Tom McClintock...a Patriot!

Yesterday, the President of Mexico stood on the floor of the House of Representatives and decried the Arizona anti-illegal immigration law, the law that absolutely mirrors Federal law. El Presidente did not decry Federal law, but the Arizona law. What's the difference?

What is even more disturbing than a head of state standing in OUR House of Representatives criticizing our laws was the Democrats who gave him a standing ovation for his comments. Wow.

Fortunately, Congressman Tom McClintock stood up and gave an incredibly patriotic speech, "taking exception" to the comments by the Mexican President.

Kudos Tom!

Arizona...armed drug smugglers

I talked to an old friend yesterday, a guy I worked with during my career in law enforcement. He retired to Arizona, and lives about 100 miles from the border on his 10 acres. We talked about the Arizona illegal immigration law, and he told me, "those people in Michigan, Washington State, and New York have no idea what goes on down here. The people coming in from Mexico will usually go around the other side of the mountain, but sometimes they cross on my land. They leave lots of trash, burn cars they find along the way and do other things to property belonging to American citizens. The drug smugglers will sometimes try to intimidate the cattle ranchers, but recently they picked on the wrong rancher--he fired back when they opened up with their assault rifles. What the smugglers don't seem to get is everybody in Arizona is carrying a gun. I don't go anywhere without my gun".

The old West still lives...because the federal government refuses to do its job, and is critical of states that exercise their rights on behalf of their citizens.

Hi-ho Silver!

Napolitano's Turn in the Fish Barrel...

The Secretary of Homeland Security is another in a growing list of government officials who degrade, criticize, condemn, and pass judgment on Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law without having read it!

Secretary Janet Napolitano acknowledged, under questioning by Senator John McCain, that she had not read the law, but in the same breath, assured the Senator she would not have signed it. (Fast forward to 7:35 to get to the relevant content)

No wonder our government is broken! We have our Congress voting on legislation that they have not read—ie, Nancy Pelosi saying they had to pass the health care bill to find out what was in it.

As if that was not enough, we have other public officials being highly critical and disparaging of the Arizona legislation that they have not read—legislation that mirrors Federal law! Napolitano, Holder, and the President of the United States who said, “If you are an Hispanic American in Arizona, your great-grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state but now suddenly if you don’t have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, your going to be harassed, that’s something that could potentially happen, that’s not the right way to go,” Obama said during a town hall event in Iowa. It is so obvious that even Obama did not read the legislation! That is nothing short of disgraceful.

These people are not only incompetent, but they are not up to the job! If these kinds of bungled missteps took place in the private sector, they would be out on their ears, with the admonition “don’t let the door hit you in the…” That our tax dollars are going to pay for such idiocy is mind-boggling.

I can’t wait for November!

Separation?

We all know how the “separation of church and state” position evolved over time in this country. We all are aware of the threat to churches should they take official “political stands” in this country.

Yet a couple of days ago, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called on Catholic bishops and priests to preach “immigration reform” from the pulpit.

“The people, some (who) oppose immigration reform, are sitting in those pews, and you have to tell them that this is a manifestation of our living the gospels,” she said.

Are you kidding me?

Certainly, preaching on subjects relating to “social justice” (a good discussion of social justice here) is not foreign to the Roman Catholic Church. This writer can recall attending “catechism class” in junior high, and being indoctrinated with the concepts of “social justice”. “Social justice” in today’s vernacular can be defined this way: Forced redistribution of wealth with a hostility toward individual property rights, under the guise of charity and/or justice. Glenn Beck opines correctly: The term "social justice" has been completely perverted and hijacked by progressives. It doesn't mean simply "help the poor" to them. It does to some people, but not to radical progressives.

The statists in this country jump up and down and scream when someone even appears to “mix” church and state. Yet, Pelosi gets a pass on her exhortation to the Catholic church leaders to preach social justice in the framework of immigration reform.

Interestingly, she claims to be a Catholic, yet Pope Benedict and Pelosi do not agree on issues the Catholic Church has deemed important. In fact, in 2002, the Vatican issued a doctrinal note on "The Participation of Catholics in Political Life," which states rather succinctly that politicians who profess to be Catholic have a "grave and clear obligation" to oppose any law that attacks human life.[1] While it was signed by John Paul II, it was also signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

In February 2009, Pelosi had the opportunity to meet with Benedict. The Vatican issued the following statement after the meeting:

His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoins all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in cooperation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development…

After that meeting, on Meet the Press, she continued to argue for “a woman’s right to choose” to kill her baby.

