30 June 2007
The local press wrote an article here. The only good thing about this story is that a former US Marine, who witnessed Officer McKay being shot and run over by the offender twice, positioned his vehicle between the offender and Officer McKay, then picked up the officer's gun and ordered the offender to drop his weapon. The offender refused and the civilian killed the offender.
Here is the dashcam video from Corporal McKay's vehicle on that fateful day.
Burn in Hell, Liko Kenney - a fitting end to a filthy savage sociopath!
29 June 2007
The current, of their continuous, attack on the Right involves Rachel Carson.
Ms. Carson wrote a book in the early 1960's entitled Silent Spring in which she painted a bleak and foreboding picture of our future if we continued to use chemical pesticides in agriculture. Her contention was that the chemicals were leaching into our ground water and poisoning birds and other wildlife.
I read this book when I was in high school and I bought in to much of what she wrote.
Because I was naive and uninformed.
Carson's book was one of the first tomes that really tapped into the latent vein of hysteria that we now see proudly portrayed in the mainstream media every day. Thanks to Ms. Carson, we now see the 10 second TV spot for that night's 6 O'clock news - "Tonight on TV7: What you didn't know about your water bed could KILL YOU."
She singlehandedly launched the environmental movement in the US and had a profound impact on other issues that shouldn't have ever seen the light of day: the spurious "population explosion" and other "the sky is falling" scenarios.
What was implicit in her writings was that humankind is bad and nature is good. Her contemporaries have echoed and magnified those sentiments - all without the data to back it up.
We now see that a world without DDT has resulted in millions of people every year dying from Malaria poisoning. But hey, if we can save a few dozen common house sparrows then a million people is a good trade-off; in the minds of the Enviro-Nazis.
Carson's book is more romanticism than science but 40 years later we're just starting to "wake up" to what a pack of hokey it was. The reason why it still has traction is because the collective Left is pushing it as a vehicle for hysteria. Remember, the Left loves two things: Emoting and Hysteria.
From the brilliant Mark Steyn:
America is the most benign hegemon in history: it's the world's first non-imperial superpower and, at the dawn of the American moment, it chose to set itself up as a kind of geopolitical sugar daddy.
By picking up the tab for Europe's defense, it hoped to prevent those countries from lapsing into traditional power rivalries. Nice idea. But it also absolved them of the traditional responsibilities of nationhood, turning the alliance into a dysfunctional sitcom family, with one grownup presiding over a brood of whiny teenagers.
America is hated for every reason. The fanatical muslims despise America because it's all lap-dancing and gay porn; the secular Europeans hate America because it's all born-again Christians hung up on abortion; the anti-Semites hate America because it's controlled by Jews. Too Jewish, too Christian, too godless, America is George Orwell's Room 101: whatever your bugbear you will find it therein; whatever you're against, America is the prime example of it.
That's one reason why its disparagers have embraced environmentalism. If Washington were a conventional great power, the intellectual class would be arguing that the US is a threat to France or India or Gabon or some such. But because it's so obviously not that kind of power <u>the world has had to concoct a thesis that the hyperpower is a threat not merely to this or that rinky-dink nation state but to the entire planet, if not the entire galaxy.</u>
"We are," warns Al Gore portentously,"altering the balance of energy between our planet and the rest of the universe."
Think globally, act lunarly. The "balance of energy" between Earth and "the rest of the universe"? You wouldn't happen to have the statistical evidence for that, would you? Univeral "balance of energy" graphs for 1940 and 1873? America is a threat not because of conventional great power designs, but because - even scarier - of its "consumption," its way of life.
The construct of this fantasy is very revealing about how unthreatening America actually is.
That about sums up precisely where we're at with this global warming issue. It's much easier for us to blame America and her way of life for the world's ills than it is to point them out in the other guy's camp. In our new "non judgmental" society, it is taboo to condemn another culture for its mores. So Yemeni law requires 8 year old girls to get a clitorectomy? Who are we to judge. A man in Iraq wears a soccer t-shirt in public, in violation of shuria (islamic dress code law)? Well then have him drink toilet water and then publicly whipped. Who are we to judge, right?
