3.1.05 @ 12:01AM
THE DEVIL HIMSELF
Your Spectator site is PURE BULL. A BLOG for like-minded Ultra RIGHT WING SICKOS to read each other’s crap and get “MOIST” reading it. It’s like a gathering of fat people at a BUFFET. Feeding their faces on the half truths and lies of a corrupt bible thumping, RIGHT WING.
From AARP, to Homosexuals, to Social Security, you people are just plane [sic] SICK. The Christians that LOVE TO HATE. Anything to keep your stupid GW in office even though his puppet strings are showing. He has all the class of a day old doughnut.
Enjoy your 15 minutes, when you fall, it will make more noise
than the World Trade Center. The American people are really NOT as
stupid as you think they are. Mostly DEMOCRATIC, good-natured and
loving, Americans are NOT the HOMO Hating, HARD-HEARTED, OVER-TAXED
IDIOTS you make them out to be. As FUEL reaches $5.00 a gallon,
they will turn like a pitbull in a dog fight. Don’t look back over
your shoulder, that will be your OWN leaders following you to
— Michael Knight
Las Vegas, SIN CITY, Nevada
Recently my friend Rian Watt sent a letter about the article you wrote. In the article, you mentioned that he was an adult pretending to be a kid on Kids for Dean and that an eleven year old is not capable of writing the essay he submitted to the site. I happen to have known Rian for quite a while. We are now both seventh graders and Rian is still active in politics. Everyday he bores us to death at school with new Bush statistics. I am disappointed that you think he is not a child. Rian is one of the best writers and smartest kids at our school of 800. Rian’s interest in politics comes from his parents, who are also big Dean fans.
I was also bothered by the comments people made about your article. Rian is actually a KID, believe it or not!! He may be too much into politics, but he is not an adult. He’s just intelligent and knows how to write well.
I hope you correct your article.
— Matthew McClone
Shawn Macomber replies:
How many seventh grade boys would actually write about one of their friends, “I am disappointed that you think he is not a child.” Yeah, that’s the desire of seventh grade boys everywhere — to be seen as a “child.” If given the chance, the only thing I would correct is my estimation of how crazy you Deniacs are. Your guy lost, big time, many months ago. You can go back to being adults now and stop impersonating your children to make dubious political points on a website where, frankly, you and your little one-win primary revolution became passé a year ago.
Re: Enemy of the Week’s Ice Guys Finish Last:
Finally! What took you so long? I look for EOW every Friday, so imagine my happy surprise to find your brilliant undressing of one of my favorite villains, David Gergen.
Can there be a more wonderful example of a PBS blowhard? Man,
this guy should have been outed long ago!
— James Crystal
I am so glad to see this toady-to-the-highest-bidder assume his
rightful place among EOW alumni. The award also represents a
significant move by TAS in the direction of diversity, since I
believe that Gergen is the first “goggle-eyed melon head” to win
the award (Andrew Ferguson’s hilarious description).
VIDEO JACK FIRES BACK
Re: Christopher Orlet’s Game Blame:
I have just read Chris Orlet’s remarkably ill-informed piece about the lawsuit we have filed in Alabama against entities within the video game industry.
There are so many factual errors that one doesn’t know where to begin to correct them.
I will note, however, that I was a conservative before Mr. Orlet knew what one was. I subscribed to TAS when it was The Alternative coming out of Bloomington.
If you all want a real account of this lawsuit and why it squares with real conservative values, not libertarian ones, please let me know.
Oh, and watch 60 Minutes this Sunday for a true rendering of what this case is about.
I’m a Christian, by the way, and unlike Mr. Orlet, I believe in
original sin even if it manifests itself in a corporate board
— Jack Thompson
HANG ‘EM HIGH
Re: Tom Bethell’s Welfare State Immigrants:
Although I agree with much of what Tom Bethell wrote in his article “welfare state immigrants,” I strongly disagree with one of his key conclusions: “Neither ‘crackdowns’ nor ‘rewards’ are needed for those (illegal aliens) already here: let them remain in their ‘shadowy’ state of legal limbo.”
The people we need to crack down on — and hard — aren’t the illegal aliens per se. The people we need to crack down on very hard are the people employing the illegal aliens. They are violating all kinds of tax and labor laws, and often as not OSHA and a host of other regulations. Throw them in jail for 30 days and slap a $10,000 fine on them for every illegal worker they have, and the demand for illegal labor will dry up very fast. And with no demand for their labor, the illegals will stop coming pretty fast.
