Thursday, April 27, 2006


Crossposted from STOP THE ACLU

Many of us find it disturbing to hear the sympathetic apologists defend the ACLU's work to live next to Elementary schools, and playgrounds. We watched in horror as the ACLU defended NAMBLA, under the banner of free speech, to plan and talk about how to rape young boys. It doubles the anger to hear the apologists defend the ACLU with some twisted talk perverting the Constitution.

In Mississippi, billboards of sex offenders and child molesters are being errected, but of course source
This is as sick as it gets folks. But the ACLU believes it is a freedom being denied to people. And before liberals start to ask. Yes, the ACLU has a current policy advocating the legalization of child porn distribution and possession.

"Students of liberty, from John Stuart Mill to Thomas Emerson, have all intentionally excluded children from their formula for freedom. The ACLU does not. Not even when the subject is pornography.Quote from Twilight Of Liberty

In 1982, the ACLU, in an amicus role, lost in a unanimous decision in the Supreme Court to legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography."

The case is...: New York Vs Ferber, 458 U.S. 747
It can be found here.

The ACLU's position is this: criminalize the production but legalize the sale and distribution of child pornography. This is the kind of lawyerly distinction that no one on the Supreme Court found convincing. And with good reason: as long as a free market in child pornography exists, there will always be some producers willing to risk prosecution. Beyond this, there is also the matter of how the sale of child pornography relates either to free speech or the ends of good government. But most important, the central issue is whether a free society should legalize transactions that involve the wholesale sexploitation of children for profit."

The ACLU objects to the idea that porn movie producers be required to maintain records of ages of its performers; this would be " a gross violation of privacy."Quotes from Twilight Of Liberty

I don't think that any other ACLU stance evokes more anger from me, than this one. I mean, how sick can you get? Do these people not have a conscience at all, or are they just plain EVIL? How can one argue this sick, twisted view in the name of "protecting civil liberties?" Please, some liberal out there that loves defending this evil organization...explain this to us. No wonder the ACLU doesn't want the public to have access to its policy guide!

Since the ACLU thinks that child pornography should be legal, it is not surprising to read that it is against making it a felony to advertise, sell, purchase, barter, exchange, give, or receive child pornography. It is particularly distressed about the prohibition on advertisement, arguing that "the law cannot expect every publisher to decode every advertisment for some hidden and sinister meaning," as if it took a technician-armed with a special decoding device-to ferret out pictures of children ludely exhibiting their genitals.Quote from Twilight Of Liberty

As legislative counsel for the ACLU in 1985, Barry Lynn told the U.S. Attorney General's Commission on Pornography (of which Focus on the Family President Dr. James C. Dobson was a member) that child pornography was protected by the First Amendment. While production of child porn could be prevented by law, he argued, its distribution could not be. A few years later (1988), Lynn told the Senate Judiciary Committee that even requiring porn producers to maintain records of their performers' ages was impermissible.
"If there is no federal record-keeping requirement for the people portrayed in Road and Track or Star Wars," he said, "there can be no such requirement for Hustler or Debbie Does Dallas."Quoted Reference

Is the ACLU completely retarded? I would love to think there was some kind of saving grace for an organization that says it is about protecting civil liberties, but with positions like this...which you KNOW are against the will of the people, I don't know if there is. My head is about to explode just typing this stuff!

Let's take a deeper look at the industry that the ACLU wants to defend here.

"It would be a mistake to think that all the children who are being exploited sexually are kidnapped by "kid porn" operators. Many of the children are being sold to people by their parents. In some cases, the parents have agreed to perform incest with their children. Gonorrhea of the throat in infants as young as nine and eighteen months has been reported". source
This is as sick as it gets folks. But the ACLU believes it is a freedom being denied to people. And before liberals start to ask. Yes, the ACLU has a current policy advocating the legalization of child porn distribution and possession. Yes, the ACLU still currently defends pedophile organization's.

