Wednesday, June 26, 2013

The Big Problem With the Amnesty Bill

I'm not excited about the new amnesty bill heading to the House, for reasons of:

  • Flooding the job market with relatively unskilled, uneducated competition for unemployed Americans

  • The new "immigrants" - really, those who were so self-centered as to break the law to enable themselves to bypass normal immigration laws - will be permitted to avail themselves of all kinds of services, as long as they have a kid. No, the illegal will TECHNICALLY not be eligible for welfare and other benefits. However, the kid will - and guess who will be collecting that money on behalf of the young citizen?

  • It continues to encourage uncontrolled entry into the USA.

  • Border control is NOT mandatory. It is "nice IF the administration feels like doing it, but failure to impose will not affect the status of the newly Democratic voter".

  • NO requirement that the newly amnestied learn English, acquaint themselves with our customs, laws, culture, or norms, or pay back for any benefits they have already received. God forbid that they have to follow the same rules as the taxpayers. Crimes are ignored, including use of ID, drunken driving, and gang activity.

But, other than that, there are major problems, as shown in today's National Review post. What John Fonte calls "patriotic integration" is ignored.

Alexander’s “patriotic integration” proposals were incorporated into both the 2006 and 2007 immigration bills. They called for the “patriotic integration of prospective citizens into the American way of life by providing civics, history, and English . . . with a special emphasis on attachment to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, the heroes of American history (including military heroes) and the meaning of the Oath of Allegiance.”

Isn't that all retro nonsense?

No. How can we expect these new citizens to begin thinking of themselves as Americans, unless we purposefully teach them what that means? Without some effort to bring them into our culture, they will remain separate.

That way lays tribalism, a concept that keeps permanent divisions between the sub-groups. In other countries, they have tribal groups that NEVER integrate - in Japan (even after generations living in the country, Koreans are NOT accepted), the Mideast (Shia and Sunni, but also Kurds, Christians, and Jews), and even France (the Basques, historically, but more recently, Algerians and other Muslims).

This has generally not been the case in America. Only a few small groups are separate - the Amish and other groups that marry along religious lines. After 1 or 2 generations, most immigrants start "mixing it up", producing the typical American mix.

Most of us have some idea of our family heritage. Over time, it gets more muddled, and only a few distinct customs differentiate us from our neighbors.

Regardless of the degree of intermarriage in a given family, it was always expected that the individuals would be taught basic American law, custom, and political structure. They would know the basic history of our country, and the individuals that were responsible for it.

Isn't that history exclusionist?

No. Everyone can be a part of it - most minority groups contributed in their own way. But, I'm against making things up. An example of that is the new push to teach children that Muslims were involved in America from the first.

Well, yes, they were involved in early history - but I want to maintain my right to point out that, at that time, that included such things as the earliest use of Marines in a foreign war - against the Barbary Pirates. Other than that, nope, not until around the 20th century.

Does their lack of inclusion in early American History indicate that they aren't a part of America today?

No, any more than pointing out that no Asians signed the Declaration of Independence or Constitution. They just didn't have sufficient numbers here, at that time.

That's OK. LOTS of Americans are latecomers to the American Experience. Doesn't make them less of an American. Being here early doesn't make anyone more American.

What makes you an American is that you buy into those concepts of freedom, self-government, pursuit of happiness, and all that stuff. You can walk off the plane, learn about them, and say, "Yeah, I agree" - and become an American in your heart (and, eventually, in reality, once you fulfill all of those requirements of residency, learning about our culture and laws, and paperwork).

Try that in most of the world - can't be done. There, it's all about the bloodlines.

Here, we accept you, no matter what your color, religion, or accent.

Does that mean that EVERYONE will love you? No. A few will never accept you, or your kids.

But, for almost all of us, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, or any other immigrant, and their descendants are Americans.

Tuesday, June 25, 2013

If You Still Wonder What Is Going On...

...Read here.

And here.

I'm beginning to feel like John Adams in 1776 - does anyone see what I see?  Does anyone hear what I hear?

Obama is not uniquely anti-American.  By anti-American, I mean that he is RULING (not serving as an executive) like a 3rd World Dictator.  He makes his Pronouncements (Executive Orders), and the Peasants and Middle-Class of HIS country must fall in line with his RULE.

