Executive Amnesty

In November 2014, President Barack Obama has issued executive orders to basically not enforce immigration law for some 5 million people. This is an attempt to begin the process of de facto amnesty. So… here’s my take…

Constitutional?
What Obama did was indeed beyond his Constitutional authority. He knows that. He’s stated it point blank many times. The problem is that Obama doesn’t give a rat’s posterior about the Constitution (the principles of which he has sworn to protect). It’s a character thing.

The Straw-men:
Obama claims that he is doing nothing that Republicans like Reagan and Bush did. This argument is simply slight or hand meant to cloud the issue. Other Presidents have indeed used executive orders to affect the enforcement of immigration law, but always in an attempt to enforce the letter and spirit of legislation duly passed by the Congress; NOT to create law Congress should have (in the President’s opinion) passed.

It’s generally pretty easy to find an equivalent situation that demonstrates the hypocrisy of the left when it comes to these scenarios. The Keystone XL pipeline offers such an opportunity. This would be like the House of Representatives deciding that the Senate and President should have acted on the pipeline instead of keeping the project in limbo for years. What if the House had approved the project, appropriated the funds, found someone to make it happen and bypassed the Senate and the President. Harry Reid refused to allow a vote (which would probably have passed before the election), just as the House did on “Comprehensive Immigration”. Neither legislative branch is required to vote on every bill passed by the other. Reid, in fact has been much more guilty of this sin than Boehner. And then there is Obama, who claimed he kind-of might think about support the pipeline if it ever reached his desk… But the logic goes… with no action taken, surely the House would be justified in moving forward on such an important issue.

But in reality, NO, they wouldn’t. In fact, if the House and Senate can’t get the Keystone XL pipeline though in 2015 (possibly having to override a Presidential veto), then it should not go forward. It should become a possible issue in the 2016. But the process should be followed.

In another example, tax reform is every bit as important is immigration reform. Do you think the next President (possibly a Republican) should have the same prerogative on enforcement of tax law if Congress fails to act? Can the President simply instruct the Treasury and IRS to not collect taxed for a certain group or enforce certain tax laws. Of course not. The idea is absurd, and THIS is no different.

Republican Action:
So what should the Republicans do? What the President has done here is impeachable. And in a perfect world, one in which the rule of law means something, that is exactly what should and would happen. But alas, we do not live in such a world. (In such a world, Lois Lerner would already be in jail.)

Republicans should stay calm and collected and look at the ramifications of their options. They should define their real goals, and evaluate what options/actions can realistically move us towards those goals during this time of Constitutional crisis. They should choose options that achieve goals while minimizing the damage to the nation.

The Republicans in the Legislature should use what power (Constitutionally) they have to directly thwart the President. That begins with the “power of the purse” in the House of Representative. While I understand that it is next to impossible to use that power to get the President to do something he is refusing to do (like secure the border); it can be used to prevent any money from being spent on what little requires bureaucratic action (like the issuing of green cards). This is precisely how the Republicans (and a few Democrats) prevented Obama from closing down Guantanamo. They basically told the President, “You and Holder want to bring all the terrorists over here and put them in American courts? Knock yourself out. You just can’t spend one red cent of federal money doing it.”

Now when it comes to the “power of the purse”, I’m not saying we have another government shut-down. Don’t get me wrong, I like and support government shutdowns; but they have proven to be ineffective due to the main stream media amplifying the feigned leftist hysterics to great effect. Thus the Republicans need to be smart in how they use this power.

The Senate (once controlled by the GOP) too should extract some costs from Obama for his actions. I like Ted Cruz’s idea of using the Senate’s Constitutional power of “advise and consent”. Thus, no more hearings on Obama nominations, with a few exceptions for positions that may have some affect on public safety.

The main point here is that we can use lawful and Constitutional means to thwart lawless behavior by the Commander in Chief. Will there be much wailing and gnashing of teach by the left (and amplified by the main stream media)? Yes. That is where cojones (balls) come in; and granted those are not a Republican strong point.

Comprehensive?
At the same time. The Republicans should move forward putting legislation on the desk of the President; starting with the Keystone XL Pipeline. In some cases, this is simply a means of exposing the lefts feigned support of issues (like Keystone XL) and in others an opportunity to get things done in a bipartisan manner. Legislation sent to the President should also include simple straight forward bills concerning fixing immigration.

