.
When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care.
When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care.
And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and -- you guessed it, I could not have said this any better myself! I DON'T CARE!
And I don't care whether this is a real letter or not; or whether there is such a person as Pam Foster and her design company. I DO care that someone wrote this and I agree with every word.
I also don't care what Europeans think of us -- not one little bit. They've never liked us, so why should I care what they think?
I don't care what Cindy Sheehan says or does and I don't feel sorry for her. Her son volunteered to serve; if she chooses not to honor his service, that's her problem. I'm a grieving mother, too, but I'll be darned if I'll use that grief to garner pity for myself and destruction for the Middle East.
I don't care that the French hate us. My Father served in France in WWI and came home with an intense dislike of the French -- so intense that he discouraged me from traveling in that country and couldn't understand why I would want to learn the language. It took me a while do discover that, indeed, Father Knows Best.
I don't care about the Democratic Party. Although I've worked for Republicans most of the time throughout my adulthood (mainly because as a group they are more intellectual and nicer people to be with), I have voted for Democrats. They have made such political fools of themselves lately though, with their lies and half-truths and frantic attempts to destroy efforts to pass worthy legislation that I suspect I've become a "yellow dog" Republican.
WHAT'S ALL THE FUSS?
"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11.2001? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?
And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all.
I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.
I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.
I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling, slashed throat.
I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.
I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.
I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.
In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.
When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care.
When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care.
When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care.
And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and -- you guessed it, I could not have said this any better myself! I DON'T CARE!
And I don't care whether this is a real letter or not; or whether there is such a person as Pam Foster and her design company. I DO care that someone wrote this and I agree with every word.
I also don't care what Europeans think of us -- not one little bit. They've never liked us, so why should I care what they think?
I don't care what Cindy Sheehan says or does and I don't feel sorry for her. Her son volunteered to serve; if she chooses not to honor his service, that's her problem. I'm a grieving mother, too, but I'll be darned if I'll use that grief to garner pity for myself and destruction for the Middle East.
I don't care that the French hate us. My Father served in France in WWI and came home with an intense dislike of the French -- so intense that he discouraged me from traveling in that country and couldn't understand why I would want to learn the language. It took me a while do discover that, indeed, Father Knows Best.
I don't care about the Democratic Party. Although I've worked for Republicans most of the time throughout my adulthood (mainly because as a group they are more intellectual and nicer people to be with), I have voted for Democrats. They have made such political fools of themselves lately though, with their lies and half-truths and frantic attempts to destroy efforts to pass worthy legislation that I suspect I've become a "yellow dog" Republican.
TO ALL THE KIDS WHO WERE BORN IN THE 1930s, 40s, and 50s
First, we survived being born to mothers who smoked and/or drank while they carried us.
They took aspirin (and gave it to us), ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes.
Then after that trauma, our baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead-based paints.
We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.
As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags.
Riding in the back of a pick up on a warm day was always a special treat.
We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.
We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this.
We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because......
WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!
We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.
No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.
We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.
We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 99 channels on cable, no video tape movies, no surround sound, no cell phones, no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms..........WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!
We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.
We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.
We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them!
Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!
The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!
This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!
The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.
We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned
HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL!
And YOU are one of them!
CONGRATULATIONS!
All this was probably possible for my generation because the grownups were too busy fighting and winning a war against terror -- WWII. They concentrated on it, sacrificed for it and it never occurred to them to whine like babies and cowards and Cindy Sheehan.
Let's face it -- they were a better generation than we -- a generation who .
Kind of makes you want to run through the house with scissors, doesn't it?!
They took aspirin (and gave it to us), ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a can, and didn't get tested for diabetes.
Then after that trauma, our baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead-based paints.
We had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when we rode our bikes, we had no helmets, not to mention, the risks we took hitchhiking.
As children, we would ride in cars with no seat belts or air bags.
Riding in the back of a pick up on a warm day was always a special treat.
We drank water from the garden hose and NOT from a bottle.
We shared one soft drink with four friends, from one bottle and NO ONE actually died from this.
We ate cupcakes, white bread and real butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but we weren't overweight because......
WE WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE PLAYING!!
We would leave home in the morning and play all day, as long as we were back when the streetlights came on.
No one was able to reach us all day. And we were O.K.
We would spend hours building our go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out we forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, we learned to solve the problem.
We did not have Playstations, Nintendo's, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 99 channels on cable, no video tape movies, no surround sound, no cell phones, no personal computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms..........WE HAD FRIENDS and we went outside and found them!
We fell out of trees, got cut, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents.
We ate worms and mud pies made from dirt, and the worms did not live in us forever.
We were given BB guns for our 10th birthdays, made up games with sticks and tennis balls and although we were told it would happen, we did not put out very many eyes.
We rode bikes or walked to a friend's house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them!
Little League had tryouts and not everyone made the team. Those who didn't had to learn to deal with disappointment. Imagine that!!
The idea of a parent bailing us out if we broke the law was unheard of. They actually sided with the law!
This generation has produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers and inventors ever!
The past 50 years have been an explosion of innovation and new ideas.
