So the other day a whole bunch of Senators grew brains – (at least temporary ones) and finally got the picture – voting for the amnesty based immigration bill would very definitely have mandated the typing of their resumes before the end of autumn, 2008. A lot of credit goes to junior senators who thankfully opted to buck their more senior counterparts and do the right thing for their country, thus proving my theory that imposing term limits on members of Congress would constitute a much needed reform. So-called “junior” senators apparently still possess the principles that drove them to serve to begin with, whereas most of the “senior” ones have become part of the machine.

At any rate, they shot down the bill. We conservatives are both pleased and relieved. I had been really sure that amnesty would pass if for no other reason than that too many Republican Senators would be sold on the proactive additions to the bill, figuring they could use them to placate their anti-amnesty constituencies. After all, a politician’s only real career asset is the gift of gab. He or she can be as dumb as a post, but as long as his/her skills as a con man (or con woman) remain intact, he or she can continue to parasite off the taxpayer for decades.

But I digress (ahem).

Let’s see what happens next – the amnesty that centralized the bill was like a shark, while all the positive ad-on agendas like securing the border and enforcing work eligibility laws were like pilot fish clinging to the shark.

Unfortunately, these particular Naucrates ductor didn’t enjoy the option afforded other pilot fish of simply dropping off a dead shark’s teeth and going elsewhere, they shared the fate of the shark. Bummer.

Now, watch the amnesty mongers on the Hill interpret this to mean that all immigration issues are up for individual assessment or reassessment. Bush signed off on the border fence, but that was before the Democrats became the Congressional majority. Those critters could promise us the moon, then not fund the acquisition when the time comes, somehow blaming their failure to deliver on the Republicans, the liberal mainstream media making it believable to the folks on Maple Street. Since they didn’t promise the fence, starving the project of funding would be at most a picayune bit of intentional neglect.

Given the above, the entire illegal immigration issue can be brought forward, without definitive resolution, right through the 2008 election season, giving the Democrats something to “champion”, with their own patented brand of misleading spin, as a co-side dish to man made global warming “climate change”, alongside the hefty Iraq entrée.

I perceive this as a political misstep for the Democrats, as their immigration agendas are offensive to the majority of Americans. But they would tear flesh from bone to stifle the viewpoint of right thinking Americans and flood the field with their liberal propaganda.

On the other hand, the more they obfuscate and promote delays, the larger the criminal alien problem can grow. The M-19 gangs can expand their memberships and bloody influence, emergency rooms can continue to close, billions of dollars in untaxed wages can be wired out of the country and out of our economy, American tradesmen such as carpenters, masons, roofers, plumbers, painters and landscapers, as well as general laborers, custodial workers, furniture movers and others can go hungry along with their families while unscrupulous contractors replace them with illegal, dirt wage, benefit free illegals.

In short, our enthusiasm regarding the defeat of the amnesty bill should be tempered by concern as to how both Bush and the Democrat majority, neither of whom has exhibited any real interest in quelling the flow of criminal aliens into the U.S. (actually, quite the opposite), will now attempt to exploit whatever they can in its aftermath in order to perpetuate a continued increase in the problem as they drag it out in hopes of eventually seeing their amnesty agenda succeed via the pressure of continuous attrition.

…who loves my home town, I can’t say I’m enamored with the field of candidates coming from there to vie for the Presidential election in 2008. Not Hillary (perish the thought!), not Giuliani, who made a fine mayor, but…, not Bloomberg, heaven forbid, should he decide to run.

The specter of an all-New York November 2008 was raised when Bloomberg, a titular Republican since his 2001 mayoral run, announced last week that he was quitting the GOP to become an independent. His predecessor, Giuliani, is running for the Republican nomination for president, while second-term New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is among the Democratic hopefuls.

While New Yorkers are all too aware of the differences between the Big Apple’s big three, folks beyond the Hudson River were not as certain.

“I think basically they are the same candidate,” said Bob House, a Republican from Des Moines, Iowa. “We all love New York. But when our options are New York, New York, New York, I think people want to see a different life experience.”

Angeles Perry, 65, feeding the slot machines in Las Vegas, saw more similarities than differences among the New York triumvirate.

“They have the money,” said the retiree from California’s Silicon Valley. “And they all have big egos.”

As far as I’m concerned, the best candidate for the next POTUS election remains Colorado’s Tom Tancredo, a man who has proven, as opposed to merely delivering campaign promises, that he fights hard on behalf of his supporters to deliver results.