But know this. “Comprehensive” when describing desired legislation is Washington speak for “Obfuscation”. Comprehensive means to design something so enormous that the devil can easily been hidden in the details. Comprehensive means that the “Stupidity of the American Voter” (see Jonathan Gruber, Obamacare Architect) can be used to deceive and hide costs, results, and ramifications. After the Obamacare fiasco, nothing coming out of Washington should ever again be “comprehensive”. Not immigration reform, not health care, not twiddly winks… NOTHING.

“Comprehensive” is the bill that came out of the Senate. THAT is what the Obama and the left want; and it should remain dead on arrival in the House.

Read Full Post »

Why We Are Doomed – E Pluribus Pluribus

Pat Buchanan penned an editorial a few days ago (8/4/14) which basically said that if Obama implements his plan to grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants it will be the end of the republic. He is partially right. In fact the only point he is wrong on is that he believes there is still any hope of stopping it. There’s not. The nation lost any hope of survival decades ago. What we see today with Obama and the lefts infusion of illegal immigrants into society is simply the acceleration of the decline.

E pluribus unum (found on the seal of the United States) is Latin for “Out of many, one” and represents the concept of immigrants coming to this nation and melting into our society, becoming distinctly American; if not the first generation, then the next. It is regarded as one of our finest qualities of a nation and also considered (by many, myself included) necessary for the continuation of the Republic.

E pluribus unum has been lost and not lost just recently but has been on the decline for half a century. Since 1965, the purpose of immigration has increasingly been to bring in more and more people who do not melt into our society and culture; but to bring in people who will… believe a certain way, vote a certain way, a distinctly non-American way.

E pluribus unum was slowly and methodically replaced by (I’m guessing on the Latin) E pluribus pluribus, “out of many many”. Immigrants today have no interest in assimilating into American culture and why should they? Those who brought them here had no intention of them doing so. Their purpose is to fundamentally change this nation by diluting the one (the unum) culture and society with something different. Obama under his administration has simply taken that concept and put it on steroids… In coming months he will put it on crack.

The left holds American society, and the Constitution it was built upon with disdain. Destroying that, remaking that, fundamentally changing that, has been their goal from day one; though you would be hard pressed to get them to admit it; even today. This is why you judge them by their actions (fruits if you will) and not their words. They believe the leftist utopia cannot be reached without first doing away with the antiquated ideas of dead European males; and to their credit they’re right about that. The two (leftism and the founding principles) are mutually exclusive.

And the left has won. The goal has not yet been realized but we’re close; and the path to that goal is unalterable. The best we constitutionalists (those holding to the founding principles) could hope for is fragmentation (Balkanization) of the nation from which we could carve out a small nation of our own and return to the great experiment started by the founders. Unfortunately, even that dire scenario of little hope is unlikely.

One of the left’s attacks on us constitutionalists is that our objections are based on race. Some of the Kool-Aid drinkers actually believe this lie. But it’s not.

This is a melting pot thing; an understanding and desiring to be American thing. We’re not just talking about the desire to escape poverty in most cases and violence in some; but the desire to embrace what has made America great. Unlike early immigrants and even immigrants early in the last century, that desire is completely missing. The left knows that, wants that, and promotes that through “diversity” and “multiculturalism”. Ant THAT is why the republic is doomed.

Read Full Post »

Consequences of Liberal Policies: Not in My Liberal Back Yard

So I turn on the news this morning (6/23/14) and there is this state legislator from great state of Massachusetts complaining that planeloads of illegal immigrants are being flown to his home state. Ostensibly, his main concern was the diseases (such as tuberculosis and measles) these refugees might be bringing to his state. He was worried the state may be sued or some such like.

Then I read another report that a Massachusetts mayor of Springfield (Domenic Sarno) is complaining about all the Somalis being dumped in his fair city.

Note: The refugee population in Springfield of about 1,500 — around 380 of them Somali — represents about 1 percent of the city’s total of 153,000.

“I have enough urban issues to deal with. Enough is enough. You can’t keep concentrating poverty on top of poverty.” — Mayor Domenic Sarno of Springfield, Mass.

Sarno also complained that resettlement agencies are bringing in “warm-weather” refugees and dumping them into cold climates only to leave them dependent on the city.

