Michelle Malkin » A national security mom manifesto

A national security mom manifesto

By Michelle Malkin • July 20, 2004 11:32 PM

I’ve written a piece for USA Today that was posted online tonight and will appear in the print edition tomorrow: Candidates ignore security moms at their peril. A few excerpts:

I am what this year’s election pollsters call a “security mom.” I’m married with two young children. I own a gun. And I vote.

Nothing matters more to me right now than the safety of my home and the survival of my homeland. I believe in the right to defend myself, and in America’s right to defend itself against its enemies. I am a citizen of the United States, not the United Nations.

I want a president who is of one mind, not two, about what must be done to protect our freedom and our borders. I don’t care about the hair on his head or the wrinkles in his forehead. I am not awed by his ability to ride a snowboard or fly a plane. Nor does it matter much to me whether his wife speaks four languages or bakes good cookies.

What I want is a commander in chief who will stop pandering to political correctness and People magazine editors, and start pandering to me…

I single out some of my security mom heroes:

Security moms are women such as Grace Godshalk, who lost her 35-year-old son, Bill, when the World Trade Center’s south tower collapsed on Sept. 11. Godshalk is on the board of the 9/11 Families for a Secure America, which lobbies for secure borders. She has made it her “lifetime job to put an end to terrorism so no one else ever has to live this nightmare.”

Security moms are women such as Bonnie Eggle, a Michigan schoolteacher who lost her 28-year-old son, Kris, a National Park Service ranger who was gunned down by a drug smuggler at the U.S.-Mexico border in August 2002.

“I approach this whole situation as a mother,” Eggle said during a Washington, D.C., news conference after her son was murdered. “I want other parents to know that these are things that can happen to your children. Our son took a bullet that he did not have to if we had secure borders.”

There are so many more I could have mentioned. Since I first started reading blogs, I’ve been struck by the intense passion and dispassionate analysis of women warbloggers, many of them mothers. (See Michele Catalano, Athena at Leaning to the Right, and Sgt. Mom, for starters.) And I have been in awe of security moms inspired to take homeland defense in their own hands (see Shannen Rossmiller, Rita Katz, and this Israeli mom, for example). In my book, Annie Jacobsen falls into this category, too.

Glenn Reynolds was on to this post-Sept. 11 phenomenon first, dubbing national security-focused women the Bellicose Women’s Brigade. Unfortunately, the presidential candidates seem to have lost interest in us–and I give them a good spanking:

So far, neither presidential ticket quite measures up. Judging from the touchy-feely-fest put on by the John Kerry-John Edwards campaign recently, it is clear that the Democratic Party still thinks it can win by wallowing in the Sept. 10 politics of grievance, entitlement and passivity. The Democratic presidential campaign is softer than a Kleenex tissue, when its motto should be “No More Tears.”

As for the Republicans, I have supported President Bush’s war on terror overseas, but he continues to fight only a half-hearted battle to defend Americans on American soil from hostile invasion or attack. Recently, the White House revived an amnesty plan for millions of illegal aliens, and the Department of Homeland Security retreated on immigration-enforcement sweeps in Southern California. It is clear that the GOP elite gravely underestimates the wrath we security moms feel toward Washington’s fatal addiction to “cheap labor” and “cheap votes” at the expense of secure borders….

Carol Taber, who has teamed up with Frank Gaffney’s Center for Security Policy, has started up a new organization called Family Security Matters to provide an alternative to the self-absorbed, head-in-the-sand klatches that pass for women’s groups these days. The website will be unveiled shortly, I hear, and I will keep you posted.

Posted in: John Edwards, John Kerry

Send to a Friend
Printer Friendly

comments (48)

trackbacks (17)

See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

Trackback URL

Comments

#1

On July 20th, 2004 at 11:45 pm, Thomas Galvin said:

Thanks for pointing out these amazing people. There is nothing in the world more powerful than a mother’s love.

There is another very smart woman who has a very good blog that addresses war and military issues, Jen Martinez. Her blog “A Collection of Thoughts” is very informative.

