95_Theses

It’s About the Future

Archive for the ‘politics’ Category

why I’ll vote for Thompson

Posted by Citizen on October 6, 2007

I’ll get the easy shot out of the way first: I’ll vote for Thompson because he is NOT McCain, Romney, or Giuliani. That’s the easy part, but it’s not the real reason I’ll vote for Thompson.

J. Peter Mulhern has admirably framed the topic and lays out the best analysis I’ve read yet. I recommend you read the whole thing so you can see what I’m leaving out. This pull quote explains why I’ll vote Thompson:

Fred Thompson is quite different from the other candidates. The conventional critiques of his candidacy all say much more about his strengths than his weaknesses.
Dick Morris complains that he is too lazy to prepare well-scripted answers to questions about local issues. In Florida, for example he deflected a question about the Terri Schiavo case saying he wasn’t familiar with the details but in general he preferred local answers to local questions. To a question about oil drilling in the Everglades he said that he wasn’t aware of major oil resources there but that we couldn’t be in the business of putting energy resources off limits.
Each of these answers was perfectly reasonable and part of a package that is likely to have broad appeal. Neither shows a lazy candidate. They both show a mature and sensible candidate who isn’t willing to pander. Thompson, unlike all the others, has important themes to project and can’t be bothered to pick up a few supporters here and there by promising to serve the interests of those few at the expense of the many.
This isn’t politics as usual in 21st Century America, but it is likely to sell. When it does, it will make a mockery of Dick Morris’s entire career, which was grounded on the idea that pandering conquers all.
What about Thompson’s experience? He never ran anything. Mitt was Governor of Massachusetts and a successful business executive. Rudy was Mayor of New York. Shouldn’t those qualifications trump a lawyer who is also an actor and used to be a senator? They would if we were hiring a manager in chief, but we aren’t.
We have gotten so used to speaking of the President of the United States “running the country” that most of us no longer notice how unrealistic and unAmerican that expression is. The whole point of the American Revolution was to establish a country without anyone to run it. We don’t want or need a president who is inclined to run things. We need a President who leads and inspires. Fred, with his non-managerial background, is the only candidate of either party who seems to get this.
Much ink has been wasted making the obvious point that Thompson is not an “outsider.” After a long career in Washington as a staffer and Senator, as a lawyer and a lobbyist Fred Thompson is as well connected as any “insider” here. But for his entire career Thompson has stood outside the bipartisan consensus that, when it comes to government activity, more is better. His commitment to governmental modesty is most often expressed as concern for the principle of federalism. That commitment put him on the short end of some very lopsided votes as a Senator…