"Mere possession should not be a crime," said John Roberts, executive director of the Boston branch of the American Civil Liberties Union."
Quoted Reference

They are a radically, out of control organization that consistently goes too far, and they must be stopped, before they destroy our Nation. And as for those who support the ACLU, this is the kind of crap your money goes to. As a parent of a 5 year old child, and as a citizen of this great nation, I am outraged! Help us stop this insane organization!


Sign The Petition To Get The ACLU Off The Taxpayer's Dole

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board

Wednesday, April 26, 2006

KUCINICH ON IRAN: BOOTS OFF THE GROUND! -or "What's it like out there?"

I took a trip to one of Saturn's moons last week, and read some of Rep Dennis Kucinich's demands of our President. He reports that the US has troops in IRAN, and demands that the President disclose this publicly. Another press release says "that Pentagon civilians and Vice President Cheney’s office are among those in the U.S. government who support" groups like MEK, which is on the official State Dept. "terrorist group" list, citing someone from

This got me thinking, which is always a dangerous thing. I know that Kucinich is "out there," but I hope that his info is correct, in this case. To expect an official statement is ridiculous, and harmful to the mission, which is probably to find out the strength and depth of opposition in that country. Will these ops lead to a full scale invasion? Probably not, but better safe than sorry, as we were in Iraq until recently. (Yes, I think we've "turned the corner" there)

Kucinich also cites Sy Hersh, who I saw on TV (PBS, I think) saying that Pres. Bush has a "messianic vision" of attacking Iran; that it is why he's here. Let's just say that old Sy's vision is perhaps inverted in the case of Ahmedinejad, the current President of Iran. Yeah, this guy Sy is credible, if you believe the opposite of whatever his analysis is.

The truth is that anytime could be GO TIME with Iran. We have to be prepared as well for a co-ordinated attack from their allies, Syria (and by proxy Lebannon, Gaza) and North Korea, with China backing them up in the UN. It may never come to war, but those regimes must be changed.


(Lebannon is making progress, but won't get true freedom until Syria no longer dominates it. China is also undergoing a different kind of revolution, but the outcome is unclear.)

Meanwhile, the Bush "regime" is constitutionally term-limited, and the Dems have their next big shot at running things in the post-9/11 world in 2008. Kucinich only hurts his party with this kind of stuff. It's bad enough that it is in the media, but for an opposition congressman to demand that the President publicly expose a covert operation during a war shows why I had to go to a moon of Saturn to read these press releases!

Note: I actually got the first one in an email from a lefty freind, which means that this is what's being reported in the elite (and totally left) media: the New Yorker, and blogs like Websites that work against the US national interest this way are all probably on the "favorites" list of every Al Queda spy's computer. Average people can understand that, post 9/11.

This is why I hope we have "boots on the ground" in IRAN. We need to have a credible threat to that country, as the logical next step in the war on terror. This is no time for pussy-footin' around, Kucinich! (hat tip ASSORTED BABBLE-must read!)

(Hat tip to Joe Bloggs-How's this for a scary reply?)

Monday, April 24, 2006


Well, it seems that Sen. Kerry thinks that it's patriotic to protest the Iraq war, as it was in Vietnam. How long until he meets with Al Queda in Paris?

Hat tip Bo'Sun via
Knickerbocker News. Read his take on this outrage.

Join the "Free John Kerry's 180" Blogburst every Tuesday. Details avilable at Cao's Blog.

Saturday, April 22, 2006


LEAVWORLD is sick and tired of hearing the racist label attached to Republicans (hat tip Dr. Sanity). This is some political art that I thought I'd finally publish here. The original post on LEAVART has some pithy commentary, which I won't repeat here.

What I will say here is that I find racism vile, but protected, to a degree, under our laws. Much like pedophilia, one can think and talk about it, but can't actually practice it. Both of these concepts are cancers on the human condition. Both have been around throughout history. Acts of racism are being prosecuted heavily, while acts of pedophilia are still routinely not, though the counter-argument is just as strong. Acts of pedophilia are prosecuted heavily, while acts of racism are routinely not.