Again, thanks for pointing some of these people who I have never heard of - they are a great credit to our country.
#2

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:01 am, Baklava said:

I think we killed the 911fsa.org site. Shows how popular Michelle Malkin is. :) :) :)
I’ll have to check it out tomorrow when it can give me more than the few lines of text it gave back…
#3

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:04 am, Tom Kearney said:

What about Kristen Breitweiser?
#4

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:09 am, James Kotthoff said:

Great Job!!!
I think the issues of boder security, illegal immigration and immigration reform are being largely ignored by the candidates…
A poll shows that 70% of Americans want our borders protected and illegal immigrants deported but OUR government ignores them.
#5

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:51 am, Tom Bridgeland said:

I am a libertarian and have always been in favor of open borders. But not during wartime! We are at war, even though half the country can’t seem to get their heads around that fact.

Keep it up Michele! Maybe somebody is listening.
#6

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:01 am, Baklava said:

Tom,

You think of us as idiots? Kristen is a leftist who has already been exposed for her connections and all of the money flow by journalists.

Even still, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC happily used her as often as possible and aired her message.

It cracks me up that the left doesn’t even try to understand our perspective, ignores even a semblance of objectivity and don’t even care that they are exposed so badly.

I haven’t figured out what it is. Is it laziness? Arrogance? Stupidity? A combination of a few factors….

One thing I know… the left had it good for so many decades. An almost full monopoly on what the public heard, a run of 40 years controlling the House of Representatives (54 if you span the 2 year gap before that 40 year), almost the same for the Senate and many instances when the President was a Democrat during those time periods. Why you’d think that America’s problems would’ve/should’ve been solved with all of that time in control. Now we’re actually able to get our message out (centrists and right of center people) and liberals this country is going through a time of rhetoric that is wild. I don’t think it’s a 50/50 nation any more. I think it’s a 47/53 nation at about this time now. And 53% translates to a landslide the way electoral votes get counted.

Liberals will be wondering what the heck hit them in November after all of this caterwalling about Bush lied (when he didn’t and has been proven not to have) and it’s basically been liberals who have drug this country into a situation where we have reduced security and reduced will to fight the war on terror. The mom’s that Michelle references is who I’m hoping will keep that will alive and fight and get the men in this country to keep up the will to fight.

We are in a time period where whole masses of people can be killed because of technology, nuclear, chemical and biological weapons advances and we have a situation where there are whole populations of islamofacists (not to be confused with the actual peace loving muslims) want to use weapons to kill as many Americans as possible.

There is no negotiating with freaks like that.

Sorry. I went on again. It happens. Suffice to say that the 4 women who were trumpeted by the major news networks (one of them being Kristen) are completely discredited as partisan hacks who were being organized and were lead to the camera’s (because of their point of view).
#7

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:15 am, Miel said:

Amen!

You have perfectly articulated what I have been feeling since 9/11.
#8

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:16 am, Carol said:

You have “educated” your four year-old about terrorists?!? Whatever happened to letting children be children? Your child is going to have enough to deal with in this world without having nightmares about “bad men” trying to kill her. Give her a few more years of Barbies and fairie tales before subjecting her to the harsh realities that adults must face.
#9

On July 21st, 2004 at 5:45 am, Don said:

After reading your piece for USA Today I couldn�t help but sit and think how some that read that paper would perceive your thoughts. A woman that knows how to use and owns a gun? A woman that has let her child know of the bad people in this world? I can just imagine what some of the more left winged moms out there might be thinking. But I also think its woman and moms like you Michelle that are the majority in this country. After reading that article in the New York Times that you had a post about. The one of the mother that had triplets in her womb, and chose to be rid of two of them as to not make life harder on her. I watched my wife, the mother of my three children as she read it, and saw at first the fear in her face, then the sadness, and finally the anger, as she finished reading it. That woman is not the poster child for the average woman in this country today. She�s a very small minority, and there on their way to extinction in times to come. It�s the woman like you, the ones we read about in the publications of the National Rifle Association. The ones that we don�t hear much of from main stream news organization for the obvious reasons. But it�s the moms like you, the woman like you, that will someday be the backbone for the preservation of not only our rights as citizens, but also the backbone for this country in keeping our children safe and secure.
#10

On July 21st, 2004 at 8:32 am, Marshall said:

Mr. Nail meet Mr. Hammer, also known as another Malkin column. It must be Wednesday. Great work, as usual, Michelle!

