Muslim Brotherhood Declares Its Goal

By Semperpapa

No, it is not a surprise, at least for those who have paid some attention.

The radical Islamic organization of the Muslim Brotherhood has come out declaring that the events in Egypt are just the beginning of a movement in the Arab world aimed at ridding the region of the influence of the United States and to install Islamic state governments.

The leader of the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood, Hammam Saeed, stated that the unrest in Egypt is just the beginning of a general movement in the Arab world to remove governments that have been accommodating to the United States, and, in the case of Mubarak, tolerant of the existence of Israel.

Saeed made his comments as he was protesting, with about another hundred of members of the Islamist group, in front of the Egyptian embassy in Amman.

Hitting on subjects that have resonance with radical Islamists and the American Left, Saeed stated that the Arabs are going to revolt against the dominance of America in that part of the world, dominance over the oil riches of the region through the support of despotic regimes. And of course Arabs are revolting against the military occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, a subject so very dear to the anti-American element in the United States.

It is still unclear what role the Muslim Brotherhood has held in the start of the unrest in Tunisia and Egypt. What is certain, at this point, is that the radical group is seeking the opportunity to position itself so that the unrest in the Arab countries would attract the elements of the radical component and those nations’ left.

The Muslim Brotherhood is a very powerful entity in the Middle East and other Arab countries. It has been conceiving an Islamic Caliphate since its formation in the 1920s, with fundamentalist Muslim predominance and strict Sharia compliance. The group has expanded its tentacles across the globe, including the United States, where it operates via organizations like CAIR and ISNA.

The possibility of such a group filling the void of power in any country should be of great concern for the West, as it would translate into an Islamic dominance threatening security and commerce across the globe.

In Egypt, for example, it remains unclear if the military, which appears to be slated to take control of government and the nation, remains clean of the influence of the Brotherhood. Historically, the Egyptian military has cracked down on the organization, maintaining a more secular posture in its governmental influence. But things can change.

In Egypt there is also the danger of someone like El Baradei taking a position of leadership. As the head of the United Nations IAEA, Baradei was instrumental in Iran gaining its nuclear technology capability, as he remained blinded, by incompetence or purpose, to the obvious march of Teheran toward nuclear power.

El Baradei in a position of power in Egypt, someone even mentioned the possibility of his presidency, could very well translate into a pro-Iran, anti-Israel and anti-American posture of that country. Not a favorable outcome.

On the positive side, El Baradei has been living the good life as a United Nation stooge for sometime and he may not meet the strict Islamic guidelines of the Muslim Brotherhood, but if collusion between the two should occur or already exists, than the situation would precipitate rather quickly.

Just my thoughts!

Three Illegal Aliens Turn Themselves In To Authorities For Murder

By Semperpapa

This is one of those stories that leaves more unanswered questions than not.

At a border crossing in Nogales, Arizona, three men presented themselves to Border Patrol agents and surrendered. They told the agents they were being sought by American authorities for the brutal murder of a 15-year old girl in 2009 in Tucson.

According to Tucson television station KGUN, Orel Vasquez, 20, Christian Vasquez, 26 and Juan Carlos Leon, 29 told the agents they were the suspects in the murder.

In August 2009, armed men invaded a home in Tucson and in the process of attempting to carjack the residents’ vehicle, they shot Brenda Arenas in the head, leaving the young lady to die in the harms of her mother.

The suspects fled to Mexico and were the subject of a manhunt on both sides of the border.

Authorities in Pima County are not sure why the three men decided to surrender.

That is an understatement.

It is really puzzling why three murder suspects, who were in the United States illegally at the time of the crime, would now decide to face justice in America, when they evaded any punishment in their native country for almost two years.

The interesting part is that even if caught in Mexico, they would have not faced anything more that few years in prison, while here in the United States they may face the death penalty or at least life in prison. Granted that the “living” conditions in an American prison are far better than those in a Mexican jail, still these three “gentlemen” have been able to escape capture for a while now, and probably could have continued to do so indefinitely in a lawless country like Mexico.

As I look at the picture of this beautiful young lady struck down in the prime of her young life by the evil actions of others, I cannot help but wonder the real reasons behind the actions of her killers.

I would not be surprised if the investigation will show that the three men are members of some drug cartel’s army and, considering the short life span of such individuals, they decided that it would be healthier to just turn themselves into American authorities as a way to preserve their miserable lives.

Even in the case that US authorities would seek the death penalty against the three, I am not sure if their crime would qualify for special circumstances, the process usually takes so many years that the possibility of prolonging their consumption of oxygen is very good.

Moreover, there is always the possibility of some progressive take over of our system and these sub-humans could be sprung from jail in just few years.

In my perfect world, the three would receive a speedy trial and, if found guilty, they would be dead in a matter of days.

But we do not live in a perfect world. In a perfect world Brenda Arenas would still be alive.

Just my thoughts!

Ambassador John Bolton On The Egyptian Events

By Semperpapa

Worrisome is probably the best way to describe the succession of events in Egypt in the last few days.
Demonstrations in the streets have pinned the people against the police and the military, deployed by Hosny Mubarek, the Egyptian president whose ousting is part of the demands of the population.

Regardless of VP Joe Biden’s remarks, Mubarek has been a dictatorial figure in Egyptian politics for the last three decades, and his son, who fled to London, was slated by his father to succeed in the presidential position.

When it comes to analyzing a situation like the one shaping up in Cairo and other cities, there is no person more qualified than former UN Ambassador John Bolton.

During an interview on Fox News, Amb. Bolton made some interesting points, involving the Muslim Brotherhood.
This is a radical Islamic organization native of Egypt and whose tentacles have been spanning the rest of the globe, including the United States.
There is no doubt that MB is considered, including by Bolton, as a tangible force of radicalism in the current events. From the interview on Fox:

I think what's clearly happened today [in Egypt] is that the Muslim Brotherhood, the radical Islamist party in Egypt has called it's supporters into the street. I don't think it was present on the first two or three days.

Mr. Bolton is of the opinion that the MB called its supporters to take to the streets, a direct threat to the Egyptian military. According to Bolton, the military is the real government in the country and has been since the days of Nasser. Mubarek is the president as long as the military is willing to let him be.
This means that the evolvement that must be carefully considered is the infiltration that the Muslim Brotherhood has been able to achieve within the military. Bolton adds:

I don't think we have evidence yet that these demonstrations are necessarily about democracy. You know the old saying, "one person, one vote, one time." The Muslim Brotherhood doesn't care about democracy, if they get into power you're not going to have free and fair elections either.