Translation: Not in my back yard. Send these people to the southern states where they belong.

And isn’t it interesting that all these immigrants (legal and illegal) produce untold of wealth and prosperity when it comes to justifying amnesty; but when it’s in their home state they seem to produce “urban issues” and “poverty on top of poverty”.

This is the epitome of the leftist mindset when addressing consequences of leftist policies; in this case immigration of the generally low skilled and poor. They want the warm fuzzy feeling of “doing the right thing” while not suffering or seeing any of the ramifications themselves. Wind Power? All for it, just don’t mess with my view of Nantucket Sound with those ugly turbines. Amnesty? All for open borders and amnesty, as long as the riff-raff is confined down south for those hicks to deal with.

It’s high time the yanks got a taste of the medicine they make us border states endure. Maybe that bitter pill would wake them up to the problems they create for the rest of us.

Read Full Post »

Fix Immigration, Reignite the Melting Pot

“We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, and American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding house; and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.” — President Teddy Roosevelt

And that’s the problem we now face with immigration in the United States. We are no longer concerned with creating citizens out of immigrants. Other agendas have destroyed the notion of how important that is to the American dream. Some would say that the fire of the great American melting pot has gone out, but it hasn’t… it was extinguished… a long time ago.

So I ask (rhetorically), by Whom and Why?

Mainly by the left. (Big surprise coming from me.) They have little or no interest in people who share a traditional common American identity. It’s something they largely despise themselves. I specify “American” identity because the left does desire A “common” identity, it’s just not the same one envisioned and set forth by our founders. Instead they wish a common identity of dependence on them, on government. And unfortunately for the future, they are achieving that more and more every day.

As a result, when it comes to immigration, the left only cares about numbers and political disposition. When it comes to illegal immigration, the left would grant citizenship to every illegal immigrant in the nation with the stroke of a pen. All of the left’s immigration policy can be justified by increasing the number people available and inclined towards being indentured.

The political right is by no means off the hook either. The establishment wants the cheap labor and they are willing to cast aside the good of the nation to get it.

The few lone voices seeking reason when it comes to immigration have little chance to be heard. More likely they will be labeled as racist by the illegals themselves and those who wish to enslave them.

So what we have is both sides of the equation working against the crucible, against the melting pot; and we have a larger and larger number of dwellers in the polyglot boarding house we call America. Many think this is just an unfortunate side-effect of the times we live in. It’s not… it is by design.

And the designs are producing the desired ends of its creators; votes and cheaper labor at the expense of assimilated citizens. It’s hard to say if the designers see the secondary consequences of their schemes or if they would even care. Those consequences are that eventually a nation requires a population of people who will come together for the greater good or for protection from threats (external and/or internal). That requires citizens with a common American nationality… dwellers don’t do that, it’s not in their nature.

We have created an environment where when the barbarians arrive at the gate we will discover that we have million already on the inside. If it’s not too late already; we need to sort them all out. And before you leftist throw a hissy fit. I’m not saying all immigrants (or even 12 million illegal immigrants) are barbarians. A small percentage of the whole mean our destruction. We just need to identify them, sort them out, and prevent more from coming and gumming up the works. And here’s how…

Get the Crucible Working Again:
Fire it up. What that entails is identifying who we want to immigrate and why; then codifying that in our immigration law.

So who do we want? First off we want the educated. Almost every foreign national who gets an education in the United States should have an application for citizenship stapled to their diploma. I say almost. Let’s face it some degrees are worth more than others. Doctors, Nurses, Engineers, Technology Specialists? We want them. Liberal Arts, Psychology, Social Sciences, Twelfth Century Elbonian Literature? Not so much.

But even more important than that we need to identify immigrants (individually and as groups of peoples) that are interested and likely to actually attempt the process of integration. Some of those requirements include learning English right off the bat; knowledge and admiration of our history, our culture, and our system of governance. Immigrants should understand and embrace the Bill of Rights and we’re not just talking about rote memorization. All this means is that the immigrants should want to come to America for the right reasons. Lacking that, they don’t come.

Side Note: With that in mind, guess what culture is the antithesis of democracy and freedom? What culture is destroying those very fabrics in other democratic nations? Our immigration policy should exclude those with no interest in becoming one of us… and it should dam sure exclude those who want to destroy us.

