Today’s Obama News (Chicago Sun-Times) has possibly the most useless in what has been a surplus of pointless columns about Barack Obama. Jennifer Hunter has outdone herself this time and that took a real relaxing of an already low standard. Her latest column informs us of the Illinois Senator’s lack of interest in sweets and how Hillary Clinton is beating him in that arena of the campaign. Nowhere in the article is an actual issue pertinent to the campaign mentioned, proving that it pays to be the wife of the newspaper’s publisher. Hunter is married to John Cruickshank and owes her column if not her entire job to him.

Instead of offering substance, this column treats us to Hillary Clinton’s entire Weekend schedule and what pies were served at each campaign stop. We are then given the shocking news that Barack Obama (gasp!) isn’t really fond of sweets as he spent his formative years in Indonesia where dessert is not a customary part of the menu. Hunter then goes on to worry about Obama’s gaunt frame and apparent lack of nutrition.

With many on the left clamoring for the return of the fairness doctrine I have yet to hear a mention of the lopsided coverage afforded the first term Senator who has yet to flesh out much of his platform beyond the luke-warm national health care proposal this week. On second thought, maybe the substance challenged Hunter is given the Ogle Obama beat because her columns reflect the true essence behind his campaign; other than a carefully crafted and polished image he offers nothing.

Posted by Biloxi in Obamastan at 8:17 PM EDT

2 Comments »

I have responded to Senator Obama concerning his communication to mean as outlined in the post below:

Dear Senator Obama:

Biloxi

I would suggest as many as possible do the same. You can contact Senator Obama here and Senator Durbin here. I have never seen an issue where the elected elite are more out of sync with the American public than this one. They think we are too stupid to understand the bill yet they rush it through in secrecy because they know it is a controversial at best and against the will of the majority at worst. Speak loud.

Posted by Biloxi in Immigration, Politics at 9:45 AM EDT

No Comments »

I received this letter from my Senator, Mr. Mangod, otherwise known as he who walks on water, Barack Obama. I had contacted him along with my Congressman and my other Senator Dick Durbin. I have yet to hear from Sen. Durbin.

Dear Biloxi:

Thank you for contacting me about the current immigration reform debate in the Senate. I appreciate having the benefit of your perspective on this important issue.

Unchecked unauthorized immigration unquestionably is having significant adverse effects on American workers and on some of our communities health and education infrastructure. The challenge facing President Bush and Congress is how to stop the flow of immigrants coming illegally across our borders and deal with those who are already living and working in this country illegally.

The Senate is currently considering immigration reform legislation authored by Senators Kennedy (D-MA) and Kyl (R-AZ) and supported by President Bush. This bill would tighten border security, increase enforcement against employers who hire illegal workers, establish a process by which undocumented workers and their families who may have entered the United States illegally but are now contributing and responsible members of society can earn citizenship after paying fines and learning English, and create a temporary program for foreign workers who must return to their homeland after a specified period of time.

The Senate is expected to debate the Kennedy/Kyl immigration reform bill through early June. Many amendments to the bill will be considered, and the underlying legislation could change dramatically. I will be following these deliberations closely.

The most controversial elements of the Kennedy/Kyl bill is its path to citizenship and the new point system it proposes for future immigration. I understand the strong feeling within Illinois that undocumented immigrants should not be rewarded for flouting U.S. law. And I appreciate that many Americans feel we should just seal our borders and deport undocumented workers currently living in the country. However, it is significant that the Department of Homeland Security recognizes that identifying and deporting 12 million undocumented workers currently working in this country would be both difficult logistically and disruptive to the American economy Further, I am concerned with the proposed change under a new points system to reduce the emphasis we place on uniting families in our immigration system.

