“If anything, this debate underscores the necessity of passing comprehensive immigration reform and resolving the issue of 12 million undocumented people living and working in this country once and for all.” President Obama, September 16, 2009

Now, in Washington-speak “undocumented” means that they are here illegally – they broke the law of the United States to get here.  So 12 million people came here seeking freedom and opportunity that they didn’t have in their own country, but their first act here was to break the law.

Now consider that approximately 13.2 million people were unemployed in April 2009 and around 14.9 million in August 2009 for a 9.7 percent unemployment rate.

14.9 million minus 12 million equals 2.9 million.  What is the unemployment rate then?

There is nothing wrong with immigration, but make it legal.

“Canada is not Mexico, it doesn’t have a drug war going on. It didn’t have 6,000 homicides that were drug-related last year. Nonetheless, to the extent that terrorists have come into our country, or suspected or known terrorists have come into our country, it has been across the Canadian border.”

The CBC reporter then asked whether she was referring to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks and Napolitano answered:

“Not just those, but others as well. So again, every country is entitled to have a border. It’s part of sovereignty.”

Napolitano apparently missed the fact that the September 11th terrorists all entered through United States airports. Very comforting to see that level of knowledge displayed yet again in the Obama administration.

Come with us, align yourself, come with us on the road to socialism. This is the only path. Imagine a socialist revolution in the United States,” Hugo Chavez, dictator of Venezula.  March 6, 2009

“Washington has told Moscow that Russian help in resolving Iran’s nuclear program would make its missile shield plans for Europe unnecessary” – March 2, 2009, 4:16pm, en.rian.ru

We should remember this day when Europe, the United States or elsewhere is hit by a missile that could have been stopped by an anti-missle shield.  Never in the course of history has a madman (or madwoman) been stopped by appeasement and backing down from self-defense.  

Let us hope we do not come to rue this day any time soon.

A single high-altitude nuclear weapon detonation (perhaps 200 miles) would create an electromagnetic pulse that would cover most of the continental United States, some of Canada and Mexico.  The EMP would disable much of the electronic equipment in the United States.  Even a small – by nuclear weapons standards – fission weapon would do significant damage.  EMP would mean loss of power for everyone.  This would mean no delivery of food or medicine or any other supplies.  People that require water and sewer systems would be without power.  Computers, TVs, radios would be damaged.  The damage would not be a matter of resetting circuit breakers.  Decades would pass before we were back to a 1920 level.  Half a century before we were back to the 1970s.  Tens to hundreds of millions of people would die in the United States within a year from starvation, disease, and untreated medical conditions.  Many more hundreds of millions from around the world would die from ripple effects.

A country such as Iran or North Korea with a nuclear weapon and a delivery system could put the United States back to 1850 in terms of technology in 1 second.  Without a weapon defense system, the United States is completely helpless.

Do we want to be at the mercy of an insane leader of a foreign country?

Two steps that must be taken as soon as possible:

1. Missile defense to stop the EMP before it starts.

2. Try to “harden” much of the United States electrical network.  This is not a quick solution, but should be started.

If we are ever hit by EMP it will be too late.

Nothing reflects the result of hyperpartisanship more than the current immigration debate, which has become so toxic that anytime a practical proposal is put forward, it is shot down before it can even be weighed on its merits. New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, November 14, 2007

One wonders what Gov. Spitzer would have said about Patrick Henry saying “give me liberty, or give me death!”Governor Spitzer, it is not hyperpartisanship to defend freedom, liberty and the rule of law. The steps to immigration are well spelled out. Immigrants are great. Illegal immigration is breaking the law by definition.Anyone who decries so-called “hyperpartisanship” wishes to confuse the issue, marginalize people in order to increase their own power, and decrease the liberty of the people of the United States. The “hyperpartisans” are those who are willing to trade your liberty for their power. Compromise over freedom only has one result – loss of liberty. When the choice is freedom or anything else, freedom by definition will lose in any compromise. And once lost, freedom is much more difficult to regain. Gov. Spitzer, there are at least three steps:1. Border security.2. Encourage freedom and the rule of law elsewhere to make life better for the citizens of the countries there.3. Then deal with the problem here.It is not Hyperpartisanship to point that out. It is not “hyperpartisanship” to state the freedom should not be compromised on. It is not “hyperpartisanship” to defend liberty.

