No More Amnesties

Vox Day:

The law is clear, the principle is settled, the American people have been burned by such amnesties before and they are not going to accept another one, no matter how many sob stories about “Dreamers” are waved like red flags before the public.

Damn right. Don’t think that photos of 5-year-old kids with big, soulful brown eyes matter any more. We’re beyond that now. It’s a matter of whether we have a right to survive as a nation.

Day continues:

However, if there is one thing that is clear about Donald Trump, it is that he is capable of learning from his mistakes.

Agreed, and thank God.

His base needs to be very clear about the fact that failing to keep his word on DACA is not acceptable.

Quite. Hey Donald: We love you… but we’re watching.

President Trump, NEVER Cave In on Immigration

Mr. President, this is our last chance to save the country. At least, it is our last chance to save it without literal civil war. It will require a political fight, maybe the most hard-fought political fight in this country of the last 100 years. You must hold fast on all measures pertaining to immigration. This will involve fighting it out, not bluffing your opponents. They won’t be bluffed, they won’t cave in: They really want to destroy this country. So we’ll have to actually fight it out and win, not convince them to yield concessions. Nor will they hesitate to use absolutely any tactic, including blatant outright lying.

Any concession that you think you’ve gotten from them will be a lie. It will be just like the 1986 “deal”:
“Give us an amnesty today, and we promise we’ll start strict border enforcement tomorrow.”

Americans had an amnesty inflicted on them, but never got the enforcement.

The fate of our great nation depends on your not believing anything that Democrats, or treasonous Republicans, tell you about this.

On the subject of Leftist lying about immigration “deals,” here are two recent essays by the incomparable Ann Coulter. Both are short and it’s easy to read them straight through. Some key passages:

We Made Donald %#&@ Trump PRESIDENT — What Else Can We Do?
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2017-09-06.html

We already tried amnesty once. The 1986 amnesty under Reagan was supposed to be a one-time fix. We’d forgive the estimated 1 million illegal aliens living here and, in exchange, draconian measures would be imposed on any employer ever caught hiring an illegal again — up to a $10,000 fine per illegal and jail time for repeat offenders.

We never got the employer sanctions.

There weren’t 1 million illegals — it was 4 million.

It wasn’t a one-time fix. In another real-world example of “incentives,” the first amnesty led to a never-ending stream of illegals across our border, confident of getting in on the next amnesty. Today, there are at least 40 million illegals living in the U.S. (Eleven million is nonsense — they’ve been claiming that since the 1980s…)

We’re told the DACA amnesty will apply only to a very small, discrete group of unbelievably fantastic illegals — who melt Ivanka’s heart by refilling her water glass at Cipriani with such alacrity! [Yes, Coulter’s being sarcastic here, Mr. President, but she’s right: We cannot make these decisions based on emotional considerations. And it’s not reciprocated: The people who are flooding into our country don’t have any such tender notions about us.]

Not only that, but there will be strict requirements on who qualifies for a DACA amnesty.

None of which will ever be enforced.

…Every politician swears up and down that he wants a “secure border.” But then these same politicians go absolutely berserk when Trump says he wants to build a wall.

They say we’ll get enforcement right after the amnesty. That’s obviously absurd… As long as both political parties stoutly refuse to build the wall, we know they are not serious about ever stopping illegal immigration. (Luckily, the Constitution gives the commander in chief full authority to protect our borders, with or without congressional approval.)

We know what happened after the Reagan amnesty. We know politicians and the media are lying to us.

The second piece:

NO AMNESTY IS A GOOD AMNESTY
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2017-09-13.html

To see how DACA will actually work, let’s look at another extremely limited amnesty that was passed in 1986.

Farmers wanted temporary guest-worker permits for their cheap labor, so that they could continue pretending that the Industrial Revolution never happened and refuse to mechanize… The agricultural amnesty was supposed to apply to — at most — 350,000 illegal aliens. It would be available only to illegals who were currently in the country…

In the end, “up to 350,000 farm workers” turned into 1.3 million…

This innocent little amnesty for a small, clearly defined group of illegals quickly became amnesty for anyone who applied. The same thing will happen with any other amnesty, no matter how strictly the law is written. (And it won’t be written strictly.)