I agree with President Bush who said: “Some in this country argue that the solution is to deport every illegal immigrant, and that any proposal short of this amounts to amnesty. I disagree. It is neither wise, nor realistic to round up millions of people, many with deep roots in the United States, and send them across the border. There is a rational middle ground between granting an automatic path to citizenship for every illegal immigrant, and a program of mass deportation. That middle ground recognizes there are differences between an illegal immigrant who crossed the border recently, and someone who has worked here for many years, and has a home, a family, and an otherwise clean record.”

Again, thank you for contacting me. You may be assured that I have heard your views on this issue.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator

Another reason not to vote for the guy. Among the boilerplate response is the true position of Senator Obama, let’s look at the sections I placed in bold. First the Senator promises to take time out of his busy campaign schedule to actually monitor the debate, thanks Senator, we are forever in your debt for doing your job. Next he tells us he understands the strong feeling in Illinois against rewarding those who break the law and the rest tells us that he plans to ignore that “strong feeling” known as the voice of the people. The following bold commentary trails into the impossibility of deporting 12 to 20 million people. I personally have never supported mass deportation and I do not know any others who take that outlook either. Many, if not most conservatives believe in strict enforcement of our borders and immigration law to include the employer sanction if it can be found that people knowingly hire illegals. Enforce the borders, remove the incentive and EXPAND the legal guest worker program to allow employers to hire the workers they need. If the incentive is not there the illegal workers will leave on their own. Those like President Bush, John Kyl, Ted Kennedy and Barrack Obama who characterize it as such misrepresent the debate entirely. It is disingenuous and reprehensible. It is pandering of the worse kind.

When he is in agreement with Ted Kennedy and Barack Obama on the same bill there should be a klieg light of reason bearing down on the President but instead he wishes to call those rational conservatives that disagree with him names. Linda Chavez and Michael Chertoff also do themselves and conservatives a disservice when the misrepresent the debate and call names. We are not nativists, we are not racists or bigots and we are not anti-immigrant. We expect our politicians to respect the rule of law and to uphold the Constitution. If this bill is just then there should have been no reason to craft it outside the normal process in secrecy and then rush it to the floor without proper debate and exposure. There is a middle ground that the President didn’t touch on, it doesn’t include mass deportation or amnesty and it starts with enforcement. The need for a solution does not mean we need to accept bad legislation and compromise need not be surrender.

As usual, I can not count on my Senator to represent me. Unfortunately the President of my party doesn’t either.

Posted by Biloxi in Immigration, Politics at 9:01 AM EDT

No Comments »

Call it once bitten twice shy or merely skepticism but I’m not buying the President’s rhetoric on the new amnesty bill about to be debated in the Senate. In a speech at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center today President Bush attacked a good portion of his base by suggesting those who don’t support the compromise bill “don’t want to do what’s right for America.”

This President has repeatedly betrayed the conservative base and has gotten nearly every domestic issue wrong excluding National Security, two Supreme Court nominations and the tax cuts. He has capitulated to the Democrats in the Senate before they had the majority and now he thinks it is proper to dress down a sizable portion of Americans who actually respect the law. What’s right for America is border security and though the claim is that this bill offers just that, the devil is in the details. If both Congress and the President are serious about our security then they should pass a stand-alone border enforcement bill and not even consider amnesty, guest workers, or anything else until we have control of our borders and have an idea of how many illegals we are actually talking about naturalizing. The stand alone bill should restore the original 700 plus miles of border fence that Congress authorized last year. How are we to believe the government will actually enforce the borders when one of the few provisions in the new bill that they even bothered to publicize actually cuts the required mileage of border fence in half? Are we to trust the government to actually enforce the triggers and not water down the requirements for compliance? Where are we to draw this confidence from? Certainly not historical precedence as the 1986 bill called for enforcement as well and now the number of illegals has trippled or quadrupled.

Whatever happened to honest disagreement? This President has advocated amnesty for a long time and now sees an opening to build his legacy at the expense of the country. How could ignoring the law possibly be the best thing for America? What message do we send to future hard-working immigrants when we tell them we prize those who jumped in line and ignored our sovereignty over those who followed and respected our system and laws? One of the first things scaled back in debate last week was the number of guest workers allowed from 400,000 to 200,000. Essentially telling the guys who follow the rule of law to take a hike.

