Free Republic

“But Kennedy’s work on the immigration bill is, in fact, the third time he has thrown himself behind a major initiative of President Bush’s.”

Yeah.... the THIRD attempt at trying to get more illegal immigrants as registered socialist voters, as well...... 1965 (300,000 illegals), 1986 (4,000,000 illegals), 2007 (12,000,000 illegals)..... Gee, do you suppose that we shall see another one in 2027 (56,000,000 illegals) !?@?@

Stop this nonsense. Stop Ted Kennedy. Stop the Marxist left.

Everyone - Do everything you can to stop this from happening. It will NEVER stop unless WE stop it.

"I've met foreign leaders who can't go out and say this publicly, but boy, they look at you and say, you've got to win this, you've got to beat this guy, we need a new policy, things like that."


Kinda like that, huh?

"Did you see where McCain explicitly attacked Limbaugh over the illegal alien issue on May 24th in a New York speech?" Oh, yeah - I sure did. I'm really sorry, but I have no respect left for McCain. He needs to just pull a "Jeffords", go all the way, join his buddies on the left and be done with it. Adios! And good riddance! Unfortunately, he'll run in 2008, and we'll have to contend with the "media darling" again. I sure hope he gets defeated as soundly as he did in 200 - maybe he'll get the point.

"Something is very wrong in a world when the only answer to violence that adults can find is more violence, using weapons more lethal that those your opponent has. Something is very wrong when our imagination fails us and our creative energies for the making of peace without violence are non-existent."

Be Afraid. Be very afraid.

I cringe in church when the prayer petitions are offered up - one example "Pray so that governments and nations can work together so that people can live in peace and justice". Now, what made them say "Justice"????? What about FREEDOM?????

It's pure Marxist thought ..... and it has come into religions without people realizing what it is.

On Good Friday, Pope Benedict XVI gave his address that blasted Marxism and I was standing up cheering. He warned against the dangers of Marxism and the prevailing Cultural Marxist trends in liberal thought today.

My plan - pray for peace..... but in the meantime, hand me a spare .50 cal, will ya?

You are exactly right about the kind of Marxism that is being taught in the educational system today.

The main words to look for are anything that deals with or states "SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE" as a means to an end (redistribution of wealth, power and the use of guilt to achieve the goals). "SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPEMENT" or anything with the word sustainable is another one (control of economy and business through regulation guided by social concerns, not economic policy). And, of course, the most benign of all words "PEACE" (the moral high-ground - roll over and take it because you must have deserved it - and never, ever retaliate).

I just hear these words and I do an instant knee-jerk reaction to them, because they are the key buzz-words of this Marxist movement guiding the enviornmentalists, the UN subservients, liberalism, disarmerment peace-freaks and globalism.

Whatever the movement, is - it's the same theories behind it - Marxism.

Much appreciated! Well, if I ever ran for office, I'd get one vote!

Hey - Don't forget about the Ray Nagin's school busses idea!

I'm kind of partial to that part of the plan, myself! LOL

And, he'll probably be the one wringing his hands in sequence with the rest of the small intellectual, elitist crowd that even bothers themselves to show up at a Memorial Day service.

My God - stop with the elitist, intellectualist crap, already.

Throw those credentials out there..... blah, blah, blah.....

And, at the end of that little tyrade of supposed superior qualifications, you use the phrase.....
"Ain't gonna happen."

BAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Yes, how intellectually, morally superior you are!

Step off of it, will you? I'm really tired of hearing your degrading comments without an ounce of rational thought to back it up.

"The vast majority will head for home and stay there. As it is, most visit their home at least once a year anyway.

This will just encourage them to stay."


Well, that's one approach. A much more passive one, albeit.

I like the loud, bold statements that communicate the message "respect our laws, or you WILL be deported." And, I have the will to do it.

After all - protecting our borders and our sovereignty is ACTUALLY one of the powers that the Constitution grants to the function of the government.

How long will we put up with the government doing everything BUT what it is actually given the power to do?

It makes me absolutely sick everytime I hear anyone use that common phrase "You can't deport 11 million people. It just can't be done." as the introduction to the argument.

And, WHY NOT?????

I don't see us wringing our hands wondering what to do with all the criminals in our society. I don't hear anyone saying, "... well, you can't just lock up 11 million criminals. It just can't be done." It seems to me that most of America has that one pretty well figured out.

And, how about this?

Clear our the Federal Pens near the borders. Use them as holding and processing stations for the Border Patrol's new assignment - to actually ENFORCE AND FOLLOW THE LAW AS IT IS WRITTEN.

Then we could use the some twisted process of Eminent Domain or something to take Ray Nagin's busses that he has no use for...... to start the wagon train back to Mexico!

I'll bet - in a few years, we'd have a much better control of the problem if WE ACTUALLY STARTED DOING SOMETHING!

Mine are De"Whine" and "Cry me a set of tears on the Senate Floor" Voinovich.

I'm telling you, I would love to get up there and take both of them to the woodshed. And I bet a lot of Ohioans would love it!

Well, I figured I could let my theories about OWG go for another day. I tend to go off in tangents and never reach my point if I stray too far.

But, yes - you are exactly right. And I am very wary.

Thank you!

