The burglar had to be one of the following because every other Congressman had an ironclad alibi:

Bennett (R-UT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Burr (R-NC)
Coleman (R-MN)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
Domenici (R-NM)
Ensign (R-NV)
Gregg (R-NH)
Kyl (R-AZ), who also voted for the border fence before voting not to fund it.
Lott (R-MS)
McConnell (R-KY)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Pryor (D-AR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Stevens (R-AK)
Warner (R-VA)
Webb (D-VA)

The Congressman nearly jumped out of his skin, clicked his flashlight off, and froze. He quickly made a call on his cell phone to someone named Harry saying something about holding off on the “Bill.” When he heard nothing more after a bit, and thought the commotion had ended, he spoke briefly again into the cell phone saying, "Harry, it's safe, go ahead.”

After hanging up, the Congressman shook his head, momentarily a little unnerved, and promised himself a long taxpayer-funded vacation after the next big campaign contribution. He clicked the flashlight on again and began searching for more valuables to redistribute to the Mexican. Just as he pulled the home owner’s Health Care Insurance Card from a drawer and was reaching for their children’s Student ID card, clear as a bell he thought he heard the voices again, millions of people saying, “Jesus is watching you.”

Freaked out (speaking in the vernacular), the Congressman shone his flashlight around frantically, looking for the source of the voices. The Mexican never flinched and continued to ransack the house. Finally, in the corner of the room, the Congressman’s flashlight beam came to rest on a parrot.

Did you say that?" the Congressman hissed in a half-whisper at the parrot.

"Yep," the parrot confessed, then squawked, "I'm just trying to warn you."

The Congressman relaxed. "Warn me, huh? Who in the world do you think you are?"

"Moses," replied the parrot.

"Moses?" the Congressman laughed. "What kind of voter would name a bird Moses?"

"The kind of voter that would name a Rottweiler, ‘Jesus.’"

« Close It

Are you aware the United States government has suspended its own passport requirements for American citizens who are traveling to and from Mexico and Canada? Our government was reportedly overwhelmed because the passport services we provide to our own citizens were all but unresponsive, but that is not the whole story. Those same government officials now insist they will be able to process a "Z" visa for 12-20+ million illegal immigrants, complete with background checks, in one day – 24 hours. American citizens wait up to three months or longer for the federal government to process their passport applications? Twenty-four hours for a criminal illegal alien Z-Visa and 3 months for an American citizen?

United States' citizens have also been promised that our government will “start” to enforce the law against those who came here illegally after Jan. 1, 2007. Our government expects us to believe that they have the resources, commitment and intelligence to be able to figure out which illegal alien was here before January 1, 2007. If 20+ million illegal aliens are given amnesty, who in government is seriously going to try to distinguish between illegal aliens who arrived during the last two decades - and the next ten million illegal aliens who will soon flood our shores? How are we or they to prove when any particular illegal arrived?

Are you aware the proposed "amnesty bill" actually codifies the right of cities and counties to continue their policies as a Sanctuary City, i.e., to give sanctuary to illegal aliens including probable terrorists, known MS-13 gang members and felons convicted of violent crimes? Or, maybe you have you said to yourself, "Where’s the fence!?" Despite the huge success of the border fence in the San Diego area, and legislation authorizing construction of an additional 700 miles of border fence, President Bush will not allow the same success to be repeated in other geographic areas. Are you aware that the Administration has recently cut the budget for the National Guard’s work at the southern border, even though the government's widely touted program to hire more Border Patrol agents is hopelessly behind in meeting its manpower goals? Enforcement promises are apparently as empty today as they turned out to be 20 years ago, particularly when Border Patrol Agents are incarcerated for protecting themselves from assault and the United States of America from drugs and invasion. Arizona Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano is reported to be elated at the turn of events.

The historical comparison between past Presidents and President Bush has become clear. President Carter tried to convince Americans to accept malaise as the best we could do, or hope for, and to lower our expectations (because we were Americans). Ronald Reagan recognized that government was not the solution to any problem; it was the problem. Ronald Reagan told us we had every right to dream great dreams if for no other reason than we were Americans. William Jefferson Clinton taught us sincerity is everything. When you can fake that, you've got it made. Hillary taught us that meanness don't jes' happen overnight. President H.W. Bush's legacy will likely be successfully snatching defeat in Iraq from the jaws of victory on the recommendations of Colin Powell. How many lives has that Presidency cost the rest of the world?