This is the final slap that many can take from a President they have supported through thick and thin. How are we supposed to take the man seriously anymore after the attempted nomination of Harriet Miers or the elevation of the incompetent Alberto Gonzalez to Attorney General? Where was this stiff back when we desperately needed a veto on the McCain-Feingold debacle? For a man who has such a clear picture on the threat from radical Islam, we get support for a bill that underestimates the government incompetence and actually makes it easier for them to attack us from within.

While I am sure the President fervently believes he is right on this issue I think he needs to take a step back and survey the damage he is about to bestow on our great country. Anything that is supported by Ted Kennedy and concerns immigration deserves careful examination because there is a pretty good chance it is a Trojan horse chock full of ills for the USA.

Posted by Biloxi in Immigration, Politics at 9:08 PM EDT

No Comments »

To those who have served and made the ultimate sacrifice for me and for all Americans; may God always hold you in the palm of his hand. Your sacrifice is not forgotten.

Posted by Biloxi in Biloxi Says at 7:38 AM EDT

No Comments »

Texas Senator Mario Gallegos Jr. risks his health daily in an effort to block a vote on a bill that would require Texas voters to provide identification. I have heard resistance to this concept in other States as well. This might lead a rational person to ask what the voter was hiding; but not in Demworld.

Gallegos is putting his health at risk to block a measure he and others say could prevent many minorities and the elderly from taking part in elections in Texas.

How could this possibly be? I would think it should be imperative that a person should be able to prove their identity upon reasonable request in this country. How is it that some form of documentation or proof of identity is not readily available for all citizens of the United States? Texas is a border state and as such has a large influx of illegal immigrants. Without proof of identity it is very possible that these individuals could be voting in defiance of the law and in an attempt to influence our governmental policies. With all of the hue and cry after the 2000 election wherein the Democrats claimed voter fraud one would think this would be universally accepted as an excellent idea.

The Republicans pushing the voter ID bill say illegal immigrants are voting in Texas elections and must be stopped. But Democrats say thousands of legal residents would lose the right to vote because they lack proper identification. Opponents of the measure — including Gallegos, a Mexican American — say minorities, the elderly and the poor are less likely than others to have driver’s licenses or other documents.

If it is a cost issue I am sure the States can provide legally binding identification cards akin to a drivers license for reduced fees or no fee at all for those in need. Poor or not, any legal resident should have a birth certificate or naturalization papers that prove their legal existence. In an era where our National Security is at stake I would think it would be paramount that we do not have potential enemies influencing our elections from within.

This is not solely a Texas problem as this Washington Times article outlines. If voter fraud were such a national issue as was charged in 2000 and again in Ohio in the 2004 election then such a bill seemingly makes the ultimate sense. If a person is legal to vote they should be able to at least present a valid social security card. Most desirable is a legal and valid photo identification card of some sort. If voting is sacrosanct then it it essential that we know the voters are legally capable of casting a ballot. There is no doubt that if the largest ethnic bloc of illegal immigrants are of Hispanic origin and that those Hispanics vote in a 2/3 majority for Democrats which is the crux of the matter here. Instead of looking at the sanctity of the process or National Security issues many in the Democratic Party are looking at a potential new influx of votes and care not from where they emanate. Otherwise why would they take this stance that is in such contrast to their claims of voter fraud? It appears fraud only concerns them when the potential deception is from votes that can hurt them in their attempts to acquire and retain power.

To protect the importance of the inviolate right to vote, it is of the essential that we are sure who is actually voting and that they have the right to do so under the laws of the States in which they vote. Our process cries for it, our consciences should demand it and we owe it to the people of this great country.

