Caroline Glick hits the nail right on the head once again.

“International” kangaroo courts are in the offing. But that’s the very least of Israel’s problems…

Israel is endangered today as it has never been before. The Turkish-Hamas flotilla two weeks ago precipitated a number of dangerous developments. Rather than attend to all of them, Israel’s leadership is devoting itself almost exclusively to contending with the least dangerous among them while ignoring the emerging threats with the potential to lead us to great calamities.

Since the Navy’s lethal takeover of the Mavi Marmara, Israel has been stood before an international diplomatic firing squad led by the UN and Europe and supported by the Obama administration. Firmly backed by European and largely unopposed by Washington, the UN is moving swiftly towards setting up a new Goldstone-style anti-Israel kangaroo court. That canned tribunal will rule that Israel has no right to defend itself and attempt to force Israel to end its lawful naval blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza.

Fearing this outcome, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu bowed to US President Barack Obama’s demand that Israel set up an Israeli inquest of the Mavi Marmara takeover and permit foreigners to oversee its proceedings. Netanyahu also agreed to scale-back Israel’s blockade significantly, and allow international bodies to have a role in its far more lax enforcement. Netanyahu has made these concessions with the full knowledge that they will strengthen Hamas in the hopes that they would weaken the international onslaught against Israel.

Unfortunately, it took no time at all to see that his hopes were misplaced. Even before Netanyahu announced these concessions, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon already announced that they make no difference to him or to his friends in Washington and Brussels. They will move ahead with their plans to appoint a new kangaroo court charged with asserting that Israel has no right to defend itself.

Meanwhile, while Israel gets totally unjust flack from a bunch of hostile countries, the EU, the U.N. and the usual suspects based on calculated inaccuracies and omissions of fact, at least one man, surprisingly a former European leader, José María Aznar (Prime Minister of Spain from 1996-2004 — defeated because the people of Spain, cowed and trembling after a single terrorist attack, wanted a noodle-spined leader who would run his troops out of Iraq with a tail-between-the-legs cowardice that would have made the French green with envy).

By Jose Maria Aznar:

Anger over Gaza is a distraction. We cannot forget that Israel is the West’s best ally in a turbulent region. For far too long now it has been unfashionable in Europe to speak up for Israel. In the wake of the recent incident on board a ship full of anti-Israeli activists in the Mediterranean, it is hard to think of a more unpopular cause to champion.

In an ideal world, the assault by Israeli commandos on the Mavi Marmara would not have ended up with nine dead and a score wounded. In an ideal world, the soldiers would have been peacefully welcomed on to the ship. In an ideal world, no state, let alone a recent ally of Israel such as Turkey, would have sponsored and organised a flotilla whose sole purpose was to create an impossible situation for Israel: making it choose between giving up its security policy and the naval blockade, or risking the wrath of the world.

In our dealings with Israel, we must blow away the red mists of anger that too often cloud our judgment. A reasonable and balanced approach should encapsulate the following realities: first, the state of Israel was created by a decision of the UN. Its legitimacy, therefore, should not be in question. Israel is a nation with deeply rooted democratic institutions. It is a dynamic and open society that has repeatedly excelled in culture, science and technology.

Second, owing to its roots, history, and values, Israel is a fully fledged Western nation. Indeed, it is a normal Western nation, but one confronted by abnormal circumstances.

Uniquely in the West, it is the only democracy whose very existence has been questioned since its inception. In the first instance, it was attacked by its neighbours using the conventional weapons of war. Then it faced terrorism culminating in wave after wave of suicide attacks. Now, at the behest of radical Islamists and their sympathisers, it faces a campaign of delegitimisation through international law and diplomacy.

Sixty-two years after its creation, Israel is still fighting for its very survival. Punished with missiles raining from north and south, threatened with destruction by an Iran aiming to acquire nuclear weapons and pressed upon by friend and foe, Israel, it seems, is never to have a moment’s peace.

For years, the focus of Western attention has understandably been on the peace process between Israelis and Palestinians. But if Israel is in danger today and the whole region is slipping towards a worryingly problematic future, it is not due to the lack of understanding between the parties on how to solve this conflict. The parameters of any prospective peace agreement are clear, however difficult it may seem for the two sides to make the final push for a settlement.

