From: Dale Long (e-mail him)
Re: Peter Brimelow's Column: A Modest (?) Proposal
Nearly fifteen years ago, Brimelow suggested that we annex Baja California. The idea is more attractive today than when he first introduced it in 1995. But I propose expanding Brimelow's concept to include all of Mexico.
After all, the U.S. government has nothing to show for the billions in bailouts to the various banks and the trillions in deficits. At least if it bought Mexico, we'd have something to show for our expenditures. And we can count on the corrupt Mexican government's willingness to eagerly accept our offer.
If Mexico were our 51st state, we would acquire their oil fields, their coastal properties and could get eradicate the drug and gun problems on both sides of the border without any diplomatic back and forthing.
And a recently-added benefit: we would be better able to contain the swine flu within Mexico without risking infection among the rest of the lower 48 states.
Since it doesn't appear that the U.S. is ever going to get serious about dealing with the illegal alien nightmare, we might actually get something out of the deal.
The benefits for residents in the US and Mexico would far outweigh the drawbacks.
Long is a graphic designer.
Peter Brimelow comments: Mexico, of course, is also the largest source of legal immigrants to the U.S.—creating a post-1965 immivasion of such historic proportions and implications that we've dubbed it the "Mexodus".
When I was on the road with Alien Nation in 1995, an interviewer for one of the Arizona newspapers (can't find his article, alas) asked me why I had written made my modest buy-Baja proposal. It just discredits you, he said. Sigh. I guess that's what you get for thinking out of the box.
So here's some more out-of-the-boxness: I now think it's just a matter of time before U.S. troops are deployed as "peacekeepers" in our corrupt and collapsing narco-neighbor to the south. We should get something out of it.
Sounds improbable? How probable did the collapse of the Soviet Union seem back in 1995?
From: Richard Bass (e-mail him)
I am a member of a student group at Purdue University campus, the Conservative Coalition for American Values.
The previous day we had booked a part of campus in order to distribute fliers to the student body about her upcoming speech. Instead of having the space to ourselves, we were confronted by the Purdue University chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine who claimed they had the area reserved.
This was false. We had reserved the space via the proper channels well in advance.
Then, to make it even more interesting, Associate Dean of Students Pablo Malavenda stepped in and said that we had to leave, since we were "disturbing" the SJP's memorial (a flag memorial which used the deaths of Palestinians in the recent Gaza conflict for political gain).
Although we were able to produce the proper paperwork to the Assistant Dean, he dismissed the whole affair as a "technical glitch."
Here's Darwish's account:
"I have encountered some of the most radical students at the audience at Purdue who said that I should never be allowed to speak… all they cared about [was] defending the indefensible and denying any kind of violation for human rights done in the name of Islam and Sharia."
Even after living under Sharia law for 47 years, Darwish expressed shock that:
"Not one [SJP] student said that [he or she] was offended by the stoning of women and by the violations of human rights by both Muslims and non-Muslims who live under Sharia Law. I see the culture of hate and anti-Semitism that I grew up with in the Muslim world moving to U.S. campuses." [Conservative Student Group Says Purdue Denied Free Speech, Defended Radical Group, by Caroline Shelby, Lafayette Online News, April 22, 2009]
From: J.J. McDonnell (e-mail him)
Re: Today's Letter: A Pennsylvania Democrat Says "Ho Hum" To Arlen Specter's Party Switch
Letter writer D. F. Whipple failed to mention that Specter's biggest problem is unsolvable. He's a weak candidate no matter which party he represents. And Specter has flip-flopped between Democrat and Republican his entire career.
Moving to the Democratic Party to keep his Senate seat proves how desperate Specter is and gives off the foul stench of a man who wants something too much—specifically his Senate seat. In most cases that gives voters pause and makes the opposing candidate—in this case former Republican Congressman Pat Toomey—automatically look better.
Specter knew that because of voter disgust with him, he couldn't win the Republican primary in 2010. Rather than standing on principle and fighting, Specter ran to the other side in the hope of saving himself. The latest Rasmussen Reports poll has Toomey leading Specter by 21 points in the primary. That was all the "principle" Specter needed to bolt.
Here's what RNC Chairman Michael Steele had to say:
"Some in the Republican Party are happy about this. I am not. Let's be honest-Senator Specter didn't leave the GOP based on principles of any kind. He left to further his personal political interests because he knew that he was going to lose a Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record. Republicans look forward to beating Sen. Specter in 2010, assuming the Democrats don't do it first."
Specter admits that he's frantic to hang on.
"I am not prepared to have my 29-year record in the United States Senate decided by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate—not prepared to have that record decided by that jury." [Specter Switches Parties; More Heft for Democrats, by Carl Hulse and Adam Nagourney, New York Times, April 28, 2009]
In addition, nearly forty-five years ago, Specter was Philadelphia's District Attorney. Other Specter bids to become Philadelphia's mayor, Pennsylvania's governor and U.S. president were soundly defeated. A new face in the Senate is long overdue.
Last but certainly not least, Specter never votes with us on immigration so what does it matter regarding the National Question which side of the aisle he sits on?
McDonnell is retired from what he describes as "a very high level" position in municipal government at a major American city. His previous letter proposing Mitt Romney for Treasury Secretary is here.
From: Beverly Tyler (e-mail her)
Specter's decision to move to the Democratic Party pleases me.
The Grand Old Party will not return to being a major political force until it abandons its ill-conceived philosophy of being a Big Tent Party.
I firmly believe this even though the Democrats are inching their way to having a 60-vote filibuster proof majority if Minnesota's Al Franken is seated, at the expense, I might note of yet another traitorous RINO, Norm Coleman.
Tyler is a supermarket cashier. Her previous letter about Pennsylvania's Access card and immigrant welfare fraud it allows is here.