printBush bears the Mark of Cain: He has been showered with profuse praise by Obama for the former president’s efforts on behalf of his people, Mexicans residing in the USA.
I have no doubt that Bush, who must be smiling like a Cheshire cat as he reads this, will strongly support BHO’s efforts to further sunder US sovereignty and welcome Mexico to the legal lynching underway against a state in the Union, Arizona. (See “Judge Lets Mexico Have Voice in Court Case Against U.S. Immigration Law.”)
After all, Bush was an avid supporter of international courts in their attempts to save a Mexican—rapist and murderer of American young girls—from a fate the great state of Texas dealt him with a vengeance. From “José Medellín’s Dead; Cue The Mariachi Band”:
The president had set a precedent in the case of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. For defending their country, and in the process shooting a drug smuggler in the derriere, Bush sicced his bloodhound, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, on these Border Patrol Agents. With the same inverted morality, Bush rode to the rescue of another Mexican outlaw, Medellín; this time against the state he once governed. The president ordered Texas to heed the World Court. Texas said NO. The Supreme Court seconded Texas.
The likes of Karl Rove, Sarah Palin, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, and their ilk—they’re all Bush and BHO compliant with respect to advocating “a ‘clear’ path to legalization for immigrants.” And they still reign supreme among the country’s philosopher kings.
Bush and his acolytes ought to give a shout-out back at Barack, for they certainly would approve of BHO’s code words for open borders: immigration reform, reform that brings accountability to our system, and so on.
UPDATED (July 3): How easy it is to get people drunk on the Demopublican KoolAid. The authorities remove South African illegals who’ve made lives for themselves in the US and send them back to the cauldron of racial violence whence they escaped. But because you’ve heard it repeated over and over again that Hispanics, a protected species, cannot be treated like they treat undesirables (South Africans, or one Romanian girl)—you buy the version the Roves and the Palins mouth: “you can’t remove illegals settled here.”
It’s a cycle. The system is set up to treat certain undesirables (read white south Africans) harshly; process them quickly; get them out of here with little noise. The same system succors the noisiest gang, Hispanics. All people like Huggs hear about—and he is vulnerable because of his great respect for GOPiers—is how impossible deportation or a program to bring about attrition is.
They deport white South Africans! They deport Polish 11-year-olds. They’re good at it—and becoming better. Thanks to cry babies who accept the arguments Rove throws at them, GARCIA, MARTINEZ, ALVAREZ, RODRIGUEZ, ROMERO, LOPEZ, FERNANDEZ, HERNANDEZ, GONZALES—they stay in the US of A. If your name is Ewelina Bledniak or Jan Pretorius; you’re gone. If my girl were Hispanic, she would not have lost her hard-earned green card on the border due to a technicality.
Remove all welfare grants, birthright citizenship for anchor babies; make clear that there is no path to citizenship. (Huggs, you know that granting illegal aliens political rights is delivering a voting bloc to the Democrats.) In your own dealings, choose local labor (my landscaper knows that only American boys are welcome on my property; it’s so much more pleasant too)—and watch what happens.
One woman’s utopia is another’s dystopia.
I’m not particularly upset about Mexico’s filing a brief. Anybody can file a brief in a federal court case. I’m rather more upset about the Fox News story linked above, which states that illegal immigration is a civil, rather than criminal offense. 8 USC 1325 imposes fines and imprisonment for illegal entry, which makes it sound like a criminal offense to me. I’m too lazy to look it up, but I’ll bet that the forgery and the use of false documents commonly practiced by illegal immigrants are criminal offenses too.
This country is going to hell in a handbasket. Now, how’s that for an original and insightful thought. There is only one way to approach “comprehensive immigration reform”. That is to seal the borders and absolutely refuse citizenship to any alien who can’t proove that they would actually be a productive citizen.
A further thought: What do we do with the 15 or 20 million illegals we have here now? (Forget about the 11 or 12 million as told by the government. Those clowns have lying and misrepresentation down to an art form.)
Anyway, what about the millions already here? We can’t round them up and send them back. There’s too many of them.
The human misery it would cause, not to mention the impossible logistical nightmare precludes sending them back. Amnesty? No way! If they are in jail, back they go when released. If they come back and are caught then back to the joint for a longer time. If arrested and found to be illegal, back they go. Now, lets be reasonable here. If some latino or any other illegal for that matter is holding a job and supporting his family and has been here for years I don’t advocate deporting him for having a loud muffler or running a red light. Once again we get into the area of avoiding human misery wherever possible and there’s also the 14th ammendment that would come into play here. Beyond that I just don’t have any answers. But it would seem that I’m not alone there. The only difference is that I admit when I have run out of answers whereas our political leaders all claim to have answers. These answers are calculated to enhance political careers and the country be damned.
It says more about, and more surely indicts, those who’ve made these demiurges, Bush, Obama, Palin et al, the political class than it does the political class itself who, after all, can’t help being in awe of their virtue.
Aggravating the charge against them is that they have made the handmaidens of the political class, Van Susteren, O’Reilly, Beck, et al, the arbiters of ‘fair and balanced’.
Beck’s ‘the people’ have much to answer for.
As you’ve repeatedly pointed out, Ilana, where is the logic in deploying troops to “secure” the borders of a foreign country (Iraq) while refusing to secure our own? We have G. W. Bush and his “conservative” acolytes in media and among the public to “thank” for the former situation, and for at least some of the latter. BHO did not inherit a “clean slate” with respect to this issue of border “security.”
BTW, whenever I hear in the media that evangelical Christians desire “immigration reform,” I want to be sick. That’s my faith; I thought I’d joined the Body of Christ, not a political voting bloc.