The real threats to regional stability, however, are to be found in the rise of a radical Islamism which sees Israel’s destruction as the fulfilment of its religious destiny and, simultaneously in the case of Iran, as an expression of its ambitions for regional hegemony. Both phenomena are threats that affect not only Israel, but also the wider West and the world at large.

The core of the problem lies in the ambiguous and often erroneous manner in which too many Western countries are now reacting to this situation. It is easy to blame Israel for all the evils in the Middle East. Some even act and talk as if a new understanding with the Muslim world could be achieved if only we were prepared to sacrifice the Jewish state on the altar. This would be folly.

Israel is our first line of defence in a turbulent region that is constantly at risk of descending into chaos; a region vital to our energy security owing to our overdependence on Middle Eastern oil; a region that forms the front line in the fight against extremism. If Israel goes down, we all go down.

To defend Israel’s right to exist in peace, within secure borders, requires a degree of moral and strategic clarity that too often seems to have disappeared in Europe. The United States shows worrying signs of heading in the same direction.

The West is going through a period of confusion over the shape of the world’s future. To a great extent, this confusion is caused by a kind of masochistic self-doubt over our own identity; by the rule of political correctness; by a multiculturalism that forces us to our knees before others; and by a secularism which, irony of ironies, blinds us even when we are confronted by jihadis promoting the most fanatical incarnation of their faith. To abandon Israel to its fate, at this moment of all moments, would merely serve to illustrate how far we have sunk and how inexorable our decline now appears.

This cannot be allowed to happen. Motivated by the need to rebuild our own Western values, expressing deep concern about the wave of aggression against Israel, and mindful that Israel’s strength is our strength and Israel’s weakness is our weakness, I have decided to promote a new Friends of Israel initiative with the help of some prominent people, including David Trimble, Andrew Roberts, John Bolton, Alejandro Toledo (the former President of Peru), Marcello Pera (philosopher and former President of the Italian Senate), Fiamma Nirenstein (the Italian author and politician), the financier Robert Agostinelli and the Catholic intellectual George Weigel.

It is not our intention to defend any specific policy or any particular Israeli government. The sponsors of this initiative are certain to disagree at times with decisions taken by Jerusalem. We are democrats, and we believe in diversity.

What binds us, however, is our unyielding support for Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself. For Western countries to side with those who question Israel’s legitimacy, for them to play games in international bodies with Israel’s vital security issues, for them to appease those who oppose Western values rather than robustly to stand up in defence of those values, is not only a grave moral mistake, but a strategic error of the first magnitude.

Israel is a fundamental part of the West. The West is what it is thanks to its Judeo-Christian roots. If the Jewish element of those roots is upturned and Israel is lost, then we are lost too. Whether we like it or not, our fate is inextricably intertwined.

Would but Old Europe, the U.N. and — fat chance — the Muslim in the White House exercise as much sense as Senor Aznar!

Well, it looks like Barack Obama’s popularity is plummeting not only here in the United States, but he’s not doing too well among his own people, either.

The people in Muslim countries are losing confidence in President Obama’s leadership since he gave a major outreach speech in Cairo last year, according to a worldwide poll released Thursday.

The survey by the Global Attitudes Project, a project of the Pew Research Forum, showed that Mr. Obama’s favorability ratings in Muslim countries dropped significantly from 2009 to 2010, as has support for his foreign-policy actions in the Middle East and South Asia.

Oh, well…

One of the things that demonstrates the intolerance of the self styled “tolerant” left is their “either you agree with every last piece of doctrine we preach, not 1/4, 1/2 or even 90%, but all, or you are the enemy.”

Their rejection of Joe Lieberman, which didn’t work out as they’d hoped, was a prime example (deprived of the Democratic nomination after expressing views on Iraq that didn’t agree with the “party line,” he ran as an independent and was reelected to the Senate despite their pre-adolescent actions).

Or, try getting a foot in the door in the film industry, which is dominated by some of the most spacey left wing loons on earth, if it is known you are a patriotic American.

Here, we have Hard Astarboard’s all time favorite sheriff, Joe Arpaio; well, let’s let the Washington Times tell it…

Maricopa County Sheriff Joseph M. Arpaio is known as “America’s Toughest Sheriff,” but he has a secret that not many people outside Arizona know: He loves little critters, like puppies and kittens.

