-
The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
May 13, 2013 | 150 comments
-
Farrell’s Fallacies
May 9, 2013 | 25 comments
-
Turning on Obama
May 7, 2013 | 227 comments
-
The Pigs of Pigford
April 30, 2013 | 71 comments
-
Overstating Boston
April 26, 2013 | 143 comments
The Public Policy
Gay Marriage Meets Immigration
For better or worse, deportation will have to wait.
A week ago, immigration judge Mimi Tsankov, basing her ruling on the Obama Administration’s rapidly changing immigration policy, postponed deportation hearings for Sujey Pando, a Mexican citizen whose story is as sympathetic as the judge’s ruling is problematic: Ms. Pando appears likely to have deportation proceedings against her dropped because she is married to another woman.
Ms. Pando was pulled over in 2008 for a minor traffic violation at which time the police officer determined her to be in the country illegally and handed her over to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) which jailed her for 3½ months before beginning deportation proceedings.
In 2010, Ms. Pando went to Iowa and, under Iowa’s State Supreme Court ruling which permitted gay marriage (a ruling that precipitated the removal of three of those justices in the state’s 2010 retention elections), married her girlfriend, Violeta, an American citizen who now also uses the last name Pando.
It’s hard not to have sympathy for Sujey Pando. According to her attorney, Lavi Soloway, who responded to e-mail queries for this article, she was physically and sexually abused as a child in Mexico. When she was 16 years old, her mother brought her to the U.S., but then kicked her out of their home a year later upon finding out that Sujey is a lesbian. Following that, her mother, who is a permanent resident, successfully got three of her children through the U.S. citizenship process, but excluded Sujey who is now the only non-citizen of her immediate family. She has a job, has (other than not using a turn signal) stayed on the right side of the law, and seems, based on quotes in the Denver Post article about her case, to speak English quite well. In other words, she’s a poster girl for the assimilated, employed immigrant — which is certainly one of the key reasons that attorney Soloway, a gay immigrant himself, took this case.
I asked Mr. Soloway, who is representing Ms. Pando pro bono after taking on her case just before it went to court, if he had verified any of Pando’s claims of abuse. His response in its entirety:
I was not her attorney for the past three years, but I have reviewed the file, the briefs filed by both sides, I have listened to the recorded testimony and of course I have spoken to my client about her past experiences. What Ms. Pando suffered would shock the conscience of the most skeptical person. To answer your question: irrefutable medical evidence and other evidence strongly corroborated the narrative. It was overwhelmingly corroborative, in my opinion. Unfortunately, some of the incidents of violence left lasting, physical damage to Ms. Pando. This was not a case of “gray area” as to the claims of past abuse. To call the brutality she suffered “abuse” is really to diminish what she endured. It was more like torture.
Among his “many clients in this situation,” Soloway has successfully represented two other homosexual couples, these male rather than female, in each case involving a Venezuelan man illegally in the United States who married a male American citizen (one marriage in Massachusetts, one in Connecticut). In both of these cases, just in the past month, deportation proceedings have been postponed or the deportation case dropped by the government.
But a rule of law must not routinely be trumped by sympathy, political correctness, or polling data showing the public moving away from a long-held view as, arguably, is happening regarding the issue of gay marriage in America. Nor should it be trumped by an election unless those elected change or repeal the currently controlling law.
It’s not only Soloway’s cases that have been going in this direction. In May, Attorney General Eric Holder vacated a Board of Immigration Appeals ruling against another gay man, this one a citizen of Ireland, who married an American man in New Jersey. In his ruling, Holder says that the Board must reconsider its prior ruling against Paul Dorman, considering a few factors including “whether, absent the requirements of DOMA [the federal Defense of Marriage Act], respondent’s same-sex partnership or civil union would qualify him to be considered a ‘spouse’ under the Immigration and Nationality Act.”