Thompson’s commitment to governmental modesty makes him the only serious candidate for president who isn’t part of the bipartisan Party of Government. He is the only candidate qualified to build on the success of Ronald Reagan and the only candidate who can counter the Democrat drive for more socialism, particularly as it applies to health care.
Reagan turned America away from the socialist morass of the 1930’s and reconnected us with our deepest political traditions. He reminded us that we don’t want a government, let alone a President, to run the country. Unfortunately, his successors never understood this essential pillar of Reagan’s success. When George W. Bush perpetrated the atrocious statement that “when somebody hurts government has got to move,” the Republican break with Reagan was complete.
Fred Thompson isn’t Ronald Reagan. But he can restore the Republican Party to Reagan’s default settings. He can make the GOP once again the party of the American Revolution and distinguish it sharply from the party of the French, Russian, Chinese, and Cuban Revolutions.
Does Thompson have the rhetorical skills to be the leader we need? Let’s put him to the same test both Romney and Giuliani just flunked. Does Thompson understand that our problem with terrorism is now primarily an Iranian problem? Can he face that problem and discuss it in terms most Americans will understand?
Thompson’s reaction to General Petraeus’ recent testimony before Congress suggests that he can. Before Petraeus said a word everyone knew that our efforts in Iraq have become vastly more successful under his command. Everyone understood that Al Qaeda and Iran’s proxies will probably be humiliated in Iraq unless they can adjust to the tactics we are now using with such success. The $64,000 question was this: What is Iran doing to forestall humiliation in Iraq and what will we do to stop them?
General Petraeus dropped some very interesting hints on this subject and Thompson zeroed in on them. His statement on the subject was simple and direct: “Gen. Petraeus’ report also leaves me even more concerned about Iran’s role in Iraq. Iran is headed down a dangerous path, and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must understand that.”
Thompson reinforced this barely veiled threat with his reaction to a controversy over Ahmadinejad’s request to visit Ground Zero while he is in New York to address the UN. He said “I wouldn’t let him in the country.” He went on to say , according to the Dallas Morning News, that “the Iranian regime was a threat to Americans and should be dealt with accordingly.”
At last a candidate who understands that Iran is at war with us and who is willing to speak as though we are at war with Iran. It’s a bonus that he speaks in clear declarative sentences and that everything in his manner and appearance demands that you take him seriously.
When Thompson speaks the chattering class often sputters that he is too laid back, even soporific. People who have never seen him speak themselves often adopt this critique and endlessly repeat the same clichés on various conservative websites – “lackluster,” “underwhelming,” “tired,” “old,” “no fire in the belly.” Conservatives are hungry for a Hillary slayer and many of them fear that a thoughtful, deliberate senior statesman can’t possibly play that role. They are wrong.
Watch a Thompson speech that was widely panned as dull. Just because Fred talks slowly doesn’t mean he’s stupid, or uninspiring. Notice that he is saying important things and saying them well. How many politicians can talk about Russell Kirk’s The Conservative Mind in terms which indicate that he has both read and understood it?
Consider that Fred’s calm, sensible demeanor permits him to say things that would terrify many ordinary voters coming from someone who seemed less steady. Thompson can say radical things and nobody turns a hair. If any other candidate talked about overhauling social security and the tax code while we fight a global war of which Iraq and Afghanistan are mere outcroppings, a substantial part of the electorate would faint dead away. Try to wrap your mind around the reality that coming off like an old coot having a conversation as he whittles next to the pot-bellied stove down at the country store is an excellent way to attract most American voters.
… The best way for a Republican to beat Hillary is to talk to the American people calmly, simply and sensibly, and let her be the poster child for all the bitterness and anger of the last decade.
After a recent Thompson speech in Iowa a member of the audience called out: “Kill the terrorists, secure the border, and give me back my freedom.” Thompson replied “you just summed up my whole speech.”
No other candidate could have carried off that quip because no other candidate is capable of delivering a convincing speech focused on those powerful themes.

This is my point too. Fred is the right guy at the right time for the right reasons. The proof? Watch the midget minded bm.org patsies get shrieking louder and louder as the election nears. Every inconceivable smear by every lying leftist out there will sound a cacophony of shrill groans, allied closely with warnings from ubl, akman, and the rest of their terrified cohorts.

My point? The one that the muslim/democrat defeat America first coalition fears most is the one I’ll vote for. Join up, America is worthy of preservation for a few more centuries, know what I mean?

Posted in conservatism, GOP, politics, republican | Leave a Comment »

Rudy is NOT a Republican

Posted by Citizen on October 6, 2007

It is not true that Giuliani is the only candidate who can defeat Clinton. Heaven knows that Clinton would be a unmitigated disaster for America. Giuliani runs a close second. Rather than bore you with my own prose, I propose the following excerpt to explain my position against Giuliani’s positions:

What about America’s Mayor? After the McCain campaign went on life support, conventional wisdom converted from the belief that Republicans would anoint McCain because it was “his turn” to a new and equally irrational faith. The catechism goes something like this: Republicans are probably doomed in 2008. Their only chance lies in swallowing hard and nominating Rudy Giuliani who can, supposedly, compete with Hillary for votes in left-leaning states like New Jersey , New York, Pennsylvania and California.
This argument is a hardy perennial of conventional commentary, and it is utterly inane. You can’t win by appealing to people who won’t vote for you under any imaginable circumstances at the cost of alienating your core supporters. Trading a perfectly good cow for a handful of beans only makes sense in fairy tales.
The Democrat Party was once the dominant political force in American life. It lost that position for two reasons. First, because the electorate discovered that Democrats, beholden as they are to leftist, anti-American supporters, can’t be trusted to defend the country. Second, because voters also discovered that Democrats lacked the strength and the wisdom to defend our culture against all sorts of bizarre social experiment.
Democrats have worked very hard to draw the camouflage nets over their irresponsible attitude toward national defense. Republicans have been extremely timid about exposing it. The point of distinction between Republicans and Democrats which works most strongly in the GOP’s favor is that Republicans fight back when vandals try to deface fundamental social institutions and Democrats stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the vandals. Nominating Rudy Giuliani would neutralize this advantage.
With Rudy on the ballot millions of “values voters” would stay home. Millions more who are beguiled by socialism’s promise of something for nothing but often vote for Republicans anyway because Democrats are just too weird, would vote for the Dem. With Giuliani as the candidate Republicans would limp into the fall of 2008, both feet riddled with self-inflicted bullet wounds.
Giuliani’s supporters like to complain about the petulance of “single issue” voters who would ignore their man’s many sterling qualities and help elect Hillary merely because they have some serious disagreements with the former Mayor. This complaint is a waste of time and energy. A Giulliani nomination would hurt Republican prospects. This is as predictable as the tide and just as impervious to argument. If Giuliani’s supporters insist on shattering the Republican coalition and, as a result, Hillary wins, they should blame their own arrogance not the petulance of others.
Giuliani had a clear chance to unify the Republican coalition and step forward as it’s natural leader. If, at the outset of his campaign he argued forcefully that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and needs to be overturned, Republicans could have had confidence that he would stand with society’s defenders and against the vandals.
Henry Clay once said he would rather be right than President. Giuliani would rather be wrong about Roe than President and by now his choice is irrevocable. Apparently Rudy doesn’t understand that Roe is a travesty, which puts him squarely on the wrong side of the culture war. For both moral and political reasons, Republicans can’t choose him as their nominee.
But isn’t Rudy so tough on terrorism that voters will flock to him? No, he isn’t. Giuliani has given no indication on the campaign trail that he has an especially clear understanding of our strategic situation. Nor has he given any indication that he will be particularly forceful in dealing with our enemies. Once again, the acid test is what he has to say about dealing with Iran. Rudy flunks that test even more dramatically than Romney does. At least Romney is talking about the subject, however ineptly.
When Giuliani talks about the “War on Terror” he says we need to “stay on offense,” which presupposes that we have been on offense. We haven’t. We have been trying to fight a limited proxy war in Iraq and avoid taking the fight directly to the enemy’s center of gravity. That isn’t offense. It isn’t smart either but that’s another subject for another time.
When Rudy mentions Iran at all he gives no hint that he understands that, one way or another, the road to victory leads through Tehran. He says, as does George W. Bush, that Iran can’t be allowed to have nuclear weapons. Like the President, he never says how we are going to stop Iran from getting them.
Giuliani has very little foreign policy experience and he seems to be in thrall to the same establishment groupthink on the subject that has largely paralyzed the Bush administration. Giuliani was level-headed on September 11. That doesn’t make him a latter-day Patton, or LeMay.

While I can’t equal Mr. Mulhern’s great prose, I can comment that Giuliani is a wolf in a republican toga. Here’s what you get when the toga is misplaced:

  When a National Rifle Association member opposed a ban on assault rifles in 1994, Mr. Giuliani really got annoyed.

“Now the reason why the N.R.A. has lost all credibility is statements like that,” he said. “By definition these are attack weapons. They are used for offense. It really is absolutely astounding that the N.R.A. continues to have influence in areas in which they make no sense at all.”

In 1994, Mr. Giuliani applauded President Bill Clinton for banning assault rifles and urged Congress to enact physical and written tests and stringent background checks for prospective handgun owners. He also saluted the Clinton health care plan as “doing some pretty good things” and boasted that New York offered “universal health care,” not least for illegal immigrants.

“Isn’t it better they get some humane treatment for themselves?” Mr. Giuliani told a caller.

This is the real deal here, the condescension of Clinton bared beneath the roman repubican toga. [easy there big boy, that’s not a misspelling] Giuliani is on the same side as Clinton regarding my guns, abortions, and illegal aliens. To make matters worse, he’s essentially on the same page with Clinton regarding terrorists. Neither one has proffered a policy concept that assures me that the problem will be dealt with correctly FOR AMERICA in the next presidential cycle. Both Clinton and Giuliani are willing to offer the same lies about what they really think to get elected. What’s Republican about that? Yup, I just painted them with the same brush for this very simple reason: I don’t trust either one of them, and I don’t believe either one of them, and I won’t vote for either one of them.

Neither will millions of other right-thinking Americans. We want a real Republican and more, we want a real Conservative too. Believe it..,

citizen

Posted in elections, GOP, politics, republican | Leave a Comment »

will you listen to Cal?

Posted by Citizen on August 23, 2007

OK, maybe you don’t want to believe my take on the climate change scam being run by junk scientests and algore, FINE. But how about Cal Thomas? A real journalist. A real writer. And not a blogger. Will you listen to Cal?

… global warming fundamentalists are pushing planet worship on us in a manner that would make a jihadist proud.

