…in a week. I’m tired of blogging, and I have projects that require my attention. Coincidentally, the Republican National Convention is this week. I doubt I’ll watch it.
{ 30 comments }
From the monthly archives:
August 2004
I. That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety….
III. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community; of all the various modes and forms of government that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, whenever any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.
IV. That no man, or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the community, but in consideration of public services; which, not being descendible, neither ought the offices of magistrate, legislator, or judge be hereditary.
— From the Virginia Declaration of Rights
{ 24 comments }
Warning: Another long one!
This post may be referred to as “Part I” as I collect my thoughts on a Saturday morning. I never intended to blog about illegal immigration all week, but this post started it. After it received so many comments, I conducted further research and read reports, etc., to understand the policy implications of illegal immigration.
A few commenters grappled with what Christians should be doing/thinking about illegal immigration. These folks got my attention but never really fleshed out their thoughts. I will attempt to do so.
Let’s put aside the economic, social and cultural burdens illegal aliens impose on this country. From an economic standpoint, California is bearing enormous costs because of free medical care and overcrowding of government schools, for example. The budget shortfall in California is staggering ($38 billion? $40 billion?). Keep in mind that Governor Gray Davis was recalled for this reason.
It is not “un-Christian” to support restricted immigration into one’s country. It is not “un-Christian” to advocate deportation of illegal aliens. I challenge anyone to find in Scripture where such a concept is even hinted at.
Here’s the problem that arises when discussing biblical issues. In our secular society, humanistic philosophy is the norm. The Bible and God have been pushed out of government schools and the public sphere, and our society in general prefers that religious beliefs be kept private. In this regard, we don’t discuss these things in “mixed company.”
When referencing biblical things and speculating on “what Jesus would do,” there is a tendency among believers and unbelievers to argue philosophically rather than scripturally. I understand this temptation, especially when one doesn’t know what the Bible says about certain things. See Jesse Jackson’s Liberal Jesus, for example.
As a Christian, I look at it this way. My brothers and sisters in Christ come in all colors, shapes, sizes and countries. My fellow Christ followers are in Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Russia — in every country on the planet, including Mexico.
Among illegal aliens I have brothers and sisters in Christ. The call to share the Gospel with unbelievers and worship a merciful and gracious God with believers doesn’t stop at our national borders. God saves all kind of men, and all kinds of men are my fellow inheritors of Christ’s bounty!
However, I am not required to ignore or oppose justice against lawbreakers, even if they are believers. Government is supposed to punish lawbreakers, and Christian criminals are not excepted. God appointed men to authority and laid down the function and role of government. In that same vein, as an aside, it is not unbiblical to support war. I’ve written about the role of government and a biblical view of war in a few posts:
{ 51 comments }
A few announcements:
- Remember the freelance writer who wrote “Blogging Brothers (and Sisters)” for NRO? He and his friend Stephen have started blogging (using nicknames). Welcome to the blogosphere!
- See this week’s installments of the Christian Carnival and Carnival of the Vanities.
- No Walter Williams live on the Rush Limbaugh Show today.
{ 5 comments }
La Reconquista! When I read Pat Buchanan’s book two years ago, I thought it was alarmist. He’s overstating his case to scare people, I thought. Not anymore.
Buchanan’s main points are easily verifiable by simply observing the culture. By 2050, America will be a Third World nation. With the influx of non-assimilating cultures, I see it happening as clear as day (although I probably won’t be around to see it). From Publisher’s Weekly:
“Historians may one day call ‘the pill’ the suicide tablet of the West,” writes former presidential candidate Buchanan in this cri de coeur regarding the perils that await Western civilization. And he is correct in his assessment that the advent of artificial contraception brought about huge changes in the ways American and European cultures dealt with sex, children and family. Buchanan, a staunch Roman Catholic and a conservative, feels that these changes were socially and politically disastrous.Worried about the declining birth rate of European-Americans and increased immigration from nonwhite countries, Buchanan predicts that people who are now celebrating diversity “will spend their golden years in a Third World America.” Along with shifting racial demographics, Buchanan also frets about the changes in morality “rampant promiscuity and wholesale divorce and tax-payer funding of abortion.” Buchanan is equally upfront about his position on homosexuality: “had the killers of Matthew Shepard chosen a sixteen-year-old girl rather than a twenty-one-year-old gay man, her rape-murder would have been to me an even greater evil.” Fearful that American is being “de-Christianized,” Buchanan argues that “while the prognosis is not good,” America must reevaluate itself and reclaim its white, Christian origins; despite the current “coarseness of her manners, the decadence of her culture, or the sickness in her soul,” the nation is worth saving. Buchanan’s passionately expressed ideology will be too extreme for most readers, and its proud bigotry is unlikely to play well even among most conservatives.