OK, now this really just makes me sick (and a bit trigger itchy).

I had no idea that things had progressed to such a point as to have nations openly stating their intentions in that report - "Building a North American Community".

I have noticed things going on for a long time, and have connected the dots. Of course, I have been labled "paranoid", but I really don't think so - and the movement is out there to eventually merge into one socialist American union.

When that happens, our Bill of Rights will be gone (no 2nd Amemndment) - we will be subservient to the UN, WTO, and the IMF. And our wealth will be forcefully redistributed to the black holes of the 3rd world nation dictatorships.

Be very afraid - and do everything you have to to defeat this Amnesty bill in the Senate!

I have listened to the sound-bite a number of times. Fantastic stuff!

However, Rush doesn't go far enough in this. He always used to say.... if you want to know the truth, follow the money. I say dig a little deeper......

OK..... Here's my take on what this whole "illegal immigration" debate is about and why the government seems to be turning a deaf ear to the people's voices on the matter.

The people see things straight - ENFORCE THE LAW. PERIOD. Stop allowing social programs to be misused. Stop shoving bilingual nonsense down our throats. Bottom line - come here legally and assimilate.

However, the Senators don't seem to get that message. Why? Simple - A different Agenda that our opinions don't fit into.

Well, here it is - my take on why this is so out of control.....

I honestly believe that there is a force out there that is pushing for the dissolution of our borders (both north and south) in order to form an American Union (similar to EU). We have NAFTA & CAFTA already. The economy (business & manufacturing secotor) has withstood the first step of the dissolution. The next step is the labor. Following that is monetary (you notice how colorful our dollar bills are getting, lately?) unity. The final nail in the coffin will be some sort of new Constitution which is "current and updated" to fit the needs of our newly formed continental union. That way, the "American Union" can compete with the Eurpoean Union "equally", according to theories.

All this is is pure marxist theory of governmental regulation (thereby control) of business in order to harness and distribute the wealth equally in our hemisphere. The larger the economy, the more wealth to redistribute.

Of course, it's a long way off until that part of things happens..... but doesn't anyone else see the signs?

Look who's behind the movements for Amnesty - communist and marxist groups. And they're up to the same tricks with the same old "blah, blah, blah... racists....xenophobe...imperialist... blah, blah, blah.....". That's all I need to know.

"So what ever happened to the 5th amendment and the right to be silent."


(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.


There ya go!


And, for the record, I did a knee jerk reaction as well to this bill. However, in seeing the actual language that the ACLU is "protesting", it just gives police officers the right to arrest anyone who won't identify who they are - but only if the officer stops an individual on a "suspicion". They already have that power, somewhat. The officer must have an "articulable suspicion" of a crime as a reason he stopped an individual. This bill doesn't change that - it now gives them the authority to arrest anyone who is uncooperative.

Yes, of course, I see the power for abuse. It really doesn't sit well with me.

Case in point - I once ran into a rookie officer (that was trying to make a name for himself in the dept) that stopped me on a resonable suspicion. I cooperated fully and proved to him that his suspicions were false - while providing all necessary information. However, he demanded to see my social security number. I told him he wasn't entitled to that information and he threatened to arrest me then. I told him "go ahead - what law did I break?" None. Needless to say, I won that match. But the power for abuse is definitely out there.

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:-1DE1kp-E0gJ:www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm%3FID%3D126_SB_9+Ohio+Patriot+Act+&hl=en


Sec. 2921.29. (A) No person who is in a public place shall refuse to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects either of the following:

(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.

(2) The person witnessed any of the following:

(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;

(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;

(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;

(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of failure to disclose one's personal information, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

(C) Nothing in this section requires a person to answer any questions beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth. Nothing in this section authorizes a law enforcement officer to arrest a person for not providing any information beyond that person's name, address, or date of birth or for refusing to describe the offense observed.

(D) It is not a violation of this section to refuse to answer a question that would reveal a person's age or date of birth if age is an element of the crime that the person is suspected of committing.

Post 127.

A Freudian slip, perhaps? Didn't mean to let intentions slip out?

Yes - and each state's statutes are handled differently. In the case I was referring to, there were totally different circumstances. The stops were made randomly (every so many vehicles) and the officers would ask permission to search the vehicles. If the person was smart enough to say "no", there was a judge sitting in a parked vehicle down the road who signed warrants to search. It was blatently unconstitutional. Warrants are only valid if based on reasonable probably cause - and a random stop checkpoint did not amount to probable cause.

The courts in some states have ruled checkpoints unconstitutional, while in other states the courts have upheld checkpoints which stop the flow of traffic in both directions for license checks, informational stops, DUI's, etc. However, "general crime" enforcement reasons have been deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Claws, guys - retract the claws!

Well, since you think the stopping of all individuals in their vehicles to make sure they're not breaking the law in the interest of "safety" is justified:

I really feel there is a need to begin setting up checkpoints to stop drug smugglers. They would be random, but some states have to do something because it's getting to be a major problem, and it's killing a lot of innocent people. Besides, if you're not smuggling drugs, you won't have anything to worry about.


Hint - This was attempted by the NC police back in the 90's along Rt 40. It was deemed UNCONSTITUTIONAL, and unjustified by the Supreme Court in either 2001 or 2002!