Reform the Immigration Bureaucracy:
Our current system to process and bring in new immigrants is broken. It must be reformed. And by reform, I mean destroyed and rebuilt; because the current system is not salvageable. Old engrained bureaucracies seldom are…

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has evolved into what most federal bureaucracies become over time; an organization whose sole purpose is to perpetuate itself and grow in size and authority. There is little or no emphasis on actually providing a service or doing the job it was created for.

Even worse, the corruption within the system is epidemic. The foreign rich can simply buy citizenship from former federal bureaucrats who have the knowledge and contacts within the system. The going rate is about 200K. These parasites should be exposed and prosecuted if possible.

A “NEW” system is sorely needed. One that is fair, objective, and efficient.

Stop Illegal Immigration:
The current porous borders must be plugged (by which I mean slow illegal crossing to a trickle). Yes, I know it’s hard. Yes, I know it’s expensive but not beyond our means if done properly. Control of our borders is possible if we use all means at our disposal; including technology, barriers (where effective), and the military.

Protecting our borders isn’t some off-hand thing we should think about. It is one of the few actual responsibilities of the Federal Government; as opposed to the thousands of things the Feds are doing that aren’t its responsibility.

Deal with the Illegal Immigrants Present:
We have an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. today. I wish it weren’t true. I wish the borders had been secured when we last dealt with this problem. But all that is water under the bridge. We have got to deal with it again and the only thing we should look to the past for is not to make the same mistakes.

To the problem at hand. We need to deal with the 12 million illegal immigrants; and we need to do it legally, fairly, and humanely. To the left I say, No! You’re not getting all those votes… at least not immediately. And to the right I say don’t be a dumbass, logistically we are not deporting 12 million people… especially when Obama isn’t enforcing the law or securing the border. And to both I say we can solve this problem (and that of the insecure border) piecemeal. So forget the “comprehensive” billsh$t! We’re not falling for that again…

OK… how to start… Criminals? Gone! Welfare Abusers? Gone! How hard is that? (Actually pretty hard… they vote. 🙂 )

OK… Now move forward with documentation and then legalization. That means no vote (yet) but legal status to work and pay taxes. The process should be fair, but tough. If ten to twenty percent of those eligible don’t balk and self-deport… it’s not tough enough.

OK… Finally provide a means for now legalized immigrants to become citizens if they wish. They would do this through the normal channels behind those who did it right in the first place. Hopefully by this time we’ve “reformed” the immigration bureaucracy.

And, yes, all this is tied to progress of objectively securing the border so we don’t have to deal with this again on down the road.

Remove the Beam from Our Own Eye:
So I described above that we only want immigrants that have a basic understanding of who we are as a nation; what the founding fathers tried to set up. Yet not even a simple majority within this nation have that basic knowledge. Which makes me ask, “Is civics even taught in public schools anymore.”

Fewer than half (much fewer in fact) of American citizens can name more than one guaranteed freedoms protected by the First Amendment. (Hint: religion, speech, press, assembly, and… petition). And that is just one example of the rampant ignorance we face. No wonder this nation is falling apart. It’s a national tragedy! Any school system that doesn’t produce 90+ percent of graduates who can’t name all five should be shut down! Fix this crap already!

Conclusion:
Yes, I know… I’ve said it’s likely too late to save the Republic… and it is. But I can’t help but point out the obvious decay and cure until the columns finally come tumbling down as our dear leader takes another selfie.

Immigration is part of that decay as we invite the very people who will destroy us into our mist. And it doesn’t have to be that way. Immigration has been a boon to the nation for centuries and it could be again… if done right. So can we at least agree to stop that aspect of our self-destruction!? Probably not…

Read Full Post »

Comprhensive Billsh@t

Let me first say that I don’t know as much as I would like about the immigration bill currently being pushed by the “Gang of Eight” in the Senate. I’ve heard both sides go back and forth trying to counter each other. It’s hard to tell what’s in the bill and what isn’t.

So with that said I’ve recently decided I’m against it. Why? Because it’s hard to tell what’s in the bill and what isn’t.

