Click to bookmark this page!

- Contact Me -
Include your email address

<< January 2004 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03
04 05 06 07 08 09 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31


Just in case you weren't sure...
If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:

Please sign the Ted Kennedy Resignation Petition!


rss feed

Shameless Self-Promotion

Buy this book (not just because it contains two of my op-eds):
Americans on Politics, Policy, and Pop Culture:
The 101 Best Opinion Editorials From OpEds.com


An Interview With the G-Man:
My first (hopefully not last) experience in live radio, being interviewed by G. Gordon Liddy!



Perspective
Joe Mariani

Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by precision use of American military force under George W. Bush:
50 million in just two years

Number of people freed from totalitarian dictatorships by anti-American Bush-bashing terrorist-appeasing whining elitists:
Zero. Ever.
...

The problem seems to me to be the definition of "free speech". Liberals define it as anything they want to say or do that opposes America. I say "speech" ends where "action" begins. Once you pick up a gun for the enemy, throw a rock at a cop during a "peace" march, send money to a terrorist organisation, or travel to Baghdad to block an American JDAM with your ass, you have crossed the line from free speech to costly action.
...

Saying the War on Terror is all about al-Qaeda is like saying we should have fought the Japanese Naval Air Force after Pearl Harbor. Not the Japanese Navy, not the Japanese Army, not the Empire of Japan -- just the Naval Air Force.
...

Complaining about the "waste" when human embryos are destroyed instead of being used in medical experiments is a lot like going to a funeral and complaining about the waste of perfectly good meat.
...

Blaming CO2 for climate change is like blaming smoke for the fire. CO2 is largely a following, not a leading, indicator of a rise in temperature.
...

Cavalier's First Theorem:
Every time, Liberals will fight to protect the guilty and kill the innocent, while Conservatives will fight to protect the innocent and punish the guilty.

Cavalier's Second Theorem:
Liberals are just Socialists who want to be loved... then again, Socialists are just Communists who lack the courage of their convictions.

Cavalier's Third Theorem:
Any strongly moral, hawkish or pro-American statement by a Liberal will inevitably be followed by a "but."

Top News Headlines

Iraq Blogs

The Messopotamian
Iraq at a Glance
Iraq the Model
Hammorabi
Iraq & Iraqis
Nabil's Blog
Road of a Nation
The Sun of Iraq
Healing Iraq

Iraqi Bloggers Central

The Truth About Iraq
Liberating Iraq
Pictures from Iraq
The Iraqi Holocaust: a collection
Iraq's Mass Graves

Mudville Gazette:
News the media can't use

The Other Iraq:
The Iraq you never hear about in the MSM

Michael Yon - Online Magazine
Dispatches not filed from the Baghdad Hilton hot tub


United States Central Command


Humor

Infamous Monsters of Filmland

Day by Day: Chris Muir's witty comic strip with a political bent

The Ultimate War Simulation: Why does this scenario seem so familiar?

What Kind of Liberal Are You?
Save me the trouble of figuring out what kind of idiot you are

Blame Bush
Because Bush is to blame... for everything

Sacred Cow Burgers
Web Archive

Satirical Political Beliefs Test

Communists for Kerry

Cooper's Protester Guide

Fellowship 9/11: Sauron never attacked Rohan, Saruman did! Yet a small group of elitists convinced Middle-earth to divert resources from the real war to attack Mordor for personal gain.


Analysis

When Democrats Attack
Did prominent Democrats switch positions on Iraq just to attack President Bush for political gain? (See the updated list.)

Was Iraqi Freedom Justified?
An honest, step-by-step analysis of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq that Congress voted into law shows that it was.

Saddam's Philanthropy of Terror
Details of solid ties to organised international terrorism

How The Left Betrayed Iraq
by Naseer Flayih Hasan

Did We Botch The Occupation?
No, not of Iraq: of Germany. Read the media's take on how we "lost the peace" in 1946 and compare.

Debunking 8 Anti-War Myths About the Conflict in Iraq

Pictures from Hate Bush/Hate America/Hate Capitalism/Hate Israel/general wacko rallies
- by Zombie

Jihad Watch


2004 Election Links

Looosers: Sorry, Everybody!
Winners: You're Welcome, Everybody!