Don - I totally agree with you. There will be jaws wide open in the USA Today readership this morning, and that is a good thing.
#11

On July 21st, 2004 at 8:59 am, Hilary S. Gavenda said:

Another great article Michelle! I read you all the time on Townhall.com and I am always impressed with your insight. I hope to God there are more of these mothers out there, they are the backbone of what makes this country great. Keep up the good work and keep fighting the good fight.
#12

On July 21st, 2004 at 9:32 am, sam said:

Michelle,

Excellent. That article is about Mom’s, but it applies to a larger category of voters overall.

I hope that Bush starts getting a clear view of the fact that a majority of us don’t care for his open enrollment for aliens. I think this cause is gaining ground though. A couple of weeks ago when there was a roundup of illegal aliens for deportation, the news interviewed a department head and asked about how they thought the American public felt about it. He replies (I wish I had caught his name): We have gotten thousands of emails in praise, and five in anger.

Yah. This is something Bush better pay attention to.
#13

On July 21st, 2004 at 9:42 am, Nathan said:

I would add that President Bush’s flirting with signing an extension to the assault weapons ban also signifies a disregard for security moms (and dads!). Sure, it’s safe to say you’ll sign a bill if you’re pretty sure the bill will never get passed, but it still seemed like a cold-blooded attempt to pander to the anti-gun lobby.
#14

On July 21st, 2004 at 9:58 am, Jack Fender said:

I understand that the Security Mom’s are mad about the governments refusal to enforce our immigration laws. So am I!

But what can they do about it? They are faced with the choice of George Bush who is awful or Jophn Kerry who is worse.

We are being betrayed by both parties.

Regards,
Jack
#15

On July 21st, 2004 at 10:12 am, Marshall said:

Jack - which is exactly what I think Michelle is saying in her USA Today column.

I petition the President to form a Department of Immigration and appoint Michelle Malkin as it’s Secretary. Or just replace Mineta with her at Transportation. Come on Michelle! Do it for your country!
#16

On July 21st, 2004 at 10:19 am, Eric said:

Great column……Is it not really what’s at stake this election year?
#17

On July 21st, 2004 at 10:38 am, Mike said:

Carole-”You have “educated” your four year-old about terrorists?!? Whatever happened to letting children be children?”

Well, Carole, first it started with Sex-Ed in the classrooms. “But they’re children!” Yeah, but they’re having sex, right? Then it was Drug Awareness. “But they’re children!” Yeah, but they’re taking drugs, right? Then it was about Sexual Predators. “But they’re children!” That doesn’t stop molesters, right? Now it’s about terrorists. “But they’re children!” That doesn’t stop them from getting killed, does it?

Childhood was removed from children a long time ago, piece by piece. A parent who insulates a child from reality does that child no favors. True, the harshness can be softened, but the reality can only be denied at her peril.

Childhood isn’t all daisies and fluffy bunnies. It never was. It never will be. Anyone who pretends otherwise is a fool.
#18

On July 21st, 2004 at 11:01 am, Jack Fender said:

Marshall,

I agree that is what Michelle is saying. It is clear from the headline: “Candidates ignore ’security moms,’ at their peril” .

But it still begs my point. The Security Mom’s have nothing but bad choices.

They can choose to punish George Bush for his awful immigration stand and elect John Kerry who is even worse.

Or, because he is better on security in most respects, they can re-elect George Bush and thereby effectively give him a mandate to implement his awful immigration ideas.

It seems that the politicians CAN IGNORE the security Mom’s at NO PERIL because there is no better alternative choice.

Regards,
Jack
#19

On July 21st, 2004 at 11:10 am, Marshall said:

Jack - point well taken.
#20

On July 21st, 2004 at 11:18 am, Surge said:

As a child of immigrant parents, Michelle Malkin should be ashamed of making sweeping generalizations about immigrant families.

The majority of immigrant families that come to the U.S. work harder than many of you here lazily typing away on this blog, sometimes putting in 14-16 hour days for very low wages.

