(D)Amnesty! - continued by Doug Wrenn

(D)Amnesty! - continued

By Doug Wrenn

May 31, 2007

Just as a side note, after viewing "The World Over," my typical guy TV remote clicking brought me to CT-N, Connecticut's version of CSPAN, but for state government. I watched former Senator, current actor and rumored presidential candidate Fred Thompson give the keynote speech at the annual Prescott Bush Award Dinner (HA-RUMPF!), the yearly gathering of a bunch of quisling, bumbling, pathetic, double-talking closet Democrat blowhards who masquerade as "Connecticut Republicans," an oxymoron that itself is deserving of an award, probably an Oscar. In the course of his speech, Thompson referred to the previous failed amnesty plan of 1986, and cited that many of the laws passed with that bill, such as to prosecute employers hiring illegal immigrants, were not only unenforced but pretty much abandoned. Thompson mused why any American should trust what Congress now writes on a piece of paper, 21 years later. (Gee, no wonder people like this guy! He really is for "Law And Order"!)

The issue that bonds the issues of immigration, war and sovereignty is what our Border Patrol, or more appropriately, our Border "Patriots" refer to as "OTM's." No, those aren't cash machines, they're death machines. "OTM" stands for "Other Than Mexican." Of the literally hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who transverse into our country every year over the Mexican border, peppered among them are many OTM's, who in many cases are covert terrorists from Middle Eastern countries and are here on a mission to attack and destroy us. The 12-20 million figure is a guess, and by some accounts, a bad one at that. Now consider that our inept and corrupt government also has no real handle on how many OTMs exist within that figure, which could even be substantially larger. It only took 19 such terrorists on September 11th, and six at Fort Dix, had they not been stopped, and three of them were illegals who infiltrated our country via the nationally humiliating abomination known as "sanctuary cities" on our own soil. The masses of illegally immigrating Mexicans bring OTMs into this country like dogs bring fleas and ticks into a house. We need to shut down the border and have a temporary moratorium on all immigration until we can get a handle on this crisis. Meanwhile, considering that Mexico has tacitly refused to help us with our problem, despite its well-sealed southern border (with armed troops), and that Mexico has opposed our efforts, such as the border fence, instructed illegals how to immigrate into the US, has even threatened to sue us for stopping them, and has allowed rogue Mexican army troops to fire upon our Border Patrol and provide cover for entering illegals, the time is long overdue to consider Mexico an enemy and to treat that nation as such, and if necessary, with appropriate military action if it doesn't get its own house in order soon. Our war in Iraq and Afghanistan is very much connected to our illegal immigration problem, which provides an avenue for our enemy to access us. Likewise, these loopy, globalist free traders, who continue to push for the NAU are the real obstruction to real border enforcement and immigration reform, and without border enforcement and immigration reform, we are only fighting a war on its from while our flank is wide open and vulnerable.

It thus should be no surprise to anyone, that a committee working on a common defense pact between the US, Canada and Mexico will report its proposal. The proponents of this idea include former State Department officials such as Henry Kissinger and Richard Armitage. This tenet is one of those concocted from the Security, Prosperity Partnership (SPP), the more formal name of the NAU. Other such tenets include the erasure of our borders in 2010 and the NAFTA superhighway to transverse all three countries with a "checkpoint" to be built in Kansas City, which will be considered Mexican territory and staffed by Mexican officials. Before we can ever win the war in the Middle East, we must first defeat the NAU, secure our borders and preferably defund and deport all illegal immigrants. It astounds me that anyone today still cannot understand why we are not succeeding in the immigration battle. It is because despite the lip service, our treasonous government officials from both major parties don't want the problem solved. To us, it's a problem. To them, it's an agenda being aggressively forwarded, and America and Americans be damned.

No, I don't trust the government, just in case you were still wondering. Personally, I think we are now at about the stage in which it should be overthrown, if not electorally, then forcefully, and then rebuilt as per the abandoned model of the Constitution if the current circumstances don't drastically change soon. On its web site, Real Clear Politics, www.realclearpolitics.com, shows polls that the American people disapprove of President Bush's job performance by 61.7% to 32.8% and they disapprove of the job performance of Congress by 58.0% to 32.6%. Yet continually, our elected leaders continue to ignore the will of the American people. The very troubled waters of this vast and dysfunctional harbor are long overdue for the dumping of tea, and the revolutionary removal of tyranny.

In his liberal diatribe to Raymond Arroyo, Kevin Appleby articulated the flawed and veiled liberal agenda of the USCCB on the issue of immigration, not migration. Appleby spoke of the dignity of illegal immigrants. Newsflash pal, people with "dignity" don't break the law! Appleby spoke of how illegal immigrants are exploited here by unscrupulous employers. Indeed. Unscrupulous people will behave unscrupulously to other unscrupulous people. It's not like they all belong to the same club and feel a sense of fraternity for each other. That isn't a newsflash, but I do have a suggestion, if illegal immigrants are so exploited here by unscrupulous employers, then let the equally unscrupulous illegal immigrants go back to their native land. Exploitation ended, problem solved. Appleby bashed the US by saying that our immigration system is broken, because the bureaucracy is slow and only 5,000 visas are granted when a cap of 500,000 is needed. I won't challenge Appleby on the genuinely ineffective bureaucracy of our government, but caps, beyond the possibility of being at obsolete levels, are in place for a reason. Caps are instituted to give balance. Like it or not, the country can only economically support so many leeches. If the US economy collapses, where will all these exploited but dignified illegal immigrants go next? (Appleby's house seems like one good alternative!) The problem with entitlements is that instead of "thank you," the response of the recipients is instead, "MORE!" Hence, the throngs of illegal immigrant protesters in the streets, waving flags other than ours and arrogantly demanding more perks than those already conveyed to them, such as employment, ID cards, social security, tuition assistance, health care, and passive exemption from well deserved arrest, incarceration and a one-way bus ticket to cross the Rio Grande in a southerly direction for once. Enough with the hard worker drivel. Some work, but many don't, and we have the overly filled state and federal prisons in the Border States to prove it. More perks won't instill assimilation or civic pride in trespassers who are only here to illegally take what someone else legally earned. Another newsflash: The United States doesn't owe anything to anybody. We allow immigration here out of our own charity and generosity. That charity and generosity must be realistically tempered with prudence, and if not, when our economy is busted and our people are starving, will these liberal do-gooders in the Church advocate for us as well? That's a heck of a price to pay to simply be liked by a bunch of leeches who don't know the difference between "thank you" and "more" in any language.

Appleby stated that he found Rector's comments, indirectly putting a price tag on the head of each illegal immigrant, to be offensive. Mr. Appleby, I find you and your sugarcoated propaganda offensive. Appleby also defended the term "undocumented" over "illegal" because he said words to the effect that no person is illegal. No, but trite semantics aside, their activity is illegal. He then tried to make the point that illegals from Latin America will better fulfill good citizenship and the church pews, as Hispanics allegedly tend to be more spiritual, moral and conservative. Kudos to Mr. Arroyo for responding that as the Pope Benedict XVI recently addressed, Latin America, the home of half of the world's Catholics is now both legally and culturally accepting the culture of death, beginning with acceptance of abortion. As Mr. Arroyo correctly pointed out, there is a disconnect between the spiritual piety of these Hispanic Catholics and what they live in their daily lives. In other words, they are a bunch of double-talking, baby butchering hypocrites, jut like many North American Catholics.

Appleby took another shot by claiming that what immigration reformers say of Hispanics now, immigration reformers said of the Irish in 1910 and none of those dire predictions came true. Mr. Arroyo again appropriately responded that in 1910, we didn't have Medicare and Social Security. (And many other entitlements.) As Mr. Rector stated, this wave of illegals will predominantly take out of our already nearly bankrupt system of entitlements far more than whatever pittance some of them they may contribute. Mr. Arroyo also cited a good analogy that when attending bishops' conferences, he is stopped at the door and checked in by security and restricted as to where and when he can travel within the building. He asked why the US should not be entitled to the same kind of security and sovereignty of its borders. Personally, I think when Appleby's house fills up, we should direct these "undocumented" immigrants to the next USCCB conference and let the good bishops put them up for a while on the diocesan dime. Otherwise, let he among you who is without free accommodations cast the first stone! In other words, put up or shut up. Amen.

I'm sick of the abused mantra that America is a land of immigrants. America is a land of legal immigrants. It was originally started as a haven, not a penal colony. That other place the liberals are thinking of is called Australia. This is not just a debate about right and left, or right and wrong. It is also a debate about common sense. Unlike Democrats seeking electoral domination and Republicans seeking cheap labor for their check-writing campaign/business cronies, there are many individuals and groups besides the Catholic Church who view this issue as one of compassion, but they forget the ugly but necessary common sense angle. Charity is a virtue, but anyone who bankrupts his home to charity and causes his family to starve is an irresponsible fool. The United States of America has been nursemaid to the world since our existence, and with little gratitude in return. We should be reasonably charitable to others, but not at the expense of our own national survival. For those who break our laws, they deserve even less. Such people are truly criminalized in countries like Mexico, yet for some reason, I don't hear the liberal, anti-American do-gooders like Appleby and the bishops rail on about those alleged human rights abuses. For that matter, within the Church is an organization called Catholic Relief Services (CRS), which is an international relief organization that specifically excludes the US from receiving its charitable services, which is why this American Catholic does not give CRS a dime. It is for that very reason that my favorite charities which I most often donate to are the Christian Appalachian Project, The Bishop of Northern Alaska (Fairbanks), AKA: "The Alaskan Shepherd," and Catholic Extension, which supports financially strapped seminarians, as well as destitute churches and missions throughout the rural US. Charity begins at home and there are plenty of destitute fellow Americans who are suffering and forgotten throughout our vast country. Being Catholic should not mean not being American. This isn't about faith or charity from the Church's viewpoint. It is an inane, one-sided, liberal anti-American, fluffy, hypocritical do-gooder campaign by a bunch of closet socialists who use their Bible to hide their flag. Bravo to Raymond Arroyo of EWTN, for demonstrating that devout Catholics and patriotic Americans do not have to be two separate groups.

As Mr. Rector pointed out, this whole utopian conundrum isn't even amnesty. It's beyond amnesty. It's more than just forgiving an auto thief for stealing a car. It's also giving him the car back, plus a blank check. He's right. That's not amnesty. It's "damnesty," and it must be stopped, soon and permanently. Otherwise, "America," if it even still exists after this fiasco, won't be at all what it once was, despite the pomp, puffery, false promises and euphoric prophesies of those whose priority is everything but America. This amnesty panacea is just cake frosting on a dog turd, and that's an insult to dogs. Perceived images can be deceiving, although appearing alluring on the surface, and yet quite unpleasant underneath.

Speaking of perception and deception, my wife later came home and told me the "big game" was a real sleeper, and the fireworks were postponed to Saturday night.

Let's all keep our eye "on the ball" and carefully separate fact from knee-jerk fiction, lest any of those gallant, yet bittersweet memories from Memorial Day ever be remembered in vain. May God bless America, all who continue to protect and preserve her and all those who made the ultimate sacrifice in doing so.