Monday, June 30, 2014

Sí Section

obama, obama jokes, cartoon, humor, political, pelosi, immigration, border, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, conservative

Over the weekend, Nancy Pelosi traveled to Texas to stare creepily at the crushing tide of young illegal aliens pouring into our country - her purpose being to encourage us all to "find the best solution to the problem, not the fastest."

Happily, Hope n' Change has found a way to do both by drinking tequila instead of whiskey whenever Pelosi speaks. And trust us, you'll be doing the same once you hear what San Fran Nan is saying.

For starters, she declared that whether or not one is born in this country, "We're all Americans in this hemisphere. North and South America." Semantically, she's right. Legally and Constitutionally, she's out of her botoxed noggin. By her bizarre hemispheric definition, Fidel Castro is an American - entitled to Obamacare, food stamps, and the right to vote for Democrats without showing an I.D.

Nancy then elaborated that "this is a community with a border running through it," essentially equating our nation's southern border with the cruel and artificial division of the Berlin Wall. Unfortunately, she couldn't demand that anyone "tear down this wall" because she and her colleagues have made sure that one was never built.

The abortion-loving Pelosi then rhapsodized that "every child has a spark of divinity in them and is therefore worthy of respect. What we saw in those [detention and holding] rooms was a dazzling, sparkling array of God's children." Although before you start imagining the Vienna Boys Choir based on Nancy's description, keep in mind the sparkling array of interesting diseases some are carrying, including HIV, TB, and scabies (which we think is Spanish for rabies). 

Moreover, Homeland Security is currently using our tax dollars to buy underwear for the new arrivals in sizes up to men's XXXXXXL.  Which, suspiciously, is also the roman numeral which identifies the date of the apocalypse. Coincidence? We think not.

Nancy also said of the young illegals that she'd like to "gather them up and take them all home with me." And we say - go right ahead! We'll help with the bus fare! Seriously, let's ship all of these kids to San Francisco where they can have fun riding the cable cars, eat Rice-a-Roni, and enrich the local culture with their sparkling divinity and (oh yeah) gang signs.

But that's not going to happen. Nor is Barack Obama going to get serious about either closing our borders or deporting this slow-moving army which he and his policies have actively encouraged to invade.

Because while Barry is happy to send active Taliban terrorists back where they came from, there's no way he's ever going to let go of tens of thousands of young, useful political pawns.

He dreams of finishing grade school
and wearing underpants with no skidmarks.


Wahoo said...

If Barack Obama had a son, he'd be throwing signs and wearing a wife-beater, too.

Chuck Baker said...

As has been noted so many times before, if it wasn't for double-standards, the left would have no standards at all.

TrickyRicky said...

Both of those photos make me physically ill. I just can't decide which one is worse. Of course the "Through The Looking Glass" Kafkaesque state of our banana republic nation makes me ill pretty much each and every day.

Quest Grande said...

If Barry had a son.....well that still wouldn't be proof of his masculine viability.

Geoff King said...

Although most illegal aliens are historically from Mexico, the recent influx from places like Guatemala and El Salvador is catching up fast. Now, there is also a large number of Chinese entering our country illegally across our non-existent Southern Border:
Legal immigration is what our nation was founded on, and what made us great. Illegal immigration is destroying us. All illegals need to be rounded up and deported back to their nation of origin, starting with any Kenyans in Washington D.C.

Judi King said...

Ditto to Geoff and Chuck Baker. This "person's" double standard is so blatant, I just don't understand how the left can't see it or, more to the point, doesn't care. The unborn babies are so much more innocent than the pawns being sent here. Pelosi and her supporters care not because it's not in their agenda.

Jim Hlavac said...

Well, this is where I get practical. Nancy Pelosi is indeed a crazed loon -- so, how to get rid of her? She represents San Francisco. The city has an odd electorate -- 1/3 are Republican or Libertarian. One third are the CWLH community (Crazed White Liberal Heterosexuals) and 1/3 are middle to upper class gay folks ... and so, the Republicans are going to have to figure out a way to appeal to one of the 1/3rds among the 2/3rds who like Pelosi to one degree or another. And well, the CWLH are probably not reachable - but the middle to upper class taxpayers are ... and well, that's just the practical reality. So far, we can say charitably, that has not been tried by the Republicans. But, that's how you can get rid of Pelosi.