There's a reason we have elected Representatives and Senators - their role is Legislative, and it serves as a check on despotism.

No more.  We have rule by fiat.

There have been Presidents who tried to run everything THEIR way before - Lincoln, during the Civil War, basically was a one-man ruler.  Wilson, in whose term we had the Palmer Raids, ignored such niceties as Constitutional Rights.  By comparison, Nixon was a pussycat - and he, unlike his predecessors, got slapped down by Congress.

Obama's agenda is screamingly Leftist, with a CAPITAL L.

He feels NO push to compromise or work with others.  He uses the media, cynically, to push HIS legislation, HIS plans, HIS way.

Yet, he complains about the Republicans and Conservatives.  They are, according to him, too extreme.

He is willing to hold up a budget, or any attempt to reign in spending, by threatening old folks and children.

The Voting Rights Act Case Decision

Why is this so important?

Because formerly solidly-Democrat regions of the country (much of the South) are in DANGER of turning Republican.

The only way to prevent that is to flood the voting ranks with phony registrations, particularly in dense parts of the states involved.  You can't as easily do that if you have to phony up some identification.  So, the ID laws slow the "progress" of the Progressive's taking over the state (and, through their domination of the votes at the state level, the federal vote - executive and senatorial).

In some of these states (the Carolinas, for example), MANY non-citizens try to vote - often, they succeed.  Other chronic offenders are the "sunbirds" - those seniors that split their time between a Northern state and a Southern one.  SOME of them vote twice - once in the summer state, and once in the winter state.  Increase in the absentee voting has facilitated that fraud.

Yes, I do call it fraud.  In some cases, the senior may not be smart enough to realize that they are committing a crime (their dimness leads some conservatives to believe that these are Democratic voters - not me, but some).

Look for changes to be in effect by the next fall elections.  Should be interesting.

Saturday, June 22, 2013

How to Talk to Liberals/Those on the Fence... that they will actually listen to what you have to say, rather then reflexively tune out.

This came up when I was talking to my brother-in-law, Mike.  He is another politically aware person, who does not just get his news from the approved sources.  As a result, when I mention "Benghazi" or "Fast & Furious", he knows the events behind the news, is conversant with the controversies and issues, and has an informed opinion about the event.

Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about most people.  They have no knowledge about the events (except PERHAPS a superficial acquaintance with the "facts" - heavily filtered by the established media bias that "there is NOTHING to it - just conspiracy theory"), would require much patient teaching about the events, tend to tune out when the explanation gets over a minute or two, and, when challenged to think, fall back on ridicule of any facts that contradict the standard factoids.

In other words, they have a ferociously and determinedly closed mind.

It is possible to guide people to consider that they are living in a media-saturated false matrix.  It takes effort.  It takes patience.

Most of us want to "unload" the knowledge we have gained through careful attention to the events of our time.


It is too much, too soon.

The unaware mind will resist.

Instead, pick ONE topic, ONE focus.

Use it carefully, as a way of creating a breach in the wall of resistance.

In a sense, it is a long war that we face, one that requires patience and a willingness to think long-term.

We have to slowly lead people to consider, just lightly entertain the possibility that their thinking is limited by their reliance on the conventional wisdom.

Once they reach the point that THEY start seeking information, they will find that it is readily available.   The real work is getting people to that point.

Over the next few months, I'm going to be adding to the Conservative Self-Education section of this blog.  I'm going to focus on providing "chunks" of info, coupled with suggestions for how to broach topics, AND limiting the flow to what is manageable.  Consider it to become a "script" for limiting their exposure to a level of SLIGHT discomfort - not so much as to blow them out of the water, but enough to raise concern that they might want to find out more.

Thursday, June 20, 2013

MY Red Line

I found this post on Ace of Spades.  It brings up the idea of a Red Line - the absolutely non-negotiable issues that will lead you to reject a party nominee.

Such as the Amnesty Bill - it WILL eliminate any possibility of keeping a border.  Our borders will turn into a turnstile, manned with guards who produce a "Yes, Master" cringing response when ANYONE - for ANY reason - decides that they chose to walk across the border.

Do I want immigration?  Not particularly.  I'm not against someone coming to this country and ASKING for a chance to become a citizen.  I just see no reason why the American citizens who are unemployed have to watch aliens given preferential treatment to take any available jobs.

