AlterNet: Sean McElwee: ‘The Case For Censoring Hate Speech’

Censorship

Source:The New Democrat– Censorship, is Un-American and Un-liberal democratic

“For the past few years speech has moved online, leading to fierce debates about its regulation. Most recently, feminists have led the charge to purge Facebook of misogyny that clearly violates its hate speech code. Facebook took a small step two weeks ago, creating a feature that will remove ads from pages deemed “controversial.” But such a move is half-hearted; Facebook and other social networking websites should not tolerate hate speech and, in the absence of a government mandate, adopt a European model of expunging offensive material.”

Read the rest of Sean McElWee’s piece here AlterNet

This piece was originally posted at The FreeState MD

“Last week the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the right of the hate-mongering Westboro Baptist Church to disturb the funerals of servicemen with homophobic protests — a reflection of their belief that the US government should be punished for tolerating homosexuality. The Court’s 8-1 ruling, invoking the First Amendment’s protection of free speech, ended the efforts of Albert Snyder to collect damages for the emotional distress inflicted on him by the Westboro hate mob, who had carried “God hates fags” and “Thank God for dead soldiers” placards at the funeral of his son, Marine Lance Cpl Matthew Snyder. In the same week, In Britain, Emdadur Choudhury of Muslims Against Crusades was fined £50 for causing harassment, harm and distress through calculated and deliberate insult for burning two poppies during the 2 minutes commemorative silence on November 11th 2009. And John Galliano, the one-time Dior designer, has been charged in Paris for racial insult after a video emerged in which he proclaimed his love for Hitler. He could spend 6 months in jail and a fine of $30,000. How should democracies deal with hateful speech? Is the muscular American free-speech fundamentalism preferable to its protective, molly-coddling European counterpart?”

From IQ Squared

Hate speech_ better American fundamentalism than European censorship

Source:IQ Squared– IQ Squared debate about hate speech and free speech.

When you live in a liberal democracy take like America you should be aware that most of the things that you receive in life aren’t free. That you are one of today three-hundred twenty-million people and that we simply do not see things the same way. And all live in our different factions, or cultures, or cliques, however you want to put it. And what may sound like the truth to you, may sound like hate speech to someone else. But since we are a liberal democracy we all have the freedom of thought and speech. As long as we aren’t acting on these ideas that could physically hurt innocent people, or put them in danger.

The First Amendment like the Second Amendment or the Fourth Amendment and all our constitutional amendments are not absolute. Meaning they can be regulated, but not to the point that they limit individuals in how they live their own lives. For you can say whatever you want and think whatever you want. But you can’t order someone to be killed or physically assaulted without a price for that. You can own a gun in America, but you can’t use that gun to murder someone. We all have the right to privacy to protect law enforcement from breaking into our homes without just-cause. But if they have good reason to believe that someone’s health or life is in danger, they can break the door down to save that innocent person. And if they believe you are at fault, they can arrest you.

Since freedom is not free that means we have to put up with sometimes even things that we do not like, including speech. That you are free to live your own life. But so is everyone else whose not incarcerated. So they may do things or believe in things that may offend you and you have the right to disagree with them. And take another side, but you cannot stop them from what they are doing or what they believe in. Simply because you do not like what they believe in and what they said.

The First Amendment is a perfect example of that. As long as we aren’t inciting violence or threatening to hurt or kill innocent people. Or yelling fire in crowded spaces when that fire doesn’t exist, we are free to believe in and say what we think. Which is what makes our country a liberal democracy. Along with our other constitutional rights, as other countries are a little more statist and collectivist and put more authority and faith in the state over the individual.

As far as I’m concern if you do not believe in freedom of thought and speech and choice more broadly than just abortion, you are not a Liberal. You cannot be a Liberal if you do not believe in a high degree of personal freedom. When you put the state over the individual when it comes to personal freedom, you are not a Liberal, but more of a Statist. Even if you are pro-choice on abortion, marijuana and sexuality.

If your idea of liberalism is that it is the job of the state to protect people from having to see or hear things that may offend them, than you are not a Liberal. And sound more like a Religious-Conservative, or some other type of Statist, than you do a Liberal. And even if we were to outlaw hate speech, good luck with that with our first amendment, who would be the judge of what is and what isn’t hate speech. Partisan right and left-wing ideologues who see it as their job to eliminate speech they disagree with. While they are protecting the speech that they want. Which is what would happen in our current divided political system and culture.

