Wasn't the outrage supposed to be about Russia? Or Stormy Daniels? Oh, I forgot. That was yesterday.
Today, we are asked to believe that parental child abuse is okay as long as you are an illegal immigrant from south of the U.S. border. Putting a child alone on a train, or with a chaperone who knows little about the child, or on a forced march where exposure, dehydration, rape, drugs and violence are epidemic, but bypassing every legal means to avoid such dangers, is commendable? Seriously? You actually believe that? If U.S. citizens did the same with their children, no matter their income or education level, they would be prosecuted for child abuse. Would not the child be taken from them for the sake of the child?
Do these parents from other countries not know better, or not understand the difference between legal and illegal behavior, or moral versus immoral? How insulting to them to suggest they are that dumb. Or is it that they don't care about their children's welfare, which is equally insulting to them. Or are they just too stupid to understand the larger issue? How about those who send their children without any parental supervision? Is that, too, okay, provided they are stupid and acting illegally? Is that not equally insulting? Are they targets of political oppression? If so, how? Or are they so economically desperate that they can't think at all? If so, how can they afford the expensive journey? Last I heard, the mules charge between $6,000 and $15,000 for a one-way ticket. What do we tell those who are even more economically depressed in North Africa and the Middle East? Why are there such things as laws, anyway? Should we all ignore them?
Help me here. I'm running out of obvious questions to ask. I've read that children have died on their pilgrimmage to the U.S. I don't doubt it. It is hearbreaking. And maddening. Is that the fault of the U.S.? If so, why? Would they have died if not for the journey? Let me know since your heart is so big and open and your mind so sharp. Mine aren't dull. Perhaps we can discuss this civilly. As for the heartbreak, it is not my fault or yours, or theirs. Let's set that aside, agreeing that we both feel the heartache.
Lots of children around the world face hard times, in the U.S. and elsewhere Every caring soul feels a sense of urgency. That's the starting point, not the conclusion. So what's the conclusion, other than a borderless world? What is your view on taxes on social safety nets? I'm willing to go back to the 18th and 19th centuries, or beyond, if you want, but we will need to give up on tax-supported relief and personal income taxes, which didn't exist back in those foregone centuries. Ask any mountain man or pioneer from those days. They will give you the same answer. Every person for themselves, and God bless you along your journey. Only, religious groups didn't go along with that philosophy. Instead, they created more eleemosynary institutions (i.e., charities) in the U.S. than the world had ever seen. They determined to help those who seemed unable to help themselves. One can hardly call the U.S. a heartless nation. At least, not based on facts. So tell me which way you want to go. I have an open mind.
Ugh. Talk about soft bigotry. Take your nose out of the clouds and get real. People may be poor, or even less educated than you, but they aren't as stupid as you imply they are. Say it to their faces if you really believe it. Tell them how stupid they are for subjecting their children to such a brutal journey, but that you still believe in them and accept their ignorant and illegal behavior, what with you being the enlightened person in the room. Yeah, that's the ticket. Then be prepared to live up personally to the principles on which your argument is based. An under-educated thief may soon come your way, perhaps with gun in hand. Explain it to him. Or travel to the inner city and explain it to them all. I bet you won't, and don't. Life is complicated. Much more complicated than you seem willing to admit.
To hold such views, you've got to pretend not to know a lot of things.
Such as this:
Listen to this interview of a border patrol spokesman who is questioned by Brooke Baldwin on CNN. I know she wishes she had not asked such vapid questions, but, hey, if she wants the paycheck, she must stick with the corporate meme. We've all been there in one way or another. You do what the boss says, or else. The guy answering her question has all the appearances -- in the minds of some-- to be an easy mark ... a poorly-educated but well-meaning southwestern buffoon who can be taken down easily ... and it appears that way at first. But then he gets his feet under him and all she can do is search for a graceful way to exit the interview. I give her credit for revealing her heart. Eventually she recognizes he has just sunk her boat. Listen:
If the video fails to work, here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGuSdXiFtLk
2014 — Obama admin relaxes their procedures for vetting “sponsors” of unaccompanied minors, thus facilitating human trafficking rings.