In the first few years of the agricultural amnesty, internal Immigration and Naturalization Service statistics showed that 888,637 legalization applications were fraudulent. According to immigration agents, “farm workers” stated in their interviews that cotton was purple or that they had pulled cherries from the ground.

Of the 888,637 fraudulent applications, guess how many our government approved. Answer: More than 800,000.

The agricultural amnesty was so carefully administered that not one, but TWO of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers were in this country because of it.

…The main problem with the farm worker amnesty, the DACA amnesty or any amnesty is that everyone involved in the entire immigration apparatus is feverishly working, on the taxpayer’s dime, to transform this country into a Third World hellhole.

…For two decades after the 1986 amnesty, the federal courts were tied up with dozens of class-action lawsuits brought on behalf of illegal aliens — regular illegal aliens, farm worker illegal aliens and still-in-Mexico illegal aliens — challenging every aspect of the law.

…Lawyers sued over everything — the absence of Creole interpreters, the requirement that illegals have proof of prior farm work and the rare denials of amnesty… Left-wing lawyers just had to pick the right judge, and they won.

In 2005 — nearly 20 years after the 1986 amnesty — the Ninth Circuit was still granting amnesty to hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens who claimed they had been unfairly denied because they were not in the country for the first amnesty. Seriously.

No matter how the law is written, as long as anyone is eligible for amnesty, everybody’s getting amnesty.

President Trump is the last president who will ever have a chance to make the right decision on immigration. After this, it’s over. The boat will have sailed.

If he succeeds, all the p@ssy-grabbing and Russia nonsense will burn off like a morning fog. He will be the president who saved the American nation, its character, its sovereignty, its core identity. But if he fails, Donald Trump will go down in history as the man who killed America.

Hungary Bills EU for Border Fence

Hungary sends the EU a bill for their border fence:

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has been something of a thorn in the side of the EU for quite a while now when it comes to the refugee crisis and questions over terrorism and illegal immigration. While most of the rest of the union has been bending over backwards to keep pace with Angela Merkel’s plans for unlimited immigration and open borders, Hungary has taken a hard line in keeping the illegal migrants out. This has led the EU to recently consider imposing penalties on Hungary for their failure to get with the program.

Orban came up with an even better response of his own. He just sent the European Union a bill for $476 million to cover half the cost of the razor wire fence he put up to keep the flow of immigrants out.

Via Anonymous Conservative at
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/hungary-bills-the-eu-for-their-border-fence/

Not only is it perfectly just to present the EU with a bill, given EU “mandates” about immigration, and good politics, it also has the benefit of going on the offensive. Always being on the offensive is indeed the strategy the left used against us the last 50 years, and it certainly has worked for them. As Anon Conserv comments:

The more you go on the attack with the left, the more the left is trapped by having to repel your attack, and the less energy they have to insist on their own initiatives. As Donald insists on making Mexico pay for the wall and deports illegals at a record pace, the left finds itself forced to fight those initiatives, hoping to just diminish the success of one. While they are doing that, they are not lobbying to let illegals vote in our elections, or seek a path to citizenship.

Say What?

An anecdote heard second hand:

A woman is standing in line at a mall for whatever. She’s wearing shorts. Maybe she’s a little overweight.

Another woman in line behind her strikes up a conversation: “I really like your hair, looks great!”

“Thanks!”

Then, snottily: “But you might want to re-think those shorts.”

The kicker: The woman who said that was wearing a COEXIST T-shirt.

LOL.

More Political Miscellany

Good news, at least judging by bad guys’ appalled reaction, in a poll on Charlottesville:
Americans were polled about the violence in Charlottesville, and the answers are ugly

On the subject of Charlottesville:
What is a neo-Confederate? I’ve encountered the term here and there on the Net after the Charlottesville imbroglio. Is it someone who advocates re-legalizing race-based slavery? (Are there any such?) Or someone who wants to secede? Or what? If the latter, are leftists advocating Calexit neo-Confederates? Or is it anyone who doesn’t think Confederate statues should be torn down? In which case a strong majority of the US are neo-Confederates.

