I can understand the argument, I simply don’t think it’s the right analogy.  If we had sealed borders, decent manpower for security, and a national policy that said “tresspassers will be prosecuted”, then comparing illegal aliens to burglars breaking into our homes would be an acceptable one.

But we dont.

What we have amounts to leaving our front door wide open, putting food on the table, leaving valuables in plain site from the street, and then announcing loudly that we’re leaving town for awhile.  Even friends and neighbors who otherwise wouldn’t consider coming into our house would be tempted to at least come in and take a look around.

To the peoples of Mexico, who have higher unemployment and a lower standard of living than the people of the United States, the desire to just “come on in and make yourselves at home” has to be damned near irresistable.  To criminals who would take everything you own and use your house to do their criminal activity, it’s an offer they can’t refuse.

Until we tighten our border security, we don’t have anyone to blame for our “illegal immigrant” situation but ourselves.

Funny thing is, before we had such problems with “illegal” immigration, the U.S. kept the front door open, food on the table, and valuables in plain sight anyway.  We also had a policy that said “Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses.”  But we tried to make sure the table was always full, valuables were always available, and that everyone had an equal opportunity to be successful.  Because of illegal immigration, people are “stealing” less than what they could reasonably expect to have-living wage jobs, decent health care, a good education, and an opportunity to become productive American citizens.  Illegal immigration forces under-the-table labor, medicaid supplement and back alley health care, unfunded education, and the ever present fear of being deported.

Is this really what anybody wants?

It was our first chance to listen to Alan Colmes radio show.  I used to like him from Hannity and Colmes; he was polite, let Sean Hannity walk over him, and was usually clueless when it actually came to what was going on.  Maybe that’s being a bit harsh.  He wasn’t clueless-just liberal.  That means he was being brainwashed and was unaware of what was really going on.

Now, Alan was speaking on the subject of homosexuality because of the overturning of California’s constitutional ammendment by a gay judge (who did not recuse himself from a case he should obviously not have taken) and a gentleman called in saying some very sick and rude things about Jesus and his disciples-stating they must be gay because…well, as I said, he was sick and rude.

After the caller hung up, Alan Colmes made the comment that he needed to become more tolerant, because he was really repulsed by what the caller had to say.  My interpretation was that Mr Colmes believed he was lacking as a liberal because he was intolerent of the opinions of another.

Point is- there are some things that should not be tolerated.  Mr Colmes did not have to, and should not have, tolerated this sick, perverted, soul; and there would have been nothing wrong with telling him so.  We have been conditioned so much to “tolerate” whatever we disagree with, that we forget sometimes thate there is difference of opinion, and then there is just right and wrong–there are opinions and actions that are detremental to society.

Edmund Burke said it best-

“All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.”

I know Alan Colmes is a liberal.  I also believe he is a good man.  His comment that he should learn to be more tolerent is a sign that evil works in all places–sometime just to get us to be complacent and accepting…tolerent…as it worms its way into our world.

Here’s the rules:

1. Before Barrack Obama’s next televised speech, prepare your “Bullshit Bingo” card by printing out the form above. 2. Check off the appropriate block when you hear one of those words/phrases.

3. When you get five blocks horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, stand up and shout “BULLSHIT!”

Testimonials from past satisfied “Bullshit Bingo” players:

“I had been listening to the speech for only five minutes when I won.” — Jack W., Boston

“My attention span during speeches has improved dramatically.” — David D., Florida

“What a gas! Speeches will never be the same for me after my first win.” — Bill R., New York City

“The atmosphere was tense in the last speech as 14 of us waited for the fifth box.” — Ben G., Denver

“The speaker was stunned as eight of us screamed “BULLSHIT!” for the third time in two hours.”– Harry A, Chantilly

“This is the most fun I have ever had with my pants up!”– Robert H. Portland

Thanks to the friendly folks at poorandstupid.com.

A federal judge has blocked key provisions of a controversial Arizona law aimed at illegal immigrants. The judge blocked a requirement that police have to check the immigration status of detainees they reasonably suspect of being in the country illegally, and stopped part of the law that makes it a crime for immigrants to be in the state illegally.

Of particular interest is the statement “and stopped part of the law that makes it a crime for immigrants to be in the state illegally”.  Okay.  Let me get this straight-The federal judge determined doing something illegal cannot be considered a crime? 

Then they go on to say that detaining people suspected of being illegals and detaining them until they have been able to prove their status can’t be done because it would put a burden on the federal government.  What the hell are we paying these folks for if it’s not to track down, detain, and deport illegals?  You can’t pass a law because it would require us to do our job?  That’s ludacris!

Folks, the time has come.  We have an election coming up soon.  Tell Washington, Olympia, Salem, etc., that We The People want our country back, we want our laws enforced fairly and evenly, and we want immigration to be a way to bring people into this country under rule of law.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/40346.html

For those of you who have never traveled to the West or Southwest, cattle guards are horizontal steel rails placed at fence openings, in dug-out places in the roads adjacent to highways (sometimes across highways), to prevent cattle from crossing. The cattle will not try to cross the guards because they fear breaking a leg if they slip between the rails.

A few months ago, President Obama received a report that there were over 100,000 cattle guards in Colorado . Because Colorado ranchers had protested his proposed changes in grazing policies, he ordered the Secretary of the Interior to fire half of the guards immediately.

Before the Interior Secretary could respond and presumably straighten him out, Vice-President, Joe Biden intervened with a request that before any guards were fired, they be given six months of retraining.

 Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, added that since these unemployed people were no longer guards, they should have their firearms confiscated. 

Of course, I had to do a bit of checking-after all, nobody in their right mind could be so stupid.  So I looked at the Snopes web site and found it to be a fake.  However, in the interest of fair disclosure-and decent storytelling-I decided to dig even deeper into the story.  After assorted e-mails from “unnamed sources outside of the U.S. government” and other nefarious sources, I was able to compose, er, uncover the following:

In the true liberal media style, they got the story all wrong.. 

• The true story was that Obama wanted to federalize the cattle guards and put them under the Department of Homeland Security, because he considered cattle to be a “national resource”, of at least as much importance as airports and border crossings. 
• Currently there is a bill in congress called the “Bovine Protection Act” that would create a branch under Department of Agriculture strictly to deal with bovine security issues.  Office of Management and Budget expects this new branch to add over 280 billion dollars annually to the budget and could create another 1 trillion dollars in debt within 3-4 years. 
• Department of Revenue is requesting a “head tax” on cattle to pay for this spending, which would raise the price of beef by over 25%. 
• This tax would not apply to “free range” cattle, because by their very nature they are unguarded and left to fend for themselves. 
• This tax would also not apply to “mad cows”, because they already fall under the direction of the Surgeon General; who administers a program which costs taxpayers $100 billion per year for herd-centered anger management counseling in an attempt to re-integrate these “mad cows” back into society.

Because they knew the public would be outraged at the additional spending in a time of recession, the press spun the story so that President Obama and our senior leadership would simply appear as clueless, instead of being socialist, fiscally irresponsible…and clueless.

The potential for comments, speculation, and spin, however, cannot be over-emphaiszed.  Among the possible causes:

• Al-Quaeda wanted to be able to claim they’d nuked the U.S. without actually destroying anything that would incur the wrath of the U.S.
• Department of homeland security was cleaning out another nest of zombies.
• ODOT (Oregon Department of Transportation) screwed up again.

No matter what the explanation we choose to give it, one thing is for sure…

IT’S BUSH AND CHENEY’S FAULT!

I’m totally disgusted at politics in America right now, on both sides.  I figure I need something else to write about.

Mike, any ideas?