Miss White America

Miss White America
The White Congressional Caucus
The White Entertainment Network
The White Family Reunion
National White History Month
The Hollywood White Film Festival
The White Music Research Journal
The National Association for the Advancement of Caucasian People
White Music MonthThe White America WebWhiteAmericaToday.com
The National White Women's Health Project
The National White Chamber of Commerce
The National White Child Development Institute
The National White Police Association Homepage
The National White Arts Festival
The National White United Front
The National White Theatre
The National White Business Council, Inc.
The National White Nurses Association, Inc.
The National White Programming Consortium
The National White Deaf Advocates

None of these things exist, nor should they; nor would they be allowed to in spite of that free speech thing that we hear so much about.

Substitute Black for White, however, and all of these things exist, along with thousands more entities designed to promote, or at the very least, encourage, racism in America.

Racism still exists... only now it comes from a different direction.

No race (as a whole) will succeed when it (as a whole) insists on separating itself from the American People (as a whole).

Conditional Citizenship for Illegal Immigrants

11 million? 30 million?

It is unrealistic to suggest that we track down this many people and eject them. This is a costly and ineffective plan which - because of current anti-profiling procedures - would turn the entire population of this country into suspects - (see TSA).

It is impractical to simply forgive this serious flaunting of our laws. American Citizenship has always been a priveledge and any amnesty program further devalues that priveledge. It's time to add that value back with a strict but fair proposal. Here's one:

Every illegal immigrant must do the following:

1. Pay all back taxes.
2. Serve 2 years probation.
3. Supply fingerprint and DNA identification.
4. Pass the citizenship test within 2 years.

Successful completion of these four requirements grants conditional citizenship and expungement of the conviction. Failure to pass the citizenship test in the allotted time shall result in expulsion and disqualification from future Conditional Citizenship consideration.

Conditional citizenship so acquired will be restricted as follows:

1. applies ONLY to the individual - not to his or her family - for the first 5 years, after which full citizenship is granted.
2. commission of certain types of felonies as a conditional citizen will result in revocation of citizenship and expulsion and placement on a watch list which prohibits or severely restricts future citizenship processing.

The keyword is ILLEGAL

Tell me how can people in good conscience protest the enforcement of immigration laws?

Tell me how people who commit a felony by entering our country illegally and then proceed to steal (or be given) a geometrically disproportionate percentage of the benefits available to poor American citizens - that's CITIZENS - how can these people have the audacity to complain when we ask them to abide by the law?

How can they "demand" anything? And why does anyone listen when they do?

This country has always welcomed legal immigrants, and I believe it always will. Very few on the other side of this are against immigration. We are against ILLEGAL immigration. Let me say that again: We are against ILLEGAL immigration.

And somehow - after 230 years - that has become a bad thing.

This country is very sick.

"Insurgents"... Brilliant!

People who kill innocent men, women and children are called "insurgents".

This single choice of substituting the word insurgent for "terrorist" in order to make Iraq appear to be an internal affair which poses no threat to the U.S. and in which we should not be involved, was a brilliant move by the (anti-)American Media.

I can just hear the meetings now in February of 2003.

"There's going to be a war and if we win this war, Bush will look good and the Republicans might win the next election. My God! Hillary might never be President!!! What can we do?"

"Let's say that Bush is going there because he wants to avenge his father... haliburton wants Iraq's oil... he is a stupid cowboy... he just loves war... you know, all the regular stuff"

"Nah. That won't keep us from winning the war. We need to make it seem Not like a war."

"Maybe we shouldn't use the word terrorist. Everybody hates terrorists."

"Brilliant! What should we use then?"

(Pause)

"Underdogs?"

"Freedom Fighters?"

"Challengers?"

"Little People?"

"Insurgents?"

"That's it! Insurgents aren't "bad" people. Insurgents have a "cause". Insurgents represent the grass roots. Yep. Insurgents it is. OK pass the word: from now on Terrorists will be referred to as Insurgents."

"But won't the American people see right through that? I mean, these terrorists - i mean, insurgents - are murdering innocent people."

(Brief pause... then laughter all around.)

"Good one, Sandy. Now go get us some more Danish."

Media, not Government, is Big Brother

It is one thing to "interpret" events in light of one's own bias. It is another thing to suppress facts that conflict with that bias.

