|
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Chris Charles: Close Encounters
Of The Third World
Part I--Mexican
Mayhem
We are use to OUR President
admonishing the country; we don’t need it from Mexican President Felipe Calderon too! President Obama doesn’t
need any help scolding America; he does a good job of that himself. Calderon should go home and disparage his own country.
Because as bad as President Obama would have you believe this country is, Mexico is a whole lot worse.
Mexicans citizens
coming to Arizona illegally may now have to worry about getting deported, however American citizens visiting Mexico legally
have to worry about getting decapitated by drug cartels! Calderon may be ‘Presidente’ but the drug lords run Mexico.
There have been for a long
time many good reasons NOT to visit Mexico; crime, corruption, poverty, and typhoid among them. Now a trip to Mexico could
get a person beaten, falsely arrested, kidnapped, or (most likely) killed.
In a little over three years, 23,000 people have been killed in drug-related
violence in Mexico. 3,365 murders took place between January and March of this year! And you thought the violence in the inner
city was bad here in America! Mexican violence makes rough neighborhoods like Compton look like the Hamptons. Sure drugs and
gangs still plague areas, like the South Central LA but when compared to many areas of Mexico, the South Central part of Los
Angeles looks more like the Upper East Side of Manhattan.
It’s like the Wild West down there, only there is no Wyatt Earp or Doc Holliday fighting for the good
guys. It’s only bad guys fighting other bad guys, there are no good guys. Mexican officials (the ones that are NOT pawns
of the cartels) are impotent to do anything to help the situation. The only spot of good news is that, in addition to innocent
Mexicans and tourists, drug cartels are busy killing each other too. Unfortunately, for every drug cartel that is toppled
a new one takes its place, each more ruthless and callous than the last.
I know Mexico is a ‘third world’ country but this is ridiculous.
Your average day in Mexico is like a bad day in Baghdad! Some of these cartels make the Islamic throat-cutters seem almost
civilized.
Nobody is immune from the violence in Mexico, not even politicians. Recently, former Mexican presidential
candidate Diego Fernandez de Cevallos was abducted (presumably by the cartels) and has not been heard from since. Cevallos
is not alone, there have been many Mexican politicians either kidnapped or murdered by drug cartels in recent years. In the
state of Tamaulipas there is nobody willing to run for political office because too many that have, have ended up dead.
All this, and Calderon
is worried about ‘racial profiling’ in Arizona? Mexico is arguably one of the most dangerous countries on earth
and Calderon is critical of us? You can compare Arizona to Nazi Germany all you want but I would much rather live in worst
part of Arizona than the best part of Mexico. In fact, I think I would rather take my chances living in Germany circa 1940
rather than live in modern day Mexico!
1:13 pm pdt
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Chris
Charles: Nancy Pelosi In A Black Robe
Many Americans
are concerned than President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Elana Kagan, is a left wing ideologue. They should not be
concerned; they should KNOW that she is a left wing ideologue. Even before the nomination was announced, common sense would
dictate that any candidate nominated by President Obama would be a leftist.
Why do people even bother to inquire about Elana Kagan’s ideology?
If she were not a committed left wing fundamentalist she would not be President Obama’s pick. Anyone with half-a-brain
should not be surprised that President Obama would pick a liberal for the nation’s high court. The President is a liberal;
of course his Supreme Court nominees will be leftists.
Some have expressed concern that Kagan does not have judicial experience but Kagan’s role on the court
will be guided by her liberalism. She will not be concerned with precedence, litigation, or Constitutional law; her aim will
be to impose her ‘values’ upon the court and upon the American citizenry. Elana Kagan will be like Nancy Pelosi
dressed in a black robe.
President Obama has right now what all good leftists want, power. He has the power to appoint someone,
for life, to the US Supreme Court. He is not going to screw this up. He is not going to gamble on an unknown entity. He would
have made absolutely sure that Elana Kagan’s view’s are in concurrence with his own.
Where would the President find a 'qualified' Supreme
Court candidate? There are many fine institutions of higher learning that would prepare a person well to be a Justice on the
Supreme Court. But since President Obama needs candidates that have been PROPERLY groomed in left wing ideology and ingrained
with an elitist contempt for the country, then his choices would be narrowed to candidates that attended either Harvard or
Yale.
Not only did
Kagan attend Harvard, she was the Dean of the Harvard Law School. What better place to look for a committed leftist? The only
better place to look for a hard core liberal would have been at the New York Times.