Then too, rounding up millions of people is just not feasible. And to give our current government vast new police powers doesn't seem a good idea either.

There's also offering "amnesty, BUT NO VOTE," to the current illegals. A proposal which seems not to have been made.

Though, how do you solve the problems of these folks from leaving where they are? Regime change? Adopt-a-Country? I suppose a wall would work, but the cost of building and manning it might be equal to the cost of the immigrants themselves.

There is the fantasy idea -- if all 100 million Mexicans moved to the US, they'd make up 1/4 of the new population (120/440 million) and then Mexico would be empty -- either a national park with a new border of just 200 miles at Guatemala and Belize (heavily fortified already, by Mexico) -- and perhaps as an added fun idea -- all the world's gay folks all move to Mexico ... Solving so many problems at once.

Ultimately though, the problem is too complex, with too many variables and players, to be solved by any of the current proposals being suggested, and certainly there's enough posturing over the issue.

idahobob said...

They are just cramming their wet dream of The North American Union down our throats.

They tried to do it quietly several years agl. but there was so much public outcry, they went quiet.

Now that they have their stooge, Barry Sotero in office, they can and will do just about anything that they damn well please, and to hell with whatever the general stoopid populace wants.

We are living in interesting times.


Bruce Bleu said...

If we don't HAVE a southern border, why can't we re-locate Nancy and her ilk to JUAREZ, THEN just build one fence, preferably out of nuclear waste!
How can we HAVE a country when we don't have a border to the south? I say, let illegals enter via our UPPER border, (not "Northern", but "upper"), but sans the requisite parachute! Remember, the U.S. gubmint put out requests for bid for logistic company's to transport 65,000 ILLEGALS from the border in JANU-FRIGGIN-ARY!!!!!!!!! And what precious little bundle of tattoos, who's just walked 2000 miles from Smell-Salvador, needs to wear 6X skivies?
The inmates are running the asylum!

Anonymous said...

Ditto to Judi who ditto'd the others. And ditto to IdahoBob.

Like I said yesterday - The shameful Pelosi went to the border and said: ¡Ándale!¡Vamos! ¿Tiene usted algún papel higiénico? ¡Por favor, siempre votar por los demócratas o voy a hacer pis en usted!

This is about election stealing by turning things blue come hell or high water. The hypocrisy is manifest. But one thing people should always remember is that in the progressive way of thinking, it's "one world". The notion of the nation state is soooooo yesterday.

This is truly, among many others, a threat to America (meaning the United States of). Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Equador, and so on truly do use the US as a dumping ground for their undesirables (of course, the words on the Statue of Liberty come to mind so I need to be careful - we are built on legal immigration - and we have seen waves like this before but not this magnitude and not encompassing a common border area) because of their elitist power structure.


Hey, Hlavac - Belize is mine! Mine I tell you! Dibbs, you rummy!

Grumpy Curmudgeon said...

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty". Cloward and Piven were both professors at the Columbia University School of Social Work….(Gee,no wonder Obama has his Columbia transcript buried…).

The two stated that many Americans who were eligible for welfare were not receiving benefits, and that a welfare enrollment drive would strain local budgets, precipitating a crisis at the state and local levels…

Reference: Cloward-Piven Strategy

How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky:

There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important.

1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people
2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)
6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.
7) Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools
8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

Does any of this sound familiar?

Reference: Saul Alinsky

Eduardo de los Flácidos said...

Señor Hlavac

As in my home country of Venezuela, there is no hope once the population is spoon fed gifts from the gobierno. It is human nature. The Nancy Pelosi's of the world (in your country, the Democrats and the RINOs - as in your Thad Cochran) have discovered this and the people are more than happy to continue to vote them in. As a great lady once said, socialism is a great (and I might say easy) thing as long as you do not run out of other people's money.

Only a crash, as is coming in Venezuela, will cause a change. And maybe not for the better. The Founders of America had to leave their land to "power up, master reset" as an engineer friend of mine likes to say.