{ 56 comments }
From the Associated Press:
A claim of responsibility for the downing of two Russian planes appeared on a Web site known for militant Muslim comment Friday.The statement, which accused Russians of killing Muslims in Chechnya, was signed “the Islambouli Brigades.” A group with a similar name has claimed at least one previous attack, but the legitimacy of the group and the authenticity of such statements could not be verified.
Russian officials have said terrorism was the most likely cause of Tuesday’s plane crashes, which killed 89 people.
“We in the Islambouli Brigades announce that our holy warriors managed to hijack two Russian planes and were crowned with success though they faced problems at the beginning,” the statement said without elaborating on the problems.
This is the epitome of evil, just in case some of you don’t know what it looks like.
See stories from the Herald Sun and the BBC. But, alas, there’s good news. The “holy” temple in Najaf is still standing! All’s well with the world! Maybe the Islamofacists hiding in our country (and laughing at our suicidal stupidity) will take their toys and go home now.
Or not.
(Hat tip: Ramblings’ Journal)
Update I: Muslims For Bush
(Hat tip: One Hand Clapping)
Update II: I just heard on the news that homicidal bombers brought down the two planes. Looks like the Russians will have to impanel an 8/24 Commission. Islamofascism must be contained by any means necessary.
Update III: This is a darn shame: Al Qaeda May Target Veterans Hospitals, U.S. Says. Just think, some of the potential Middle Eastern thug murderers may have slipped in through our southern border. We’ll certainly here about it if any veterans hospital is attacked.
{ 24 comments }
Yuck. I’m stuck between MoveOn.org and Liberal Oasis. And I don’t know what Scripting News is.
{ 5 comments }
I’ve often asked, “Who’s advising Bush and what was he/she thinking?” I’ve never paid much attention to Karl Rove, who apparently stays behind the scenes (in hiding?). As President Bush’s “chief strategist”, he’s giving the leader of the free world some dumb advice.
Take the amnesty for illegal aliens scheme, for example. If I ever met him in person, he wouldn’t like me — just like liberals out there in the blogosphere — because I’d tell him exactly what I think of his advice. Dump Karl Rove!
Yesterday’s illegal immigration post was sort of contentious. I like a rigorous discussion, and illegal immigration is an issue that needs to be discussed. Our country can’t afford not to. Some people are so afraid of being called a “racist.” I’m not one of those people. Encouraging more Mexican immigrants to swarm into the country illegally was a dumb idea. But I guess Rove thought that pandering to Hispanics was the way to go. Good luck with all that.
It’s times like these when I’m glad I’m not a registered Republican. It’s funny how some black liberals castigate me for “espousing partisan rhetoric” and advise me to be “more independent”, and they’re the ones who are registered Democrats “espousing” their own rhetoric! Hypocrites. Wake me up when it’s over.
{ 53 comments }
No, it’s not a reference to the Democratic candidates.
It’s all about the voters in Florida, who can’t seem to cast a simple ballot. I hope they don’t embarrass the country this time around. Taxpayers’ money would be well-spent on mass copies of such a book.
According to liberal race-mongering hounds, we black folks just can’t seem to do anything right. Check out this paranoid article I found in a paper called In These Times, subtitled Independent News and Views (yeah, OK). Juan Gonzalez writes about the apparent ineptitude…I mean, disenfranchisement of black voters in Florida.
