they destroyed our country for "cheap" labor!
"Schumer and Pelosi have armed guards whenever they are among the public. But they are both fervent in their quest to deny us the right to bear arms and to prevent a wall on the southern border to protect us from the flood of lethal drugs that flow into the US. They are impervious to the crimes of the barbaric gangs like MS13, no matter how many innocent Americans they kill. They do not give a thought to the many illegals from terrorist nations that also seek to enter the country on a daily basis. Schumer, Pelosi and their willing subjects in Congress ignore completely the horrific hazards that cross the border every day. They want cheap labor, no matter how many Americans are left jobless, and they want, more than anything, a dependent underclass whom they mean to give the right to vote. They already vote anyway, thanks to the Left's rejection of Common-sense voter ID."
HOW TWO GUSTAVOS USED CALIFORNIA’S SANCTUARY STATE LAW TO SPREAD TERROR ACROSS 200 MILES
No sanctuary for the victims of these two illegal alien killers.
January 2, 2019
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
Less than 200 miles separate Tulare County and Stanislaus County. And a little over a week separates the two reigns of terror in these two California counties by Gustavo Garcia and Gustavo Perez Arriaga.
Both Gustavos were dangerous and violent illegal aliens. On Monday, December 17, Gustavo Garcia went on a murderous rampage that killed at least two people and put seven more in the hospital. On Wednesday, December 26, Gustavo Perez Arriaga murdered a law enforcement officer at a traffic stop.
Cpl. Ronil Singh, murdered by the second Gustavo, and Rocky Paul Jones and Rolando Soto, murdered by the first Gustavo, did not have to die. They died because California’s sanctuary state law took their lives.
Gustavo Garcia had a criminal record dating back to 2002 covering everything from illegal weapons to meth. He had been deported in 2004 and then again in 2014. There had been three immigration holds on the illegal alien criminal. Before he began his murderous spree, Tulare County sheriff's deputies arrested him. ICE put a hold on him as a dangerous illegal alien. But because of California's sanctuary state law, local law enforcement had to let him loose. A few days later, the illegal alien’s carnage began.
Garcia shot a farmworker picking fruit in the chest, robbed a mini-mart at gunpoint of $2,000, shot and killed a man, shot at a woman in the parking lot of a Motel 6, wounding her in the arm and torso, opened fire at two gas stations, killing Rocky Jones, fired shots into several homes, including the home of his ex-girlfriend, forcing her and her children to flee, opened fire on the deputies pursuing him, stole a car from three other farmworkers at gunpoint, and got into a high speed chase while deliberately trying to hit other cars.
He exchanged fire with pursuing cops during the chase, and smashed into other cars while going 100 miles, taking his own life and putting four other people in the hospital, including one critically wounded.
And that’s actually an incomplete list of the illegal alien killer’s crimes after the ICE hold wasn’t honored.
"Before SB 54, Gustavo Garcia would have been turned over to ICE officials. That’s how we’ve always done it, day in and day out. After SB 54, we no longer have the power to do that," Sheriff Mike Boudreaux said.
SB54, euphemistically named the California Values Act, banned local law enforcement officers from holding illegal aliens in custody on immigration detainers or communicating with immigration authorities. Introduced by Senator Kevin de Leon and signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown, the sanctuary state bill illegally made California a sanctuary state and tied the hands of law enforcement.
A little over a week had passed when Gustavo Perez Arriaga was pulled over on suspicion of drunk driving early in the morning. He shot Cpl. Ronil Singh, an immigrant from Fiji, and led law enforcement on a 55 hour manhunt as he fled for the Mexican border. When he was caught, he had traveled around 200 miles from the original scene of the crime. And he had taken the life of a family man and corporal.
Gustavo Perez Arriaga was an illegal migrant who had crossed the border into Arizona a few years ago. The illegal alien was allegedly a member of the Sureno gangs operating under the Mexican mafia. While he found employment as a farm worker, he boasted about his gang membership on social media and racked up drunk driving arrests that couldn’t be used to deport him because California’s sanctuary state law prevented law enforcement from doing anything until it was too late. Now it’s too late.
Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson blamed California sanctuary state laws for Singh's death and questioned why Sacramento was “providing sanctuary for criminals, gang members”. Cpl. Ronil Singh would have been alive, he pointed out, if his future killer had been deported.
Sanctuary state law advocates claim that they want to protect immigrants. Instead they killed one.
“Deepest condolences to the family of Cpl. Ronil Singh of the Newman Police Department. Our hearts are heavy during this holiday season. You truly lived the American Dream,” Senator Kevin de Leon tweeted.
Singh had been living the American Dream, until Kevin de Leon’s illegal alien nightmare took his life.
Singh "immigrated here lawfully and legally to pursue his American dream,” Sheriff Adam Christianson said. “He achieved that goal and his dream was taken from him."
Under fire, Senator Kevin de Leon doubled down on putting illegal alien criminals ahead of legal immigrants. “The type of tone and attitude that Sheriff Christianson has taken instills fear and panic in all immigrant communities,” he ranted. The immigrants attacked by his illegal aliens may disagree.
Meanwhile ICE Out of California, the pro-illegal pressure group, blamed the illegal alien crime spree on “gun violence”. “The California Values Act,” it claimed, “is part of the solution.”
Law enforcement officers, even those like Sheriff Boudreaux, who support illegal aliens to some degree, however agree that the sanctuary state mandate is costing lives.
“We are very frustrated with the fact that the way the laws are set up currently that law enforcement hands are tied,” Sheriff Mike Boudreaux said. “Our county was shot up by a violent criminal that could have easily been prevented had we had the opportunity to reach out to our fellow counterparts.”
In Fresno County, Sheriff Margaret Mims has faced harassment over her cooperation with ICE. "It's ridiculous the state dictates the local law enforcement which other law enforcement agencies they can and can't talk to,” she said.
Meanwhile in Los Angeles, there’s a new pro-crime sheriff in town.
Sheriff Alex Villanueva’s upset victory had allegedly been illegally lubricated by straw donors. And the pro-crime figure is vowing to go further than ever to protect illegal aliens and has even threatened to “physically remove ICE from the county jails."
Across California, the sanctuary state law has been putting more illegal alien criminals on the street.
In Monterey, ICE detentions dropped by 83%, from 217 to 36. In San Luis Obispo County, the 87 illegal alien criminals picked up by ICE in 2017 had dropped to 0. Other counties have been partial holdouts, maintaining some limited and diminishing cooperation with ICE despite illegal alien lobby pressure.
Similar battles are being fought in counties across California as the number of illegal criminals grows.
Sanctuary state defenders claim that these illegal alien criminals are exceptions to the rule. But when Gustavo Perez Arriaga went on the run, after murdering a law enforcement officer, a network of illegal aliens stepped out of the shadows to help him flee justice and return to Mexico.
7 men and women were arrested for aiding the cop-killer. Every one of them is an illegal alien.
PAUL KRUGMAN
The disintegration of California,
a Mexican satellite welfare state of poverty, crime and high taxes
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2013/04/paul-krugman-look-at-california-under.html
"Chairman of the DNC Keith Ellison was even spotted wearing a shirt stating, "I don't believe
in borders" written in Spanish.
According to a new CBS news poll, 63 percent of Americans in competitive
congressional districts think those crossing illegally should be immediately
deported or arrested. This is undoubtedly contrary to the views
expressed by the Democratic Party.
Their endgame is open borders, which has become evident over
the last eight years. Don't for one second let them convince you
otherwise." Evan Berryhill Twitter @EvBerryhill.
Save the Children, Build a Wall
The Democrats would rather see children die than build a wall.
By Daniel Greenfield
FrontPageMag.com
The dead children are not the victims of an overworked Border Patrol that has been deliberately starved of the resources to do its job, because its job would limit the ability of Democrats to steal elections. They are the victims of abusive parents or caretakers, who are willing to use the lives of their children as tickets to get inside the United States, not to escape persecution, but to double or triple their incomes.
The migrants are not refugees fleeing totalitarian regimes that are persecuting them for their beliefs. They are economic migrants who are willing to kill their children to earn more and get more free stuff. And they are every bit as guilty as the parents who leave their children to die in hot cars while they play slot machines. Any sane society would treat their murderous abuse of their children the same way.
Unfortunately we are not a sane society.
The flow of illegal migrants manufactures Democrat votes, not just through illegal voting, but through the far more pervasive problem of fake districts, boosted by illegal aliens and other non-citizens. The political machine that turned California into a Democrat one-party state where democracy is an alien concept, that has ravaged Virginia and has its gimlet eye on Texas, depends on illegal migration.
. . .
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272368/save-children-build-wall-daniel-greenfield
The Democrats would rather see children die than build a wall.
By Daniel Greenfield
FrontPageMag.com
The dead children are not the victims of an overworked Border Patrol that has been deliberately starved of the resources to do its job, because its job would limit the ability of Democrats to steal elections. They are the victims of abusive parents or caretakers, who are willing to use the lives of their children as tickets to get inside the United States, not to escape persecution, but to double or triple their incomes.