Their work contributes over $300 Billion in U.S. GNP and pay over $133 Billion in direct taxes (local, state and federal). And this is AFTER they send money back to their families in their respective countries.

http://www.seiu.org/media/issues/immigration_facts.cfm

Until many of you are ready to landscape my lawn, clean my bathroom or hotel room for $5.75 an hour with no benefits, please refrain from criticizing and making inaccurate accusations and judgements about immigrants here in our great country.

Thanks!
#21

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:00 pm, James Uselton said:

Thank you!

James Uselton
#22

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:08 pm, Lorie said:

Surge,
I agree with you statement, however I don’t think Michelle or anyone else who is from an immigrent family (the majority of us) has any problems with immigrents that come here through the proper means.

I happen to be Italian & my Grandfather came over at the age of 15 & that is something that I’m not only grateful for, but am very proud of.

I live in the San Francisco Bay Area & my issues aren’t against anyone her LEGALLY. My issues are with all those here ILLEGALLY & the REPERCUSSIONS of that.
Thanks,
Lorie
#23

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:09 pm, Anti-Malkin said:

HI everyone. I greatly enjoy arguing/debating and reducing other people’s arguments to rubble. If anyone thinks we should get rid of immigrants in the USA then THEY should pack up and leave. This country was infiltrated and stolen by Europeans. Native Americans are the only people who should really be complaining. But no one addresses that, huh? America is the supposed to be the land of opportunity. If people want to come here and work to make their lives better as productive members of society then what is the problem? The vast majority of people who come to this country are looking to make a better life for themselves, not engage in criminal behavior. Besides, most of the immigrants I come across are very humble and would out-work almost anybody posting on this little form. A lot of the complaining I hear seems to stem from fear. I get the impression that most of you are terrified by the fact that minority/immigrant population is on the rise. Too bad. That’s all I have to say until Malkin says or writes something else that I can use to attack her credibility as a talented writer. Peace.
#24

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:10 pm, Mike H. said:

Hey Surge, which immigrant families? The legal ones, or the illegal ones?
#25

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:16 pm, Jerome Wolgavine said:

“If anyone thinks we should get rid of immigrants in the USA then THEY should pack up and leave. This country was infiltrated and stolen by Europeans”

That is so true.
#26

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:25 pm, Thomas Berrington said:

Anti-Malkin- I couldn’t have said it better myself! Your name had me laughing outloud for a good while. WTF?!? The Anti-Malkin!?! Real funny stuff.
#27

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:44 pm, Thomas Kearney said:

Hey Baklava,

I like how I ask a simple rhetorical question, and you go off on a long rant, assuming that I am a leftist.

If KB has been exposed as some sort of nefarious leftist who wants to boot Bush out of the White House, I was not aware of it. I had seen her in the media a few times and while I did not agree with her 100%, I agreed that we should shine a lot onto why our government was unable to prevent 9/11.

But if you want to put me in an ideological box, I am libertarian/conservative.
#28

On July 21st, 2004 at 12:47 pm, Peter said:

I guess this means I’m a security grandfather. Gun? Check. Wife and daughter with guns and CHLs? Check. Sons and daughters in law with guns and CHLs? Check. Oldest grandson already have his .22? Check. His next visit he gets his first deer rifle.
Does every one of my family both support Dubya for reelection while making our demands for the control of illegal immigration known? Check.
#29

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:09 pm, Surge said:

“Hey Surge, which immigrant families? The legal ones, or the illegal ones?”

Both, Mike.

http://www.urban.org/urlprint.cfm?ID=5868#I
#30

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:12 pm, James Kotthoff said:

Too all you pro illegal immigration folks. Wake up!!!
You claim they do jobs “Lazy Americans” won’t do. In reality they drive wages. Cheap labor.
Economics 101 a larger supply of labor means employers don’t have to pay a living wage. So don’t complain about low wages unless you are willing to understand why.
But all that aside “We are a nation of immigrants” Wrong we are supposed to be a nation of laws.
It is against the law to enter this country illegally. But you seem to ignore that fact. So I assume you think that laws don’t need to be enforced? Does that mean you don’t think drugs laws or prostitution laws shouldn’t be enforced either? or driving laws or gun laws? How do you want to pick which laws are enforced?
Now on the subject of “A nation of immigrants” try a nation of legal immigrants…at no time in our 200+ year history have we had as many illegal immigrants flooding into the country. Mass illegal immigration is not good for this country and sadly all you folks that are complaining about Ms. Malkin’s opinions don’t get it and won’t until it is too late.
#31

