A true conservative candidate vs. a libertarian/ Part II

 

by Don Hank

 

Does Ron Paul understand cultural Marxism?

Ron Paul’s scoffing attitude toward those of us who care about culture makes me wonder whether his administration would cater to the cultural Marxists.

America has been victimized by cultural Marxism for decades. First it was the feminazis, who ushered in the “woman’s right” to kill her unborn and discredited fatherhood, influencing the courts to separate men from their children, effectively separating families under welfare rules, and generally declaring men evil abusers.

Now it is the homosexual activists (not gays as a group) who are organizing to discredit  candidates who oppose gay marriage. Ron is unfairly benefitting from this radical movement to gain ground with the gay agenda. It is cowardly and does him no credit.

And it is illegal aliens who are now demanding special rights, even as border guards sit in jail for essentially doing their jobs. The administration has contrived to make it look like it is protecting our borders, but that is a lie. They are in fact arresting and deporting fewer of them.

Paul’s position on illegal immigration? A true Von Mises libertarian, Ron Paul has never been strong on the border and illegal immigration. In fact, NumbersUSA has given him an F on immigration. A very big red flag.

 

Is there anyone left?

Who has the best grade NumbersUSA grade on immigration?

Why that would be Michele Bachmann. And just what if people could be focused on illegal immigration again, and made to understand that it is costing jobs? Wouldn’t that help her poll numbers? Of course, the GOP would have to stop catering to lawbreakers.

Further, regarding cultural Marxism (of which illegal immigration is a facet), Michele Bachmann is one of the few people in politics who understand what 100% of politicians should understand about cultural Marxism. For example, she recently set a feminazi straight on the Kinsey myths, ie, who Kinsey was, and what his agenda was. She probably could also have shown why he should have gone to jail instead of being hailed as a great researcher.

Anyone who still believes the Kinsey myths needs to check out the work of Dr. Judith Reisman at:

http://drjudithreisman.org/

I doubt any of the other candidates have a clue about this, and other, cultural Marxism issues.

 

But can Bachmann win against Obama?

The GOP wants you to think she can’t and that only a leftwinger who is ideologically indistinguishable from Obama can beat Obama. So why not just clone Obama, give him another name (would that be a third?), and run him?

But they are forgetting a few things.

Here is what one poster commented on a blog regarding a recent PA poll:

And now for a little course in Political Science 101: This poll is not of ‘likely’ voters. It included a sample of 500 Pennsylvanians. It was done by PPP which is a democratic polling group. It is notoriously flawed because in past polls PPP has been poorly predictive when identifying Republicans and Republican leaning Independents for the sample. It is also flawed because of its proximity to the general election in November of 2012. Polls taken long before elections are inherently non-predictive of the actual election results.

Added to this is that fact that the poll didn’t even include Bachmann, although she was not trailing Santorum by much, and he was included. It also doesn’t show the fallout of another 6 months of further job losses and other Obama incompetency that  may well make him unable to beat a warm body. Finally, let’s admit that Ron Paul has been successful largely because of his fund raising, and much of his money has come from libertarians, recreational drug enthusiasts and anti-war groups. What would happen if the GOP got behind Michele Bachmann and backed her financially instead of giving her the cold shoulder? Can we admit her poll numbers would rise significantly?

One of the main reasons Bachmann is showing so poorly is that the GOP and RINOs in the MSM are either unfairly attacking her or ignoring her sterling conservative and fiscal merits. There are no real conservatives left in the GOP leadership, which is bringing the party dangerously close to irrelevance.

If they were suddenly to turn around and show how Reagan-like Bachmann is, for example, that would change everything. After all, who would not want to return to the boom times under Reagan? It would be Reagan-Carter all over again.

A lesson that the GOP learned the hard way – again – is that when you try to hype a candidate like Newt or Mitt, who in important ways are indistinguishable from a Democrat, and who have ethical and moral issues as well, the public will eventually focus on these blemishes. Not because conservatives point them out, but because the Democrat-leaning MSM won’t let us forget.

Bachmann, to her credit, has no major skeletons, and all the criticism she has reaped so far looks like what it is: extreme nitpicking. For example, apparently one of her advisors fed her a false statement about an IEAE report showing that “Iran will have a nuclear weapon in 6 months.” I have read the latest IAEA report and although it does not say that, it actually shows that Iran has been weaponizing nuclear materials for a long time, and one can infer that it most likely will have a warhead in the near future. Ron Paul crucified her for the inaccuracy but ignored the relevant facts of that report.