Honored for his humanitarian efforts by the Humane Society of the United States, he also received the lifetime achievement award from the nonprofit group In Defense of Animals for his work encouraging police agencies nationwide to take more seriously the crimes of animal cruelty.

He puts animal abusers in jail instead of giving them citations.

The sheriff even has dedicated an air-conditioned jail solely as a sanctuary for dogs, cats and other animals that have been removed by his deputies from abusive and neglectful homes. He began a training program for some of his female inmates to learn how to care for, groom and train those very animals.

So you might imagine how disappointed he was when President Becky Barnes of Guide Dog Users Inc. (GDUI) booted him as the keynote speaker for its July national convention in Phoenix because of his tough stance on immigration enforcement and the state’s pending immigration law.

“This group says it isn’t involved in politics. Well, clearly they are,” Sheriff Arpaio said. “The local group, Arizona Council of the Blind, petitioned the national board to have me removed, and for what, because they don’t want me to enforce Arizona’s immigration laws? They are out of step with our citizenry; shame on them.”

because of his tough stance on immigration enforcement and the state’s pending immigration law

That’s exactly what I mean. It doesn’t matter that the reason they originally invited him to speak had everything to do with his and their common interest in protecting animals from abuse and giving them good homes, not immigration enforcement issues, the hypocrites on the left believe that unless you agree one hundred per cent with their politics and act accordingly, you should be excommunicated from the human race.

Yeah, yeah, these pieces of feces can say that they have:

…concerns about the invitation based on their view of Sheriff Arpaio’s policies and perceived concerns over security at the event.

Security, right. Of course, if lefties didn’t lie, they’d have very little to say.

I’ve said more than once in political discussions with friends that what we are seeing now is a bloodless revolution of sorts.

Not a coup d’etat, of course, but a revolution within the established parties, waged by the common man.

Provoked by the irresponsible passage of the “Stimulus” Bill and ObamaCare, the Big Bail-outs and, among other factors, the trillions of dollars of national debt which has obligated the children of today and those of generations as yet unborn, to pay the freight, the revelation arrived in the form of the Tea partyers and others, from both sides of the political divide, letting the politicians they elected know it’s time to type their resumes.

How? By voting out incumbents in the primaries, declaring their frustration with the old boy network of self seeking parasites on the Hill who squander the taxpayers’ money as though it were Monopoly money via spending the majority of voters of both parties do not condone.

Then, of course, a number of Democrats who were browbeaten or bribed by the Reid/Pelosi biumvirate learned very quickly that they had flushed their political careers down the tubes by ignoring the will of The People who, though they seem to forget, are their employers.

These on-the-way-out politicians are only the beginning, there is in progress a voter backlash the likes of which hasn’t been seen in my lifetime, and that, my friends, is the American system at work. It may take awhile for the American People to get it together, but what do you expect when the media, the public’s primary source for information, has become a propaganda unit for the far left?

As for the president, he, too, is experiencing a rude awakening, not only in the way his previously tame media, like rats abandoning a sinking ship, is going with the same popular opinion, to some extent, that has been placing as much blame for the outpouring of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, but also in the way certain members of his formerly agreeable congressional majority has, in an attempt to save their own skins in this midterm election year, begun to stand up to our self-styled king.

The Senate on Wednesday rejected a $140 billion taxes and spending package in a resounding defeat for President Obama and Democratic leaders that signaled the era of freewheeling stimulus spending is giving way to greater concern for deficits.

Hours later, chastened Democrats produced a pared-down version they said spent less and found offsetting tax increases to pay for most, though not all, of the new measure, which includes unemployment benefits and aid to states.

“There are fewer dollars involved here, and it is more paid-for,” said Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, acknowledging the 11 Democrats and one independent who sided with Republicans in blocking his first version. “We heard what those senators were saying and we have adjusted the amendment accordingly.”

Republicans said the vote - in which Democrats fell 15 votes shy of the 60 needed to allow for the overspending - marked a new attitude for lawmakers who are beginning to worry about debt and deficits as they prepare to face voters in November. It would have swelled the federal debt by $80 billion.

The whole thing.

Photo hat tip to The Voting Female.

Yup, and then into the oil patch, only this one a topical one, drilling pipe not included.

But don’t worry, Barack H. Obama, teeth bared and loins girded for combat, vowed during his Oval Office address to make ‘em pay, yes sir, make those evil knaves from British Petroleum pay through the nose, or else…

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama vowed on Tuesday to compel BP Plc to pay the price for its “recklessness” in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill and sought to harness public outrage over the disaster for a “national mission” to cut U.S. dependence on fossil fuels.

