Thursday, March 30, 2006

Can Mexican Flag Wavers Influence American Policy?

CNN has a report today about Los Angeles teachers discussing the effectiveness of recent pro-immigration (anti US border?) student walkouts. See the story here..

First of all, why is this newsworthy? Since when is American policy driven by the whims of thousands of 16 year old truants? Since when does prancing around a city with the flag from a foreign nation serve to influence the US political agenda? Am I the only one who sees the absurdity of TV commentators stating "Washington is sure to take notice" when they see thousands of high school kids waving the Mexican flag and skipping school?

In what's sure to be a typical response, one boy waxed poetic on why walking out of school Monday was a good thing: "Because we let them know what's up". Really? By walking out of your high school you showed American politician's what's up? In what way? Do you think law makers are unaware of the fact that 10's of millions of Hispanics live in our nation? Do you think waving the Mexican flag will cause politicians to change US borders? Maybe I'm the ignorant one, but I don't see how student walkouts showed anybody "what's up". Gee, the 11,000,000 Hispanics living in the US illegally want amnesty? Big surprise there.

The more likely result of the student walkouts and demonstrations is that Americans are angry. It's perhaps an odd thing about Americans, but we respect the American flag. We respect our borders. Our ancestors came to this nation and learned the English language, and they came here legally. Most of us work with residents from China or India who are in the 6 year process of obtaining a green card. We respect their tenacity, and appreciate that they respect our laws. No amount of Mexican flag waving will make people believe that Mexicans should jump to the front of the immigration line.



More importantly, the student protests have confirmed suspicions that Mexican immigrants are not here to become Americans. The resistance to learn English is real, not imagined. The propensity to root for the Mexican national team when they play the US team is not a short-term by-product of recent immigration, it's a systemic attribute of the Mexican community. The goal appears to be to establish the Mexican culture and an allegiance to the Mexican nation within the borders of the United States. This of course begs the question of why they came to the US in the first place.

Just to be clear, nobody is stating that Mexicans residing in the US should change their culture, their food, their customs, nor their religion. Mexican citizens are welcome to jump in our melting pot as fast as the INS can process the paperwork. But if they sincerely want to become Americans, they should abide by our immigration laws, learn our language, put away their Mexican flags and pledge allegiance to the American flag. If on the other hand they want to remain Mexicans and retain their allegience to Mexico, then they should go back home.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Hillary Clinton the Hypocrite

Hillary Clinton spoke out today about a recent immigration reform proposal which would criminalize illegal entry into the United States. The bill would make illegal entry into the United States a felony, whereas today the crime is considered a civil offense.

Clinton said that the bill was "mean spirited". She further stated:
    "It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures," Clinton said, "because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself."


This coming from a woman who's "understanding of the Scriptures" makes it OK to dismember an unborn child? Are you kidding me? If criminalizing the criminal entry into the United States is "mean spirited", what is partial birth abortion Hillary?

Monday, March 06, 2006

Soccer News from Houston, Mexico

I've reported previously on the muchos problemos caused by Houston's new soccer team name, 1836. This name was soooooo offensive to local Mexicans, that the team president, Oliver Luck (Olivar Suerte), has changed the name to the Houston Dynamo. See the latest.

I'm sure this comes at a tremendous relief to all of the Mexican residents of Houston. I'm sure they've been awake at nights, shuddering at the prospects of seeing the year "1836" emblazoned on soccer jersies. After all, that was the year Texas won her independence from Mexico. How could gringos be so insensitive as to rub that year in their faces! Forget the fact that 1836 was also the year Houston was founded - how could the city be so mean-spirited? How did Texas get to be so racist that she continues to celebrate the year she gained independence?

In all seriousness, I suspect maybe 2% of Mexican-Americans were offended by the team name. Perhaps 10% of the Mexican citizens living in Houston were offended (which begs the question - why is the team owner of Houston's soccer team trying to please the citizens of Mexico?). But as is usually the case when a few politically correct wingnuts start crying in the press - insanity rules.