Liberal democracy is all about freedom of speech, thought and expression. Again as long as we aren’t threatening to physically harm or kill people or inciting violence and yelling fire in public places. Which gives Americans the right to be, quite frankly assholes, as long as they aren’t physically threatening people. Which is why we have freedom of speech as well as hate crime laws. So people do not have the right to physically harm to kill others because they simply to not like them because they are bigots. One of the differences between living in a liberal democracy and some type of authoritarian state. Where you can be arrested for your own views.

Posted in Alter Net, FreeState MD | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Young Turks: Cenk Uygur: ‘Harry Reid Full Of Cat Shit On Filibuster Nuclear Option’: Bipartisan Bullshit Strikes Again

Source:Free State MD

I was watching a little of C-SPAN today before I went bike riding and went out and did what I needed to do. Why, because I’m a political junky whose interested in other things than the George Zimmerman case. And actually interested in important news that affects the country and that makes me un-American than so be it. C-SPAN was showing a debate in the U.S. Senate and for all of you Zimmerman trial junkies who are perhaps reading this blog by accident, thinking this was also about George Zimmerman, one turn off your TV.

And perhaps take a look out in the world and see what else is going on. But C-SPAN is the network that covers the United States Congress and other current affairs events that are going on the country. And C-SPAN was showing an old Senate debate from 2005 when the then Senate Republican majority and the last one that they’ve had wanted to eliminate the filibuster on executive appointments. I was watching this old Senate debate and couldn’t, but help notice the hypocrisy on both sides.

If I had to guess there was more hypocrisy coming from the Republican side led by then Senate Assistant Leader Mitch McConnell. Who is now of course the Minority Leader a job he’s had since 2007 when Democrats took control of Congress. And if I had to bet there’s probably more hypocrisy coming from Senate Republicans than Democrats. But if this were some crazy contest it would be a nail biter. I mean it would be like trying to decide which is redder, or the red apple or tomato? How would you and besides why would you care?

Neither side has been very responsible here. But guess what, this is Congress and why would the Senate be responsible anyway, they don’t work for a living. Neither does the House of Representatives in too many cases as well. But the same people led by Mitch McConnell today Senator Orin Hatch and Senator Jeff Sessions all members of the Judiciary Committee and then Senate Leader Bill Frist who first proposed the so-called nuclear-option, are now saying this is a power grab by Senate Democrats and they’re the ones being unfair.

“Sure if we do this, we’re acting in the best interest of our party, I mean country. But when the other side does it, it is a complete abuse of power and unconstitutional”. I mean seriously anyone who is actually familiar with Congress, still wondering why they have a ten-percent approval rating? And who are these ten-percent anyway? Any of them not living in mental hospitals and not in comas. Perhaps whoever does these polls, counts dead people. You know, the way they vote in Illinois, Louisiana and New Jersey.

Where do Congress people come up with these labels? “We’re saying the Democratic obstructionism is out of control. And we need to do away with the filibuster? Are now saying that “the filibuster is a check on absolute power in America”. On the Democratic side back in 2005 led by then Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid who is now of course the Leader to go along with Senator Chuck Schumer who is also on the. Judiciary Committee to go along with Senator Jack Reid, Senator Evan Bayh and others, those Democrats were saying eliminating the Senate filibuster would be a power grab.

“We’re saying that eliminating the filibuster would be an abuse of power and go against two-hundred years of Senate tradition and so-forth”. Wait, aren’t these Democrats supposed to be the Liberals, what do they care about tradition? But now they are saying that “the filibuster now represents ruling by minority. With one minority party in this case the Senate Republican Conference led by Mitch McConnell now running and having veto say on how the executive and judicial branches can now operate. When instead they are just supposed to be one voice and a minority voice at that”.

The point being that there’s enough hypocrisy and hypocritical people, to be nice, bullshit artists to be accurate here to form their own national club of bullshit artists. “We’re a club that creates and promotes bullshit across the country”. Apparently the agriculture sector is really struggling and then they need to create this national club, because they aren’t producing enough bullshit. Apparently Winnie the Bull is sick or something.

This club wouldn’t need any other members because all the available spaces would be filled by the United States Senate and an example of why ninety-percent of Americans dislike Congress. Because we have a lot of Senators like this. This whole Senate filibuster debate is all about “do what I say not what I do. Forget about my past record because this is what is important now and what I believe in”. They sound like your parents, right.