And as far as the way the US should conduct itself right now, Bolton

Let's be clear what the stakes are for the United States.. We have an authoritarian regime in power that has been our ally. We don't know at this point what the real alternatives are.

John Bolton is also of the opinion that the demonstrations came so quickly and high in intensity that even the Muslim Brotherhood got taken by surprise. That explains the delay in MB participation in the protests. Now that the events have become self-feeding, MB is sure to seek positioning in what may be the after-Mubarek Egypt.

That is where the danger of the situation lays, because a country under Muslim Brotherhood’s control would be one that completely opposed to any democratic approach and in tune with strict Sharia law.
Moreover, John Bolton continues, the idea of the Suez Canal in the hand of radical Islamists is of great concern for the whole globe.

At this time the news from Egypt are of great chaos in the streets. Thousands of protesters defy the curfew to take to the streets and clash with the police and military forces. Some of the latest tell us that, while violence is still occurring, some police officers and military members shed their uniforms to join the protesters.

Mubarek went on Egyptian TV and called for the government to resign, but did not include himself in the mist of those who he wants gone. This will most likely not quell the protesters.

The best case scenario is for a moderate individual emerging from the smoke and chaos of the unrest. A moderate that would still keep the Muslim Brotherhood at bay and out of the political scene, maintaining an open connection with the West and continuing to be at peace with Israel.

The worst case scenario is the radical Islamists gain power in Egypt, squeezing through the chaos of the moment to place themselves in control of the nation. If the military has been infected by Islamic radicalism enough, the result would be devastating for the entire region.

And Iran has been hailing the unrest in Egypt.
Is it just a smoke screen that the Teheran government is putting up because they may be preoccupied by the epidemic of popular revolt? Or is Iran somehow involved in the spark of the events and in the participation of the Muslim Brotherhood?

Regardless, the situation in Egypt, just as much as the one in Lebanon, should be monitored by our intelligence services, because the stakes are very high for the United States, for Israel and Europe.

Just my thoughts!

Al Capone Would Be Proud

By Semperpapa

In a move that probably broke every speed record for a state Supreme Court decision, the Illinois Supreme court voted unanimously to allow Rahm Emanuel to be included on the ballot for Chicago mayoral race.

Challengers to Emanuel’s candidacy, and a lower court, had agreed that Emanuel did not meet the qualifications of residency the law in Illinois demands. According to the rules, a mayoral candidate must have resided in the city for at least a year prior to the elections.

Emanuel, who has been the attack dog for Obama for two years, clearly did not meet the requirement, but the highest court of the state declared him eligible anyway, proving, once again, that the rule of law in the world of liberals, is nothing more than just an annoyance and a distraction.

Al Capone would be really proud of the accomplishment.

The court stated, in their decision, that they wanted the people of Chicago to have all the power in deciding who they wanted to vote for, and the hell with the law.

The Chicago Tribune reports:

On Tuesday, the state Supreme Court put the appellate ruling on hold, restoring Emanuel temporarily to the ballot, and agreed to take the case. The justices did not want to hear arguments or receive new legal briefings from the attorneys on either side of the ballot dispute. Instead, they used the material the attorneys already filed at the appellate level.

That’s convenient.

So the campaign begins for the Feb. 22 elections. The 300,000 ballots printed without Emanuel’s name on it due to appellate court decision are in the trash and the new ones are being printed.

Meanwhile, Emanuel’s campaigners head for fish markets to buy all the dead fish they can in order to send Rahm’s electoral message to the people of Chicago.

Just my thoughts!

The Fuse Has Been Lit In The Arab World

By Semperpapa

The events of the last few weeks are shedding a light on the dangerous volatility of the Arab world.

In the North African country of Tunisia, the despotic president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali was ousted after 23 years of heavy handed power holding. He and his family had to quickly leave that country and seek political asylum in Saudi Arabia.

In another North African country, Egypt, violent protest has hit the streets, much inspired by the Tunisian events. Egyptian president Hosni Mubarek is under pressure from an increasingly restless population to step down and allow more democratic policies to take hold in the country.

Mubarek has been in power for 30 years, holding highly controversial elections occasionally and stifling opposition in totalitarian manner.

The people in Egypt, again inspired by the events in Tunisia, grew increasingly angry about the demonstrated attempts of Mubarek to manipulate the political system in order to place his son Gamal into the power succession. Gamal Mubarek and his family fled Egypt for London, as the unrest is becoming more violent

International opinion in the West is voicing its opinion regarding the events in Tunis and Cairo, hopeful for a more democratic political system taking hold and possibly spreading to other Arab countries. But the unrest in the streets, the violence of the security forces against demonstrators is also sparking a call for restrain by the European Community and even the White House and State Department.

I also am hopeful for a greater democratization of the countries in the Arab world, but I am also more pessimistic than not.

My pessimism is based on the Arab culture as we witness it. In Davos, Switzerland, the Arab League met on Wednesday, and the issue of the Tunisian and Egyptian events was taken up in a close doors session.

Some comments about the events have been addressed by members, one specifically, who wanted to keep his statement anonymous, said that democracy is not part of the Arab culture, because said culture is based on tribalism and patriarchal traditions.

The main causes of the unrest in Tunisia, and consequentially in Egypt, are that the population is affected by economic disaster, with high unemployment and high poverty level.

The regimes there have maintained an iron fist upon the people, silencing opposition and openly gathering personal fortunes in the face of abject poverty. In effects, both regimes in Tunis and Cairo have been totalitarian and heavily centralized.

Some of the representatives in Davos declared that the lack of small business empowerment is drastically affecting the economic potential of Arab countries. Formal education may be wide spread among their citizens, many having studied in the United States and Europe, but many are swallowed up by government careers at the expenses of the private sector.

On a side note, considering the direction the Obama administration has been taking the country, the high unemployment, the increase level of citizens living at poverty level, we should take notice of international events. But the news coverage is sparse at best.

There is a major danger, though, in what we are witnessing in the Arab world. Public unrest and the taking down of the leadership have the potential to create a power vacuum in those countries, possibly opening the door for fundamental Islamists filling the vacuum.

Already reports have shown up that with the fall of the Tunisian government, an amnesty for all political undesirable has been actuated. One of those who have benefited from the amnesty is Rached Ghannouchi, leader of Tunisia's Islamic party Ennahda. Ghannouchi is planning to return to Tunis from his exile in London. And he is a supporter of Sharia law.

So does this mean that the Islamic party will be part of filling the power vacuum? And does it mean that the pro-West posture of Tunisia will revert back to radical Islam?

Only time will answer those questions.

Another reason for my pessimism is what we are witnessing happening in Lebanon.