The migrants are not refugees fleeing totalitarian regimes that are persecuting them for their beliefs. They are economic migrants who are willing to kill their children to earn more and get more free stuff. And they are every bit as guilty as the parents who leave their children to die in hot cars while they play slot machines. Any sane society would treat their murderous abuse of their children the same way.
Unfortunately we are not a sane society.
The flow of illegal migrants manufactures Democrat votes, not just through illegal voting, but through the far more pervasive problem of fake districts, boosted by illegal aliens and other non-citizens. The political machine that turned California into a Democrat one-party state where democracy is an alien concept, that has ravaged Virginia and has its gimlet eye on Texas, depends on illegal migration.
. . .
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272368/save-children-build-wall-daniel-greenfield
Obama's
'Hispanicazation' of America
Siting a shadow on economic recovery
efforts in the United States is the cost of illegal immigration that consumes
U.S. taxpayer dollars for education, healthcare, social welfare benefits, and
criminal justice. Illegal aliens (or more politically correct, “undocumented
immigrants”) with ties to Mexican drug cartels are contributing to death and
destruction on U.S. lands along the southern border.
While the declining job market in the United States may be discouraging some would-be border crossers, a flow of illegal aliens continues unabated, with many entering the United States as drug-smuggling “mules.”
Increasingly vicious foot soldiers of the Mexican drug cartels are taking control of U.S. lands along the border, especially since U.S. Border Patrol units have been reassigned, some to offices 60 to 80 miles inland.
The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) early last year posted signs warning citizens to avoid Interstate 8 between Casa Grande and Gila Bend, Ariz., because of criminal activity in the area, an area that includes protected natural areas precious to the nation.
In reaction to public outrage over the signs, the BLM removed the offensive wording in October 2010, replacing it with the following: Visitor Information Update—Active Federal Law Enforcement Patrol Area.
As the liberal news media, far-left Democrats, and labor unions push for the “Hispanicazation” of U.S. culture, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says the U.S. border has never been more secure.
Perhaps she is basing this on the reduced number of apprehensions, which result, of course, from reassigning Border Patrol agents inland.
In a recent New York Times article, Nicholas Kristof criticized U.S. citizens for not speaking a foreign language and suggested that “Every child in the United States should learn Spanish.” He concluded that as the United States increasingly integrates economically with Latin America, Spanish will be crucial for the United States.
For decades, the liberal left has argued that Latin America is essential for U.S. business and trade. Kristof states that Latin America “is finally getting its act together” but fails to mention the Obama administration’s $2 billion loan of U.S. taxpayer money in 2009 to Brazil’s Petrobras oil company for deep off-shore oil drilling. Obama confidant George Soros, through the Soros Fund Management LLC, until recently owned millions of dollars of Petrobras stock.
Kristof suggests that one day Spanish-speaking Americans will be part of daily life in the United States and that workmen such as mechanics will be able to communicate easily with Spanish-speaking customers.
He fails to explain why these customers will not be speaking English. After all, the ability to speak, read, and write English remains a requirement for U.S. citizenship.
While the declining job market in the United States may be discouraging some would-be border crossers, a flow of illegal aliens continues unabated, with many entering the United States as drug-smuggling “mules.”
Increasingly vicious foot soldiers of the Mexican drug cartels are taking control of U.S. lands along the border, especially since U.S. Border Patrol units have been reassigned, some to offices 60 to 80 miles inland.
The U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) early last year posted signs warning citizens to avoid Interstate 8 between Casa Grande and Gila Bend, Ariz., because of criminal activity in the area, an area that includes protected natural areas precious to the nation.
In reaction to public outrage over the signs, the BLM removed the offensive wording in October 2010, replacing it with the following: Visitor Information Update—Active Federal Law Enforcement Patrol Area.
As the liberal news media, far-left Democrats, and labor unions push for the “Hispanicazation” of U.S. culture, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano says the U.S. border has never been more secure.
Perhaps she is basing this on the reduced number of apprehensions, which result, of course, from reassigning Border Patrol agents inland.
In a recent New York Times article, Nicholas Kristof criticized U.S. citizens for not speaking a foreign language and suggested that “Every child in the United States should learn Spanish.” He concluded that as the United States increasingly integrates economically with Latin America, Spanish will be crucial for the United States.
For decades, the liberal left has argued that Latin America is essential for U.S. business and trade. Kristof states that Latin America “is finally getting its act together” but fails to mention the Obama administration’s $2 billion loan of U.S. taxpayer money in 2009 to Brazil’s Petrobras oil company for deep off-shore oil drilling. Obama confidant George Soros, through the Soros Fund Management LLC, until recently owned millions of dollars of Petrobras stock.
Kristof suggests that one day Spanish-speaking Americans will be part of daily life in the United States and that workmen such as mechanics will be able to communicate easily with Spanish-speaking customers.
He fails to explain why these customers will not be speaking English. After all, the ability to speak, read, and write English remains a requirement for U.S. citizenship.
President Barack Obama gives lip service to increasing border control resources with limited funding and personnel. Many officials, including the governors of Texas and Arizona, are skeptical regarding the Obama administration’s resolve. They resent that the United States is being blamed for the killing fields on both sides of the Mexico-U.S. Border.
For instance, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in March 2009, during her first official visit to Mexico, placed the blame for the Mexican drug cartels’ vicious murders on the United States.
In Mexico City, she announced that the U.S. appetite for illegal drugs and the easy acquisition of guns from the United States by Mexicans are the root causes of the Mexican crime wave. “Blame America” has become the global agenda of the Democratic Party.
The Obama administration’s plan to resolve the immigration chaos is to offer amnesty to all comers. President Obama re-affirms his support of a “pathway to citizenship” (amnesty) for illegal aliens in 2011.
The administration, however, has announced no plans to control the influx of future waves of illegal aliens or their skyrocketing costs to the nation. The administration, which condones U.S. sanctuary cities and states, has no plans to file charges against them for violations of federal immigration law. Nor does the administration seem concerned about the environmental impact that illegal aliens have on the ecology of the United States.
Many national forests, parks, monuments, wilderness areas, and wildlife refuges — once the pride of the nation — are serving today as marijuana fields for illegal alien gangs.
Former Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi reportedly said to a
gathering of illegal aliens in
California in 2009 that U.S. immigration laws were “un-American,”
suggesting that they need not be obeyed. Concerned
citizens can only trust that the new speaker of the House, John Boehner, as
part of congressional oversight of federal agencies, will demand enforcement of
existing immigration laws.
When will President Obama recognize that illegal immigration is slowing economic recovery? Can he resolve the chaos while still appeasing his Hispanic base?
To maintain his populist aura, the president is in the habit of saying one thing to one audience and the opposite to another.
One Obama apologist explained, “Campaign rhetoric is one thing,” suggesting that governing is another. The deliberate Hispanicazation of the United States to secure a block of votes is quite another.
When will President Obama recognize that illegal immigration is slowing economic recovery? Can he resolve the chaos while still appeasing his Hispanic base?
To maintain his populist aura, the president is in the habit of saying one thing to one audience and the opposite to another.
One Obama apologist explained, “Campaign rhetoric is one thing,” suggesting that governing is another. The deliberate Hispanicazation of the United States to secure a block of votes is quite another.
Illegals and the American
Dream
When talking about immigration,
Democrats like to conflate illegal and legal immigration, dropping the word
“illegal” and spouting meaningless babble about no human being illegal. They
like to preach that illegal immigrants commit crimes at a lower rate than
American citizens, a
factoid that has been exposed as a lie.
The murder of legal immigrant and Newman
Police Corporal Ronil Singh on Christmas night by an illegal
alien in the sanctuary state of California shows not only that the claims by
Chuck Schumer and the “bride of Chucky” Nancy Pelosi that the Democrats support
border security is a deadly and bald-faced lie. It highlights the difference
between legal and illegal immigrants, between those who love America and want
to be Americans and those who murder them.
Pelosi and Schumer like to talk about
the “Dreamers.” Well, Ronil
Singh had dreams, too:
Ronil Singh came
to the U.S. from his native Fiji to fulfill a lifelong dream of becoming an
officer, joining a small-town police force in California and working to improve
his English. The day after Christmas, he stopped another immigrant, this one in
the country illegally, who shot and killed the corporal, authorities said
Thursday…
"This
suspect is in our country illegally. He doesn't belong here. He is a
criminal," Stanislaus County Sheriff Adam Christianson, whose agency is
leading the investigation, told reporters.
Newman Police
Chief Randy Richardson fought back tears as he described Singh, a 33-year-old
with a newborn son, as an "American patriot."
"He came to
America with one purpose, and that was to serve this country," Richardson
said…
"He was
living the American dream," said Stanislaus County Sheriff's Deputy
Royjinder Singh, who is not related to the slain officer but knew him. "He
loved camping, loved hunting, loved fishing, loved his family."