I call myself a Republican here, and that is what I am. I believe the Republican Party stands as a progressive force against both of those evil ideas, as well as a host of other persistent problems plaguing humanity. This is what irritates me so much when people blithely/hatefully say "Republicans are racists!" -As if all of us, but no Dems are racists. I know better.

RACISTS come in every race, religion, color, gender, sexual preference, and political persuasion on this planet. DEMOCRATS INCLUDED. I know this first-hand.

"Conservative Libertarian" (CL) might be more appropriate for me, with the GOP divided into so many factions. Lord knows, they don't stand for half of what they should these days. Still, I understand that the party is made up of people, all of whom are quite fallible. Well, my fallible ass is standing behind my party, and my President.

Republicans are not racists!

I don't agree with every person in the Republican Party by a long shot. However, I read all of the major Right wing columnists, and don't find any of them to be racist, either. The best blogs are the provocative ones, that also get many comments either calling them racists if they're White, or an Uncle Tom/Aunt Jemima if they're Black (Let's not forget our little "slant-eyed honey," Michelle Malkin). Obviously, I want to be a little provocative here, but I don't see alot of racism in the right-wing blogs I read, except in the lefties' comments there!

...that's "the truth as I see it," to quote Autum Ashante...Hey, if it works for her, why not me?...

(YES, I TURND 44 YESTERDAY. Anna's birthday was last week, and Easter was in between. That is why I had no posts, except for some Vendome stories this past week. -LEAV)

Wednesday, April 19, 2006


Hat tip to Kender, Gribbit, and Bob, whose words I've lifted here. Much of this is edited straight off of STOP The ACLU. It's just such great stuff! (Click links in item titles for their commentary, except first item)

Indiana Dems and ACLU lose on voter ID requirements

A federal judge ruled in favor of Indiana's photo ID requirement for voting, rejecting a challenge from the Indiana Democratic Party, the ACLU, and other groups. While the Indiana Democratic Party claimed that almost a million registered voters did not have a photo ID, not one was produced in court.

An excerpt from the ruling: "It is a testament to the law's minimal burden and narrow crafting that plaintiffs have been unable to uncover anyone who can attest to the fact that he/she will be prevented from voting despite the concerted efforts of the political party and numerous interested groups."

The Dems promise to appeal.

Minutemen Survive ACLU Challenge

From Tucson today comes the news that the ACLU is not going to be able to kick the Minutemen Corps. off of public trust land. Ranch owners who lease public trust land in Arizona may use Minutemen as volunteers on their ranches, according to deputy state Land Commissioner Richard Hubbard.

The ACLU may take legal action.

ACLU Challenges Ohio Terrorist Questionnaire

An article in The Plain Dealer of Cleveland says that the ACLU is challenging part of a new Ohio state law requiring applicants under final consideration for a government job, contract or license to complete and sign questionnaires to determine if they have supported organizations on a federal list of terrorists.

The ACLU argues that the legislature cannot make laws regarding individuals employed by the judicial branch, in this case lawyers who recieve court-appointed cases.

School Changes Dress Code, After Both Sides Enter the Debate

A school district has changed it's dress code, after allowing one group of students wear a shirt critical of the Supt. of the district. When another group of students wore shirts supporting the Supt, the dress code was changed, and the students were punished.

The ACLU has stepped in on behalf of the punished students, and STOP The ACLU supports them on their blog. Like a broken clock, the ACLU is right about 2 minutes out of every 1440. These are those two minutes.

NYC Schools to Get Random Metal Detection Teams

The mayor of New York, Michael Bloomberg has announced that police, equipped with metal detectors, will be making unannounced sweeps of students at schools throughout the city this month. This will be done as students arrive in the morning at secondary schools that do not have permanent metal detectors. The city will post notices outside schools alerting students that they can be searched on entry.

"Our reasons for doing this couldn’t be clearer or more compelling: we have zero tolerance for weapons of any kind in city schools," said the mayor.

"We intend to ask the Department of Education a series of questions to clarify exactly what this program entails and what measures are in place to minimize the intrusions on student privacy," said Donna Lieberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

--Of course they do.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 150 blogs already on-board.