The U.S. House of Representatives this morning voted to withhold federal emergency services funding for “sanctuary cities” that protect illegal immigrants.

Anti-illegal immigration champion Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., sponsored the measure, which he says would apply to cities such as Denver and Boulder. He was elated by its passage, which stunned critics and supporters alike.

The Littleton Republican’s amendment to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill appears to have no language specifically defining a sanctuary city. Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper has long disputed giving the city that label.

“The issue has come to fruition,” Tancredo said by cell phone after the vote. “The people of the country really have spoken. It’s a really good indicator of just how much closer to the people the House is than the Senate is.”

The House passed the amendment, 234 to 189, with 50 Democrats voting in favor.

Tancredo and his staffers hooted and cheered from his office across the street from the Capitol immediately after the vote.

Run, Tom, run!

…in the U.S. Congress aren’t all that different from their counterparts that infest the British Parliament. They’re certainly right behind the Brits in engineering this state of affairs.

“We supposedly live in a truly democratic society where freedom of speech is a fundamental right enjoyed by everyone,” friction.tv Chief Marketing Officer Andy West said in a press release. “However these survey results have shown rather powerfully that most adults in the U.K. feel that this is not the case.”

West added, “We live in such a politically correct society that people don’t know what they can and can’t say anymore and there is a constant fear that if you go against the grain, you’ll be vilified by your peers.”

Sally McNamara, a senior policy analyst in European Affairs for the Heritage Foundation’s Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom, blamed recent British policy.

“The government’s role in any free society is to ensure the safety of its citizenry and pursue policies that guarantee basic rights for all law-abiding people,” she told Cybercast News Service on Monday. “This has been taken to the extreme; legislating against language, behavior, etc.”

Perhaps we should learn from the Brits’ mistakes before it’s too late — if it isn’t already…

…doing something like this would get you in…

If you are sitting next to someone who irritates you on a plane or train:

1. Quietly and calmly open up your laptop case.

2. Remove your laptop.

3. Turn it on.

4. Make sure the guy who won’t leave you alone can see the screen.

6. Close your eyes and tilt your head up to the sky.

7. Then hit this link.

H/T Shana

…is, as the Bard might have said, much ado about nothing.

The MSM and much alternative media as well promote the information czar turned New York mayor’s quitting the Republican Party as a significant event. Right, sure, um… it’s, er, truly an epic event.

Bah!

That’s right, Bah!

Bloomberg was a staunch Democrat prior to the N.Y. mayoral elections at the end of the Giuliani years. However, the Democrats already had a candidate. Really determined to be the mayor, Bloomberg went the turncoat rout and “became” a Republican for the sole purpose of running for mayor. He won.

His first move as the new Republican mayor was to revert to a Democrat, big time.

Now that he’s in the twilight stages of his second term, he no longer needs to be a “Republican”.

The headlines shouldn’t read, Bloomberg Leaves GOP, they should say, Hizzoner Casts Off Sheep’s Clothing.

Now the speculation begins: “Will Bloomberg make a run for President in 2008?”

The media and assorted pundits make reference to his $5.5 billion smackers, wondering if he will use a chunk of it to campaign for POTUS.

And then the wishful thinking makes its way to columns, blogs and broadcast — if he runs as an Independent, his candidacy will be good for, depending upon the commentator, the Democrats or the Republicans.

Now, all opinions are based upon the fact that he won’t win the general election, but that he’ll take votes away from one of the two major parties, like a major league Ralph Nader.

I am not a wishful thinker. Though I’m not always right, I tend to base my opinions and/or projections on what I view as reality based on evidence, human nature, track records, real circumstances, etc, etc. As often as not, I find myself at odds with fellow conservatives who continue to have faith in the integrity of today’s politicians while I reserve judgement under an umbrella of doubt based upon the “bitter pill” of experience.

Personally, as a conservative I would welcome a Bloomberg campaign.

He is for gun control, he is pro-”choice”, he is for stem cell research and other Democrat themes. He certainly wouldn’t get any votes from conservatives or true Republicans.

He would, however, get a lot of votes from moderate Democrats who mistakenly view Bloomberg as a conservative possessed of “progressive” ideals. With or without Nader running, the billionaire, with his monetary edge, would suck up Democrat votes like an aardvark with a Dyson tromping through ant country.

So sure, let the schmuck run for President. His loss would be America’s gain.

Evidentally, the Centers For Disease Control, like many other federal bureaucracies, looks upon our hard earned tax money as nothing other than theirs to squander without a second thought.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provides an example of a big-budget federal agency getting its priorities wrong, according to an oversight report released by a Republican senator.