To Bush loyalists [Is he talking about me?], and cynics in general, these statistics prove only that many uneducated black voters haven’t a clue as to what they’re doing in the voting booth — and if they can’t read instructions and lose their vote, that’s their problem. [It's my problem?] It is clear, however, that badly designed ballots in some counties made things worse. [Bureaucratic sloppiness is now called "racism."] Palm Beach’s butterfly ballot is already the stuff of legend. In Duval County, the official sample ballot produced by the county’s Republican canvassing board instructed voters to “vote on every page” and listed all presidential candidates on a single page. But the actual ballot, only half the size of the sample, listed the candidates on two pages and directed, in small print: “Vote appropriate pages.”In reality, no one in Florida was prepared for the enormous turnout of black voters on Election Day. While 540,000 blacks voted in the 1996 presidential election, this year 893,00 showed up at the polls, a 65 percent increase. That number would have been even greater were it not for the hundreds and perhaps thousands of blacks denied the right to vote because their names did not appear on voter rolls or because they had been mistakenly purged as convicted felons [We just can't seem to cope with life's unfairness]. And of course, it does not include the 400,000 black men who, because of a single felony conviction, are banned for life from voting in the Sunshine State. [Poor felons..., I mean fellas.]
As is typical of liberal hysteria and hype, Gonzalez is incorrect about the “enormous turnout” of black voters, at least according to Frank J. Murray, writing for the Washington Times:
Widely quoted assertions that black voters cast 15 percent of Florida’s ballots in the 2000 presidential election are wrong far beyond any acceptable margin of error, The Washington Times has learned.
Official computerized reports obtained by The Times, identifying each voter by name and race, contradict claims that turnout by blacks has increased by more than 50 percent since 1996. Contrary to all reports, black voters on Nov. 7 constituted 10 percent of Florida’s turnout — 610,616 by actual count, as opposed to estimates that routinely top 900,000.
Simply achieving the widely reported 15 percent share of the turnout of 6,086,109 would require that an unheard of 97.7 percent of all black registered voters had gone to the polls. “People just throw out statistics. Where do they get this stuff? It’s basically a guess,” Clayton Roberts, who heads the Florida Division of Elections, told The Times before the full file was assembled.
The actual 10 percent black share of the votes cast on Nov. 7 rose only slightly from 1996’s official record, when blacks cast 9.5 percent of the 5.4 million votes.
But who cares about facts when there’s racial tension to stir up?
{ 22 comments }
Back in April, I blogged about Ralph Nader’s presidential run and wished him all the best. I also blogged about the Congressional Black Caucus’s frustration over their powerlessness when Republicans are in the White House. Lately I’ve been reading about the so-called Nader Effect, and it is my fervent wish that it grows to gigantic proportions. MSNBC says:
Democrats fear that Nader’s presence on the ballot in places such as Wisconsin might tilt the election to Bush — or at least might force Kerry to divert advertising, money and staff to states where he’d be comfortably ahead, were it not for Nader.In the final week of the campaign, for instance, Kerry might need to spend three days appealing to voters in Florida, but might be pulled away to shore up support in Wisconsin and Oregon, if polls showed Nader drawing anti-Bush voters there….
lthough exit poll data from 2000 is too scanty to prove that Nader cost Al Gore the election, Democrats believe that he did.
And Democrats’ anxiety over Nader reflects Kerry’s weakness as a candidate. With a stronger Democratic candidate in 1996, Nader was merely a curiosity, not a menace. That year, Nader running as Green Party presidential candidate won 685,000 votes, but Bill Clinton coasted to re-election.
This November, if Nader won only the same number of votes as he did in 1996, but if they were cast in the “wrong” states from Kerry’s point of view, it could cost Kerry.
Of course, no one knows how all this is going to turn out. I’m dismayed that most polls seem to show President Bush behind John Kerry. I just don’t understand why a man like Kerry is polling so closely. If I were the paranoid type, I’d think something was up.
Having John Kerry as president wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world, I suppose. Hopefully the Nader Effect will have an enormous effect.
Perhaps America deserves to have a man like John Kerry as its leader. It will be a just punishment for allowing the mass slaughter of the unborn.
{ 14 comments }
This morning I awoke to a headline similar to this: “Bush Campaign Lawyer Tied to Veterans.” My first thought was, “So what?” The veterans asked one of Bush’s lawyers for advice on what to do about John Kerry’s attack dogs.