President G. W. Bush has taken the seat immediately adjacent to Jimmy Carter in the back row of the annals of history. President Bush says that Americans must bow to reality. The “Bush reality” is that because millions of aliens have entered the United States illegally, it is our “duty” as United States citizens to abandon our national sovereignty, give over our national wealth in the form of income redistribution, and support these criminals by providing them the unearned benefits of citizenship with no expectation of anything in return.

Illegal alien migration has been left unchecked for decades. Unrestrained migration is now consuming our national culture and heritage from the inside out. Our government has failed to enforce the law and failed its citizens; American citizens have failed at nothing but trusting elected politicians who it turns out were seeking self-interest instead of our national interest. Now, faced with a national-health crisis in the Rule of Law, President George W. Bush, has chosen to invoke the Schiavo option. Beyond comprehension, President Bush has unilaterally directed the death of our nation’s sovereignty. Arguably, President Bush is convinced that the patient is already brain-dead (Bill of Rights all but a historical footnote) and believes his unconstitutional choice of a “life and death decision” is his “right” to make without regard to the “will of the people.” Not only does the U.S. Constitution not provide a living will, there is a viable and coherent voting electorate, none of whom (with a few liberal exceptions) are more than metaphorically brain dead. United States’ citizens will not (should not) allow themselves to be deprived of nutrition (jobs and security) and hydration (education and faith) in a way that effectively ends their culture and birthright. Senator John McCain, who has every intention of inheriting the national estate from George W. Bush, is more than willing to facilitate George Bush’s descent into infamy. He probably views the situation more as the Kevorkian option.

The simple fact is this: the Bush Administration, and a number of powerful figures in the U.S. Senate (including John McCain and Jon Kyl), have recently intimated in public interviews that if American citizens do not agree to pass an amnesty bill for millions of illegal aliens, they (Congress) will never make an effort to enforce the immigration laws. Congress is already not enforcing the law (any laws). While their threat is both hollow and moot, their threats should be seen for what they are - an extraordinary effort to blackmail the American people by proclaiming defiantly they will intentionally and recklessly fail to perform their sworn duties and defend the United States Constitution.

A very unfortunate trend began some forty years ago. Political entities, with incredible wealth derived from oil revenues or commerce based on cheap labor, began looking at investment opportunities. The result is that today, many U.S. corporations are under the direct or indirect ownership and/or control of foreign governments (such as China and Saudi Arabia) – even the Fox News Channel. Concurrently, campaign contributions have flowed freely to our U.S. Senators through these corporations, in search of favorable congressional influence, both from foreign governments and a potpourri of political action committees with questionable agendas. It would appear that, one by one, the Senate votes needed to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” legislation (which in reality officially begins the dissolution of the United States of America) have been cynically sold by our elected representatives to foreign nations (including Mexico) for campaign contributions.

Isn't it time to take our government back? If not now, then when? The United States should not be for sale by a cabal of traitors whose only devotion is to themselves and who have engineered their own election to public office in an attempt to gain personal access to taxpayer funds in the U.S. Treasury.

In conclusion, imagine a Twilight Zone episode in which the President of the United States asserts that because those in both federal and state governments intentionally failed for decades to control the border, and intentionally failed to enforce immigration or employment laws, we simply need a new law to replace the old law? The Simpson-Mazzoli immigration law was passed 20 years ago and not surprisingly, it promised the same things. The agenda then was unabashedly amnesty. The licentious agenda today is one of national dissolution - nothing less.

The comprehensive immigration reform bill before Congress will do exactly what our Senators claim - it will eliminate illegal alien migration, but not the way you expect. The comprehensive immigration reform law has been written to end the legal status of "illegal alien," and with it the need to enforce sovereign borders. The whole notion of an "illegal alien" will become quaint folklore. Illegal aliens already in the United States will be legal, and those who arrive tomorrow will be legal, and all those who have plans to cross the border into the United States in the immediate future will become legal. Nobody in the United States will be an "illegal alien." All illegal aliens, including felons convicted of violent crimes, terrorists, and violent MS-13 gang members will have temporary legal status. There will be no such thing as an illegal alien, and therefore no immigration problem! There will no longer be a need for immmigration enforcement, deportation, or for that matter even immigration laws. What is the point of all this?