Just last week the government of that country fell after the representatives of Hezbollah declared their vote of no-confidence in the government of Prime Minister Saad Hariri.

Hariri is the son of the former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, who was assassinated in 2005.

That assassination has been linked to the Syrian government and the departure of the Hezbollah political contingent from the current government is attributed by the current Prime Minister support for a United Nation backed investigation that is preparing to bring indictments for the 2005 assassination.

According to reports, the tribunal in question will be bringing to light the involvement of Syria and Iran in the plot. When Saad Hariri refused Hezbollah demands to cease cooperation with the tribunal, they walked away from the government.

Hezbollah has also been able to master enough support in the Lebanese parliament to have one of its own, Najib Mikati, forming the next government.

A take over of the Lebanese government by Hezbollah, a terrorist organization, is bad news for the attempt of the Lebanese people to move toward a more Western life style, also creating a potential for conflict with Israel. All in all a bad situation.

Many of the questions on the true significance of the events in the Arab world, including today’s story regarding the unrest just happening in Yemen, can only be answered by time. But it is clear that the fuse has been lit for some changes that may range from positive to disastrous.

Just my thoughts!

I Spoke Too Soon

By Semperpapa

Yeah, I should have probably not mention the word “embarrassment” so soon. Politicians from California do not fail us in the realm of embarrassment.

As if the whole charade of sitting together was not enough to make me barf, the following report from The Hill sure got me a lot closer.

According to the website

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) announced Tuesday morning that not only will she and Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.) sit together at Tuesday night's State of the Union address, but they will coordinate their outfits.

That is right! Congressman David Dreier, my Congressman, coordinated his tie with the dress that Maxine Waters wore. Do I hear a collective “awe”?

Rep. Waters stated that she was surprised when Dreier invited her to sit together for the SOTU:

"I thought, well, why not? Let’s see what this act of bipartisanship means tonight, and more importantly, tomorrow. We have even coordinated our outfits for this special occasion,"

She was reported saying.

Waters was actively looking for couple of seats on the Democrat side of the chamber for the new couple. But Dreier has also invited another California liberal to join in the kumbaya, Rep. Jane Harman.

At the time of the report, it was not known the outfit Ms. Harman was going to wear.

We all hope she did not clash with the ensamble of Waters/Dreier.

As a California resident, I would like to apologize to the rest of the country for this ignominious display.

Just my thoughts!

Rep. Loretta Sanchez Cannibal Moment In The Spotlight

By Semperpapa

California liberal congresswoman Loretta Sanchez once again graces the American people with her latest rendition of what political cannibalism looks like.

In a moment of definite “political civility” the woman, who is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, suggested that the wounded Gabrielle Giffords, who is also member of that committee, be removed from the committee until her conditions improve.

The suggestion sparked a vigorous rejection on the part of not just the Republicans in committee, but also from other Democrats.
Texas Democrats Silvestre Reyes told in an interview that Sanchez proposal was inappropriate and made for bad morale.

Reyes, together with California Rep. Adam Smith, were the most bellicose about the classless suggestion of Sanchez and the proposal was denied.

Just for starter, it is really amazing for me to even conceive that this two bit politician would be on an important committee like the Armed Services one.
In my humble opinion, the only committee she should be allowed to be on is the toilette cleaning committee, together with Maxine Waters and Barnie Frank.

Next, there is really no gutter that the Sanchez woman would get down into for political power. There must be a personal advantage that she would be enjoying by the removal of Giffords from the committee.
That is how Rep. Loretta Sanchez works.

Sanchez’s proposal is one perfectly in line with the way politicians work, removing any doubt that to be a politician, one must remove, or not have any at all to begin with, any moral compass.

Once again, I am almost getting used to it, a California politician is able to bring shame to an entire state.
I thankfully do not live in her district, but just the fact that I share this state with her and the morons that re-elected her is an embarrassment.

And for all of you who read this, I did not vote for her or Boxer or Feinstein, so I remove any responsibility from myself for these corrupted ignoramuses, although I have to accept the responsibility for David Dreyer.

Oh well., we cannot always be perfect.

Just my thoughts!

One More Reason To Avoid SOTU

By Semperpapa

Tonight is the night president Obama goes in front of Congress for his second State of the Union Speech. Much has been said and written about it, with pundits dissecting what we already know Obama will be saying.

I will stick with my usual approach of waiting for the transcripts and analyze it my way, far from the annoying arrogance that characterizes every speech the man makes.

I must admit that last year I did watch few minutes of the SOTU for entertainment purposes, because it was amusing to watch Nancy Pelosi jump up and down like a puppet every time Obama gave her a thrill up her leg.

This year there is one more reason me to avoid the visual of the event: the buffoonery of the “let’s sit together” farce, ushered in by the shooting of Rep. Giffords early this month.

So much has been made of this idiotic idea that by eliminating the physical separation between the Parties in the Chamber is going to foster a more civilized political discourse between the two political factions and a more pronounced collaboration on problem-solving.

Chuck Schumer will sit next to Tom Coburn; John McCain with Tom Udall.

Olympia Snowe will sit with Dick Durbin, Mark Kirk and Mary Landrieu, really not much of a departure from her voting record.

Chuck Grassley with Ron Wyden? Really? Not much of a difference for Grassley!

I am personally more interested in what the president will be saying than the charade bunch of politicians will engaged in to feed their sanctimonious self promotion.

There are much more important issues that those elected to office need to concentrate on than the “strange bedfellow” comedy.

Millions of unemployed Americans could care less about the seating location of some politician.

Millions of small business owners are concerned about paralyzing regulations practically shutting down their livelihood.

Millions of Americans are concerned about the out of control spending robbing ours and future generations of the potential to enjoy the opportunities that our Nation has been traditionally offering.

Millions of American are concerned about Obamacare and the government takeover of 1/6 of our economy and the destruction of the best health care system in the world; about appointed officials (czars) instituting policies that affect the whole population without any Congressional oversight.

Millions of Americans are concerned about the invasion being perpetrated by illegal aliens through a southern border the leadership in Washington is refusing to secure.

Millions of Americans are concerned about Military budget cuts being considered while our enemies are increasing their military spending at neck breaking pace.

And millions of Americans are concerned about our Military being stretched so thin in its mission in Iraq and Afghanistan, forced to fight with one hand tied behind their back and yet having to contend with untimely social engineering pet projects.

The point of this is that in the context of the issues our Country faces today, from the economy to security to the rule of law, where a specific politician sits during the speech really means nothing.

Last November, the American people did not vote politicians into office to have a good old kumbaya session (next we will hear that they will pass a bong around too!), but to advance the demands of their constituencies.