And now he is dead. The blood of Kate
Steinle, Mollie Tibbetts, and now Ronil Singh and others is on the
hands of open border advocates and the sanctuary city loons who provide no
sanctuary for the American citizen victims of illegal alien criminals.
Even if it were true that illegal aliens
commit crimes, including murder, at rates lower than American citizens, that
would be irrelevant. The murder rate for illegal aliens should be zero because
none of them should be here and the indisputable fact is that Jamiel Shaw Jr.,
Kate Steinle, and Mollie Tibbetts would be alive today if the illegal aliens
who slew them were still staring at the other side of a border wall liberals
refuse to build.
Pelosi has said that a border wall would
be “immoral,
ineffective, and expensive” when it has been documented when
it has been demonstrated that none of that is true. The fact is that
walls are so effective they
have been built in scores of countries around the world and in
the U.S. places like San Diego and Yuma have demonstrated their effectiveness
as Pelosi and Schumer worry more about Syria’s borders than our own:
According to
Quebec University expert Elisabeth Vallet. there are65
completed or under construction border walls in the world
today.
One-third of the
world’s nations have border walls or barriers with their neighbors.
Pelosi believes
this is immoral.
Tell that to
Israel, Hungary, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, India, Pakistan, Spain, Greece, Cyprus,
Ireland, etc.
And Nancy Pelosi
has a wall around the backyard at her home in San Francisco.
In the wake of the Singh murder, Schaaf
still insists that warning illegal aliens about I.C.E. raids was and is the right
thing to do, the lives of American citizens she is sworn to protect be damned:
Oakland Mayor
Libby Schaaf -- who once warned Northern California residents about an
impending ICE raid -- said she has “no regrets” for her actions and said the
federal immigration agency “has gone astray.”
“I have no
regrets, none. The more time goes by, the more certain I feel that I did the
right thing in standing up for our community and pointing out our values are
not aligned with our laws,” Schaff toldBuzzFeed
in an interview. “That’s hopefully the message that is sent out.”
The message Schaaf, Pelosi, and Schumer
are sending out is one of callous disregard for the lives of American citizens.
Democrats are endangering their lives and the lives of migrant children by
enticing caravans to drag young children a thousand miles with lies about easy
entry and waiting jobs:
The father of an
8-year-old Guatemalan boy who died in U.S. custody took his son to the border
after hearing rumors that parents and their children would be allowed to
migrate to the United States and escape the poverty in their homeland, the
boy's stepsister told the Associated Press.
Felipe Gomez
Alonzo died Monday at a New Mexico hospital after suffering coughing, vomiting
and fever, authorities said. It was the second such death this month. Another
Guatemalan child, 7-year-old Jakelin Caal, died in U.S. custody on Dec. 8.
The fact is that if we had a wall, or
whatever the hair-splitters want to call it, both these children would be alive
today. And it is American kids are dying too, killed and murdered by illegal
aliens who have no right to be here. Just ask the parents of Justin Lee,
14, who
was killed in a hit-and-run accident by an illegal alien:
An illegal
immigrant has pleaded guilty to a hit and run that killed a Wixom teen in June.
Miguel
Ibarra-Cerda, 22, entered his plea Thursday, the day his trial was set to begin
before Judge Cheryl Matthews in Oakland County Circuit Court.
Ibarra-Cerda is
charged with failing to stop at the scene of an accident when at fault,
resulting in death, and reckless driving causing death for the collision which
killed Justin Lee, 14. Ibarra-Cerda faces up to 15 years in prison and a
$10,000 fine for the first charge and 15 years in prison and a $2,500-$10,000
fine on the second charge. Matthews will sentence him Dec. 20.
Or ask the parents of 12-year-old
Clinton Howell,
shot and killed shortly before Christmas by an illegal alien from Jamaica:
Police in
Connecticut have arrested an 18-year-old undocumented immigrant from Jamaica on
murder charges related to the shooting death of an innocent 12-year-old boy a
week before Christmas.
Bridgeport
Police Chief Armando Perez on Monday announced the charges against Tajay
Chambers stemming from the December 18 death of Clinton Howell outside his
family's home on Willow Street.
Chambers has
been charged with murder; murder with special circumstances; use of a firearm
during the commission of a felony; illegal possession of a firearm without a
permit; risk of injury to a child; reckless endangerment, and larceny….
CTpost.com reported,
citing police sources, that earlier that evening, Chambers and his alleged
co-conspirators were driving in a stolen car when they got into an argument
with some people walking along Willow Street, among them Howell’s relative.
There have been many
suggestions as to how to pay for the wall, such as Sen.
Ted Cruz’s idea to apply drug asset forfeitures to wall construction or
to tax
the billions of dollars aliens return to their home countries..
Pelosi certainly found no problem locating $3 billion for the ineffective and
absurd “Cash for Clunkers” program under Obama, didn’t she?
The wall would in fact pay for itself,
if only in the reduced cost of crimes that would be eliminated, saving both
dollars from overburdened social services and the cost of illegal alien crimes,
particularly the cost in human lives such as that of Ronil Singh, who is
survived by his wife and young son.
His death, the death of a legal
immigrant pursuing the American dream, and countless other American citizens,
including children, is on the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Perhaps
Pelosi can attend Singh’s funeral and explain how his death and the deaths of
others in the absence of a wall is all President Trump’s fault and that not
building the wall is the moral thing to do.
Daniel
John Sobieski is a freelance
writer whose pieces have appeared inInvestor’s Business
Daily, Human
Events, Reason Magazine and the ChicagoSun-Times among other
publications.
Is California the next Detroit?
Most
Californians live within about 50 miles of its majestic coastline — for good
reason. The California coastline is blessed with arguably the most desirable
climate on Earth, magnificent beaches, a backdrop of snow-capped mountains and
natural harbors in San Diego, Long Beach and San Francisco. There is no mystery
why California’s population and economy boomed after the Second World War.
The Golden
State was aptly named. Its Gold Rush of 1849 was followed a century later by
massive growth in the 1950s and 60s. Education in California became the envy of
the world. Stanford became the Harvard of the West. A college education at the
University of California and California State University systems was
inexpensive. The Community College system that fed its universities was
ostensibly free.
California’s
public school system led the nation in innovation and almost all of its
classrooms were new. The highway system that moved California’s
automobile-driven commerce eliminated the need for public transportation
systems like New York and Chicago. The fertile soil of the Central Valley
became the breadbasket of the world.
The next
golden wave in the 1980s grew from former orchards south of San Francisco known
as Silicon Valley. Intel and other companies led the world’s computer and
software revolution. In the 1990s, the dot-com revolution brought immense
wealth to more Californians. Its innovators, Google, Apple and others, ushered
in the Internet Era. The 2000s brought the greatest housing and mortgage boom
in the nation’s history, with innovation centered in Orange County. California
was truly the Golden State.
Why then would
the author have the temerity to ask, “When did Californians become Stupid?”
And: Is California the next Detroit?
Unique
oblivion
Californians,
due to their golden history, live in unique oblivion. When the Tea Party
movement caused a political tsunami that swept more than 60 incumbents from
political office in 2010, the wave petered out at California’s state line.
There was no effect on the 2010 election that saw Democrats take every elected
office in the state.
California
voters rejected Meg Whitman, the billionaire founder of Ebay, in favor of Jerry
Brown. Gov. Brown signed into law a “high-speed rail” bill that will spend $6
billion (the state does not have) to build a train between Fresno and
Bakersfield — not Los Angeles and San Francisco, as promised. There was little
outcry.
California has
a $16 billion deficit that no one seems to notice. Brown’s budget “assumes”
that California voters will pass massive tax increases on themselves. If they
do not, the 2013 deficit becomes a mind-numbing $20 billion. The budget,
mandated to balance by the Calfornia Constitution, has been billions in the red
for 10 straight years. How could Californians re-elect the same politicians
year after year that produce budgets with multi-billion dollar deficits?
To protect the
endangered Delta Smelt, a fish known better as bait, water has been diverted
from the Central Valley to the Pacific Ocean. Orchards in the Central Valley
have been allowed to wither and die, resulting in unemployment in the Central
Valley as high as 40 percent. Imagine Californians living in what was the
breadbasket of American now living on food stamps. California voters rejected
Republican Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senator in 2010. She ran Hewlett Packard.
Instead, they re-elected Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer ,who vowed to protect
the Delta Smelt at the expense of the Central Valley.
California has
519 state agencies, like the state Blueberry Commission, that pay each of their
commissioners more than $100,000 per year. State politicians, when asked to
make cuts, fire teachers and fire fighters to inflict maximum pain on its
citizens, while leaving these patronage commissions intact. State politicians
have elevator operators in the state capital to push the buttons for them.
Their solution for the overcrowding of the state’s prisons is to release
inmates or transfer them to local facilities in already bankrupt cities. Yet,
they are re-elected by California voters in numbers consistently higher than
the old Soviet Politburo.
California’s
public education system, once the envy of the world, now ranks 49th in the
nation. Its business climate, according to 650 CEOs measured by Chief Executive
Magazine, ranked dead last. Apple will take 3,600 new jobs to Austin, Tex. at
its $280,000,000 new facility. Texas ranked first in the same survey.
