Friday, June 29, 2007


Immigration Revisited

What does an acceptable immigration bill contain?

A very easy question that 100 senators could not agree upon!

  • Do everything needed to seal up our Southern border very tightly.

    Enforce old laws

    Enforce new laws

    Photo and fingerprint all who cross and are caught, then deport them.

  • Do everything needed to identify and bring to justice all Illegals.

    Give arrest permission to all law enforcement.

    Give deportation permission to all law enforcement. Force INS to follow.

    Deport all Illegals forthwith over the next five years.

  • Do not allow Illegals to be employed in the nation.

    Punish employers severely that knowingly hire Illegals.

    Search and find Illegals diligently wherever they may be.

    Do not allow families into the nation.

  • Rescind the ‘child born in the nation automatically a citizen’ clause.

    Rescind the rule.

    Make the new rule retroactive to 2000.

    Ensure that there is no dual citizenship allowed.

  • Create a legal migrant worker program with all needed provisions.

    Limit the number per year, and number of years in succession.

    Limit travel to only the registered employer’s locations.

    Ensure positive identification and employer sponsorship

  • Create a registered employee program, with penalties for abuses.

    Employees must sponsor named migrant workers.

    Employees must deposit $1,000 per worker he sponsors.

    The deposit will be forfeited in the worker leaves.

Labels: ,

Wednesday, June 27, 2007


Iran, Iraq, Immigration: Cut to the Chase!

Does History Apply?

For some time, I have noticed that many prominent bloggers (who shall remain unnamed here) have the style of searching for the origins of issues, and only gently deriving any actionable conclusions from their efforts. It appears to be a fetish to delve into history as far back as the Crusades when focusing on Iraq or Iran, and to discuss the benefits of the Scotch-Irish immigrations when weeding through the issues hidden in the current immigration debate. There seems to be an enormous investment in past events, outcomes, and ideas that are supposed to inform our current debates. Perhaps so and perhaps not.

We are in the 21st century, and the contrasts in practically every category of life you can name in America are vastly changed, even from the early to mid 20th century till now. Thus, arguments by analogy can be terribly flawed because of: misuse of the comparison by a straining author; data from the past or present being incomplete, biased or in error; by the changed technology available today; or by the prevailing attitudes, spirit, conviction, or patriotism prevalent in the past or today. It seems then, that only the most gross comparisons can have real meaning and utility.

Vietnam versus Iraq is one to think about. The one comparison that has any real meaning is the abject defeatism of the media in both cases. In the Vietnam instance, it eventually turned military victory into a political defeat for America, and a genocidal disaster for the people of Southeast Asia. It is apparent that the lesson here has not been learned by the media for Iraq.
So I have little use for the media, which is yet another user of false comparisons to make their negative points.

There are many new factors to be accounted for, including: WMD; GPS; logistics and transport capabilities; communications; intelligence; modern weapons; speed of execution; and the commander's and the troops knowledge of the battle today. While some ruses and tactical or strategic ploys from the past still work today, they must be carefully tempered by these new factors, or even rejected because of them. This is not to say that study of the past of warfare is not meaningful. It is. It provides grounding for new officers in grasping the thinking of the excellent soldiers and generals of the past. Then it is up to them to apply these methods to the present, or to update them with their newly available capabilities.

In most cases that I have familiarity with, both bloggers and the media tend to misuse historical comparisons blatantly, causing untold confusion in the public mind. It is happening today in the totally politicized Iraqi situation.

There is no cure, either, I believe.

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, June 25, 2007


Immigration Bill---Yea or Nay?

Where a vast majority of citizens heartily disapprove of the bill!

We have done our best to convince our Senators that we do not like this bill. I have called both of my Senators, and emailed them three times. I have joined in petitions, and I have posted negative comments wherever the subject was broached.

There is no argument that we have a real and pressing problem to solve in closing our borders, in handling somehow our flood of illegals already here, and in allowing migrant workers to work for our farms. But to load the bill with sneaky provisions that will negate most of the good it would do is a travesty, and an insult to our intelligence.

I hope, whatever transpires, the stealth provisions will be eliminated.


Friday, June 22, 2007


Whither Iraq

A few hard facts and suppositions drawn from my posts elsewhere

I see little hope for diplomacy in the area. We are in a kill or be killed situation, where money will not buy our way out, and all of the other sides of the table are rogues of renown. We seem to insist on treating Muslim fanatics as reasoned individuals, when they are cutthroats and dervishes that should be eliminated. The situation reminds me of the cold war “negotiations”. The other side took whatever concessions we offered and kept asking for more, while yielding nothing in return. If you don’t want to be taken to the cleaners, stay away from the negotiating table. The prescription for this situation is the application of unyielding force.