University of Houston professor Raul Ramos, writing a guest editorial in the Chronicle, wondered if the name meant "the team wants Latino [fans] but only on their terms … leaving your heritage, identity and family at the door." This guy is a professor at the University of Houston (note to self - never send a child to U of H)? The name "1836" means Latinos have to leave their heritage and identity at the door? Does the moron Ramos think Americans of Japanese descent cry about V-J day commemorations? Does this fool think Americans of British ancestry "leave their heritage" at the door when they go see the New England Patriots play? Or is it only Hispanics who cry at every perceived "injustice"? Or maybe Ramos thinks that because Houston is now a majority Hispanic, the city is better served functioning as Houston, Mexico than Houston, Texas?

As for Senor Suerte and his soccer team, he's doing a great job keeping me and my insensitive gringo family away from Major League Soccer.

Tuesday, February 28, 2006

Major Pro-Life Supreme Court Victory!

Today the Supreme Court ruled (by a vote of 8-0 with Alito abstaining) against the National Organization of Women (NOW) in their fight to bring Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) charges against pro-life activists.

In a bitter press release, NOW stated:
    "Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that could add to the increasing difficulty women face in obtaining reproductive health services. If the Court's 8-0 decision in Scheidler, et al., v. National Organization for Women (NOW), et al. and Operation Rescue v. NOW, et al. ushers in a return to clinic violence in the United States, NOW stands ready to fight in every jurisdiction.


First of all, it should be noted that only the most ardent pro-infanticide activists of NOW believe the dismemberment of a living human being constitutes "reproductive health services". Secondly, the fact that the Supreme Court voted 8 to 0 against them illustrates just how far from the mainstream NOW has become. Relying on RICO statutes which where put in place in response to organized crime, and on the Hobbs Act which bans extortion, NOW achieved a "victory" in 1998 when a federal judge issued a nationwide injunction against pro-life demonstrators. Today's ruling makes it clear that organized pro-life demonstrations are not criminal acts. NOW's desperate and bitter press release reveals that perhaps they're on the outside looking in on mainstream political debate, so rapid in their desire to protect infanticide that they miss the entire free speech aspect of the case.

Of course, ever reliable CNN frames the issue in an ultra liberal fashion, stating in their headline "Court Deals Setback to Abortion Clinics". Does CNN really believe that abortion clinics should stand above other American enterprises, and remain free from all opposition and protests? Only CNN could take a look at a major victory for free speech and label it a setback to abortion clinics.

Friday, February 17, 2006

Bryant Gumbel: White Bad, Black Good

In what has made barely a ripple on the national news scene outside talk radio, Bryant Gumbel recently gave a commentary on HBO about the Winter Olympics. Said Gumbel:

    "Count me among those who don't care about them and won't watch them. So try not to laugh when someone says these are the world's greatest athletes, despite a paucity of blacks that makes the Winter Games look like a GOP convention"


The messages are clear: White athletes are only at the Olympics because blacks are not competing. How can an athlete possibly be considered among the world's greatest if he's white? Worse yet, Gumbel's implication is that blacks are somehow prevented from playing. If this were a simple matter of blacks choosing not to compete, wouldn't Gumbel's message be delivered to the black community? Wouldn't he encourage all races to participate in speed skating, snowboarding, etc.? And why would he feel the need to bring in the GOP if he wasn't trying to paint a mental image of racist white men running the show?

Gumbel is a fool and should be fired today. Since when is it acceptable to state that an event is not worth watching because the participants are of a certain race? Had a white man stated "I have no interest in watching the NBA because it's blacker than an NAACP convention", do you think he'd keep his job? Of course not.

But HBO's decision to keep Gumbel on staff, and the national media's failure to report this story are just two more indications of our national culture of reverse discrimination. White bad, black good.