Thursday, April 13, 2006


I thought it would be interesting and informative to illustrate what our Nation
might be like if it caved into all of the radical ideals of the ACLU. It ended
up quite scary, and if we were to follow the law of consequence to its end, I'm
certain I have only scratched the surface.

On October 27, 1787, Alexander Hamilton predicted that a "dangerous ambition"
would one day tyrannize the gangling young American Republic, all the while
lurking "behind the specious mask of zeal for the rights of the people." It
could almost be said that Hamilton had a prophecy of the ACLU.

Our nation would be quite a scary and dangerous place if it were left in the
hands of the ACLU. Creating an accurate picture of what our nation would be
like is complicated by the inconsistencies in the ACLU's philosophy, but one can
conclude that it would definitely be a much more dangerous society to live in.

To begin with, if our nation were under the ACLU's ideas, national sovereignty would be no more. Our constitution
would become obsolete and superceded by International law. This would
completely undermine national security, which the ACLU are constantly at odds

For instance, the ACLU filed a formal complaint with the United
Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention against the United States, stating
that the United States violated international law when it detained 765 Arab
Americans and Muslims for security reasons after the September 11, 2001,
terrorist attack on our nation. Eventually, 478 were deported. ACLU Executive
Director Anthony Romero said, “With today’s action, we are sending a strong
message of solidarity to advocates in other countries who have decried the
impact of U.S. policies on the human rights of their citizens. We are filing
this complaint before the United Nations to ensure that U.S. policies and
practices reflect not just domestic constitutional standards, but accepted international human rights
principles regarding liberty and its deprivations.”Source

Since the 5th amendment is pretty much
already gone
under judicial tyranny, one of the first things you can kiss
goodbye is the 2nd amendment. The U.N. are already pushing for international gun control
, and you can bet the ACLU won't fight against that.

ACLU POLICY “The ACLU agrees with the Supreme Court’s long-standing
interpretation of the Second Amendment [as set forth in the 1939 case, U.S. v.
Miller] that the individual’s right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated
militia. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of
weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. Therefore, there is no
constitutional impediment to the regulation of firearms.” –Policy #47

Without any means to protect ourselves, lets take a look at crime in the world
of the ACLU. To begin with, many of our current crimes would no longer be
considered so. They don’t belive in zoning laws, and do believe in fully
legalalized, and unregulated prostitution. So there wouldn’t be any law
that could keep a prostitution house from being a certain distance from your
neighborhood, your Church, or your child’s preschool. This is especially
disturbing when they think child pornography distribution and possession
should be legal.
So, in the ACLU world, we would probably find it much like
Amsterdam, child prostitution rampant. Under the ACLU, All drugs would be legal, and Capitol Punishment would
completely be abolished.

The 10th amendment would be gone, rendering all states rights to the
international community. We would become a welfare state, with our taxes being
used to redistribute wealth around the world, as long as the U.N. didn't pocket
it in scandals.

Freedom of religion would be eliminated. Churches would lose their tax exempt status, completely
pushed out of the public sphere, and forced to comply with international laws that compromise their core

In spring 2003, a group from the United Nations Human Rights
Commission, of which former ACLU officials Paul Hoffman and John Shattuck are a
part, met and discussed a resolution to add “sexual orientation” to the UNHRC’s
discrimination list. Homosexual activists at the meeting called for a “showdown
with religion,” clearly intending to use international law to silence religious
speech that does not affirm homosexual behavior. Source

What a scary and dangerous place this would be if it were given over to the
ACLU's vision for America. In no way would it resemble what our founding
father's intended. For the sake of our children, and their children's future,
Americans can not sit idly by and allow the ACLU's radical agenda to continue.
Help us expose the ACLU's radical agenda for the subversive danger it is. Get
involved. Donate and support organizations like the Alliance Defense
and the ACLJ that
are out there fighting the ACLU's agenda. Contact your representatives and Senators and tell them to
support Constitution Restoration Act that would put an end to the
use of foreign law in our courts. Tell them to support the The Public Expression of Religion Act which
would put a stop to taxpayer funding of the ACLU in establishment clause case.
Sign Our
Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding Of The ACLU.
Pray that America wakes up before
its too late.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU
Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing
list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board

Wednesday, April 12, 2006

ONE SICK BLOG: "Paiderastia" The Boy Love Revival

This is not an easy subject to post about, having had more than one encounter with pedophilia in my own childhood. I'm actually more comfortable relating those stories as anecdotes from my past than I am posting about the problems we are facing today.