There are at least two characteristics all fundamentalists share. One is the exclusion and sometimes suppression of any and all information that challenges or contradicts the belief one wishes to impose on all. The other is the use of the state in pursuit of their objectives, overriding the majority’s will.

I’m just saying, give truth a chance..,

Posted in climate, climate change, fraud, junk science, life, politics, ponzi, scams, scandals | Leave a Comment »

climate lies discovered

Posted by Citizen on August 11, 2007

There are scandals upon scandals in climate politics. There are “scientists” who’ve given up scientific inquiry and completely sold out to the nuttiest fringe of the issue. More’s the pity because there are actual benefits to ascertaining the evidential truth of the matter. Lying on purpose and covering up the lies and lying about the cover-up doesn’t contribute to facts supported by evidence.

For the record I think there are cycles of climate change with ample evidence to support that view. I don’t think there is one bit of conclusive evidence that human activity is responsible for altering those cycles, and I am sceptical enough to doubt that humans have the capability of altering and managing the climate changes we observe. Enough about me, how about some facts for a change?

 Years of bad data corrected; 1998 no longer the warmest year on record

My earlier column this week detailed the work of a volunteer team to assess problems with US temperature data used for climate modeling. One of these people is Steve McIntyre, who operates the site climateaudit.org. While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or “jump” in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000.

These graphs were created by NASA’s Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change). Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.

McKintyre notified the pair of the bug; Ruedy replied and acknowledged the problem as an “oversight” that would be fixed in the next data refresh. NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place.  1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II.  Anthony Watts has put the new data in chart form, along with a more detailed summary of the events.

Honest people will take note of the details that are highlighted in the pull quote and then read the original and then read the supporting evidence and come to their own conclusions about who the liars are.

The believers, the algoreites and their ilk, will obfuscate, or just scream and lie. Perhaps an honest handful will reassess the noise and see through the scam. Reality is both simpler and more complex than most pundits let on.

In case you suspect me of exaggerating claims, this spot provides a good follow up on the cover ups. It’s positively shameful that junk science is so cheap and common, and it’s stupefying how sheepish their followers actually are..,

citizen

Posted in climate, climate change, fraud, global warming, junk science, politics, scams, scandals | Leave a Comment »

commies

Posted by Citizen on July 19, 2007

Well, ya gotta see this if you love America, ’cause it’s a sure bet that hclinton does not. She wants to ride ya, she means to ride ya down, she’s out to get you. Like al gore, there seems to be no controlling legal authority. WHAT THE HEY!?!

Trust me, SHE IS OUT TO GET YOU. And the entire corrupt judiciary is aiding and abetting. Pssst, she is a commie, pass it on.

Someone should raise a huge stink over this. This should be thoroughly invested by the controlling legal authority, eh? Be sure to watch the whole flic before joogle pulls it, to aid and abett her crimes..,

Posted in blood-sucking parasites, clinton, commies, communists, elections, hillary, politics, scandals | Leave a Comment »

more democrat treason

Posted by Citizen on July 19, 2007

They’re taking the side of our muslim enemies AGAINST US.

Republicans aides will put up a fight when the conference committee begins at 1 p.m., to reinsert the language, but the public needs to weigh in. We are always told to be vigilant. To “say something” when we “see something.” I see Democrats carrying water for CAIR and endangering national security.

Say something!

Congress switchboard: 202-224-3121
Nancy Pelosi’s office: 202-225-4965

The partisans of defeat are at it again..,

Posted in axis of surrender, back-talk, blood-sucking parasites, coliseum of corruption, government, politics, scandals | Leave a Comment »

OSHA slapdown –> dontcha just love it?

Posted by Citizen on July 16, 2007

**************************************************

Labor Department Announces It Will Revise
Overreaching OSHA Explosives Rule

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced it will significantly revise a recent proposal for new “explosives safety” regulations that caused serious concern among gun owners. OSHA had originally set out to update workplace safety regulations, but the proposed rules included restrictions that very few gun shops, sporting goods stores, shippers, or ammunition dealers could comply with.

Gun owners had filed a blizzard of negative comments urged by the NRA, and just a week ago, OSHA had already issued one extension for its public comment period at the request of the National Shooting Sports Foundation. After continued publicity through NRA alerts and the outdoor media, and after dozens of Members of Congress expressed concern about its impact, OSHA has wisely decided to go back to the drawing board.

Working with the NRA, Congressman Denny Rehberg (R-MT) planned to offer a floor amendment to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill this Wednesday when the House considers this legislation. His amendment would have prohibited federal funds from being used to enforce this OSHA regulation.