Pelosi and separation…hmmm…

---

[1] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/18/pelosi-pope-meeting-minds/

Holder Critical of AZ Law...Yet...

Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States, has been highly critical of the relatively new law in Arizona relating to unlawful immigration. He has said that one of the concerns he has is that it will lead to racial profiling.

He has said that the law is an unfortunate law that has the potential to lead to abuse. He said the Justice Department is reviewing the law with DHS to determine how to react to the law, “including the possibility of a court challenge”.

Keep in mind, he is a lawyer. Keep in mind, he is the head of the Justice Department of the United States of America.

Yesterday, May 13, 2010, he admitted to Congress that he had not even read the law. Yet, for days, he was highly critical of the law.

How is it that he can be the head of the “Justice” Department?

Environmentalism: Enemy of the State (Part II)

I opined in Part I that the members of the extreme environmental movement make up the second greatest enemy of this country. Of course, terrorists are the number one enemy.

Al Gore and his ilk have reached deeply into the pockets of the American citizens, slowly over time. Amazingly, Americans are allowing this to happen without the slightest peep. Everyone knows the analogy of the frog in the pot—a frog dropped into a pot of boiling water will jump right out. But a frog in a pot of lukewarm water, will adjust to the increasing temperature of the water as the heat is raised, until it boils to death. Too many Americans are frogs.

Too many Americans buy into the myth of man-made global warming—a myth because it is not based on scientific fact. More and more, the truth regarding man-made global warming alarmists is coming out. Their data is contrived, and their published works are intentionally filled with untrue data and statements (lies).

Roy W. Spencer, Ph.D., the author of Climate Confusion, makes a clear case for “How Global Warming Hysteria Leads to Bad Science, Pandering Politicians and Misguided Policies that Hurt the Poor”. It is a must read.

The Really Inconvenient Truths, by Iain Murray, lays out “Seven Environmental Catastrophes Liberals Don't Want You to Know About—Because They Helped Cause Them”. This book will open the reader’s eyes to how the environmentalists actually harmed humans and how environmentalists have actually harmed the environment. For example, Murray identifies the reason for the exponential increase in malaria cases in Africa, cases that have resulted in an exponential increase in the death rate. It all has to do with the elimination of DDT and the falsified reasons for discontinuing its use. Oh, and it involves extorting nations in Africa to discontinue the use of DDT or else run the risk of losing financial assistance from the United States and from European countries. This book is also a must read.

It’s all about the money. Scientists, in order to receive funding for their research from the United States government, crank out the “results” the government wants to see. Spencer makes it really clear how this worked at NASA.

Unless the American people wake up, we will be subjected to the Federal Government reaching even more deeply into our pockets—Cap and Trade. More on that next time.

POTUS

"We can’t start singling out people because of who they look like, or how they talk, or how they dress," the president said. "We can’t turn law-abiding American citizens, and law-abiding immigrants, into subjects of suspicion and abuse."

With that statement, POTUS, a supposed law professor (or should I say “lecturer”?) has revealed a dangerous fact: he did not read the Arizona bill. Why dangerous? It is dangerous because he was a lecturer in a law school, but instead of reading the bill, he echoes the comments of the media such as NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, MSNBC and their ilk. He didn’t read it—that’s dangerous. It is dangerous because in addition to the fact that it is so blatantly obvious he did not bother to read the Arizona law, he did not have any of his minions bother to brief him on the law. Otherwise, POTUS would not have made such a dimwitted statement, a statement that has no basis in fact. He is the President, for crying out loud! He should have read it!

He also said, "Make no mistake -- our immigration system is broken". Well, duh! Plain and simple, illegal immigrants flood into the USA because this Administration is afraid to offend—afraid to offend those who donate money, afraid to offend those they count on for votes. But Obama and his folks are most afraid of offending the illegal immigrants, which would, logically, include potential terrorists.

By now, those who have taken the time to read the law know that law enforcement cannot make contact with anyone regarding their immigration status unless the officer has probable cause to make contact for another, unrelated reason.