But-but-but, you see, there are all these RULES in the bill that keep that from happening....

Crap.  EVERY one of those "rules" can be waived by order of the executive branch - and they already are, in that deportation orders are negated, agents are ordered to let criminals go - ACTUAL criminals, who have committed felonies.

It's a bad bill.  Also, the way the "reconciliation process" is structured, once a bill passes both houses, ANY and ALL changes that a small committee agrees to, even if they have been rejected by one of the chambers, gets into the bill.

UPDATE:  It looks as though the Liars have come up with a "compromise" that includes SOME of the restrictions that the opponents have looked for.

Have you learnt NOTHING, Charlie Browns?  Lucy will pull that football from under you, AGAIN.

I find it hard to believe that the Stupid is so deeply ingrained in some people.

Frankly, the ONLY thing that makes sense is widespread blackmail.  Given the Thug-in-Chief's history, it's a reasonable assumption.

Powered by Qumana

Some Random Thoughts About the News

I'm home for a few days.  Have to clean and organize, get laundry done, and prepare for another round of workshops.

But, first, some FUN political stuff!

In no particular order:

  • Obama is trying to pull an FDR-type court-packing scheme.  Follow the link, and send along your comments to your reps in Congress and the Senate.

  • Not precisely political, but USED by politicians to promote their agendas, Climate Change.  I'm not unwilling to consider the possibility that the climate is changing, but let's not over-hype it - nor, use it to pass a Progressive agenda.  There simply is NOT good evidence that man caused the problem.  There is EXCELLENT evidence that this is a cyclical phenomenon, with some relationship to the sunspot cycles.  For some opposing arguments, backed up by EVIDENCE, link here, and here.

  • Here's a graphic that shows the extent of the hype.Climate Models vs Reality






More random links:

That's all I have the time for now - more later this week.

Sunday, June 16, 2013

Back Again With Regular Postings

I'm finally out of school, and, although not free of commitments/responsibilities, with more control over my time.

Hence, I'll be blogging more regularly.

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

The REAL Censorship Issue - Part One

I've been watching the recent revelations about the NSA snooping on Americans with fascination, and a little paranoia.  Over-the-top?  You might want to read this, about what metadata (the information that the NSA was collecting) can tell about your life - ALL of it.

It's bringing back memories of those dystopian novels Baby Boomers had to read, in the 60s and 70s.  I'm referring to 1984 and Brave New World.

Orwell's novel chilled me.  I've seen Youtube snippets from the movies, and the look of it fit what I imagined at the time.  I remember, however, wondering, why didn't he just resist the re-programming that he endured at the end?  I had a hard time imagining how a person could be so beaten-down that they just caved on issues of freedom.

No longer.  I've discovered the Great Secret of Big Brother - he doesn't censor, he coerces individuals until they, and those who sympathise with them SELF-CENSOR.  We've gradually been hectored, nagged, coaxed, and pushed towards stifling our root beliefs, feelings, words, and, eventually, thoughts.

Words:  the "N" word - even referring to it in order to condemn it has been made taboo.  Unless, of course, you're Black.  Woe betide anyone singing a song with "that word" in it - you will be subjected to all that the Liberals can throw at you - loss of employment, fines, expulsion from school, threats.  The same goes for someone who uses a REAL WORD that, unfortunately, someone ASSUMES is the "N" word - no amount of apologies or explanations saved his job.

Unless, of course, you're a White Democrat - who, BTW, was a leader in the clan in his youth.

Beliefs:  Public prayers - off limits. Unless, of course, you're a member of a favored religion, in which case the government actively provides public assistance in furthering your religious practices, on the job.  Again, this was NOT a case of the adherents being allowed to use their OWN money - it was a government freebie.  Also, Government/authority refusal of ability to choose freely about abortion*, Biblical interpretation, appropriate teaching about morals, support of abortion through Obamacare, right to hold a minority opinion (or, a majority opinion that Liberals find repugnant).  You don't have to like or approve of Dan Cathy's opinions.  He is, however, a private citizen, who runs his own company according to his faith beliefs.  He takes a serious hit, financially, for keeping his restaurants closed on Sundays.  There is NO evidence that he discriminates against gays in hiring, promoting, or providing service to them as customers.  Would that his opponents were so civil.

Targeting by Government:  IRS, EPA, ATF, DHS**.