The mainstream media - virtually all media - has moved into this second stage of action. The complete and utter misrepresentation of the Dubai Ports affair and the near total suppression of the significantly revealing analysis of captured documents and tapes signify that the press no longer has any interest in "the Truth". The "people's right to know" has become "the people's right to know what we (the media) want them to know".

One of the most lasting images that the liberal press has used over the years against any and all conservative thought is the "Big Brother" mantra. The truth is: mainstream media has itself become Big Brother.

Five things that will never happen...

Shut down the borders until our legislators can resolve the issues.

Institute a loser pays court system for civil suits - like every other civilized country.

Allow law enforcement to do its job.

Impose term limits on Congress. Why just the President?

Enforce the laws governing Treason during times of war.

Republican back-stabbers

They deny their bigotry, but many of those who so fiercely opposed the Dubai Ports World deal are just that. I never heard a single complaint about the ports that are "controlled" by the Chinese. The rest are liars Some are both, characterizing the deal as a takeover of control of our ports by ARABS. At the same time, anyone who suggested that the TSA pull aside anyone wearing a turban, would be crucified. The ACLU, of course, remained silent on this one, confused, I presume, by the dichotemy that these victims of racism are also rich - what to do?

Democrats suddenly concerned over security? Not a chance. I expect them to become "proponents" of anything that might make GW look bad. They have no belief system other than that... no standards... and above all, no shame. But I was surprised and disgusted by those Republicans who took this opportunity to distance themselves from the President, and in doing so, did far more damage than the predictable and impotent Liberals.

I don't think the deal was the smartest political move the Administration could have made. This group really isn't very good at public relations. It smelled bad from the start but, had it been squashed before becoming a public issue, the NYTimes would have been the first in a long line protesting the bigotry of the Administration - (no standards).

Politics is a repulsive business. We would be better off "electing" random citizens or, better still, having no Congress at all.

Andrew Sullivan: Ship-jumper

Sensing that the political winds may be changeing, Andrew Sullivan has become the latest "conservative pundit" to abandon his support of the War in Iraq (magically disassociated now with the War on Terror).

First in his March 6 Time article, as if to show us what lofty company he keeps, Sullivan cites William F. Buckley Jr, George Will and Francis Fukuyama, other recent ship-jumpers. Then he makes the statement that "The shock of 9/11 provoked an overestimation of the risks we faced."

In reality, the "shock" of 9/11 forced us to see the risks that were out there by revealing, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is a sizable contingency out there in the world, who want ALL Americans dead and are willing to die themselves in order to contribute to that goal. It also made it quite clear to us how much damage a very small group of people can do when they are willing to kill themselves to do it. How then can that "risk" be "overestimated"?

He further asserts that "the WMD intelligence debacle, something that did far more damage to the war's legitimacy and fate than many have yet absorbed."

Sullivan is wrong here too. The war has been deligitimized only as a result of the massive and unrelenting efforts by the Fourth Estate and the "Loyal Opposition" over the past 4 years to deligitimize anything and everything that George Bush touches. Sullivan is merely swallowing the story along with 50+% of the rest of us. Since it was clearly known that Saddam had WMD's in the mid-nineties, and since he had not complied with the U.N. order to destroy those weapons and report their destruction, it was by no means a failure for intelligence, but rather an extremely logical process, to assume that those weapons still existed. Hussein himself, in fact, encouraged that assumption by failing to provide the proof that would have established his compliance and saved his skin.

For his third airball, Sullivan quotes and agrees with Fukuyama "about the inevitability of democratic change, and its ease. We got cocky." But, however cocky "we" may or may not have been, no one ever told us that establishing democracy in Iraq or anywhere else would be easy.

Sullivan also seems to think that "we" were suprised by the resentment that was "provoked" by our efforts in Iraq. This resentment has been there for decades. It was kind of obvious from the celebrations that broke out in the Muslim world on September 11th, 2001. This hostility was not provoked but merely found a focal point in the Iraq War.

Perhaps auditioning for Air America, he jumps on the "too few troops" bandwagon, the "incompetence and misjudgement" bandwagon, the "civil war" bandwagon, and of course, the "torture" bandwagon.

With his egotistical regret concerning his role in leading us into war with his erroneous reasoning, Andrew Sullivan has "cleansed his soul", abandoned his neo-con label, and cleaned his slate for his next -ism.

He does not withdraw all hope - Wars and Democracies, it seems, are long term enterprises and anything can happen - but one has to wonder who will lead us, now that Mr. Sullivan has abdicated his post. God what pompous asses these men are! And the roles grow daily.