Round ‘em up and send ‘em home.

Get Real About Immigration

OK, first of all let me make the standard declaration: We need to control our borders and we need to know who is in our country.

Now: In almost any conversation about the issue of illegal immigration someone says we ought to round them up and send them home. OK, what would that entail?

First of all, how many are we talking about? Estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If we split the difference we are talking about 16 million breathing living human being. That is more people than the combined population of Sweden, Norway and Switzerland. That is a hell of a lot of people.

So, let us assume we will assemble a convoy of buses to send them home. The usual seating capacity of a passenger coach is 47 to 62 passengers with a maximum length of 40 ft or 45 ft. Assume we put 62 passengers to the bus that will require 258,064 buses. Assume our convoy of buses allows one bus length between each bus. The convoy will contain 58 busses per mile and stretch for 4449 miles. So, as the first bus reaches El Paso, the convoy will stretch to Nashville, but that is only 1280 miles, so we will stretch it to Washington DC, which adds another 660 miles. We are just getting started. If the convoy stretches from DC to Chicago, that adds another 710 miles. It the convoy stretches from Chicago to Seattle that is another 1733 miles, which would still be 66 miles up the road from the last bus. Can you see that convoy of buses in your mind?

OK, that is not practical so let us put them all on jumbo jets and fly them home. A Boeing 747 can hold 416 people. If we have one an hour taking off, we could do it in 38,461 trips. If a fully loaded jet per hour takes off, 24 hours a day, that will take 1602 days or 4 and a half years.

I doubt we can be so efficient as to dispatch a plane per hour. Anyway, we would have to hold them until their scheduled flight. So, we will have to build concentration camps to hold them. If we build some really big camps that hold, say, 2500 people each, then we will need 6400 concentration camps. How many guards will we have to hire? How much will it cost to build 6400 concentration camps? How much will it cost to feed, cloth, and care for 16 million people?

Now, keep in mind that these concentration camps are for people who committed the misdemeanor crime of illegally entering the country. That would certainly be bad PR. How would that look on the evening news in the rest of the world?

Now, where are we going to send them? Back where they came from, you say. Well, most of them, but not all of them, came from Mexico. If they can’t prove they are Mexican, Mexico may not take them. I would be surprised it Mexico wants to accept 16 million displaced persons. Mexico would certainly have to plan for the repatriation. Sixteen million unhappy unemployed people being dumped in Mexico and the sudden loss of the money they have been sending home could cause a crisis and a revolution in Mexico. That could create more refugees trying to enter our country.

What are we going to do about those who are married to Americans? Are we going to forcibly separate families? What about the children who were born here and are American citizens? Are we going to build a lot of orphanages to house them?

Any solution to the problem of illegal immigration must include a guest worker program and some sort of path to citizenship for people who are already here without a requirement that they go home and reapply. The eventual solution will not look that much different from the plan proposed by President Bush. It is time our gutless politicians stop pandering and get real about a solution to the immigration problem.

Top Stories

RE: Who is Barack Obama? (fwd)

by Rachel Williams

“Somethin' to consider Rach”.

Ok. Now, here is something for you to consider. Not everything one reads is true. I'm quite tired of receiving emails which are passed on with blind enthusiasm. I receive them on a regular basis, and I receive them on a variety of topics. From the origins of the word "shit" (see http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-s-word.htm) to 9-11 conspiracy theories to political messages intended to promote right-winged agendas--feels like I've read it all. It's not that I mind getting them (usually I find them as a source of humor), it's the whole blind enthusiasm that I'm hung up on.

This email about Barack Obama is atrocious. A complete attack on his character, his reputation, his up-bringing, and most obviously, his personal relationship with God. Not to mention the offensive nature towards Muslims. I take offense to this email not because I am a staunch supporter of Obama (Funny thing is, I'm not), but because it isn't right.

It's one thing to tell lies, but it's another thing to pass them on with a judgmental, unquestioning nod of the head, with those myopic lenses donned. It abrades me to no end when people do not question. Don't get me wrong, it isn't that I don't get duped by accusations of a false nature; sure I do! This is in line with human error, human nature.... But if something sounds fishy, then do a little research! Or if you're not going to research it, then for heaven's sake, don't pass rumors on as truth!!!!!!

Upon receiving this email, It took two seconds to open another tab in my internet browser, go to google, and type in the words "obama muslim email". In 0.19 seconds, I had thousands (about 174,000) of results. The first one was this website:http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

Please, go there yourself. Read the article. And then, pass it on to everyone you know. If you aren't familiar with Snopes.com, which I am assuming you are not, here is a link to wikipedia about the website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snopes

Here is an appropriate quote from that wikipedia article: "Snopes directs people to more information about various hoaxes, especially in regard to chain e-mails. Although they research their topics heavily and provide references when possible, not all of their sources (especially those which are personal interviews, phone calls, or e-mails) are fully verifiable. Where appropriate, pages are generally marked "undetermined" or "unverifiable" if the Mikkelsons feel there is not enough evidence to either support or disprove a given claim."