Posted by Biloxi in Politics at 8:30 AM EDT

1 Comment »

Now that Cindy Sheehan and Harry Belafonte have drifted into the ether of insignificance, let’s examine the policies of one of their higher profile allies. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has recently announced his intention to close down a privately owned television station that is often critical of him and his administration.

Rangel has even defended Chávez’s decision not to renew the license of an influential and stridently anti-government television station, RCTV, which will go off the air Sunday just before midnight. “It’s up to the state to renew or not renew,” Rangel, 77, who was vice president until January, said in an interview. “This is not an issue of freedom of expression. The issue is the sovereignty of the state.”

Wow, in the socialist utopia of Chavez’s Venezuela quashing the voice of the people isn’t silencing dissent at all, it is a matter of the “sovereignty of the state“. I believe many of Chavez’s American supporters are people who claim that the Patriot Act is eroding our freedoms and the evil Bush regime is trying to silence dissent. After taking office, Chavez threw out the Venezuelan Constitution and had it re-written; giving the Presidential term an extra year at 6 instead of 5, it also term limits him to 2 terms. Further it takes more of the power out of the hands of the people and places it with the President. There is talk now that he is attempting to change it and allow himself another term(s). The altered Constitution also gave him powers of decree for a year. He issued a set of 49 decrees including the land transfer decree which seized land from its rightful owners. In recent years Chavez has begun to nationalize key industries and is well on his way to a totalitarian regime. Much of Venezuela’s wealth is driven by huge oil reserves, another reason to conserve as well as look for domestic sources like ANWAR or drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.

Hatred of President Bush by many on the left has driven them into the arms of the evil that they claim the President to be. Bushhitler and King George references proliferate among the left, look in the op-ed page in any large city newspaper and you are sure to get a dose of that which I speak. In their criticism of the Administration, the George Soros/Mother Sheehan extreme left ignores the real abuses in their own back yard. Chavez has aligned himself with another dictator that is popular among the left in Fidel Castro. That alone is all one needs to know about the policies and politics of Hugo Chavez. It is also an issue to be watched closely as Chavez builds up his military, ostensibly to protect against an American attack. Say what you will about George W. Bush, he is no totalitarian nor is he an imperialist.

Central and South America are as important to our national security as a stable Middle East. It’s time that the anti-war left open their eyes and quit cozying up to a dictator who is on the verge of seizing total control of a country in a very undemocratic manner. He has embraced our enemies and maligned our President. Rest assured he would like to marginalize our influence in the region in a manner that harms the United States.

For those on the left who cannot wait to cozy up to this communist disguised as a populist; President Bush may not be your political soulmate but he is not your enemy. The enemy resides in totalitarianism and those who wish to undermine our own political process through interference. That would include Hugo Chavez. Though you oppose the President and his policies, it does not make Hugo Chavez any more your friend than Kim Jong Il in North Korea or Premier Wen Jiabao of China. Like you they oppose President Bush and have an agenda, though theirs includes the destruction of the our country and way of life. Is that really what you want?

Posted by Biloxi in Foreign Policy, Liberal Illogic at 8:51 AM EDT

No Comments »

Can’t the Democratic base see the obvious? Michelle Obama resigned her position as a director of TreeHouse Foods yesterday. TreeHouse is a supplier to the hated WalMart, anathema to all that is good in labor. Obama cited increased demands on her time, ostensibly because of the increased role she has undertaken in her husband’s campaign. Barack Obama has been a vocal critic of WalMart’s labor practices. Interestingly those practices did not effect Mrs. Obama’s willingness to take $100,000 in compensation from the company that relies heavily on its business with the giant Arkansas retailer. The real issue here is timing, was this really brought on because of her heavy schedule or as a result of the budding media attention given to TreeHouse’s Walmart business?