While our soldiers are getting tortured, decapitated and killed - the Leftists at Salon.com and The Daily Kos feel the need to focus on the constitutional restrictions to Bush's electronic surveillance of terrorists and how they can help get the Gitmo detainees more constitutional rights and procedures.
I sent "thank you" emails to a handful of senators who voted "nay" for the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act. The real leader on this issue was Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. If you're only going to send out one thank you, please send it to him.
And of course our two asshat senators - "Little Dick" Durbin and Barack "Insane" Obama - both voted "yea" (in favor) of the legislation.
Shame on them! Never forget that they took the side of illegal immigrants, law-breaking illiterate invaders, over the wants, needs and resources of American citizens. We will never forget!
We will not give up our language, our culture and our national sovereignty in order to feed the myopic political agenda of one man and one ethnicity. This is not that cesspool of socialist corruption - This is the United States of America!
OOh-rah!!!! Get some!
28 June 2007
Mayor Daley launched himself into a bout of poseur nympholepsy over the tragic shooting of a 13 year old girl at Armitage and Central Park. As SCC rights asked - What is this guy smoking?
Da' Mayor isn't anti-Gun, privately that is. Ask his bodyguard detail. Are any of them unarmed?
Ask his cousin - one of the Guilfoyle clan - what he was doing driving around downtown Chicago with a loaded gun in his car.
Oh - and did you know that Mr. Guilfoyle, after being arrested for possession of the aleged weapon, stated he was a City of Chicago Inspector? His brother Michael was fired for violating city residency rules for 13 years as a water department employee.
The sad fact is that our Mayor is anti-Gun because he knows the media would grill him if he came out in support of gun ownership. While he benefits from having gun toting body guards surrounding him, he can play the other side and claim to be anti-Gun - all for political effect. Daley playing the "I hate guns" act is pure theatrics.
We all know hypocrisy streams out of City Hall like a poisonous mist. Some day the little man behind the curtain will get his because every dog has his day.
27 June 2007
I apologize for being so monotone the last 8 weeks. It's just that this is an issue that I'm passionate about and, most of you are passionate about it too.
It seems that we're almost finished with all this, for now. The Open-Borders special interest groups took it on the chin today but there is another amendment vote tomorrow (Thursday) so keep sending those emails and keep calling. Durbin's office actually hung up on me today. Pinch me....I'm shocked.
I saw a quick snippet today by Mark Steyn and he sums up our government's attitude fairly well:
|I agree with Stanley. There's something creepy about a political class so determined to impose a vast transformative bill cooked up backstage in metaphorically smoke-filled rooms on a nation that doesn't want it. It's an affront to republican government and quasi-European in its disdain for the citizenry. It's hard to imagine Senator Trenthorn Lotthorn as an EU Commissioner but his position on this immigration bill is basically the same as that of Jean-Claude Juncker, Prime Minister of Luxembourg and European "president", on the EU constitution. When asked what difference the referendum result in France would make, "President" Juncker replied:|
If its a Yes, we will say on we go, and if its a No we will say we continue.
Same with the immigration bill. I think I say somewhere in my book that the first line of the European constitution is: "We the people agree to leave it to you the people who know better than the people." That suits the US Senate, too. They'll teach this one as a textbook definition of "bipartisanship": both parties gang up on the electorate.
Laura Ingraham bitch slaps Allen Colmes and takes it to the hole on what we're all fighting for. Well done Miss Ingraham!
24 June 2007
In fact, the collective Left seems to have joined hands with the Jihadists for a round of Kumbiya, all in the dismal hope that when the Muslims outnumber non-Muslims; the feminists who refuse to wear a burqa, and the gays who refuse to not hold hands in public - that the Islamic Religious Police will turn away and pretend not to notice that the Koran has been insulted.