And please don’t trot out that ridiculous truism that illegal aliens have jobs Americans won’t take. (INSERT EMPHATIC PROFANITY) this is definitely not the case now, and hasn’t been the case for many, many years, and I think we all know it. Anyone who took an Econ 101 class in college knows that when you when you greatly increase the supply of something (like labor) the net affect is to depress the price paid for that commodity. To say that is to claim that no Americans will take construction jobs, or work in restaurants, or work in labor-intensive factories. And that’s an absurd statement. It might be correct to say that no Americans will take those jobs for the low wages the employer prefers to pay his workers, but let’s not kid ourselves here. Offer a high enough wage, and you can fill any job there is.
Frankly, I think that the real reason our countries ruling classes — both liberal and conservative — are so enamored with illegal aliens’ labor is because of racism. Take a look at the old movies from the 1930s and 1940s, back before illegal immigration was a large issue. Do you notice who the domestic help is for the rich people in those old movies? They’re African-Americans.
The mostly white ruling class of today — both liberal and
conservative — emphatically DOES NOT want to have cleaning ladies,
gardeners, and nannies who are American blacks. The ruling class
wants domestic help that is brown, that can be forced to work long
hours at low pay, and on whom they don’t have to file pesky
government-mandated paperwork or pay Social Security/Medicare and
other taxes on.
It is refreshing to read an article, concerning the present crisis in immigration, as espousing neither the lock all the doors or open the floodgates point of view. Mr. Bethell has done an excellent job of summing up the reasons for the current crisis. I find his solution to be a bit strange to say the least.
Mr. Bethell’s solution, ignore the current illegal immigrants living in this country but deny them standing and services, seems to me a bit puzzling. What exactly is to be accomplished by this? It seems that for this type of policy to prove effective, we have to assume that the only reason illegal immigrants come to the US is to avail themselves of access to public services, such as schools and hospitals. But, is that the real reason that thousands of impoverished people brave the deserts of Northern Mexico and the Southwestern United States every year? I doubt it.
I believe that the true reason for this immigration is simply money. A job harvesting fruit or vegetables in Mexico pays starvation wages, even by Mexican standards. The same job in the US, though well within the poverty level of this country, pays near skilled labor wages by Mexican standards. Access to free hospitalization and schooling are merely additional benefits and are not the basis for the initial trek into this country.
Mr. Bethell’s political analysis is spot on, however. Both
national parties and many national politicians view illegal
immigrants as a vast, growing and largely untapped pool of
potential voters. Due to their lack of education and insecure
status, many politicos believe that they can be what is lacking
today, an ill informed, easily led electorate. This is not exactly
the case, however. The only political
group that will benefit from this type of unbridled immigration are Hispanic leaders who find themselves able to control the expanding Hispanic immigrant electorate.
Now, lest any readers feel inclined to tar me as having an anti-Hispanic bias, let me say this. I support legal immigration, from any source country. A guest worker program is also an option. It makes no difference where the immigrant originates. The key to this is simply verification of the immigrant’s identity, at the time of entry, and the continued monitoring of the immigrant’s residence while in this country. Coupled with this is the tacit understanding that there will be active enforcement of any violations of the immigration codes by US agencies. This encourages immigrants to seek citizenship.
The granting of access to taxpayer supported services is an issue that will have to be addressed sooner or later. But, the people of this nation have always been generous and I would expect access to services to continue, though limited to citizens and legally documented aliens.
So, what is the answer to dealing with illegal immigration? Ease access to legitimate avenues of entry with appropriate measures to insure accurate identification of the candidate. Establish a reliable system for monitoring the location and resident status of immigrants. And actively enforce immigration policies and codes, both at the borders and within the country itself.
These measures will not correct the decades of neglect inherent in the present system, but implementation will move illegal immigrants from their “shadow world” into the light of legal status over a short period of time. It will also discourage the growth of an underclass of workers lacking civil rights and the access to the legitimate system that enforces recognition of those rights. It will elevate the new immigrants, quickly, to the status of an informed electorate, which will, in turn, limit the power of political power brokers.
The most egregious think that can be done in regards to the present immigration problems are to simply ignore them. Hardworking, ambitious immigrants, most having a strong patriotic feeling for their new home, have always been the backbone of the United States. They traditionally have to do what the native born citizens of this country do not; prove their worth and desire to be citizens.
My ancestors came over on the Mayflower. Well, someone had to
man the oars.