At this point, the GOP has a worrisome dilemma: either choose Ron Paul, whose star is rising even as Newt’s wanes, or choose squeaky clean candidate Michele Bachmann and give her that much needed, and much deserved, extreme PR makeover.

Now would be a good time to act, before Ron Paul takes the nomination.

Michele Bachmann is probably their – and our — only chance.

Evidence that the difference between libertarianism and liberalism is paper thin:

Romney is for illegal aliens:

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/gingrich-romney-amnesty-immigration/2011/11/24/id/419071

Newt is for illegal aliens:

http://cis.org/krikorian/more-gibberish-from-newt

Ron Paul is for illegal aliens

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/immigration/7393-anti-illegal-immigration-group-awards-an-qfq-to-ron-paul

Michele Bachmann gets NumbersUSA highest grade

http://www.numbersusa.com/content/action/2012-presidential-hopefuls-immigration-stances.html

Further reading:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=379089

GOP Debate / Chavez learns a Bible lesson

by Don Hank

Did you see the GOP candidates’ debate the other night?

While Fox News moderators and commentators pretended that Perry and Romney were the stars of the debate and that Mitt had “won,” the fact is, neither of them were close to winning if you look at the debate from a constitutional conservative standpoint.

Bachmann said, near the end, that we should not dismiss those candidates who are “constitutional conservatives” in favor of candidates who look like they are better equipped to beat Obama. She pointed out – rightly in my opinion – that Obama is by now an extremely weak candidate and that this is a good opportunity for a true conservative to win.

In saying this, she defined not only herself – as a constitutional conservative – but also every one of the others, NONE of whom used that term.

Not only that, she was the only one who said she would build a fence on every mile and every foot of our southern border.

Frankly, folks, she sounded for all the world like Ronald Reagan and no one else came anywhere near that. She is THE conservative candidate, if you really want a conservative president. And if you are willing to do your own thinking and not let Fox steer you to the left.

Ron Paul is very smart and, as he mentioned, he really does understand the economic and financial issues well. His problem is that he has decided not to be a conservative. He clearly wants to be a libertarian and has defined himself as such without mentioning that word. If I recall correctly, Gary Johnson, the de facto libertarian former governor of New Mexico, said he wanted Paul as his running mate. Gary and Paul have indicated in the past that they are not for closing our southern border and that we need more, not less, immigrants – read, illegal aliens. You know better than that.

A friend emailed me that they are setting up Romney or Perry to win. However, judging by the tough comments by the moderators themselves, it looks like they favor spoiled rich kid Mitt Romney.

I haven’t given up on Bachmann yet.

 

Chavez learns a Bible lesson:

Did you know that, in June of last year, Hugo Chavez literally cursed Israel, in defiance of God’s warning in Genesis? I have seen this at YouTube. You can google it.

Well, that is not the interesting part:

THIS June, a crestfallen and humbled Chavez returned from Cuba, where he had gone to get treatment for cancer. In a press conference he admitted: My cancer is not gone.

Shortly thereafter, he released political prisoners from prison.

Chavez learned the hard way that God meant it when He said this:

Genesis 12

 1Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father’s house, unto a land that I will shew thee:

 2And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing:

 3And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

Listen and watch as Chavez says: “Maldito sea el estado de Israel”:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7EYL0_5J_o

Police officer sacrificed on the altar of ‘integration’

Nothing new here. Just another good American life thrown away to bolster world government.

by Don Hank

Kevin Will, a Houston area traffic cop, was run down and killed yesterday in the Houston area for the sake of the North American Union.

That’s right. In plain words, his life was sacrificed so that the US, Mexico and Canada can all be integrated into a single nation for the purposes of “security” and “prosperity,” or in other words to create a supranational unit based on the EU model, which is now proving to be a disaster in Europe and has led to an unaccountable supreme government – a de facto dictatorship, that has supplanted democracy throughout Europe. The US government wants this disaster for you and is cheerfully sacrificing your safety and your lives to achieve it.