There is a blog called "Paiderastia" The Boy Love Revival. It is among the most disgusting things I have read online, and that says alot. WND reports that Stacy L. Harp of Orange, Calif., is trying to convince Google to drop the website from Blogspot, which also is the home of my three blogs. The fine folks at STOP THE ACLU have also weighed in on this, which is where I found out about it. Read those links, and the other blogs that linked to STOP The ACLU (and the comments). I like Lobo in OK's idea to flag the blog as offensive, for starters.

I want to take on a couple of common liberal arguments in favor of pedophiles' right to "free speech."

I will protect a pedophile's right to free speech, unless it advocates pedophilia. We, as a nation, have tolerated advocates of murder, as in "kill the pigs," a phrase that was prevalent in my youth. While we tolerate these kind of politically-inspired rantings, we wouldn't tolerate them from murderers, or suspected murderers. If one is not a known murderer, but wrote a blog about how beautiful and loving an act murder can be, he/she might reasonably be a suspected murderer. This is similarly why some rap artists, whose "art" is tolerated (protected), are under intense police scrutinization, as these pedophiles should be. Advocacy of pedophilia, murder, or any violent crime is not protected under the first amendment, and should be restricted.

A theoretical debate about this sick act is also protected from government censorship as "free expression." This is true, but Google is not the government. They are a publicly-held corporation, and as such, are not bound by the same rules that government is, regarding censorship. I know that I may be going against my own interests here. A whole bunch of people I've offended may someday try to do this to LEAVWORLD. I also worry that criticizing blogspot might cause me some trouble, but I will have to deal with that if it happens. Blogspot should shut down "Paiderastia."

In the age of South Park, we can expect some people to think that this blog is no big thing. If the blog stays up, I will write more about it, as I do about many other blogs I passionately disagree with. I haven't commented there yet, or even read the comments. It just is too revolting. The best course is to publicize it as much as possible, with the hope that O'Reilly will pick it up. When that happens, the blog will dissappear. That's my two cents.

UPDATE: I went there, and commented. I hope they do the same here, specifically Justice and Ashleigh; please debate what I have written here. Also, everyone check out Ashleigh's blog "neither here nor there." -for more sick rantings. These people won't go away, unless they are put away.

UPDATE II: The PEDERASTIA blog now is subtitled "in absentia,: and is authored by someone called "CLAYBOY." It's first post starts with this:

This blog is being kept and will be handed over to the original Paiderastia authors if and when they should want it.

It gets uglier after that. It's at the same link as above, if you want to get sick (again).

Friday, April 07, 2006


National Geographic has a new discovery, a "Book of Judas." It is an ancient scroll, painstakingly reassembled by a small selected group of people. Here is how NG introduces it on their website:

"What if Jesus arranged his own execution? One of the most hated men in history sheds light on the last days of Christ. See the contents of one of the most controversial discoveries revealed for the first time."

This new scroll is making some waves. It purportedly says that Christ instructed Judas to betray him. Some have joked that this lets the Jews off the hook, as if they were ever on it. More importantly, it also says that Christ instructed Judas to do this to hasten His return to God. This is an interesting tenet of Christianity, and one that Muslims share. The belief in the afterlife, or Heaven and Hell. This is not a part of Judaism, and yet Jesus was a Jew, as was Judas.

Judas appears to be a manifestation of the human condition, which is basically a sinner. If these scrolls are accurate, Jesus chose Judas to be the traitor in order to forgive him, symbolizing all of humanity, who can never live up to God's (or Jesus') standard. I cite Islam's Sharia law as a futile effort to please God, since none of us can live a perfectly holy life. -Or can we, if we were instructed by God to sin?

