House of Cards III

READ PART I

READ PART II



The only people who don't want that outcome are the Mexican-hating bigots -- they would rather destroy the Republican Party than tolerate a change in the law that would allow more brown-skinned Spanish speakers a chance to become full-fledged English-speaking Americans.

Seeing that the law already allows brown-skinned Spanish speakers a chance to become full-fledged English-speaking Americans, and seeing that third worlders have been given special status among immigrants since the Immigration Reform Act of 1965--over and above people of white European stock--I can conclude only that you're either an imbecile, or grossly ignorant on this subject matter. Of course, that hasn't stopped you from waxing long and sophistically, has it?

And to you, Mitt Romney, if you win in New Hampshire on the backs of hard-working, brave Mexicans who put their family's welfare ahead of obedience to a cruel and useless immigration law, then shame on you. Shame on you as an American. Shame on you as a Christian.

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings, but Mormonism isn't Christianity. Anyone conversant with both sets of beliefs knows this; those who deny it either dissemble or speak from comfortable cluelessness. Nor will I brook being lectured on proper Christian behavior by a Mormon.

I hope you lose in New Hampshire, Mitt Romney. I hope you realize that taking Tancredo's place as the leader of the xenophobic wing of the Republican Party is a losing proposition.

Interesting how Card defines someone who wants to preserve his country: as a xenophobe or a bigot. It says all you really need to know about his intellectual acuity and penchant for promoting left-wing anti-Americanism. It disgusts me to no end that a man who calls for what amounts to America's dissolution dares lecture others on what it means to harbor anti-American sentiments.

Then maybe you'll become again what I think you really want to be, at heart: A true moderate, a man who could preside over all the people of America -- even the ones who came here from Mexico under the wire, most of whom long to be citizens just like your ancestors and mine.

Two quick points, on this. First, "moderation" is not what brought the U.S. into existence, nor made it a great country. Were the Founders moderate in their philosophical and political outlook? Second, drawing no distinctions between illegal alien Mexicans and our ancestors is disingenuous. Prior to the 1940s, illegal migration into this country wasn't a serious problem; most immigrants came legally, and attempted assimilating into the culture. There is no comparison between Europeans who immigrated here one hundred-fifty years ago, and the uncontrolled chaos and flagrant disregard for the rule of law that we see today. That's a standard canard trotted out by globalists and illegal alien sympathizers.

Many Republicans are fond of saying that America is a Christian country. They claim to believe that we are all sinners, dependent on the mercy and forgiveness of Christ.

Which is why I'm baffled that so many of the same folks are grimly determined to deny any chance of amnesty -- a synonym for forgiveness or pardon -- to people whose crime is only a crime because a law we could easily change declares it so.

Simplistic and dishonest. Jesus never preached that we should allow crime to go unpunished. He never said, "Turn out your prisons; release your rapists and murderers; invite the torturer over for dinner." Forgiveness does not mean pretending that someone did no wrong, and foregoing just temporal punishment. Nor was He talking about the rule of law, when he spoke of mercy and forgiveness. He was referencing one's personal interactions with others. This is the same sort of argument made by those who proclaim Jesus was a socialist who advocated government confiscation of individual incomes for "charitable" purposes. It's applying to a national level what was meant strictly on a personal level. Charity starts at home and is a free-will sacrifice for the sake of others--not the involuntary loss of funds, confiscated by Caesar. There's nothing charitable about stealing another man's money, no matter how you sugar-coat it, and letting wanton criminals off the hook for their crimes is not following Jesus' example, in my opinion.

There's another point here that needs addressing: When Card says that their only crime is illegal entry, this is just more obfuscation on his part. In 2005 Los Angeles, 95 percent of outstanding homicide warrants were for illegal aliens, as were 66 percent of fugitive felony warrants. The 18th Street Gang has 20,000 members--of whom 60 to 80 percent are illegal aliens. According to the California Department of Justice and the L.A.P.D., The L'il Cycos Gang was thought to be made up of 60 percent illegal aliens in 2002, and the percentage is considered higher, now. This gang is best known for murder, racketeering, and trafficking drugs. Housing illegal aliens in Florida prisons costs the state $155 million annually. Around 30 percent of the U.S. federal prison population is illegal alien. All of the above doesn't even take into account tax evasion, social welfare and identity fraud, rapes, robberies, etc. Predictably, some of the most crime-ridden areas of our country are those where illegal aliens constitute the highest population percentages.

The unavoidable and non-PC truth is that a large portion of these people were criminals before they ever set foot on American soil, committed further crime by entering the U.S. illegally, and followed a path of career criminality once they settled down in the U.S. Even the ones who came here, received deportation notices, and came back--and did nothing else--are felons, according to U.S. law. Again, if you didn't respect the law in the beginning, why would you pay it heed later?

But in the voting booth, most Americans consult their consciences. Most Americans will not vote for a candidate whose platform is built on hate and fear of strangers.

This is the same brand of rhetoric practiced by the Left: if you don't embrace what they say you should embrace, it's because you hate or fear it. Don't like homosexuality? You're a homophobe or hate-monger. Dislike affirmative action? You're a racist. Find the modern feminist movement distasteful? Your a mysogynistic, knuckle-dragging patriarchal scum. Believe unborn children have a God-given right to life? Why, you must hate women and want to keep them repressed.

I don't want to live under shari'a -- but I also don't want to live under a government that drives hard-working parents and their children out of our country at the point of a gun, all for the crime of doing what it took to feed their families.

How hysterical. In the end, it all comes down to "it's for the children," doesn't it? Whose children? Why, not yours, you Anglocentric rat. He's talking about the children of criminals, who were born in our country and are now considered American citizens, due to a deliberate perversion of the Fourteenth Amendment. As for your children, gringo, they should smile and brush up on their Spanish. So what if their country and heritage is being stolen from them, without their consent or knowledge? Your children can go to blazes.

As a novelist, I quite like Orson Scott Card; as a thinker and a man of intellectual integrity, I think he's a charlatan, and strictly third-rate--at least on this particular issue. I'm not impressed by his feeble attempts at rationalization and semantic subterfuge. His emotion-driven casuistry on immigration is indistinguishable from that of the most committed one-world socialist.