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:19 pm, carol m said:

For crying out loud, Indians (Native Americans) aren’t even from here either! They came from Asia! Throughout man’s history he has migrated all over. Sometimes invading and taking over others’ territory and sometimes not; sometimes mingling peacefully with others in their lands, sometimes not; sometimes changing themselves to fit in, sometimes changing the people whose land they ‘took’. That’s the way it was no matter how ‘unfair’ it may have been. Get over it.
The argument for Europeans to go back where they came from is so ridiculous. Do you think the Indians are going to then go back to living the way they did 400+ years ago? Get real. And if Europeans have to go back, then hey, let’s all go back to where we came from. And all of us, including the Indians, would have to go to Africa. Would life then be fair and equal for all people? Hardly.
#32

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:22 pm, Lester said:

if immigrants can’t get here legally tough luck. Those that get here illegally just leave a sour taste in the mouths of those that legally entered the U.S. They make the hard work done by the legal ones go down the drain. They don’t have to worry about visas and such.
#33

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:30 pm, Surge said:

“I live in the San Francisco Bay Area & my issues aren’t against anyone her LEGALLY. My issues are with all those here ILLEGALLY & the REPERCUSSIONS of that.
Thanks,
Lorie”

Lorie,
The repercussions are POSITIVE. Italian and Irish immigrants made New York and San Francisco they successful cities they are today

Cheap immigrant labor drives the U.S. economy. Please read this report:

http://www.urban.org/urlprint.cfm?ID=5868#I

It refutes anything these anti-immigration zealots have to say about this issue.
#34

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:54 pm, Surge said:

“Mass illegal immigration is not good for this country and sadly all you folks that are complaining about Ms. Malkin’s opinions don’t get it and won’t until it is too late.” James Kothoff

James,

“According to the most controversial study of those discussed here, the benefits and costs of immigration to the United States in 1992 add up to a total net cost to all levels of government of $42.5 billion. This study, by Donald Huddle, was sponsored by the Carrying Capacity Network, a nonprofit group that advocates major reductions in immigration to the United States. “The Costs of Immigration” (Huddle 1993) uses estimation procedures that include a variety of errors. When these errors are corrected, the post-1970 immigrants in Huddle’s study actually show a surplus of revenues over social service costs of at least $25 billion (Passel and Clark 1994).” from “Immigration & Immigrants: Setting the Record Straight” report by the Urban Institute.

http://www.urban.org/urlprint.cfm?ID=5868#I

This was the conclusion made by a group who wants to control immigration: immigrants pay more taxes than they receive social services.

“No taxation without representation”. Didn’t the founding fathers who immigrated to the U.S. say that?

It seems that you and Mrs. Malkin are the ones who don’t get it.
#35

On July 21st, 2004 at 1:56 pm, Lorie said:

Surge,
I’m unable to read the information on the link you provided due to time constrants, but I did browse the Contents section.

I did not see anything that speaks to crime & illigal immigrants.

If you have the time, please read the following.

http://www.cis.org/articles/2004/back704.html

Thanks,
Lorie
#36

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:00 pm, Diane said:

Surge:
By some chance are YOU an illegal
immigrant? Oh, when my grandmother and her friends came here from Ireland in the 1920’s they WANTED to be citizens. When my son came here in 1996 from South Korea we couldn’t wait for him to become an American. Why should my family have to jump through the hoops to become legal and no one else has to? By the way I am not a zealot. I obey the laws of this country.
#37

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:11 pm, CocoNL said:

I wonder what excuse you used to rationalize your obvious racism, prior to September 11th.
Reading your call to arms, focused on enflaming hatred against Arabs and other immigrants, I can�t help but wonder how fellow Asians felt during WWII round-up of Japanese citizens and suspicion of anyone �Asian�. My heart goes out to your poor 4 year old and the psychological trauma you appear to be gleefully inflicting upon her. Presumably she will be so disturbed growing up that she will only be fit to take those �great jobs� all supposed criminal illegal aliens do. Don�t expect her to visit at Christmas though, the local fastfood joint doesn�t offer benefits to dishwashers & cleaners. My advice to you: put the weapon down, and check into the nearest mental hospital: you need professional help.
#38

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:15 pm, Carol said:

“Childhood was removed from children a long time ago, piece by piece. A parent who insulates a child from reality does that child no favors. True, the harshness can be softened, but the reality can only be denied at her peril.”