Which of course is the easiest near advantage that they can use against the other side and hit them as hard as they can with it until they lose power. Apparently unaware that will be used against them once they are out of power. Rather than doing what is best for the Senate and respecting the true role of the Senate as the upper chamber in Congress and its role in the Federal Government.

Posted in FreeState MD, TYT | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Doc Ludi: High Society (1956) True Love Bing Crosby & Grace Kelly

Source:The Daily Journal

I’ve only seen bits and pieces of High Society, which to me anyway as someone who isn’t at least a full-time movie critic, is a pretty overrated movie. But I kind of like this scene, because Grace plays a somewhat stuck up spoiled young women who doesn’t like her parents that much, especially her father and they don’t approve of her completely. And she wants to get pass that and decides the way to move pass that, is to marry a pretty boring man who no one close to her is crazy about.

And her ex-husband played by Bing Crosby, sees right through that and is telling her, that she could be a special person if she just let her guard down and have feeling for other people’s feelings. Bing’s character was being sort of a constructive critic towards Grace’s character. A new man Tracy’s life played by Grace, Mike Connor played by Frank Sinatra, also sees Tracy’s wall that she has built around herself and tries to knock it down in this movie as well.

The Amazing Grace

The Amazing Grace

Posted in Amazing Grace, Hollywood Goddess, The Daily Journal | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Dan Gillmor: Criticizing CNN: Goodbye to That

Source:FreeState Now

Whatever happened to the Cable News Network which if not was the standard at least when it came to cable news if not TV news in general was a standard that had this mentality of “just the facts” without bias’ or trying to report news with political slants. But reporting exactly what’s going on in the world and what is important that they viewers need to know. About with intelligent professional analysts who explained what these things meant and not trying to tell us what to think.

And lately CNN hasn’t been the Cable News Network, but more like the News Rating Network, perhaps the OMG Report, reporting on everything awesome and tabloid. Or the Everything Awesome Network, trying to compete with E and perhaps what is now called True TV. “How can we make money and compete with FOX News and tabloid news networks”. The George Zimmerman trial is a perfect example of that, but they had the Jodi Arias trial before that. And they seem to have this idea that most Americans aren’t that interested in hard news anymore. And rather know what Kim Kardashian or George Zimmerman had for lunch today. Rather than the turmoil in Egypt the largest country in Arabia experimenting with Democracy for the first time ever.

Is cable news a business? Of course it is, anything that’s done by companies are business’s. And of course CNN along with FNC, MSNBC, ABC News and CBS News have to be profitable in order to stay in business. But not at the expense of real journalism. And of course there’s a market for tabloid and other celebrity journalism. But those networks already exist and we already have a network that devotes its matinée programming to the American justice system. Actually we have several networks like True TV, the Criminal Investigation Network, Investigation Discovery and others.

And these are the cable networks that should be covering tabloid and celebrity news , everything awesome or whatever the hell they want to call it. But not a network that advertises itself as a news network. That use to be the gold standard at least when it came to cable news, but now is looking to find itself and figure out who they want to be after losing viewers to FNC and MSNBC. Time Warner the parent company of CNN already has a cable network that advertises itself as knowing drama. What’s the TNT tagline, “we know drama” and that would be the place for CNN to broadcast the Zimmerman trial and other celebrity news stories. And leave CNN to be the home of hard news in America at least as it relates to cable TV. Where people go to find out what’s going in the world that’s important.

Posted in CNN, FreeState Now | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Associated Press: Egypt’s Army Tightens Grip


Source:FRS FreeState

Political satirist George Carlin had this phrase that voters get who they vote for. So in Egypt’s case they elected with less than a majority a weak President and that’s what they got was a weak President who was unable to take on the military establishment and bring civilian rule to the country. Not as a dictator, but as democratically elected leader. And of course the question would’ve been how democratic would someone who represents the Muslim Brotherhood in a country without any democratic tradition would’ve been.

But the good news is that Egypt will have another chance and hopefully elect for President someone with stronger democratic credentials who’ll assume power and govern Egypt in a responsible way. Which I believe should be the number one goal there with a real Parliament there and a real Constitution to hold the President and his administration accountable in a country of eighty million people with a lot of potential for growth. But I say that hopefully because Egypt doesn’t have much of a track record that indicates they are capable of moving forward.