Start at 12:00 to see what the Obama admin did to facilitate human trafficking;
https://www.pbs.org/video/trafficked-in-america-pppgmt/
1. Stopped fingerprinting “sponsors” who picked up unaccompanied minors illegally entering the country
2. Then stopped requiring certified birth certificates of sponsors
3. Then stopped doing FBI background checks of sponsors
RESULT — Criminal network, including illegal aliens in United States acting as sponsors to receive minors, induced to come to USA from Guatemala — parents had to pay $15000 to smuggler, and forced mortgaging their home as ransom. Responsible parents ???? No violence excuse — just wanted to have more income, so they sent their son into serf labor.
The egg factory, supplying 2 billion eggs, “had no idea” that teen slave labor was working in their chicken barns and were not even fined.
http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-leader-to-be-sentenced-in-ohio-egg-farm-forced-labor-case-2016-6h/t: Fred5678, quoting from the comments section at The Last Refuge.
Obama is out of office in 2016. Hillary is supposed to win, but doesn't. She would have hidden the problem. Donald Trump now inherits what Obama left behind. Those problems, heretofore unmentioned, now become politically useful. Useful how? Easy. Blame those problems on Trump and go after him tooth and claw. Make it bloody. The bloodier the better. And don't stop, not now or in the future, until someone loses. That's how it works. The MSM announces one Trump outrage after another. Collusion. Obstruction. Nuclear war with North Korea. Russia. Muehler indictments of anonymous Russians. Russia. Russia in Syria. Russia yet again. Stormy Daniels. Stormy Daniels. Okay, Stephanie Clifford, aka Stormy Daniels. Abuse of Melania. The horror of tariffs. Trudeau's hurt feelings. Manafort's manslaughters. This week it's (Obama's) immigration policy. Naturally, Trump caused them all. Who else? Pro tip: You can turn off the TV any time you choose.
Now, let's move forward.
If you want to get down in the weeds on the illegal immigration problem, and if you have time to watch a Frontline video, go here. It will help explain why Obama's "catch and release" program was so cruel and actually promoted child trafficking. I don't blame him personally, since he never did border patrol. I blame his opportunist and immoral politics of immigration, and all those who supported it, and all those who support it still. I also blame parents who willfully subject their children to these abuses. Thank God someone like Donald Trump wants to put an end to it by enforcing the laws that few in Congress seem willing to change. And if not him, it's Stormy Daniels to the rescue. Who doesn't need a porn star in this time of need? Yes, folks, that's the bullet the congressional Dems still have in their chamber. Let that sink in.
Abraham Lincoln had a solution to this problem: If you want to get rid of a bad law, enforce it strictly.
Trump agrees. Throw it back into the laps of those empowered to create law, not into the lap of the person entrusted to enforce it if Congress won't change it. Chuck Schumer disagrees. He claims Trump is a dictator who usurps power and oversteps his bounds. Yet he prefers that Trump fix this problem with an unconstitutional executive order rather than Schumer and his colleagues fixing the problem by taking "tough votes" to change the law. In other words, Schumer wants the alleged dictatorial President to be even more dictatorial. Honestly, you can't make this stuff up. Schumer's rationale is gob-smackingly cynical. Is this the guy you want representing the best interests of helpless children (or others who claim to be seventeen, have no parent with them, and don't even look like a teen)?
BTW, Trump obliged Schumer by writing an executive order (EO) to fix the problem. Keep families together, adjudicate the issue quickly, and then send home all who are not forced from their homes for political reasons, except for children who entered the U.S. alone, in which case they must be protected until a good and moral solution can be found. What's not to like about that?
Of course, Dem operatives will sue Trump over the EO, basically on the grounds that it does not allow for catch and release, much as Obama had done. Trump knows this will happen. He will be defeated in court just as Obama was defeated on DAPA. Trump knows as much. Once this happens, it goes back into the lap of Schumer and his elected colleagues in Congress, few of whom want to make a "tough vote." Yet Schumer and his colleagues have been elected to enact good laws. The Dems are now in trouble. They either must work with Republicans for a better law, or else they hoist themselves upon their own petard. See how that works?
If you want to dig deeper into why "the D.C. Swamp" is so swampy, kick back some evening and start here. If you have no interest in doing your homework, please don't waste my time responding to this post. At least know your facts. Otherwise, listen and learn.
This child-abuse-at-the-border hysteria promoted by D.C. Dems and the MSM is being destroyed for the hypocrisy it is. It got your mind off the I.G.'s report, though, didn't it? So it may have worked for the time being. However, the ongoing outrage-du-jour is falling apart. A new false flag will need to be raised in the weeks to come.