Mike, you get no argument from me that all American children should be educated about terrorism. However, the point that I was trying to make is that 4 is much too young.
#39

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:25 pm, Sashawna Miller said:

I hear what you’re saying, ANTI-MALKIN! You’ve got some good points. If you had a forum I’d be a dedicated reader. Anti-Malkin is just saying that we’re all immigrants in this country. No it wouldn’t make scense for us all to go back to Africa. But if America wants to call itself “The land of opportunity” then why is there such a fuss about immigration. Your family more than likely immigrated here or was brought here due to the greatest crime in mankinds’history (SLAVERY). Why is okay for those who immigrated here in the past but those in the present looking for a better life have people trying to deny them access to our “Land of Opportunity”?
#40

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:37 pm, Hector said:

CAROL M. you’re not very smart are you? “GET OVER IT.” That one comment is the dumbest thing I’ve ever read in my 29 years. “Get Over it.” Well, hell I guess we should tell Jewish people to just get over the holocost, and tell african americans to just forget about slavery. While we’re at it black people should just get over generations of persecution, huh? Is that your way of sweeping America’s murderous history under the rug. You say get over it. I say never. Native American’s were brutally slaughtered, our image and history have been slandered, football teams play under racial slurs directed at us, our land was stolen, and we were put on to plantations called reservations. America commited genocide. And you say, “GET OVER IT!” Go to HELL! Anti-Malkin, keep speaking the truth!
#41

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:52 pm, Islam Genius said:

Carol M:

Native Americans did originate in Asia but that was when the continents were all apart of Pangea. As the continents seperated over the ages the native Americans migrated to what would one day be North America. Ages later when North America had settled into the western hemisphere Native Americans were the people who for all intents and purposes owned what is now America. The land WAS infiltrated and stolen from them by the first IMMIGRANTS to this country…. EUROPEANS! If anyone should be raising hell it’s native americans.
#42

On July 21st, 2004 at 2:57 pm, Marshall said:

Anti-Malkin - your post is silly and ignorant. We all know that legal immigration is the life blood of this country. What the sane on this blog are arguing against is ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION!!

If the Italians, the Irish, the Jews, the Asians, the Indians can come here legally, why not Hispanics?

In a post-9/11 world, you simply can not have thousands of miles of open borders and a policy that almost invites people to come here ILLEGALLY. Why is anyone who is against illegal immigration suddenly branded anti-immigration by those on the left?

The answer is because you would rather argue with silly sound bites about how the “Europeans” should go home. HA!

As far as reducing any arguments to rubble, I would say you fell a little short on that one.
#43

On July 21st, 2004 at 3:08 pm, Beck said:

I find this article to be a perfect reflection of the soccer/security mom egocentrism: you want lower priced goods, yet you cry foul when jobs are exported overseas; you want larger, gas-hungry cars to transport your brood, yet you demand, with a galling sense of self-entitlement, lower prices at the pump; you want to ‘protect’ your children, yet you often vote for an administration hell-bent on destroying our quality of life (see Bush’s record on the Clean Air and Clean Water acts) and our environment (recent castration of protection for ‘roadless’ portions of our national parks); and finally, you want tighter immigration, but you also want tax breaks and less government.

Certainly, this is a generalization on many Republican platforms and may not represent the nuanced views I’m sure Michelle has on many of these issues, yet one of the biggest loopholes in our immigration and naturalization policy deals with Cuba — a country both parties have vilified as a way to court the *very* powerful anti-Cuban lobbies. However, nobody is in bed deeper with these exiles than the Bush family. Not only have both Bushes bolstered the “dry foot” policy, which allows asylum-seekers from Cuba and from NO other country to be granted citizenship if they can get one foot on dry American soil, but Sr. Bush also pardoned and allowed to return to the States known Cuban terrorists, including a nasty bunch of gentlemen that had a penchant for blowing up airliners (one happened to be chock full of a young contingent of Cuban children coming back from an athletic event in Central America). Hard on terrorism? Only if it suits our interests.