Among the report’s findings — a $106 million visitor center decorated with waterfalls and Japanese gardens and a $200,000 fitness center with saunas and zero-gravity chairs.

Read on…

Given all the attention Canadians have been giving the stealth agenda of the SPP/NAU (Security & Prosperity Partnership of North America/North American Union), it’s about time we heard something about it from the U.S. media.

Shamefully, President Bush is a part of this plan that will, as I have reported in numerous previous posts, if allowed to reach fruition as expected in the fast approaching year 2010, diminish our nation’s sovereignty, undermine the Constitution in the face of a continental version and replace SCOTUS with a continental supreme court. In the meantime, Mr. Bush is doing his part in the agenda, pushing Congress to flood the United States with legalized criminal aliens on a “come one, come all” basis. With the witting and unwitting help of the Democrats, amnesty for illegals would include multiculturalism rather than assimilation, saturating our country with people whose sheer numbers would erode the American traditions our own liberals have already weakened considerably, playing right into the hands of the principals (POTUS, his counterparts in Mexico and Canada and some megabucks corporate interests) behind these plans whose details haven’t been presented to our three respective governing bodies, of the NAU agenda.

The videos and the article featured in the above-linked post are well worth reading and viewing to any Americans interested in doing whatever they can to help our nation, as we know it, to survive.

Major tip of the hat and many thanks to Always On Watch.

…rather involved pro bono work over the last few days that demanded more time than I’d bargained for, I hope no more of that occurs for some time. Now I can hopefully get back to the business of posting.

On reading Monday’s Jewish World Review, I ran into a few columns that really highlighted the idiocy epidemic that has apparently descended on America and the world.

On the domestic front, Jeff Jacoby definitely rang the bell on the topic of frivolous lawsuits and the consequences of same, citing that most famous of ongoing cases in point, Pearson versus the dry cleaners.

As everyone this side of Mazar-e-Sharif must know by now, Pearson is the administrative law judge in Washington, D.C., who in 2005 sued his dry cleaners for $65 million over a missing pair of pants. He later reduced his claim to $54 million, and the case was tried in D.C. Superior Court last week.

Truncating,

But Pearson’s ludicrous lawsuit, and the legal system’s willingness to indulge it, is no joke to Jin and Soo Chung, the owners of Custom Dry Cleaning. The legal bills they have incurred in fighting this lawsuit have wiped out their family’s savings. Three times they have offered Pearson a settlement, most recently for $12,000. Three times Pearson has refused.

This Pearson critter is a real piece of work.

Lawsuits cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars each year. Legal fear — the fear of being sued, and the lengths to which US businesses, institutions, and municipalities go to avoid legal risk — makes life more expensive, more frustrating, and less free for all of us. “I think we may class the lawyer in the natural history of monsters,” John Keats wrote. But that was in 1819. Imagine what he would have said if he had met Roy Pearson.

A number of years ago, I was a member of a casino security department. About half of our job had to do with the sort of stuff one might expect a security department in a casino to take care of. The other half was protecting the business from fraudulent, frivolous and overstated lawsuits. As one of the several investigators found on each shift, while I handled the usual suspects like embezzlement, pilferage, theft from customers and such, the majority of my work dealt with investigating any incident that might, no matter how slim the odds, lead to a lawsuit.

Unfortunately, too few businesses do this. Someone has a mishap and sues them, and the defendant has no documentation or properly processed physical evidence to bring to court to refute whatever tale the plaintiff has to tell.

When someone sued us, it was another story entirely. There were often weeks when I logged as many as 40 hours in overtime just writing reports. They contained pages of mounted, labeled photos I’d taken, chain-of-custody-of-evidence documents, witness statements, diagrams, refusal of care and release of liability forms, numerous pages of my own written observations, adendums directing our attorneys to videotapes, etc, etc. Between three shifts, there were about a dozen of us doing the same thing. Whew!

As a security shift supervisor, I had to attend management seminars on PC techniques for conducting job interviews, which included acting them out. It was fun “interviewing” the senior casino shift manager, we had some great laughs. We learned that on an application, the best way to protect yourself against discrimination lawsuits is to avoid asking any questions about age, gender or personal limitations or impairments (the best they could offer was “is there any reason you don’t feel you can fulfill the job requirements as they have been explained to you?”)

“Impaired” is a word with many applications.

Some bonehead gets falling down drunk while out drinking and gambling by himself and goes flying down an escalator, a crash & burn, perhaps a 7 on a scale of 10. He’s not drunk, he’s impaired.