I do not want my Representative to make nice with some liberal counterpart who wants to raise my taxes and could not care less about our troops in arm’s way or the police force on the streets of America.
I want my Representative to fight for the values he promised to support and I gave him my vote for.

We will see the travesty of the whole thing tonight. Pundits will be more attentive to the seating arrangement than the new conglomeration of empty promises the president will spew.

Personally, I will just read about it and save myself some aggravation.

Just my thoughts!

Slaughter OF Millions Is Good For The Environment

By Semperpapa

It is a good thing that we can always rely on some elitist scientist to give us a chuckle or two.

Here is the case of Julia Pongratz, head of a research team at the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology, quite a mouth full, I dare say.

Ms. Pongratz headed a study that concentrated on the environmental impact of great historical events and what these braniacs concluded was that the Mongol invasions of the 13^th and 14^th century had a real great impact on the carbon footprint mankind placed upon the environment.

Genghis Khan, so unfairly portrayed by John Kerry when he compared the Mongol tyrant to American troops in Vietnam, could be actually considered as the environmental pioneer, sort of an Al Gore with a personality.

The Mongolian leader, who was able to create an empire covering about 22% of the entire land mass of the time, was responsible for the slaughter of approximately 40 million people, during his eco-friendly marauding of Asia.

According to the superior brains at the Carnegie, the mass killing created a shortage of farmers which in turn fostered the re-forestation of large portions of agricultural fields and in turn the estimated absorption of about 700 million tons of carbon.

So, if my inferior intelligence does not fail me, it looks like that the best solution to the global warming debacle would be the elimination of a large portion of the world population and the return of large areas of land to its primitive state by eliminating the impact of mankind upon it.

Sounds good to me! Let’s start by eliminating all those snobs crowding the Carnegie Institute, small potatoes comparing to Genghis Khan, but we must start somewhere. We will then move on to all the other university professors and on to all liberal progressives.

That should get us in the ballpark.

According to their website, the Carnegie Institute is a private organization based on the Stanford campus, and it appears that, luckily, no public funding may have been used for the financing of this crock of horse manure.

But it is amusing, to some degree, that there are actually people out there in the utopian stratosphere of liberal progressivism, who would actually look at the brutality of a historical event like the Mongolian invasion and put a positive twist to it by paring it up with a false farce of today.

I wish there would be some video circulating of these moonbats having their meetings, probably interrupted by some tree worshiping services aimed at getting back in touch with the soul of vegetation.

Like I said, we can always count on these miscreants for a good laugh.

Just my thoughts!

Getting Serious About Cutting Spending: Go After The UN, Not The Military

By Semperpapa

As much as the talk about spending cuts is a welcome sound for fiscally conservative Americans, hint of cuts directed to Defense spending is troubling.
How can reducing Military spending even be considered when our enemies, Russia, China and Iran, are increasing theirs?
How can we even discuss cutting our forces and strategic capabilities when North Korea is ever so blatantly engaging in hostile behavior?
Not to even mention the ever present threat of Islamic terrorism and a state of civil war practically existing south of the border.

So I would suggest that the GOP now in power in the House of Representatives concentrate its attention on cutting the funding the United States wastes yearly on the United Nation.
For some time now, I have been writing about the absolute need for the United States to truncate its connections with the futile, parasitic and corrupted international body.
There is absolutely nothing that the UN can be counted as having achieved, from the failure to address North Korea and Iran nuclear ambitions to the worst corruption ever witnessed by mankind with the Oil-for-Food program in Iraq and the failure of “peace keeping” UN forces failing to protect African villages from rape fests.

And yet, every year the American taxpayers are forced to pour billions into an organization whose only purpose is to promulgate its own corrupted elitism and criminality.

A ray of hope is given to us today by Florida Representative Ileana Ros-Lethinen, the new chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. The Republican politician declared that she is going to look into scaling back the contribution of the United States to some of the UN entities, especially the Human Rights Council.

According to the Chairwoman, time has come for the travesty called Human Rights Council to be cutoff from the contributions of the American people.

“I’d like to make sure that we once and for all kill all U.S. funding for that beast. Because I don’t think that it advances U.S. interests, I don’t think that that’s a pro-democracy group, it’s a rogue’s gallery, pariah states, they belong there because they don’t want to be sanctioned.”

The Congresswoman is reflecting my thoughts about the UN, although she does not go far enough as I would just cut all funding and evict every single one of the delegations, giving them 30 days to clear the premises or be considered illegal aliens and subject to immediate deportation.

But that is not quite what the administration has in mind, especially after they turned into the Council a report on human rights “issues” in America. Truly unbelievable, considering that the nations on that council are some of the worst violators of human rights on the planet: China, Saudi Arabia, Iran.

Please read this previous post for more details.
http://semperpapa.blogspot.com/2010/11/time-to-pull-plug.html

I hope that Ms. Ros-Lethinen will succeed in her quest to cut off funding and that she will decide to broaden the scope of her analysis to the entire organization.
The United Nation has been a failure mostly financed by the hard work of the American people, only to be taken hostage by the very enemies of our country aided by a political leadership with similar nefarious intentions toward America.

Just my thoughts!

The Debate Over Self-Defense And Defense Of Others

By Semperpapa

The shooting in Tucson that cost the lives of six innocent people and several wounded, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, has sparked a new round of excitement on the part of the anti-gun activists. These are the same kind that lurks in the shadows feverishly waiting for the next opportunity to advance their anti Second Amendment agenda.

For these types, every horrible tragedy like the one in Tucson, or Columbine, or Virginia Tech, lends itself to the advancement of their Utopian view of an America where the right to own and bear arms is removed.

These folks are not much better than those lawyers we qualify as “ambulance chasers”, because they will try to win their arguments on the blood of others.

We have gone through all the different iterations of blame on the part of the Left regarding the tragedy in Tucson, from the blame placed on Conservative dissent against the current regime to assigning the responsibility to Bush and Reagan and who ever else.

And of course, practically immediately, the attacks against the Second Amendment started to pour out of every liberal that could get to a microphone or a keyboard. Absolutely expected.

One accompanying issue of the Tucson tragedy was the one concerning the safety of elected officials. The attack on Ms. Giffords brought to the surface the vulnerability of Congress members as they try to come into contact with their constituencies across the Nation. The availability of contact between an elected official and his or her voters is a basic characteristic of our governmental system, and one that should not be allowed to be altered by the actions of a deranged individual.

Calls for additional protective details for politicians have been made, but the task could be daunting, considering that the extra protection would have to fall upon the Capitol Police force in Washington and on the local law enforcement when the politician is home. Perhaps it is a difficult task, but a doable one.