Speaking of Harvard, some people are worried that Ms Kagan is
anti-military, because while at Harvard she banned military recruiters from coming on campus. People shouldn’t
be surprised by this either, most good liberals share a healthy distain (or at least distrust) of the US military. Liberals
would rather have sex offenders roaming school campuses than military recruiters. Better to have your privates tickled by
some pervert, than to be asked if you have ever ‘considered a career in the Army’. Leftists know that young people
that join the military VOLUNTEER to do so, right? It’s not as if recruiters are kidnapping students and shipping them
off in Afghanistan.
One area of concern for radical leftists is Kagan’s record on Abortion. Pro-abortion
activists are concerned that Kagan may not be a radical enough when it comes to abortion because she advised President Clinton
to ban late term abortions in 1997. Does supporting a ban on late term abortions make her pro life? When is it acceptable
to ban abortions? After the child starts kindergarten? Rest assured, Elana Kagan is about as ‘pro life’ as Dr
Kevorkian, there is no way the Obama White House would even consider a nominee that was not committed to ‘choice’.
A Supreme Court Justice
is supposed to interpret the Constitution and make rulings based on guidelines within it. They are not supposed to twist the
meaning of the Constitution to further their own agenda. This just is not acceptable to President Obama; he needs a Justice
that believes that the Constitution itself is ‘defective’ and therefore is in need of ‘fixing’. In
addition to wanting to make our ‘defective’ Constitution more ‘affective’, Elana Kagan believes the
Supreme Court needs to show extra special ‘solicitude’ to the ‘disadvantaged’. What ever happened
to equal opportunity under the law? To a leftist everyone is equal, but some are ‘more equal’ than others.
Is Elana Kagan outside
the American mainstream? Absolutely, but so too is President Obama. What else expect would you expect from him? A ‘moderate’?
Why would he do that? He has a majority in the Senate that would confirm Reverend Jeremiah Wright to the Supreme Court if
the President nominated him. Until Americans stop electing radical leftists to positions of power, we will continue to have
a Judiciary of leftist radicals.
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
Chris Charles: No Papers, No
Problemo
Part
II: Here To Work…The System
If you believed liberals,
you might think that Arizona was rounding up all Latinos and sending them to concentration camps. Recent legislation passed
in Arizona, merely bans ‘sanctuary city’ policies and makes Arizona law mirror federal law so that Arizona can
enforce the federal immigration regulations. Illegal immigration is a massive problem in the United States, Border States
like Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas are particularly hard hit and the feds refuse to act.
Billions of taxpayer dollars go to pay for
illegal alien social services every year, in 2004 it was estimated that illegal aliens cost each Californian family $1,183
a year. Sure we might pay a few pennies less for tomatoes at the grocery store, but don’t you think that Californians
would rather keep the $10.5 billion dollars a year they spend on illegals?
Forget taxpayers, you KNOW government could find a way to spend $10.5
billion dollars a year. Especially in California where the State has huge budget deficits, despite one of the highest tax
rates in the nation.
Of
course illegal aliens are exempt from paying that tax because they are paid ‘under the table’. It is absurd when
liberals claim that illegals pay their taxes. Would liberals have us believe that illegal alien workers, that obviously have
little respect for American law, would volunteer to pay their income taxes? What, do they do the math and determine what they
WOULD owe (if they were on a payroll) and then anonymously mail the amount, in cash, to the IRS? Sure illegals pay sales tax,
but how much are they spending when you consider what immigrants make? I don’t think a strawberry picker or gardener
is going to be buying any big ticket items any time soon.
It is cheaper for businesses to hire illegals because they don’t have to pay
taxes, also because they’ll work for less money than American workers will. Obviously this is to the detriment of the
low income Americans that either cannot find work or have their wages driven down by the influx of cheap labor.
Many people that are here illegally come here
to work, unfortunately not all of them do. Some are less interested in work as they are in working the system. Although that’s
not as bad as those that come here to commit crimes, traffic drugs, and join gangs. Sure there are plenty of American citizens
that partake in these types of activities but that is just the point, who needs more criminals, drug dealers, and gang members?
If illegal alien criminals
can cross the southern border with impunity, what’s to stop Islamic Jihadists, murders, and Al Qaeda members from doing
the same?
Of course
radical leftists could care less about the national security, sovereignty, and well being of the United States but what about
the illegals themselves? If liberals really care about the welfare of the millions of illegal aliens, why do they continue
to allow them to be exploited?
