Unbelievable.  Absolutely unbelievable.  The hysterical, irrational and baseless rage being coughed up by the mainstream media, liberals and leftist “thinkers” over Governor Brewer’s signing of SB 1070.  To listen to Al Sharpton, Phil Gordon, Raul Grijalva and even the current tenant of the White House, you’d think she had teamed up with Lucifer himself to convert Arizona into a racist, Nazi concentration camp.  And Steve Benson’s juvenile, third-grade scrawls in the Arizona Ministry of Truth tabloid merely underscore the goofy reaction of those peddling their “boycott Arizona” message from San Francisco to the Potomac.

Attention all who wish learn the truth: read on.

Ah, I see that we’ve now lost Barack (”I-am-too-eligible”) Obama, Janet (”I-fear-trepidation-in-the-illegal-immigrant-community”) Napolitano and Eric (”I-um-er-well-that’s-something-I’ll-need-to-research”) Holder.  Oh well, no big deal.  For those still here, consider the following “inconvenient truths” which Messrs. Obama and Holder, as well as Ms. Napolitano and the tide of illegal immigrant advocates surrounding them “hope” you will ignore regarding SB 1070.

First, speaking of Napolitano, had she done anything more than approximately zip while serving as U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona (yes, Virginia, as a federal officer under Bill Clinton), when the tsunami of illegal aliens now flooding over the southern border was but a small fraction of what it now is, perhaps SB 1070 would not have been needed at all. 

But since she essentially ignored the problem - not only as U.S. Attorney, but also when she was Arizona Attorney General and Arizona Governor - it comes with ill grace for her to now criticize Arizona and Governor Brewer’s proactive efforts to clean up the mess she helped create before she high-tailed it out of town to join the regime now in charge in Washington.  But then again, no one ever accused Napolitano of being graceful.

Second, the cries of “racial profiling” and “jackbooted police” indiscriminately stopping “brown-skinned people” and demanding that they “show me your papers, please” rings as hollow and an empty piñata.  Why?  Well, because if SB 1070 causes or facilitates racial profiling, it is in much the same way that spoons cause or facilitate obesity. 

Current federal law must therefore also cause or facilitate racial profiling, since it already requires all legally-admitted aliens to carry “at all times” their alien registration documents.  Specifically, 8 U.S.C. § 1304(d) requires all aliens to be issued an alien registration card and 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e) requires that the alien “…shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him….” 

Third, if a federal officer (or, after SB 1070 training, an Arizona officer) has Fourth Amendment “probable cause” coupled with a “reasonable suspicion” that a person is not in the country lawfully, that person can be stopped and the alien registration documents requested (the dreaded “may I see your papers, please?”).  But as noted, federal law already specifically requires that the person who has entered lawfully into the country carry those papers on his/her person at all times, and whether the paper is a visa, an alien registration card, a passport or other similar document. 

The inflammatory anti-SB 1070 crowd thus seems to be advocating that those who have entered the country illegally have rights superior to those possessed by persons who have obeyed the law.  The color of their skin somehow constitutes a shield against the equal application of the laws, not only a “get-out-of-jail-free” card, but a “don’t-even-ask-me-the-question” card.  This is the mindset which passes for “reasoning” in the pro-illegal immigrant lobby.

Will there be instances where the potential for “profiling” is higher than others?  Of course.  But as the Supreme Court has already noted in Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996): “The standards of ‘reasonable suspicion’ and ‘probable cause,’ as used to evaluate the constitutionality of investigative stops and searches, are not readily, or even usefully, reduced to a neat set of legal rules but rather are commonsense, nontechnical conceptions that deal with factual and practical considerations of everyday life on which reasonable and prudent persons, not legal technicians, act; these standards are fluid concepts that take their substantive content from the particular contexts in which the standards are being assessed.”