Judaism reveals much of God's word, though some Jews refuse to print the word God itself... good old common sense laws, such as incrementally increasing the penalty for killing an unborn child as it grows in the womb, were established well before Christ was born. Now that science can show how developed a baby is only confirms the wisdom of these ancient people, notwithstanding their failure to acknowledge an afterlife. Science cannot confirm an afterlife, either. That doesn't stop many from believing in it; or the many others who disbelieve what science tells them about "fetuses."

I am going to get an earful about this post from Anna, my fiance. She has studied the Bible much more extensively than I have, and I generally defer to her superior knowledge. This scroll has just been discovered, though, so I think I have grounds to posit an opinion. I'll post her input tomorrow, if I can get her to co-post with me.

UPDATE: As noted in the comments, Jews do believe in the afterlife, just not the same concepts of Heaven and hell. However, Anna mentions to me a thing called sheol, which she defines as "separation from God." I also saw Ed Koch talk to Leon Charney on a word for purgatory in Hebrew. I think they settled on "we'll see."

Judas should've never been considered a traitor, because it was part of God's plan. It's commonly known that Jesus knew about this betrayal before it happened, as described in the New Testament accounts of the Last Supper.

Anna doesn't believe that Jesus instructed Judas to betray him. She does believe the "betrayal" fit God's plan, but it was Judas's choice to do this. We all have free will.

She also points out that Judas killed himself, and went to Hell for that. So we're not all Judas, after all.

Thursday, April 06, 2006


This week, I thought I'd write my own STOP THE ACLU Blogburst. First, here are some excerpts from an email I recieved from the NYCLU:

Dear Christopher Leavitt,

The Senate continues to deliberate this week over two competing immigration reform proposals that will shape the lives of millions of men, women, and children for decades to come.

Your immediate help is needed to ensure that any immigration bill passed by the Senate upholds basic rights and freedoms.

Anti-immigrant forces are mounting a fierce battle in Congress to push through heavy-handed measures that would violate fundamental rights and freedoms. The House has already passed the unrealistic and punitive "enforcement only" bill that would turn hundreds of thousands of hardworking immigrants into criminals. Now the Senate is debating its own bill.

Under certain provisions in the Senate bill, the government will have the extraordinary power to detain non-citizens indefinitely and to deport certain immigrants without any court hearing. The bill even encourages local police to enforce federal immigration law, which will drive communities underground and deprive immigrants of vital government services.

PS. Please remember to join the NYCLU contingent at an immigrants’ rights rally scheduled for April 10th at City Hall.

Oh, my heart is bleedin'!

Who could support such inhumane measures?


Here is the email form letter that they suggest I edit and send to my elected representatives. I have included my edited version of it, paragraph by paragraph:

Dear [ Decision Maker ],
As your constituent, I urge you to oppose any immigration reform bill that infringes on the fundamental rights to due process, judicial review, and privacy. (Edit Letter Below)

Immigration reform should not punish individuals who come to this country seeking a better life for themselves and their families. Rather, immigration reform must be consistent with American values. I ask you to oppose any immigration bill that contains the following provisions:

Immigration reform should not punish individuals who come to this country legally seeking a better life for themselves and their families. Rather, immigration reform must be consistent with American values, primarily obeying the law and customs of our nation. I ask you to support any immigration bill that contains the following provisions:

Section 202 - The indefinite detention (possibly for their entire lives) of undocumented immigrants who cannot be returned to their countries of origin.

Section 202 - The indefinite detention (possibly for their entire lives) of undocumented immigrants who cannot be returned to their countries of origin, if they are legally determined to be a danger to society.

Section 231 - The expansion of the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database to include data on millions of immigrants who have not been accused of any criminal wrongdoing. Police who use the NCIC database should not be charged with enforcing federal immigration laws. Otherwise, immigrants will be discouraged from helping law enforcement and from seeking government services.

Section 231 - The expansion of the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) database to include data on millions of immigrants who are here illegaly. Police who use the NCIC database must be charged with enforcing federal immigration laws. Illegal immigrants will be discouraged from seeking government services, unless they comply with the guest worker program.