Here's another take on the story from the Sporting News:

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Houston 1836 Name Deemed "Offensive"

Houston has a Major League Soccer franchise. The team used an internet poll to select the new name, and fans selected 1836, which was the year in which the city of Houston was founded. In European soccer leagues, incorporating years into team names is quite common, so this name seemed to have appeal due to it's distinctiveness and similarity to big time soccer in Europe.

Unfortunately, some Mexicans (apparently these folks wouldn't want to be considered Mexican Americans) don't seem to like the name. They're offended because 1836 was also the year that the battle of the Alamo was fought. It was the year that Sam Houston's troops defeated Santa Anna (just outside Houston), and the year Texas declared their independence from Mexico.

Fast forward 170 years (yes, 170 years), and some Mexicans seem to still be bitter. Some say the name signals a "lack of respect". Others say they won't go to games if the team is named 1836. In a recent Times interview, Tacho Mindiola, director of the Center for Mexican-American Studies at the University of Houston stated "It's unfortunate because sport is an integrating mechanism in society, and unintentionally or not this is a blunder. Do they think we're going to wear a T-shirt with the year 1836 on it?"

Yes Tacho, I do. It suspect sane Mexicans aren't carrying a 170 year old grudge. If he has such a disdain for the United States of America and our history, then he certainly has other options regarding his place of residence. How anybody could reach the conclusion that it's insensitive or inappropriate to recognize US victories in the USA is beyond me.

Am I some insensitive racist? Well consider the city of Philadelphia for a second. Their basketball team name is the 76'ers, after our declaration of independence from England in 1776. Do you see any Brits crying over that name? Do we have to listen to Americans of British descent cry about our July 4th celebrations? Of course not, because they're not hyper-sensitive morons accustomed to racial coddling.

Unfortunately, the word today is that the Houston franchise will change the name. Once again, Americans adapt to please a few outspoken immigrants. Something is backwards in all this.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Does News Travel to Syria?

Condoleeza Rice yesterday accused Syria and Iran of fanning the flames of violence in the middle east in response to cartoons of Muhammed. Said Rice: "Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes, and the world ought to call them on it."

So what is Syria's response? Syria's US ambassador Imad Moustapha told CNN: "We in Syria believe anti-Western sentiments are being fueled by two major things -- the situation in Iraq and the situation in the occupied territories, the West Bank and Gaza. We believe that if somebody would tell Secretary Rice that Syria is not the party that occupies Iraq and is not the party that occupies the West Bank and Gaza, then probably she would know it is not Syria who is actually fueling anti-Western sentiments."

Maybe somebody should tel Ambassador Moustapha that nobody but Palestinians occupies the Gaza strip. Perhaps the news did not make its way to Syria, but Israel pulled out of the Gaza strip months ago. Also, it might help if somebody told Moustapha that Americans have no interest in staying in Iraq. When Syria stops supporting the insurgency in Iraq, American troops will back their bags and head home.

CNN story here.

Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Buy Danish!!

Show your support, and render the Arab world's boycott of Danish goods irrelevant. Need some top of the line home electronics? Check out the BeoCenter2 at Bang and Olufsen's homepage. Very cool.

How about some toys for your kids?
Lego Homepage

How about some great coffee for you? Check out the Gevalia Homepage

Mexicans Like Americans the Least

Check out the results of this poll on world public opinion.

