Monday, May 24, 2010
What fools we be...
Attributed to someone from the Czech Republic and making the e-mails rounds. No actual person cited as the source, but it hits pretty near the mark:
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president."
"The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.
The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their president."
Substitute the name of virtually any one of the fools - from Dodd to Schumer on the left to Lugar and Snowe on the not-so-far-left - and it is abundantly clear that the electorate is the problem. But why? It's easy enough to point the finger in any direction and score a hit. Education? Sure. Complicit media? Sure.
But the truth is that the electorate has become lazy and complacent. Looking past the party line is too hard. Educating your own kids is too hard. Taking responsibility for yourself is too hard.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Nice win for Rand Paul in Kentucky!
Unfortunately, the bifactional ruling coalition isn't about to roll over, and Rand Paul, assuming the PTB don't manage to derail his campaign, is likely to be as marginalized in the Senate as Ron Paul is in the House.
The way the parties control the political process you about have to take over a party from the grassroots up to change anything, and that has to happen on a state-by-state basis.
Third party activity is actually counterproductive. The winner-take-all approach to elections and the inability of third parties to change election laws at the state level precludes 3rd parties from anything but the spoiler role. The Paul win is nice, but just winning an election changes nothing where it counts. Our dumbed down electorate will continue to suck down Kool-Aid and return the same old progressives to power, albeit with different names, more often than not.
Democracy ensures the election of the best panderers, and the best panderers are big gummint "progressives." Rand Paul, like his father, will likely be just another exception that proves the rule.
The way the parties control the political process you about have to take over a party from the grassroots up to change anything, and that has to happen on a state-by-state basis.
Third party activity is actually counterproductive. The winner-take-all approach to elections and the inability of third parties to change election laws at the state level precludes 3rd parties from anything but the spoiler role. The Paul win is nice, but just winning an election changes nothing where it counts. Our dumbed down electorate will continue to suck down Kool-Aid and return the same old progressives to power, albeit with different names, more often than not.
Democracy ensures the election of the best panderers, and the best panderers are big gummint "progressives." Rand Paul, like his father, will likely be just another exception that proves the rule.
Labels: election
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
The fate of a turncoat...
Sen. Arlen Spector: ‘To Eliminate Any Doubt, I Am a Republican....errr, Democratic...errr, unemployed."
I don't know why he thought he was going to get any loyalty from the folks he'd been beating in elections for so long, much less from Obama. They got what they wanted from him. He got no less than what he deserved.
So long, it's been good to know ya!
I don't know why he thought he was going to get any loyalty from the folks he'd been beating in elections for so long, much less from Obama. They got what they wanted from him. He got no less than what he deserved.
So long, it's been good to know ya!
Thursday, May 13, 2010
In support of Arizona.
As I understand Arizona's immigration law, it is more-or-less a codification of federal law and an attempt to actually enforce laws that the Feds are simply not enforcing. I sympathize completely with what Arizona is doing. I wish more states would adopt such a law. Better yet, I wish the pandercrats in Washingon would actually enforce the law. Good luck with that. I suspect the only way that would happen would be if the migrants were white libertarians and/or lower-middle class Republicans.
FWIW, one of my grandparents was a naturalized citizen (German by way of the Ukraine) and my wife is Hispanic. Her grandparents were also naturalized. I know why immigrants come and I do not object to their presence so long as they are here legally and they behave themselves. If and when they become naturalized citizens, I will welcome them and their children as such.
Charity does not demand that we let everyone into the US who wants in. Just as the Church does not give the Eucharist to every Tom, Pablo and Ivan that walks in the door - they are supposed to be one of us - and while we can and do welcome them, there is a process they have to go through to qualify as "one of us." You know - RCIA, baptism, confirmation and all that legalistic stuff? Even a cradle Catholic has to be reconciled to the Church before he can receive. Why some of the bishops and priests insist that we follow a national policy that the Church doesn't practice herself is beyond me.
True charity would dictate that we insist the Mexican and other Central American governments do something about the sorry states of affairs in their own countries and desist from depending on the US to do what they should be doing for their own citizens. Common sense dictates that we not allow people in who want to destabilize or overthrow our government.
And, really, if the place you are migrating from is so bad, why in the world would you want to recreate in the US the conditions of the hellholes you came from? Californians go home!
No, wait...
The politician who proposes the following is going to get strong consideration for my vote:
1. Build the fence. An open border policy is simply insane. It's no more rational than leaving your door unlocked. Simple folk looking for a better life and willing to work aren't the only people crossing that wide-open border, and more than a few of them are dangerous.
2. Amend the laws on citzenship to exclude children born of non-naturalized citizens.
3. Offer guest visas to those already here. AFTER A REASONABLE TIME, deport those we find who do not have one. Deport those who should not be here (criminals, etc) immediately.
4. Offer permanent visas to those who qualify.
5. Let those who wish to become citizens do so when they have met the criteria.
6. Fine or shut down the employers who hire them.
7. Immediate execution by burning at the stake of race-baiting, pandering politicians and lawyers.*
I'm not asking for a lily-white America. I am demanding that our immigration policy at least be coherent. Illegal immigrants are here. We need to treat them as human beings and take care of them as well as we are able and deport them as fast as is humanely practical if they do not deserve to be here.
*Wishful thinking, I know.
I edited and enlarged this from an earlier post. I daresay I'll be able to trot it out annually with only minor changes, as nothing much will change - except most likely for the worse.
FWIW, one of my grandparents was a naturalized citizen (German by way of the Ukraine) and my wife is Hispanic. Her grandparents were also naturalized. I know why immigrants come and I do not object to their presence so long as they are here legally and they behave themselves. If and when they become naturalized citizens, I will welcome them and their children as such.
Charity does not demand that we let everyone into the US who wants in. Just as the Church does not give the Eucharist to every Tom, Pablo and Ivan that walks in the door - they are supposed to be one of us - and while we can and do welcome them, there is a process they have to go through to qualify as "one of us." You know - RCIA, baptism, confirmation and all that legalistic stuff? Even a cradle Catholic has to be reconciled to the Church before he can receive. Why some of the bishops and priests insist that we follow a national policy that the Church doesn't practice herself is beyond me.
True charity would dictate that we insist the Mexican and other Central American governments do something about the sorry states of affairs in their own countries and desist from depending on the US to do what they should be doing for their own citizens. Common sense dictates that we not allow people in who want to destabilize or overthrow our government.
And, really, if the place you are migrating from is so bad, why in the world would you want to recreate in the US the conditions of the hellholes you came from? Californians go home!
No, wait...
The politician who proposes the following is going to get strong consideration for my vote:
1. Build the fence. An open border policy is simply insane. It's no more rational than leaving your door unlocked. Simple folk looking for a better life and willing to work aren't the only people crossing that wide-open border, and more than a few of them are dangerous.
2. Amend the laws on citzenship to exclude children born of non-naturalized citizens.
3. Offer guest visas to those already here. AFTER A REASONABLE TIME, deport those we find who do not have one. Deport those who should not be here (criminals, etc) immediately.
4. Offer permanent visas to those who qualify.
5. Let those who wish to become citizens do so when they have met the criteria.
6. Fine or shut down the employers who hire them.
7. Immediate execution by burning at the stake of race-baiting, pandering politicians and lawyers.*
I'm not asking for a lily-white America. I am demanding that our immigration policy at least be coherent. Illegal immigrants are here. We need to treat them as human beings and take care of them as well as we are able and deport them as fast as is humanely practical if they do not deserve to be here.
*Wishful thinking, I know.
I edited and enlarged this from an earlier post. I daresay I'll be able to trot it out annually with only minor changes, as nothing much will change - except most likely for the worse.
Labels: immigration
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