Where is the middle ground between good and evil?  Where is the middle ground between freedom and tyranny? Where is the middle ground between liberty and slavery?  There can be no compromise between you and your destroyers unless you willingly accept your own destruction.  Without liberty your life is not your own, it belongs to those who enslave you.  Enslavement for a good cause is still enslavement.

There is no ground for compromise between people who want to take your freedom from you.  Partisanship is not saying “no” to enslavement.  The evil here is not those standing up for liberty, the evil is those attempting to take it.

As is typical for the Episcopal Church, the Church again injected politics into the pulpit, at least this time, it was something that people could -and should- do to help.

The statement begins: ?¢‚Ǩ?ìImagine waking in the middle of the night with a raging fever and sore throat. Or even worse, your child wakes up feverish and covered in chicken pox. Now, imagine there is no aspirin, Tylenol, or Benadryl in your home because these products are simply not available for purchase in your country. For our brothers and sisters in Cuba, this is everyday life.?¢‚Ǩ¬ù It goes on to request prescription drugs ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú antibiotics and antiparasitics. Imagine a country where you can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t go to the store and get them with a prescription when needed. Imagine a filmmaker stating that should be the goal of the United States. Moore is right, it does take a Sicko to advocate that.

A big thank you to the Episcopal Church for stating the truth about Cuba and Cuba?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s Michael Moore touted health care system. Let?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s be clear: Cuba is a totalitarian dictatorship without freedom. The health care system in Cuba is horrendous unless you are in the top 1000 government officials ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú or are Michael Moore, ready and willing to manipulate the American people into ceding their freedom for a socialized, extremely expensive (in both dollars and lives lost) health care system. Everyone else is out of luck.

Before you buy into the socialized health care system that sicko Michael Moore advocates, look at the facts of Cuba, Britain and Canada. Do you really want a country where even multivitamins are unavailable? Where toothpaste, soap, and shampoo are too? That is the goal of Michael Moore and his ilk ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú centralized control of your life by power-hungry people and politicians like him.

The problem is illegal immigration and the current proposed legislation rewards lawbreakers ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú it is amnesty for breaking the law while millions of people who do not break the law are still waiting to come here legally. A pig in a parlor is still a pig. A pig in the Capitol is still a pig too. You may say, what about the fines? Does anyone really believe that they won?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t be waived? Or that they?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ll be upheld in court? Or that they won?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t be changed by future legislative revisions? It is amnesty plain and simple whether acknowledged or not.

After the 1986 Immigration Act (The Immigration Reform and Control Act), the current wave began and without fixing the root causes, we will be dealing with the same issue again in 15 or 20 years. To prevent further illegal immigration, the root causes must be fixed: first, the porous border needs to be patched so as to prevent more waves of illegal immigration. Second and most importantly, the United States must help the countries of the Americas improve their laws, social systems, and economies to provide opportunities for their own citizens. Freedom, low taxes, sound money, property rights and the rule of law are necessary ingredients for economic opportunity. Without opportunity and freedom in their home countries people will seek it here.

Until the United States solves those two problems, any reform such as this is going to be a pyrrhic victory. This legislation will only damage the rule of law and consequently the United States itself.

What is right for America is this: legal immigration, with no rewards for breaking the law. The 2007 Immigration plan is nothing more than surrender to law-breakers. The President has refused embrace surrender in Iraq and should refuse surrender to the left’s demagoguery here.

For the world is too crowded folk, here is an interesting fact. The entire world population could fit in the State of Texas with a population density of approximately 28 people per acre. That is 1500 square feet per person, assuming one story. Yes that might be somewhat crowded, but the point is that it could be done and that the world is not nearly as crowded as some would have you believe. The facts:

Total Land Area: 261,914 sq. miles (167,624,960 acres) (see http://www.texasalmanac.com/texasrank_2000.htm)

Approximate world population: 6,000,000 (6 billion)

World Total Land Area: 51,789,516 sq. miles. Texas is, in other words less than 0.5 percent of the world land area.