Fat bloody chance.
As Europe slowly disintegrates due to absurdly low birth rates, Muslims will take over. It's not a matter of "if" but a matter of "when".
As I said in a previous post, Greece has a fertility rate of 1.2 - the highest on the continent. Spain, Russia and Italy are the lowest and are in a death spiral that they won't be able to pull out from.
Well why all the doom and gloom chum? Would it be so bad if Muslims were installed into positions of power? It certainly would. Go right now over to Michelle Malkin's site and check out how the Islamic Police treat people who go into public wearing clothing that doesn't fit "Islamic code". Go see the beatings, whippings and humiliations heaped upon these guys.
You Lefties think that Evangelicals are intolerant???? Guess what's coming to your neck of the woods in about 25 years? Since the Left has decided that Bush and Cheney are the "real" threats, then it's almost a moot point to say that they don't recognize Islam as a threat to us all. But you can't escape the fact that all terrorists are Muslim - brought up and bred on wahhabism.
Islam is the only major religion that is also political. Every year there is an International Islamic Economic summit - kind of like our GATT or G8. Of course no one objects to it because it would be anti-PC to do so. One just doesn't criticize a major religion except - Oh that's right - except when the major religion is Christianity: then it's full steam ahead.
What if Christianity tried to put together a Christian Economic Summit? What do you think the world's reaction would be?
23 June 2007
|It's no secret that the Senate immigration bill rewards 12-20 million illegal aliens with immediate amnesty. What is less well known is that the bill also allows illegal aliens to receive in-state tuition rates at public universities, discriminating against U.S. citizens from out of state and law-abiding foreign students. |
These provisions are buried deep in the Senate bill. They are part of the Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act section.
The DREAM Act is a nightmare. It repeals a 1996 federal law that prohibits any state from offering in-state tuition rates to illegal aliens, unless the state also offers in-state tuition rates to all U.S. citizens. On top of that, the DREAM Act offers a fast track to U.S. citizenship for illegal aliens who attend college.
That's right! You read it correctly - YOU are funding the college tuitions of illegal aliens with your hardearned tax dollars. Click here for the full story. It's a must read.
I'm truly happy that many of you jumped on the bandwagon and contacted your Senators. It is imperative that you do it one more time. (H/T: Laura Ingraham's site
Tell them you do not support the Senate's "bipartisan immigration reform bill." Tell them you will not vote to reelect anyone who ties the issues of border enforcement and legalization together in one bill!
Border enforcement first!
When we as Americans verify over a number of years that this has been done, we can consider plans for those who have lived here illegally for several years.
Below is the list of 15 GOP senators that the amnesty pushers want to flip to their side (asterisked senators are up for re-election in 2008)
* * Alexander (R-TN)
* Bennett (R-UT)
* * Cochran (R-MS)
* * Coleman (R-MN)
* * Collins (R-ME)
* * Craig (R-ID)
* * Domenici (R-NM)
* Gregg (R-NH)
* Hatch (R-UT)
* Kyl (R-AZ)
* Lott (R-MS)
* * McConnell (R-KY)
* Murkowski (R-AK)
* * Smith (R-OR)
* Snowe (R-ME)
* Stevens (R-AK)
* * Warner (R-VA)
Meanwhile, back at the Ranch - the House rejected funding the security fence on our southern border.
Go here to send your Representative an email or phone call.
15 June 2007
Just like his boy Georgie, the elites in government want YOU to remain ignorant of the facts on this Shamnesty bill. They introduced this 300+ page behemoth and then gave the senate 5 days to review before they went to vote. Our elites tried to get it passed on the fly, right before the Memorial Day break so that they could keep YOU from asking too many questions.
Well Lott and his Bush Groupies are now trying to "reign in the younger dissenters in congress" and get this bill revived with dozens of "ear-marks" and other padding.