“Gay rights” activists, including attorney Soloway, view this as laudable prosecutorial discretion. However, allow me to propose a metaphor: Imagine we had an Attorney General who, quite unlike our current AG, was a Second Amendment absolutist. Imagine further that upon his hearing a case of a man who owned a banned “assault weapon” (the left’s term of choice for a range of semi-automatic rifles that were banned from 1994 through 2004), he asked, “Would this person be allowed to keep this weapon without penalty absent the Federal Assault Weapons Ban?” Can you imagine the outcry from liberals of all stripes? Yet that ban was at least as easy to consider unconstitutional as DOMA is.
Even considering prosecutorial discretion it is troubling for the nation’s chief prosecutor to ask a government Board to ignore a duly passed law.
Section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage as “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife,” has been deemed unconstitutional by the Obama Administration. It’s one of the few cases of this government considering the constitutionality of a law or policy. In February, the Justice Department announced it will no longer defend DOMA in court challenges against it. Perhaps not coincidentally, the administration’s most famous challenge of constitutionality — that of Arizona’s controversial SB 1070 — was also in furtherance of President Obama’s goal to unilaterally liberalize immigration policy over the wishes of Congress and states alike.
Lavi Soloway, not surprisingly, disagrees with my view that Eric Holder is going too far by ignoring federal law: “Prosecutorial discretion is not ignoring federal law, to say that is to do violence to the plain meaning of the word ignore. Law enforcement has to exercise discretion in order to enforce the law. To imagine otherwise is not a conservative value, it is anarchism.”
Instead, Soloway argues, that these cases are about law enforcement priorities. Namely, with thousands of criminal illegal aliens (by which I mean who have committed crimes beyond just being here illegally) in jail waiting to be deported, should the Justice Department be spending taxpayer money deporting people like Sujey Pando? It is a reasonable question, though not the key issue here.
Soloway again: “The government is NOT doing anything categorical. It is looking at whether deportation meets priorities for enforcing the law, and in addition to lack of adverse factors like criminal records, it’s looking for families ties and including in them LGBT families, on a case by case basis. DOMA is fully enforced. Believe me, if it were not enforced, I’d let you know.”
About the Author
Ross Kaminsky is a self-employed trader and investor and is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute. He is the host of The Ross Kaminsky Show on Denver’s NewsRadio 850 KOA at 11 AM on most Sundays. You can reach Ross by e-mail at rossputin(at)rossputin(dot)com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (151) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ross Kaminsky
More Articles From The Public Policy
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/08/26/gay-marriage-meets-immigration
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Michael Tomlinson| 8.26.11 @ 6:37AM
Too bad, but is time for her to go home where unemployment is lower than the Obamanation.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 7:49AM
Why does Kaminsky have to stealth-pick on gays? he doesn't like it when Jews are picked on.
The pettiness of it: finding a case of a woman who was abused in Mexico who is in legal difficulty married to another woman-- and getting journalistic mileage from it. PETTY, thats all.
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 8:12AM
Mr. Brooks:
Are you KIDDING?
When is the last time you saw an article on a conservative web site offering sympathy to an illegal alien lesbian?
Furthermore, as far as "journalistic mileage", I found the original story in a newspaper and then the NY Times mentioned it (after I wrote this article but before it was run on these pages.)
This is a fascinating story on many levels, any rational person would agree.
I don't know why you're so hypersensitive that you don't see my article for what it is rather than what you for some reason expect of me. But even there, why would you think I would be inclined to "stealth-pick on gays?"
Anyway, the story is far less about her being gay than it is about using that aspect to get a compliant government to ignore a duly-passed federal law.
I am sympathetic to Ms. Pando not because she's gay but because she's (apparently) been through a lot, has lived the best life she can here (again, as far as I can tell), and probably really does love this other person.
So as for PETTY, it is your comment not my article which fits that description.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 8:39AM
Mr. Kaminsky,
that doesn't mean your piece is not petty. And since you are conservative, the fact that the NYT would publish her story might mean you would rather want to avoid it.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 8:44AM
Here's a rule of thumb:
We both know the Gray Lady is a lesbo, so don't fall into her trap by writing about what she writes about.