As for "anonymous", that is the problem with a common border, as the Central American countries have found. America in past mass migrations enticed only those with a desire to become "American" (Irish, Hungarian, Italian, etc) because of the arduous journey. A common border allows "anyone" in. They have no need to "become American" when they can easily go back home. And this is what you see. "American" means simply having a tax-payer funded debit card.

Eduardo de los Flácidos said...

I see that Señor Gruñón beat me to the punch, as you say. He has outlined the "crash" as I put it.

Good man, Grumpy

deadmau5.1 said...

Uh oh, is Issa turning RINO? I may not know a lot about politics but any fool can see that there is a cover-up going on a the IRS - a criminal enterprise punishable at least under RICO. What is going on in this country?

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Wahoo- Well, that's what happens when you grow up without a father figure.

@Chuck Baker- Amen, brother.

@TrickyRicky- You don't have to decide which picture is worse, since we have to put up with both.

@Quest Grande- If Barry had a son, a turkey baster could take most of the credit.

@Geoff King- Immigration is a good thing. Illegal immigration is a bad thing. This isn't complicated.

And it pretty much seems that besides Central Americans and Asians, pretty much anyone who wants to can easily cross our borders, including those who most want to do us harm. Not that anyone in Washington cares.

@Judi King- I genuinely can't understand Nancy's comfort with abortion if she believes every child is from God and carries a spark of divinity. In her mind, does God only add that spark to the baby after it's born and He's seen the Apgar score?

@Jim Hlavac- No question in my mind that the Right needs to do a way better job of appealing to the gay citizens of this country. I'd like to see conservatives adopt a more libertarian mind set and, yes, learn to keep their theology and politics separate if only for the entirely pragmatic purpose of sustaining this nation.

And speaking of pragmatics, I agree that rounding up 30 or 40 million people for deportation isn't going to work. But STEP ONE is to close the freaking border. Maybe we could repurpose a few hundred thousand people on welfare and give them lawn chairs and walkie-talkies at the border.

"Amnesty but NO VOTE EVER" would be an acceptable (barely) idea. F*ck a "path to citizenship" for anyone who got here illegally, whatever their age or circumstance.

Harsh? Maybe - but it's also harsh to turn away the 51st person from a life boat that can only hold 50 people without sinking. And similarly, if we don't stop this tsunami of immigrants we'll all be sunk.

@idahobob- As long as we're uniting all of the Americas, can we just ship the newcomers straight to Canada?

@Bruce Bleu- A nation without borders won't be a nation long. Which is, I'm fairly certain, the goal of the Left.

@Anonymous- While I do think that the Dems have dreams of importing more voters, I think the real master plan is to overwhelm our communities and social support systems to force broader acceptance of federal intervention and control within our boundries. And I don't just mean controlling the illegals.

@Grumpy Curmudgeon- Nice summary. And by "nice," I mean nightmarish.

What you're saying is exactly right.

@Eduardo de los Flácidos- I don't really see a major change happening in our own country except after a crash. I fear that it's impending, and I'm increasingly doubtful that we'll bounce back in a meaningful way afterwards. (Coffee time!)

@deadmau5.1- It may be wishful thinking on my part, but I don't think Issa is so much going RINO as he's simply being pragmatic. The IRS stonewalling may well be successful - especially since the Justice Department is helping them cook the books.

Eduardo de los Flácidos said...

Just a quick follow-up, Doctor. I very much liked your responses to Judi and Jim H. Very well put. This is why I keep coming back.

Not to give short shrift to anything else you or the others wrote. It's just those caught my eye (and mind) the most.

Alfred E. Newman said...

So way off topic but I am having a great time watching the left freak out over the Hobby Lobby decision. What fun. Parteeee!

And more off topic, from a previously discredited reporter, a point made in some earlier posts by a couple of others.

Geoff King said...

A new Gallup poll just out on the confidence in all three branches of government:
It's official, America’s elected representatives are viewed in a worse light than zombies, witches, dog poop, potholes, toenail fungus, and hemorrhoids. Congress ranks less popular than cockroaches, lice, root canals, colonoscopies, traffic jams, used car salesmen, Genghis Khan, Communism, North Korea, BP during the Gulf Oil Spill, or Nixon during Watergate.

Colby Muenster said...