California
unemployment is consistently higher than 10 percent of its workforce, but it’s
under-employed, according to a Gallup poll, is 20 percent. There are few jobs
for college students who graduate with as much as $100,000 in student loans.
Despite the overwhelming evidence that bad public policy is chasing away jobs,
the same state politicians are sent back to Sacramento every two years.
In the last
two months, three California cities have declared bankruptcy. Compton is next.
More will follow. Some cities will simply cease to exist due to $500 million in
unfunded pension obligations they simply cannot meet.
The unfunded
pension obligations, now swamping California cities, were approved by these
same politicians whose re-elections are financed by the unions they serve. Nine
years ago, outraged Californians recalled Gov. Gray Davis from office for
excessive spending and crony capitalism. Nothing has changed a decade later.
Its residents believe the golden state will be golden forever. It may not be
the case.
Detroit
History has an
unpleasant precedent known as Detroit. In the 1950s, Detroit was a major
American city with a dynamic labor force built on the manufacturing miracle
that won World War II. Its factories quickly converted tanks, planes and
artillery shells into trucks, automobiles and refrigerators that baby boom
families demanded. Everyone had a good paying job. Detroit Iron had no
competition. Its burgeoning middle class was the model of the world with
excellent public schools and universities. It was the 4th largest city in
America with 2 million inhabitants, with the world’s most dominant industry —
the automobile.
Detroit in
2012 is a shadow of that once great metropolis. Its population has shrunk
to 714,000. There are
200,000 abandoned buildings in the derelict city. The average price of a home
has fallen to $5,700, unthinkable in California terms. Unemployment stands at
28.9 percent. It has a $300 million deficit. Its public education system, in
receivership, is a disgrace, producing more inmates than graduates. The jobs
have long ago abandoned Detroit for places like South Carolina and Alabama, far
hungrier than Detroit’s leaders who believed the gravy train would never end.
In 2006, the
teacher’s union forced the politicians to reject a $200 million offer from a
Detroit philanthropist to build 15 new charter schools. The mayor has proposed
razing 40 square miles of the 138 square miles of this once great American
city, returning it to farmland. Even such a draconian plan may not be enough to
save the city from itself.
If a hurricane
hit Detroit, more of us would know of this tragedy in our midst, but this fate
was man-made and not wrought by nature. Detroit has had one party rule for more
than 50 years. Louis C. Miriani served from September 12, 1957 to January 2,
1962 as Detroit’s last Republican mayor. Since that time, the Democrats have
ruled the Motor City.
John Dingell, Democrat
congressman for the 15th District outside Detroit, has served since 1956.
His father was the congressman there from 1930 to 1956. Despite the disastrous
decline of their city, Detroit voters send him back to Congress every two
years.
One-party rule
Similarly,
California now has one-party rule. The Democrats of California did not need a
single Republican vote to pass their budget. They now own the Golden State’s
fate. The politicians’ plan to address the nation’s largest deficit is to raise
taxes instead of cutting spending. If the Proposition 30 tax increase passes,
the deficit would drop from $20 billion to a mere $12 billion.
Democrats have
done nothing to cure the systemic problems of a bloated bureaucracy. Brown,
referring to the state’s highway system, once said, “If we do not build it,
they will not come.” Caltrans stopped building highways under Brown, but the
people kept coming. Now 37 million Californians are locked in traffic jams each
day.
Brown was
rewarded for such prescience with re-election as Governor.
California’s egotistical politicians passed AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act in 2006. Dan Sperling, an appointee to the California Air Resources Board, and a professor of engineering and environmental science at UC Davis, is the lead advocate on the board for a “low carbon fuel standard.” The powerful state agency charged with implementing AB 32 and other climate control measures claims the low carbon fuel standard will “only” raise gasoline prices $.30 gallon in 2013. But The California Political Review reported implementation of these the policies will raise prices by $1.00 per gallon.
California’s egotistical politicians passed AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act in 2006. Dan Sperling, an appointee to the California Air Resources Board, and a professor of engineering and environmental science at UC Davis, is the lead advocate on the board for a “low carbon fuel standard.” The powerful state agency charged with implementing AB 32 and other climate control measures claims the low carbon fuel standard will “only” raise gasoline prices $.30 gallon in 2013. But The California Political Review reported implementation of these the policies will raise prices by $1.00 per gallon.
Detroit was
once the most prosperous manufacturing city in the world. Will California
follow Detroit down a tragic path to ruin? In 1950, no one fathomed the Detroit
of 2010. In 1970, when foreign imports started to make a foothold, the unions
and their bought and paid for politicians resisted any change.
In the 1990’s,
as manufacturers fled to Alabama and South Carolina, the unions and their
political lackeys held firm even as good jobs slipped away. No one in Detroit
envisioned their future, even as schools declined, the jobs withered and the
once proud city deteriorated in front of their own eyes.
No longer
golden
California was
once the Golden State. Today, it is no longer so golden. Its schools are in
decline. Its business climate is equally dismal. Its cities are facing economic
ruin, with exploding pension obligations and a declining tax base. Housing prices
have fallen 30 to 60 percent across the state, evaporating trillions of dollars
of equity. Unemployment remains stubbornly high and under-employment is rife.
The Central Valley is in a depression, with 40 percent unemployment. Do our
politicians need any more signs?
Brown’s budget
will first slash money to schools and raise tuition on its students, while
leaving all 519 state agencies intact. He apparently will protect political
patronage at all costs. Jobs, and job creators, are fleeing the state. Intel,
Apple, Google and others are expanding out of the state. The best and brightest
minds are leaving for Texas and North Carolina. The signs are everywhere. State
revenues are declining during many years. Meanwhile, the voters sleep and
blindly send the same cast of misfits back to Sacramento each year — just as
Detroit did before them.
The beaches
are still beautiful. The mountains are still snow capped and the climate is
still the envy of the world. Detroit never had that. But will California’s
physical attributes be enough? If the people of California want to glimpse
their future, they need look no farther than once proud City of Detroit. It can
happen here.
Robert J Cristiano, Ph.D., is
the Real Estate Professional in Residence at Chapman University in Orange,
Calif. and a Senior Fellow at the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco.
CALIFORNIA and the RISE OF THE LA RAZA MEXICAN FASCIST WELFARE STATE
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/08/they-invading-horde-waving-their.html
"The costs of illegal immigration are being carefully hidden by Democrats."
Accounting
for these differences reveals that California's
real poverty rate is 20.6 percent – the highest in America, and nearly twice the national
average of 12.7 percent.
"The
public schools indoctrinate their young charges to hate this country and
the rule of law. Illegal aliens continue overwhelming the state,
draining California’s already depleted public services while endangering
our lives, the rule of law, and public safety for all citizens."
"America’s
elites, now overwhelmingly
represented by the Democratic Party, have a single overriding interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle."
Class Conflict
within the Democratic Party
Over
many decades, the American Left, the Democratic Party and their mutual
propaganda arm, the self-styled “mainstream media,” have successfully portrayed
conservatives and the Republican Party as a coalition of the wealthy and
intolerant. Further, the Democrats and the left have claimed that they
are the true champions of the working or middle class as they unceasingly fight
to defeat and marginalize this evil menace.
The
reality, however, is that this cabal has virtually no interest in defending or
aiding the working class as they are, in fact, the party of a bifurcated
constituency: the wealthy and those dependent on the largess of the government.
America’s
elites, now overwhelmingly represented by the Democratic Party, have a single
overriding interest: their self-indulgent lifestyle. This
is manifested in their mistaken belief that conservatives (i.e. the “right”)
are hell bent on enforcing their version of morality on the nation, thus
potentially calling into question the lifestyles of the rich and
solipsistic.
The
veracity of this claim is immaterial as it would require an element of
deliberation not emotion -- a trait in extremely short supply among the
nation’s privileged class, nearly all of whom have difficulty in generating an
original thought due to the ill-education rampant in America’s
universities. Thus, the mindless accusations of racism, misogyny and
Fascism directed at the conservative rubes in middle America are acceptable,
and in far too many instances believed, particularly as many had the temerity
to vote for Donald Trump – who, although wealthy and Ivy League educated, is
considered the ultimate unsophisticated rube.
As
conservatives are the dominant force in the Republican Party and this nation
cannot function politically with more than two major political parties, the
alternative is the Democratic Party. An entity dominated by the American
Left, an assemblage whose core philosophy is antithetical to the interests of
the wealthy and privileged. Yet, determined to protect their lifestyles
and vilify conservatives, they willingly ally with the left and overwhelmingly
support virtually any Democratic candidate. In the recent 2018 mid-terms,
Democratic House candidates outspent their Republican opponents by a two to one
margin thanks primarily to this wealthy but myopic assemblage.
Their
colleagues in the Democratic Party, and the preponderance of the membership,
are those dependent on the largess of the federal and state governments.