There is no known test for the honesty, trustworthiness, and humanity of a Muslim, be he fanatic or not. We cannot tell. We have no way to reach common ground with them in the end, since they are tied to Islam, which allows them in their minds absolute free reign over infidels like you and me. Their Qur’an states that it is just fine to lie, cheat, steal, and kill infidels, those who do not believe in Islam.

Thus, the practical steps of the situation are to garrison the capital, borders and the oil areas to prevent their falling into unfriendly hands, and to isolate the Muslims from any travel to the West for an indefinite period.

The US should not allow Muslims into our country, and those that are already here should be "encouraged" to leave. There are some exceptions to this, of course, such as diplomatic and business travelers with our approval.

Let the oil pay for our occupation and a goodly profit for us, with the rest of the money being shoveled to the Iraqi in shares to each family head and a large share to the government, say 10%. On this matter, we will have to return the oil infrastructure to our control, since we did give that control to the Iraqi earlier. They are not dealing with this issue properly, nor are we at the moment.

There should be no reconstruction program funded by the American taxpayer. Let oil money do its thing. We should keep hands off the internal machinations of the Iraqi government, unless their actions threaten us. We should give humanitarian aid where needed in a carefully managed manner.

Other than that, let them find their own way. We should immediately drop the facade of having to "win hearts and minds" of Muslims. That will never happen. What they will appreciate is security and a decent flow of revenue to all provinces, backed up by force.

For those who believe we should cut and run from Iraq, you cannot un-crack an egg. Iraq is a cracked egg, and we have helped to crack it, although for the best of intentions. Perhaps a better analogy is a whole carton of cracked eggs, one for each of the major parties to the crackup. By my reckoning there is at least: Sunni, Shiite, Kurd, Iraqi politicians, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Russia, China, Palestine, Lebanon, and the US in the carton! There is therefore no moral lift whatsoever for us to abandon what we helped to undo. You cannot fix what is wrong in Iraq by running from it.

We need to assist in some ways to create a dozen new eggs: 1) help to protect the carton; 2) help to create new eggs by mainly commercial means; and, 3) in our own interest, to maintain substantial forces and well-organized bases next to Iran and Syria.

However, we cannot change the Muslim mind, the Muslim tribal loyalties, or the Muslim traditions of the various tribes, of which there are well over a hundred. Thus, we must stand aside, and let them solve their own internal problems and conflicts.

If they manage to build a sane government, we can help them further at their request. If they decide to split the nation into regions of Sunni, Shiite and Kurd influence, we can still help by sitting on the key element of their economic future--the oil--and doling out the revenue fairly. If they attack our bases, that would be a huge problem for them, since they would be drawn out into the open where our superior forces would prevail.

The major results of this proposal would be several fold: 1) disengagement and reduction in our losses; 2)defense of the infant government while it tries to find its way; 3)allowing (or even forcing) the various sects and tribes to seek their own solutions to both their ancient their and modern conflicts and problems of governance; 4)taking the question of fair distribution of oil profits off the table by fiat; and, finally, 5) providing for a US springboard in the event of escalation of Iranian and Syrian confrontations.

It is not incidental that we should control the oil revenue, since it would be a major resource for the Iraqi to use in rebuilding their military forces further than we would want.

Should massive genocide break out between the sects after our repositioning, we would be able to react quickly to help quell the bloodlettings--by both denial of oil revenue and by force.

US troops would be in Iraq still, and quite able to help in the event of sectarian violence should we be called upon by the Iraqi government.

We are not responsible for the ancient conflicts of the Muslims, nor should we even try to be. Nor are we responsible to try to fix them now and never have been. We can still support the current government as a power of last resort should serious sectarian violence break out.

The oil is the correct economic lever for us to control to ensure fair distribution of profits (less our expenses and profit!). Oil shares would likewise be a lever to control planned violence--more terror, less revenue.

Since I believe we will soon be fighting Iran, the feelings of the Islamic world about the Iraqi situation we would create will become a quaint backwater. The reaction to the devastation of Iran and the eventual takeover of their oil will be on page one everywhere. After Iran is neutralized, who is to take us on from the Islamic world?