The dam thing approaches 1000 pages in length. Even that is debated but the lowest number I’ve heard is the upper 800s. I’ve decided the length of this bill is by design; to be sure no one (legislators of us) can really know what’s in there. I’ve also decided that if I hear the word “comprehensive” I’m against it. “Comprehensive” has come to mean so large you’ll never find all the crap we’ve put in this thing.

Sound familiar? Obamacare was in the thousands of pages. Nancy Pelosi actually said the words “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it” concerning that piece of … legislation. We tried that and NOW we still don’t know… I do think Nancy was right, but she didn’t mention how slow that finding out would be.

I can give at least one example of what I’m talking about in respects to the immigration bill. Satellite phones. Opposition says the immigration bill has a provision to provide fee satellite phones to illegal immigrants. Support (Rubio) says that provision of the bill “was actually meant” for people who live in remote regions on the border who don’t have a cell phone signal and cannot notify authorities about illegal crossings.

So I did a little bit of research and this is what I’ve come up with. The bill does not specifically say satellite phones for illegals. It doesn’t not say it either. And that’s the problem. The bill just says it will subsidize (free phones) within 100 miles of the border where there is no cell signal. It’s doesn’t say which side of the border, who, why, or much of anything else. Just free phones…

And Rubio uses weasel words in his defense of the provision; “was actually meant”. What the hell is that? If it was actually meant to be specific, then be specific. If you leave a loophole that big in the law; Obama and Napolitano will drive a Mac truck though that loophole and proceed 100 miles into Mexico and distribute free “Obama phones” along with voter registration cards.

But finally, what the %$#$ is the phone thing doing in the immigration bill in the first place. It shouldn’t even be there. It was probably placed there by some Senator who was paid off by a phone company with an inside track to provide the “free” phones at inflated government prices. I have no problem with the Senate debating and voting on a (stupid, yes stupid) idea/bill concerning providing satellite phones within 100 miles of the border meant for blah, blah, blah. But it should be a separate bill. It should be a short bill. It should be an understandable bill. It should NOT be hidden in 900 page “comprehensive” behemoth that no one really understands.

I really don’t know the number of pages a bill should be. But I do know it’s a fraction of what this bill is. Let’s say a hundred pages. Our legislature should adopt rules that no bill will be over 100 pages. And I guess since common sense and decency are dead with these guys, you would also have to agree on fonts, spacing, margins, paper size, etc…

Bills should be straight forward so that even a hick like me can understand what’s in there. If you want to be “comprehensive” then break up the ideas of what you want to accomplish into smaller pieces in separate bills. You can even add provisions that laws won’t go into effect unless/until certain objective goals are met. But no more of this passing it to find out what’s in it crap!

Starting immigration reform is pretty dam simple. There is no need to do anything unless you secure the border. So do that. Write a bill specifying how, where, when, and objective measures to determine success or failure. Pass it and then move on to the next step. The next step/bill/law may include a provision that it is not implemented until the objective measures from the first bill are met. When you finish that… move on to the next step; each bill less than 100 pages; each bill humanly readable and understandable before a vote is called.

I’m a conservative. I support immigration reform. It’s badly needed. I even support a path to citizenship (not residence, citizenship) for most of those here illegally. I think that path should behind those who have gone through the legal process. I think that path should be through the newly reformed and efficient process everyone will go through (not a special process). And that path should only be for those who have avoided criminal records and welfare… Am I being unreasonable here?

I still believe that immigration is a key part of our national heritage and our future; but we need to be smart about it. One thing is for sure through. What we have doesn’t work; not the illegal system; not even the legal (massively bureaucratic) system. Unfortunately the fix being proposed is just more of the same old bullshit. Doing nothing would be better than that.

Read Full Post »

LMBYBYSA – Words Mean Things

The left has been complaining for months about the term “illegal immigrant”. They consider it a derogatory term. I wouldn’t say that it’s derogatory so much as having a stigma attached to it. AND it should. They should have gone through the proper legal channels.

[TL: That said, I have little doubt I would have done the same thing in their shoes. This post is not meant to be a commentary on our immigration policy, on the right or wrong of what “illegal immigrants” have done or what we should do about it. It’s only about the lefts play on words and why they do it.]

All that aside, the term “illegal immigrant” is a most accurate description. These people are immigrants in that they are people from a foreign country who came (immigrated) to the U.S. They did not do so following the laws set by this nation. They did not immigrate legally; they did it illegally… thus the apt term which describes practically 100% of the sample.