In official statements, the US government pays lip service to protecting our borders and keeping us safe from the bad guys. Janet Napolitano says our borders are “safer than ever.” But even long before the savage killing of rancher Robert Krentz in March of 2010, most people living along the border have felt unsafe, and the fear is only getting worse. Prior to that, for example, in July of 2009, border patrol agent Robert Rosas was shot and killed by illegal aliens in San Diego County, CA. Following Krentz’s murder, Pinal Country Sheriff Paul Babeu said in an interview that several of his agents had been killed by illegal aliens. In August of 2010, the hit-and-run killing of a nun by an illegal alien drew attention to the fact that federal authorities were failing to properly detain alien criminals. Years earlier, in June of 2007, in an article showing how the federal government promotes alien criminals while discouraging honest visa applicants, I became the first to report that our government had built a visa processing center on the grounds of a federal prison used to house alien criminals, thereby inviting criminal types to stay in the US.

In October of 2010, US citizen David Hartley was shot to death by Mexican pirates while fishing in a border lake. Border patrol agent Brian Terry was then killed in December of 2010.

Back in 2006, US Rep. Steve King had reported that, based on government statistics, 25 Americans die daily at the hands of illegal aliens, and that number can only have increased. And yet, the vast majority of politicians on both sides of the aisle continue to lament that returning illegal aliens to their home countries would cause an undue hardship to them. But what about us?

However, American civilians and law enforcement officers aren’t the only ones sacrificed for the sake of putting the entire world under one government run by a small group of extraordinarily rich white men. I have shown how our US military is now sacrificing the lives of young men to support the UN, the EU and NATO in waging undeclared and illegal wars in the name of “democracy” in the Middle East, supporting groups of Islamic radical thugs, including known terrorists, whose ultimate aim is to destroy Israel and eliminate Christianity in their countries, all in the name of “democracy.”

From a Texas based contact, here is an amazing report on the illegal alien who killed Kevin Will in Houston:

The 5 pm news is now on here in my part of TX.

The Fox affiliate described finding federal documents verifying that this most recent illegal alien perpetrator was previously arrested and deported, in one incident, claiming to be a Texas citizen by producing a TDL, and convicted, sentenced to time served, and released with a $10 fine, only to return.

It also described his rantings on his facebook page, and in particular, a description of how to dispose of a firearm used in a crime.

Nice guy.

 

FWIW:

This is almost a mirror of the incident with HPD Officer Rodney Johnson, there, shot and killed by an illegal alien during a traffic stop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Joseph_Johnson

 

[end quote]

In addition, one of my readers just wrote and wondered why our politicians almost all seem to welcome the invasion from Mexico. He said he couldn’t figure out how in the world any of our politicians want the illegals here and speculated it was because they have no conscience and are only concerned about re-election.

Here is my response to this reader:

I think it is much worse than that. It is beyond political. Our politicians follow the mandates of the New World Order, which wants to eliminate the borders of the US and create a North American Union.

When Bush tried to meet with the Canadian and Mexican leaders near the end of his last term, he was caught in the act and forced to back down. That project was the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), as you may recall.

That name was never used again because of the failure to keep it secret.

So they are going with plan B, namely, behaving as if there are no borders by allowing an almost unlimited number of aliens to cross without papers and making a huge stink about how families are being torn apart by sending some back. Any politician who fails to go along with this NWO agenda is threatened by the establishment. The GOP is 100% pro-invasion at the highest levels.

In reality, almost none are sent back, and when the most hardened felons among them are, as in the case of cop killer Johoan Rodriguez, they just cross the border illegally and wind up back here anyway.

Every American needs to know this.

Every candidate needs to be drilled on his/her stand on illegal immigration, although in most cases, we know they are for the invasion based on their past actions and on their immigration grades issued by NumbersUSA. Around 90% are for it and apparently are unwilling to send back any Mexicans who have entered the country illegally.

That goes for ex-cons, as I had shown here:

http://laiglesforum.com/wanted-a-few-bad-men/98.htm

 

Of course, you may ask: who the heck is Don Hank and why should we listen to him?

Good question, and many people don’t listen to me. But there are a few excellent reasons why you should:

For years I have been watching the way the New World Order operates on both sides of the Atlantic. I was one of the first Americans to warn of the de facto EU dictatorship and how it seized power by stealth. Every day I receive emails from activists in Germany and the UK, telling me about how the EU is destroying their nations.

I correlate what happens there to what is happening here and see the same identical behavior, eg, destruction of the banking system through disastrous lending policies obviously aimed at destroying the entire system; the importation of millions upon millions of Muslims who refuse to integrate and who have increased the crime rates in their adopted homelands exponentially over time; blatantly anti-Christian policies.