Accordingly, the appropriate remedy is to address those instances of “real” (as well as “purported”) “profiling” as and when they arise rather than completely eliminating federal immigration laws - and along with them, laws like SB 1070 - which is essentially what the “amnesty-now” crowd wants.  People like Sharpton, Gordon and Grijalva much prefer the amnesty-lite approach to enforcement that people like Janet Napolitano gave to Arizona than the expanded enforcement that SB 1070, thanks to Governor Brewer, now authorizes.  At least Arizona now has a Governor looking out for Arizonans rather than maneuvering for the next governmental appointment.

So, boys and girls, the fact is that SB 1070 is no more unconstitutional than is 8 U.S.C. § 1304(e)…. meaning: it is not unconstitutional.  Those who oppose reasonable, rational attempts by governors like Jan Brewer to protect Arizonans by addressing the very problems that the federal government has created, yet refuses to competently rectify, are from the same DNA pool of “useful idiots” that Lenin applauded as Russia careened down the hole of communism last century. 

These apparatchiks of amnesty are content with keeping the federal scheme in place, as long as it remains feckless and ineffective.  But as soon as initiatives appear which portend effective enforcement of the law or threaten the continuation of porous and incompetent border enforcement, the cries of “profiling,” “racism,” “police state” and “immigration reform now” reach a crescendo… much of it in Spanish.

Enough, already.  If the regime now in charge in Washington cares not about the fate of the State of Arizona, then it is time for Arizona to fend for itself.  Let us see if the Constitution and the Tenth Amendment still have any vitality.  Through the steady hand of Jan Brewer, applying her signature to SB 1070, the process has begun. 

After having endured the immigration insouciance and incompetency of the prior governor, it’s about time that Arizona got back on track.  SB 1070 is a start… and a welcome “change” from the past, at that.

From the Internet, and too good not to pass along:

Dear Lord, in the past year you have taken away my favorite actor (Patrick Swayze), my favorite actress (Farah Fawcett), my favorite musician (Michael Jackson), and my favorite salesperson (Billy Mays).  I just wanted to let you know that my favorite legislator is Nancy Pelosi.  Amen.

As the dictatorship of the American proletariat gathers steam through the now-seeming inevitable passage of legislation which will nationalize one-sixth of the nation’s economy, the electorate should consider a few things.

First, none of this had to happen.  Had congressional Republicans as a whole been more responsible stewards of the public trust that had been deposited with them following the 1994 Contract With America, the disaffection of the voters with George W. Bush and Republicans in general would likely not have been as deep or pronounced.  Oh, and some unknown politician/community organizer from Illinois likely would not now be occupying the Oval Office.

Second, I’m not kidding when I use the word “dictatorship” to reference what is overtaking the country.  When sixty people in the U.S. Senate, goaded forward by The Guy from Chicago, can ram up America’s collective nose a piece of legislation intended to nationalize one-sixth of the nation’s economy, and over the protests of nearly two-thirds of them, no word other than “dictatorship” comes closer. 

And never mind that the proposed legislation is patently unconstitutional.  These guys are from Chicago, as in, “they send one of our statutes to the hospital, we send their Constitution to the morgue.”  As Rham Emanuel instructs us: “We won, you lost.  Get over it.”  Oh, and if the regime gets one or two new Supreme Court nomination opportunities, look out.

Third, the only thing that now might drive a stake through this vampire’s ticker is an outbreak of statesmanship, an exceedingly unlikely pandemic, but not completely beyond the realm of possibility.  To indulge in a really appealing fantasy, if enough Blue Dog Democrat Senators - and plain old Democrat Senators with half a brain left after being laundered by Harry Reid (thus excluding Al Franken) - would come to their senses and, at minimum, vote against The Monstrosity Masquerading as Healthcare Reform, perhaps we will survive and the dictatorship could be crippled.  Sorry… how un-PC… the dictatorship could be prosthesis necessitated.