The left prefers the term “undocumented worker” which does describe a large percentage of these immigrants… but 100%? Not even close. There are many (no not a majority) who come here for welfare, medical, education, and even criminal purposes. Thus this term is less apt than the previous one.

But of course apt description is not the purpose of the lefts wordplay. The whole purpose of this Orwellian exercise is to remove the stigma from what these people have done; and move the public opinion in their favor. An undocumented worker is just a victim of circumstance. An illegal alien; made a choice (or had one made for him/her by their parents). Unfortunately, this stuff works and the left are experts at it. Big Brother would be proud.

Of course moving this agenda forward greatly depends on all your allies getting the message and towing the line. Enter the main stream media…

“And in a groundbreaking move, the Associated Press, the largest news gathering outlet in the world, will no longer use the term ‘illegal immigrant.’ That is out. No longer ‘illegal immigrant.’ They will now use the phrase ‘undocumented Democrat.’” — Jay Leno (monologue 4/2/2013)

That’s funny… mainly, because it’s true.

Read Full Post »

Why We Just Can’t Get Along… and Shouldn’t

Introduction :
A good “liberal” (my label, not his) friend of mine recently thought he had some insight into the left vs. right infighting. He asked if I agreed with the following:

I think this is a big part of what the whole left-right thing is about, ultimately. There are two different languages being used. When a liberal talks of gov’t assistance, the conservative hears “socialism.” When the conservative talks of family values, the liberal hears “theocracy.”

Does any of that ring true to you.. or are you just hearing the trombone sound from Peanuts?

Well I don’t hear the trombone sound from Peanuts, because I hear what you’re saying. But your words don’t ring true for me. I’m sorry to say that what we have here is a case of wishful thinking.

You want this to be about communications & misunderstanding each other’s motives, because if that’s all there is too it; there is no culture war and all we have to do to solve our problems is talk to each other more. Bless your soul… you want to believe it’s possible to bring everybody under a great big tent, with lots of hugging, drinking cokes, and teaching the world to sing in perfect harmony. It’s noble! It admirable! And it’s based on a false premise!

Sorry. We don’t have a communications problem and we don’t misunderstand each other. Well, at least the Right doesn’t misunderstand the left. (see below)

Three Cultures:
There are three distinct cultures in this nation and two of them are at war.
The Left: Fighting for a “fundamental change” of this nation to more resemble Europe. While not completely socialist, it’s dam close and based on fundamental assumptions that assure failure.
The Right: Fighting to return to the republican principles set forth by the Founding Father. We want to save and continue the “Great Experiment.”
The Oblivious: No clue what’s going on and don’t care to. They know nothing of history or civics. They don’t know the difference between the debt and the deficit. And as long as politics doesn’t affect their Snooky watching or their access to Facebook they are fat dumb and happy. Unfortunately about a third of these morons actually vote.

Two of these cultures are at war with each other; obviously the Left and Right. And it is nothing less that a battle of good vs. evil. If I’m on the Right, then obviously I think my guys are on the side of good. Does that mean I think the entire Left is evil? No, but the entire left serves evil… most members do so unwittingly. Nor does that mean everyone on the Right is good. We do our weeding as precisely and as regularly as we can.

A Conservative Take on Liberals
So you say, “OK, LJ, if you understand the Left so well, why don’t you break it down for us?”… OK, I present to you the The Left: (as understood by Texas Lynn)

The rank and file of the left are made up of two types of people:
1. Those who really believe in government solutions and have good intentions. They do however turn a blind eye towards the costs and results leftist government programs produce.
2. Those receiving the “entitlements” and want to keep/expand them at the expense of those who pay the bills. THESE are the people who will ultimately bring about the downfall of the nation. Their numbers have been steadily climbing ever since the War on Poverty. When their numbers reach the tipping point where nothing can stop them from voting themselves more and more lagress from the public treasury, the jig is up.