Posted in AP Video, FRS FreeState | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Russia Today: Thom Hartmann: ‘Time For Congress to Regulate The Supreme Court Clan!’

TH on SCOTUS
Source:Free State MD

This is why I have a hard time respecting a lot of the arguments of todays so-called Progressives, that I call Social Democrats. Because they are so short-sided and go off when they see something they disagree with. And say, “because of this, we must blow up the system and do something different and completely change the ways we do things.” Where was this editorial three weeks ago, or a month ago and why does Thom Hartmann wait until a ruling on the Voting Rights Act from this week, to go off on the Supreme Court? There are short-sightedness on both the lets say further Left and further Right and not saying this only belongs on the Left. But judicial activism as Senator Lindsay Graham whose obviously not a Liberal, but as the Senator said at both Elena Kagan’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing as well as the Sonia Sotomayor, Supreme Court hearing, to quote Senator Graham, “judicial activism are decisions made by courts that someone, or some people disagree with.”

The way our branches of government are supposed to work is that the legislative branch made up of our bicameral Congress of a Senate and House of Representatives, is supposed to do the legislating and oversight over the executive branch. Meaning the administration that the President leads and the judicial branch, our court system where the Supreme Court is our highest court, the executive branch is supposed to enforce the laws that the President and Congress agree to. Both the House and Senate working with the President. And the judicial branch is supposed to interpret the laws what they mean and are they constitutional, or not and. Can overturn laws not based on whether they agree with them, or not, but whether they are constitutional, or not. So in Chief Justice Roberts case who personally disagreed with the 2010 Affordable Care Act, but ruled in favor of it, because he believed it was constitutional. Not that he agreed with the law which is a different thing.

The Supreme Court didn’t throw out the entire Voting Rights Act and rule that as unconstitutional. Which I believe would’ve been judicial activism. Because whether you agree with the law, or not it’s clearly constitutional under the Equal Protection Clause. But what they did was throw out a section of it. That had to do with how the Federal Government regulates state voting laws. And gave Congress the option of rewriting it to fix that law. I disagree with that decision, but it’s not an overreach even though with the makeup of todays Congress. It looks that way with the Republican House probably not bothering to take that up.

Posted in FreeState MD, Russia Today, Thom Hartmann | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

ABC News: Special Report- DOMA Overturned by SCOTUS: Punt on Prop 8

Source:FRS FreeState

If you are a true believer in states rights and just don’t just use that term to push your partisan ideological agenda, but then disagree with states rights when a law is passed that you disagree with, then you should like this decision whether you are personally in favor of same-sex marriage or not. Because this is a pro-federalist position, because it says that marriage is still a states issue. That the Federal Government has no business in interfering with how states regulate marriage.

If you are a defender of the Equal Protection Clause which I clearly am as a Liberal, then you should like this decision, because it says that government state or federal can’t discriminate against people simply based on their sexuality gay or straight. That when you pass a law that says straights can get married, but gays can’t, you are judging people and giving them or denying them status based on their sexuality. You do not have to be a lawyer to figure that out, its pretty obvious.

The other thing I like about these decisions is that it does not create any new power for the Federal Government. It continues to limit the Feds which is where Justice Anthony Kennedy is on the side of the proponents of this decision. There are those on the Left let’s call them Progressives, who are looking for gay marriage to be the law of the land. In other words give the Federal Government the power to decide who can get married and who can’t. Rather than the states making that decision for themselves.

And then the courts would still be able to rule on the constitutionality of those decisions or not. Marriage is still a states issue and they can write their own marriage laws that would stand as long as they are within the United States Constitution. Which has been the true conservative position in this case. That marriage is a states issue and this is about federalism, rather than the Feds deciding who can get married and who can’t. So if you are a real Conservative like George Will or Ted Olson a lawyer in the Prop 8 decision, whose against Prop 8, then you should like this decision as well.

So I believe the Supreme Court hit a home run both on DOMA by ruling it as unconstitutional. But also saying that the court ruling on Prop 8 that overturned that gay marriage is still valid. Allowing Gays to continue to get married because Prop 8 is unconstitutional because it violates the Equal Protection Clause. While allowing for the people and states to continue to officially weigh in on same-sex-marriage. Just not giving them the last word necessarily.