Regarding oil production in Iraq, if we cannot protect it, modernize it, and ensure it gets to market, I submit that neither can the Iraqi. This is due to the deterioration of the infrastructure, the lack of trained mechanics, and the dearth of replacement parts, virtually all of which came from foreign sources. Thus, if we do not take this role, someone else will, such as Russia or China. Do you want the second largest proven reserves in the world under their aegis? I think not. Oil is the key to a stable Iraq, and a more stable world, if it can be developed to work as projected, and it should be in our interest and our objective to see it realized.

The only reason that one makes a claim that we cannot put massive troop power into Iraq is purely political. Without the will to win here, all is simply empty words, heralding a full retreat sooner or later. This notion of abject retreat I reject, and so does the American people if given a clear chance to express their opinion, which they haven‘t yet had. Do not draw the inference that the American people reject going for a win in Iraq from the results of the 2006 elections or recent polls.

If we need more troops, we can get them, that is reality, but only if the people and the government want them. So the simple question is, do we want to carry out a policy that has a real chance of ending to our satisfaction, or not? I see no other satisfactory option. My previous post covered the reasons for us to stay the course.

Unfortunately, we may well need the troop power increase very soon in any event, because of Iran, which would trump this Iraqi question without a doubt.

If one searches back five years, there are very many people that were on record then for a massive troop invasion of Iraq, including me. What, besides will to win, stops us now?


Labels: , ,

Wednesday, June 20, 2007


The Stupidity of Cut and Run in Iraq

What a wonderful ignorance to think we can just get out of Iraq!

The very simplest solution is to stay where we are and do something constructive with our capabilities along the lines of my proposal.

We are not going to leave any time soon.

We are not going to admit defeat.

We are not going to give the insurgents a victory.

We are not going to let the current government down because of our commitments to them.

We are not going to let the Iraqi people down by leaving them entirely to their own devices, after promising them to stay the course.

We are not going to let Iran and Syria move into Iraq and take over.

We are not going to let Iraqi oil be used against us, although this was one of the great mistakes of the war up to now to let the Iraqi decide how to manage oil. We will regret this soon now, so it may change.

We are not going to let the Kurds be massacred by Iran or Turkey or the Sunnis from Iraq, or all three.

We are not going to stand by and watch the Sunnis and Shiites massacre each other.

We are not going to turn our backs on the soldiers who sacrificed to help give Iraq a chance, over 3,500 of whom did not return alive.

We are not going to turn our backs on an investment of hundreds of billions of dollars to help Iraq out of its troubles.

We have an overweening moral obligation to stay the course now and give the Iraqi a further chance. Any idea that we were morally wrong to invade Iraq is superseded by the subsequent decisions, events, and commitments of the US to Iraq and its people.

We have a national interest in keeping a substantial force in this strategic area of the Middle East, next to Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. This force will be useful in many ways in the near future. It will be augmented soon now.

We are not going to substantially change the situation if the Democrats win in 2008, unless it be along my lines or something similar.

Want to bet on this?

Labels: , ,

Sunday, June 17, 2007


American Ideas

A few ideas that make all the difference!

Let us assume that we believe in the Constitution fully, the laws of the land, and the premise of a free and equal opportunity nation. No, I do not mean the constitution that you want to have, or that you want to revise, I mean the Constitution as written and interpreted by the Supreme Court as of today, and any extensions of that law into the civil laws. There is a formal procedure to change the Constitution that must be the only way it can be changed. Any other subversion is an abomination that must not be allowed to happen.

The premise of an equal opportunity society is hardly ever challenged as it reads. It seems that there is general agreement that all of us must have equality of opportunity. Then comes the groups that claim we must also have equality of outcome. On this slim and pervasive idea, many legislators have bought into the methods of redistribution of wealth by way of progressive taxation and welfare programs. Thus many of our lower income citizens not only pay no tax, they receive money from the government as a direct redistribution of wealth from the better off to the poor. This is pure socialization. Many citizens, myself included, consider this progressive redistribution to be stealing by the government, and it should be terminated. A flat tax would be correct.

A current progressive meme is that of general non-discrimination of any individual or group against any other individual or group. The reductio ad absurdum for this meme is obvious: to carry this out in the ultimate case you must suspend your common sense and your ability to judge people for their honesty, veracity, and reliability. You must equate Christianity with Islam as equally valid, which is simply not a true comparison at all, as can easily be demonstrated. The ridiculous cases can be found everywhere in life. Thus, some definite forms of discrimination must be practiced to survive in this world.

(more later)

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, June 14, 2007


Katie Couric

CBS is leading the way downhill--ABC and NBC to follow!