Study tries to find racial bias in Oakland police, fails, asserts it anyway:
https://www.city-journal.org/html/conjuring-disrespect-15339.html

The Carlos Slim Blog, formerly known as the New York Times, is annoyed that it can’t find evidence of Trump racism:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2017/08/we-can-infer-that-kanye-west-russell.html

The solar eclipse was racist!
http://davidthompson.typepad.com/davidthompson/2017/08/excruciatingly-woke.html

From the comments in the Atlantic piece being discussed:
“I vaguely remember when The Atlantic wasn’t a shrieking hive of retardation.”

USA Today annoyed by lack of Nazi regalia in Charlottesville:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/08/13/swastika-use-rise-nazis-trump-charlottesville-violence/104488402/

GQ annoyed by lack of Nazi dress in Charlottesville:
https://www.gq.com/story/uniform-of-white-supremacy
“In Charlottesville, demonstrators turned out in polos and khakis. But their seemingly innocuous clothes spoke volumes.”

Don’t be fooled by their seemingly innocuous polo shirts and khakis!

Speaking of shrieking hives of retardation.

The Left’s Rhetoric of Murder

The Left takes another rhetorical step toward attempted genocide:

Utterly vile little Antifa scumbucket, speaking (after being arrested) about the right:

Their existence itself is violent … so I don’t think using force or violence to oppose them is unethical.

This is the language of genocide. To say that a person’s very existence is violence is to try to construct a rationale for killing them. Note she didn’t claim a conditional right to attack people, as in “We have the right to attack them if they do such-and-such.” She claimed an unconditional right to attack people, as in, “The very fact that they exist gives us the right to attack them.” Plainly they are going to try it eventually. They’re going to try to kill us. So we are going to have no choice but to kill them in self-defense.

Hard to believe, but still harder to see how this plays out any other way.

It’s inevitable, because obviously we’re not going to let them kill us; we’re going to defend ourselves. Equally obviously, they’re not going to back down. The Left is designed as a machine that doesn’t back down. Vox Day didn’t articulate “SJWs always double down” as one of the Three Laws of SJWs for nothing.

Wow. That really is sad. It’s all so avoidable. All the leftists have to do is not try to kill us. But they’re not willing to forbear. They’re actually going to try to genocide whites in a majority-white nation. Wow. There’s only one way that ends.

And if you doubt this is going to “all whites” as opposed to just “politically incorrect whites” eventually, consider two facts: (1) Most whites are already deeply incorrect by the standards of the Left. The clear majority of whites voted for Trump, e.g. (2) Just think about the rhetoric of the Left, which is increasingly “ALL whites are guilty of racism and oppression.” See my post The Left, Summarized of a few days ago.

Also note something else: This rhetoric is the rhetoric of someone who literally cannot imagine the people she intends to be her victims fighting back. In a majority-X nation, you don’t say, on the record, “I have an unlimited right to attack all X’s” unless you simply cannot imagine a scenario in which X’s fight back. (Would you walk into a room full of a hundred hockey players and announce, “I have an unlimited right to kill all hockey players”?) This utterly insane failure of foresight and realism is another reason they won’t back down, and another reason that civil war is inevitable.

Some of the more sane, or less-insane, leftists are already starting to be like, “Um, guys…?” to the rest of them, and actually expressing doubts in public. (The situation has become extreme indeed when even leftists are willing to deviate from their herd.) But it’s too late. The momentum has gone past a certain tipping point. It’s now too late to stop the rush into civil war; we can only fight it out.

Everybody Lies About Sex

“Everybody lies about sex.” – Robert Heinlein

Funny fact: Since the number of women roughly equals the number of men, the average number of heterosexual sexual partners women have had must be roughly equal to the average number of heterosexual sexual partners men have had. In a study of US and UK non-virgins, ~40-year-old women reported having on average 8.6 male sexual partners and ~40-year-old men reported having on average 31.9 female sexual partners. Absolutely priceless.

PS: 100th post, whoo-hoo! Now that I’ve got you addicted, I’m going to double the price for reading this blog.