The Professional Drunk-Driver Immigration Visa

Crime, Criminal Injustice, IMMIGRATION, Journalism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Outsourcing, Reason

America’s much-coveted, Professional, Drunk-Driver Immigration Visa demands killer qualifications. But do not apply for it unless you are “a person of color,” undereducated and well-connected.

Ramon Hernandez, a recipient of this visa, is a four-time repeat offender, who (allegedly) killed little Dimitri Smith, in-utero. The deceased preemie was shown on CNN, being held by young mother Aileen Smith, before being laid to rest.

RIP, precious Dimitri.

“He should have been kept off the streets,” intoned CNN’s bimbo anchor, Brooke Baldwin.

Not one word was uttered—or allowed?—during today’s CNN segment about the fact that the man was not supposed to be in this country. It’s simple: Had Hernandez been THERE (in Mexico, presumably), chances are that Dimitri would have been HERE (with his parents).

Teletwits of amnesty such as Geraldo Rivera and Tamar Jacoby have argued again and again that the illegality of such perps—or, put more respectfully, holders of the Professional Drunk-Driver Immigration Visa—is irrelevant to the crime. “It’s not an illegal-alien story; it’s a drunk-driving story,” Geraldo once noodled on “The Factor.”

Geraldo was serious, although he should not be taken seriously. For their crushingly stupid claim to stick, Geraldo/Jacoby would have to demonstrate that, had this drunk, illegal alien been stopped at the border or been deported, his victims would have nevertheless suffered the same fate. Death, in Dimitri’s case.

As far as our CNN idiot was concerned, hers was a scoop, for she was able to seal the segment with that most penetrating of questions, pioneered by The Oprah-Anderson (as in Winfrey and Cooper) School of Journalism:

“Could you, Aileen Smith (mother of Dimitri), ever forgive Ramon Hernandez?”

A Good Country For Dead Beats

Business, Economy, Federal Reserve Bank, Law, Private Property, Rights, Socialism

Initially, every parasitical official seeking to renew or secure a grip on the public teat was demanding a halt to what are mostly perfectly legitimate foreclosures on delinquent homeowners. Now cities across the US are considering using eminent domain to seize underwater mortgages. One dreadful cur, Chicago Alderman Joe Moreno, claims that the effort will “boost a recovery of the housing market.”

Fox Business’ Melissa Francis hammered Moreno for his scheming.

“Chicago is threatening to undermine whole system,” blasted Ms. Francis. “If you seize these mortgages from the banks and you just rip them up, why would a bank ever lend money again?” Good for her. But why not use the words “contract” and “property rights”? Why use “system,” so vague and meaningless?

Public discourse never rises above the utilitarian: what works, what doesn’t. Rights be damned. Anything to get away from making a principled distinction between what is mine and what is thine. In a word, property rights.

It is almost always true that a necessary condition for a foreclosure is for the homeowner to have failed to make his mortgage payments. Some even “argue” for all-out sweetness and love for the foreclosed upon. They say that because the banks are embroiled in the fractional reserve system, they should suffer this fate.

That’s like saying that because a legal system is corrupt, murderers should go free; or because an owner who sells a parcel of land partakes in the property tax theft, the buyer should not have to pay him. Or because businesses often act like exuberant idiots during a phase of the business cycle—some as offenders; others as victims—their customers need not pay them. And on and on.

UPDATED: Don’t Be Fooled By Campaign Foreplay

BAB's A List, Debt, Democracy, Democrats, Elections, Propaganda, Republicans, War

Don’t be fooled by campaign foreplay, counsels Barely a Blog contributor Myron Pauli, Ph.D., the country is going to be screwed for the next 4 years regardless of who wins the November race.