Some of the highlights.
  • Of all 31 nations surveyed, Mexicans likes America the least. Only 10% of Mexicans have a favorable view of teh United States. Quite a strange position for a citizenry who flocks to our borders looking for a better life. Why are they in such a hurry to get here if they have such a disdain for the USA?
  • In Europe, we are liked most by the Poles. This was my experience at World Youth Day in Germany this past summer. The Poles were a great people, eager to get to know us and eager to trade for USA flags and pins. To top it off, they sang and danced all night, so they must be a great people.
  • South Korea has a mainly negative view of the USA. Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if we stopped supporting Seoul. Do you think Kim Jung Il would want to make a "visit"? I do too. It's a pretty sad state of affairs when a nation owes their very existence to you, and they still don't like you.
  • The Philippines has the most favorable view of America, with 85% having a positive view of our nation? Is this due to our common religion?
  • 72% of those in Afghanistan have a favorable view of the USA, but only 27% of those in Iraq share that view.
  • 62% of Chinese have a mainly negative view of the USA. Don't the Chinese people have any concept of "customer appreciation"?
  • Finally, notice the support for the USA in Africa. All 8 nations survey have a more positive than negative view of the USA. Finally, a people who truly appreciate humanitarian assistance. A dollar spent in Africa is clearly money well spent.
  • Great Gift Idea!

    Send a message of support to Denmark (and a message of disdain to Islamo-fascists), buy a box of Royal Dansk cookies.

    Thursday, February 02, 2006

    Unrest over Cartoons

    Tempers flared today throughout the Islamic world. Students marched in Pakistan shouting "Death to Denmark" and "Death to France". Masked Palestinian gunmen shut the European Union office Thursday in Gaza City, writing on the door that the office would remain closed until the Europeans apologize to Muslims. The Palestinian men, from Islamic Jihad and the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades fired bullets into the air and one of them read their demands. In Gaza, gunmen threatened to kidnap European workers unless the European Union apologized. The rational new government will certainly restore order to the West Bank, right? Check that - Hamas is the new Palestinian government. So much for law and order.

    Why all the threats of violence? Why the intimidation of EU workers in the West Bank? A cartoon. Yep, a political cartoon published in Denmark initially which depicted Muhammed. Said outgoing Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia about the pictures: they "provoke all Muslims everywhere in the world."

    Wow - so the beheading of westerners doesn't provoke Christians? 9/11 didn't provoke Christians? The claims that Israel has no right to exist and the holocaust is a myth don't provoke Jews? Once again, the hypocrisy of the Muslim world is on center stage. This could be the new radical Muslim motto: "We'll kill you for your religious beliefs, but don't you dare even write a cartoon about ours!"

    Who is CAIR?

    Bill Handel is the talk show host in Los Angeles who has recently come under fire from the Council on American-Islamic Relations for his comments about Muslim pilgrims who were killed in a stampede this year. Apparently Handel made some light of the situation, stating that perhaps better traffic management should be employed at Mecca during the pilgrimmage. CAIR is insisting he apologize, and Handel has stated he will gladly apologize as long as CAIR does the following:

    • CAIR must denounce all bombing or attacks where intended victims are innocent citizens
    • Acknowledge Israeli sovereignty
    • Verify that the group has never had connections with any terrorist group or sponsor.


    This should be easy right? After all, isn't CAIR merely a US based organization intent on improving relations between America and the Islamic world? Think again. CAIR does not want to improve relations, they don't simply want to protect the rights of Muslims, they don't want to simply encourage Americans to convert to Islam. They want Islam to become the ONLY religion in the United States. CAIR wants an Islamic theocracy in America.

    Witness this quote from the founder of CAIR, Omar Ahmad:
    ""Those who stay in America should be open to society without melting, keeping Mosques open so anyone can come and learn about Islam. If you choose to live here, you have a responsibility to deliver the message of Islam ... Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth."

    So the next time you hear about CAIR in the news, don't think "peaceful group trying to help Muslims integrate into America". Think radical Muslims who are spending all their time and resources trying to bring and Iranian style theocracy to our nation. As such, trust nothing they say, and understand everything they do is only done to further their agenda.

    Monday, January 30, 2006

    Kerry, Clinton, and Kennedy: Out of Touch Again

    A few desperate neoliberal Senators dropped a bomb on Senate proceedings today in attempt to filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court. Fortunately America was spared the mind numbing misery of having to listen to the likes of John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, and Dick Durbin drone on and on for hours. By a 72-25 vote, the Senate voted to abort the attempts of the extreme left wing to stop democracy in its tracks. Word on the street is that this is the first time these senators had opposed an abortion of any kind.

    Fortunately, many Senators in the Democrat party took the high road and voted to end the filibuster. A disappointed Kerry stated the nomination posed a threat "to the balance that the Supreme Court has upheld in all the years that Justice O'Connor has served there." Kerry further droned "This nomination is an extraordinary circumstance. What could possibly be more important than an entire shift in the direction of the Supreme Court of the United States?"

    Wow. Basically Kerry is saying "I want a liberal court. If I don't get it, then I say we obstruct senate proceedings indefinitely." Can you say Sore Loser?

    Monday, January 16, 2006

    MLK Day Reflection

    Today we remember the great civil rights leader, Martin Luther King Jr. King is remembered and honored for many things, but his biggest legacy is his "I Have a Dream" speech, made August 28th, 1963. Of course, the highlight of King's speech was this line:
      "I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."


    I wonder what Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and other proponents of race-based college admissions, affirmative action, and minority set-aside government contracts would have to say would King give that speech today? "Pssst. Hey Martin....let's not get carried away here. We're trying to rig the system so that race does matter. It's just going to matter in our favor! So if you're going to talk this nonsense, you better register Republican!"

    In any event, it's worth all of our time to say a prayer of thanks for the work of Dr. King. Clearly America is a better place with respect to race relations than it was in 1963. Full text of MLK's speech is here.

    Friday, January 13, 2006

    Aunt Jemima the Protestor?

    What does the city's "small business" law have to do with minorities?

    Story

    Thursday, January 12, 2006

    Robin Hood Alive and Well

    The state of Texas has used a school funding system that takes money from wealthy schools and school districts, and passes the funds along to other schools. The goal is to balance school fundings so that all students have an equal opportunity for a good education. Although this is just a little socialistic, I can understand the need to adequately fund schools with low tax bases. I would have no problem if the goal were simply equality.

    Unfortunately the state of Texas has gone overboard. Equality is apparently not enough. Wealthy schools must give up so much money that they end up below average with respect to school funding. I just received our annual Texas Education Agency Report Card for our school. Although the tax base for our school is well above average (median home price of school neighborhoods exceeds $250,000), our school receives only $3,951 per student. The average for our "school group" (whatever that is) is $5,067, and the average for all schools in the state of Texas is $5,323. Does anybody else find it odd that my kids are the recipients of over 20% less funding because they attend a wealthy school? Doesn't this seem to cause cries of "limited opportunity" and kids getting "failed by the system" to ring hollow? What more are Texans supposed to do to balance the scales?

    It seems that even Robin Hood didn't go this far.

    Tuesday, January 10, 2006

    More Katrina Fallout

    Another Houstonian is dead at the hands of a Katrina evacuee. Very sad, especially in light of the fact that evacuees receive free housing, free meals, $2,000 debit cards, and a general outpouring of support from the community. While most of the storm victims are using federal benefits to get back on their feet, New Orleans criminals have simply brought their ways to the streets of Houston.

    It seems that this unplanned sociology experiment is proving that throwing money at criminals is not an effective method of reducing crime.

    Story here.

    Monday, January 09, 2006

    35% of CNN Readers Confirmed NeoLiberals

    Today's poll asked whether the Senate should filibuster Samuel Alito's confirmation vote. As we all know, a filibuster is a tactic designed to short-circuit democracy, and essentially prevent an issue from even coming up for a vote. Who in their right mind, outside of a career politician in Washington, would prefer that Democrat congressmen filibuster as opposed to debate the merits of an Alito confirmation head-on?

    It what comes as little surprise, 35% of CNN respondents advocate a filibuster. The surprising aspect of these results is that the poll also included the option to "decide after the confirmation hearings". So basically, these lemmings (35% of respondents) say categorically "we don't want to hear anything Alito has to say, just short circuit the process so the Senate can't vote on Alito".

    CNN Poll Results

    Belafonte the Traitor

    Harry Belafonte and Danny Glover were the noteworthy members of a "delegation" of US activists who spent 6 hours with Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez. Recall Chavez is the lunatic leftist hell-bent on alienating himself from the democracies of the world and inciting a socialist revolution in the Americas.

    In a perverted sort of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" move, Belafonte coddled up to Chavez this weekend, stating that George Bush is the "world's biggest terrorist". In what might be the most ludicrous and ill-informed statement ever made, the pinhead Belafonte actually said to Chavez: "No matter what the greatest tyrant in the world, the greatest terrorist in the world, George W. Bush says, we're here to tell you: Not hundreds, not thousands, but millions of the American people ... support your revolution." I don't know about you, but if I were to make a list of people I'd let speak for me, Harry Belafonte wouldn't even sniff the top 100 million.

    Harry and Danny, there are many one way flights from the US to Venezuela. How about purchasing a one-way ticket, and tranferring all of your wealth to the Venezuelan state in your sign of support for the "revolution"? Oh wait, you don't want to give all your money away? You really don't support the revolution - you just want to bring some attention to yourselves? Hypocrites.

    Here's the story.

    Tuesday, December 20, 2005

    More Katrina Race Baiting

    This news is a couple weeks old, but I can't help but comment on the Queen Victim Race Baiter, Leah Hodges. Here is a snippet of what the Louisiana had to say to congress about the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina:

      First of all, I would like to offer condolences to the approximately 10,000 people who lost family members, and what certainly appears to me to be a mass act — an act of genocide and of ethnic cleansing.

      Anyway, I’m chair of a committee called Causeway Concentration Camp. Causeway Concentration Camp arose directly from the harsh military treatment and the tensioned fascist style under the I10 in Jefferson Parish at the causeway exit.

      The one person who was there to actually help people, he just vanished and we just never saw him again. The next morning all we saw was what appeared to be a bunch of hardened rednecks scowling and growling at us in military uniforms, just hostile, full of hatred, and pointing guns at us and treating us worse than prisoners of war. And in over 100 degree temperatures we were forced to stand out in that hot sun with a hundred percent humidity. We were exposed to skin cancer. We were tortured with sleep depravation. They created a garbage dump and they made us live on it and sleep on it and they flew helicopters over our heads and blew the garbage, the muck and the toxic mire back into our faces.

      But, you know, I will answer questions but I will say this, we have been exposed to genocide by ethnic cleansing, the rights of our children have been violated, women’s rights against discrimination have been violated, our economic, social and cultural rights have been violated, our human rights have been violated, our rights against torture have been violated, our rights as prisoners of war within the scope and jurisdiction of the Geneva accords have been violated, migrant workers’ rights have been violated.

      These and all other violations both expressed and implied arise directly from the failure of the United States’ government to eliminate apartheid practices and all other forms of oppressive government practices against poor and working poor citizens of the United States who are mostly African-Americans or otherwise people of color. These violations are historical and continuing.


    Wow! I'm almost speechless. What the moron Hodges fails to recognize is that whites died at a higher per capita rate in New Orleans than did blacks. But let's not let facts stand in the way of her "I'm an oppressed black who is owed everything from racist cracker America" agenda.

    I'm left to wonder who in their right mind invited this race-baiting buffoon with a 5 ton chip on her shoulder to speak to Congress? Secondly, did anybody call her on her ridiculous claims of "genocide", "ethnic cleansing", and "apartheid"? Thirdly, how does a racist wingnut allowed to hurl racist venom, calling whites "hardened rednecks"? Finally, what does the Geneva convention have to do with Katrina?

    As it turns out, Hodges appears to be a member of the Black Panther Party. For more background (from Newsbusters), check out this story from 1970, where Hodges' "party" describes beating up under cover "pigs". And I'm still left to wonder how in the world the likes of Hodges could get a forum before Congress.

    God save our country from fools like Leah Hodges.