The Pondering AmericanPhotobucket - Video and Image Hosting

An average American that has some thoughts on politics, culture, and society with a conservative and Catholic twist.

Location: Louisiana, United States
Email me!

Thursday, June 22, 2006

WORLDnetDaily Amazing Headline

Well, WorldnutzDaily has done the conservative community a great service today. It has posted this Story.

INVASION USA Illegal alien rapes puppy Suspect felt there was no problem, claiming animal was his to abuse

If you wish to read the story go here and you can see the mugshot, the dog, and the whole nine yards.

May, I ask respectfuly what is the point of this article? Why should this be going out all over the internet targeted to a nationwide audience.?I suppose their argument will be that if this illegal alien had not been here this dog's honor/virginity would have been protected. However there is a subtext here and we all know it. It is in the same vein as Illegals are all criminals and they all carry diseases blah, blah blah. Now even your pet dog rover isnt safe from the foreign invaders. There is a racial or ethnic card being played here too. Its doesn't take a P.H.D in propaganda to realize that.

I think of course that criminals should not be able to come into this country. That is one reason, I am against illegal immigration and for secure borders. Its in essence it is why I support the President in his comprehensive approach. But this is going overboard. There must be balance. If I wanted to read stuff like this I would read the National Examiner or the Globe. Does this article have a place in rational debate or is its purpose simply to inflame? Is not its true purpose to contribute to discourse but to inflame every prejudice and fear we have in ourselves?

This story is about as releant as this one they ran "'Illegal runs red light,' kills popular principal" I realize that illegal aliens have criminal problems. Part of that is because they are often living in the shadows. I see the same things with friends for example that have some small offense they are running from. They often get into more trouble it seems by avoidance and it jsut piles on. It sounds like a Bush plan of getting people into open society would cure a bit of that.

Who owns this outfit that is promoting itself as a conservative outlet of news. Well that it appears is a little shrouded in mystery except that the columinist Farah is involved. I will try to get more info on this tomorrow.

The anchoress hit on this topic today and I was thinking almost the same thoughts before I read her blog as I was reading this "news" from Worldnetdaily. Let me give a partial quote:
I have written about some of the illegals who go to my church, who have lived here for many years, established themselves as best they have been able, have learned English, worked hard - they haven’t complied with the broken INS system, but they have become as model citizens as they might be under the circumstances. They come to church each week with mannerly children, impeccably turned out - the father is at daily mass every morning, and every day before he leaves for work he prostrates himself before the Tabernacle. Yeah…he should just be shipped back. Illegal is illegal and that’s all that matters. But what am I saying? I forgot, I’m a Catholic, I can’t be credible on this issue, because all we Catholics care about are asses in the pews and money in the collection basket.
No normalization, no reasonable examination of a person and his life and his circumstances…no plea bargaining…“no excuses, illegal is illegal…ship them all back…” might sound pithy, moral and right to some. But it is offering no solutions beyond a fence - it considers no reform. Some of these high-minded moralists betray something in themselves when they write - as some have in the ’sphere, all their principals really demand is the “rounding up and shipping out” of millions of people, the distruption of established families, a wall and a guard standing a post with a loaded rifle.
In some ways the breezy categorizing and dismissing of the human beings involved in all of this sadly brings to mind
these Phelps disasters who see only “fags” and “fag enablers sinning away grace and messing with the wrong God.”
President Bush has not forgotten
that we are talking about human beings, here and his “base” is all-too-eager-and-willing to kick him in the teeth for it. But he is on the side of the angels on this, and not for the first time.

Amen, Anchoress, Of course like you I am a Roman Catholic and everytime I open my mouth I get accused of being complicit in some plot. The point is that the crime rate of illegals has a place in the debate. But this stuff is over the top. This article whole purpose is make a whole group of people seem "inhuman" To rob them of their human dignity so that we view them as things not people. You disagree? Well, in the past year I know some good ole Country boys and their wives that got arrested for doing more than playing fetch with the family pet. It was news here. But it was never a national story. Come back from the edge folks. This stuff is becoming very nasty and I suspect that its going to annoy alot of Legal latinos. If good taste and decency can't persuade you maybe the practical political consequences will.


Blogger Robert said...

If you are against illegal immigration and for secure borders, you cannot support
President Bush's position because it does not. He has made it very clear that he is not serious about cracking down on the illegals currently or, nor on strengthening the security of the border. (And if I hear one more person mention the TEMPORARY deployment of a handful of National Guardsmen who will NOT actually be doing enforcement as evidence of seriousness, I'm going to pull out what little hair I have left.)

It is perfectly right and fair (although I think badly mistaken) to support the President. But it's more than a little silly to do so because you want illegal immigration brought under control.

3:54 PM  
Blogger Pondering American said...

Well, I guess we have to disagree. The President is talking about a comprehensive approach. There seems to be a attitude that its either/or in this debate and I do not get that. He seems to be serious to me. He is also for letting the process work. THe House could have put in many things as to funding and real border security. THe Senate would have gone along with it if there was a compromise and some program for those that might want citizenship. Would the President had vetoed a bill that included Employer sanctions for instance for those that went outside the bounds of the guest worker program. I think not. The President cannot be blamed here. He is ready to bend like the wind to get a compromise to start solving the problem. However there is one group that refuses to move a inch.

11:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great site lots of usefull infomation here.

8:58 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

FREE Hit Counters!