Over $4 billion will be spent to influence 400,000 swing voters in 6 swing states who are undecided between the champion of the White Churchgoing Party, Mitt, and the champion of the Party of the Secular and the Minorities, Barack. Ten thousand dollars a person to influence mostly ignorant voters. Although both candidates support health care mandates and endless no-win wars, billions must be spent on the façade that it is important to vote for one of these big government parties. The money will be handled by spin doctors, which is a term that also refers to Atomic Physics.
In fact, Atomic Physics seems an apt way to view this whole election process. Romney and Obama are both electrons in outer orbits circling far away from a nucleus (the Constitution) and rarely do their wavefunctions actually overlap with the Constitution. They do, however, obey a political form of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. In the Uncertainty Principle, one can know where an electron is somewhat or where the electron is heading, but not both of them exactly.
With Romney, we basically know what sort of person he is – Mormon Venture Capitalist. However, there is hardly any idea what he stands for. His flip-flops are legendary. He can even change within the course of minutes. These rapid-phase oscillations are known in Atomic Physics by the term Zitterbewegung. Romney’s ideological twisting may be the first macroscopic sighting of Zitterbewegung. Perhaps this is part of a larger phenomena whereby supporting a party which claims that supporting the American Dream Downpayment Act, the Prescription Drug Plan, the Leave No Child Behind Act, and the Transportation Security Administration counts as being for small government.
On the other hand, Obama has been generally a consistent supporter of the Hollywood-Academia-Politically-Correct-Left but we have little idea who this Teleprompter-Zelig is as a person. Is he atheist or Christian or Muslim? Is he black or white or mulatto or Asian or post-racial? Is he American or Indonesian or Kenyan? Partisan or above political squabbling? Much of this ambiguity is part of Obama’s own making – in short, he is the primordial “Birther.” Nevertheless, if one votes for the “Party of Peace,” you are going to ensure more presidential undeclared wars
While it really takes a Large Hardon Collider to tell these two apart, the voters will instead be subjected to a great debate, where things hinge on important issues like sweaty unshaven Nixon, or Ford freeing Poland, or Reagan cracking jokes, or Dukakis’ apathy over his wife being violated. Instead of worrying about the impending financial collapse of the economy, Fox News can crown Romney the “winner” of the debate while MSNBC declares Obama the “winner” and the spin doctors search out every possible “gaffe” to magnify into cosmic significance.
The reality is that both candidates are identical particles, and choosing between them is as likely to change things as a Soviet citizen deciding between Brezhnev And Kosygin Regrettably, there is a correlation between having more people voting and the rise of government and the decline of economic freedom and growth as Ilana Mercer demonstrates in her excellent book.
Well, I know which side I stand on – mine. As a true swing voter, I will go for the first candidate who hands me my $10,000. No sense of my wasting a vote for free on Gary Johnson, when I can line up with a “mainstream” statist and pocket $10,000. Show me the money, and I am all yours – Barack or Mitt! Save 3 hours of your life and just watch the 10 minute debate summary here.

******
Barely a Blog (BAB) contributor Myron Pauli grew up in Sunnyside Queens, went off to college in Cleveland and then spent time in a mental institution in Cambridge MA (MIT) with Benjamin Netanyahu (did not know him), and others until he was released with the “hostages” and Jimmy Carter on January 20, 1981, having defended his dissertation in nuclear physics. Most of the time since, he has worked on infrared sensors, mainly at Naval Research Laboratory in Washington DC. He was NOT named after Ron Paul but is distantly related to physicist Wolftgang Pauli; unfortunately, only the “good looks” were handed down and not the brains. He writes assorted song lyrics and essays reflecting his cynicism and classical liberalism. Click on the “BAB’s A List” category to access the Pauli archive.

UPDATE (Aug. 19): Facebook Thread. Robbie makes a good point. These automatic intonations about Romney’s past, absent further analysis, run to lazy. My fear is not that MR will flip-flop. That’s such a trite angle. And Romney might have learned his lesson. (Also, Myron’s links are old.) What I do believe is that Romney lacks a good (Austrian, even Chicago) understanding of the economy. The fact that this comprehension is better than BHO’s means squat. MR, moreover, does not understand freedom, and will take us to war, for sure. As I put it, “Mitt’s Foreign Policy Is Obama’s With A Daisy Cutter On Top: Unbridled, Bellicose American Exceptionalism.”

Ryan, Ayn And Rachel The Wretch

Capitalism, Elections, Free Markets, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Morality, Objectivism, Political Philosophy, Republicans

The excerpt is from the current column, “Ryan, Ayn And Rachel The Wretch,” now on RT:

“… Unrelenting in maligning Ayn Rand, [Rachel] Maddow ended [her diatribe] on a loud moo:

‘In Ayn Rand’s novel, she leads her readers to see the wealthiest people as heroes, heroes that must be protected. The rich are heroes and everybody else is a taker. The more the rich have, the better. The better for everyone. That is not fiscal conservatism either. It is something else.’

Rubbish. Rand scorned those rich whose ill-gotten gains were derived by using the coercive power of the state—Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, to mention a few. In Rand’s book, these men have not earned an honest crust.

Rand’s celebrated ‘rich’ were the men and women who bring to market the products and services without which life would be miserable, and for which Maddow is a walking ad.

The clothes she is kitted-out in, her coif; the devices she uses to communicate and transmit her sub-intelligent message, the food she buys cheaply to sustain her efforts—these are all produced, facilitated or brought to market by the invisible hand she labors to lop-off.

The ‘rich’ were voted into riches by the only democratic vote—the dollar power of the ungrateful masses, who, like Maddow, cannot do without the computers; software, hardware, hand-held devices, air conditioning, airplanes, apparel—on and on—the rich provide.

The Left treats ‘The Rich’ as a reified, rigid state-of-being. Ayn Rand—and all men and women of reason—understand that ‘rich’ is a work in progress.

Achieved through voluntary cooperation, riches are a reward for work well done. (Which is why this book is well-worth buying.)

Read the complete column, “Ryan, Ayn And Rachel The Wretch,” now on RT.

If you’d like to feature this column, WND’s longest-standing, exclusive libertarian column, in or on your publication (paper or pixels), contact ilana@ilanamercer.com.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION, AND DO BATTLE FOR LIBERTY:

At the WND and RT Comments Sections.

By clicking to “Like,” “Tweet” and “Share” “Return To Reason” on WND, and the “Paleolibertarian Column” on RT.