On the other hand, the growing segment of the citizenry who are working and
self-sufficient are increasingly joining those who believe in limited
government in migrating to the Republican Party-- a process that is
accelerating with the policies and tactics of Donald Trump in combating the
entrenched left and their determination to culturally and economically
transform the nation. The Republican Party will inevitably become the
party of the working or middle class. As such, they could potentially
dominate the political agenda for the foreseeable future.
The
left and the Democratic Party, in order to offset this possibility, must
aggressively seek to increase the number of dependents by promoting the
legalization and ultimate citizenship for untold millions of illegal immigrants
and promising all Americans cradle to grave economic security. In order
to enact this strategy to defeat the Republicans, the left must have the active
participation and financial support of the nation’s wealthy-- which they
have.
The
Democratic Party has evolved into essentially an incompatible two-tier
class-driven entity encompassing the nation’s wealthiest and the nation’s
poorest. Nonetheless, it is at present a convenient home for the elites
to hold off the imaginary horde of conservatives outside their gilded
doors.
However,
the voting numbers within the party are overwhelmingly with those who generally
support the leftist philosophies of redistribution (e.g. socialized medicine
and guaranteed incomes) and curtailing of freedom (e.g. speech, assembly and
religion). While it may not manifest itself to the affluent who have cast
their lot with the Democrats, the redistribution of wealth must, by necessity,
come from the wealthy, as that is where the bulk of the nation’s wealth
resides. It is also this same small-in-numbers group that benefits
the most from freedom of speech and assembly.
Once
fully embroiled in this marriage of convenience, a divorce will be impossible
as the co-inhabitant of the Democratic Party, the dependent class, must
continue grow in order to electorally defeat the Republicans and protect the
left’s agenda. Further, the oversold expectations promulgated by the left
will never be satisfied regardless of how many promises are made or token
redistributive programs are enacted by the current ruling class. Only a
complete transformation of this nation into a failed socialist state will satiate
the left, their acolytes and their attendant army of dependency. A goal
more in reach than ever thanks to the inability of the nation’s elites to give
a damn about the future of the country.
There
is not a more short-sighted and self-absorbed group of citizens in this nation
than the white, wealthy well-educated urban and suburban voters. They
are willing to rend the fabric of this nation in order to protect their
privilege and lifestyle. While the vast majority of Americans will
ultimately pay the price, the current ruling class and their progeny will have
far more to lose.
Potential Speaker Candidate
Marcia Fudge: Nancy Pelosi
an ‘Elitist,’ ‘Very Wealthy
Person’
4:02
Potential Democrat speakership candidate Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-OH) says
that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the former Speaker who is angling to
retake the gavel early next year, is an “elitist” and “very wealthy person” who
surrounds herself with other “very wealthy people.”
In an interview with the Huffington Post’s Matt Fuller, Fudge–the former chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus
who is toying with a run for the Speaker position against Pelosi–says that
people do not like Pelosi because “they see her as an elitist.”
“And I think to some degree she is,”
Fudge said. “She’s a very wealthy person. She raises a lot of money from a lot
of other wealthy people.”
Marcia
Fudge on Nancy Pelosi's unpopularity: "I think they see her as an elitist.
And I think to some degree she is. She’s a very wealthy person, she raises a
lot of money from a lot of other wealthy people.”https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/marcia-fudge-speaker_us_5bed9033e4b03af89267a979?5rh …
Marcia Fudge, Toying With Speaker Run, Slams Pelosi
“Everybody wants to give her such
big credit for winning back the House, and she should be here because she won.
She didn’t win it by herself,” Fudge added, also saying: ““If we’re going to
give her credit for the wins, why is she not responsible for all the losses?”
She, per Fuller, pointed to how Democrats had lost 63 seats in the 2010
election and did not regain majorities in 2012, 2014, or 2016–not until 2018
did Democrats retake the House.
Fudge is one of the signers of a
letter from Democrats pledging to oppose Pelosi’s speakership bid on the House
floor in January. Depending on where some final races come down, Pelosi, in the
best case scenario, can afford to lose just shy of 20 votes. The letter
already, reportedly, per a previous story from the Huffington Post’s Fuller, has enough signatures
to block her ascent to the Speakership, assuming its signers follow through on
their pledge.
Fudge also on Wednesday floated a
potential speakership bid of her own in an interview with her hometown Cleveland Plain Dealer, saying she
would be open to running against Pelosi but at this time had not committed to
doing so. Meanwhile, anti-Pelosi Democrats including Reps. Ed Perlmutter
(D-CO), Kurt Schrader (D-OR), and Seth Moulton (D-MA), say they already have
the votes to stop her from being Speaker. Pelosi retorts that she will be
Speaker no matter what they say, and says she has the votes for the job–despite
clearly not locking enough down per this circulating letter.
Meanwhile, Fudge is out there
stirring the pot, pushing for new leadership–and arguing that “racism” has
seeped into the Democrat leadership under Pelosi.
“I don’t have a pitch because at
this point I’ve not decided I’m going to run,” Fudge said in the Huffington
Post interview, “but I would say this: My concern about the caucus is the same
concern I have about the country. Just as there is this undertone of racism in
the country, there’s also that in our caucus.”
Her specific argument is that Pelosi
has not done enough for the Congressional Black Caucus to warrant support. From
the Huffington Post interview with Fudge:
Fudge pointed to Pelosi’s refusal to
endorse in the race for majority whip, a contest between the current No. 3
Democrat ― and CBC stalwart ― Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), and Rep. Diana DeGette
(D-Colo.).
“But she wants our endorsements?”
Fudge said of Pelosi. “Who has she endorsed?”
“We’re not feeling the love,” she
added.
That all being said, Fudge insists
she does not “hate” Pelosi and believes Pelosi has been effective as a leader
but thinks it is time for Democrats to have a new leader.
“I don’t hate Nancy. I think Nancy
has been a very good leader,” Fudge said. “I just think it’s time for a new
one.”
Fudge also says the lack of
diversity in Democrat leadership ranks is clear–Pelosi is old and white, and
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), the likely new Majority Leader who has been Pelosi’s
number two, is also old and white.
“And so I’m saying, what is wrong
with acknowledging the fact that the Democratic Party is becoming more young,
more black, and more brown?” Fudge said. “And letting that be reflected in our
leadership.”
Fudge also said she believes
President Donald Trump is a “racist.”
“The President of the United States
is a racist, in my opinion,” Fudge said. “If we open up the Civil Rights Act,
it’s like opening up Pandora’s box.”
If Immigration Creates Wealth, Why Is
California America's Poverty Capital?
California America's Poverty Capital?
The Golden State is peddling fool's gold lately.
California
used to be home to America's largest and most affluent middle
class. Today, it is America's poverty capital. What went
wrong? In a word: immigration.
According
to the U.S. Census Bureau's Official
Poverty Measure, California's poverty rate hovers
around 15 percent. But this figure is misleading: the Census Bureau
measures poverty relative to a uniform national standard, which doesn't account
for differences in living costs between states – the cost of taxes, housing,
and health care are higher in California than in Oklahoma, for
example. Accounting for these differences reveals that California's
real poverty rate is 20.6 percent – the highest in
America, and nearly twice the national average of 12.7 percent.
Likewise, income
inequality in California is the second-highest in America,
behind only New York. In fact, if California were an independent
country, it would be the 17th most unequal country on Earth, nestled
comfortably between Honduras and Guatemala. Mexico is slightly more
egalitarian. California is far more unequal than the "social
democracies" it emulates: Canada is the 111th most unequal nation,
while Norway is far down the list at number 153 (out of 176
countries). In terms of income inequality, California has more in
common with banana republics than other "social democracies."
More
Government, More Poverty
High
taxes, excessive regulations, and a lavish welfare state – these are the
standard explanations for California's poverty epidemic. They have
some merit. For example, California has both the highest personal
income tax rate and the highest sales tax in America, according to Politifact.
Not
only are California's taxes high, but successive "progressive"
governments have swamped the state in a sea of red tape. Onerous
regulations cripple small businesses and retard economic
growth. Kerry Jackson, a fellow with the Pacific Research Institute,
gives a few specific examples of how excessive government regulation hurts
California's poor. He writes in a recent op-ed for the Los
Angeles Times:
Extensive
environmental regulations aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions make
energy more expensive, also hurting the poor. By some estimates,
California energy costs are as much as 50% higher than the national
average. Jonathan A. Lesser of Continental Economics ... found that
"in 2012, nearly 1 million California households faced ... energy
expenditures exceeding 10% of household income."
Some
government regulation is necessary and desirable, but most of California's is
not. There is virtue in governing with a "light touch."
Finally,
California's welfare state is, perhaps paradoxically, a source of poverty in
the state. The Orange
Country Register reports that California's social
safety net is comparable in scale to those found in Europe:
In
California a mother with two children under the age of 5 who participates in
these major welfare programs – Temporary Assistance for Needy Families,
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps), housing assistance,
home energy assistance, Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants and Children – would receive a benefits package worth $30,828 per year.
...