Illegal immigrants face enormous danger when coming to the US. If they try to cross the border on foot they face long
journeys through the desert with little food or water. Every year many illegal immigrants die in the desert before they ever
reach a US city.
Illegals
that don’t want to risk death in the desert, risk death (or worse) at the hands of ‘coyotes’ which they
hire to smuggle them across the border. ‘Coyotes’ charge thousands of dollars for their service and if the immigrants
cannot pay they are beaten, killed or forced to work as slaves.
The lucky ones that make it to America in one piece do not have the proper documentation
to legally work in the US, so they are forced to work long hours doing back-breaking labor for little pay. Some argue that
without illegals the price of things like produce would go up and that is true, just like the prices went up after slavery
was abolished in the mid 19th Century. Why do ‘compassionate’ liberals continue to allow illegal to
live as second class citizens?
Arizona is trying to solve this problem; everyone would have to agree that something must be done. Unfortunately, the
liberal solution to this problem is just to legalize all of the illegals! What would this accomplish? Will it stop the influx
of illegals? No. Will it stop criminals from crossing the border? No. Will it prevent illegals from being exploited? No. Will
it help the American worker? No. Will it give Democrats millions of new voters? Yes! And that is the reason why the left supports
illegal immigration and supports giving illegals amnesty. The left is not as much interested in ‘compassion’ as
they are in winning elections and amassing power.
2:23 pm pdt
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Chris Charles: No Papers, No
Problemo
Part I: Law
& Disorder
When is it
permissible to break the law? According to liberals, violation of federal immigration law is a law that SHOULD NOT be enforced.
They do not want immigration law enforced AND they do not want to stop the flow of illegal aliens coming across our southern
border.
Liberals
see not only conservatives but ordinary average Americans as racist if they support the enforcement of laws against illegal
immigration. This assertion is absurd when you consider that that America is a nation of immigrants. Unless you are 100 percent
Native American Indian you, at one point or another, are a descendant of immigrants. Most Americans welcome legal immigrants
from all over the world, provided that they followed the proper procedures in coming here AND want to contribute to the betterment
of America.
Most Americans
are anti-illegal immigration, not anti-Mexican. The vast majority of illegal immigrants are in fact Mexican but rest assured
if most were pale skinned Canadians just looking to escape the cold, we’d be just as dead set against it. It doesn’t
matter who is coming here, they need to come here LEGALLY. Even if cute, furry Ewoks from the Endor Moon want to come to the
US, they better have their ‘papers’ or they should be sent back!
There are plenty of Mexican people that immigrate here legally; nobody
has a problem with them. What about the Mexican people still in Mexico that are waiting in line to come here legally? Shouldn’t
we be rewarding these people instead of the law breakers?
Doesn’t the left feel it is necessary to enforce our laws and control our borders? Apparently not,
left wing politicians from all over the nation have instituted ‘sanctuary city’ policies that have essentially
decriminalized illegal immigration in certain areas. Even if illegal aliens commit violent crimes, some ‘sanctuary areas’
won’t turn the offenders over to immigration control.
Immigration laws are necessary if a country is to remain a country. Without control
of one’s borders national security is compromised, yet liberals continue to ignore the existing laws.
I thought liberals loved to pass and enforce
laws. The same people that refuse to enforce immigration law are the first one to create and enforce all kinds of oppressive
new laws. Most places now days, smoking (cigarettes) is prohibited by our benevolent dictators in government. You can’t
smoke in bars or restaurants, public sidewalks, city parks, or even beaches. Some would even ban smoking in one’s home
if they could get away with it.
Seat belts must be worn in cars or else drivers can be ticketed. Most places, talking on a cell phone while driving
is strictly prohibited by the government. There are cameras installed to bust motorists that run through red lights. As you
may have heard, legislation has recently been passed to make it a crime NOT to have health insurance. In dry climates, the
government tells citizens when and how much they can water their lawn. The government sets limits on vehicle emissions, vehicles
that do not meet those limits are prohibited from using public roads. Failure to comply with any of these laws can result
in hefty fines or even jail time.
Even now as federal immigration law goes unenforced, Congress is considering legislation that would restrict
and limit that amount of carbon individuals could use. So it is kind of hard to understand why liberals, who are so keen in
most instances to saddle Americans with oppressive regulations, openly thwart attempts by some to enforce reasonable immigration
regulations. Is there any other federal law that is ‘optional’ the way immigration law apparently is? The message
government is sending is this: immigrating here illegally is okay but once here, make sure you don’t use your cell phone
when driving or you’ll be in big trouble.
12:02 pm pdt
|