Make no mistake; the new comprehensive immigration reform law has been intentionally crafted so as to make United States borders into "only a momentary commercial and security check point" in compliance with the North American Union - rather than a sovereign demarkation that defines the jurisdiction of the United States and controls the migration of people. What illegal immigration? What could you be talking about?

Calling the Senate Bill an "amnesty bill" is a smokescreen knowingly foisted on the American people, an intentionally misleading point of debate. If you fell into the trap of seeing the immigration reform bill in emotional humanitarian terms, you were "had." You should be angry. The so-called "amnesty bill" is in reality nothing but the next step in an intentional and unilateral dissolution of the borders of the United States of America to advance the North American Union, an act which renders unnecessary any future enforcement of the borders except as it relates to commerce and national security. With passage of the Trojan Horse "amnesty bill," national sovereignty ends and the United States becomes nothing more than a transshipment point between China, Mexico and Canada. The refusal to build the fence, reducing National Guard presence at the border, and the termination of passport requirements between Mexico and Canada are small parts of the larger implementation of the North American Union.

One more time for the record, there is not much time left to be an American. We had better do something very, very soon if we care.

Red State Patriot

Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).

Response by LS:
The politicians (of either party) who allowed the "Mexican Problem" to occur and who now want to grant amnesty to the millions of illegals whom they have allowed to invade us, should be publicly hung in Yankee Stadium.

« Close It

Though the kidnappers demanded that the US arrest and return the Shah to Iran, the main reason for the attack was to bring attention and popularity to the Mullah's version of how the revolution should proceed. It was a successful strike for the islamists to wrest the popular revolution from the hands of secular socialists, and morph it into a radical religious movement. Even when the embassy was taken, the "students" would periodically release "discovered evidence" to paint moderates or the mullah's domestic political enemies as CIA spies, or collaborators. They used this means to create a "terror" phase of the revolution reminiscent of the terror phase of the French Revolution. It is typical for revolutions go through this stage, but in Iran killings consolidated the hold of a political religious class. The dreams and aspirations of those members of Iranian society who dreamed of a post Shah Iran as a progressive, secular, state, evaporated as their political leaders will killed or driven into exile.

However, the grim, austere, joyless world view offered by the Mullahs and Sharia law does not enjoy much popular appeal in its application. The Mullahs discovered what so many revolutionaries did before, that running a country is much harder than whipping up the emotion necessary to overthrow it. Ahmadinijad and the Mullahs had to fall back on "the perpetual revolution" as discovered by Robespierre, Lenin, Mao, and Fidel Castro. Maintenance of loyalty to the revolution, and hence the regime, was dependant upon a constant struggle against outside powers who sought to overthrow the great revolution. While the Embassy hostages were still in Iran, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, sensing weakness in the chaos of post revolution Iran, attacked. The Mullah's revolution found a benefit in having a surplus of enemies. While the Iranian people felt besieged by Sunni Iraq, embargoed and vilified by the western world, and threatened by the "atheist" Soviet Union, the Mullahs did not need to offer anything attractive by way of governance. They merely had to call for unity in the face of enemies.

Ahmadinijad has problems at home. He and the Mullahs face a population that is one of the youngest in the world in terms of demographics. The Iraq war and the prolific birth rate have changed the face of the country he helped overthrow. Few of Iranians alive today were even born when the Americans were held hostage, and fewer still remember life under the Shah Pahlavi. The people of Iran are young and feel constrained by the oppressive rules of Sharia. They are using cell phones to transmit all sorts of subversive mpeg files to each other as humor, from a young woman using karate on the morality police who have come to chastise her for "indecency", to computer animations that transform Ahmadinijad's image into that of a monkey. While there is still a nationalist spirit and an autonomic hatred of the West, in practical terms the populace is tired of the Islamic Revolution. It is a very short step for them to stop supporting the regime, and make the intellectual leap to supporting western values in addition to the western lifestyle they crave. The moment that happens, Ahmadinijad and the Mullahs are out of power.

So, why is Ahmadinijad smiling? He is prepared to return to the successful tactics of his youth in politics. He can bolster his domestic powerbase by creating enemies which his public must fear. He can antagonize the West, and get sanctions so the economic problems aren't his government's fault. He can eliminate his political opponents and have them killed by claiming they are CIA spies. Finally, I suspect, he may plan to drastically reduce that burgeoning population of young people.