We had freedom, failure, success and responsibility, and we learned
HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL!
And YOU are one of them!
CONGRATULATIONS!
All this was probably possible for my generation because the grownups were too busy fighting and winning a war against terror -- WWII. They concentrated on it, sacrificed for it and it never occurred to them to whine like babies and cowards and Cindy Sheehan.
Let's face it -- they were a better generation than we -- a generation who .
Kind of makes you want to run through the house with scissors, doesn't it?!
Sunday, April 2
The Difference Between Republicans and Democrats
From "Issues in Kansas" by Lance Kinser
For those of us who spend a good part of our time and energy engaged in
the political life of our state and nation the apparent apathy of some
toward all things political can at times be a source of frustration.
While there are numerous reasons that people recoil from political
involvement one significant factor is the sense that such involvement
has no real connection to day to day life. Indeed, there is a feeling
among many that no matter who is elected, be they Republican or
Democrat, things will pretty much go on as they always have because at
root all political parties, and by extension all politicians, are
largely the same.
With this in mind one of the chief tasks of those who are politically
active must be to articulate the reasons why politics matter. From my
perspective as a Republican this includes helping to uncover the core
presuppositions that distinguish us from Democrats. Of course with any
entity as large and diverse as political parties, hard and fast rules
are difficult to apply. That having been said it is my belief that one
core distinction that makes a difference between Republicans and
Democrats is a differing understanding of the concept of community. The
desire for community is common to the human race; we all desire the
sense of purpose, membership and continuity that comes from living in
community.
The crucial question from a political perspective is where we go to
find the source of community. In my experience the different ways in which
Republicans and Democrats tend to answer this question marks a
significant point of distinction between the parties. In particular
Democrats are inclined to follow any mention of the term community with
a discussion of the importance of the role of government as the focal
point for community action and identity. In taking this approach
Democrats have infused the State with roles and responsibilities once
inherent to families, churches and voluntary associations. For
Republicans community is the product of deeply enmeshed bonds of
interpersonal connection that develop naturally within society from the
bottom up. From this perspective the role of government, while vital,
is also limited. A crucial aspect of this limitedness stems from the
fact that true community can not be imposed from the top down.
These differing perspectives on the nature of community have
significant practical importance. In particular, the 'Republican" view of
community provides policy makers with a natural check against the fallacy that
every good idea can be made better by turning it into a government
program. Rather, Republicans understand that community building
institutions must be left to operate with substantial freedom within
their proper spheres, less they become brittle and anemic. Even the
best intentioned government actions can have negative social impact if
they serve to hobble the bonds of true community that are so necessary
to a vigorous, diverse and humane social order.
The differences that matter most between Republicans and Democrats are
then quite fundamental. They involve a different conception not merely
of mundane political questions, but of the very role and purpose of
government and its connection to those institutions most necessary to
nurturing a life well lived.
For those of us who spend a good part of our time and energy engaged in
the political life of our state and nation the apparent apathy of some
toward all things political can at times be a source of frustration.
While there are numerous reasons that people recoil from political
involvement one significant factor is the sense that such involvement
has no real connection to day to day life. Indeed, there is a feeling
among many that no matter who is elected, be they Republican or
Democrat, things will pretty much go on as they always have because at
root all political parties, and by extension all politicians, are
largely the same.
With this in mind one of the chief tasks of those who are politically
active must be to articulate the reasons why politics matter. From my
perspective as a Republican this includes helping to uncover the core
presuppositions that distinguish us from Democrats. Of course with any
entity as large and diverse as political parties, hard and fast rules
are difficult to apply. That having been said it is my belief that one
core distinction that makes a difference between Republicans and
Democrats is a differing understanding of the concept of community. The
desire for community is common to the human race; we all desire the
sense of purpose, membership and continuity that comes from living in
community.
The crucial question from a political perspective is where we go to
find the source of community. In my experience the different ways in which
Republicans and Democrats tend to answer this question marks a
significant point of distinction between the parties. In particular
Democrats are inclined to follow any mention of the term community with
a discussion of the importance of the role of government as the focal
point for community action and identity. In taking this approach
Democrats have infused the State with roles and responsibilities once
inherent to families, churches and voluntary associations. For
Republicans community is the product of deeply enmeshed bonds of
interpersonal connection that develop naturally within society from the
bottom up. From this perspective the role of government, while vital,
is also limited. A crucial aspect of this limitedness stems from the
fact that true community can not be imposed from the top down.
These differing perspectives on the nature of community have
significant practical importance. In particular, the 'Republican" view of
community provides policy makers with a natural check against the fallacy that
every good idea can be made better by turning it into a government
program. Rather, Republicans understand that community building
institutions must be left to operate with substantial freedom within
their proper spheres, less they become brittle and anemic. Even the
best intentioned government actions can have negative social impact if
they serve to hobble the bonds of true community that are so necessary
to a vigorous, diverse and humane social order.
The differences that matter most between Republicans and Democrats are
then quite fundamental. They involve a different conception not merely
of mundane political questions, but of the very role and purpose of
government and its connection to those institutions most necessary to
nurturing a life well lived.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)