— Michael Tobias
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida
BEWARE THE ANTI-DDT HYPE
Re: Gerald and Natalie Sirkin’s DDT, Fraud, and Tragedy:
Only scant mention is made of the biggest problem associated with DDT, the rapid selection of pest resistance. This problem was caused primarily by the overuse and misuse of the product, but also facilitated by DDT’s long residual life. Resistance was a much larger problem with the agricultural use of DDT, but not uncommon in anopheline control, as some authors have implied. The resurgence of malaria in many areas probably had as much, probably more, to do with the incompetent administration of the control programs as they were turned over to indigenous governments in the 1970’s. While DDT could still be used to some extent in Indoor residual sprayings (IRS), it is by no means a panacea.
Furthermore, I think there are other products that are every bit as effective now, though more costly. While I do not specialize in malaria control, several of my colleagues are veterans of the old Malaria Eradication Program, so forgive me if some of my info is a bit old.
I believe such compounds as Propoxur are now used to great
effect in IRS programs, and have largely replaced DDT anyway, and
carry less risk of resistance. DDT is still perhaps needed in
mozzie control as a hedge against organophoshate resistance, but is
not a magic bullet, and is seemingly becoming the subject of a
“Counter-mythology” that may well become just as riddled with
misinformation as the now well-known anti-DDT hysteria.
— Bradley E. Foster
THE GOOD OL’ TAS DAYS
Re: Geoff Brandt’s letter (under “Hostile Intentions”) in Reader Mail’s Ignorance is Bias:
Reader Geoff Brandt’s letter of 2/28 mentioning Dixy Lee Ray jogged my memory. Back in the days when the Spectator was an 11-by-14 tabloid magazine published in Indiana, it printed an article by Governor Ray. It was the first article I had seen debunking aspects of the incipient Environmental Movement. I wish I still had it but my old copies of your magazine disappeared after a series of moves. If you took the time to look it up you might find it is worthwhile reprinting.
I showed it to a couple of fishing buddies and they changed
their minds about hopping onto the environmental bandwagon.
— Bob Keiser
Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania
The Editor replies:
Actually, the wonderful Dixy Lee Ray’s articles, “Why We Test Nukes” (TAS, July 1986) and “The Great Acid Rain Debate” (TAS, January 1987) ran after we’d moved from Indiana in 1985 to the Washington area. We remained tabloid until 1992, when, certain admirers contend, we became a different sort of tabloid.
OUR SECRET JUPITER
Re: Mark Shepler’s letter (under “Winter Blues”) in Reader Mail’s Ignorance is Bias:
Reader Mark Shepler writes that he is glad most northerners like “experiencing the seasons” so that they are not here in his (and my) town of Jupiter, Florida. But he spills the beans when he blabs that he “learned almost 30 years ago, a person can cheerily get in their vehicle and be in paradise in 24 hours.”
Perry Como, at the end of his variety show many moons ago, told
his viewers that he was “going to Jupiter, a little bit of heaven
on earth.” Burt Reynolds and Joe Namath have repeated that message
for years. And while I have enjoyed this area for 34 years now,
coming seven years prior to Mr. Shepler, I remind readers that
might wish to relocate that the summers are very long and hot here.
I’ve been told many times that nothing is as good here as in New
York. Even the humidity, it seems. So buyer (and visitor) beware.
Mr. Shepler and I will share our paradise with you, just hoping
there will not be too many of you.
— Marcus Bressler
SUSPICIOUS OF MEN IN BLACK
Re: “Berrigan College” letters in Reader Mail’s Ignorance is Bias:
CSJE (Conservative Survivors of Jesuit Education), the impromptu self-help group that has coagulated on your Letters Page, has another recruit.
As a member of the third generation of my family to have received a Jesuit schooling, just about the only Marxist value I wasn’t taught at high school in the '80s was to how to strip down a Kalashnikov in the dark. The Gospels seemed to take second place to social justice and “Rich Man, Poor Man” lunches. It should come as no surprise that amongst the ranks of the Jesuit educated, sitting beside such beacons of Christian virtue as Voltaire and the Marquis de Pombal, is one Robert Gabriel Mugabe.
If St. Ignatius Loyola could see the Jesuits of today he’d whup
— Martin Kelly
The American Spectator Foundation is the 501(c)(3) organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator magazine and training aspiring journalists who espouse traditional American values. Your contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by law. Each donor receives a year-end summary of their giving for tax purposes.
Copyright 2013, The American Spectator. All rights reserved.