Ahmadinijad plans to launch a war. In earlier essays I discussed the means and methods by which Iran may choose to inflict nuclear terrorism on the United States and Israel. This suicidal tactic, a virtual "bomb belt" for his whole country, is very much in line with the martyr complex of Shiite Islam. Another, parallel maneuver he may implement as soon as this summer is also viable from his perspective. In fact, some of the recent developments across the Middle East may be preparatory maneuvers for just this action. Ahmadinijad may choose to launch another pan-Mid-East war this Fall along the lines of the 1967 Six-Day-War. Iranian controlled Hezbollah in Lebanon, combined with Syrian forces, may attack northern Israel and the Golan Heights. Hamas may have taken absolute military control of Gaza, so that it can launch a simultaneous ground offensive into Southern Israel, picking up "the Egyptian front." Iran would send forces to attack Israel, passing through northern Iraq (Kurdistan) to link up with Hezbollah and Syria. This would mean a massive Iranian army attempting to roll over the small U.S. force in Iraq, which has been re-tooled for peace keeping duties rather than large scale, heavy unit, maneuver warfare. No doubt that U.S. air superiority and advanced technology weapon systems will make mincemeat of the massive Iranian army, but that would suit Ahmadinijad just fine. The Iranian army will be composed of all those unreliable young men who may choose to reject Islamism, unless they personally suffer horribly at the hands of the Americans. The effect of the massive casualties would be magnified through out the remaining Iranian population, who would lose friends, relatives, lovers and children. The Mullahs could then take to the international, sympathetic airwaves, decrying the brutality of the U.S., and at home elevate a whole generation of good Shiite martyrs.

This is the strategy for the whole new generation of Islamic political leaders. They have yet to prove their strength of will, after having taken over from their fathers. Hafez Assad is gone, as are Arafat, Nasser, Yassin and Khomeini. For a new generation of Islamic political leaders, in Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and amongst the Palestinians, it would be a win-win war. They get to prove to their populations that they are willing to attack the Zionists and Crusaders rather than just talk about it, and simultaneously kill off a large, potentially uncontrollable part of their own population, all while fanning the fires of rage that sustain their legitimacy, without having to produce results.

As Osama bin Laden said, "the West values life, while we value death." Massive casualties are bad for our politicians, but good for theirs. One best not play games against opponents, unless you know what their win conditions are. One hopes that our political leaders have, like Thomas Jefferson's reading the Koran, taken the time to get to know our enemies.

By David Roth

Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).

Response from Mark L.
As Christians we know the ending don't we?

« Close It

Do twenty million illegal aliens constitute a “deluge?” Maybe a tsunami (tidal wave) is more accurate? You saw the devastation to coastal areas of the Indian Ocean from the 2004 tsunami that killed over 300,000 people, 168,000 in Indonesia alone.

As a tsunami approaches land, it takes on the characteristics of a violent onrushing tide, hence the name tidal wave. You saw the aftermath on television and in the print media; the destruction was almost total and death was everywhere.

While a tsunami is one of the deadliest of natural disasters, the effect of unrestrained illegal migration into the United States is no different than an onrushing tide. The migration tsunami could have been, but was not blocked at the shores. The devastation has reached every corner of America and harmed every family. Economic destabilization and criminal destruction is widespread. Entire communities have been culturally overrun, some obliterated. Millions of American lives have been irreparably altered. It could have been prevented. The laws were in place. Politicians simply refused to permit law enforcement agencies to enforce the laws. As a result, 3-5,000 Americans have died annually in the tsunami at the hands of illegal aliens. Maybe one of the victims was your child or loved one. Entire generations of families have been destroyed by gang violence. Human trafficking and drug smuggling has never been worse in the history of the United States. More Spanish than English is being spoken in public schools. The children of American citizens are not being educated. Emergency room physicians have become the family doctors of illegal aliens. Entire hospitals have closed – bankrupt - required by our government to provide free medical care. Gasoline prices are artificially high caused in part by the extra demand created by millions of illegal aliens for products intended for consumption by Americans. It could have been stopped. Why did our Congressman willfully allow this to happen? Why did our President? Why do they allow it to continue?