Why do we need a female reader of the news? One who cannot seem to decide whether to smile or frown at the biased presentation she must read. Always a cute person, and she usually has a sunny disposition, she was a staple figure for years in DC, but never in any serious vein. Katie Couric as anchor for CBS news is simply not cutting it.


Friday, June 08, 2007


Erase Amnesty

We should be clear about what we want!

Never mind the screaming idiots from the Left shouting: Bigot! or Racist! The fact is that we see no reason to mortgage our society in favor of a rag-tag swarm from Mexico. What could these people have been thinking when they promoted such a sell-out bill? Open borders deluxe!

We do not need more workers. We need fewer abortions.
We need migrant fruit pickers who pick and go home.
Day laborers who give a good job for their pay we always need.

But, do we have to subsidize them to the tune of $32,000 per family per year? I think not.

Do we have to pay for their health care? Why? Just tell me why.
Can’t these workers stand on their own two feet? Buy insurance?

Why do we have to give them amnesty, including criminals and gang members? What are these Senators trying to do here? Madness! They will not get my vote.

We do not want amnesty for illegal immigrants. We want to send them home. We want employers to stop hiring them.

We do not want criminals or terrorists to be given amnesty. We want them in jail, and then deported.

We do not want open borders. We want the borders fully controlled, and a big multi-fence installed for at least the lawful 800 miles.

We CAN send the illegals home if we so desire. It would be a big job, yes, but doable also! Over a four year period in WWII, we drafted, processed, housed, fed, clothed, gave medical care, trained, and transported over 12,000,000 men and women all over the states and many foreign countries, and then back home. So stop the nonsense that it cannot be done! Of course it can be done if we have the will to do it!

I have often thought it very odd that we seem to want 45 million lawbreaking, low-skill foreigners to come into the US essentially for free and to subsidize them as well. At the same time, or since Roe versus Wade passed, we have permitted 45 million abortions of our own potential citizens at a rate of over 1.5 million per year.

Doesn’t this strike anyone as nuts? It is morally reprehensible!

Labels: ,

Thursday, June 07, 2007


Immigration Bill

Cloture Refused/Reid Pulls Bill

Whew! This terrible bill goes down for revision now. Revision should be named total rewrite, since few of the provisions of the text are acceptable as they stand. The maneuver to ram the bill through failed, and the more people that actually read the monstrosity , the more hairs that stood on end. Few senators had truly read the entire bill. They were relying on staff to give them a precis and a go/no go signal. So it almost passed on the precis of weenies. But, it all ends well, for the moment.

Tuesday, June 05, 2007


List of Vital Issues for America

Here is my list: What is yours?

1. Christianity--
growing its importance to our citizens.

2. Islam--recognizing that we are at both passive and active war with Fundamental  Islam.

3. Conservatism--getting the message right and out to the public.

4. Liberalism--defeating their outrageous propositions to change America.

5. Education--revising our education system to give a better education.

6. Science--honest tracking of climate change; energy breakthroughs; environment.

7. Globalization--bringing more nations into higher wealth and lower poverty.

8. US Government--reforms in Congress, the SCOTUS, and Administration.

9. US Financial Stability--reform of the budget, reduction in spending.

10. UN and World Politics--deemphasize the UN in favor of democratic nations.

11. World Poverty--work to end starvation of masses of people.

12. WMD Proliferation--stop it by force; carry a big stick.

13. Natural Resources--conservation of scarce resources is a must.

14. The European Union--partner, ally, or dedicated trade enemy?

15. China--Carry a big stick.

16. Social Changes in the US--preserve our effective institutions and traditions.

17. Security--support the GWOT, upgrade the armed forces, keep Patriot Act.

18. Immigration--cap the flow, deport illegals, create a good guest worker program.

19. Corruption in Government--our legislators, judges, and the administration have gone wild, and must be reined in. It is not accidental that the immigration bill is being reinstated. (New)

Labels: , ,

Saturday, June 02, 2007


Thank You Mr. Bush

We Conservatives are Stupid!

You have finally unmasked yourself to us, Mr. Bush. You have turned on the Conservatives in a vicious manner, and we, the original core of your constituency, deeply resent it. It was hard for us to pinpoint your real beliefs until now, since you openly stated your support for real reform of immigration. Real, that is, in the conservative manner. You and the GOP have lost a major part of your support by this action to effectively open our borders to all comers. The message is becoming clear to your party now. A 40% reduction in donations. You are sunk at the polls in 2008, as things stand now.

Labels: , ,

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?