Don't let them do it! Call or write your Senator and Representatives and let them know that this thinly veiled Amnesty won't be accepted.
Yesterday on Michael Medved's show, a couple of illegal alien callers stated on the show that they've been here 10 years, have families and businesses here and have NO INTENTION of returning to their home countries.
So there you go - I'm sure most illegals have no intention of following ANY NEW LAWS that get passed so let's get this FENCE built and tougher sanctions on employers who hire illegals.
God help us!
14 June 2007
The insurgents who kill our young soldiers are ruthless, but we have sometimes been cautious in our response. Take the question of targeting bomb makers: There may be an unlimited supply of explosives in Iraq, but there is not an unlimited supply of people who know how to wire the detonators. In 2004, CIA operatives in Iraq believed that they had identified the signatures of 11 bomb makers. They proposed a diabolical -- but potentially effective -- sabotage program that would have flooded Iraq with booby-trapped detonators designed to explode in the bomb makers' hands. But the CIA general counsel's office said no. The lawyers claimed that the agency lacked authority for such an operation, one source recalled.
There are technologies that would allow us to detonate every roadside bomb in Iraq by heating the wires in the detonators to the point that they triggered an explosion. But these systems could severely harm civilians nearby, so we're not using them, either. "In our system, we often are not given credit for the fact that we are very concerned about collateral damage," Meigs said.
This is absolutely unbelievable ... it's no wonder that everybody hates lawyers.
Once again we see that we have people within our government who won't do something that could save our soldiers' lives because they're afraid - of what? Who knows.
If I was an attorney working for the CIA the only thing I'd be afraid of would be to look into the faces of the Mothers, Fathers, Wives, Husbands and children of the men and women who were murdered by the Islamofacists we're fighting in Iraq.
And know that I could have made a difference and saved some lives.
The National Center for Policy analysis has published a long-term study in which it shows that the death penalty actually deters murders.
The Illinois moratorium on executions in 2000 -- imposed by then-Gov. George Ryan and continued by current Gov. Rod Blagojevich -- led to 150 additional homicides over four years following, according to a 2006 study by professors at the University of Houston.
Those of you who disagree with the results of this and other pro-death penalty studies; take a moment and absorb the following analogy.
What if the state had a law that if you commit a murder on Sunday, you’d automatically be executed for that murder - no appeals? What do you think would happen to the murder rate for Sundays?
It would undoubtedly fall.
The inescapable conclusion is that Capital Punishment does deter crime.
One of my college professors was a death penalty proponent. He discussed it in class one day and brought up the usual reasons that people are opposed to it. The ALCU over-used rant that "even one person wrongfully executed makes the death penalty too risky to enforce" turns out to be a non-issue.
This study shows:
* Assuming as many as 25 percent of those trials resulted in acquittals (and ignoring, as the innocence merchants are wont to do, the problem of wrongful acquittals), the wrongful post-trial conviction rate is only 0.013 percent.
* Since only 5 percent of cases are tried, that would place the overall wrongful conviction rate at around 0.00065 percent.
And what percentage of convicted murders go out and murder again?
This Washington study shows that for men convicted of at least one prior felony, the overall rate of recidivism was 64.6%. Interestingly, African-Americans accounted for 3.5% of the population but 13.6% of all sentences – a disproportionately high rate.
The recidivism rate for murderers was 34.9%. So more than a third of convicted murders went out and murdered again after getting out of prison.
This is just one more reason why I can't stand policies that are enacted out of a Liberal foundation of reasoning. They typically ignore the rational, and focus on the emotive virtues of the topic. Look at almost every initiative that Liberals have had their hand in and they are almost always a disaster in the long-term.
From illegitimacy to drug abuse to a Cradle-to-Grave welfare State - Liberals get it wrong every time.
Their intentions are usually good but they don't have the principles that ensure long-term effectiveness for their national policies.
13 June 2007
Hannity's website doesn't have who the guest was so I'll just wing it.