Such an amendment is no longer necessary since Kristine A. Iverson, the Labor Department’s Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs, sent Rep. Rehberg a letter, dated July 16, stating that it “was never the intention of OSHA to block the sale, transportation, or storage of small arms ammunition, and OSHA is taking prompt action to revise” this proposed rule to clarify the purpose of the regulation.

Also, working with the NRA, Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO) gathered signatures from 25 House colleagues for a letter, dated July 11, expressing concerns about this proposed OSHA rule. The letter calling the proposal “an undue burden on a single industry where facts do not support the need outlined by this proposed rule” and “not feasible, making it realistically impossible for companies to comply with its tenets.”

The OSHA proposal would have defined “explosives” to include “black powder, … small arms ammunition, small arms ammunition primers, [and] smokeless propellant,” and treated these items the same as the most volatile high explosives.

Under the proposed rule, a workplace that contained even a handful of small arms cartridges, for any reason, would have been considered a “facility containing explosives” and therefore subject to many impractical restrictions. For example, no one could carry “firearms, ammunition, or similar articles in facilities containing explosives … except as required for work duties.” Obviously, this rule would make it impossible to operate any kind of gun store, firing range, or gunsmith shop.

The public comment website for the proposed rule is no longer accessible. The Labor Department will publish a notice in the July 17 Federal Register announcing that a new rule proposal will soon be drafted for public comment. Needless to say, the NRA monitors proposed federal regulations to head off this kind of overreach, and will be alert for OSHA’s next draft.

We will post the letter to Congressman Rehberg shortly.

http://www.NRAILA.org

Write Your Representative

Write The Media

Get Involved Locally

Register To Vote

Contribute

Hopefully no one will be so deceived as to forget about this. Be absolutely certain that the enemies of all our liberties are still laboring to destroy them.

Posted in government, guns, OSHA, politics | Leave a Comment »

OSHA is stealing your ammo

Posted by Citizen on July 7, 2007

If you value your second amendment rights, if you want to be able to at least stop the jihadis AT YOUR DOOR, it would behoove you to use this template and contact your dearest and nearest politician as soon as possible. This is a date-certain deadline that will gut your second amendment rights if it goes unchecked. We won’t have any decendents if we don’t defend our freedoms when they are attacked by our own government. Dial for liberty.

Dear ( )

RE: OSHA-2007-0032-0001

I am one of your Constituents and live and Vote in Indiana, which, as you know, is the home of the National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association, based in Friendship IN. The Traditional American sport of Black Powder Muzzle loading Rifle Competition is already being not so slowly squeezed out of existence by the regulation of Black Powder.

Flintlock and Wheel lock muzzle-loaders require real Black Powder to function – modern substitutes have too high an ignition temperature to work properly, if at all. However, it is now the case that, because of the cost of complying with the regulation of Black Powder as an Explosive, there are often fewer than two or three retailers in an entire State that will carry real Black Powder.

This Rule Update will make that worse, and will carry that regulatory burden even further into the realm of Smokeless Powder cartridge reloading – utterly devastating the sport and Industry, throwing thousands out of work.

The requirements described on Pg 53 and 54 will make it almost impossible for small gun shops to maintain enough reloading supplies to have a viable product mix. There are over 20 different brands and formulations of smokeless powders – making it impossible for a business to be able to offer them all on display. Likewise, many private reloaders prefer to buy in bulk, more than 1lb at a time, and this regulation would make extant 4lb and 8lb canisters illegal.

Also, most shops would have to undergo major architectural renovations and absurd evacuation rules to comply with storage requirements. The net effect of this will be to drive retailers to discontinue all reloading supply sales.

The net result of this regulation will not be more safety, but less, as reloaders make a run on supplies to keep at their homes – possibly in violation of local Fire Codes.

Unaccountable Regulation has all but killed America’s First Sport of Flintlock Riflery. This looks to finish off sport shooting all together.

Please see the NSSF concerns at these links:

http://www.nssf.org/share/docs/BP070207-OSHAletter.rtf

http://www.nssf.org/news/PR_idx.cfm?PRloc=common/PR/&PR=BP070207.cfm

This proposed regulatory gutting of the 2nd Amendment is also directly contrary to the spirit and letter of the McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986, which was intended to deregulate ammunition.