As I sat Thursday evening, June 7th and watched Hannity and Combs on the Fox television network, the disgust I felt was palpable. I thought to myself, “Why doesn’t anyone understand?” Politicians are hugely profiting from the carnage being inflicted on American citizens. They are recklessly and intentionally facilitating our nation’s extermination in pursuit of their own self-interest, an assertion not disputed by anyone but an ideologue. There can be no other explanation than self-interest for the inaction to enforce existing laws - short of insanity.

How can it be that everyday liberals and conservatives, good decent folks, don’t understand that there is nothing wrong with the existing immigration laws? Nobody – not one person you will talk to - can tell you what specific part of the current immigration law is flawed – only that they don’t like it, say that it is unenforceable, or believe that somehow it isn’t “fair.” Congress, if you asked, would tell you they are all-seeing and all-knowing, but strangely didn’t find anything wrong in 1986 when they passed the last immigration reform legislation and distributed 2.7 million "green cards." Surely they wouldn’t have knowingly passed a flawed immigration bill?

Amnesty for millions was the 1986 solution to our government’s having failed (willfully) to enforce earlier immigration laws. In 1986 we trusted that Congress, including John McCain who voted against amnesty in 1986, would enforce the newest immigration law rather than find a way to profit from it. Regrettably, so did President Ronald Reagan who signed the first amnesty legislation into law.

Think of it this way. Just because Congress passed the legislation to provide equipment to the troops, they voted against funding it. Just because Congress passed the legislation to build a border wall last year, they made no effort to fund the construction. The administration has kept reducing the total miles of border fencing. To date, only 3 miles have been built. The funds intended for the border wall have been diverted by the Administration to other uses.

Clearly, the President and Congress have made only a token public relations effort to implement the legislation that authorized a border fence. Arguably, more efforts have been made to obstruct the legislation than enforce it – just as probably occurred with earlier attempts at immigration reform.

It is quite possible there is one or two paragraphs in the 1986 law that could be improved by rewording it, fine – but there is not one thing that justifies scrapping the law. There is no excuse for not having enforced immigration laws for 21 years. What if we waited 21 years to rebuild the levies in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, and spent the money elsewhere?

While it probably should have been obvious in 1986, the virus of refusing to enforce existing laws was already firmly established and spreading across society. I don’t think the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta has a cure for moral and ethical degeneracy. It is not that our laws are broken; it is our law enforcement that is broken. It is our President, Congressmen and Governors that are broken.

The bill before the U.S. Senate has an insidious intent that has not been recognized.

The instant the “comprehensive immigration reform” bill passes, widely criticized as incoherent but skillfully crafted, not only will all illegal aliens in the United States suddenly become ‘legal,’ all future illegal aliens will have an instant path to entry and legalization. In deadly reality, the Senate's immigration reform bill puts an end, once and for all, to the concept of “illegal alien.” There will never again be another illegal alien. Immigration enforcement will become as unnecessary as a border wall. The intent of this cunning "comprehensive immigration reform legislation" is that the border itself will constructively disappear with the stroke of President Bush’s pen.

The immigration reform bill, about to be imposed on United States citizens, is but the ultimate subterfuge to dissolve the United States of America and transform what remains into the controversial borderless North American Union (NAU). American citizens have been taken to the proverbial cleaners. Many members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives are complicit, chief among them Arizona's Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl. With the President’s signature on the immigration reform bill, the United States of America will immediately begin the process of dissolution. National sovereignty will have ended once and for all and assimilation into the NAU will accelerate. The lid on your coffin will have been nailed shut. There is very little time remaining to be an American.

Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).

Response by David C.:
Why don't they just make Mexico a state and be done with it? One huge welfare state. For whatever reason, Bush simply does not want a fence or apparently, even a border. What makes him think that way? Is it truly just pressure from corporations who want cheap labor or could there be more to it than that? If Congress allows all the illegal’s to become citizens, I guess we should just open up our country to the whole world. Do away with ALL immigration laws. That's effectively what they are doing.

« Close It

Kudos, Rudy Giuliani!

Regardless of philosophy or ideology, why is it not time for every candidate for President of the United States to provide their unique list of personal commitments to the American people – not only what they will endeavor to do, but what they pledge they will not do? I would also like to see added to Rudy Giulani's list a few statements that begin with “I will not ….”