“We will fight this spill with everything we’ve got for as long as it takes. We will make BP pay for the damage their company has caused,” Obama said in a televised address aimed at restoring confidence in his handling of the crisis before it further tarnishes his presidency.

Obama’s stern message for BP, delivered in a solemn tone, was a centerpiece of his high-stakes speech on the oil spill, which threatens to distract from his domestic agenda of reducing nearly double-digit U.S. unemployment and reforming Wall Street.

How forcefully Obama responds to America’s worst ecological disaster will have implications not only for the British energy giant but for the future of U.S. offshore drilling and for any hopes he has for rejuvenating climate change legislation stalled in Congress.

While urging Americans to “seize the moment” to break their addiction to fossil fuels, Obama’s appeal offered no detailed prescription for getting there and lacked a timetable for passing comprehensive energy legislation.

“Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash American innovation and seize control of our own destiny.”

I hate to be the harbinger of reproof, here, but… While George W. Bush was in office, all we seemed to hear from the left side of the aisle, between the ladies and gentlemen over there blaming Bush for everything under the sun, was of the vital need for America to drop everything and single mindedly concentrate on finding alternatives to fossil fuels before “it” was too late; Yet since the Democrats took over both the House and the Senate and got their fearless leader into the White House, there has been nary a peep about spending any money on that “vital” goal.

Instead, we’ve had unbelievable quantities of the taxpayers’ hard earned cash, much of it in debt instruments to be paid off by said taxpayers’ children, grandchildren and their issue and issue’s issue thrown at bank and brokerage bail-outs, the nationalization purchase of auto manufacturing companies and a “stimulus” bill that has stimulated nothing but the coffers of ACORN and various other friends of the Obama Administration.

Now, suddenly, as…

NEW ORLEANS – Scientists provided a new estimate for the amount of oil gushing from the ruptured well in the Gulf of Mexico on Tuesday that indicates it could be leaking up to 2.52 million gallons of crude a day.

A government panel of scientists said that the ruptured well is leaking between 1.47 million and 2.52 million gallons of oil daily. The figures move the government’s worst-case estimates more in line with what an independent team had previously thought was the maximum size of the spill.

…comes to light, our dictator the president, who’s already stressing out under the pressure of two wars (he doesn’t acknowledge the war on terror, since that would mean also acknowledging that his friends and fellow Muslims are behind it), an inevitable, multi-state rout of DC Democrats, a pitched battle over illegal immigration (he’s for it, patriotic Americans are against it) and our collapsed economy, which includes rampant, depression era levels of unemployment, is striking out with a vengeance at the most visible target, BP, as though his onslaught might make the ongoing oil problem go away.

Speaking of unemployment, his infamous drilling moratorium and support of operations “elsewhere” is definitely “helping”, unfortunately not helping the taxpaying, voting Americans in Louisiana.

The six-month drilling moratorium in the Gulf of Mexico will cripple Louisiana’s economy and leave thousands of families without income, particularly in coastal Louisiana, where one in three jobs is related to the oil and natural gas industry.

In Louisiana, oil and gas production can be divided into three industries – oil and gas extraction, refineries and pipelines – which in 2005 supported more than 15 percent of the total household incomes earned in the state.

Okay, how about a statistic or two?

How much oil comes from the Gulf of Mexico?

Around 33 percent of domestic oil in the United States comes through the Gulf of Mexico;

Eighty percent of the Gulf of Mexico’s oil and 45 percent of its natural gas comes from “deepwater” operations that occur in more than 1,000 feet of water.

How many jobs does the oil and gas industry provide in Louisiana now?

The Louisiana Department of Economic Development estimates that the active drilling suspension alone will result in a loss of 3,000 to 6,000 Louisiana jobs in the first two to three weeks;

The ban could cost Louisianans more than 10,000 jobs within a few months;

The state risks losing more than 20,000 existing and potential new jobs during a 12 to 18 month period, if the federal panel takes longer than six months to do their reviews and write their reports;

Coastal Louisiana, where one in three jobs is related to the oil and gas industry, services around 90 percent of deepwater operations in the Gulf of Mexico;

The Louisiana Department of Natural Resources estimates that an average of two supply boats per rig work every day with rates of $15,000 to $30,000 a boat, which means that suspension of drilling activity will result in a nearly $1 million loss per day in supply boat rental income. Each drilling rig job supports four other jobs in local communities.