The guest was discussing the importance of fathers. He threw out some interesting statistics :
* Girls without a father in their lives are 3 times more likely to have sex by the age of 15.
* Fathers who live with their children are more likely to have a close, enduring relationship with their children than those who do not. The best predictor of father presence is marital status. Compared to children born within marriage, children born to cohabiting parents are three times as likely to experience father absence, and children born to unmarried, non-cohabiting parents are four times as likely to live in a father-absent home.
* About 40% of children in father-absent homes have not seen their father at all during the past year; 26 percent of absent fathers live in a different state than their children; and 50 percent of children living absent their father have never set foot in their father's home.
* Children who live absent their biological fathers are, on average, at least two to three times more likely to be poor, to use drugs, to experience educational, health, emotional and behavioral problems, to be victims of child abuse, and to engage in criminal behavior than their peers who live with their married, biological (or adoptive) parents.
* From 1960 to 1995, the proportion of children living in single-parent homes tripled, from 9 percent to 27 percent, and the proportion of children living with married parents declined. However, from 1995 to 2000, the proportion of children living in single-parent homes slightly declined, while the proportion of children living with two married parents remained stable.
* Children with involved, loving fathers are significantly more likely to do well in school, have healthy self-esteem, exhibit empathy and pro-social behavior, and avoid high-risk behaviors such as drug use, truancy, and criminal activity compared to children who have uninvolved fathers.
Since the 60's the feminists have tried to tip the power point in our culture by disempowering men. Gloria Steinem's famous phrase "A woman needs a Man like a fish needs a bicycle" became the standard for media portrayal of the male role in the family. Gone were the days of "Father knows best" and "Cosby" - fathers were (are) seen on TV as weak, shallow, easily manipulated, stupid and hen-pecked. While males were being emasculated, women were (are) being shown as smart, witty, in control, smooth and powerful.
Back in the 50's and 60's most US households were a married couple raising their 2.5 kids. Now we're seeing a shift away from that. Single parent households are becoming the norm, not the exception. And with it, all the attendant headaches are coming along for the ride.
The biggest reason? Liberalism.
When Lydon Johnson created his big "Great Society" welfare programs, he inadvertently sent the message "you don't need a father because the government will feed you, pay your rent and help you with your bills." And if you kids need discipline? The government can take care of that too - it's called Jail.
We as the police see the toxic effects that missing dads have on our society. Increased crime, drug use, violence and abandonment could be minimized if dads just stepped up and became involved in their kid's lives.
So for all you Fathers out there that stood by your wife and kids through thick and thin and offered them love and nurturance - I salute you! You have done more good for our country and our society than will ever be recognized.
Have a wonderful Father's Day and give your Dad a big hug for all the hard work.
You also learn that in "ethnically diverse" neighborhoods, many of the long-time residents have no idea who their neighbors are. I mean people who live right next to each other for 30+ years have never even talked! I can't imagine living like that.
I've been living in my current neighborhood for almost 3 years now and I know 80% of the people who live on my block.
Thank God my area is (not yet) "ethnically diverse" because its current ethnic makeup ensures it will remain a low crime area. (wink-wink!)
Michelle Malkin links up a piece in which Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam has said what many people have long suspected but not dared say in public: that high degrees of ethnic and racial diversity destroy the conditions of social solidarity in affected communities.
From the Finacial Times :
|This is a contentious finding in the current climate of concern about the benefits of immigration. Professor Putnam told the Financial Times he had delayed publishing his research until he could develop proposals to compensate for the negative effects of diversity, saying it would have been irresponsible to publish without that.|
The core message of the research was that, in the presence of diversity, we hunker down, he said. We act like turtles. The effect of diversity is worse than had been imagined. And its not just that wedont trust people who are not like us. In diverse communities, we dont trust people who do look like us.
Prof Putnam found trust was lowest in Los Angeles, the most diverse human habitation in human history, but his findings also held for rural South Dakota, where diversity means inviting Swedes to a Norwegians picnic.