Otherwise, it’s anyone’s guess.  I know… I know… on a scale of 1-10, the likelihood of that happening is around 0.00003.  Still, 0.00003 is bigger than zero.  And remember what Churchill said: “Never give up.  Never.”  To that point, just yesterday, one Democrat House member - Parker Griffith - announced his intention to switch parties and become a Republican, but not because he’s had a sudden epiphany that he’s secretly always been a conservative. 

Rather, in a fit of statesmanship, Griffith, a radiation oncologist in his prior life, explained: “I can no longer align myself with a party that continues to pursue legislation that is bad for our country, hurts our economy, and drives us further and further into debt.”

Precisely.  

Look, if one rational congressman can come to his senses and actually place country ahead of politics, as from appearances has Griffith, maybe others will follow, not only in the House, but in the Senate.  Whoa… Joe Lieberman could make a lot of Americans happy if he would emulate Griffith.  As an added bonus, Harry Reid would be really torqued.  Cool.

And if Lieberman started a trend, who knows, perhaps a bunch of others would succumb to the pestilence of statesmanship beginning to infect Congress, despite all efforts of The Guy from Chicago, Harry Reid and Janet Napolitano to rush more federal vaccine - also known as taxpayer money - to the Senate.  And maybe the nation would enjoy a Merry Christmas after all. 

Hey, you have your fantasies, I have mine…. get over it.

The lunacy of placing into the hands of the federal government the responsibility for the healthcare of Americans seems to be finally dawning on the Congress and the White House.  Who says an American grassroots movement can’t accomplish anything?

Tell me again why we should turn over 15% of our economy - healthcare - to the federal government when virtually everything it has touched for over two and a quarter centuries has gone or is going broke?  

For example, Congress established the U.S. Postal Service in 1775 - they have had 234 years to get it right; it is broke. Social Security was established in 1935 - they have had 74 years to get it right; it is broke. Fannie Mae was established in 1938 - they have had 71 years to get it right; it is broke.  The “War on Poverty” started in 1964 - they have had 45 years to get it right, with trillions of dollars in taxes and borrowed money being spent only to be told the problem is that we haven’t spent nearly enough.

Medicare and Medicaid were established in 1965 - they have had 44 years to get it right; they’re broke. Freddie Mac was established in 1970 - they have had 39 years to get it right; it is broke.

Trillions of dollars in the massive stimulus called the TARP bill and they don’t know where billions of it went or if they will ever get it back.  And The Fed refuses to disclose to whom it has loaned over two trillion dollars, claiming “irreparable damage” will occur to the borrowers if their identities are disclosed.

And the country is now in debt to the tune of some 9 trillion dollars and the government wants to “save money” by running healthcare, the same government that spends 1.4 cents to make a single penny?
Are they crazy?

To quote Richard Russell, from a Dow Theory Letters excerpt now circulating on the Internet: “Let me get this straight - Obama’s health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn’t understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn’t read it, and whose members are exempt from it, signed by a president who smokes in secret, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that is broke.  What could possibly go wrong?”

To quote another sage mind on the issues, Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.”

Like Obama cares.

Once again, the Arizona Ministry of Truth pens an editorial urging that folks stop “squabbling” over the illegal immigration problem and “achieve reform.”

Ah, yes… achieve a result, no matter what.  Spoken like the true leftist propaganda arm it has become for liberal causes everywhere. The Arizona Republic now lands squarely in the camp of those who advocate ignoring the rule of law and achieving equality of outcome over equality of opportunity.  And all because a few million illegal immigrants - aided and abetted by the likes of Janet Napolitano when Arizona Governor and now as Secretary of Homeland Security under the Guy from Chicago - don’t want to play by the rules. 

Stand in line like those other fools who do it the right way?  Como se dise in Mexican (which is, after all, merely a dialect of Spanish): “¡Surely you jest!”?

The Rag, as it is affectionately known by those with the intelligence to have stopped buying it, also seeks to lay blame for the deaths of many illegal border-crossers not on those who are intent on breaking the law.  Perish the thought.  No, the real culprits here are those who would callously observe the rule of law and who have purportedly had the gall to “… deny the humanity of these people (i.e., the illegal border crossers) [by successfully blocking] the comprehensive immigration reform that could reduce the annual death toll count.”  

Ummm… memo to the editors: the death toll could be reduced to zero if the illegal obrder crossers would get in line with everybody else.

And the Rag’s reliance on quotes from Eliseo Medina of the Service Employees International Union (”SEIU,” the soul-mate of ACORN and Obama’s cadre of foot soldiers in the march to a socialist America) is particularly telling of its hard left turn, as if it could further tighten the radius path of its editorials. Editorial translation: “Amnesty Now!”  “Healthcare for Illegals Now!!” “Free Bus Tickets to Phoenix, L.A., Denver, Seattle, Chicago, St. Louis, Miami, Atlanta, Boston, Houston!”  ”¡Si se puede!“ 

The Arizona Republic has thus cemented its proper place in the ranks of the rest of the dinosaur media plodding mindlessly toward that editorial La Brea Tar Pit called Chapter 7.  While the journey perhaps will not end, in the literal sense, in bankruptcy court (although with its readership in unrestrained free-fall, that destination is by no means out of the question), in terms of moral, intellectual and journalistic bankruptcy, the Arizona Republic is giving The New York Times a run for its money.   

“There’s somethin’ happenin’ here… what it is ain’t exactly clear….”

So begins “For What it’s Worth,” one of the most popular songs from early 1967 performed by one of the 60’s most popular, if short-lived folk rock groups, Buffalo Springfield.  Barack Hussein Obama was 5½ years old, having been born (we are told) August 4, 1961.  Four-plus decades later, the words have renewed meaning as the occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue continues to bamboozle, blindside and buffalo the American people.

In 2008, from a number of corners came more and more questions relating to whether Obama, then a senator from Illinois, was even eligible under Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, the “natural born Citizen” clause. 

That provision precludes any one other than a “natural born citizen” from being deemed eligible to hold the office of president.  And despite repeated efforts between 2008 and today by Obama, members of his administration and the largely sycophantic mainstream media to deny, debunk, marginalize and trivialize the issue - still unresolved because of Obama’s intransigence and refusal to provide indisputable, as opposed to purported, proof of his birthplace - the mystery continues to grow and metastasize.

There is, indeed, something happenin’ here….

But first, let us agree: there is a rebuttable presumption that Obama may well be a natural born citizen by virtue of the circumstance that he simply says so, because if nobody is even allowed to question that assertion, he just might pull it off. 

There is a Latin phrase from the law that precisely applies here: “ipse dixit,” translating, roughly, to “it is so because I say it’s so.”  On this topic, Obama’s nickname may be quickly becoming “POTUS ipse dixit.“  “The recession is over.”  “No raising of taxes except on the wealthy.”  “If you’re happy with your healthcare, you will keep it.”  ”I am a U.S. citizen.”

There is also presumptive evidence that he was, as he claims, born - somewhere - in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. There is even presumptive evidence that the “certification of live birth” he has posted on the Internet (not to be confused with an original Hawaii birth certificate which could be independently examined and verified) does, in fact, correspond to the “original records kept by the Hawaii Department of Health” as claimed by Hawaiian officials.

These presumptions, however, are just that: mere presumptions.  A presumption is not a fact: it is an assumed or inferred supposition offered up and asserted in lieu of actual fact.  Indeed, the courts have referred to presumptions as being “the bats of the law, flitting in the twilight, but disappearing in the sunshine of actual facts.” 

Moreover, as pointed out by Andrew McCarthy in his excellent article “Suborned in the USA” in National Review, increasingly, the controversy surrounding Obama’s actual birthplace is becoming more about his honesty, candor and purported commitment to “transparency” - that cute pre-election bromide discarded by Obama two nanoseconds after Chief Justice Roberts’ handshake last January - than it is about his actual place of his birth. 