In fact, it is somewhat disturbing that the law enforcement chiefs of Tucson and Pima County, did not have at least couple of officers at the Giffords event on that Saturday.

But there is another line of approach to the issue that could, at least, provide an improvement of the situation, and that is being already taken into consideration by some in Congress: the possibility of carrying a weapon themselves.

North Carolina Rep. Renee Elmers is considering carrying a weapon at public functions by virtue of her possession of a Concealed Carrying permit she already holds, while another NC representative, Health Shuler, stated that he has been already doing so for sometime, due to some dead threats received.

Other politicians have expressed the intention of doing the same, as the attack in Tucson brought to the forefront the necessity, and right, to self defense.

The right of an individual to self defense is one that our Forefathers understood very well, as they had to come to grips with that concept as they took on the most powerful military empire on Earth to achieve independence. And the Second Amendment was intended to address just such right: the ability to defend oneself from injury or death by the hand of another or by the hand of an oppressive government.

In the wake of the attack against Giffords, who was the intended target of the madman, the anti-gun machine got into high gear, with a renewed call for more gun control legislation.

Even a usually conservative congressman, Rep. Pete King, has fallen pray to the insanity of the moment proposing legislation that would prohibit anyone with a gun from being within 1,000 feet of an elected official.

Initially, I was somewhat surprised of Mr. King’s move, knowing that the New York congressman is not one to find refuge in the cooks’ camp, but considering his intention of investigating the disturbing connections between the current administration and known radical Islam organizations in the US, I could understand the apprehension of the man.

But his reaction is one that is dictated purely by a knee-jerk reaction to a tragic event, without much common sense thought going into it.

The truth of the matter is that no law can prevent a determined attacker from perpetrating his or her crime.

In fact I am convinced that the law, at times, is a contributing factor to the criminal act.

There is already a slur of gun laws prohibiting guns within or near schools, and yet we have seen massacres taking place in schools (Columbine and Virginia Tech), where the no-gun zone legislation only contributed to the inability of students to self-defend.

I am not advocating that students would be allowed to have weapons in the classrooms, after all here in California one must be at least 21 to own a pistol, but I am certain that there may be some of the faculty members, especially in the grade schools, that would be willing to take action in defense of innocent lives.

Maybe if such person was at Columbine or on the Virginia Tech campus and was allowed to have a firearm at the location, the death toll could have been contained.

The question still remains about the right each one of us has to self defense. While I applaud the intention of some lawmakers to take responsibility for their own protection, although I believe that they should refrain from publicizing it, I cannot help being incensed by the hypocrisy of the whole thing.

I, as a law abiding citizen with no criminal record or mental conditions, cannot obtain a CCW permit in California, because the reason I would want one, pure self defense, is not enough to afford me such right.

Unless I am a businessman who usually carries large amounts of money or precious stones; unless I am involved in a legal dispute that forced me to take out a restraining order against someone; unless I have dire reasons to request such a permit, the county Sheriff would not even consider my request.

What makes my safety less important than the one of a jewelry merchant or a Congressman?

Why is the safety of my family of lesser value?

In the days following the Rodney King police beating verdict in Los Angeles, when riots were exploding at various location, we lived in a city east of LA that was not the best of neighborhoods. In fact some violence had erupted in the streets and I even heard a gun shot just on the other side of my backyard wall, on the main street. Until things came down, I took the necessary precautions to insure the safety of my family, including breaking the law and having a weapon with me as we tried to live our lives.

Yes, I broke the law, but ultimately the defense of my loved ones was most important on my mind. And thankfully, I never had to face the need of having to use my weapon, I did not hurt anyone and no one was the wiser. Contrary to what the anti-gun nuts want all to believe, we, responsible gun-owners, are not itching to use our weapons!

I am tired of people jumping on band wagons and take self righteous positions against my God-given right to self defense and to defend my loved ones. I am tired of people who are all for security details protecting their safety, while they attempt to impose their Utopian “gun-free society” views on law abiding citizens like me. And I am definitely tired of authorities who self appoint as judges of my right to self-defense.

When someone just broke into my home and is only seconds from “interacting” with me and my family, a police unit ten minutes away does not do me any good.

When I am stranded on the highway in the middle of the night and some criminal decides to take advantage of that opportunity, the chance of a Highway Patrol cruiser driving by to protect me is not much help.

And yet it appears that the powers-to-be believe that my life and that of my family is not worth enough to allow me to exercise my constitutional rights.

Even here in progressive California, the law allows me to open carry a weapon, but that exercise in lawful behavior comes with a definite downside. Either because of ignorance of the law on the part of law enforcement or because such activity is so rare that people freak out at the sight of a civilian with a .45 Glock in a holster, open carry can land one in custody and with mounting legal costs, just to prove that one’s actions were in perfect concordance with one’s constitutional rights.

So the debate remains one between adherence to the law of the land and the primordial need to defend oneself and our families. Thousands of gun control legislation have provided only a much easier field of operation for those who thumb their noses at the law. They have provided somewhat of a safe heaven for the safe perpetration of criminal activity, penalizing only law abiding citizens who exercise their god-given right to self defense.

When a progressive nutcase succeeds in creating another “gun free zone”, the only real accomplishment is that criminals have one more zone where to safely operate.

Years ago, in the 1990s if my memory does not fail me, the highways of Florida were scenes of several violent carjackings, in some cases deadly attacks. The Florida legislature acted in passing a law allowing residents traveling on the state highways to carry their weapons in the vehicles. Immediately the number of carjackings dropped dramatically.

Criminals, conscious of the possibility that the vehicle targeted was driven by someone now able to defend himself, started to target cars that displayed rental companies stickers, having come to the conclusion that those vehicles would be driven by tourists and non locals, therefore unarmed.

That criminal pattern convinced the car rental companies to remove all the stickers from their vehicles, eliminating the ability of criminals to isolate potential victims and the rate of criminal activity fell even further, again because the criminal element was not able to distinguish a potential victim from someone who would be able to defend himself.

It does not take much more than the basic application of common sense to understand that prohibiting the presence of guns is a rule observed only by law abiding citizens, while criminals, by definition, have the tendency not to concern themselves much with the rule of law.

Self defense and the defense of our loved ones is a right we have as a civilized society. No politician or activist should have the power to infringe upon that right.

Just my thoughts!

Some People Just Don’t Get The Hint

By Semperpapa

Former House Representative Alan Grayson is definitely one of them!

In a continuous show of disturbing megalomania, the unstable Grayson continues to put himself in the limelight, or at least attempts to, by continuing his attacks against his favorite target: Sarah Palin.