Section 301 - Requiring employers to verify the employment eligibility of all citizens, lawful permanent residents and visa holders. This would set the groundwork for a national ID card system.

Section 301 - Requiring employers to verify the employment eligibility of all citizens, lawful permanent residents and visa holders. Congress must make it a crime to knowingly not enforce these laws, or to COERCE their non-enforcement.

Sections 701 and 707 - Stripping the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal of their jurisdiction to hear immigration appeals and requiring that all appeals be sent to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, DC. This unwise proposal transferring 11,000 or more cases per year to a dozen judges with little immigration law experience should be rejected.

Sections 701 and 707 - Stripping the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal of their jurisdiction to hear immigration appeals and requiring that all appeals be sent to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, DC. Repeat illegal immigrants should be deported with as little involvement by the judiciary as possible.

We need a reasonable bill from the Senate, not an unrealistic bill based on anti-immigrant sentiment.

We need a reasonable bill from the Senate, not an unrealistic bill based on pro-illegal immigrant sentiment.

I look forward to your response. (I'm sending the edited version to Hill & Chuck, as well as Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D), my House Representative, just for kicks. I'll get form letters back, if I'm lucky. I encourage readers to paste my edited version on the ACLU's link, here. -Or edit it yourself. I posted the whole edited version uninterrupted in the comments section, to make it easy to paste.)


The ACLU is insane. They are totally ignoring a whole host of problems relating to illegal immigration. What they want is more anarchy and dissonance in the USA. They seem to be willing to extend the rights and priveleges of citizenship to all illegals, even if they reject and hate this country! I predict that they will want to make the Gitmo detainees US citizens, taking the YALE Taliban example to the extreme.

Seriously, the ACLU's agenda is not good for the USA. The Senate must have a stick, as in penalties for illegals who don't register as guest workers. The wall is also a must, as well as more personnel at the border, whether National Guard, or Minutemen. Only then can we allow the liberal legal immigration policy that will serve both the US and Mexico better than the current state of affairs.

This was a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us, please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll. Over 180 blogs already on-board.


Wednesday, April 05, 2006


Here are some excerpts from Sen. Kerry's op-ed piece in the NYT today:

"Iraqi politicians should be told that they have until May 15 to put together an effective unity government or we will immediately withdraw our military... The civil war will only get worse, and we will have no choice anyway but to leave... If Iraq's leaders succeed in putting together a government, then we must agree on another deadline: a schedule for withdrawing American combat forces by year's end."

"To increase the pressure on Iraq's leaders, we must redeploy American forces to garrisoned status. Troops should be used for security backup, training and emergency response; we should leave routine patrols to Iraqi forces. Special operations against Al Qaeda and other foreign terrorists in Iraq should be initiated only on hard intelligence leads."

"We will defeat Al Qaeda faster when we stop serving as its best recruitment tool. Iraqis ultimately will not tolerate foreign jihadists on their soil, and the United States will be able to maintain an over-the-horizon troop presence with rapid response capacity."

Sounds like the Murtha plan. This man says this the same week that
Zarqawi is "demoted after 'political mistakes.'"

It's interesting to note that he releases his op-ed the day after the weekly John Kerry blogburst, which normally comes out every Tuesday. --LOL!

John Kerry, release your full military records, and stop giving comfort to our enemies.

Join the "Free John Kerry's 180" Blogburst every Tuesday. Details avilable at
Cao's Blog.

Tuesday, April 04, 2006


Just some quick comments on the Rep. McKinney incident, and her ridiculous "press conference." The officer acted wholly appropriately; Rep. McKinney acted wholly inappropriately. This situation is one that draws a clear divide between "racial hucksters" and "rational people." It is instructive to note who is not supporting her, especially those of the liberal political persuasion.

LATE UPDATE: See SWEET SPIRITS OF AMMONIA for details, and excellent commentary. IS IT JUST ME has some moderate, and not so moderate comments on this situation as well. Good stuff!