This circumstance is traceable, virtually exclusively, to Obama’s continued adolescent refusal to authorize the release of the original birth records, let alone a host of other records that would expose his own past to the sunshine of actual facts. When it comes to Obama’s original records, birth and other, in his lexicon the new “transparency” is: opacity. 

On the topics of “hope” and “change,” those charades are now replaced by “arrogance,” “obstinacy” and “paranoia.”  This stuff is straight out of 1984’s Newspeak, where up is down, good is bad and truth is falsity, and all of it even George Orwell would deem to be “doubleplusungood” for America.   A cynic might be tempted to ask: “What in the heck is the Guy from Chicago trying to hide?”

If, as Obama and his shrinking but still substantial cadre of media apologists insist he is, in fact, a “natural born citizen” under the Constitution, what possible legitimate reason exists for his continuing refusal to order the Hawaii Department of Health officials to release and make available to the public the “original records” which they have already said still exist? 

What could be so damaging or problematic in the original records to cause this depth of secrecy?  His refusal to produce or authorize the production of the original records has now had the effect of emboldening his critics on the point and has even seemingly produced the ironic effect of “turning” otherwise presumptive sympathetic minds and ears against him.

Case in point # 1: Lou Dobbs.  Mr. Dobbs, no friend of the Republicans from his post at CNN, has now taken the position that, while Obama was almost certainly born in Honolulu, and is thus a “natural born citizen,” he should put the continuing speculation and conspiracy theorists to rest by ordering the release of the original birth documents.  Simple, yes?  Wrong.

The reaction of the liberals’ and Obama attack machine?  Why, Dobbs has now simply lost it and, of course, must be fired. Oh, and to add some never-from-ANWR-gasoline to the mix, label Dobbs and anyone who has the temerity to ask the question - even after conceding the likelihood of Obama’s eligibility - a racist.  Yeah, that’s the ticket:  When all else fails, brandish and play the race card.  Ipse dixit.

Case in point # 2: Hawaii State Senator Will Espero, a Democrat, has announced that, while he too believes that Obama is likely constitutionally eligible, he intends to introduce legislation that will make original birth certificates of all persons who are born there public records.  Espero also noted that such information “… would be important for relatives and even neighbors.” 

Do not bet the ranch that such a bill will ever see the light of day, however, or even if it does and passes out of the legislature, that it won’t be vetoed. Instead, look for a phone call in the near future (if it hasn’t already happened) from Rahm (”The Enforcer”) Emanuel to Espero demanding that he immediately abandon any plans to even think of drafting such legislation, let alone introducing it, and instructing him to fire whoever on his staff failed to deliver to him “The Memo.”  No questions allowed.  Obedience is mandatory.  Resistance is futile.

Yes, Virginia, there’s somethin’ happenin’ here…. and what it is grows increasingly clear.  No, not the fact that the Guy from Chicago and his cronies in Congress are stampeding the country into a post-Zimbabwe collectivist existence.  Rather, Obama either cannot order the Hawaiian health officials to release the original of his birth certificate, because he knows none exists, or there is something so problematic and threatening to him in those records should they still exist that he will go to the ends of the Earth to prevent them from being exposed to sunshine. 

In that regard, they’re sort of like vampires, those creatures who shrivel up and die when bathed in sunlight.  Unless and until Obama abandons his juvenile “I’m-the-president-and-I-don’t-have-to” attitude regarding this issue (remember Bush 41 on broccoli?), the questions will persist and the number of people willing to take an objective, rather than reflexive, look at the facts - not the presumptions - will continue to grow, all of the name-calling and demonizing notwithstanding.

Ah, transparency.  Ah, hope and change.  Ah… ipse dixit.

If one had any remaining doubts regarding the fitness of the Democrats to govern the nation, those apprehensions would be dispelled after witnessing the hearing held last week before Senator Barbara Boxer’s Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.  The topic of the hearing was the energy needs of the nation.

In an attempt to dress down and trivialize the remarks of Harry C. Alford, President and CEO of the Black Chamber of Commerce, Boxer made a number of references to other “black” entities - including a resolution of the NAACP and a letter from one “John Grant,” the CEO of “A Hundred Black Men of Atlanta” - purporting to support Boxer’s viewpoint, and seeking thereby to undermine Alford’s.

Alford, an Army veteran, laid into Boxer, as any rational American -white, black, brown or plaid - should have done.  He correctly noted that her only purpose was to inject race into a discussion on energy and to engage in condescending remarks attempting to pit other “black” groups against his “black” group, warning her that she was going down a very dangerous road. 

By playing the race card against a black American - and an Army veteran to boot - Boxer merely underscored her own venality and that of the leftists who have hijacked the once-rational, but now merely Obamacentric Democratic Party.  But the words here don’t fully convey Alford’s anger: watch the YouTube clip.

Oh, and throughout the exchange, Alford persisted in addressing her as “m’am,” and Boxer didn’t bat an eye.  Contrast that reaction to what happened when Michael Walsh, an Anglo Army brigadier general testifying at a different hearing, used the term only once, with Boxer chillingly requesting him to address her as “senator” because she “worked so hard to get that title.”  There is a great parody follow-up to that exchange on YouTube which captures the essence of what most Americans would have liked to see Brigadier General Walsh say and what most Americans now think of her.

Bottom line: Boxer, as a typical Obamacentric Compulsive Democrat - giving new meaning to the term OCD - is today’s poster-child for all that is wrong with the Democrats now controlling Congress.  They are a collection of arrogant, elitist hypocrites intoxicated and corrupted by the power of a majority membership, rendering them well-suited to dictate as would a garden-variety tyrant, but absolutely unfit to govern a free people. 

The time for pitchforks and torches is drawing closer.

Well, the Arizona Republic again takes up the case for illegal alien amnesty this morning.  In an editorial hilariously captioned “Arizonans can help Obama,” the paper first observes that “[t]he nation’s shattered immigration system reveals itself in jagged shards across Arizona’s landscape…,” ignoring altogether the fact that the only thing broken has been the feckless effort to more vigorously enforce the laws against illegal immigrants unlawfully crossing over the border and purporting to have a “right” to stay here. 

Leading the federal snooze when the flow of illegals over the southern border was a tiny trickle compared to the flood it later became was U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona, Janet (”I’m-Concerned-Over-Trepidation-in-the-Illegal-Immigration-Community”) Napolitano.  And her insouciance regarding the problem grew only more profound after becoming Arizona Attorney General and then Arizona’s governor.  That’s right, kids, this is the same Napolitano who the Squatter at 1600 Pennsylvania has appointed to head up the nation’s Department of Homeland Security. 

Remember, this is the person who still doesn’t know that the crossing of the border without authority is (a) on a first offense, a misdemeanor, and (b) on a second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and subsequent crossing, a felony.  Indeed, shortly after she was inserted into the position as Head PC Linguist at the DHS, she encouraged potential illegal immigrants everywhere by claiming: “… crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil.”

ANGGGKKK: Wrong.  As noted here last April, federal immigration law, 8 U.S.C. § 1325, specifically provides that the first time a person crosses the border illegally, he/she can be charged with a misdemeanor (by definition, a crime) and fined and/or imprisoned for up to 6 months. Moreover, 8 U.S.C. §  1326 specifies that if the same individual is removed or deported after a first offense and thereafter again crosses the border unlawfully - and for every subsequent deportation and re-entry - he/she can be fined and charged with a felony and upon conviction imprisoned for up to 2 years.

So, do you not feel safer already with Napolitano heading up DHS?

Thanks to her incompetence (along with the incompetence of a whole lot of other folks on both sides of the political aisle), one of the few individuals with the spine to actually enforce the laws is Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.  Arpaio - now under U.S. Justice Department “scrutiny” (c’mon, we all know it’s a politically-driven investigation) for “racial profiling” - may have lots of other problems, but taking a stand against illegal immigration in the face of the abdication on the issue by specimens like Napolitano is not one of them.  

The once-respected - a status long-gone - Republic editorialists also observe (this is really good) that “[s]tate and local officials bent on a quixotic effort to enforce federal law at state, city and county expense compound the trouble with responses that could result in racial profiling.”

Absent from this PC rationale aimed at facilitating amnesty for illegals is any explanation for why the enforcement of immigration laws by federal ICE agents is not racial profiling, but the same enforcement by Arpaio’s deputies - trained by the feds in the same procedures applicable to ICE officers - is racial profiling.

The fact is that, like all true liberals who cannot stand the thought of enforcing the immigration laws already on the books, the Arizona Republic supports, at the end of the day, recognition of a race-based immunity from arrest, prosecution and, under Napolitano’s goofy interpretation, even “civil” fines, for “suspected undocumented immigrants.” 

That immunity, if implemented through “reform,” will translate into amnesty, a “path to citizenship” as a reward for breaking the law, and yet more tax burdens on Arizonans.  In a post-reform America, look for calls for more money for illegal alien emergency healthcare, education of illegal alien’s children and incarceration of folks who have no desire to become Americans in the lawful way, including many who have no reluctance to kidnap, rob, burglarize, embezzle, ransom, assault and murder their way into the fabric of America.  And the Arizona Republic supports this “equality of outcome.”  Lunacy.

To all who voted for Obama: still happy with your “change”?    

Finally, Mesa Police Chief George Gascón gets to head a police department in a municipality that proudly declares itself to be a sanctuary city.  Chief Gascón will now be shipping out to San Francisco, the City by the Bay, where Tony Bennett left his heart and rational people leave their brains.  Look, rocket science, this ain’t: any place that would consciously elect Nancy Pelosi to public office cannot be firing on all neurons.

Ah, San Francisco.  Where illegal aliens, junkies and transients can congregate without fear of arrest or hassle by those who would seek to enforce the law.  No more hemming and hawing and denying your ‘burg is a sanctuary city.  Shout it from the rooftops and the corners…. but watch out for the junkies’ needles on the sidewalks….

Meanwhile, Hispanic activists and leaders here were saddened by the news of the departure, saying that they were “concerned that they had lost an important voice in the immigration debate.”

Debate?  What debate?  With illegal immigrants flooding over the border, bankrupting the public healthcare and educational systems, clogging the courts and filling the jails…. what’s to debate?

To the extent that the folks saddened by Gascón’s skipping off to SanFran are more concerned that law enforcement go after “real criminals” like murderers, they are advocating nothing less than recognition and acceptance of a race-based immunity from the equal application of the law. 

And they need to remember that, speaking of victims of violence, Phoenix Police Officer Jim Erfle might well be around today but for the fact that he was murdered by a previously-deported illegal immigrant from Mexico. That loser, Erik Martinez, had zero regard for the same immigration laws that those who lament Gascón’s departure want people like Joe Arpaio to ignore.  Get a grip.

And, by the way, have you been to San Francisco lately?  A visit there today gives new meaning to the phrase “a nice place to visit, but you wouldn’t want to live there.”

Best of luck to Gascón: he’s going to need it.

   Missing from President Barack Obama’s remarks on the anniversary of the Battle of Normandy, were his usual apologies for America.

Missing were his usual mentions of U.S. transgressions, of our arrogance, of our lecturing, of our selfishness.

In the cemetery overlooking Omaha beach, as Obama stood in the shadow of the memory of the 9,387 U.S. soldiers killed in that battle, there was not a word about our belligerence, about our entry into unnecessary wars.

Perhaps his usual disparagements could not be heard above the echoes of the bullets and screams of war on that beach 65 years ago.

Maybe the American sacrifices on that sand, finally told Barack Obama the truth about America.