Blogito, Ergo Sum

by Gregg Calkins

 

2 May 2010, a Sunday

Bomb scare in Times Square seems more like the work of amateurs. Could be all sorts of forensic evidence (yeah, I know, I could have said clues) since it did not go off.

I don’t know, sometimes I think Tom Friedman just seems desperate for an idea so he grasps at straws:

This is a strange time for U.S.-Mexico relations. The Mexican government just issued a travel advisory warning Mexicans about going to Arizona — where they could get arrested by the police for no reason — and the U.S. government just issued a travel advisory warning Americans about going to northern Mexico — where they could get shot by drug dealers for no reason.

Equating getting shot with being asked if you are carrying the documents required by Obama’s federal law, first issued by the hallowed FDR, is as stupid a notion as it is possible for a Liberal to utter aloud.

And, of course, LEGAL Mexicans in Arizona cannot get arrested by the police for no reason, and Tom should know that very well. Does he think probably his readers are too stupid to know better? If they continue reading further, after this, then he’s probably correct.

How strange to drop down a couple of lines and read an intelligent Op-ed instead?

Oil, however, is too complicated for simple solutions. Whether this spill turns out to be the result of a freakish accident or a cascade of negligence, the likely political outcome will be a moratorium on offshore drilling. Emotionally, I love this idea. Who wants an oil drill in his park or on his coastline? Who doesn’t want to punish Big Oil on behalf of the birds?

Moratoriums have a moral problem, though. All oil comes from someone’s backyard, and when we don’t reduce the amount of oil we consume, and refuse to drill at home, we end up getting people to drill for us in Kazakhstan, Angola and Nigeria — places without America’s strong environmental safeguards or the resources to enforce them.

Kazakhstan, for one, had no comprehensive environmental laws until 2007, and Nigeria has suffered spills equivalent to that of the Exxon Valdez every year since 1969. (As of last year, Nigeria had 2,000 active spills.) Since the Santa Barbara spill of 1969, and the more than 40 Earth Days that have followed, Americans have increased by two-thirds the amount of petroleum we consume in our cars, while nearly quadrupling the quantity we import. Effectively, we’ve been importing oil and exporting spills to villages and waterways all over the world.

Environmentalists seem to me to be mostly NIMBY people, anywhere else but in my back yard, who don’t really care all that much about Kazakhstan or Nigeria, places far away lived in by people they scarcely recognize and wouldn’t invite home for dinner in any case.

Meanwhile, they like to be able to get in their car and run the five blocks or so to get to the store.

My youngest son wants to know when we are going back to the United States again. I didn’t tell him any hard truths, he’s only 7, but by far the biggest expense of our trip, since family and friends kindly fed us and let us sleep on their floors, was renting a car and buying gasoline.

Simply pushing oil production away from us does not solve the underlying problem. But much can be done to change drilling on federal lands and possibly make it safer. A good first step would be to reform the federal Minerals Management Service, which is responsible for both environmental enforcement and financial administration of offshore drilling leases. In 2008, this agency was caught up in a wide-ranging ethics scandal — including allegations of financial self-dealing, accepting gifts from energy companies, cocaine use and sexual misconduct — that exposed its ridiculously close relationship with the oil industry.

Several years ago, the agency considered requiring the installation of relatively inexpensive ($500,000) remote-controlled switches on offshore drilling rigs as a backup mechanism for shutting down spills like the one that’s running out of control today — but decided it wasn’t needed because there were other ways for drillers to cut off their wells.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish?

George Will on Arizona:

Late-night comedians, recalling World War II movies in which Gestapo officers demand "show me your papers," find echoes of fascism in Arizona's belief that there are occasions when police officers can reasonably ask for someone's documentation. On Tuesday, Barack Obama, showing contempt for the professionalism and character of police officers, said: "Now suddenly if you don't have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you're going to be harassed."

Time was, presidents were held to higher standards than comedians. Today's liberals favor indignation over information, but lawyer Obama must know that since 1952 federal law has said: "Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him."

Obama’s disrespect for police officers is reflexive, reminding us about his other off-the-cuff comment he later had to hold a "beer summit" to apologize for making. There’s a real question in my mind how much lawyer Obama really does know before he opens his mouth without a teleprompter present.

This part particularly amused me:

In today's debate, the threshold question is: Should the nation have immigration laws? Until 1875, there were none. There are strict libertarians who believe there should be none. But the vast majority who do not favor completely open borders believe that there should be some laws restricting who can become residents, and presumably they believe that such laws should be enforced.

Once Americans are satisfied that the borders are secure, the immigration policies they will favor will reflect their -- and the law enforcement profession's -- healthy aversion to the measures that would be necessary to remove from the nation the nearly 11 million illegal immigrants, 60 percent of whom have been here for more than five years. It would take 200,000 buses in a bumper-to-bumper convoy 1,700 miles long to carry them back to the border. Americans are not going to seek and would not tolerate the police methods that would be needed to round up and deport the equivalent of the population of Ohio.

Long-time readers may remember several years ago when I spent some time estimating how many buses would be needed, although I don’t remember now how my calculations turned out. That’s 55 passengers per bus, which I had gotten from Greyhound, I believe. Even if it were voluntary, the sheer logistics are mind-boggling.

While I don’t know quite what to do which all of those who are here, I do know the one thing that needs to be done immediately: stop the influx of illegals. If people wouldn’t break the law then there’d be no problem to solve here, and that’s the first step which has to be addressed.

Do Americans know that they can’t just up and decide they want to live in another country in the world and all they have to do is simply go there and move in? I have friends and relatives who want to move to Costa Rica...but it isn’t that simple and most of them can’t qualify. Carol and I had to work and wait for our own opportunity.

Meanwhile, hysteria about domestic fascism is unhelpful, even though it is a liberal tradition. In his 1944 State of the Union address, FDR identified opponents of his domestic agenda as fascists. Declaring that his "one supreme objective" was "security," including "economic security, social security, moral security," he issued a dire warning: Woodrow Wilson's progressive policies had been frustrated by "rightist reaction," and "if history were to repeat itself and we were to return to the so-called 'normalcy' of the 1920s -- then it is certain that even though we shall have conquered our enemies on the battlefields abroad, we shall have yielded to the spirit of Fascism here at home."

Today's hysterics are unoriginal. But they learned their bad manners from a master.

Here you go:

Obama administration officials hit the Sunday talk-show circuit to defend their response to the massive oil spill off the coast of Louisiana, stressing that President Obama has been on top of the situation since "Day One" and shrugging off comparisons to the George W. Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina.

Speaking on "Fox News Sunday," Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said it's British Petroleum — the company that owns the well that exploded on April 20 — that needs to be doing more to contain the disaster. ...

Although Mr. Obama did not make his first public statement on the situation until nine days after the initial oil rig explosion, Ms. Napolitano and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said he was involved early on behind the scenes, overseeing the administration's response.

Nine days...that’s not too many. He was on top of it since day one, that’s the important part. When Obama gets on top of things then results happen immediately. Or don’t.

Frank Rich often makes me laugh...at him:

Arizonans, like all Americans, have every right to be furious about Washington’s protracted and bipartisan failure to address the immigration stalemate. To be angry about illegal immigration is hardly tantamount to being a bigot. But the Arizona law expressing that anger is bigoted, and in a very particular way. The law dovetails seamlessly with the national "Take Back America" crusade that has attended the rise of Barack Obama and the accelerating demographic shift our first African-American president represents.

The crowd that wants Latinos to show their papers if there’s a "reasonable suspicion" of illegality is often the same crowd still demanding that the president produce a document proving his own citizenship. Lest there be any doubt of that confluence, Rush Limbaugh hammered the point home after Obama criticized Arizona’s action. "I can understand Obama being touchy on the subject of producing your papers," he said. "Maybe he’s afraid somebody’s going to ask him for his."

Frank, of course, thinks this is...well, I don’t know what, maybe racist?

You see, here’s the puzzling part that Frank won’t mention. Obama claims to have an original birth certificate proving he was born in Hawaii. Hawaiian officials claim to have seen it. Despite this, Obama refuses to produce it, offering in its place another document which was created many years AFTER his birth.

I have no doubt whatsoever that it is not accurate, as far as it goes, and completely legal. But even the document admits it is only an excerpt, at best.

Why is it unreasonable to ask to see the original everyone acknowledges exists? What is the point of honor Obama is defending here in refusing? Why does Frank Rich think this is okay to do when he demanded that Bush prove his National Guard attendance, for God’s sake?

I don’t know what’s going on here, but I can tell you that something is starting to smell kind of funny, and Obama could resolve the issue in a New York minute...but refuses to do so.

Why?

If I was Obama's best friend I'd look at his sinking poll numbers and point out it would make a lot of his enemies look like idiots if he showed them his original birth certificate. You might well imagine Frank Rich would give him the same advice.

You'd be wrong, of course.

Allahpundit echoes my feelings about the Arizona law:

Even by its usual standards of bias and screeching demagoguery, the commentariat really has outdone itself this time. Click that last link to see what I mean, being careful to note that it’s not just lefties with filth on their hands. The more I think about it, the more I’m convinced that Arizona’s law will be a spectacular success even if it never goes into effect. Look at how much it’s accomplished: It’s derailed the Democrats’ amnesty bill; it’s refocused national attention on the disgraceful state of border enforcement; it’s convinced some illegals that Arizona’s not worth the trouble; and it’s baited bottom-feeders in the media into all sorts of dumb, self-discrediting analysis. All that in just a week, before the law’s even taken effect. That’s some mighty efficient legislatin’ right there.

Right on!

I’m giving you a second video below the Coulter clip along the same lines, to remind you (a) that some people are conscientious enough to read the bill before commenting on it and (b) that it’s a mistake to assume that all Latino citizens are against the bill. (But then, we already sort of knew that.) An important fact that’s often lost amid the shameless racial pandering on this subject: There are hundreds of thousands of Mexicans every year who do follow proper procedure in immigrating to the U.S. and most people are happy to have them come. In 2008, more than 230,000 native-born Mexicans were naturalized as American citizens, the most from any nation in the world and a number greater than the combined total from the next four countries on the list. In 2009, more than a million people became legal permanent residents; 15 percent were Mexican, the only country in double digits percentage-wise.

Who knew? Did the New York Times report this? The Washington Post?


Blogito, Ergo Sum - HOME
 

Blogito, Ergo Sum - ARCHIVES