What will a vote for Bush do for the safety of your children? Well, they will likely be saddled with national debt, live in a country with dimished resources and increasing health risks from powerful and newly unfettered industrial companies, be vilified the world over, not to mention feared, for imperialist attitudes, live with daily paranoia (some of it rightly so) due to the zealotry such zenophobic attitudes are feeding abroad, and possibly (if our friends at Foreign Policy Magazine are right) get to live through pronounced race wars when the inevitable crush of illegal immigrants not allowed to assimilate into society begin forming their own societies, with English language and customs as secondary. Also, if we continue to go from conflict to conflict without even attempting to solve and finish the previous one(s), one can easily envision a reinstatement of the draft. Call me a bleeding heart, for my heart bleeds for your children and the rest of this children in this nation taught to hate and fear and always place their needs well above the needs of their neighbors.
#44

On July 21st, 2004 at 3:12 pm, Marshall said:

How in the hell did an argument about immigration get to a discussion of Native Americans?

And why call them “Native Americans”? There would not have been any “America” for them to be native to had it not been for those evil Europeans. The Indian population in what is North America prior to the 1600’s was a diverse race of hundreds of tribes (some of who hated eachother) that had stayed relatively the same for centuries.

Can you imagine a world today where the vast resources and possiblities of the United States of America went completely unused? Think about the number of people that live in freedom because of America. The diseases cured by our scientists. The aid that is sent to Africa every year - more than the rest of the world combined!

Stop hating America so much you can’t even see straight and make reasonable conclusions.
#45

On July 21st, 2004 at 3:16 pm, Kylis said:

Well put Beck.
#46

On July 21st, 2004 at 3:18 pm, Jose Bradferd said:

anti malkin:

You are so very right! I get what you’re saying. Everyone else immigrated here, why not allow hispanics? Yeah, we’re at war but programs could be set up to quickly and effectivly allow hispanics a chance at the american dream. They should be allowed access into this country. America is so quick to help out bosnia and other places. If people want help and wish to make their lives better America would be the place to do it. There could be a faster screening process and we could allow a certain number of people into the country every year(more than we do currently).
#47

On July 21st, 2004 at 3:25 pm, Loraine Perkins said:

“How in the hell did an argument about immigration get to a discussion of Native Americans?”

We’re talking about immigration. The most famous immigrants ever are those who came to America and stole it from it’s inhabitants.

And why call them “Native Americans”?

Their called native Americans ’cause they’re native to the north American contentant.

There would not have been any “America” for them to be native to had it not been for those evil Europeans. The Indian population in what is North America prior to the 1600’s was a diverse race of hundreds of tribes (some of who hated eachother) that had stayed relatively the same for centuries.

Can you imagine a world today where the vast resources and possiblities of the United States of America went completely unused? Think about the number of people that live in freedom because of America. The diseases cured by our scientists. The aid that is sent to Africa every year - more than the rest of the world combined!

Stop hating America so much you can’t even see straight and make reasonable conclusions”

no one said they hate America. America was built upon the corpses of those it enslaved and bullied. America is a great country but people like to ignore it’s violent history. As great as it is, it was built through acts of evil.
#48

On July 21st, 2004 at 3:29 pm, CocoNL said:

Marshall - you naive thing you.
I neither have the time nor inclination to respond to all of your inanities posted. As a researcher, I actually like to look at things in depth unlike your cereal box, make me feel good garbage fed to you by the powers that be.

So let me just pick up one point, which is fresh in my mind from a recent piece of research: The question of Aid to African countries. Apart from the fact that it is in great part thanks to colonialism and protectionist policies that these countries find themselves in need of such aid, rest assured that the US and England MAKE money on these so called charitable acts. They make money in securing exlusive contracts, where no competitive bidding may take place, worth more than they donated.

Don’t pat yourself on too quickly - take your blinders off and actually seek the truth.