Posted in ABC News, FRS FreeState | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Kyle Summerall: John Madden’s Eulogy of Pat Summerall

.
Source:The Daily Press

As John Madden said, Pat Summerall’s long time partner on the NFL on CBS and then later on FOX NFL Sunday when they were the lead announce team for CBS Sports and FOX Sports NFL coverage, Pat Summerall was the voice of the NFL. Because, one he did have a great voice for TV or radio, but he knew what we was talking about. He not only knew what he was seeing and could describe it so well, but he knew what it meant. You got an insiders look from Summerall because he played the game himself and knew what he was seeing and what it meant.

Its almost as if you were hearing one man give the play by-play as well as the analyst in one voice. And then you add in John Madden perhaps the best sports analyst of all-time not just the NFL. And you are talking about a great team and watching a football game from two announcers who not only knew what they were looking at, but what it meant. And other than maybe with Frank Gifford and Don Meredith doing ABC’s Monday Night Football, its something that was never seen before except for Pat Summerall and Tom Brookshier working together, again at CBS Sports. To have both an announcer and an analyst know so much about the game and sport they were calling.

Pat Summerall was an analyst calling NFL football because he played the game himself as a kicker and I believe a linebacker with the Chicago Cardinals and later of course the New York Giants. Where became somewhat famous and successful as a player. So listening to Summerall call NFL games, was a real pleasure because it wasn’t a fans point of view. Some broadcaster who just loves the sport and his job, but perhaps knows as much about the game as his audience.

But with Summerall you were listening to an expert not just doing the play, but someone who would analyze what he was seeing. Because he not only knew what he was seeing and what it meant. And I feel so lucky and it was such a pleasure to hear him call all of those NFL games. Because he and John Madden were the number one announce team for the NFL on CBS and later FOX NFL Sunday. So you got to see them practically every Sunday. But also as a Redskins fans whose team played in so many NFL games of the week on CBS.

Another thing I take away from Pat Summerall was his intros which were great and famous. Because they were so natural as if Pat Summerall wrote those intros himself and added his own humor to them. And then you throw in the great theme music from CBS Sports and you got to hear the voice of the NFL at his best. Laying out perfectly what to expect from the upcoming game and what to look for from both teams. And what made him so great and best NFL announcer of all-time.

Posted in Life, The Daily Press | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

George Stroumboulopoulos: Bill Maher: ‘European Socialism Part of Their Wisdom and Savvy’

Source:The FreeState

Bill Maher as usually get’s a few things right and a few things wrong in the same commentary. He’s correct when he says that Americans do not understand socialism, I would add for the most part. There are Americans who do understand socialism who aren’t as ignorant and partisan on both sides of the political spectrum. Who are actually interested in facts and not finding things to back up their partisan ideological perspectives. I would also add to that there are Americans who are simply flat ignorant about Socialism. And we also have Socialists who are socialist, except they don’t know it yet, or don’t have the balls to admit and prefer to be called progressive, or even worst, liberal.

When Americans they think of socialism, they think of Fidel Castro or the Soviet Union and state-owned industries that are failing and so-forth. And lump socialism and communism into the same pot. What today’s Socialists do instead of taking people’s property away and making them now the property of the state, they just take most of your money away and claim they know best about what you need to live well. And keep most of the money in government’s hands in some made-up of fairness.

Another thing that Bill get’s wrong about socialism is European socialism as if all European countries are the same. As if Denmark and Germany have the same economy. Which would be like saying Vermont and Texas are the same. They’re both America by the way, how different can they be? And have the same economic systems which are simply wrong. I wrote a blog last week about Germany and its economic system and pointed out they aren’t doing well and cleaning the clocks of their European neighbors because they are a socialist republic. Because they aren’t they look a lot more like America and Canada then they do Sweden or France. Denmark looks like Vermont though, at least ideologically.

The fact is several European countries like France, Britain, Italy, Greece, Sweden and others, are examining their welfare states and seeing if it’s smart for them to have social insurance systems that are so large and cost so much. Or should they expect their populations to do more for themselves and be less dependent on the government. Why, because these countries tend to be run by fairly intelligent people who can understand when something is not working right and needs to be reformed.

The Communist Republic of Cuba is doing the exact same thing and now requiring physically and mentally able people who can work full-time. Which I’m sure must be a cultural shock for Socialist Cubans are now terrified that they may have to get a job and figure out how to pay their own bills. It might seem shocking at first, but if their education system is as good as Socialists in America claim that it is, they should be able to get through that initial cultural shock. And of course America is looking to reform its safety net as well.