Now, POTUS is making noises, along with Holder, indicating they will challenge the Arizona law in court. It was noted recently,

“The problem for Obama and Holder is that the people behind the new law have been through this before – and won. Arizona is three-for-three in defending its immigration measures. In 2008, the state successfully defended its employer-sanctions law, which made it a state crime to knowingly employ an illegal immigrant. Facing some of the same groups that are now planning to challenge the new law, Arizona prevailed both in federal district court and at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the nation's most liberal federal-appeals court.”

Wow…

Racism in Arizona? I Don't Think So...

So now, it seems, if someone is asked for their identification, that is a racist act. How inane can these people be???

The fact of the matter is that we ALL are asked for our identification every day, when we:

• Use a check to pay for a purchase
• Make a purchase of certain over the counter medications
• Are stopped by the police for a traffic violation
• Check into a hotel
• Sign up for a gym membership
• Start with a new physician
• Purchase adult beverages if we appear to be on the younger side
• Obtain or renew our drivers license
• Apply for a Passport
• And a myriad of other activities we engage in every single day!

Now the liberals have defined being required to show one's identification as "racist" if it occurs in the State of Arizona.

Arizona has it right. The law (here) is written very well (I've read it, have you?), and the accusation that "racial profiling" will take place is without merit. The Governor of Arizona has mandated that every peace officer in the state be trained in the implementation of the new law by June 30th. One can bet that officers in that State will be very careful in how they enforce the new law. It is a good tool, designed for the good of the people of the State of Arizona, and one can be assured they will not want to lose it in a court case.

Peace Officers will not be stopping people "willy nilly". Just as we are asked for our drivers license, registration, and proof of insurance when stopped by a police officer, Arizona officers will also ask for evidence of being in the United States legally if the person cannot produce the three previously mentioned documents.

Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles said the authorities’ ability to demand documents was like “Nazism.” Such speech is not only destructive, but does not contribute to the general good. Inflamatory speech such as his only highlights his ignorance. Any thoughtful person will see that while Obama is driving us toward socialism, the Arizona law is not in any way like Nazism.

The legislators in Arizona were well within their rights in passing the new law. The Federal government (currently read: Obama) has dramatically failed to secure our borders. Obviously, the Congress and the Executive branches of goverment did not learn anything from what happened on September 11th. Their failure gave the State of Arizona the green light to take matters into their own hands. The 10th Amendment of the United States Constitution gives the State the authority to deal with the problem.

Just as it is the responsibility of the Federal Government to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, it is the responsibility of each State to provide security for its citizens, particularly when the Federal Government FAILS to carry out its mandate.

Even Democrats in Arizona supported S.B. 1070! Seventy percent of Arizona residents favor the new law. So do I.

Arizona's new Law

It is amazing that the State of Arizona--part of the United States of America--had to literally take the law into its own hands today with the signing into law the bill that will enable them to protect themselves from the Mexican drug cartels that penetrate our border every day (here).

The Obama Administration (as with previous Presidents) bears a responsibility to protect all citizens of this country. After writing to the President no less than five times (!), the Governor signed Arizona Senate Bill 1070 in to law.

Why will the Federal Government not do what is supposed to be done, yet does meddle in private business and health care? Instead of bolstering protection at the border, the President criticized the bill saying it would threaten "to undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans". He wants to "reform" immigration law (read: grant amnesty).

That's just nuts.

Environmentalism: Enemy of the State (Part I)

The second greatest enemy of this country is made up of the people who are part of the extreme environmental movement.

Certainly, we bear a responsibility to not pollute, a responsibility to manage the (as opposed to "our") natural resources, and a responsibility to not to waste what God has graciously allowed us to use.

Those who are the extremists engage in fraud, extortion, and outright theft.

For example, I interviewed a Vice President for Shappell Industries--one of the largest home builders in California--who told me that his company sets aside a certain percentage of the total cost of the project for the inevitable law suits that will come from the environmental groups. Those groups bring an action against the company, and "settle" out of court because they know that the builder does not want to litigate the issues in court because of the expense.

The environmentalists look at such building projects as "free money", and they use that money to fund their projects, others they want to go after.

Can anyone say Extortion?

Here we go...

So here we go...never thought I'd be doing something like this. I have thoughts on a number of different topics, and this is as good a place as any to write them down.

First and foremost, the Lord is at the top of the priority list...nothing happens apart from him. For whatever reason some may benefit from reading the musings posted here, it is because of the Lord they may be beneficial.

Family, theology, politics...these are the things that occupy my thoughts...

Here we go...