I am asking you to investigate and vigorously oppose this blatant attempt at Legislation without Representation.

congressional toll free switchboards:

800-828-0498

800-459-1887

800-614-2803

866-340-9281

866-338-1015

877-851-6437

Posted in explosives, government, guns, media, OSHA, politics | 5 Comments »

OSHA wants to steal your ink

Posted by Citizen on July 6, 2007

Well, not exactly, but if you follow me to the end you will see the danger you’re in already.

OSHA, an agency of the US government has an open comment period on new regulations. The chilling fact is that if they your succeed with the proposed rules unaltered they will directly impinge on our Second Amendment constitutional guarantees.

As written, the proposed rule would force the closure of nearly all ammunition manufacturers and force the cost of small arms ammunition to skyrocket beyond what the market could bear—essentially collapsing our industry. This is not an exaggeration. The cost to comply with the proposed rule for the ammunition industry, including manufacturer, wholesale distributors and retailers, will be massive and easily exceed $100 million.

The majority of Americans own guns. This rule would have the same effect as depriving us of gasoline. We can’t drive cars that we can’t fuel up. We can’t use guns that we can’t fuel up either. There is no constitutional right to own a car and drive on roads, but there is a constitutional right to own a firearm.

This rotten OSHA proposal is the backdoor destruction of our right to own and operate our firearms.

For anyone who doesn’t own a gun, let’s put this in terms you can relate to. We have another constitutionaly protected right, the First Amendment. Suppose that a government agency decided to solve the problem of too few trees and too many opinions. The agency proposes a rule that ink and paper have to be treated exactly the way OSHA proposes to treat our components. There you have it then, you have the amendment but no way to use it.

“But, but wait,” you say, “we can blog on the internet and talk on the radio, right?” Well here’s a dirty little secret, the coliseum of corruption wants to destroy talk radio and hates the internet too, at least the part they don’t agree with.

It’s not that big of a stretch to see how the first amendment can be abrogated, especially if we do nothing to prevent the corruption of the second.

This is more back-room destruction of American freedoms. If you don’t care to take this reaming lying down the document number is OSHA-2007-0032-0001 and the document title is Explosives.

Congress has oversight and it controls the OSHA budget, so there is one sensitive nerve there. I encourage everyone to comment on the OSHA web site and to call everyone you called to stop shamnesty. This is part and parcel of the same problem, we need to stop it.

http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspublic/component/main

You are not free if a bureaucrat can take away your supplies, powder or ink.

Posted in explosives, government, guns, injustice, media, politics, scandals | Leave a Comment »

another stinking inconvenient truth

Posted by Citizen on July 1, 2007

Someone had to say it.

Amid all of the xenophobia and nativism surrounding the immigration debate, there is a real security concern. In the language of the bureaucracy, the problem is referred to as the “OTMs,” or Other Than Mexicans.

Thousands of non-Mexicans are caught crossing the United States border every year. They cannot be sent back to Mexico, but must be deported to their home country. Until recently, most were given a deportation hearing date and then simply released. Not surprisingly, few showed up for their scheduled appearances. Beginning last year, however, most who are caught are put into detention. They are then put through a procedure called expedited removal, under which many are flown back home within a few weeks.

Many of these non-Mexicans come from Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, the Palestinian territories and other areas of concern to counterterrorism officials. What we don’t know is how many others are evading the Border Patrol every year and what happens to them when they leave the border area. It’s not too hard to imagine that these illegal immigrants, who have clearly spent a lot of money getting to Mexico and then into the United States, are able to buy themselves an identity and corroborating papers once in an American city.

RTWT. In “light” of the gasoline attack in Glasgow and the unexploded roadside bombs in London, it would be extremely stupid to stop calling the coliseum of corruption and demanding exteme border protection measures.

The axis of political corruption in DC seems to be able to do everything and anything to benefit anyone and everyone but their actual constituents. The ‘immigration reform’ bull, (I know, it was a ‘bill’, but it was mostly all ‘bull’), rewarded the most illegal segment of the foreign trespassers and intruders, while at the same time endangering the legal immigrants as much as the home grown Americans who pay the tax bills.

What’s worse, it guaranteed that the ‘OTMs’, as Clark and the bureaucracy call them, would be given a free pass without going to jail or paying $200. It’s not over until we have some documentable accountability from the axis of surrender in the Nation’s capitol. Call, it’s only a few minutes to turn up the heat for something that can demonstrably save your life..,

Posted in axis of surrender, back-talk, borderlines, coliseum of corruption, politics, scams, scandals, shamnesty | Leave a Comment »