The snopes article about this Obama email sites a dozen sources, two of which are from Obama's own autobiographies. Again and with all seriousness, please follow the link (and pass it on). Just in case you don't pass it on, I have taken the liberty to copy every email in the forwarded email that you initially sent me. For once, you did me a favor by failing to delete all that junk preceding the email's body (I hate scrolling through that mess!). And so, if you are reading this email, wondering who in the world is "williamsra82" and why is she writing me---I got your email from my sister's forwarding of the Barack email.

Love ya Sis

Have a great week!

Rachel

(Following is the orginal email to which Rachle is responding.)

Subj: Fwd: Who is Barack Obama?

Who is Barack Obama?

Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice. If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about itand share it.
We checked this out on "HYPERLINK "http://snopes.com/" \nsnopes.com". It is factual. Check for yourself.

Who is Barack Obama? Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was bornin Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia.

When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obamaattended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic School." Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical. Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.

Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama' s mother, Ann Dunham,introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran. Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegience nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.

Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!! Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!!!

My Comment: The above entry is written by my daughter Rachel Williams in response to an email she received from a close family member. The original email, follows her response. Both are printing unedited except for deleting the names and email addresses of the sender. I have encounterd variations of this allegation on numerous web sites and chat groups. Many are trying to create the impression that Obama is some kind of Manchurian Candidate-like radical Muslim. The truth is that for four or five years, starting at age 6, Obama attended Indonesian public schools and Catholic Schools in Indonesia. The public school was not a Madrassas. He was not sworn into office on the Koran. The email is lie upon lie.

Please People: Stop spreading lies.

Good job, Rachel.

Top Stories

Why Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican

By Frances Rice

National Black Republican Association

.

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860's, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950's and 1960's.

(To continue reading: Why Martin Luther King... )

Top Stories

The Candidate Dating Game

My Match?

John McCain ? _______Mike Huckabee?________Chris Dodd??

The NPR web site has a link to four “candidates matching sites.” Each site has a series of questions that you answer and then the site tells you which candidate’s position most closely matches your position. I took all four of the quizzes.

On the Minnesota Public Radio Select a Candidate site I scored an 80% with John McCain, followed by a 50% match with Ron Paul and a 40% with Barack Obama.

According to the Glassbooth Election Quiz, I agree with John McCain 79% of the time which makes him my closest match.

In the Washington Post Choose Your Candidate quiz not all candidates are lumped in the same poll, so I took the Republican version of the quiz and my top choice was Mike Huckabee, followed by John McCain.

On the USA Today Poll my choices were Chris Dodd, followed by Hillary Clinton, and Mike Gravel.

I don’t know exactly what to make of this. I am supporting Fred Thompson, but apparently I seldom agree with him. He was not my match in any of the polls.

The quizzes my not rate highly enough the negatives of a candidate. John McCain was my closest match on two of the quizzes and the runner up on another. I like John McCain but when he said he would have supported the invasion of Iraq even if he did not believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that was reason enough to disqualify him in my view. Despite Mike Huckabee’s being my match on one of the polls, the big negative for Huckabee is his fundamentalist religious views. I am not comfortable with a candidate who wants to ensure the Constitution conforms to God’s law.

I am really surprised that I am most compatible with Chris Dodd, followed by Hillary Clinton and Mike Gravel! What? That is not the Rod Williams I know.

The quizzes do not rate candidates on your judgment of such things as the candidate’s temperament, experience, intelligence, and judgment or the intangible of just "likability".

Let me encourage you to take the quizzes and see if you are really a match with the candidate you are supporting. Leave a comment on this blog. I would be curious if others are surprised by the result. Did the quiz select the candidate you are supporting?


To go to the NPR site and take the quizzes, click the title of this post.

Top Stories

We Need to Amend the Consitution, Bring It in Line with God

By Eric Kleefeld - January 15, 2008, 1:00PM
At a Michigan campaign event last night, Mike Huckabee gave an interesting reason for why he wants to amend the Constitution to ban both abortion and gay marriage: Otherwise, the Constitution would be in conflict with God.

Huckabee first observed that some of his opponents don't want to amend the Constitution on both of these topics. "But I believe it's a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God," Huckabee said. "And that's what we need to do, is to amend the Constitution so it's in God's standards rather than try to change God's standards."