On the other hand, the moratorium does seem to be of great help to both Brazil and the “infamous” George Soros, to whom the Democrats, knowing upon which side their bread is buttered, pay homage.

Here at Hard Astarboard, while we make no bones about our solid opposition to those on the left and elsewhere whose politics threaten the liberty of all Americans and where we are quick to pounce when we become cognizant of same, we do endeavor to be fair (honestly, we do!).

With that in mind, in the aftermath of a typical incident on the part of a typical group of politically motivated, in this case stone-age, pro-terrorism Islamic agitators called Muslim Student Union at UC Irvine, we were pretty surprised and not a little pleased when the college administrators did the right thing, as opposed to taking the usual “progressive” approach, which is to say, silently applauding the deeds of garden variety miscreants, the “deeds” being the essential shouting down and therefore suppression of the right to register an opinion, of those with whom they disagree.

LOS ANGELES - A University of California, Irvine, disciplinary committee ruled that a Muslim student group should be suspended for at least a year because of a protest that disrupted a talk by Israel’s ambassador and led to the arrest of 11 students, according to documents released Monday.

The letter from a student affairs disciplinary committee to Muslim Student Union leaders said the group was guilty of disorderly conduct, obstructing university activities, furnishing false information and other violations of campus policy. University spokeswoman Cathy Lawhon said the committee’s decision will be a binding recommendation to the campus’ office of student affairs if a planned appeal by the group does not succeed.

MSU attorney Reem Salahi said the committee relied on evidence relied that was “inadequate and problematic” but declined to outline the group’s challenge in detail. She said the decision, if sustained, would leave Muslim students without an organization representing their interests. “It really does have very lasting constitutional implications,” she said. “It’s a chilling effect for Muslims on campus and their right to associate.”

Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren was repeatedly interrupted and called “murderer” and “war criminal” by pro-Palestinian students as he was giving a talk on the Middle East peace process in February. Eleven students were cited on charges of disrupting a public event after they were requested to refrain from heckling but did not. Orange County district attorney spokeswoman Susan Schroeder said criminal charges have yet to be filed and it was unknown if or when they would be. (Read earlier story: ‘Heckling of Israeli ambassador shameful’)

“Progressive” California universities, or so one would expect, would be the last institutions to interfere with the obstruction of the right to free speech of anyone whose doctrine didn’t agree with theirs or their Muslim love objects’ totalitarian ideals.

So, hats off to UC Irvine!

From One News Now.

Yeah, our incumbent POTUS is a talker, alright.

THEODORE, Ala. – In a newly optimistic tone, President Barack Obama promised Monday that “things are going to return to normal” along the stricken Gulf Coast and the region’s fouled waters will be in even better shape than before the catastrophic BP oil spill.

He declared Gulf seafood safe to eat and said his administration is redoubling inspections and monitoring to make sure it stays that way. And his White House said Monday it had wrested apparent agreement from BP PLC to set up an independent, multibillion-dollar compensation fund for people and businesses suffering from the spill’s effects.

He declared, “I am confident that we’re going to be able to leave the Gulf Coast in better shape than it was before.”

… Sure, yeah, right, of course… Before we vote you out in November, 2012, or before?

With Obama hoping to convince a frightened Gulf Coast and a skeptical nation that he is in command, he is marshaling the tools at a president’s disposal: a two-day visit via Air Force One, helicopter and boat in the region, a prime-time speech Tuesday night from the symbolically important stage of the Oval Office and a face-to-face White House showdown Wednesday with the executives of the oil company that leased the rig that exploded April 20 and led to the leak of millions of gallons of coast-devastating crude.

From an enormous waterside staging facility here, one of 17 where cleanup crews ready themselves and equipment to attack the spill, Obama mixed optimism about the ultimate result with warnings that the recovery could take a while.

“I can’t promise folks here in Theodore or across the Gulf Coast that the oil will be cleaned up overnight. It will not be,” he said, after encouraging hard-hatted workers as they hosed off and repaired oil-blocking boom. “It’s going to be painful for a lot of folks.”

Ya’ think?