Just like a recurring cancer, Grayson is pounding on the former Alaska governor in relation to the responsibility he places on Palin for the shooting in Arizona.

In his latest moment of loss of consciousness, Grayson sent an e-mail to his supporters, all three of them, where he outlined the threats of violence he has received in the past, of course all generated by the rhetoric of Sarah Palin.

Typical liberal progressive! He does not want to understand that the resounding defeat he was slapped with in the last elections was due to the fact that his constituency decided that mentally unstable individuals should not have political power. History shows, see Germany circa 1930s, that paranoia and political power are not a healthy combination.

As much as I abhor threats of violence under any circumstance outside of some douche bag breaking into my home uninvited, I can almost understand that some misguided person would react to Grayson’s hatred filled posturing with the desire of wanting to punch him on the nose.

We have all seen images from other countries’ parliamentary sessions where the politicians got so worked up and got into violent altercations. We have all sort of chuckled at those images, confident that such display would not occur in our Halls of Congress. But honestly, had Grayson been re-elected, I would not be surprise that he would snap and do something stupid against someone like Rep. Michelle Bachman.

Of course he would not pick on, let’s say, Allan West, as that move would be a quick road to a monumental ass whipping.

I just wish that Grayson would just get the fact that he is irrelevant now. Thankfully!

Maybe, if we are lucky, he will join MSNBC and finally disappear from the public scene for good.

Just my thoughts!

Legal Blow For NOW And Planned Parenthood

By Semperpapa

NOW, the National Organization for Women, and Planned Parenthood has been dealt a huge blow as one of their heroes is under indictment for murder.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell, in Philadelphia, is being charged with eight counts of murder. One count is for the death of a patient and seven for the killing of fetuses that had survived his abortion procedures.

According to District Attorney Seth Williams, Gosnell is responsible for the death of a woman due to the indescribable barbaric conditions his so-called clinic was in.
The charges regarding the fetuses’ deaths are based on Gosnell using scissors to severed the spinal cords of these babies who had been born alive in spite of the abortion procedures and who would have had viable chances for survival.

The “doctor” has been operating his Women Medical Society clinic for over 30 years, his favorite patients being minorities, immigrants and poor women.
He has made millions of dollars by exploiting current laws and the incompetence of state regulators who failed to investigate complaints filed against the monster over the years.

Finally, the law caught up with Gosnell when the DA run an investigation regarding illegal drugs violations and they were appalled by what they found when they visited the “clinic”.
DA Williams described the place as a “house of horror” with bottles disseminated all over the location with aborted fetuses in them. Basically a horrendous scene to witness.

All this considered, NOW and PP will probably come out with some sort of accusation of racism or sexism against the Philadelphia District Attorney for the arrest and the statements made to qualify the charitable work that Dr. Gosnell has been engaged in. After all, the good doc was just providing a all necessary service to women and to the cause. Let me explain.

Gosnell is providing the all needed ability to eliminate a baby from the mother’s life even when the existing law legalizing abortion is no longer applicable, when the baby is about to be born. Just a pesky little legal irritation, the ban on late term abortions, that the on-demand-at-any-time crowd is always trying to get rid of and which has even received the support of our current President.

But Gosnell is also providing a great service to the well documented cause of eugenics that the Left has been pursuing for decades. And the “specialization” in treatment for immigrants, minorities and poor women is perfectly in line with the proponents of a eugenic control of the population procreation by concentrating on that section of the population that is at the bottom of the societal ladder.

Nowhere in the Associated Press article was stated the political affiliation of doctor Gosnell, but the mere fact that the media is practically ignoring the story and my own gut feeling tells me that he is not a registered Republican.

Just my thoughts!

Detroit Planning To Shut Down Half Its Public Schools

By Semperpapa

In one more example of the disaster that public schools have become, news from Detroit is that the city authorities are considering shutting down half the number of high schools in the Detroit Public School system.

The move, which is forecasted to increase the average size of high school classes to 62 students, appears to be necessary to address the budget disaster of the district.

In the report from the Detroit News, the closure would be necessary if Detroit does not receive additional government aid. The city’s Emergency Financial Manager, Robert Bobb, is trying to slash $327 million deficit the school district has accumulated, $100 millions of them just in the past 12 months.

According to Bobb, the deficit was caused by several reasons, ranging from decline in revenue from property taxes, decline in enrollment and, my absolute favorite, “an unplanned staffing surge this past fall” which translates in workers hired. Why was any hiring done when there is no money to pay for it?

Of course the missing link in Bobb’s statement is any reference to the financial burden that teacher’s union are continuously putting on the financial status of the city.

With all the cutting that the city manager is required to do, with all the additional burden that will be placed on students and their families, the teachers will receive their planned salary increases, with any regard on the part of their union for obvious dire situation the city is in.

The office of the emergency Financial Manager also stated that the school closure is the very last resort, that he is also looking at the abandonment of vacated district buildings and a sort of bankruptcy/bailout from the government that General Motors adopted.

The head of the Detroit Federation of Teacher opposes the last plan because that may require some union contracting manipulation. Moreover, increasing the class sizes to 62 would kick in a clause of the collective bargaining agreement that stipulates an automatic increase in salary for teachers if the number of students goes over 35.

More money for teachers, and union dues, and a worsening of city financial disaster.

So what is the moral of this story? That, as it always happen, bureaucracy is keeping government hostage. The same government that aims at ever increasing the size of the same bureaucracy. A vicious circle that can only spell financial disaster for the people.

Just my thoughts!

Two Teenagers Shot At California High School

By Semperpapa

Horrible news from Gardena High School, Gardena California, where a student brought a gun in his backpack and, according to the LAPD, placed the backpack by his desk and the gun went off.
Again, according to the authorities, only one shot was fired and the bullet hit two students, one girl in the head and one boy in the neck.
The girl is in critical conditions and the boy in serious condition at the hospital.

The boy who brought the weapon in was apprehended and is in custody.

It has also been reported that school officials conduct wand metal detection of students at random and that by all accounts it is very easy to bring a weapon inside the school.

I am a little confused, though. Aren’t there few hundred gun control laws that prohibit the presence of guns on school grounds? How come, then, did the student bring a gun to school if it is against the law?

These are questions that I would like to ask any of those people who say we need more gun control laws, including Rep. Peter King.

The truth, as usual, slaps liberals and cowards right in the face! The truth is that there is no gun control law that is going to stop someone that is determined to commit a crime.
Schools today suspend elementary age students for having LEGO blocks assembled in the shape of guns, or for having little soldiers, because any of that will bring the child to be a mass murderer or something.

But in the environment of the urban center public schools, where it is often joked that teacher should receive combat pay, a student brings a gun to school, because the deterrence is just not there.
Expulsion from school, for some of these students, is almost looked at as a badge of honor by their peers.

The problem, you see, is that many of these children have been growing up being told that the reason they could not read and write was because the government was just not doing enough for them.
The failure of the education system, and the social system, in the inner cities is due to not enough government programs. So how come even in the rough there are those students who still turn up to be diamonds?

The answer is that the liberal progressives that have been polluting the educational system have been fostering a culture of failure. They have been able to inculcate the minds of students with false notions of culpability of those who support the idea of personal responsibility.
An entire generation, or two, has grown up expecting free and increasing concessions on the part of the government. More money, more programs, more catering.
A culture of “it is not your fault”, but it is the fault of those who want you to be responsible for your actions. A culture that has given us an embarrassing high rate of illiteracy for high school graduates.
And a culture that has created an ever increasing section of the population that goes directly from the failed educational system into a failed welfare system.

But nothing will be done about this, because the product of the failed liberal progressive educational system is exactly what they want: government subjects to keep them in office.
Meantime, too big a percentage of the youth of America languishes in a state of subjugation to a government that can control them easily.
As for the rest of us, we’ll probably hear soon some anti-Second Amendment miscreant stating that we need more gun control laws, and that really the cause of the incident in Gardena High School was Sarah Palin or George W. Bush.

Just my thoughts!

My Heart Bleeds For Oprah

By Semperpapa

The Blaze reports that, according to an interview Oprah Winfrey gave to Piers Morgan, she hates to write the check for her taxes to the IRS.

Oprah told in the interview that she has to sign every check for amounts over $100,000, so when her accountants come to have her sign the checks she owes the government, they bring her tequila, I guess to ease the pain.

So my heart goes to Oprah for the stress that she must obviously be feeling.

Oh, wait a minute, she campaigned for Obama! That tells me that she feels that his policies are in line with her own, including his demonstrated hatred for anyone who worked hard to achieve financial comfort. That means that she agreed with Obama's staunch intention of re-distributing wealth out of producers and in the hands of the takers.
So why is Oprah so distressed by having to pay taxes? Should she not be happy that she is contributing to the success of Obama?

Maybe Ms. Winfrey was given the impression that she, as an Obama crony and being the mighty Oprah, would be exempt from the IRS money grab that the man she worshiped has been conducting for the last two years.

Or maybe Ms. Oprah is just another typical liberal hypocrite who supported Obama because he is black and because she thought she would get a preferential treatment because of it.

That is nothing more than racism.

It is interesting how these so called celebrities have the courage to speak in these terms. She, as a successful entertainer who supposedly came from abject poverty, should be even more sensitive to the words she uses. Many of the people in her audience do not have a combined household salary that even comes close to the amount she pays in taxes.
Moreover, she also lacks any sensitivity toward the portion of the black population that has been held hostage by people like Al Sharpton and Jessi Jackson for decades and who definitely do not have anywhere near the income level of Ms. Oprah.

I get a chuckle from liberals when they get impacted by the very policies they champion so vehemently.
I would really laugh at the image of Woopy Goldberg and Joy Behar having to cope with Sharia law.

Just my thoughts!

Common Sense Solutions For Rising Oil Prices

By Semperpapa

We are all witnessing it: a definite rise in the cost of energy.

Gasoline prices are steadily inching up, placing additional stress on the cash flow of the average American family. As are heating costs and electricity rates.

Behind all this is the price of crude oil, which is at the $100/barrel cost, and when that happens, we see an immediate increase of cost of goods at the consumer level.

As usually happens, the increase in crude price sends a sobering shock through the economies of the West due to the total dependency that Western nations have on the producing Arab countries.

At the OAPEC meeting on Saturday in Cairo, Egypt, the oil ministers of the major Arab exporters declared that the current pricing, which has reached the $103.46 level, is an acceptable price and that their nations are not planning to increase production for 2011, although the demand is predicted to increase for that period.

So, once again, the Arab oil producing nations, led by our “friends” the Saudis, is conveniently placing a choke hold on the economies of the West, further putting in question the possibility of an economic rebound across Europe and for the United States.

Besides the ungrateful Saudis, supporting the high crude prices are the Kuwait and Iraqi oil ministers who appear to have a very short memory regarding their current freedom of gouging.

And yet, nothing is being done in Washington to address the issue.

As a matter of fact, Washington appears to be very comfortable with the additional financial burden that increase energy prices are placing on the average American.

Pointing to that direction is the current state of the domestic drilling issue. Last summer, as the Obama administration was clearly using the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico as an excuse to place a moratorium on all offshore drilling, thousands of people lost their jobs and many small oil companies had to close doors.

But even more frustrating was that as the ban was lifted, new drilling permits have yet to be issued, bogged down in a sea of convenient red tape.

Adding to the frustration of an entire nation is the knowledge that we in the United States are sitting on enough natural resources, crude oil, natural gas and coal, to achieve independence from our enemies, create thousands upon thousands of good jobs and increase our export.

From the desolate tundra of Alaska to the Gulf of Mexico, all efforts to rid our Nation of the yoke of dependency from the OPEC thugs is curtailed by government actions, or more accurately inactions, that defy any logic or common sense.

So, in the spirit of patriotism and common sense, I do have some solutions to this crisis. And this will soon become a crisis that will affect every American even more.

The main goal of the Washington crowd should be the forced march, not walk, toward energy independence. In order to achieve this, America must have a political leadership willing to place the Nation on an industrial war footing that should dwarf the industrial boom witnessed following the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941.

In those days, our Military preparedness was negligible and yet, within few months of national dedication, America became the Arsenal of Democracy.

We are in similar dire times, not because of the danger of an overt enemy, but by the covert actions of enemies hiding behind a façade of pseudo friendship.

Solutions, therefore is to be found in the commitment to reduce at first and eliminate all together, our need for the oil coming from the sands of the Arab world.

Drilling for oil and natural gas should be initiated immediately. Permits should be flying out of the Department of Energy at neck breaking speed, allowing oil companies, especially the smaller outfits, to have access to the immense reserves our country sits on.

Excavation for coal should be fostered by governmental support, not hindrance as the Presidents prefers, so that the heating cost for the American people could be maintained at a manageable level and electricity costs would be manageable.

And dozens of nuclear power plants’ constructions should be planned and started immediately.

When a country like France achieves 70% of their electricity production out of nuclear power, I see no possible reason why our country could not achieve even better.

Just the above three solutions could have a revolutionary effect on our economy.