[Similar] benefits in Europe ranged from $38,588 per year in Denmark to just
$1,112 in Romania. The California benefits package is higher than in
well-known welfare states as France ($17,324), Germany ($23,257) and even
Sweden ($22,111).
Although
welfare states ideally help
the poor, reality is messy. There are three main problems with the
welfare state. First, it incentivizes poverty by rewardingthe poor
with government handouts that are often far more valuable than a
job. This can be ameliorated to some degree by imposing work
requirements on welfare recipients, but in practice, such requirements are
rarely imposed. Second, welfare states are expensive. This
means higher taxes and therefore slower economic growth and fewer job
opportunities for everyone – including the poor.
Finally,
welfare states are magnets for the poor. Whether through domestic
migration or foreign immigration, poor people flock to places with generous
welfare states. This is logical from the immigrant's perspective,
but it makes little sense from the taxpayer's. This fact is why
socialism and open borders arefundamentally
incompatible.
Why
Big Government?
Since
1960, California's population
exploded from 15.9 to 39 million people. The growth was
almost entirely due to immigration – many people came from other states, but
the majority came from abroad. The Public Policy
Institute of California estimates that 10
million immigrants currently reside in California. This works out to
26 percent of the state's population.
This
figure includes 2.4 million illegal aliens, although a recent
study from Yale University suggests that the
true number of aliens is at least double that. Modifying
the initial figure implies that nearly one
in three Californians is an immigrant. This is not to
disparage California's immigrant population, but it is madness to deny that
such a large influx of people has changed California's society and economy.
Importantly,
immigrants vote Democrat by a ratio higher than 2:1, according to a report
from the Center
for Immigration Studies. In California, immigration
has increased the pool of likely Democrat voters by nearly 5 million people,
compared to just 2.4 million additional likely Republican
voters. Not only does this almost guarantee Democratic victories,
but it also shifts California's political midpoint to the left. This
means that to remain competitive in elections, the Republicans must abandon or
soften many conservative positions so as to cater to the center.
California
became a Democratic stronghold not because
Californians became socialists, but because
millions of socialists moved there. Immigration
turned California blue, and immigration
is ultimately to blame for California' high
poverty level.
It Pays to be Illegal in California
It certainly is a good
time to be an illegal alien in California. Democratic State Sen. Ricardo Lara
last week pitched a bill to permit illegal immigrants to serve on all state and
local boards and commissions. This week, lawmakers unveiled a $1 billion health care plan that would include spending $250
million to extend health care coverage to all illegal alien adults.
“Currently, undocumented
adults are explicitly and unjustly locked out of healthcare due to their
immigration status. In a matter of weeks, California legislators will have a
decisive opportunity to reverse that cruel and counterproductive fact,”
Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula said in Monday’s Sacramento Bee.
His legislation, Assembly Bill 2965, would give as many as 114,000
uninsured illegal aliens access to Medi-Cal programs. A companion bill has been
sponsored by State Sen. Richard Lara.
But that could just be a
drop in the bucket. The Democrats’ plan covers more than 100,000 illegal aliens
with annual incomes bless than $25,000, however an estimated 1.3 million might
be eligible based on their earnings.
In addition, it is estimated
that 20 percent of those living in California illegally are uninsured – the
$250 million covers just 11 percent.
So, will politicians
soon be asking California taxpayers once again to dip into their pockets to pay
for the remaining 9 percent?
Before they ask for
more, Democrats have to win the approval of Gov. Jerry Brown, who cautioned
against spending away the state’s surplus when he introduced his $190 billion budget proposal
in January.
Given Brown’s openness
to expanding Medi-Cal expansions in recent years, not to mention his proclivity
for blindly supporting any measure benefitting lawbreaking immigrants, the
latest fiscal irresponsibility may win approval.
And if he
takes a pass, the two Democrats most likely to succeed Brown – Lt. Gov. Gavin
Newsom and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa – favor excessive social spending and are actively courting illegal
immigrant support.
COST to
AMERICANS of the LA RAZA MEXICAN OCCUPATION in CALIFORNIA
ALONE: $2,370 per legal.
All that
“cheap” labor is staggeringly expensive!
"Most Californians, who have seen their taxes increase while public
services deteriorate, already know the impact that mass illegal immigration is
having on their communities, but even they may be shocked when they learn just
how much of a drain illegal immigration has become." FAIR President Dan
Stein.
Californians
bear an enormous fiscal burden as a result of an illegal alien population
estimated at almost 3 million residents. The annual expenditure of state and
local tax dollars on services for that population is $25.3 billion. That total
amounts to a yearly burden of about $2,370 for a household headed by a U.S.
citizen.
The Gospel According to Nancy: No Borders, Kill Babies (UNLESS THEY'RE LA RAZA ANCHOR BABIES!)
By T.R. Clancy
Tucker Carlson pointed
out a
few days ago how the already insufferable leader of the Congressional
Democrats has recently been "ordained….an archbishop in the church of
progressive sanctimony." For a while now, Nancy Pelosi's been
the country's expert on morality (e.g., border wall: immoral; abortion on
demand: moral). She's now taken to telling the country how much she
prays, and she's urging others to do it, too – at least that old sinner, Donald
Trump. After last Thursday's televised squabble in the Oval Office,
Pelosi shared with reporters how she told Trump she was praying
for him and urged the president (whom she also called a "skunk"
while ridiculing his manhood) to accept the Democrats' budget proposal with no
funding for a border wall. "In fact," she said with stomach-turning
piety, "I asked him to pray over it."
When a smug person ends an
argument by telling you to "pray over it," she's really saying,
"Ask God. He knows
I'm right!"
Summarizing her and Chuck
Schumer's meeting with Trump, she told the media, "I myself thought we
should open the meeting with a prayer, which I did. I told him about
King Solomon, when he was to become king of the Jews, he prayed to God, he
said: 'I need you to give me great understanding and wisdom, Lord.'"
King Solomon is Pelosi's
favorite Bible character, especially because he proposed solving a problem by
cutting a baby in half.
Now Sister Nancy's praying
for Trump to keep the government open so federal employees can finish
their Christmas shopping.
It's an axiom that if a
conservative says his faith informs his political decisions, he'll be condemned
for establishing a state religion, while liberals get to veer back and forth
over the church-state centerline as freely as those motorists who love to text
while driving. Right now the liberal media are applauding the way
Pelosi "schooled President
Donald Trump about the Bible," but it's not clear why. It's not
as if they're suddenly in favor of anyone being schooled in the Bible,
especially anyone in a public
classroom.
Pelosi never bats an eye
without a political motive. This Saint Nancy act might be her
attempt to occupy the spiritual high ground that, obviously, Donald Trump has
shown no interest in occupying himself. Pelosi wouldn't dare try
this with a president like George W. Bush, who, while he didn't boast about his
piety on TV, was recognized as genuine in his Christian faith – prompting the
left's usual reaction: Ross
Douthat wrote in 2006 that "the fear of theocracy has become a
defining panic of the Bush era."
Theology was less of an
issue for liberals during the Obama years; he was their messiah, and they just
worshiped him. Meantime, Obama conspicuously dissed orthodox
Christians with everything from calculated snubs and criticism to
gratuitously tormenting the Little
Sisters of the Poor, all the while devotedly celebrating
the unblemished virtues
of Islam. In 2015, Hillary bluntly
stated that "[d]eep-seated ... religious beliefs ... have to
be changed" to accommodate the unlimited abortion
license. Then, last year, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom
Perez said it is "not
negotiable" that "[e]very Democrat" support
abortion. Pelosi tried to mitigate Perez's remarks by saying "of
course" there's room for pro-lifers in the Democratic Party, but
try to find one who's not actually voting Perez-style.
This year, Pelosi watched
the Democrats lurch wildly to the extreme left. For decades before
that, they were trusted allies in the left's war on conventional morality and
religion (except Islam!) for being repressive, patriarchal, and
counterrevolutionary. It may be that, alarmed that the Democrat
brand has become too materialistic, amoral, and atheist, she thinks she can
give it religion. Maybe she can draw an unfavorable comparison
between the reprobate and undisciplined Donald Trump and herself: the
"ardent, practicing Catholic," who exhorts the President to beg for
"the great understanding and wisdom" that she (and Chuck Schumer?)
have already been granted by God. Haven't Republicans marched under
the banner of morality and Christian values long enough? Now that
they've elected the unholy Trump, why can't the Democrats seize that banner for
themselves?
For one thing, because no
evangelical or conservative Catholic would ever buy it. Sure, the
Democratic Party is crowded with Catholics, but the serious ones left years
ago. The leading unserious Catholic is Pelosi herself, who professes
her devotion to the faith but does it while living in open, willful defiance of
the Church's crystal-clear teaching against abortion: "It is the teaching of
the Catholic Church from the very beginning that the killing of an unborn child
is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified."
When her duplicity
threatened to become an issue in 2004, Pelosi pretended that, moved by her
"ardent" devotion to the Church, she had been studying the Church's
teaching on the beginning of life "a long time," and she stated
falsely to Tom Brokaw on Meet
the Press that the Church has never defined it. Asked
when human life begins, she replied, "We don't know," and that
"[t]he point is, that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to
choose" – the "it" being when a human life begins, which shouldn't have an impact on
the decision to get an abortion. Easy mistake to make when your
catechism is Roe
v. Wade.
Later, when a reporter
mentioned the Gosnell infanticides and challenged her own support for
partial-birth abortion, an agitated Pelosi snarled back that "[a]s a
practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred
ground to me when we talk about this[.] ... This shouldn't have
anything to do with politics." But as a politician, she never
stops talking about it, and the sacred ground she was talking about wasn't
human life, but the exercise of a mother's "free will" to terminate
her child. In response, New York's Cardinal Egan said, "Anyone
who dares
to defend that [the unborn] may be legitimately killed because another
human being 'chooses' to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason
should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the
name." Her own bishop reluctantly corrected her misstatements
in a public
letter, necessitated by "the widespread consternation among
Catholics" of her deliberate distortions of Catholic
doctrine. Pope Benedict counseled her, in person, on the
Church's express teaching, "which enjoins all Catholics, and especially
legislators," to protect "human life at all stages of its
development." Pelosi, " the respectful Catholic" who
presumed to tell Trump to pray for wisdom, emerged from thatmeeting no
wiser for it, obtusely extolling the "Church's leadership in fighting
poverty, hunger and global warming."
Jesus warned against
hypocrites who make a public display of praying "that they may be seen by
men." The way Pelosi pretends to exemplify
"prayerful" politics, and the way she told Trump "in
private" that she's praying for him – and immediately announced it in a
televised press conference – is pure Pelosi: cynical, addlebrained,
phony. If it might hurt Trump, she'll pontificate how every MS-13
killer retains a "spark of divinity,"
then goes right back to her life's work snuffing out that spark from 60 million
innocents and counting. The Bible never says it's intrinsically evil
to build a wall or protect a border, but it's still got that commandment
against murder.
Let the Democrats canonize
this Pharisee if they need a patron saint. Her feast day can fall
on January
22.
T.R. Clancy looks at the
world from Dearborn, Michigan. You can email him
at trclancy@yahoo.com.
The Schumer & Pelosi show
Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, the twin
nutters of Congress, were certain they could beat Trump at his own game, but
have made fools of themselves, as usual. The stand-off is not over
but with each passing day, the Democrats reveal more of their anti-American,
pro-illegal immigration agenda. Conservatives have been sounding the
alarm for years: Democrats do not care about American
citizens!
We are an annoying inconvenience,
especially those of us who do not buy what they are selling. We vote
against them, which makes them angry. They lash out at us, call us
names, impugn our intelligence with fervor. All of the late-night
comics, the Bill Mahers of the comedy branch of the entertainment industry, are
especially venal. Jimmy Kimmel has decried those who have
contributed to the GoFundMe page to fund
the border wall as meth addicts. It was begun by a Vet,
Brad Kolfage, who lost three limbs and it's raised nearly
$15m.
It appears that Democratic members of
Congress are as snowflakey as millennials on our university campuses. They
assume that anyone who opposes their ridiculous socialist, genderless, climate-alarmist,
virtue-signaling directives is a Neanderthal, unfit to have an opinion.
It is then thoroughly acceptable to malign such people, those of us
who oppose every aspect of their anti-America-as-founded agenda, in any
and every disgusting manner they can devise.
The left is all about identity
politics. They assign all of us to a group -- racial, class, and/or
all of their fabricated gender categories. The right is all about
individuals, their character, their talent, their contributions to society. We
do not care about skin color, economic class or sexual
orientation. We do care about good vs. evil, right vs.
wrong. This makes us quite villainous in the eyes of the left for whom everything is relative. For example, we do not think poverty causes crime, unlearned values of Western Civilization do. Try to steal an election? It is moral if it takes out an opponent. We are, it appears, the left vs. the right, very different on a neurological level.
wrong. This makes us quite villainous in the eyes of the left for whom everything is relative. For example, we do not think poverty causes crime, unlearned values of Western Civilization do. Try to steal an election? It is moral if it takes out an opponent. We are, it appears, the left vs. the right, very different on a neurological level.
Schumer and Pelosi have
armed guards whenever they are amongst the public. But they are both
fervent in their quest to deny us the right to bear arms and to prevent a wall
on the southern border to protect us from the flood of lethal drugs that flow
into the US. They are impervious to the crimes of the barbaric gangs
like MS13, no matter how many innocent Americans they kill. They do
not give a thought to the many illegals from terrorist nations that also seek
to enter the country on a daily basis. Schumer, Pelosi and their
willing subjects in Congress ignore completely the horrific hazards that cross
the border every day. They want cheap labor, no matter how many
Americans are left jobless, and they want, more than anything, a dependent
underclass whom they mean to give the right to vote. They already
vote anyway, thanks to the Left's rejection of Common-sense voter ID.
If there were a television program based
on Schumer and Pelosi, it would have to be a comedy; the two of them are so
inept, so childish. They would be Dumb
and Dumber redux. Each of them seems to
believe they run the country and can dictate to the president how he will
govern. They demand that Trump abandon the wall. They have no
intention of compromising; they only want to deny Trump and his supporters what
they want -- border security that works. So enraged, so
benighted, by Trump's presidency, they would rather see us overrun by
migrants from third-world nations, like those who have destroyed the UK,
Germany, Sweden, and the rest of Europe, than protect America as a sovereign
nation.
The "government shutdown" is
just a ploy, many times overused by now, relatively meaningless to the lives of
most Americans. The Schumer & Pelosi show will do everything they can to
hype it as a disaster, but we all know it is nothing of the
kind. Trump must hold out for funding of the wall.
While there have been some bad actors in
our government in the past, Schumer and Pelosi are the worst of the
worst. They are equally arrogant, each thoroughly ignorant of
reality beyond the bubble of wealth and privilege they inhabit. They
both believe themselves to be smarter than the rest of us, when in fact they
are both really dim bulbs, long past their sell-by date. Yes, Pelosi
is good at raising money; how and why is a mystery. That each of
them is repeatedly re-elected does not say much for their constituents'
familiarity with the Constitution, the law, American history or the facts in
their own communities.
San Francisco, Pelosi's district is now
a hell-hole but for her walled compound. New York too, like California, is a state that residents
are fleeing as fast as they can. Both states have been
destroyed by moonbatty leftists; high taxes, dumbing down of education for
political purposes, and the sacrifice of common sense to global warming
alarmists. Schumer
and Pelosi have for years been on board with every silly attempt to
restructure, to transform, American society. They both jumped on the
Obama bandwagon the moment he was elected. Along with Obama, they
are responsible for incalculable damage done to this country over the eight
years of that administration. While their constant appearances
on television are so often humorous (Pelosi's silly, practiced hand
gestures and Schumer's relentless badgering of Trump), they are
not one bit funny. They are just loathsome.
Pelosi's Stake in Illegal
Immigration
The Minuteman Project,
founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The
Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch
our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For
performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and
his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even
murderers. They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia
University and vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the
liberal press.
So it was no surprise
that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his
publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics
that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those
immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way:
“Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance
her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will
affect the security of everyday American citizens?”
Gilchrist did not stop
there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the
kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would
never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have
had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the
Foley page controversy.
Gilchrist was reacting to
my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns
non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the
availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open
the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American
taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously
reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the
cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make
employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks
medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from
Mexico with Social Security benefits.
At the same time, Pelosi
has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or
documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed
into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border
security and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must
use an electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work
in this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers' licenses for illegal
aliens in 2005. This year she opposed legislation requiring presentation of a
legitimate government-issued photo ID to prove eligibility to vote, claiming
that “there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem
with non-citizen voters.” She is dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist
by the name of Nuradin Abdi was just recently reported to have illegally
registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was
indicted earlier this year as part of a conspiracy to blow up the Columbus
Mall.
How many other terrorist
suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi
oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our
recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates
provide to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the
“matricula consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank
accounts, apply for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify
themselves to police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’
licenses and then perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally
register to vote in our elections.
Pelosi also believes in
giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal
homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share
information they learn about an individual's immigration status with Federal
immigration authorities. Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco is one of the
sanctuary cities she voted to protect for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi
even voted against strengthening our immigration law with regard to the
deportability of alien terrorists.
Jim Gilchrist cut to the
chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want
you to read:
"As we’ve shown
again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are
working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their
only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no matter
if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is dead,
alive, a citizen or an illegal alien."
Pelosi sees Jim
Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More
illegal aliens mean more votes for the Democrats and more grape-pickers for
Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So she even voted against a measure that would
have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds to tip off illegal aliens as to
where the Minutemen citizen patrols may be located! She obviously wants to see
the Minutemen put out of business – permanently. She can count on the liberal
press to distort the work of the Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye
Gilchrist’s pointed questions about her motivations for helping illegal aliens
during the run-up to the mid-term elections that may make her the next Speaker
of the House.