... the old "double standard...." Pelosi and her fellow moonbats are absolutely brilliant practitioners, and, dammit, they get away with it! A future Democrat voter makes his way a thousand miles to illegally cross our border, and he's a Child of God (true!). An innocent unborn who had zero choice of coming into being is nothing more than an unwanted piece of flesh, much like a wart or tumor. I honestly can NOT wrap my brain around this concept! But, then again, I'm still in possession a soul. I think San Fran Nan sold hers decades ago. I'll not pretend to be some sort of high and mighty sinless creature, but I have NEVER condoned, nay, encouraged the murder of even one innocent human baby.

It is so damn chilling to see it listed out like you did. Leaves no question in my miond where O'Liar is trying to take us, which means he sold his soul as well.

Alfred E. Newman,
Not many things in life are more enjoyable than watching a Liberal's head explode over a court ruling that upholds the Constitution. This is especially sweet when you consider how much the progressives were praising the SCOTUS for upholding O'Liarcare. The shoe is on the proverbial other foot now. Yee Haw! Oh! and congrats on being on magazine covers more than ANYONE! I think you even have Okra beat.

I also heard (from unsubstantiated sources) that hundreds of people currently under IRS audit are now claiming their hard drives crashed. Ya gotta love it.

Blarney the Dinosaur said...

The floodgates are officially open, people!

The bats of hell are flying out as we speak! We are all doomed..... What would we all do if Ginsberg were not on the court? Only she can saves us all from eternal damnation.

I think I saw a report this morning that after Pelosi heard about the Hobby Lobby decision, she instructed the newly arrived jetsam and flotsam that the GOP is now authorized to perform human sacrifices on illegal immigrants - but only if said "immigrants" do NOT vote Democratic.


PRY said...

Another coupla slapdowns on PC thinking from the Supreme Court today! I'll tell ya...I'm just giddy!

rickn8or said...

It is my most fervent wish that Nancy Pelosi's grandchildren catch something painful and incurable from these Newest Americans.

And I'm doing the Happy Clomp over the Hobby Lobby and SEIU extortion decisions.

txGreg said...

While I disagree that it would be as hard to deport all the criminals as some people seem to think - let's put that aside for a moment...

How exactly would "amnesty with no vote" work? First of all, we live in a country where we are afraid to check people's ID when they do vote. So, how would we know if the person voting had previously been granted amnesty? Also, how quickly after that law passed would the libs be lining up to sue over this new bunch of "American citizens" being disenfranchised? Sorry, don't see any hope for that one.

On a more humorous note, as long as we're shipping all these illegal aliens around anyway, why not just dump them all off at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington D.C.? Seems like the best short-term solution to me.

Judi King said...

One tiny step for mankind by SCOTUS. I wonder if what the world would be like if Pelosi's mother didn't choose life.

Anonymous said...

@Geoff King - "Legal immigration is what our nation was founded on..." That's absurd. When this nation was founded there were NO limitations or restrictions on immigration.

Judi King said...

Maybe not founded on.....but there is a whole LEGAL process that must be done to NOW become a naturalized citizen. The law abiding people go through this process, what is going on now is NOT lawful! And after this country was founded it was BUILT by legal immigrants.

Transcendental said...

To that "anonymous" individual questioning the term "legal immigration", technically you are correct that initially there were no such laws in the early days of the Republic. But initially people migrated here to become Americans, not live off the dole - there was no welfare state. And at any rate, when the floods of immigrants started arriving from across the oceans (not across a border), laws WERE put into place. My ancestors were in that group. And yes, they were discriminatory (although that word is very much abused - it simply means to make a decision).

It is natural for a society to want to get some order into what is a disorderly process. When the country had lots of open room and people came to be something as a part of the greater society, there was no need for laws - the immigrants were needed. They still are but there isn't as much room. And I frankly have doubts about their intentions these days, at least the majority who come here in violation of our laws - some yes truly want to be Americans and those we want to encourage and support. But how do you separate the wheat from the chaff?

At any rate, there is simply no evidence that these floods for the last several decades across our southern border have anything to do with "law abiding" people who come here to better themselves - other than get on the dole or do what should be done as part of a guest-worker program. But even the Chinese illegals are responding to advertisements in their homeland about what the can get here for "free".