Drilling and mining would create thousands of good jobs for Americans. When we discuss the construction and placement of an oil rig, for example, it is not just the rig workers employment to be considered. Oil rigs are complex engineering apparatuses, the realization of which demands the application of design and manufacturing.

When a rig is commissioned, it has to be designed and its components have to be manufactured. If the government would relax the regulatory stranglehold on small businesses, there would be a greater potential for American small manufacturing companies to enter the bidding process and be competitive even with the manufacturing counterparts in the Asian countries. And my contention does not even address the issue of product quality control.

Even more on the point would be the construction of nuclear powerplants.

The complexity of such plant would require the application of every single engineering discipline, with the obvious result of creating an enormous number of direct good paying jobs. Relaxation of regulations would allow larger contractors to again utilize the services of smaller companies who, in turn, would have to hire more workers to address the demand. More good paying jobs.

When I speak of relaxation of regulations, I am definitely not speaking of cutting corners, a misconception that the environmental zealots usually get all twisted about. Federal regulations for any sort of governmental contracting are absurd, from the Military to the civilian sectors.

We all remember the outrageous cases of the $500 hammers and the $5,000 coffee pots. Those cases were surely an example of gouging on the part of some companies, but there are many instances where the cost of a small business to comply with Military Standards (Mil-Std) or Quality regulations (like ISO) is so high that only large companies are able to invest in. This environment leaves thousands of talented small businesses out of the game.

Environmental guidelines would have to be met, so that the road to energy independence would have the least impact on the habitat. And that is technology that we already have.

What needs to be eliminated is the quid pro quo approach. By getting the government out of the process as much as possible and by empowering small businesses in the process, we could limit the occurrence of government giving “preferential treatment” to companies like BP in exchange for political contributions.

Large conglomerates like BP love government regulations (that is why they are large contributors to liberal politicians) because they are the only one who have the financial capability to adhere to such restrictive regulations. Relaxing them would create a more competitive environment, undermining their monopoly in the industries. So my suggestions should be appreciated by those folks who are viscerally opposed to the evil corporations.

One last point about alternative energy. After the debacle of the ethanol fiasco, the poor performance of solar power and wind power, there is still a wide open opportunity for research and development of alternative sources of energy. Again, the relaxation and/or removal of governmental regulation have the potential for spurring even more economic growth.

The United States, with its historic hunger for technological innovations, should be at the forefront of that sort of research; we should be independent from the stranglehold from abroad and definitely not allow ourselves to be held hostage.

Just my thoughts!

Open Warfare From Mexico

By Semperpapa

There are too many folks in the United States who do not understand that Mexico is in open warfare state with our country.

Maybe it is not the Mexican government in itself, at least not overtly, but still we are in a state of belligerence with our neighbors to the south.

Texas Sheriff Arvin West of Hudspeth County, near El Paso, reported that a road crew was shot at from the Mexican side of the border as they were working on repairing a road along the US-Mexican line.

No workers were hit by the gunfire and they called the authorities who responded and determined that the shot had actually come from the Mexican side of the border.

This is not the first instance of bullets hitting property in the United States, having been fired from Mexico, with El Paso City Hall and the University of Texas-El Paso building having been hit by bullets last summer.

With all the hoopla being propagated by illegal immigration proponents about the “unfairness” of American immigration attitude, it appears that the violence touching American lives is being ignored by the usual politically correct atmosphere of Washington.

Even as the casualties mount, like the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in December 2010, one of the true obligations of the federal government, the protection of our borders, goes unheeded.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano dismisses the criticism of agent Terry’s family toward the open border policies of the administration and then goes to Afghanistan to address the border security in that country. She attests to the fantasy that the border with Mexico is as secure as it has ever been and that it is unrealistic to expect it to be 100% secure.

Moreover, as declared by many politicians and even Sec. of State Hillary Clinton, it is the fault of America for the presence of so many weapons in Mexico.

Of course what remains hidden in the crevices of a corrupt government is that fact that the most widely used weapon in Mexico remains the Russian AK47, a weapon that is not manufactured in the United States.

While our politicians blame America for weaponizing the criminal element in Mexico, what remains completely ignored are the ship loads of weapons arriving into Mexico from China, Russia, North Korea and Venezuela.

The Mexican government responsibility in the whole issue cannot also go unmentioned.

Surely the official position is that Calderon is doing all he can to stifle the open warfare going on in his country and continuously spilling over into the United States, but the truth is a whole different thing.

Old resentments have taken a whole new life form in the contention, on the part of Mexico, that the South West part of the United States belongs to Mexico.

The concept of La Reconquista is not new in the context of the illegal immigration activists in the United States and Mexico. Basically, these activists have been working diligently in the re-taking of that portion of the United States that they claim belongs to them. And they have been highly successful.

We already have seen an increasing slide into the bi-lingual obsession, from all official writing to school teaching.

We have already seen social services being overwhelmed by illegal aliens influx.

We have discrimination being perpetrated against job applicants because there are not fluent in Spanish.

We have financial institutions, like Bank of America, catering to illegal aliens in ways that they do not do for US citizens.

And the list goes on!

The Mexican government has been conducting a covert invasion of our country for decades, achieving a dual purpose goal: they rid themselves of the lowest members of their economic scale, and infiltrate them into American society, all the while getting a nice financial return from the money illegals send back into Mexico.

The violence that we have been seeing in Mexico and that has been spilling into the United States is highly disturbing, to say the least. The US federal government took the token, PR leaden step of sending the National Guard to the border, except that their number and application is abysmal at best. Many of these guardsmen are combat Veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan and their role should be one of protection of our National soil, not just a poor attempt to pacify dissent.

And to add insult to injury, the federal government instituted another gun law that curtails people from areas along the border of Arizona from purchasing rifles. The restrictions are directed to people who deal every day with illegal aliens trespassing on their properties on their way into the United States.

What is apparent from the US government, is their intention of not only leaving the border as open as possible, allowing illegal immigration to continue unimpeded, but also to prevent US citizens from protecting their properties and their lives.

The atmosphere in the Nation’s capital has become one of extreme liberalism. Agent Terry already paid with his life for these policies and countless others have been victimized by the unwillingness of the government to fulfill its responsibilities, by an over-accommodating political pandering that is reaching a detrimental level.

So far we have had expendable law enforcement and some poor guy who decided to jet ski on the wrong lake at the wrong time, paying with their lives. And we have had the rancher who was killed on his own land.

What is the human life threshold the people are willing to accept? We have a liberal media and portion of the population willing to accuse political opponents of fomenting criminal actions like in Tucson, but they remain absolutely silent when foreign invaders kill our own citizens.

It defies any common sense.

Just my thoughts!