What a contrast. As we watch TV news programs showing throngs of Christmas shoppers packing American malls, spending hard-earned dollars to find perfect gifts for loved ones, yet other televised reports pan over thousands of migrants from Central America, all of whom, at least for now, hope to invade the USA and deprive that very Christmas shopping population of a significant portion of valuable family dollars so they can be converted into welfare for the non-entitled alien masses.
So now Mexico begs the freaking United freaking Nations to step in and assist with a "humanitarian crisis," a crisis which, near as we can figure, was significantly engineered by the far left and only became worse once the hordes were encouraged to organize -- organize -- and depart Honduras and other nations. Under international law, this entire farce is Mexico's problem anyway, not America's, because asylum is the responsibility of - say it -- the first country asylum seekers come to. It's spelled M-e-x-i-c-o-.
President Trump's true dilemma, unless he really is in negotiations with the new Mexican president to possibly alleviate the situation: Let one group in and endless "caravans" will continue forever, bringing us almost nothing but angry and illiterate young men and women with no skills, no particular intent to embrace or respect American values, but with a demonstrated penchant for screwing like rabbits, raping and being raped and genetically producing a succession of unwanted and unneeded dolts. And we haven't even referenced the criminal element now coming and yet to be born among the human rubble. Harsh words? Harsh words for a harsh situation. As thousands more migrants proceed to the U.S. border -- a prospect laughed over by leftist media pundits up until and including today -- we need to consider trading tear gas for rubber bullets and rubber bullets for the we-mean-business bullet variety.
We drown in un-enforced immigration laws while Congress should have nailed loopholes down decades ago. Precious days remain to do so in the current Congress, but the chances of legislators taking action are negligible. Why? With the wretched ACLU at the border, likely propping up religious "relief" organizations and individuals who make big money off taxpayers by bringing the miserable, the worthless and the untoward element into the country, action is essential.
Use deadly force at the border? Well, what else does one consider when strangers break into the house? How long will tear gas work before some law-circumventing judge steps in and takes that weapon away? By Sunday, crowd advocates were complaining that some children were harmed by tear gas -- but who brought those children here? Disgusted we are of seeing children used as emotional battering rams by those desirous of ripping USA law to shreds.
And of course "Sixty Minutes" just had to spotlight an immigrant family Sunday evening, using the typical TV formula. Nowhere did we see criminal illegals in prison for murder and other serious crimes, nor did the cost to U.S. taxpayers and job seekers get a mention. Further, we just love how the media is loath to include the word, illegal before the immigrant designation.
Who paid for this insurrection? Who provided food, transportation, clean clothing, baby equipment and all the obvious necessities which would never have been available to impoverished migrants who, as well, somehow arrived at our border more than two thousand miles away in just weeks?
Who lied to the Hondurans and the rest, filling their heads with flowery tales of an America forced, ready and willing to accept everybody who shows up at the border with a baby, a sad story or a weapon intended to injure border guards? Those are the folk the migrants should abhor and turn on, for the lies encouraging their journey will ultimately be as deadly as bullets, once most discover they are deemed ineligible for U.S. entry by law.
I'm not one to embrace militias, but when you watch what generally seems to come down to leftist-inspired judges pussy-footing around the question of what constitutes an invasion, putting restrictions on U.S. military members vulnerable to stand-down orders and attacks by foreign hostiles Halloween-masked initially as kindly nomads, I wonder: To whom does one eventually turn? To open-border progressives? Not.
"Obama judges" on the prowl." Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts' seemed an unlikely voice to admonish Trump over his claim that "Obama judges" exist to thwart his plans. As we recall, Roberts almost twisted himself into a pretzel to accommodate "Obamacare" with something like a tax that wasn't a tax but was a tax but wasn't really a. . .and the 9th Circuit Court, for one prominent example, radiantly glows so far left that its main legacy will be the overturning of a plethora of boneheaded decisions. District court judges located especially in San Francisco and Hawaii sure as hell bear a striking resemblance through their decisions to "Obama judges," in our opinion.
R.I.P. Christian missionary John Chau: When isolated island tribes decide they don't want to stink up their lives with somebody else's religious belief system, or even to be bothered for no reason at all, I guess they can be pretty adamant. When Jehovah's witnesses sent a carload of ladies to my home with intentions to convert me a few years ago, I did not kill them, but did tell them I really, really liked their hair styles, and they quickly departed. Murder isn't always the answer, though it appears to be quite the solution these days, so choose your islands of proposed conversion carefully, believers.
It's official, right on the steps of the Trump White House: Climate change will destroy us. Ya know, the Northeast just this week surpassed SEVERAL weather records as arctic air moved in, and in fact measured temperatures never before noted in recorded history -- though we note that "recorded history" doesn't reach all that far back. Breaking records is debatable as a prediction for the future.
Nevertheless, as a gaggle of science-based agencies have now put the big kiss of death on human civilization unless We Do Something and positioned that warm bag of climactic feces right on Trump's doorstep, we again wish to take into advisement the many instances where climate data has been fudged, yes, deliberately. The University of East Anglia comes to mind, but its lies were hardly an anomaly.
So maybe we're at a point in the planet's history where everything will go bonkers, perhaps eliminating us in the process. So what? Y'all science folk wish us to "do something" in the meantime. Like -- tax the piss out of everybody? Like use government-subsidized, bird-killing wind turbines which cost more to use than the energy one often recovers from them, and when they fail and communities honored by their presence need to remove them and find how costly THAT becomes the nightmare is enhanced?
Does science have in mind solar panels, perfect for roasting bird flocks betrayed by what looks like bodies of water, and essentially useless in areas blocked perpetually from sunlight?
Because historical markers exist obviously showing the Earth in great upheaval over the millennia, indicating both extreme heat and extreme cold, we wonder how we don't weigh the premise that climate phenomena may reverse various effects almost overnight? Despite everything we know, we don't know everything, and we have reached the summit where warnings of the sky falling have echoed so frequently that heeding renewed cackling from those allegedly best equipped to predict an albeit uncertain future becomes almost sleep-inducing.
And if such dire prospects are certain to confront the United States, all the more reason to prevent "caravan" occupants from entering our country and putting their lives at risk due to a perilous climate. This kind of compassion I can dig.
By the way, climate voodoo practitioners and the always-complicit media, if sincere about fluttering their wings, should be compelled to concentrate, not merely on the United States, but where the real fortunes of disaster currently lurk: China, India and other developing nations which don't give a damn about pollution, wildlife or pristine anything.
During multiple occasions when I have referenced climate change as defined by a specific elite group in this blog, I have attempted to balance my opinions with the assurance that I'm always willing to consider the evidence. That "the science is in" and "almost all scientists agree" are recurring statements which have not yet achieved universal agreement.
Khashoggi's Murder: First, I'm not sure he qualified as a journalist. If he really was more of a blogger for the now out of control Trump and conservative-hating, far from objective Washington Post, my writing for newsstand magazines in the "old days" such as True and Argosy would qualify me as more of a journalist, and that concept is peculiar even for me.
That aside, if his loyalty rested with the Muslim Brotherhood, then Khashoggi probably received the kind of treatment which is customary among rogues and rogue nations in the Middle East. Those places are not American in any sense. Trump's decision to continue relations with and arms sales to Saudi Arabia truly are, unfortunately, all around a necessity, when the benefits include stomping Iran and protecting our interests. War sucks, but so is the reach for peace when death steps in. Was Saudi Arabia's crown prince more than a clown prince in this instance? Quite likely, so says the CIA. What do you do about that? I think Trump's option is the only way to proceed, but one hopes and expects that during private conversations with the Saudis our government raised hell.
Asia Bibi in Pakistan: Her quest for asylum in some other country truly is worthy of satisfaction, lest she face killing by the radical followers of vaunted prophet, child rapist and murderer Moham-very-mad. You can read about Bibi's dilemma online. Too bad that Great Britain, denying her request for entry, has been so strangled by frantic Islam immigration that what remains of the proud fighting spirit and stiff upper lip among the British is giving in to a pure, encroaching evil.
Speaking of England, the discovery and arrest of a woman who successfully faked a career as a psychiatrist for 22 years in the National Health Service gives me both an entirely new understanding of psychiatry and apparently a great new way of "playing doctor." Why trouble yourself laboring away and paying for a medical degree when you can just go to work? Bonus: Your patients are bound to be so crazy they'll never notice there's something not quite right about you. Sign me up!
The land of television: Two comments. First, TVs should be free to everybody and paid for by all the advertisers currently choking off an increasing number of minutes on programs. There is no escape, paid or not, from commercials, and they have blossomed outrageously, dulling or negating whatever the programs themselves intended.
Second, about that $14.95 board advertised on TV which allows you to pretty much stand upside-down ("inversion") to achieve various claimed health (back) benefits: Should anybody care, the late writer-comedian-composer Steve Allen had his own "slant board" back in the early sixties and went so far as to extol its health virtues in TV Guide (with a photo, as I recall). Few things are really new under the televised sun.
Oops, More TV: I happened to catch Democratic strategist Adrienne Elrod on a TV talking head program. She reminds me of Debbie Wasserman Schultz (whose name I may not be spelling correctly from memory here). Question: How does the Democrat Party subsist by publicly airing members who come across as shrill-voiced vipers? Count my brain and ears as turned off.