Benjamin Ginsberg told the New York Times that yes, he’d spoken to the veterans. I could almost hear the air seeping out of the Bush-haters’ partisan balloons. I guess they thought he’d lie like someone else they know. Via the AFP:
“The truth is there are very few lawyers who work in this area … What happened was a month or so ago some decorated Vietnam vets came to me and said: ‘We have an important point of view to enter into the debate. There’s a new law that’s complicated, and we want help complying with the law.’”He added, “I have given them some legal compliance advice.”
A Bush spokesman said there was no connection between the Bush campaign and his Vice President Dick Cheney and independent groups like Swift boat veterans, called 527’s for the section of the tax code that created them.
While I believe he should have used better judgment, I don’t think Ginsberg needed to do this: “Lawyer Advising Vets Quits Bush Campaign.” He said:
“I cannot begin to express my sadness that my legal representations have become a distraction from the critical issues at hand in this election,” Benjamin Ginsberg wrote in a resignation letter to Bush released by the campaign.“I feel I cannot let that continue, so I have decided to resign as national counsel to your campaign to ensure that the giving of legal advice to decorated military veterans, which was entirely within the boundaries of the law, doesn’t distract from the real issues upon which you and the country should be focusing.”
I really hate all this divisiveness between liberals and conservatives. I really do. In the words of a famous philosopher (Rodney King, April 1992), can’t we all just get along?
Side note: Rush Limbaugh was out yesterday and today. Let’s hope he’s still out on Friday so we can hear Walter Williams guest hosting! In his latest column, he has a word or two for you appeaser-types in the audience.
{ 32 comments }
Update: Malkin’s latest: “Bipartisan Betrayal At The Borders.”
Warning: Long-Winded, Rambling, Somewhat Verbose Illegal Immigration Rant Ahead.
I am not a racist. I’m a realist. I’d rather be living under government-sanctioned racial segregation than in this pitiful, politically correct, culturally decaying place.
(Do I really want to live under Jim Crow? Of course not, but I wanted to get the point across that our culture continues to decay at a rapid pace. If I could experience in my lifetime just a sense of national pride and unity in this country, I’d be willing to forgo a few privileges.)
This world is upside down. Right is now wrong and the perverse is the norm. Sound reasoning…no, forget that…The instinct to survive has been suppressed by an irrational, hare-brained desire to be “tolerant” and open even if it means the end of our way of life and our very lives.
You see, liberals believe that Bush should have done more to stop the terrorist attacks, but criticize law enforcement officials for racial profiling and inquiring about citizenship status of suspects. While liberals contend that Bush could’ve stopped the attacks, they don’t believe targeting young Arab men is the way to do it.
My indignation was prompted after spotting a copy of the 9/11 Commission’s report, a thick 500+ page book. I’d read the Executive Summary, or some such nonsense, last month. What the book doesn’t contain is not surprising, given the suicidal tendencies of our cultural elite.
For our tax dollars, a group of “bipartisan” policy wonks had no deport-them-back-where-they-came-from kind of suggestions. Instead they spouted the same weak-kneed mumbo jumbo that made us vulnerable in the first place and offered similar inane reasoning that will lead to another attack. (Did you know that Middle Eastern men are sneaking across the southern border along with Mexicans?)
My prediction: If George Bush and his cronies don’t seal up the southern border or at least allow border agents to threaten to shoot border jumpers, the next commission — 4/13, 11/21, 12/25, whatever — will conclude what the 9/11 Commission concluded: immigration enforcement in the United States is slack, but we still don’t want you to do anything about it.
{ 61 comments }
A performance “artist” plans to lynch the Confederate flag in protest of the Republican convention! What, praytell, does that flag have to do with Republicans? It was Democrats who flew and fought under it.
The lynching ceremony, titled, “The Proper Way to Hang a Confederate Flag,” will kick off an exhibition called “Recoloration Proclamation: The Gettysburg Redress” by artist John Sims. It also will feature Confederate flags that Sims has rendered in alternate colors, including African liberation colors and two “drag flags” done in pink and lavender and trimmed with spangles.But it is the elaborate lynching ceremony — an act of symbolically “killing” the Confederate flag — that will bring him and numbers of Southern heritage defenders to Gettysburg, according to Edgerton.