2008 Election

Peace Through Strength PAC


Duncan Hunter in 2008
official site



Click to join duncanhunterforpresident2008 at Yahoo! Groups

Useful Links

FamilyWishList
Share your wish list with friends and family

Virtual Tourist
Travel tips from real travelers

RemBot.com
Appointment calendar with email/wireless notification

PriceGrabber.com
Convenient comparison shopping


Reading Material

RightWingNews
The best right-wing news and commentary

GOP USA Commentary Corner

Men's News Daily
The New Media

OpinionEditorials.com
a project of Frontiers of Freedom

ChronWatch
SF Chronicle watchdog and conservative news

American Daily
Analysis with political and social commentary

The Conservative Voice
Conservative news and opinion

News By Us
...not news bias

IntellectualConservative.com
Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics

CommonConservative.com
Practical conservatism for the common man

USASentinel
Analysis, Commentary and Opinion on the Real World

PhillyFuture.org
Philly news and blogs


Now Reading

The Fatal Conceit:
The Errors of Socialism
by F. A. Hayek



Articles Previously Published at
Useless-Knowledge.com

- When Good Liberals Go Bad - 05/29/03
- How Stupid Do Democrats Think You Are? - 05/31/03
- Who Are These 'Rich' Getting Tax Cuts, Anyway? - 06/02/03
- How Can We Miss The Clintons If They Won't Go Away? - 06/04/03
- Whining of Mass Distraction: How To Discredit A President - 06/05/03
- Liberal "Rules" for Arguing - 06/10/03
- Liberalism: Curable or Terminal? - 06/14/03
- Filibustering Judges: Hijacking Presidential Powers? - 06/17/03
- Is Hamas Exempt from the War on Terror? - 06/22/03
- How Malleable Is The Constitution? - 06/26/03
- Rejecting Our Biological and Cultural Heritage - 06/30/03
- I Need Liberal Assistance, Now! - 07/02/03
- Bring Them On - 07/03/03
- We Need You Arrogant Warmongering Americans...Again - 07/09/03
- Much Ado About Nothing, Again - 07/13/03
- Double Standard: Blindly Blame Bush - 07/18/03
- Was WWII Also Unjustified? - 07/20/03
- Clinton Backing Bush? Don't Bet On It! - 07/24/03
- How To Be A Hypocritical Liberal - 07/28/03
- The Clinton Legacy: In Answer to Mr. Stensrud - 07/30/03
-What Is 'Good News' To Liberals? - 08/02/03
- Bush's Big Blunder - 08/06/03
- The Meaning of Right - Why I Supported the Iraq War - 08/10/03
- More Liberal "Rules" for Arguing - 08/14/03
- You Can Have Cary Grant; I'll Take John Wayne! - 08/19/03
- Where Is The ACLU When It's Actually Needed? - 08/25/03
- Who's Afraid Of The Big Bad Ten Commandments? - 08/28/03
- From The Weasels: Thanks For Nothing - 08/30/03
- The Liberal Superfriends - 09/02/03
- Liberal Superfriends 2: The Sequel - 09/05/03
- Saddam and 9/11: Connect the Dots - 09/08/03
- Throwing Away the Southern Vote - 11/02/03
- Libya: The First Domino Falls - 12/20/03
- Is the UN Playing Games with American Politics? - 03/04/04


Blogs to Browse

Across the Pond
AlphaPatriot
Arts for Democracy
Betsy's Page
Bill Karl
Blonde Sagacity
Bull Moose Strikes Back
Common Sense & Wonder
Conservative Pleasure
Dangerous Logic
DowneastBlog
ElectionProjection
Everything I Know Is Wrong
Freedom of Thought
Sally Girl
Korla Pundit
LogiPundit.com
MarkLevinFan
Mark Nicodemo
Michelle Malkin
Moonbattery
My Arse From My Elbow
QandO Blog
RadioBS.net
Rebel Rouser
RightThinkingGirl
Sally Girl
Samantha Burns
Semi-Intelligent Thoughts
Sighed Effects
Sister Toldjah
Stark Truth
Take A Stand Against Liberals
The Resplendent Mango
The Right Society
The YNC
Tom's Common Sense
Tom DeLay
Tomfoolery of the Highest Order
Trying to Grok
TS Right Dominion
Violent Daydreams
Watcher of Weasels
Word Around the Net
WuzzaDem.com