* I found this through other sources, but the information is nicely bullet-pointed here:
In a national study of women, 64% of those who aborted felt pressured to do so by others.1  This pressure can become violent.2  65% suffered symptoms of trauma.1 In the year following an abortion, suicide rates are 6-7 times higher.3


Reasons women give for having abortions:
• Forced by mother

• Father opposed
• Husband or boyfriend persuaded me

• No other option given
• Would have been kicked out

• Loss of family’s support
• Lack of support from society

• Clinic persuaded me4

In 95% of all cases, the male partner plays a central role in the decision.Of men interviewed at abortion clinics 45% recalled urging abortion, including 37% of married men.Many of these men reported being justified in being the primary decision maker in the decision to have the abortion.6

Whatever your position on abortion, you have to admit that the above DOES NOT indicate a true choice - it is indicative of strong efforts to coerce, if not force, an abortion on an unwilling mother.

** I do agree that there are SOME conservative organizations that border on the paramilitary, who legitimately fall under the reasonable category of: should be watched.  Those organizations MAY eventually cross the line between genuinely ticked-off citizens to outright rebels against the government.  However, that is NOT the norm.  Most just want the government off their back, providing a level playing field with rules that apply to everyone, and not using federal power in a thuggish way.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

WHY Are Multicultural Efforts on the Part of States Failing?

I found a provocative article online, that asks:

Why is Sweden becoming so polarized about its new immigrants?

Part of the answer: Sweden is sensitive ONLY to the culture of its immigrants, not the natives.

From the point of view of immigrants, therefore, the Swedish state is warm and generous, but Swedish society is cold and distant. The more Sweden spends on “integrationspolitik,” the worse things appear to become. Sweden takes in more immigrants than almost any other country, but immigrants do not feel welcome here. In response to failed integration, the establishment has redoubled its efforts to push multiculturalism down Sweden’s throat, blaming the Swedish people for the failure of integrationist policies.

Keep in mind that Sweden was never an easy country to integrate into culturally. Swedes tend to be reticent, solitary, and reserved. Theirs is a complex culture, full of subtle rules and opaque codes of conduct. Lutheran Sweden is defined by strong behavioral norms enforced through social pressure. Swedes are conformist and quite intolerant of deviation from group norms, whether it’s immigrants or Swedes who break with protocol. Immigrants who do not conform to expected behaviors are looked down upon and often sense low-level hostility in their private encounters with Swedes. Icy Scandinavia was never a particularly well-chosen testing ground for the multiculturalist experiment.

The Multi-Culti Elites CANNOT, WILL NOT accept that the native culture has ANYTHING of value to transfer to the immigrants. In an Elite's thinking, their country is DEEPLY flawed, irretrievably racist, and, frankly, should meekly bow down to anyone who is willing to supplant the inhabitants, and replace their LACK of a culture with a rich, deeply meaningful ethnic culture. Which, of course, EVERYBODY except the locals have.

What a croc!

It's the typical Elitist "I have a passport and have traveled widely" snobbism that considers their having hit the hot spots for college-aged, moneyed gentry to be evidence of their superiority and fitness for leadership. Think of it as the John Kerry syndrome. The more "primitive" (although, don't you DARE use that word!) the culture, the better.

Don't think that they plan to let "those people" exercise their autonomy - the JK types plan to be the one, gently guiding the "superior culture" towards a political end that best benefits the JKs.

Monday, June 3, 2013

Reading Right Now

I've been reading To Set the Record Straight: How Swift Boat Veterans, POWs and the New Media Defeated John Kerry, by Scott Swett and Tim Ziegler. I'm a little over 1/3 of the way through it, and I can't put it down.

It is a chronological history of the process of how the Swift Boat vets got started, how they mobilized vets to provide their contribution to the book and website, and how the Kerry campaign responded to their refutation of his "story" - and, story it was.

Some of this, I had heard about during the campaign; most of this was new to me. If all that you have heard about Vietnam was that it was an unpopular war filled with dastardly American war criminals - I urge you to read it.

One down side of the Kindle is that you can't easily lend someone a book that you have enjoyed, as you can with the physical copies. Very little conservative reading is available at libraries or through e-book loans. I'd like some latter-day Conservative Carnegie to set up a matching donation program - for every dollar raised locally, a matching amount would be donated to improving the library's collection.