Behold! Need say no more.
|Ready to Roll!|
Whenever we have a "mass"--a word with a highly flexible definition--shooting in the US, we have the predictable calls for more gu...
We expect people who live in this country to play by the rules. We expect those who cut the line will not be unfairly rewarded. So we’re going to offer the following deal: If you’ve with been in America more than five years. If you have children who are American citizens or illegal residents. If you register, pass a criminal background check and you’re willing to pay your fair share of taxes, you’ll be able to apply to stay in this country temporarily without fear of deportation. You can come out of the shadows and get right with the law. That’s what this deal is.The deal is no deal, to paraphrase the great Canadian philosopher Howie Mandel. Does anybody sane think that the horribly managed and thoroughly politicized Department of Homeland Security can run such background checks? I can assure you if this "proposal" takes root, there will be a booming business--as happened back in the 1980s with the ill-conceived "one-time, never-again" amnesty--in fraudulent documents, e.g., rental receipts, water bills, to prove that an applicant has been in country for over five years. Criminal background checks? That alone gives the lie to Obama's earlier boasting about his misadministration's deporting of criminal aliens. If an illegal alien has a criminal record why is that person still in country? If one has a criminal record, why would he or she come forward to "apply" for . . . what exactly? What is being offered? A temporary stay free of deportation? The illegal aliens already have that. State that you're willing to pay taxes? What? Most of these people I am willing to wager do not reach the income level of having to pay taxes. They collect public dole, but they do not and will not pay income taxes.
Astrid was brought to America when she was 4 years old. Her only possessions were a cross, her doll, and the frilly dress she had on. When she started school, she didn’t speak any English. She caught up to other kids by reading newspapers and watching PBS. And then she became a good student. Her father worked in landscaping. Her mom cleaned other people’s homes. They wouldn’t let Astrid apply to a technology magnet school, not because they didn’t love her, but because they were afraid the paperwork would out her as an undocumented immigrant. So she applied behind their back and got in.Who believes that? Her parents did not want her to apply to an elite school for fear of what would happen and she secretly applied and--HORRORS!-- she got in. Nothing happened. Nobody got arrested at 3 am and deported. By the way, I think growing up watching PBS to gain knowledge of the world is justification for deportation, but that's just me . . .
Throughout her Senate career, Ms. Landrieu, a moderate who was known as the oil industry’s best friend in the Democratic Party, has clashed with the liberal environmental wing of her party.
She has for years pressed for votes on measures that infuriate them, such as expanding offshore drilling, while voting against measures to tackle climate change.
Those lawmakers took to the floor Tuesday to express their opposition to the Keystone pipeline, even as they acknowledged the importance of those votes to Ms. Landrieu’s political fate.
Environmental advocates had spent the week lobbying Democrats to ensure they would oppose Ms. Landrieu’s bill.
NextGen Climate, the advocacy group founded by the California billionaire Thomas Steyer, who spent over $50 million of his own money to back pro-environment Democrats in 2014, also hit supporters with emails asking them to urge senators to vote against the pipeline measure.
“Today the U.S. Senate decided to stand on the right side of history,” Mr. Steyer said in a statement after the vote. “This is a legacy-defining issue where one’s position signifies whether they are standing up for or against the next generation on the issue of climate.”I guess in Demo world some billionaires are good and some are bad, even though, of course, Steyer made a big chunk of money from Australia's Maules Creek coal mine. Some carbon is good, some carbon is bad? I can't keep up. I need guidance from the Dear Leader.