Locations of visitors to this page


Friday, January 09, 2004
Don't Call It Theft

Now that President Bush has put forward his proposal to give legal status to tens of millions of illegal immigrants -- sorry, "undocumented alien workers" -- who have broken America's immigration laws (an amnesty by any other name...), many other large groups of people who have performed "illegal" acts have lobbied Washington to have their crimes officially ignored.  Next up on the list of such programs is America's vast numbers of car thieves, and legal status -- don't call it amnesty -- will be granted to them for the exact same reasons.

1. Millions of people have already done it, so why not just make car "theft" legal?

2. It would be a drain on our resources to track down and prosecute the millions of "unregistered car owners" already in America.

3. Car "theft" is actually an important part of the economy because it creates a market for new cars, and that means jobs.

4. Car "thieves" who come forward and register will be given a temporary three-year registration for their vehicles, reducing the number of illegally owned vehicles overnight.

5. Once all the car "thieves" who just want to be legal, law-abiding owners of their cars come forward and register, law enforcement can concentrate on the few remaining diehard illegals with greater efficiency.

Of course, this does seem to send a message to people who have never stolen a car before that it's okay to steal cars, but the Administration doesn't seem overly concerned about that. Republican detractors of the "guest car registration" program, outraged on behalf of people who purchased their cars, claim that millions of new cars will be stolen because this bill removes any penalty for car theft. Democrats are against the program because it doesn't go far enough towards giving unregistered vehicle owners full and permanent legal registration for their vehicles.

Future decriminalisation bills may include murderers and arsonists, both of whom can also claim to number in the millions and whose "crimes" can be considered important parts of the economy.

Posted at Friday, January 09, 2004 by CavalierX

Virtus
January 9, 2004   04:45 PM PST
 
Awesome parallel. This is a really well put example of exactly what is wrong with Bush's immigration policy.
Richard Laycock
January 10, 2004   02:58 PM PST
 
I had my email to whitehouse.gov all ready to go when I heard a replay of GW's speech. I relented.

He says he's going to close the borders to smuggler's and terrorists. That's the same thing Reagan said at the last Amnesty. He failed to get it done. I have to say though that GW has done pretty much everything he said he'd do. If it wasn't for Reagan's failure I believe most conservatives would simply believe Bush because of his track record.

Most importantly the whole rant about the change of status "rewarding law breakers" by you or anyone else is totally unrealistic. How the heck do you envision the US deporting the 8,000,000 illegals? Do you seriously believe anyone will ever send in troops or the ATF or whomever to roundup millions of men, women and children and ship them out?

The idea is absurd. IT AIN'T EVER GOING TO HAPPEN. What Bush is doing is confronting the facts on the ground in the best way he sees possible.

I don't like it either but I have to agree it's the best solution that could actually be implemented.

Rich.
JM
January 10, 2004   03:08 PM PST
 
>I don't like it either but I have to
>agree it's the best solution that
>could actually be implemented.

As long as the borders get tightened, I agree. If not, then this is just an open invitation to everyone to come on in. I don't much like the idea of giving the ones who've already broken our laws a pass, either. I didn't say they all have to be deported, but there should be some serious penalty for what they've done. And those who refuse to register by whatever time limit is given SHOULD be deported immediately on apprehension.
Arty P
January 10, 2004   03:18 PM PST
 
Hey from one blogforbush to another! - I followed your link from the site.

I don't like to criticize Bush but I'm a bit troubled by this one too. Another thing I think is its a bit peculiar the idea that Mexicans are willing to do jobs that Americans arent.

Did it ever occur to anyone that Mexicans dont actually WANT to pick fruit all day in the blazing sunshine but that they have to BECAUSE THEY ARE ILLEGAL, and cant get a nice office job!

If they become legal they will want to work better jobs that Americans want as well and we'll get a whole other 10 million people in who'll have to do the rubbish ones.