When the data were adjusted for class, income and other factors, they showed that the more people of different races lived in the same community, the greater the loss of trust. They dont trust the local mayor, they dont trust the local paper, they dont trust other people and they dont trust institutions, said Prof Putnam. The only thing theres more of is protest marches and TV watching.
As a case in point I was talking to a man and woman who were having things regularly damaged and stolen from their front yard. They'd lived there for about 10 years. The woman was puerto rican and the man was a legal immigrant from Cuba. I'll never forget what he told me,"I can't stand living around Hispanics. Nobody wants to help you, no one wants to even get to know you. All you get is trouble."
As the bumper sticker goes, it should've read from the beginning - Diversity is our Weakness
So as we get more and more "diverse" the cynicism and distrust that is already a pandemic in our society will worsen and our culture and national sovereignty will continue to erode and, eventually, dissolve.
Hm. Nice. Keep letting them in.
12 June 2007
I have to confess that for a few months earlier in the year, the outlook was bleak. It appeared as if Bush was going to succeed in granting citizenship to 12 million illegal immigrants: in the face of all the data showing what a disaster that would be.
I'm going to move on to other topics now since we've won the fight (temporarily, at least) in the senate. But even after the White House was bitch-slapped by its base and flooded with emails and phonecalls, Bush still stood there today with his fingers in his ears.
He just doesn't get it that we went down this road in '86 and it didn't work then and this current bill will not work now.
Heather MacDonald over at City Journal points out some salient facts on illegal immigrants:
Myth: Illegals have the same social and value system as Americans and will vote Republican, en masse
Fact: After '86, hispanic population in California tripled from 7% to 21%. There was no "surge" in Republican voting blocks. Hispanics still vote 2-to-1 Democratic.
Myth: Hispanics are conservative on economic issues.
Fact: No. From Heather's article - A 2002 poll by the Pew and Kaiser foundations found that 52 percent of registered Latino Republicans supported a higher-taxing, larger state sector, a higher percentage for big government than one finds among white Democrats, reports Steve Sailer. As for the majority of Latinos—poor and poorly-educated—the more government services, the better.
Additionally illegal immigrants are increasingly showing up with their hands out saying, "Where's mine?" Their brazen attitude of entitlement is a direct result of our liberal leadership, liberal courts and liberal media coddling them into thinking that as soon as they show up at our front door, they have the "right" to come in and make themselves at home. With our courts bestowing "Human Rights" upon them as soon as they get across the border and our hospitals and government services at their disposal, it's not wonder they think that they have every right as a US citizen but without all the hassles of applying, writing letters, learning the language, getting a legal social security number, going through interviews and - lastly - waiting the years it takes to get residency.
As Mark Steyn points out, "I forget where I was when I first heard the phrase "undocumented worker." Possibly it was after swimming the Rio Grande and emerging dripping on the northern shore to be handed a fake Social Security number and a driver's license. But I assumed, reasonably enough, that this linguistic sleight of hand was simply too ridiculous to fly even with the American media. I underestimated my colleagues, alas."
"The "undocumented" are, as it happens, brimming with sufficient documents to open bank accounts or, on the other hand, rent a Ryder truck, as Mohammad Salameh did in 1993 when he and his pals bombed the World Trade Center first time round. Being "undocumented" means being documented up to the hilt as far as everyone else is concerned but "undocumented" only to the US government. Which, when you think about it, is a very advantageous status to have."
As Steyn is a legal immigrant from Britain, he has a very clear-cut idea on how bad illegal immigration into this country is. And I whole heartedly agree.
Here are links to Heather MacDonald and Mark Steyn. I'll let them offer a few parting shots of their own. They'll have the last word on the demise of this horrible legislation.
Many of you heard about Linda Chavez's article which called the people in opposition to illegal immigration "bigots" - well, you should read Heather's reply here.