Similarly, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton have had to distance themselves from previous entanglements with the evil empire of retailing as their Presidential campaigns take shape. Clinton was a former member of the board and Edwards held stock in Walmart while in the Senate. It looks to me like the “party of the people and not the powerful” has no qualms whatsoever about making money from Walmart or Walmart related companies, they only see the conflict when the scrutiny bears down on them. Aren’t these the people clamoring for amnesty for illegals telling us that we need the lower tier unskilled labor? Folks, a little consistency please.

Posted by Biloxi in Liberal Illogic, Politics at 2:48 PM EDT

2 Comments »

Kamal Labwani, Syrian physician and Democracy advocate was sentenced to jail last week for 12 years for “contacting a foreign country, passing on messages and encouraging attack against Syria”. The crime could have brought life in prison. Interesting to notice is this is the same government that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi met with on her own, earlier this year.

“We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace,” Pelosi told reporters after her talks with Assad.

Peace as long as you toe the official line. If Syria would jail their own pro-democracy dissidents what makes anyone think we can negotiate with them and have any realistic confidence that they will keep their word? Syria is a terrorist state that shelters the exiled leaders of Hamas and other radical Palestinian groups. They are also a major supporter of Hezbollah and claim that the terrorist organization is merely a Lebanese Political party and deny that they are connected to terrorism. Negotiation here would be about as effective as a plea to the head choppers in Al-Qaeda.

As long as Syria shelters and supports terrorism while oppressing her own people there is really no room for compromise. I wish our House Speaker was smart enough to get beyond her ego-driven power trip to see it. Speaker Pelosi feels it is alright to criticize the President on a world stage but chooses to consort with the government of Bashar Assad, a government that would deny the very same God given right to their own people. Telling, very telling.

Posted by Biloxi in Foreign Policy, Liberal Illogic at 9:14 PM EDT

1 Comment »

Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg again misses the big picture as he tries to characterize illegal immigration opponents as bigoted. In his Sunday column he again oversimplifies the debate and ignores the bigger picture including assimilation issues, the creation of a permanent underclass and National Security.

Now that Congress is once again considering machinery that would render many heretofore illegal immigrants magically legal, all those conservative Americans complaining about their being illegal (or, rather, “ILLEGAL!”) have nimbly regrouped behind a new taboo word, “amnesty,” (or, I suppose, “AMNESTY!!!”) to press on their quixotic quest to return to the lily-white America of blessed memory.

“Amnesty” is bad, the thinking goes, because it gives away American citizenship too easily (should it really be that hard? I got mine for popping out of the womb. How about you?).

“Citizenship” is a fancy word for paying taxes, voting and swearing devotion to the nation — all good things, right? It’s good to have more citizens, and most Western industrial countries are staring demographic doom in the face for lack of them.

“Amnesty” was also used when discussing American draft dodgers who fled to Canada. They got their amnesty, if you recall, despite opposition, because sometimes a nation just has to move forward.

With his myopic view he cheapens the meaning of citizenship and somehow faults those of us who were born in the country to American citizens. In his argument for more immigration he forgets to mention the part where the nation is NOT opposed to immigration in general as is much of Western Europe, they are simply opposed to illegal immigration. Likening this amnesty bill to the Vietnam draft dodger amnesty of the Carter Administration is off base because opposition or not, that amnesty did not beget another 12 million draft evaders in 20 years. It is sad because Steinberg is a gifted writer who can make a point without throwing the rhetorical bomb.

I guess Neil was having a bad day, read the next part of his column where he credits the Star Wars movies for causing American indifference to the struggle Israel faces daily as it redefined “rebels”. He also quips that it might be antisemitism but I suggest it is the same issue that plagues much of the American left regarding the war on terror. They just don’t recognize the evil that is militant Islam and instead blame those who defend themselves in a proactive manner. Don’t worry Neil, there is a lot of Americans who not only recognize the struggle Israel faces every day, we also recognize them as one of, (if not our most important) allies. That alone would put many conservatives in stark contrast to Senator Barack Obama.

Posted by Biloxi in Immigration at 9:41 AM EDT

4 Comments »