As the sentiment is expressed in an editorial in DeKalb County, Alabama’s Times Journal:

Right now, words are easy. And, in the wake of so many who are suffering from this tragedy, words do little to return Alabama’s beautiful beaches and critictal fishing industry to the norm.

Words, however, and words alone, are the sum total of the Obama product…

This one comes courtesy of the National Association for Gun Rights.

It describes exactly the kind of thing “progressives” force on us that makes my blood boil.

Thanks to Chicago’s gun ban, an 80-year-old Chicago man may face charges after shooting an intruder.

The Supreme Court is currently hearing McDonald v. Chicago, which could repeal Chicago’s longstanding handgun ban. But justice may come too late for an elderly Korean War vet who was simply defending his 83-year-old wife and 12-year-old grandson.

The Chicago Sun-Times reports that this man had been robbed at home “a couple of months ago” by “three intruders.” Afterwards, he “bought a gun and vowed never to be a victim again.”

Around 5:00 this morning, 30-something Anthony Nelson broke into the home by breaking out a back window that leads to the elderly couple’s unit. There was a confrontation between the home invader and the homeowner, and the invader shot at the elderly man with his revolver. The homeowner shot back with his handgun, killing the attacker.

Good for him!

WGN interviewed Nelson’s mother, who of course extolled his virtues:

“Lenora Nelson said her son loved to draw and build things. She said he obtained his GED in jail and had just signed up for an online carpentry program. “He could fix almost anything,” she said.

Nelson was supposed to start a new job next week for a company that cleans out homes before they’re remodeled, his mother said.”

WGN balanced this out by reporting that Nelson “was on parole after being sentenced to three years in prison for a 2009 drug conviction,” and “had a criminal record that includes a number of other drug or weapons convictions going back to 1998.”

ABC reports that the man may be charged under Chicago’s current law, which bans handgun ownership.

Lenora Nelson was probably one hell of a parent. Yessiree, raised her one fine criminal, the kind of scumbag who preyed on senior citizens and, in his case, has thankfully been taken out of the gene pool.

Mayor Daly believes shoving a rifle up a reporter’s buttocks might save his life.

And if escaped convicts bother him at his Michigan vacation home, his private security detail stands ready to hold them at gunpoint.

Meanwhile, an elderly couple awaits the arrival of another set of armed robbers, courtesy of Daley’s “law and order” crew.

This is one of the features of “progressivism” that most ticks me off: These wealthy elitists sit there in the safety of their well guarded estates or gated communities, immune to the tragic consequences of the laws they impose on the common man, and aren’t the least bit perturbed at the misery they cause others through their misguided and usually not un, but anticonstitutional doctrines.

Let’s say this 80+ year old Korean war veteran, his wife and grandchild had been murdered by Nelson because there wasn’t a weapon in the house, what then?

How about, “Oh, well, at least the oldster didn’t break the law by owning a handgun.”

Thankfully, the case is also drawing attention of the right kind.

Update: Joe Brodsky announced his willingness to take this case pro bono, if Daley charges the victim under the handgun ban.

Said Brodsky: “Self defense isn’t just a right, it’s a duty. If this man is prosecuted for saving his own life it’s not just a travesty, its justice turned inside out.”

If this man is prosecuted for saving his own life it’s not just a travesty, its justice turned inside out.

That’s for damn sure…

There are a number of good links in the NAGR article, which can be read here.

Don’t blame me, that’s One News Now’s phrase, but it does fit, according to what we outside the boundaries of “progressive” ostrichity already know and what is described in this column by Peter Heck.

In Federalist #2, Founder John Jay addressed the dangers of foreign force and influence. In the course of the essay, he celebrated, “With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people — a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs.” Jay understood that perhaps America’s greatest protection against the threat of foreign manipulation was our overriding sense of unity as a people.

That’s why Jay and the other Founders insisted that immigrants be willing to embrace and adopt our values and principles. George Washington wrote, “By an intermixture with our people, they, or their descendents, get assimilated to our customs, measures, laws: in a word soon become one people.”

Unfortunately, in the name of political correctness, we are trampling this very notion of unity in deference to the sacred cow of “diversity.” No clearer can this tragic reality be witnessed than in our developing societal embrace of Islam.