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 12:41PM
Alan,
Unlike you, I'm not scared of gays. Furthermore, I'm much closer to libertarian than to conservative, though I'm not for open borders.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 2:17PM
Mr. Kaminsky,
I'm not afraid of gays who are nude, though- because they carry no concealed weapons.
YeloStalyn| 8.26.11 @ 2:56PM
As an author for AmSpec... I would suggest you also read the rules of posting...
Don't feed the trolls.
Other than that... a fantastic article that does a very good job of expressing the true human love and compassion that conservative have as well as balancing that aginst our foundational beliefe in law rather than emotion as the only means to maintain order in civil society.
massmile | 8.27.11 @ 10:38AM
The problem is entitlement programs more than it is immigration in this case.I am a 28 years old doctor, mature and beautiful.and now I am seeking a good man who can give me real love , so i got a username Lindasunny2002 on--a'ge'l'es's'da'te.c óm--.it is the first and best club for y'ounger women and old'er men, or older women and y'ounger men,to int'eract with each other. Maybe you wanna ch'eck 'it out or tell your friends!
grandmother| 9.8.11 @ 3:42PM
So....'Massmile' is a DOCTOR?? That might explain why 'doctors 'aint' what they used to be. She can't even write well..and what the hell is she doing trolling on the net???
Bob K.| 8.26.11 @ 8:47AM
To answer your question, you won't find many sympathetic articles like this on conservative websites which have respect for the rule of law. You are lucky to find sympathetic editors here. Or maybe they need the word counts that the search engines require for advertising revenue that is generated by this type of left wing advocacy journalism.
Most illegal immigrants, who have the same values of marriage as most Americans do have sad stories to tell about their treatment in their homelands. If anything, they should be given preference when deciding whether they should stay or not stay. At least they contribute their family values to the nation!
Like all liberals you give preferences to politically correct groupings of certain people over others when it comes to enforcing laws.
ENOUGH ROPE| 8.26.11 @ 10:52AM
Accept the fact that Obama's actions define him as a Marxist and a Muslim who is dedicated to destroying the U.S. Obama has no respect for the rule of law and the rights of the states in the United States. His executive order to grant de facto amnesty to illegal aliens, his EPA's edicts that will close more than 160 coal fired electric generating plants in 2012, and his DOJ's blocking Arizona's voter ID law are three among the many usurpations of Congress and the consent of the governed. Enemies of America use our laws to subvert our country. Obama is subverting America by his sneaky actions and appointments. The state and local governments should ignore Obama's ignoring the rule of law by enforcing their states' laws.
When Obama and his criminal DOJ react by filing suit, then the governors and legislatures should respond with resolutions and laws declaring that the U.S. Constitution limits the powers of the Federal Government. These state laws and resolutions should state that the laws and executive orders (itemize them) issued by the Obama administration that manifestly do not obey the consent of the governed and the constitutional rights of states are hereby declared null and void within the boundaries of these states. The governors should preemptively issue orders to their National Guards that block their control by an out of control federal government.
The states MUST assert their constitutional rights to block an out of control federal government. Citizens must rally in support of their governors and legislatures by emails, letters, phone calls, and lawful assembly with prayers led by clergy of our Judeo-Christian heritage.
Do you think Americans who love America will approve and support the courage of those states that tell the Obama dictatorship that his overthrow of the rule of law has ended?
darcy| 8.26.11 @ 4:01PM
I would like to see you contribute comments here more often, ENOUGH ROPE. Your grasp of the peril our nation faces at the hands of 'progressives' in the federal government and your proposed solution for state obstruction of federal overreach are spot on. Frankly, state efforts to mitigate and thwart unconstitutional actions by Congress and the White House are our only avenue of redemption short of all out calamity. Even the heretofore unthinking masses are beginning to recognize the wave of destruction coming our way via the Marxist One and his cronies -- and that includes their enablers in the now misnamed Grand Old Party.