Every politician, who has any desire of being elected to public office, at any level of government, should be willing to provide specific written commitments to those citizens from whom they are seeking votes. With a similar yardstick of measurement from each candidate, not so much a platform as a pledge, voting citizens will have some basis to know if a candidate is a con-artist serving self-interest, pursuing an ideological agenda of special interests, a fugitive from a psychiatric ward, or truly serving the interests of the nation and fellow United States’ citizens.

Many politicians currently refuse to reveal their agenda, or attempt to conceal it in ambiguous terms. For example, will Hilrya Rodhamovich Clintonov will once again seek to nationalize healthcare? Will John McCain seek to legalize the presence of 20 million illegal aliens in the United States and fund their social needs at taxpayer expense? Will Barrack O’bama attempt to end racial discrimination in any form at every institution in America, or will he expand preferences for selective “minorities,” given that he embraces the "black only" racist precepts of his church and pastor. Will John Edwards initiate national tort reform and put an end to destructive frivilous litigation? Will Al Gore pursue a global warming agenda? Will Mitt Romney support homosexual marriage or attempt to implement a form of socialized medicine as he did in the State of Massachusetts?

One thing is for sure, the competition between Senator John McCain and Governor Mitt Romney will probably become increasingly caustic in the months ahead, to the disadvantage of Mitt Romney. Either McCain believes in the fantasy that he still has a chance for the Republican Party's presidential nomination, or he is maliciously determined to take Mitt Romney and maybe the United States down with him.

Which of the candidates recognizes the growing peril to the United States the longer the Islamic Wars are allowed to fester without decisive victory? Few seem to recognize the mortal danger from Islam. Which of the candidates will provide Israel with any and all measure of needed support? None have said as much. Which candidate would withdraw from the Middle East and in doing so, waste the ultimate sacrifice of the thousands of soldiers wounded and killed, not to mention the genocide that would almost certainly follow a withdrawal? Which candidate will propose that we “win” in this millenium's Islamic Wars and let the military do whatever it takes to get the job done without interference from the media, politicians, and lawyers? Only Rudi Giuliani has declared that we must win.

Which candidate will indemnify American soldiers from persecution (short of their having committed an abhorent atrocity) for doing their job to the best of their ability within realistic rules of engagement provided by their superiors? No candidate has been willing to provide anything close to that kind of leadership support. Which presidential candidate will not try to "manage" the war from the White House, a political feat that has doomed every military engagement since WWII (except Grenada and Panama)? The record of lost or abandoned armed conflicts since WWII, after expending thousands of American lives (e.g., Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm, Bosnia, Somalia) speaks for itself.

Which candidate will build the border fence, which just happens to be the least expensive and most efficient of every conceivable alternative to control illegal migration? Which candidate for President of the United States will seek out and prosecute the fraudulent use of Social Security identification numbers and stolen identities? Which candidate would enforce all existing federal laws, including immigration laws?

How can a candidate profess that they will defend America from terrorism, foreign invasion, and criminal victimization by illegal aliens - when they support an open-borders agenda? Which candidate will support enforcement and defense of United States borders rather than allow zealot prosecutors to persecute the Border Patrol?

Which candidate will shrink the size and scope of government, reducing taxes and costly regulation in the process? Which candidate will commit to restoring constitutional government? Which candidate cares more about the United States of America than himself?

Which candidate will pledge to hold the New York Times, individual Congressmen, and staff members, accountable for revealing classified information or engaging in sedition and treason? Who among the candidates will support equal justice under the law for all Americans instead of a two-tiered system favoring the elites? Who among the candidates will listen to the will of the people? It is one thing to hold Washington, D.C. accountable and quite another to shrink Washington, D.C., a voracious and arrogant ogre which is attempting to control and regulate every waking moment of every American citizen.

The Bill of Rights and private property are all but gone. Which candidate will restore liberty to its fullest extent?

Which candidate will support the 2nd Amendment without attempting to further limit the constitutional right to bear arms? Which candidate will take the profound steps necessary to stem the flow of corporations fleeing this nation’s government, taking with them American technology and jobs? Which candidate will reduce government regulation and taxation being used by Congressmen principally to enrich themselves? Which candidate will make the committment to put an instant end to the insanity of a North American Union?

Give Rudy Giuliani credit. He gets it, and he just may be the only one who does.