What an inane idea.
Does this fall under the definition of “hate speech”, or are “hateful” thoughts toward Southerners fair game?
Addendum: FYI, I think Southerners or whoever have the right to display the Confederate flag in support of their heritage or just because they like the way it looks hanging outside their houses.
{ 48 comments }
Is Allen Iverson wondering where the rest of his boys are? Are they afraid of a little beheading, perhaps?
Rudy Gersten, writing for National Review Online, says some of the National Basketball Association (NBA) players selected for the Olympic team who’ve bowed out for “security concerns” are cowards.
In Basketball’s Girly Boys, he writes:
The list of perennial NBA All Stars that either declined invitations or withdrew after previously agreeing to play is quite impressive: Tracy McGrady, Shaquille O’Neal, Kobe Bryant, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, Jason Kidd, Mike Bibby, Jermaine O’Neal, Vince Carter, Elton Brand, Kenyon Martin, and Ben Wallace — to name just a few.
Many of these players have not been shy about why they refused to play for Team U.S.A. Wallace and fellow NBA championship teammate Richard Hamilton quit the Olympic team for “security reasons,” according to the Detroit Free Press. Even though their own head coach, Larry Brown, is the head coach of the Olympic squad, both players were apparently not as brave. Same goes for Kidd, O’Neal, McGrady, and Wallace — all of whom cited “security concerns” as their primary reason not to play.
Several of these players will be in the basketball Hall of Fame one day. But there ought to be an asterisk next to each of their names, to let generations to come know that they decided not to represent our country in the Olympics while America was at war.
Whoa! I like it. Gersten is invoking an antiquated concept I often refer to on this blog: shame. I like this definition: “A condition of disgrace or dishonor; ignominy.”
Antiquated, as I said.
Gertsen notes that it is the Americans who have a “security concerns” issue, naming Yao Ming, Dirk Nowitski, Vlade Divac, Tony Parker, Steve Nash, Manu Ginobili, and Pau Gasol among the players who are overseas playing for the U.S.
“[W]e have not heard of a single foreign-born player who declined to play for his country because of safety concerns,” Gersten writes.
You know what I think of men who are selected for a position of honor to represent their country but then back out because they’re afraid of anti-American sentiment. In my estimation, the sentiment is all the more reason to proudly represent your country, with the American flag in tow.
Hey, maybe their concerned about making their children orphans or their wives widows. Who knows?
{ 33 comments }
I thought it would never happen. This man has written something I can endorse. Being the partisans that we both are, it’s not easy.
In his latest column, “GOP’s Rainbow Coalition Is For Real,” Hutchinson writes:
Civil rights leaders and black Democrats mercilessly ridicule the Republicans for their plans to parade black gospel choirs, mariachi strollers and American Indian dance groups across the stage at the Republican National Convention in 2000. They call it a cheap publicity stunt to woo black and Latino voters. They’re wrong.This year the Republican National Committee boasts that minorities will make up a record nearly 20 percent of the delegates at their New York convention. Democrats still insist this is mere GOP flim-flam on diversity….
The Republicans newfound emphasis on diversity, however, is not a political con act. It was forced on them by changing political realities. Blacks, Latinos and Asians now make up nearly one-third of America’s population, and, with increased immigration and their higher birth rates, their population will continue to rise. The current estimate: By 2050, whites will no longer make up the majority of America’s population.
I don’t like the word “diversity” as used in the context of skin color. It leaves a bitter taste. Regardless of the original intent of its usage, it’s now associated with race in my mind, and I find the whole thing odious, no matter how well-intentioned. However…
I applaud the GOP for pursuing minorities (that was hard to say). Love it or hate it, I believe Republicans could attract blacks if they set the right “look.” We’re very visual creatures, and image counts.
I don’t want to shut out Hutchinson’s other views, so in an effort to be more objective or whatever the current fad is, here’s the link to his personal site. Read and judge for yourselves.
{ 13 comments }