Here's one future "outrage" already in the planning stages: a white supremacist rally across from the White House. Permitting already has been granted for the rally, which is scheduled for sometime this summer.
Hmm. Permit granted? That's interesting in and of itself.
Jason Kessler, who organized the Charlottesville, VA white nationalist event that created a national outrage, is the ring-leader of the planned protest. Anyone who has researched Kessler's past knows he is a hired gun by the left. Kessler a white nationalist? Seriously? Read his bio. Study his past. If you don't think the Charlottesville incident was orchestrated, just read up on how the police forced the "white nationalists" to leave their permitted area of protest by a single narrow exit, right into the face of opposing forces, then stood down when violence broke out. Or why so many of the media were "Johnny-on-the-spot" when the rest of America knew nothing about this "main event," including the citizens of Charlottesville. Better yet, query why one of the first "innocent bystanders" who was interviewed happened to be a fellow (the PBS version) who worked overseas for the C.I.A. but just happened to be in Charlottesville standing in front of a camera near the action, near a camera that just happened to be near him, and he is "the fellow" that PBS chose to bring on their show. Funny how that works. Purely coincidental. I'm sure.
Go look it up yourself. Then dig deeper into the fellow himself, Brennan Gilmore. It doesn't take much effort.
Now Kessler is back at it, working with organizers and funders whose names we probably will never get to know. His job is to bring together a mob of useful idiots and create another Charlottesville incident, only this time in D.C. near the White House. I imagine the white nationalists will have signs indicating their support of Trump. And, yes, a mob of useful idiots will be organized to oppose Kessler's group. Useful idiots, full of piss and vinegar, can easily be found of any side of a social issue. And if you pay them to participate, all the better. All you need is a few violent instigators mixed in among them. Then it will be every man for himself. It will be a carefully orchestrated event with the goal of creating havoc so that someone get's hurt. Violence and death make for great TV. Cameras will be on the ready. Democrats and the MSM will be prepared -- on cue, and with talking points in hand -- to claim that Trump not only condones the violence but inspires it. It's what is known as a false flag event. The CIA has been doing it for decades. Soviets and Chinese do the same. It's not to say their intentions were bad, but their methods have been downright brutal. Start with Mossaddegh in Iran in the early 1950s and work your way forward to Quaddafi in Libya and Assad in Syria. Or jump back to the overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in the 1950's when bananas were the issue. You won't be disappointed. I spent time in Nicaragua and El Salvador in the 1980s, wanting better to understand the violence in those regions. Foreign intervention is not a new concept to me. Nor is political intervention on the homefront.
Did you happen to notice how the MSM and Washington Democrats were prepared to be outraged -- on cue, and with identical talking points -- when the pics showed up online last week alleging that Trump was the cause of child immigrant abuse. Every TV pundit was enraged. And all of them -- on cue -- failed to mention that the pics were taken during Obama's tenure, not Trump's, and that what occurred during Obama's tenure was far less humane and caring than what Trump is trying to do. If you think it's "all about the children," you simply don't understand Washington Democrats and their MSM mouthpieces (silently abetted by establishment Republicans). Unfortunately, their horror story is falling apart, all due to facts. The pivot to a new outrage soon will be needed. Trust me, these folks think ahead. The permit already has been pulled. A new outrage is in the pipeline. It's coming our way soon. Perhaps on the heels of the DOJ IG's report on FISA court abuse. We will see.
Just wanted to give you a heads up.
P.S.
A study recently done at S.M.U. identified psychopathy by state. Among other things, the study concluded:
Areas of the United States that are measured to be most psychopathic are those in the Northeast and other similarly populated regions. The least psychopathic are predominantly rural areas. The District of Columbia is measured to be far more psychopathic than any individual state in the country, a fact that can be readily explained either by its very high population density or by the type of person who may be drawn [to] a literal seat of power...
Does it surprise anyone that Washington, D.C. came out on top?
West Virginia, where I spent ten happy years of my youth, came out near the bottom, i.e., least psychopathic. If I may generalize, West Virginians tend to be smart, except by Ivy League standards. Some of my W. Va. friends disagree with my politics, on one issue or another, as I disagree with theirs, but we don't threaten one another with bodily harm. At worst, we cuss and argue amongst ourselves in hopes of an agreeable solution.
It's called the free exchange of ideas.
I like that.