Gilchrist, of course, is
accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message
out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the
"Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans.
Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I
love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and
interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no
illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the
audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance,
which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff
of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and
community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and
White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement
declaring:
“The Minutemen are not a
legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia
who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate
crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations
have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is
illegal.” (Emphasis added)
We have come to the point
in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and
who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy
issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world
is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of
lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border
and reporting illegal entry to the authorities.
Leftist slogans like “no
human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is
illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is
the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome
here. Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who
breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and
a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has
broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s
boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted
to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants,
but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter
our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values,
not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did
it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be
thrown aside now?
What we are witnessing is
a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary
wants to drag us before the United Nations for intending to build a fence on
our side of the border with our money to keep out aliens who seek to enter our
country illegally. They will probably get a sympathetic ear as some UN
bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing as “illegal” immigrants in
the first place. For the first time in our history, Americans are being asked
to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves as a nation and protect our
own borders to a globalist governance body. Will Pelosi lead her liberal
loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against America’s right to control
its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding out?
It is high time, as Jim
Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that
Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal
immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.
LOS ANGELES – GATEWAY FOR THE LA RAZA MEX DRUG CARTELS
NARCOMEX in LA RAZA-OCCUPIED LOS ANGELES – Western gateway for the MEXICAN
DRUG CARTELS and MEXICO’S SECOND LARGEST CITY.
Federal agents raided Q.T Fashion and numerous other businesses in the
downtown fashion district Wednesday, cracking down on a scheme that cartels are
increasingly relying on to get their profits — from drug sales, kidnappings and
other illegal activities — back to Mexico, authorities said.
Nine people were arrested in raids targeting 75 locations, and $90 million
was seized — $70 million in cash. In one condo, agents found $35 million
stuffed in banker boxes. At a mansion in Bel-Air, they discovered $10 million
in duffel bags.
"Los Angeles has become the epicenter of narco-dollar money laundering
with couriers regularly bringing duffel bags and suitcases full of cash to many
businesses," said Robert E. Dugdale, the assistant U.S. attorney in charge
of federal criminal prosecutions in Los Angeles.
LOS ANGELES: MEXICO’S SECOND LARGEST CITY AND GATEWAY FOR
THE LA RAZA HEROIN
CARTELS
The Gospel According to
Nancy: No Borders, Kill Babies (UNLESS THEY'RE LA RAZA ANCHOR BABIES!)
Tucker Carlson pointed
out a
few days ago how the already insufferable leader of the Congressional
Democrats has recently been "ordained….an archbishop in the church of
progressive sanctimony." For a while now, Nancy Pelosi's been
the country's expert on morality (e.g., border wall: immoral; abortion on
demand: moral). She's now taken to telling the country how much she
prays, and she's urging others to do it, too – at least that old sinner, Donald
Trump. After last Thursday's televised squabble in the Oval Office,
Pelosi shared with reporters how she told Trump she was praying
for him and urged the president (whom she also called a "skunk"
while ridiculing his manhood) to accept the Democrats' budget proposal with no
funding for a border wall. "In fact," she said with
stomach-turning piety, "I asked him to pray over it."
When a smug person ends an
argument by telling you to "pray over it," she's really saying,
"Ask God. He knows
I'm right!"
Summarizing her and Chuck
Schumer's meeting with Trump, she told the media, "I myself thought we
should open the meeting with a prayer, which I did. I told him about
King Solomon, when he was to become king of the Jews, he prayed to God, he
said: 'I need you to give me great understanding and wisdom, Lord.'"
King Solomon is Pelosi's
favorite Bible character, especially because he proposed solving a problem by
cutting a baby in half.
Now Sister Nancy's praying
for Trump to keep the government open so federal employees can finish
their Christmas shopping.
It's an axiom that if a
conservative says his faith informs his political decisions, he'll be condemned
for establishing a state religion, while liberals get to veer back and forth
over the church-state centerline as freely as those motorists who love to text
while driving. Right now the liberal media are applauding the way
Pelosi "schooled President
Donald Trump about the Bible," but it's not clear why. It's not
as if they're suddenly in favor of anyone being schooled in the Bible,
especially anyone in a public
classroom.
Pelosi never bats an eye
without a political motive. This Saint Nancy act might be her
attempt to occupy the spiritual high ground that, obviously, Donald Trump has
shown no interest in occupying himself. Pelosi wouldn't dare try
this with a president like George W. Bush, who, while he didn't boast about his
piety on TV, was recognized as genuine in his Christian faith – prompting the
left's usual reaction: Ross
Douthat wrote in 2006 that "the fear of theocracy has become a
defining panic of the Bush era."
Theology was less of an
issue for liberals during the Obama years; he was their messiah, and they just
worshiped him. Meantime, Obama conspicuously dissed orthodox
Christians with everything from calculated snubs and criticism to
gratuitously tormenting the Little
Sisters of the Poor, all the while devotedly celebrating
the unblemished virtues
of Islam. In 2015, Hillary bluntly
stated that "[d]eep-seated ... religious beliefs ... have to
be changed" to accommodate the unlimited abortion
license. Then, last year, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom
Perez said it is "not
negotiable" that "[e]very Democrat" support
abortion. Pelosi tried to mitigate Perez's remarks by saying "of
course" there's room for pro-lifers in the Democratic Party, but
try to find one who's not actually voting Perez-style.
This year, Pelosi watched
the Democrats lurch wildly to the extreme left. For decades before
that, they were trusted allies in the left's war on conventional morality and
religion (except Islam!) for being repressive, patriarchal, and
counterrevolutionary. It may be that, alarmed that the Democrat
brand has become too materialistic, amoral, and atheist, she thinks she can
give it religion. Maybe she can draw an unfavorable comparison
between the reprobate and undisciplined Donald Trump and herself: the
"ardent, practicing Catholic," who exhorts the President to beg for "the
great understanding and wisdom" that she (and Chuck Schumer?) have already
been granted by God. Haven't Republicans marched under the banner of
morality and Christian values long enough? Now that they've elected
the unholy Trump, why can't the Democrats seize that banner for themselves?
For one thing, because no
evangelical or conservative Catholic would ever buy it. Sure, the
Democratic Party is crowded with Catholics, but the serious ones left years
ago. The leading unserious Catholic is Pelosi herself, who professes
her devotion to the faith but does it while living in open, willful defiance of
the Church's crystal-clear teaching against abortion: "It is the teaching of
the Catholic Church from the very beginning that the killing of an unborn child
is always intrinsically evil and can never be justified."
When her duplicity
threatened to become an issue in 2004, Pelosi pretended that, moved by her
"ardent" devotion to the Church, she had been studying the Church's
teaching on the beginning of life "a long time," and she stated
falsely to Tom Brokaw on Meet
the Press that the Church has never defined it. Asked
when human life begins, she replied, "We don't know," and that
"[t]he point is, that it shouldn't have an impact on the woman's right to
choose" – the "it" being when a human life begins, which shouldn't have an impact on
the decision to get an abortion. Easy mistake to make when your
catechism is Roe
v. Wade.
Later, when a reporter
mentioned the Gosnell infanticides and challenged her own support for
partial-birth abortion, an agitated Pelosi snarled back that "[a]s a
practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred
ground to me when we talk about this[.] ... This shouldn't have
anything to do with politics." But as a politician, she never
stops talking about it, and the sacred ground she was talking about wasn't
human life, but the exercise of a mother's "free will" to terminate
her child. In response, New York's Cardinal Egan said, "Anyone
who dares
to defend that [the unborn] may be legitimately killed because another
human being 'chooses' to do so or for any other equally ridiculous reason
should not be providing leadership in a civilized democracy worthy of the
name." Her own bishop reluctantly corrected her misstatements
in a public
letter, necessitated by "the widespread consternation among
Catholics" of her deliberate distortions of Catholic
doctrine. Pope Benedict counseled her, in person, on the
Church's express teaching, "which enjoins all Catholics, and especially
legislators," to protect "human life at all stages of its
development." Pelosi, " the respectful Catholic" who
presumed to tell Trump to pray for wisdom, emerged from thatmeeting no
wiser for it, obtusely extolling the "Church's leadership in fighting poverty,
hunger and global warming."
Jesus warned against
hypocrites who make a public display of praying "that they may be seen by
men." The way Pelosi pretends to exemplify
"prayerful" politics, and the way she told Trump "in
private" that she's praying for him – and immediately announced it in a
televised press conference – is pure Pelosi: cynical, addlebrained,
phony. If it might hurt Trump, she'll pontificate how every MS-13
killer retains a "spark of divinity,"
then goes right back to her life's work snuffing out that spark from 60 million
innocents and counting. The Bible never says it's intrinsically evil
to build a wall or protect a border, but it's still got that commandment
against murder.
Let the Democrats canonize
this Pharisee if they need a patron saint. Her feast day can fall
on January
22.
T.R. Clancy looks at the
world from Dearborn, Michigan. You can email him
at trclancy@yahoo.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment