The illegal immigration protests in Murrieta, for the most part, have come to an end. The federal government backed down, deciding not to send bus loads of diseased migrants into our community anymore. Now, they are shipping them to local churches, and border patrol facilities in other States. We have decided to protest that, too, when we can, beginning with the 46 illegal aliens who entered the USA via Texas arriving at St. Joseph's Catholic Church in Fontana, Calfornia on July 10, 2014. A number of rallies challenging the federal government's decision to keep the border wide open are planned at that location, and others.
In the wake of the Murrieta showdown, I sat down with National Public Radio, and one of the early questions the correspondent asked me was, "If you look up the City of Murrieta on search engines, it comes up as the City of Hate. How does that make you feel."
NPR is not the only media outlet to ask that question, though it is not normally phrased in such a manner to me. Other outlets have asked, "Do you believe your protests have given Murrieta a black eye?" Another asked, "Do you think Murrieta will lose new business and investors as a result of this," referencing a conversation they had with the Chamber of Commerce chairman who, the correspondent told me, was experiencing potential businesses and investors in the city pulling out because of the "hate" portrayed by its citizens.
Most of America supports the idea of securing the border. In fact, one poll states that 82% of Americans are in favor of securing the border with Mexico. That tells me that most Americans support the patriots in Murrieta, and their protest against the federal government trying to force its will upon a community. The ones putting out the message that Murrieta is a city of hate do not belong to the majority, but are the well-funded, or the loudest shouters.
The unfortunate truth is that the loudest voices are not necessarily the majority, but the news agencies treat them as if they are. And to be honest, I don't even care if the majority did not support Murrieta in its crusade against a tyrannical federal government. Sometimes, doing the right thing is not always the most popular thing to do. During the American Revolution only a third of the population of the colonies supported the drive for independence, and only 3% of the population actually fought the war against the tyranny of Great Britain.
In the case of Murrieta, "hate" had nothing to do with the motives of the citizens that stood out there in the heat protesting what was being done to their city. Discrimination, and racism, was not a component in the minds of the people of Murrieta. The protests were about defending the rule of law, protecting the city in terms of health and safety, and bringing attention to an issue that places those trying to come to the United States in danger because the federal government refuses to secure the border and instead has put out a welcome mat for those willing to break the law to enter this country - regardless of gang affiliation, criminal history in their country of origination, and health status.
Immigration laws, of which this White House refuses to faithfully execute (as provided in Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution), are in place for a reason. In Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution, Congress is given the authority to "prohibit" such persons, not based on race or ethnicity, but on what is safest, and most beneficial, in regards to the welfare of the receiving population. Ellis Island was established to function as a health screening facility. Immigration law is in place to weed out the contagious, and those that would not abide by our laws. By ignoring the immigration laws that are currently on the books, the federal government is placing the resident population of the United States at risk, placing at risk the domestic tranquility and general welfare of the United States. To infuse disease and persons with criminal pasts into our society is to dilute Americanism, and destroy the native population.
The accusation of "hate" and "racism" is an expected reaction by the political opponents of the United States Constitution. The fact that our system cannot absorb the numbers we are experiencing in terms of illegal immigration, be it economically, culturally, and in regards to the introduction of disease previously eradicated (or minimized) in our society is not a concern for those on the left side of the political spectrum. Theirs is a drive for power and control, using a false premise of racism and hate in order to bring emotion into the debate. Emotion can smother reason, and the facts no longer remain important. Truth becomes radical thought, and honest government recedes into a domain considered to be extreme, and the thinking of fringe revolutionaries.
A friend of mine, John O'Donnell Rosales, is a Cuban exile, and he told me that the change in Cuba happened within a decade. My friend Arkady Faktorovich came to the United States from the Ukraine, while it was still under the control of the Soviet Union. Patriot Greg is from Romania, before the fall of the Soviet Union. Another friend of mine, a fellow truck driver, Paul, came here from Russia. All of them are nervous, and say that the signs we are seeing with the current administration is in line with what they saw in their homelands. The immigration explosion is not about immigration, just like the gay agenda is not about marriage, common core is not about education, Obamacare is not about health, the Hobby Lobby case was not about birth control or women's rights, and Michelle Obama's nutritional standards for schools is not about getting our kids to eat healthier. Each and every one of these issues are about the consolidation of power into the federal government, and more specifically, into the hands of a democrat controlled White House and judiciary. How many times have we heard the President say he will put his agenda into action with or without Congress, and how many times have they tried to push the federal government's agenda on local communities, cities, and States regardless of what the localities wanted?
The protests in Murrieta were not about hate, or racism, but was all about a local people standing against the tyranny of a federal government intent upon forcing its will upon the people, regardless of constitutional authority, regardless of the people's will, and regardless of the opinion of a House in Congress that dares to stand against the rising tyranny of the federal government.
Murrieta was more than a protest. It was the beginning of a revolution, a resistance to federal tyranny, and President Obama's desire to lawlessly force his policies upon America. The American Revolution over two centuries ago began as protests by colonists trying to appeal to the king as Englishmen. Right now we are trying to appeal to the federal government as Americans, and those that recognize we are a nation under the rule of law, not the rule of men. Let us hope the federal government has enough sense to appeal to Heaven, and remember that the rights of men are God-given, not given by government.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Poll: 82% of Americans think it is important to secure the border - Illinois Review
No comments:
Post a Comment