The Left Leadership: (To make the list, the description must fit a large majority of the Left.)
• The Left is not dumb. They are generally very intelligent and believe in government solutions as strongly as I believe in free market solutions.
• Their actions are based more on power than the good intentions of the rank and file.
• The Left wants this nation “fundamentally changed” into a European Socialist-lite state.
• Many on the left are racist (“Many” means a large majority doesn’t share this view. But I include this because a large majority of the left’s black leadership IS racist. And a large majority of the left supports racist policies in the form of “affirmative action” because of white guilt.)
• Many on the left are anti-Semites. (Again I use “many”, but include this item because a large majority of the left is anti-Israel.)
• The Left has a deep seeded hatred toward the Jewish/Christian religion. This partly stems from the Right receiving much of its support from the Christian community during the 90s and early 00s. But is also has a lot to do with the Christian community opposing on moral grounds the Left’s stances on homosexuality, and abortion.
• The Left has a deep seeded hatred toward the U.S. military and all entities and companies that support the military.
• The Left would repeal the second amendment and disarm the populace.
• The Left supports the woman’s right to choose to end a pregnancy at any stage. Maybe with the exception of the 3rd trimester if asked, but it would be close. Meanwhile the left is certainly willing to turn a blind eye toward supported organizations that do support and provide “service” at any stage.
• The Left has disdain for the U.S. Constitution. They think it is an outdated document written by white men who could not conceive of today’s issues. In reality, the limiting principles in the Constitution are based on the timeless understanding of the weakness of men and the dangers of an unbridled man made institution of government. The Left seeks to undermine the Constitutions through the courts with judges who share their disdain for the founding document.
• The Left supports extreme environmentalism at great expense, even the expense of human life. The left uses their unique ability to focus on intent and ignore results to justify this belief. (I.E. DDT to fight malaria in the third world.)
• The Left sees extreme environmentalism as a way to hide and further their socialist agenda.
• The Left wants full amnesty for all illegal immigrants; no strings attached. The Left believes (rightly so) that this will help grow their entitlement base of support and help solidify their power.
• The Left is opposed to all but minimal enforcement of immigration laws; especially along the southern border, again as a means of growing their entitlement base.
• The Left supports forcing the public by law to accept homosexuals and people with other sexual “proclivities” (more like Europe).
• The Left supports extreme spending (more than 20% GDP) supported by extreme taxes (more than 30%). Yes on the wealthy, but they won’t stop there (like Europe). They know this spending will help cement their power through the expansion of “entitlements”.
• The Left does not care about the deficit or the debt. It is a non-issue for them. Because of the current political climate, they must appear to be concerned, but that is a lie. Like Greece, Italy, Spain (Europe) they somehow easily ignore the 800 lb. gorilla in the room. I suspect they think the debt can eventually be solved with enough cuts in the military and more (much much more) taxes.
• The Left unquestionably support the unions (a socialist concept in itself) because of the philosophical and financial unity. The Left completely ignores the great damage unions do to our economy, and even the damage they do to the education and futures of our children.
• The Left has no concept of market forces. But that’s OK, they want to do away with the free-market altogether. The left would institute strict governmental controls on the market if it could.
• The Left has no concept of human nature in regards to governance. History has proven their system will not work because it’s foundation is based on the false premise that people will act outside their self-interest; and that those in power will not abuse that power.
• The Left is arrogant, believing themselves to be superior morally, & intellectually. The Left believes the only reason ALL past and present Socialist/Communist systems did not work is because people of their caliber were not the ones in charge.

The Left’s misunderstanding of the Right: (Again, the description must fit for a large majority)
• The Left believes the Right to be racist, while as a whole, we are less racist than they are.
• The Left believes the Right to be stupid, ignorant, hicks. (Part of their arrogance)
• The Left believes the Right wants to create a theocracy. A majority of this irrational fear is caused by the Left’s deep seeded hatred for the Christian religion. It is also caused by the Right’s belief (and we are correct) that the religious clause in the First Amendment was intended to prevent the federal government from designating a state religion; and THAT’S IT. Thus public expression of religion (events, on property, memorials) is protected speech and celebrates our heritage. The left knows we are right on this issue which caused them to have further disdain for the U.S. Constitution and appoint judges to undermine it. (see above).

The Left’s correct understanding of the Right: (Again, the description must fit for a large majority)
• The Left believes the Right to be un-enlightened by the secular/enviromental philosophy of the day. That is correct. When considering the whole, the Right does not put it’s faith in man (or anything created by man) or nature.
• The Left believes the Right to be philosophically opposed to almost everything they stand for. ABSOLUTELY!

Read Full Post »