The bottom line, is that the illegal immigration problem goes back to at least the late 19th century. But now, it is a very dubious claim that people who break the law to get here are here for anything other than to break the law again.

Transcendental said...

I will add this.

TR was at least a proto-progressive, as I suspect that anonymous commenter just above is a full-blown "progressive". The "progressives" forget their own roots in racism and elitism. But at least here, TR got it right.

Sparky said...

Excellent as always Stilton. I'm still reading, just not commenting much. Been a bit down lately.
Anyway, and as if this wasn't all bad enough, there's always the real truth behind the sudden influx of illegals: Is Obama Trying To Get Us Killed?.
Face it folks. Obama HATES America. He hates all that's good. He wants our culture dead and evil to reign supreme. Until we start putting heads on spikes ("metaphorically", of course), we might as well get used to living this way.

Grumpy Curmudgeon said...

For once I wish the Demobots would actually READ a bill or decision before opening their flytraps to spout the pre-positioned talking points (God - What a concept!). I read what Princess Lie-awatha says (remember this is the genius when elected to the Senate and asked how she would vote on the Budget responded 'Not My Job' - well, yes, actually it is your job) and I have to wonder if she is another Manchurian Candidate?

Anonymous said...

Grumpy, Sparky, et al,

I never met Al but I am including him on this.

Look, I'll say it again. The "progressives" want nothing more than to rescind the Constitution and put "The Truly Worthy" in power - the junta that will make "all the proper decision for the common good". Why? Because they know best - "you" are an idiot. The key to "American Exceptionalism" is a faith in the "common man/woman/cisgender/transgender/etc" and in the Rule Of Law. The "progressive" knows only elitism and contempt for the common (put whatever you think you are here).

These are dangerous times - keep the faith. The Founders were very wise.

Anonymous said...

I can't read this because I do not have a subscription - cheap bastard that I am but the title is more or less what I was getting at. Progressives are evil.

But I mean in that in the nicest possible way!

Grumpy Curmudgeon said...

Anonymous said...
I can't read this because I do not have a subscription...

Copy the article title, paste it in the address bar, and search the results for - you can usually read the article - see - I'm even cheaper than you...heh,heh,heh

Anonymous said...

Grumpy - you are a genius.

Thanks - didn't occur to me to do that but it DID work.

Colby Muenster said...

Read a bill or decision? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The only thing these types read are labels on food to make sure they're not accidently eating something they can't pronounce. When your entire worldview and opinion is based on Facebook or what you overheard at Starbucks, you are doomed to a life of ignorance and continual foot in mouth disease.

And I'd venture a guess that the vast majority of our Senators do not have the slightest clue what their jobs are supposed to be. I'll bet O'Liar's Blackberry rings constantly every time there's a bill up for vote in the Senate or House. Another guess: probably less than 10 Senators read a bill and vote using their brains and conscience.

The "Mom's Basement Dwellers" that vote in people like Lizzie Warren or Al Franken deserve what they get, but dammit, I don't.

Would it be crazy if we went back to the "ya gotta own property to vote" days? Or maybe you have to take a test. If you can't explain the balance of power or name the current Vice President, go home and study and maybe we'll let you vote next time.

Pete (Detroit) said...

Colby, dunno about owning property, and you're NEVER gonna get a civics test in, but I'd be happy to weed out the non-tax-payers, you betchya!

Grumpy Curmudgeon said...

@Colby: How 'bout you have to pass the citizenship Test (same test they give to LEGAL immigrants) to get to register to vote? I know - RACIST!

I've long advocated that in order to get your high school diploma, you have to pass that test.

Trucos de los Políticos said...

Hey, did you guys see that our beloved morons - I mean, elected officials - have WEAKENED the reporting requirements for lobbyist-funded junkets? They snuck that in.

These people are criminal - thanks to the LoFo voters, none of whom comment (or blog) here.

That was both a suck-up comment and a self-serving one. HA!

puta del político said...

Valerie Jarret tiene una cabeza grande!

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Readers- As is frequently the case, I've only found enough time to read and enjoy all your comments but not to respond to them. Great stuff, though!