The excuse for importing Muslims and giving them special treatment is the same as our excuse for supporting illegal Mexican “immigration”: humanitarian reasons. In the US, exponents of unlimited immigration evoke images of innocents suffering at the hands of the cartel. In Europe, the image is one of masses escaping tyranny. The media in both regions ignore the untold suffering of the benefactors of these often hostile immigrants, including major crime increases and school children being literally driven from their schools by hordes of hostile Muslim kids mercilessly persecuting them.

Excuse me, Folks, but you need to know that this commentary is still under construction. New details are coming in. Here, for example, are 2 emails from radio host Dave Levine:

email #1:

I fully agree! Excellent points by you. While the SPP was dropped, the NAU has gone full speed ahead with Soetoro-Obama’s meetings with Canada’s PM and Presidente Calderon. The TTC–the NAFTA Superhighway under Bush and the prime plan under Governor Perry–has been renamed The I-35 Corridor and The I-69 Corridor plans. These are also with the Spanish conglomerate CINTRA (also renamed, I’m told) and I’m sure with RINO Rudy Giuliani’s law firm backing them. Instead of just one I-35 TTC, the plan now is for TWO superhighways carving up Texas and bringing not only a port to Mexico in Kansas City but also truckloads of illegals and drugs via these two planned, private superhighways.

We’re not hearing enough cries against these roads. The anti-TTC folks haven’t been vocal enough lately. Time to re-contact them!

 

email #2:

Here’s Jerome Corsi’s report on the TTC’s rebirth as the I-35 and I-69 Corridor Plans:

http://jeromecorsi.com/article.php?id=72

….

Please send this out to all who may have missed it.

Here are some anti-TTC sites, this one not updated since March:

http://transtexascorridor.blogspot.com

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?9329-Trans-national-Corridor-I-69-Cutting-Through-the-U.S.

 

Thanks to everyone who helped with this article. Please help keep it going.

The narrative will not be over until we either are slaves to the NAU or have succeeded in turning public opinion against it.

We – a tiny few of us — have only just begun to fight.

New:

http://www.khou.com/home/Officer-struck-killed-by-suspected-drunk-driver-in-north-Houston-122797274.html

Update: This was the 6th death of a Houston officer at the hands of an illegal alien!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTRg2jxPXXw&feature=player_embedded

They’re still catching up to Laigle’s Forum

by Don Hank

As I have said before, the world is slowly catching up to Laigle’s Forum.

I have written a fair amount about the hypocrisy of US policies that coddle Mexican illegal aliens and treat the corrupt Mexican government with exaggerated respect instead of standing up to it as it should.

It is therefore always gratifying to see at least the alternate media focusing on this hidden issue.

COPS magazine is the latest to show such courage, and I include the following link for those who do not regularly read Laigle’s Forum, and for whom this COPS report will therefore seem like news:

http://www.examiner.com/public-safety-in-national/mexican-military-police-brutalize-illegal-aliens-from-central-america

Having been in the Peace Corps in El Salvador in the late 60s, I have come into contact with enough Central Americans to know that Mexican police are practically an arm of the cartel they purport to oppose, and Central Americans passing through their country fear them with good reason.

It is well known in the US Central American community that male illegal immigrants in Mexico are routinely robbed and female illegal immigrants are almost routinely raped by these defenders of law and order.

I have reported on this before and have posted a commentary on the condemnation of the Mexican authorities by the Mexican Diocese, which had the cojones to stand up and condemn them shortly after the massacre of over 70 immigrants:

http://laiglesforum.com/mexican-church-confirms-immigrant-abuse-by-authorities/1754.htm

Ironically, our government’s coddling of Mexican “immigrants” and its refusal to confront the Mexican government over gross human rights abuses is perhaps the prime factor in the perpetuation of this abuse. Victims of abuse by Mexican authorities have no voice and in fact, feel betrayed by us. To state it plainly, the US government is the best friend of Mexican criminals and the most fearsome foe of law-abiding Mexicans and Central Americans. 

Our open borders policy and tendency to want to grant amnesty to all Mexicans, regardless of any criminal past they may have is harming America to a great extent but Mexico and Central America even more.

The Mexican and Central American people desperately need a US government policy with guts — or as they say, cojones.

Instead, they get mush brains in Washington tripping all over each other to please the far left, and hence the criminal element, in the Mexican community, opening up our country to increasingly dangerous criminals, while encouraging the cartels in Mexico, even supplying them with guns.

Finally, let me point out that a recent online exchange I had with a group of libertarians (Sons of Liberty) and an opinion expressed by the chairman of the Utah LP (“there is not such thing as an illegal”) demonstrate to me that libertarians are running with the progressives in this issue (and also in many others).

Ron Paul identifies with the libertarians and, sadly, he too apparently does not believe in protecting our borders and making immigrants present documents.

Conservatives must stand up and be different, even if it means standing alone at times. We are truly the only ones who insist that right is right and wrong is wrong, an insistence on absolutism that has held America together since the very beginning.

More on Libertarians:

http://www.aim.org/aim-report/probe-the-progressive-libertarians/

Ninth Circuit poisoning the well

 Ninth Circuit “legalizes” voter fraud, undermines all authority

by Don Hank

According to the judges of the 9th Circuit, Arizona laws requiring potential voters to present documentation for AZ elections are “illegal.” Supposedly they discriminate against the poor who do not have driver’s licenses.

All the potential voter now has to do is swear that he is a citizen under penalty of perjury and he or she can register to vote.

But since it is illegal to prove that he is lying, this is a de facto legalization of voter fraud and the 9th Circuit knows it. So does any thinking American.

This decision is an attack on the entire legal process. If it is now illegal to ask for documentation for voter registration, then it is automatically illegal for courts to require documentation for anything at all because some are too poor to afford documents.

An applicant for a passport would not have to prove he is the person he says he is. He would only be made to sign a sworn statement that he is that person. Any attempt on the part of officials to prove he is not would be illegal. And because the government is concerned with the poor and their rights, this applicant could not be charged one penny for the passport.

All applicants would be issued passports without proof.

Youngsters would now be free to purchase liquor and cigarettes at will, simply by providing a sworn statement that they are over 21. No one could force them to produce any documentation.

Nor could a suspect be required to present documentation to prove he is who he says he is. He can deny that he is the suspect who was picked up by the police on suspicion of a crime. If they try to prove he is the suspect, he can simply sign a sworn statement that he is in fact someone else, under penalty of perjury. The prosecution would not be allowed to look for evidence to the contrary because, by the 9th Circuit’s logic, the suspect would have the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

Hence, case closed, no decision allowed.

For that matter, no criminal would ever be tried again in the USA if 9th Circuit logic were applied across the board, because by extension of this twisted logic, a suspect would need only swear he did not commit the alleged crime and would immediately be set free, no questions asked. Sorry for the annoyance, Sir.

As for banks, they have already ceased to require documentation of loan applicants, and the result is a worldwide financial and economic crisis that keeps on taking.

The 9th circuit is also in effect enforcing the notion of equality for every human being on the planet: the right of every person on earth to vote in US elections.

If this decision is allowed to stand, then citizens of other countries can argue that they are being discriminated against because they are “too poor” to travel to the US to vote in our elections.

By the logic of these judges, all human beings over a certain age can vote in US elections simply by swearing they are US citizens.

They can now go to a US embassy and vote there. By 9th Circuit logic, no US embassy official would be allowed to ask for a passport or any other proof except a sworn statement that the voter registration applicant is a US citizen.

I think you can see that Arizona must recover its sovereign right to require proof of citizenship or we are all in grave danger.

First, Arizona can and should appeal this decision and should keep the old law in place until such time as the appeal is heard. But in the event the appeal fails, the election officials and officials involved, including legislators, who have sworn an oath to defend the Constitution, have several types of constitutional recourse, including the 10th Amendment. They can refuse to go along with the decision on the basis that the decision unconstitutionally interferes with the internal affairs of a state and on the basis of their oath of office.

Or if they want to preserve decorum, they can throw the decision back in the 9th Circuit’s face, declaring the old law requiring documentation upon voter registration null and void, based on the 9th Circuit decision, and replacing it with a new law that allows a sworn statement of US citizenship plus proof positive of citizenship – not just the applicant’s sworn statement – but without specifying what kind of proof.  The new law could allow an applicant to use a driver’ license or birth certificate as proof but would not require that particular kind of proof. The sworn statement would not be accepted as proof positive but would be allowed, as long as proof positive were also provided. It would be up to the applicant to provide proof positive but the type of proof – in accordance with the decision – would be up to the applicant. Or in the event such a statement is mandated by federal law, it could even be required, but would not be considered as proof positive, since it obviously is not.

The law would be written as a temporary law, but without an expiration date.

The law in question would state that it would expire shortly after the court that abolished the old law provided an adequate substitute of proof positive of citizenship, whereupon a new law would be written specifying the use of that type of proof specified by the court. The court could not argue against this new law giving it the right to specify the type of proof allowed without admitting it does not allow any proof at all and in fact wants illegal aliens to have the vote.

This would elegantly throw the issue back in the laps of the justices who would now be responsible for coming up with a kind of proof that would satisfy human logic. The beauty of such a law is that, on its face, it at least seems to go on the assumption that the court is not malicious and does not have an interest in allowing undocumented aliens to vote. In fact, while it is obvious that the court is malicious and wants illegal aliens to vote, it would never dare admit this. The court could not come out and say they wanted illegal aliens to vote and hate Arizonans. They have to have something to hide behind, and this decision lets them hide behind the poor.

Such a new “temporary” replacement law in Arizona would on the surface satisfy the letter of the law but would also put the onus on the court to decide the nature of the proof positive that must be provided by voter registration applicants.

The court certainly could not say that a sworn declaration of citizenship provides such proof because Arizona would then point out that such sworn declarations are not seen as proof of anything in other areas of law, such as criminal and commercial law.

If the court kept up the farce despite this revision of the law, Arizona could argue that a sworn statement is not accepted as proof of anything in other areas of law and that the court must provide an alternative that satisfies human logic as to what proof positive actually is. The court would have to admit that it is mililtating against all human logic and then Arizona would have an airtight motive for ignoring the decision. The fact is, it already does, but such a strategy as I have proposed would catapult the issue into the media in such a way that other states would be encouraged to rebel in like manner. People are on the verge of rebelling anyway, and Arizona could be the fuse that sets off the charge.

If all of the above happens to fail, natural laws will intervene as they always do, but the result may not be pretty.

By way of illustration, the irresponsible behavior of the banks and their public partners Fanny-Freddy and insane legislation like the CRA, inevitably resulted in a financial meltdown with universal consequences. More and more people are noticing this, including people outside the US (The NGO Transparency International recently found the US to be perceived as a significantly more corrupt nation than previously). The exact consequences of wholesale voting by non-Americans are hard to imagine or predict.

But eventually, the court’s decision to eliminate the requirement for documentation will affect us all, including the progressives responsible for the decision, because it eliminates almost all authority over anyone, including criminals, thereby undermining the authority of the very court itself. Anarchy is the inevitable result.

So if you want to poison the well, be careful where you drink.

copyright©2010

Further reading:

http://blogs.forbes.com/walterpavlo/2010/10/26/u-s-more-corrupt-in-2010/?boxes=financechannelforbes

http://english.pravda.ru/opinion/columnists/27-10-2010/115537-obama_mexicans_vote-0/

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=221161

Arizona, you CAN’T blow THIS one!

Don Hank

A recent article by Jesse Mathewson tries to show that maybe McCain and Hayworth are both wrong for Arizona. He’s right about McCain. But he uses a now largely discounted scandal and an obscure vote on Singapore free trade to cast doubt on Hayworth.

Now in all fairness, Jesse has written a fair number of articles with genuinely conservative content. However, he has consistently supported an obscure no-experience candidate, Jim Deakin, whose chances to defeat McCain are remote, while Hayworth is fairly well — if precariously — positioned.

Further, Mathewson’s attempt to equate John McCain and J.D. Hayworth is definitely skewed if you consider the ratings of Hayworth and McCain given by the American Conservative Union (ACU).

In 2005, for example, ACU assigned a grade of 65 to McCain and 100 to Hayworth.

In 2005, it was 80 to 100 in favor of Hayworth.

I don’t know about you, but if I were a college admissions officer considering 2 students and one had McCain’s near-failing to lackluster grades and the other had Hayworth’s top notch grades, I would choose Hayworth in a heartbeat.

Of course, there is this other guy Deakin, who may be ok. But how can we know? By what he says he’ll do? Remember how Obama sweet-talked us? Are you ready to vote for an unknown when you have a hard-working tried and proven A student waiting in the wings? And, strangely, Mathewson doesn’t say a word about illegal immigration, the key issue this year. If his candidate has a strong position on it, why doesn’t he say so? It’s his golden opportunity.

JD Hayworth obviates all other alternatives this year. After all, given the state of the polls today, a vote for Deakin is probably a vote for John McCain and we can’t afford another 6 years of waffling and pandering to illegal aliens.

On the other hand, Deakin has a chance to show Arizonans he has real character. By throwing his weight toward JD Hayworth and ridding America of a dangerous RINO once and for all. That in itself could be the start of a brilliant political career.

Hayworth:

http://www.conservative.org/ratings/ratingsarchive/2005/2005House.htm

McCain:

http://www.conservative.org/ratings/ratingsarchive/2006/2006senate

Hit “El Presidente” where it hurts most — in the wallet

by Don Hank

(Don’t miss the latest column on this subject. Since this was written, a number of readers have been encouraging their state senators and reps to draft this legislation. Two of them are working with Senator Russell Pearce in Arizona.  The new column contains a letter to Sen. Pearce as a sort of template with talking points. Also my heartfelt thanks to staff writer Jim O’Neill of the Canada Free Press for linking to this column.)

 Mexican president Calderon complains that Arizona wants to do what Mexico does: exercise their right to enforce immigration law.

Calderon has a really good reason for wanting to keep Mexicans in the US illegally – money. Every year illegal workers send billions of dollars home to their families. So far this year, they have sent a reported $15.5 billion. On top of that, illegal Mexicans cost state governments many more billions. So let’s stop calling them “cheap” labor. They are anything but.

The major cash transfer agencies like Western Union and MoneyGram, as well as ordinary banks, aid and abet by not requiring any ID of the transferring party that would establish the client’s legal residency or citizenship.

That needs to stop, ASAP.

State lawmakers need to introduce a bill that would require Western Union, MoneyGram, other such cash transfer agencies and all banks to demand ID for sending money to foreign countries and turn away any customer without legal documents authorizing him/her to be in the US. After all, this is money laundering because in many cases, no tax is paid on that money. And money laundering is a crime! The US blasts Latin American countries for it, but we hypocritically engage in it on an even larger scale here.

Arizona may be amenable to such a law already. If so, other states would follow.

If this seems like a far-out idea to you, consider that when I make a transfer here at MoneyGram in Panama to someone in the US, I need to show a passport or Panamanian ID card issued by the Migration Ministry or they refuse to serve me (I was turned down on one occasion when my passport was at the Migration office getting stamped with a visa.) No one in the local foreign community here yells discrimination or racism. We understand this is good business practice and keeps everyone safer, including us in the long run. Besides, we know protesting could eventually get us in trouble, or maybe even sent back home.

Now guess what bank provides the MoneyGram service locally here in Panama?

Banco Azteca, of Mexico!

That’s right. The Mexican bank demands ID from me when I transfer cash anywhere. Yet they think Mexican lawbreakers have a “right” to send cash from my country to theirs with no questions asked?

The hypocrisy sickens!

Some of you activists and candidates need to get behind this idea and feed it to state legislators, candidates for state and federal office, and others. Remind them that money laundering is going on in their state and needs to be stopped.

This being an election year, I predict that if you float this idea to your state senator or rep, someone will pick up on this and a law of this kind will be passed in some state soon.

You could stop these lawbreakers in their tracks or at least have them move to another state in a hurry!

Here’s what needs to be done:

Anyone wishing to send money abroad should have to show at least a valid drivers license issued by the state in which the transfer is to be made, or from a state that is known not to issue drivers licenses to undocumented aliens, or other proof of citizenship or legal residency.

Among the issues addressed by such a bill are national security and money laundering.

The violent overthrow of America

Donald Hank By Donald Hank

Three of America’s enemies are positioning themselves to enter the White House, where one will continue the siege initiated by George W. Bush.

Hillary hates us because we didn’t go to Harvard.

The Obama’s hate us for our color — red, white and blue.  Barrack H. (don’t ask what it stands for) wants to be our first red president.

John McCain doesn’t hate us.  He just doesn’t know — or care — that we exist.

We are like the Travelocity gnome about to go over the falls.

Conservatives have always thought the left was planning a bloodless takeover of the US.

Takeover yes, bloodless, hardly.

The left sprouted in the bloodstained soil of France, coming to maturity in Russia and later China and elsewhere. Whenever it took root, millions died.

How will Americans die?