So now we have Socialists in Europe who aren’t quite as in love with the welfare states in Europe, looking to reform their welfare states. Even though we have Socialists in America who do not want to reform our safety net. But call any attempts to reform it mean-spirited and callous. And believe if anything that we should expand the safety net in America and create a European welfare state. Even as Europeans are scaling back their welfare states. Socialism in its mainstream and even most used form is about the welfare state.

And government social services, and not state-ownership and government takeovers of industries and outlawing private-property. Again the modern Socialist is not so much interested in government takeovers here. We are not talking about Communists here, they just want to take most of the money away from people, but allow for them to keep and continue to own their physical property. Because in most Socialist countries private enterprise and property rights exist.

So do welfare states, high taxes and regulations, but now there are Socialists in Europe who are examining the role of government there. And looking to see whether they can afford to have a government that provides so many services for their people. Or should their people do more for themselves instead. They are actually examining can they afford to have a government so big and expensive that the people don’t have to take personal responsibility over their own lives. And when was the last time Socialists did that.

Posted in Real Time, The FreeState | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ann Coulter: ‘If The GOP is This Stupid, They Deserve to Die’

Source:The FreeState

This just in, I’ve just seen my second video in where Sean Hannity was the most responsible person in the discussion. So either Sean is getting better or his guests are getting worst. The first time was from back in 2006 when she was interviewing a lawyer from the so-called Westboro Church, which is really a far-right cult, who protest funerals for Gays or soldiers gay or straight, they actually protest people who’ve died to protect their country.

Ann Coulter is pure entertainment for everyone on the Left and I bet many people on the Right. Whether it’s immigration reform or whatever the issue, because she doesn’t get taken seriously very often as a commentator. But used and I mean used to talk about her. “Look Ann Coulter just spoke or wrote something again. This is what Far-Right is now saying and Ann Coulter is their spokesperson”. The whole amnesty issue is a perfect example of that. It’s as if Neoconservatives do not know the word and the definition of it. Or they’ve made up their own definition and perhaps have written their own dictionary as well.

Or Neoconservatives are simply being dishonest about the word amnesty. I’m not sure, I go all three ways a lot of times, but amnesty when it comes to legalizing illegal immigrants and not citizenship exactly, but saying they can live and work in the country legally and not have to pay any penalty for it, they are essentially pardoned for entering the country illegally. No one serious in the immigration reform debate who has any real power in this debate is talking about that. What we are talking about in the immigration reform debate is probationary residency for people who entered the country illegally, they would become probationary residents.

Not legal immigrants or American citizens at least not until way down the road. But for probationary residential status for illegal immigrants who’ve committed no other felonies other than entering the United States illegally, but haven’t committed any felonies since and are working and pay any back taxes they may owe and pay a fine based on how long they’ve lived in the United States illegally. Learn English and after all of these conditions are met, then they would be able to get at the back of the line. But if you’re on the Far-Right, anything short of deporting 10-15 million illegal immigrants, or locking them up, especially Latin-Americans, is considered amnesty to them.

Neoconservatives call this amnesty because they either do not understand the word, like probably in Michelle Bachmann’s case, or they have something against Latinos and seem them as invaders or something like in Pat Buchanan’s case. But with Neoconservatives like Ann Coulter and unfortunately many others on the Far-Right, is anything short of deporting ten to fifteen million illegal immigrants and perfectly securing the borders which is about as easy as making a country free of crime, is considered amnesty to them.

What we can have in America is a safe and secure border, but not perfect and a country that has low crime rates. But we’ll never have a perfect system, but we can keep illegal immigrants from coming into the country in the future and do a much better job then we are doing now. You’re never going to have a perfect immigration system legal and otherwise, as long as you’re a huge country both in population and in land that is as wealthy and as powerful as we are. And where a lot of the rest of the world including neighboring countries live in deep poverty and want better lives for themselves and their children. And don’t see that happening in their country.

So when Neoconservatives who don’t seem to support much of anything when it comes to immigration reform, except for increase border security, say we have to secure the border first. What do they mean by that, are they simply not intelligent enough to figure out that perfection is simply not possible in an imperfect world. Or do they want the border to the point that only so many people enter the country illegally every year. Secure the border is a cute political catch phrase, sort of like tough on crime, or fiscally responsible. But unless there are real policies behind those phrases, they are nothing, but political catch phrases and talking points.
Ann Coulter

Posted in New Right, The FreeState | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment