Mexican Government denounces American Incursion

In another Hypocritical and asinine claim, the Mexican Government denounced incursions by the Americans into Mexico. The Mexican Government claims that the Americans who are building a wall to defend America crossed the border a full 10 meters into Mexico.

Now, Mexico is the same nation who demands we ignore the millions of their citizens who have crossed not only 10 meters, but ten years across the border. We have 10 million illegal aliens a vast majority of whom are Mexican Citizens. I would happily welcome those people, if they had immigrated legally, to the United States. However, I have a hard time swallowing the idea of forgiving them for breaking the law to come here, using identity theft to work here, use false documents to live here.

While this would have a hard time competing with the Democrats as the most hypocritical event of the month, it is certainly in the top three.

I saw the news story on Drudge Report, and then saw it on Hot Air as well.

Perhaps the Mexican Government would appreciate the arrival of 10 Million Illegal Americans breaking the law down in Mexico, on the other hand, would they notice 10 million more lawbreakers?

Why don't Liberals ever care how much other things cost?

No cost is ever enough when we are talking about the Teachers Unions. No amount of money is ever enough, despite how little we get for the dollar. Our kids are dumber than we were/are. We are dumber than our Parents were/are. Each generation is getting dumber, lacking the real knowledge that is absolutely necessary. As an example, a customer of a friend of mine lives in Maine, and said she wasn't good with maps. The Customer said she didn't know if she lived east or west of some river (the Mississippi River) because she wasn't very good with maps.

I mention the dumbing down of our population as an example of wasted money, far more money over the years than the War on Terror in Iraq, yet no one is calling on people to shut it down. The reason I am annoyed is another Left Wing Loony Blogger is demanding we pull out of Iraq and one of the reasons is.... Money. It's too expensive, in lives, and in money, and we can't afford it. I have found it interesting that Liberals only mention cost when it comes to the Defensive or National Security issues.

Liberals play the hard headed Fiscal Conservative only in the matters of National Security. It's one of the big arguments against the Missile Defense Shield. One of the first arguments we hear is that a Missile Defense Shield wouldn't be 100% effective. On the bodies of Murder Victims, one of the things they police look for is Defensive Wounds, scratches, bruises, or other marks to indicate that the victim fought back for their life. Why would they fight? Isn't it painfully obvious that they are outmatched, and they can't possibly defend themselves against a determined attacker? Shouldn't they just stand there and be hit, battered, and yes Murdered? The truth is that people fight for life with every breath, and struggle to survive even if they are outmatched by a much larger, much more dangerous person. People raise their arms, and try to fend off the blows. They try to keep the attacker off of them. They try to defend themselves, even if it isn't 100% effective. It isn't useless, it's part of the survival instinct. To denounce this instinct as illogical or stupid is foolish beyond description. If the survival instinct was illogical, or stupid, it would have been weeded out by the Liberals other beloved ideal, Darwinian Evolution.

I also noticed other asinine arguments in the post from the far left wing loony mentioned above. Another argument put forth is that no faction in Iraq could win the civil war, so if we leave they would HAVE to reach a settlement. I don't understand that idea, and yes it's that asinine that it defies definition. Perhaps I will use it however the next time someone tells me that we HAVE to risk lives to end the fighting in Darfur. I bet the Liberal in question will brush that argument away without even more than a well deserved look that I am apparently stupid.

If the Liberals were capable of being intellectually honest, or even intellectually consistent, then most of these arguments would never be offered. However Liberals never understand what it is they are arguing, so ill advised half considered arguments aren't about to be rejected, to the contrary they are embraced by the foolish Liberals.

Let's consider the "It cost too much" argument. From the post in question. 1. The costs we have incurred to date in Iraq may be as high as $2 trillion. We cannot afford more.

How much has the Federal Government spent on Education? Has the situation improved? Shown any signs of improvement? If you answer no, as you must since the test scores continue to be low showing our nation to be doing poorly, then the obvious question is why do we continue to fund it?

How about the war on Poverty? Welfare, and other social programs have continued since the 1960's and we still have to fund it, more than two generations have passed, and we still need to fund it every year. Hasn't it reached a point where using the Liberals Fiscal Conservative Iraq argument that we must declare that we have lost, and cease funding? It's not getting better is it? Has it shown any signs of improvement? Are we close to an exit strategy?

How about any other program that the Liberals love? Embryonic Stem Cell research has rewarded us with exactly nothing. Yet, adult stem cells have already given us many treatments, so why are we so excited about Embryonic Stem Cells? Why not focus our research dollars on an area where promise has been rewarded?

While Liberals haven't yet mastered the principals of logical thought process, at least they are pretending to be thinking about topics, which is a step in the right direction.

Brittney Spears and the culture of sycophants

Ok, I have ignored the stories about the various nuts out of Hollywood. I didn't previously comment on Brittney Spears and her crotch shot at the club with Paris Hilton. I for one don't really care about the self destructive behavior coming out of the various movie and music stars that seems to be the core of almost any newscast.

What I am going to comment on is the culture of Sycophants that Hollywood and media elites tend to surround themselves with. The brown nosed yes dears that these hipper than thou hire to take care of things. Every imaginable job title from personal secretary, to image consultant, is hired to fawn over the stars and constantly remind the star in question how wonderful, great, and just awesome they are.

Brittney and the rest don't need an image consultant, nor a psychoanalyst, nor anything else that they have now. What they need is a cynic. Someone to tell them they sang that pretty good, perhaps as well as THEY could sing it, but in the end, they are just human, and mortal.

Imagine if you will that Michael Jackson had a Cynic, a regular guy from a blue collar neighborhood, there beside him as he announced that he was going to buy the bones of the elephant man. After the regular guy slapped Michael, and told him it was the dumbest thing Michael had said today, but no fear, it was still early, and surly Michael will have something else dumb to say that may top it. Would Michael have bought the bones of the elephant man?

George Michael who is now a has been pop star, complained about the price of fame. I personally loved it when Frank Sinatra told him he was a punk, and told him to lighten up.

That is part of the problem. This generation of stars are taking themselves way too serious. They barely refrain from referring to themselves in the third person.

Guys, in case you wondered, yes, your bowl movement stinks, just like the rest of us. Yes, you put your pants on one leg at a time, yes you are mortal. No, you aren't the greatest thing since the dawn of time.

In short, get over yourself. Hire a cynic who doesn't worship the ground you walk on. Hire a former Drill Sergeant from the Army, who will happily chastise you day in and out, and point out the many personal, genetic, and educational failings you possess. In the end, you won't need all those sycophantic leeches, hangers on, and advisers, who are bleeding you dry while telling you how wonderful you are. The only reason you could possibly need all those people telling you how awesome you are is that your ego needs some serious shoring up. If that is the case, you need that Drill Sergeant worse than you can possibly imagine.

Stars who constantly complain and need sleeping pills should consider this. No Private in Basic Training ever needs sleeping pills, he wants more sleep. He is exhausted. He will happily sleep on a pile of rocks after a few weeks of the intensive activity that is his average day. It's a shame that there is no basic training program offered to wannabe Stars. I think the type of self destructive behavior that seems to be the delight of the pundits would be far less typical than it would appear to be now.

Brittney, hire a Drill Sergeant to help you, I mean, you have the hair cut right?

Bank of America to issue credit cards to Illegal Aliens

The title of this post is strange, since it's incredibly hard to imagine, yet it seems to be true. I found the first story link on Drudge Report.

Bank of America Corp. has begun offering credit cards to customers without Social Security numbers, typically illegal immigrants, the Wall Street Journal reported on Tuesday.

I was astounded, amazed, and nearly speechless. I then went to the world famous Michelle Malkin website to see what Michelle had on this. Immigration as most of you know is one of the topics which Michelle is extremely well informed on. Michelle had it of course.

Now, Michelle has covered the legal issues that Bank of America has apparently violated in this among other actions.

Hypocritical expectations of Senator (Presidential Candidate) McCain

Senator McCain, half of the famous driving force behind the 1st Amendment violating McCain Feingold legislation demonstrates his hypocrisy, yes again, in financing his Presidential Aspirations. It seems that the Senator wants to have huge donations from the very Rich Republicans whom he usually is beating on as corrupting politics. I guess McCain considers himself above corruption right?

In his early efforts to secure the support of the Republican establishment he has frequently bucked, McCain has embraced some of the same political-money figures, forces and tactics he pilloried during a 15-year crusade to reduce the influence of big donors, fundraisers and lobbyists in elections. That includes enlisting the support of Washington lobbyists as well as key players in the fundraising machine that helped President Bush defeat McCain in the 2000 Republican primaries.

...McCain the reformer worked unsuccessfully through Congress and the courts to try to stop nonprofit political groups known as 527s from using unlimited donations to run political ads and fund other activities aimed at influencing voters in the run-up to elections. He reintroduced legislation last week to end 527 donations, but there appears to be little appetite in Congress to pass it.

Senator McCain, who would be King McCain wants those Conservative supporting 527's to support him in his bid to become President. Of course, his history of Hypocrisy in these matters is well known, which is why his biggest supporter across this nation is the Establishment News Media.

Additional areas of Hypocrisy is Immigration if you will recall my post here, covering among other things McCain's action on Immigration Reform, which probably wouldn't need more reform if he had fixed the problem 20 years ago while he was in the Senate. McCain has said on many occasions that he is willing to Negotiate Anything. That includes your free speech rights under McCain Feingold Campaign Finance Legislation. That willingness to negotiate your freedom of speech rights away is one of the reasons many Conservatives oppose him for the Presidency, and one of the reasons I will never support him.

Senator McCain isn't a Conservative at heart, his core beliefs are all negotiable, and that is something that shouldn't be for a leader. I have given credit to the Senator before regarding his extremely honorable service, and conduct as a Prisoner of War in Viet-Nam. However that service doesn't give him any more right to be President today than it does all the others who served with Honor. He is a perfect example of respect for one thing not affecting all the other areas of life. While I do respect his service, I don't respect his legislative history, and don't respect his beliefs.

The so called Straight Talk Express, which is easily as hypocritical as John Edwards Two America nonsense, is a bunch of Media Approved hype. The obvious reason he is so loved by the Media is that Senator McCain can always be counted on to denounce other Conservatives.

My posts which mention John McCain are found here.

The Lesser of Two Evils

Presidential Elections, as far as history has developed, has become a choice of two mediocre individuals of late. Granted, that has been the case far too often in History. We could discuss many historical elections, President Ford and President Carter's race. The history of that election could be used for Insomniacs who don't respond to heavy medication.

Ronald Reagan is perhaps the last Presidential Candidate who really inspired the population, and yes Liberals, I include Bill Clinton and George W. Bush as well. Bob Dole was another great assistance to those who suffer from sleep disorders. That brings us to a great question, why are we left with these mediocre candidates?

I started to consider this question after reading a piece by Hugh Hewitt. During an interview with another blogger, Hewitt is shocked by the responses of the Blogger.

HH: Okay, so my last question for you is, if you had to cast a vote today in a Republican primary near you, who would you vote for?
TJ: If it were in Virginia?
HH: And declared candidates only.
TJ: I would probably vote for Tom Tancredo, to tell you the truth.
HH: Are you out of your mind?!?!?!?
TJ: Not that I think that Tom Tancredo is electable, and not that I think that Tom Tancredo is…
HH: Terry, okay, I’m going to change my question. Between Romney, McCain and Giuliani, who would you vote for?
TJ: I don’t know. I honestly don’t know.
HH: What?
TJ: I would not vote for Giuliani. I can absolutely tell you I would not vote for Giuliani. Between McCain and Romney? I don’t know.

Hugh is shocked that anyone would support a candidate who is unelectable according to conventional wisdom. Further Hugh is very upset that Terence Jeffery would not happily jump on the bandwagon for whomever wins the Republican Nomination.

Hugh, Terence is closer to the public ideals than you are. Look at the last midterm election, which we are suffering in now. It was obvious that election wasn't a vote FOR Liberalism. It was a rebellion of the Conservatives who refused to support a party which had abandoned the Conservative Principals. Conservative Principals are what Ronald Reagan ran on. It's what allowed Newt to become Speaker of the House, when the Republicans "took over the house" in 2002. Conservative ideals were the fuel of the times when apathy was dispelled in this nation over political ideals. When we dared to hope that the Conservative Ideals would take hold, we voted and got the "conservative candidate" into office, and watched them become more moderate with each passing day.

Hugh, we want Conservatives, who are conservative not only during the campaign, but once they win. We want another Ronald Reagan, we want an unapologetic, unabashed conservative who can communicate our ideals to the public the way Reagan did.

Instead we are offered the Blue Blood, Country Club Republicans of yesteryear. We didn't like them then, we don't want them now. I won't support McCain. I won't donate to McCain, and won't vote for McCain. If he is the nominee, I would vote, but not for him. He has betrayed too many conservative ideals in the past to be trusted by me ever again. From Bankruptcy reform to McCain-Feingold. From Amnesty for Illegal Aliens to any other issue you wish, McCain is not a Conservative. His Straight Talk is about the lies of low expectations. We refuse to take on the hard challenge because it's not possible in the current political views as laid out in the New York Times. That is taking the easy way out, and refusing to address the problems honestly.

I understand that the conventional wisdom is that this election is going to be between Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator John McCain, my vote will be a write in for Mickey Mouse, or whatever I feel like writing in the blank. Perhaps Michael Steele will be my write in, or Zell Miller. The point is simple there cheerleaders for the Republican Party. Show me a candidate who is a Conservative. Show me someone who knows what the problems are, and isn't looking for the Politically Correct, New York Times mandated solution. Show me someone who is going to call for less Government spending on all programs. I know what you are thinking gentle reader, I am giving the election to Hillary. That is my point, it doesn't matter which of the two are elected. Both are disasters. I don't go to the polls to exercise my Franchise to vote against a candidate, I show up to vote FOR a candidate, and there aren't any to vote FOR yet.

Does that mean I am betraying my Republican Friends? Yes, it might. However I think that the last election clearly indicated that the Republicans betrayed the Conservatives, and we were sick of it.