My Comment: While I oppose both abortion and gay marriage, I do not think it wise or fruitful to pursue a constitutional amendment to address either issue. I am concerned about Huckabee's advocacy of amending the Constitution to deal with these two issues, but I am more concerned about his desire to "amend the Constitution so it's in God's standard." What other constitutional amendments would Huckabee advocate to bring the Constitution in line with God's standard? According to Southern Baptist doctrine, God opposes the use of alcohol; would Huckabee bring back prohibition? A society that conforms to God's law would not be a free society. I am not so sure I want a Southern Baptist minister to be our President.

Top Stories

Conspiracy Theory: John McCain’s Wife’s Illuminati Connection

I am intrigued by conspiracy theories. Could the moon landing have really been a hoax? What is really hidden at Roswell? Did Lyndon Johnson have Kennedy killed so he could be President? Is the reason we have a drug problem in the Black community because the CIA planned it? Did the Government blow up the dikes to cause the flooding in New Orleans?

I think that sometimes events seem so outrageous that it is hard to believe that they are just random occurrences and some people need explanations to give life meaning. Other people, like the 9/11 truthers and Holocaust deniers, are just “crazy as hell” if not simply evil.

I was a teen when JFK was shot and for a while I devoured the JFK assassination conspiracy books. Then during the Goldwater campaign of 1964 I became a politically aware teenager and I read the book None Dare Call it Treason. The thesis of the book was that the foreign policy blunders that weakened the US in the Cold War, such as the loss of China, were not mere blunders but were betrayals by Communist and their fellow travelers within our own government. I am not sure how much of what was in that book was true and how much was speculation and conjecture, but I was influenced by that book as well as the JFK assassination books. Later I learned that there is a step beyond this level of conspiracy theory that ties all of history into a nice bundle.

As a young conservative in the late 60’s and early 70’s, I naturally became acquainted with the John Birch society. They are still around, but were much more influential during the fifties and sixties and seventies. Much of the analysis and material they produced appeared to be mainstream, quality, anti-Communist and conservative analysis. However, as I began to know some John Birchers, and read more of their material, it became clear that the Birchers were nuts. It was from the Birchers I first learned of the “big explanation” that explains everything.

One of the Birchers most popular books, was an attempt to benefit from the popularity of the None Dare Call it Treason book. This book, None Dare Call it Conspiracy, laid out the “big” picture and explained what was really happening in the world. These many years later, I am not certain that all I know about the big conspiracy was in the None Call it Conspiracy book or from other sources but the big conspiracy goes something like this: About the time of the enlightenment, an organization called the Illuminati was formed to manage the evolving chaos taking place in the world. The old order was passing away and democracy and other enlightenment ideals were flourishing. The Illuminati were an elite of enlightenment thinkers who wanted an orderly universe and did not want to loose power. They could not necessarily stop events from happening but they could shape them. The Illuminati evolved overtime to this loose collection of people who are now called “the insiders”.

The insiders are the ones controlling events and they span the globe. In America, Democrat or Republican it does not matter, the Insiders control both parties. The American Revolution, the French Revolution, The American Civil War, World War I, and World War II and other conflicts were all plots to manipulate the world. These events did not just happen, the insiders either allowed them to happen or caused them to happen. The insiders were not Communist, but they financed Communism and exerted authority over the Communist leaders who were their puppets and they allowed Communism to achieve success.

Some of the most famous insiders are the Bilderbergs, the Rothchilds, and the Rockefellers. The biggest current insider organizations are the Council on Foreign Relations and the Tri-lateral Commission. Also, the United Nations is a useful tool of the insiders. “The New World Order” is the plan of the insiders to reorganized the way the world functions.

Variations of the big conspiracy theory include the roll of the Catholic Church and Masons. Read much of this conspiracy stuff and you realize that radical right and radical left merge in the world of conspiracy nuts. Both share a lot of the same conspiracies. The right-wing kooks are actually often at odds with a lot of conservative principles. They are generally against free trade and rant a lot about “international bankers” and “Globalist”.

I recently came across this bit of information that is floating around the Internet and thought you might find it entertaining. It seems that Hillary Clinton has been wearing a gold lapel pin that features an Eagle clutching a single pearl. Also, more and more women in the Clinton circle have been wearing the same pin. According to the conspiracist, this is really an Illuminati emblem and Hillary and all of these Hillary women are brazenly wearing it.

Well recently, [OK, now for scary part: if you know it, imagine the Twilight Zone theme music (do-do-do-do, do-do-do-do). Ready?], John McCain’s wife has been seen wearing the same pin. (To read all about it: Senator John McCain Signals… )

Top Stories