Patriots On Our Borders & Security At Home

Well, the Minuteman Project is at it again!

I would like to take this opportunity to thank these bold patriots for forcing this on-the-ground approach into the national debate.

Although they are certainly unable--at the moment--to patrol our entire southern border, they've chosen one of the highest traffic areas for illegals, rolled up their sleeves, and gone to work, well aware that their greatest achievement will probably be to put pressure on the politicians who have refused to do the job that they were elected to do.

The usual whiners are out in force.

"Hispanic" and "Immigrant 'rights'" groups are complaining that the Minutemen are "racist". (If you look carefully, you'll find that most groups throwing that term around are actually racist themselves, and are often expressing their racist sentiments by screaming "racist" at anyone who isn't)

The media is delighting in referring to the project as "controversial"--which, for those of you who haven't caught on yet, usually means "bad" in mediaspeak--and conjuring up horror stories of what these dangerous people could do--unlike the "peaceful" Arabic Muslim creeping over the border with drugs and explosives.

President Bush, not content to keep federal forces from protecting our borders, has openly opposed the project, calling the patriotic volunteers "vigilantes".

In case you missed the memo, "eternal vigilance is the price of freedom".

Has anyone else figured out why President Bush opposes securing our borders?

I have.

I'll be nice and give the President the benefit of the doubt that his intentions do not involve another successful terrorist attack, but one thing that they do involve is power.

Power from two different angles:

First, he wants to keep the "Hispanic" community (especially the illegal portion--after all, they vote too!) voting Republican. (He has managed to pick up some support among their ranks.)

This is the "gotta keep my Party in power" mentality.

Second, he wants terrorists to make it across the border so that he can catch them using his pet project, the so-called "Patriot Act". Why? Because he needs a trophy that he can hold up every so often to keep too many people from seriously questioning this tremendous power-grab.

Now, I understand that the Democrats are, for the most part, screaming bloody murder over the wiretaps, the "Patriot Act", and other similar Bush projects, but try to understand; they don't mean to be right, they're just doing what they have to in order to keep themselves opposed to the Republican Party so that the people won't notice the two working toward the same goal: absolute control of the American people.

Thus, they violate our constitutional rights, claiming that it's necessary to do so in order to "keep us safe," while at the same time they refuse to take the most basic legal security measures--enforcing our immigration laws and deporting violators immediately.

Benjamin Franklin once noted that "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

And as I recall, it was on this Thursday (March 23) in 1775 that the great American patriot Patrick Henry uttered the immortal words:

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me; give me liberty, or give me death!"

It's time a few more of us spoke up with words to that effect, and demonstrated to these politicians that we will no longer be made slaves to our own government under the pretense of "security".

Let us remember the advice from Patrick Henry that we have failed to remember, let us remember, repair the damage, and forget no more:

"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."

Guns and the Commoners

I caught a portion of a program the other day supposedly about "vigilantism". Admittedly, the program did a fair job in distinguishing (at first) between the true vigilantes and the KKKesque groups and individuals who have come to be falsely associated with vigilante groups in recent times.

Then the program took an ugly--if somewhat predictable--turn.

It presented with much glee the story of a Japanese exchange student who had wandered off at night, gotten lost and killed. He was apparently in the front yard of a house where he supposedly planned on asking directions. The homeowner was alerted to someone in the front yard and responded reasonably--by taking his gun out and ordering the man to stop.

The story goes that the exchange student "didn't understand" the order and kept coming. The man fired.

Any accidental killing is tragic, and even if the slightly suspect story (I'll comment on that if someone asks) is perfectly true and complete, it serves best as a warning to be careful when wandering around at night, or at least to be hypersensitive to homeowners coming out of their homes with guns and yelling in a foreign language--things that most of us were either told as children or had the great perception to learn on the spot if we ever encountered such a situation. (Which most of us haven't.)

But what did the producers of the TV show do? Unsurprisingly, they gleefully held the story up as an example of why private citizens should not be allowed to have and use guns!

They somehow failed to mention the many vicious and very un-accidental murders that have happened because the homeowners were not armed.

They did report a rather happier story--one in which the bad guy took the bullet and no innocents were harmed--but their commentary was pretty dour and limited.

"What if he had missed and hit a bystander?"

Of course, the police never do that! Notice, the question "what if an armed citizen hadn't been present?" is never asked. That's because we know what happens when an armed citizen isn't present!

Take a look at the evening news, and chances are that you'll see the results of a chronic shortage of armed citizens!

Anybody ever heard the phrase "an armed society is a polite society"? It's true.

The propaganda here is certainly anti Second Amendment, but it is also elitist. "Don't defend yourself...leave it to the 'experts'."

The police are not legally obligated to protect everyone, and they couldn't even if they were.

This is yet another way in which most Americans are all too willing to surrender freedom in exchange for a (false) sense of security, an action which Benjamin Franklin said renders them unfit for either.

Why don't we ever hear about the school shootings that are stopped by citizens with guns? (Roughly 1-2/3 of public school shootings in the past have been.)

Why don't we hear about the abject terror that so many people have suffered--often before they eventually died--because they didn't have a gun handy when they needed one?

Because the truth tends to hurt communist regimes. Freedom isn't too popular with the elitist crowd. They want power. Control over the common swine--by that they mean you and I.

The best way to do that is (and this comes straight from the Comintern--the now vanished organization that was charged years ago with spreading communist rule around the world) is to create "systematic chaos"; to cause society to become terrified of itself--enough so that it would accept an elitist ruling class in the name of "safety" and "security".

It's up to us to take a stand for freedom!

Enough Is Enough!

Has anyone else been flooded with these obnoxious "Gov Funding--Millions in Grants David Get Your Share" eMails?

Sure, we all get SPAM and we all hate it, but this particular type gets on my nerves more than most.

The problem is that there is some truth to these claims. The government is giving away our hard-earned money to who-knows-who for doing who knows what! (Taking courses, buying a computer, starting a business, or doing nothing at all!)

There are people out there with the gall to promote this kind of theft as if it's a great thing! Imagine what would happen if in the wake of any disaster--Katrina in New Orleans or any other "potential looter" situation--someone started advertising "free stuff; come and get your share!"?

Yet we have people (one in particular who I won't name--you know who I'm talking about) who actually make their living--scratch that--make their fortune by writing books and giving seminars telling us how to rob our fellow Americans through the corrupt government extortion system!

Of course, these folks are probably just following the lead of their politician buddies. Is anyone else fed up with politicians running for re-election and bragging about how much loot they've been able to bring back from the pillaging of America? Oh, I'm sorry--it's called "securing federal funding for local projects"!

Like that bridge to nowhere in Alaska.

Does anyone remember that this is money that has been stolen from hardworking American citizens by an immoral taxation scheme designed to keep corrupt politicians in power? (Primarily by forcing the people to rely on the government for as much as possible, then buying votes: "Elect me and I'll bring more federal money to this state!")

I think it's time that we said "enough's enough! We don't care what party you belong to, if you fail to oppose federal pork of all kinds--including these wonderful government-grants-for-buying-a-car--we will replace you with someone who will!"

It's not "federal" money--it's ours, and it's time that we reminded everyone of that fact!