Well put. To truncate:

When Dr. Daniel Shayesteh (the former co-founder of the Islamic terror group Hezbollah) appeared on my radio program, I asked him whether true adherents to Islam could peacefully assimilate into American culture and embrace constitutional law and order. He responded, “It is impossible for a person who follows Mohammed and says, ‘I am a Muslim’ and follows the instruction of the Koran to align himself with other laws and cultural values. That’s impossible, because everything other than Islamic culture and principle is evil.”

That chilling admission should set off warning bells. Yet, despite this plainly stated position, Americans continue to suffer the foolishness of political correctness that tells us we should celebrate the growth of Islam here in America. Let me ask a hypothetical question: would you vote for someone who ran on the platform of obliterating U.S. sovereignty, discarding the U.S. Constitution, subjugating women, and executing homosexuals and executing?

The “chilling admission” hasn’t set off any warning bells with our PC politicians or the mainstream media.

What’s new? Nothing ever does, the result being that the citizens our politicians are supposed to serve are forced to weather tragedy after tragedy that could have been averted, such as the price we are now paying for their decades of ignoring the growth of illegal immigration in America.

The entire article.

Once again, Arizona is proving to be the only wet-back infested state in the nation that’s thinking with anything other than its nether regions.

“Anchor babies” isn’t a very endearing term, but in Arizona those are the words being used to tag children born in the U.S. to illegal immigrants. While not new, the term is increasingly part of the local vernacular because the primary authors of the nation’s toughest and most controversial immigration law are targeting these tots — the legal weights that anchor many undocumented aliens in the U.S. — for their next move.

Buoyed by recent public opinion polls suggesting they’re on the right track with illegal immigration, Arizona Republicans will likely introduce legislation this fall that would deny birth certificates to children born in Arizona — and thus American citizens according to the U.S. Constitution — to parents who are not legal U.S. citizens. The law largely is the brainchild of state Sen. Russell Pearce, a Republican whose suburban district, Mesa, is considered the conservative bastion of the Phoenix political scene. He is a leading architect of the Arizona law that sparked outrage throughout the country:

Senate Bill 1070, which allows law enforcement officers to ask about someone’s immigration status during a traffic stop, detainment or arrest if reasonable suspicion exists — things like poor English skills, acting nervous or avoiding eye contact during a traffic stop.

But the likely new bill is for the kids. While SB 1070 essentially requires of-age migrants to have the proper citizenship paperwork, the potential “anchor baby” bill blocks the next generation from ever being able to obtain it. The idea is to make the citizenship process so difficult that illegal immigrants pull up the “anchor” and leave.

This issue is serious business; Using childbirth as a means to evade the law of the land and its acceptance as such by authorities is the kind of affair that should leave, at the very least, a bad taste in the mouth of any thinking individual.

It’s just as pitiful that the pro-amnesty/pro-illegals crowd, using the usual left-handed tactic of laying guilt trips, defends the acceptance of anchor babies by claiming that sending the parents back to “the old country”, wherever it may be, will divide families.

However, it doesn’t have to, does it? Simply deport the cute little tyke in the company of his/her parents. Problem solved.

Naturally, the supporters of illegal immigration and of amnesty for those felons who have swum the ol’ Rio Grande or come across the border in a dryer context will lay guilt trips, the only weapon of the “progressives” that is second to accusations of racism, distorting a Constitutional law to fit their scenario:

The question is whether that would violate the U.S. Constitution. The 14th Amendment states that “all persons, born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” It was intended to provide citizenship for freed slaves and served as a final answer to the Dred Scott case, cementing the federal government’s control over citizenship.

But that was 1868. Today, Pearce says the 14th Amendment has been “hijacked” by illegal immigrants. “They use it as a wedge,” Pearce says. “This is an orchestrated effort by them to come here and have children to gain access to the great welfare state we’ve created.” Pearce says he is aware of the constitutional issues involved with the bill and vows to introduce it nevertheless. “We will write it right.” He and other Republicans in the red state Arizona point to popular sympathy: 58% of Americans polled by Rasmussen think illegal immigrants whose children are born here should not receive citizenship; support for that stance is 76% among Republicans.

Anchor babies spring forth from illegal aliens. Illegal aliens are illegal.

You know that, I know that and the illegals know that. So do the Democrats and their far left “progressive” masters, yet they continue to insult the intelligence of the American people by remolding laws to suit their agendas, expecting citizens to emulate simpletons and go unquestioningly with the program…

The rest of the article.