In court, you take the stand. You can’t say he was intoxicated, drunk or even, believe it or not, shitfaced. If you even hint that you believe he had somehow succumbed to the effects of an alcoholic beverage or ten, his lawyer will immediately demand to inspect the medical credentials that qualify you to render such an opinion. This will provide him with license to diddle with the rest of your testimony.

You have to say what you had to write in your report: The subject’s words were slurry and there was an odor that smelled like alcohol on his breath.

It can all be pretty tedious, and we have six digits’ worth of parasites with Law degrees to thank for that.

Sexual harrassment was another issue. Any charges of same had to be dealt with by whichever security supervisor had the watch when the report arrived.

Luckily, I was a member of the in-house old boy network, which spanned all departments and always got all the scuttlebutt in a timely fashion. I headed off a lot of problems like that before they became official, and as such knew when a BS case came in. Those got,

“On 9 Nov 94 at approximately 1940 hours, such-&-such restaurant waitress so-and-so came to the security office and filed a sexual harrassment complaint against food runner so-and-so… Statements by Ms X and Mr Y are attached.” And that’s what I sent upstairs.

“Seth, where’s the rest of your investigation?”

“That’s it. Maria’s pregnant and claims it’s Hector’s. Hector says it isn’t. Maria has a highly active and diverse night life. Hector refuses to shack up and take responsibility for the baby. That’s gospel, but I’m not putting it in writing. Maria’s trying to punish Hector. Deal with it.”

We once had a woman in the security dept who got “injured” her first day on the job and “held the casino hostage” for nearly a year with one litigious issue after another. She got two pit bosses, both of whom were good friends of mine, in major trouble via BS. We finally found out that she was a doper and found a legal way to dump her.

To cut to the chase, we saved the casino several million dollars a year in greed motivated lawsuits.

Yes, we do have a problem in this country that revolves around parasitic trial lawyers. They cost companies precautionary funds that might otherwise create employment, impose budgets that detract from spending on company business.

Luckily for trial lawyers in general, I’m not ruling America. If I were, those cockroaches would all be taken out and slowly drowned.

…one blonde joke,

Blonde in the Everglades

A young blonde woman was driving through the Florida Everglades,while on vacation. She wanted to take home a pair of genuine Alligator shoes, in the worst way, but was very reluctant to pay the high prices that the local vendors were asking.

After becoming very frustrated with the attitude of one of the shopkeepers, the young blonde declared, “Well, then, maybe I’ll Just go out and catch my own alligator and get a pair of shoes
for free!”

The shopkeeper replied with a sly smile, “Well, little lady, why Don’t you go on and give it a try?”

The blonde headed off to the swamp, determined to catch an alligator.

Later in the day, as the shopkeeper was driving home, he spotted the same young woman standing waist deep in the murky water, shotgun in hand. As he brought his car to a stop, he saw a huge 9-foot gator swimming rapidly toward her.

With lightning reflexes, the blonde took aim, shot the creature and hauled it up onto the slippery bank. Nearby were 7 more dead gators, all lying belly up.

The shopkeeper stood on the bank, watching in silent amazement as the blonde struggled mightily and barely managed to flip the gator onto its back. Then, rolling her eyes heavenward, she screamed in frustration,

“CRAP! THIS ONE’S BAREFOOT, TOO!”

H/T Brenda

…I voted for Arnold.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Latino immigrants who want to learn English more quickly should avoid Spanish-language media.

“You’ve got to turn off the Spanish television set,” Schwarzenegger said at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists convention in San Jose on Wednesday.

“It’s that simple. You’ve got to learn English. I know this sounds odd and this is the politically incorrect thing to say and I’m going to get myself in trouble. But I know that when I came to this country, I very rarely spoke German to anyone.”

Well, I suppose one runs into a lot more German speakers than Austrian speakers here in America, but the Governator’s point is well taken.

Too many immigrants, especially among Latinos and to some extent Chinese, unfortunately, are too lazy (a real shame on Latinos as learning English from Spanish is a lot easier than learning English from most other foreign languages) or aren’t interested enough in assimilating into the U.S. population as Americans to put any serious work into learning English, and instead they bury themselves in like-minded communities. These people are definitely not worthy of U.S. citizenship, in my book. My maternal grandparents, who arrived in America from eastern Europe nearly 80 years ago and met at night school in New York learning English, subsequently permitting only English to be spoken in their home, would agree with me whole-heartedly.