We’re already dying.  We just don’t associate these casualties with the left, partly because we can’t agree on the definition of a person and partly because the Bush administration managed to pull off a leftwing coup without being identified as a leftist.

But what is globalism if not neo-communism?  Old-fashioned Communists robbed rich people and gave to poor people, making nations poor.

Postmodern Communists rob from rich countries and give to poor countries, making the world poor.

Where’s the violence, you say?

There are 2 forms of violence due to leftist activism. The most obvious is abortion, which has produced as many casualties as Hitler and Stalin. The other form is more subtle and requires some explanation.

First we need to realize that when leftist historians report on events like the French, Bolshevik and Chinese Revolutions, they excuse the violence, saying the leaders were noble but participants got out of hand. Voila, no such thing as intentional leftist-generated violence. Just collateral damage.

Stefane Courtois and comrades, authors of The Black Book of Communism, the itemized tally sheet of the Left’s casualties (about 100 million by their count), are unrepentant leftists, who think leftist ideology can exist independently of violence. They envision a kinder gentler Marxist utopia in the future.

The mantra that killings in leftist regimes are not attributable to ideology works like a charm.  Psychologically, Americans need to believe everyone is good, even brutal dictators.  Thus, it wasn’t hard to convince us of this absurdity. 

Another reason why casualties of the Left are hidden is that the Left has been successful in convincing us that the tilt of government toward “globalism” is actually part of a conservative agenda, alleging that the Bush administration wants open borders because capitalism needs cheap labor.  But if that’s true, why is it Ted Kennedy and Republicans in name only – the Republican left – who most enthusiastically support Bush’s amnesty campaign? 

But the left (Democrats and RINOs) has also succeeded in convincing the public that the alien invasion causes no violence.

Just like “people who got out of hand” in foreign leftist revolutions, many illegal immigrants have “gotten out of hand,” committing violent crimes and killing people in auto accidents (over 9,000 deaths annually from both causes) or through diseases and drugs.

Though shrugged off by the media, these deaths far exceed the American casualties in Iraq that the media constantly rub under our noses. 

But you will argue that these deaths are incidental and the government certainly does not intend to hurt you. But if you buy into this notion that the takeover of government by open border activists has not deliberately caused injury, then why are dangerous illegal aliens released here after serving time?  Why is an INS prison the site of one of the busiest naturalization offices on the East coast?

And how is it that a border guard can be killed by an alien criminal whom no one can extradite while those border guards who defend us are jailed?

Why do politicians oppose deportation when there’s a resurgence of formerly conquered diseases like leprosy, malaria or TB – including the multi-drug-resistant variety – precisely in areas of heavy illegal alien concentration?

How is it that the bulk of murder warrants in Los Angeles are for illegals, and yet the Los Angeles police department isn’t allowed to ask if a detained suspect is here illegally?

Isn’t it obvious that the government actually wants violent aliens to harm us?

What difference is there between releasing an angry mob to kill people in France, Russia and China and unleashing armies of criminal aliens to kill Americans?

Clearly there is an ideology behind this, based on the premise that Americans have too much — not only too much wealth, but even too much safety!  There is more to this than a desire to help the downtrodden.  There is a clear-cut thirst for revenge against the haves.  I had written that Maoism is, de facto, a movement intended not to help but rather to punish.  And our homegrown Maoism has been doing just that for many years.

I can’t tell you how many thousands of dollars I have lost over the years when companies that were then my clients started sending me affirmative action forms asking my sex and race.  Every time I returned one of these, confessing to being a white American male, I lost the client in question.  Every single time. 

Affirmative action wasn’t devised to help anyone.  It was born to punish.  I am in fact fined thousands of dollars every year for being who I am since I was born, and absurdly, my daughter and Hispanic wife – supposed beneficiaries of affirmative action – pay a heavy price for having a father and husband who is – male!

Likewise, if you are a resident of this country, you are being punished for living here.

Even immigrants don’t escape.

A Hispanic friend of ours used to argue that we can’t just deport illegal aliens.  He was horrified when I said we can and should.  He and his wife recently moved to a suburban community near Washington, DC.  She called recently and complained of violent crime in their neighborhood due to Hispanic gangs.  Though mostly illegal immigrants, when they’re jailed, the gang members are eventually released back into their neighborhood.  These friends have four children, including their anchor baby, and they fear for their safety.

They finally get it.

When will we?

Contact: zoilandon@msn.com