11 June 2007
In this HotAir video, he unleashes on Harry Reid on Fox. The link posted on Michelle Malkin's site.
Check out the video here.
My favorite line(s) from Miller's rant -"if it's possible to make Mr. Limpit sound like Demosthenes, Reid does it everytime. Reid has been unrelentingly bleak on the war in Iraq and in this off the rack culture, Reid is the mediocre man's Thermopylae. Senator Reid, you are a vague, translucent living shade who barely matters and if you want to serve this country, the best thing you can do is to never open your mouth in public again."
08 June 2007
Hard upon the heels of this battle, another piece of flotsam is floating around and is set to be presented to the US Senate verysoon.
This piece of dross is called Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, H.R. 1592 or, the Matthew Shepard Act.
For those of you who don't know (and I can't imagine that you don't because the Pink Mafia continues to beat us all over the head with this story), Matthew Shepard was a young gay man living in Wyoming who was beaten and murdered by two viscious local yokels.
While Shepard's tale is a tragedy, the two who killed him got what they deserved.
But you have to look deeper at what is going on here. This bill is supported by the Human Rights Campaign and the ACLU. Both are left-wing organizations who's agendas are to strip away your rights and make us all bow in obeisance to the homosexual political lobby.
This hate crime legislation is unnecessary. I feel all hate crime legislation is unnecessary and is only enacted to pander to special interest groups. The politicians who come up with these laws can then thump their chests and pat themselves on the backs and say, "Look what I did! I care SOOOO much for gays and minorities that I pushed this IMPORTANT legislation through!"
|For me, a seemingly innocuous bill known in the Senate as Matthew Shepards Law (S1105) can lead us down a slippery slope that ultimately limits our freedoms. The proposed hate crimes legislation does not provide adequate |
protection of free speech. Many seasoned legal minds believe that S1105 and its companion House bill HR 1592 are discriminatory measures that criminalize thoughts, feelings, and beliefs, and provide greater protection to some victims than others simply because of an inherent status or a lifestyle that they have chosen such as gay, lesbian, or sexual orientation.
It is a fact that whites are overwhelmingly victimized by "persons of color"much more than the other way around. Sure there are some high-profile cases but when the victim is white and the offender is black or hispanic, no Hate Crime legislation is used against the offender. Is that fair?? No. Is it effective? No.
Hate Crime laws are a big waste of time. Just like passing stricter Gun Laws does nothing but interfere with Lawful ownership, Hate Crime laws only embolden minorities into buying more and more into a communal sense of victimhood.
Send an email to your senators telling them that they should vote NO for this useless new legislation.
04 June 2007
30% of France's population are illegals. The US only has about 5.5% right now. The reason France has had so much violence is that they waited too long to get rid of their "problem children". If they had nipped the problem in the bud a decade ago, France wouldn't be in the situation it is now.
Taking a cue from McCain, it sounds like maybe we should start deporting more and more of them BEFORE we get like France. That sounds like a good idea.
The US currently spends $21,000 per illegal alien family. They use our E/R's like a primary care facility and don't pay for the services received. That's why schools are in dire straits, hospitals are closing and our social security funds are getting sucked down the toilet.
Well I say let these people riot. Two years ago they were caught running around waving Mexican flags and hurling racially insulting slurs at Americans. Then when the MSM caught them doing it on videotape, they changed their tactics. They started carrying US flags after that.
Well no one is buying the public relations spin that the pro-open borders groups are trying to shove down our throats. This bill is bad and, with our government's track record on enforcing immigration law, it's no surprise that 63% of US households want the bill dashed and swept under the rug.
Check out Fontana HS Riots from last year. The offspring of people who "are doing the jobs that Americans won't do" were caught in a fullscale race riot. They have video and pictures of the little darlings throwing up gang signs and beating other students.
That's why they should all be allowed into our country - We don't have enough gangs, drugs, corruption and crime.
Thank you Mr. Bush...