Most of the candidates for President of the United States probably could not articulate, in the correct order, the Bill of Rights - even if it was their last conscious act. I would confidently wager Rudy Giuliani can. I wouldn't bet against Mitt Romney. Mr. Giuliani, if you will add to your list a few of the things you promise not to do, and you will have not only my vote, but more votes than you can count.

Peter S.

Red State Patriot: If you share the values expressed by Rudy Giuliani, you are encouraged to validate your support for these principles by signing the petition posted at: http://www.joinrudy2008.com/commit.php

« Close It

Sen. John Kyl of Arizona has emerged as the amnesty bill's conservative promoter. So it appears that Kyl has left the Rule of Law officer corps.

In a recent column,* Senator Kyl justified his stance by suggesting he had a choice between helping to author a compromise or to stand on the sidelines and watch the passage of a much more liberal bill written by Democrat leaders. (Editorial comment: It is hard to imagine the bill could have been any more liberal short of deleting the borders entirely and repudiating United States sovereignty, which is the ultimate outcome of the current amnesty bill – just another “slow bleed” strategy.)

I simply don't accept the idea that those are our only choices. When given the choice between standing with the Constitution and the Rule of Law, or compromising my principles to get the lesser of two evils, I must uphold the Constitution and Rule of Law every time. (Emphasis added)

Back on the ship, the crew of the "U.S.S. America", 144 million strong, trims the sails, swabs the deck, cooks in the galley, cares for the sick, bails the bilge, and steers the course. The passengers number an additional 156 million, including: the retired who have had their turn at the oars, the children who will get their turn, the unemployed who want their turn, and welfare recipients who are unenthusiastic about taking their turn. In all, the ship is carrying an untapped group of nearly 70 million working age passengers who are simply not in the workforce.

Perhaps Sen. Kyl would explain his willingness to legalize stowaways because of so-called "trigger" provisions in the bill. Those measures don't actually do anything. The very first lines of the bill provide an exception to the triggers for most every stowaway. Effectively, most of them could be legal with a "Z" visa the day after this bill was signed by the President.

Two decades have passed since the 1986 amnesty "to end all amnesties". More than 20 years later, we know that the Immigration Reform and Control Act legalized three million stowaways, not one million as we were promised. That 300% increase was the result of fraud driven by a counterfeit document industry which sprung up to meet the new demand. Perhaps the trigger for considering a new amnesty ought to be full implementation of the security provisions contained in the last.

No matter the arguments of Captain Bush and his open borders officers, you and I know that more than 20 million stowaways will be given amnesty to stay on board. According to a study by the Heritage Foundation, the real number will rise well above 100 million.

All this, despite the fact that 90% of the illegal drugs on board were smuggled onto our ship by these stowaways. Captain Bush and his officers will not order them off even though 28% of court-martial convictions are stowaways. They will not order them off "America" even though the stowaways represent only 7% of those on board and produce only 2.2% of the work. Instead of amnesty for stowaways, what America needs is for some of the passengers to become crew. The Rule of Law officers need only to recruit ten working age passengers not currently at the oars to replace all of the 7 million working stowaways.

Taking on too many passengers or unskilled crew will slow and eventually sink "America". But none of these facts have been enough to sway President Bush and the open borders officers.

If we simply enforce our current laws, millions of stowaways, both those working and those along for the ride, will voluntarily disembark at the next port of entry. Their departure would immediately reduce the burden on the ship's supplies and crew.

"America" has granted its stowaways amnesty six times since the "amnesty to end all amnesties". This time, the captain and the open borders officers mean to forever sail off course of the Rule of Law, taking aboard every willing traveler. Unfortunately, some fellow officers from the Rule of Law corps have joined the effort to steer a new course.

This time it will truly be an "Amnesty to End All Amnesties". Because this time, if "America" legalizes all its stowaways, she will certainly sink.

Rep. King was elected to Iowa's 5th District in 2002. He sits on the House Judiciary Committee and its Constitution and Immigration subcommittees.

For the original article, see: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20870
* http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/0520kyl20.html

The cartoon appended to this article was received from a reader via the internet, and was not originally published by the artist (Ramirez) containing the possible identity of the elephant in the bottom of the bottle.

Comments are welcome at redstatepatriot@hughes.net. Please include the title of the article as your subject line. Selected responses, in whole or part, may be published (appended to the article).

« Close It