Also to Rich, no one is suggesting we can deport 10 million any more than anyone is suggesting we can catch every car theif.

But the fact that you cant catch them all is not a reason to give up trying to catch (or deport) some of them!

Or maybe in 5 years time if Osama is still on the run and the idea that we ever will get him becomes "unrealistic" we should just stop chasing him too?

I don't understand how if backward Communist Russia was able to secure all its borders so effectively that our nation, light years ahead in every department is not!
JM
January 10, 2004   03:28 PM PST
 
>If they become legal they will
>want to work better jobs that
>Americans want as well

That's true. That's why they'll only get a three-year work pass, and only for jobs that no American will fill in a certain time frame. Any kids they have while here, however, will be full citizens. That'll be a problem in a couple of decades.

>I don't understand how if
>backward Communist Russia was
>able to secure all its borders so
>effectively that our nation, light
>years ahead in every department
>is not!

Well... there were two minor differences.
1. Their borders were designed to keep people IN.
2. They didn't worry about those pesky civil rights.
Neither one should ever apply to us. :)
Kerry Dupont
January 10, 2004   10:18 PM PST
 
There are some interesting comments on this over at NRO (www.nationalreview.com) in The Corner, their blog spot. John Derbyshire brings up the point that:
In the 1954 Operation Wetback (sorry, that's what it was called), the INS claimed to have sent 1,300,000 illegals back to Mexico using a force of only 700 officers. The figures have been disputed; but as a matter of sheer practicality, I do not believe that deporting eight million illegals with current resources is unthinkable. Whether it is POLITICALLY--which nowadays, of course, largely means "judicially"--possible is, I certainly agree, another matter. Still, conscientious commentators should not entertain false beliefs even about impossibilities, and to the best of my understanding the statement that we simply cannot physically deport eight million illegal aliens is false. But the real scandal here is not that we are failing to deport ALL illegal aliens, even supposing we could, but that we are failing to deport ANY. If you have cast-iron evidence that I am an illegal alien, and you take that evidence to your local immigration enforcement office, they will do nothing. We know this because enterprising citizens have been trying it out and logging their efforts on immigration-restrictionist web sites. If the authorities just did what they could, and deported those illegal aliens who came to their attention, the chilling effect would cause far larger numbers to drift back to their home countries. (Which is part of what happened in 1954.) Yet we do nothing. This is disgraceful. Traffic cops on the expressway don't catch any but a small proportion of speeders, but they catch enough to make the rest of us wary.

Kerry Dupont
January 10, 2004   10:24 PM PST
 
Rich-he says that he's going to close the borders to smugglers and terrorists? Just now we're going to do that? IMHO, the borders should be closed PERIOD until we get the people already here dealt with in one way or another. Should have been since Sept 11. And I live in another "border state" and we've had a lot of problems with this for the terrorist reason, not the illegal immigrant reason.
Sorry, Joe, to take up your space, I'll blog about that on my own site!
JM
January 10, 2004   10:34 PM PST
 
The problem with closing the borders altogether is that way -- and I hate to repeat the phrase -- the terrorists win. I see no problem with LEGAL immigration, fingerprinting and photographing even visitors, and other reasonable precautions. But building walls to keep people out will never stop -- every time one terrorist gets lucky, we'll just build 'em higher, and it'll never be enough. No, ending State sponsorship of terrorism was the right way to go. We have to stop ILLEGAL immigration, though, and not by screwing around with semantics.
Kerry Dupont
January 10, 2004   11:02 PM PST
 
JM-I'm not talking about closing the borders forever, I'm talking about until the INS or whatever bureaucratic mess deals with it now, starts going through some paperwork on aliens already here. I'd just like us to get a handle on the people already in the country, then I'm happy to invite more in. I'm really not an isolationist, after all, my grandparents came here from Ireland.
Kerry Dupont
January 10, 2004   11:04 PM PST
 
And I don't think that ending "State sponsorship" was the wrong way to go at all, I just think that it is part of the big picture.
James
October 31, 2005   08:11 AM PST
 
Greate site. Thank you :)
 

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments




Previous Entry Home Next Entry