Jack in Wi.| 8.26.11 @ 9:56AM
I remember when immigrants to this country had to be morally fit to enter it. Now we are taking in all the moral dregs of the world. Who is supposed to pay for all this nonsense. The costs of treating all these homosexuals with their, many social deseases and pychiatric problems is bankrupting us. We have to take care of those that are American citizens, I guess but lets keep out and kick out the rest.
I remember when I was a kid. My old man had an old Italian named Vito working for him. Now Vito was quite a ladies man and started an affair with a young married women about 35 years younger then himself. Vito never had bothered to get his citizenship. Maybe because he never learned how to to read and write. You used to have to be literate and of good moral charecter to be given citizenship. When the immigration services found out about Vito's adultrous affair he was deported back to his wife and family in Italy who he hadn't seen in decades.
W| 8.26.11 @ 10:46AM
Is this the same Jack who works in a soup kitchen and is a pacifist, especially all wars that the USA was involved?
How can you call this woman a moral dreg because she is a lesbian?
Jack in Wi.| 8.26.11 @ 11:02AM
I give illegal immigrants a and probably a lot of homsexuals food all the time. That doesn't mean I don't think they should be deported if they came here illegally.. The woman is a moral dreg. That is what most of human history has taught us. We don't any more moral dregs then our present citizen population. There are plenty of our own moral dregs to take care of. Let mexico take care of it's own.
Jack in Wi.| 8.26.11 @ 11:10AM
I am not a pacifist. I believe in the traditional foreign policy of the USA, which is non intervention in other countries business. I believe war should be declared after much thoughful discussion only in the most extreme situations of self defense. I believe it is right to attack if someone is about to attack you. You don't however, go looking for trouble like we have for the last 100 years. Minding our business and let others mind theirs is the best policy. We can't be the world's policeman any longer. We are broke. The world is a big boy now and can take care of itself.
W| 8.26.11 @ 11:57AM
Several weeks ago I asked you to name one American war you supported. Answer was zero. And you said not even WWII was justified, even though Japan attacked us and Germany declared war on us first. If not a pacifist, then you are a fool that would not defend our country.
Is the immigrant a moral dreg because she is a lesbian?
Jack in Wi.| 8.26.11 @ 12:49PM
Nonsense: You are misquoting me. I said all the wars we have been involved in could have been avoided by sound and sane policy and leadership. After Japan attacked us and Hitler declared war on us we had to fight. FDR had been goading both Germany and Japan to go to war with us. Almost all historians agree with that. He lied to the people during his re -election campaign. " That I will never send your boys to war. " He said it over and over again. My old man never forgot it. Everytime Roosevelt's puss came on TV he used to call him liar and a lot more. Wilson did the same thing in 1916 and got elected and sucked us into Europe's war. If Wilson would have stayed out, Europe would have had to figure out how to end the war itself. Both sides were exausted and The Pope had a peace plan that would have had both sides go back to their own borders. The Germans aand Austrians accepted. The British and French were on the ropes and the French army had mutinied. The only thing that kept them in the war was the the thought of America coming into the war. Wilson was an Anglophile who hated to see Britian lose anything and was in the pocket of the big banks who had huge loans at stake. He got us into the war and it has been down hill since. There would have been Hitler, no communism, no WW2 in all likely hood.
The same can be said of WW2. If Roosevelt had followed a policy of non intervention instead of plotting with Churchill to get in the war. The English would have had to accept Hitler's peace plan which gurarenteed the British empire. I also think that the Holocaust could have been avoided.
Hitler wanted to get rid of the Jews in his empire but not necessarily kill them. He knew if he took that step there would be no turning back. The Holocaust wasn't planned out until 1942 when Hitler saw it would be a war to the death. We had a mass murderer worse then Hitler and Hitler's parner in starting the war as our ally. We gave him of Eastern and part of Central Europe. We then had a 50 year cold war. Hitler winning could not have been that much worse. Every war we have fought in this century seems to lead to another.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 4:46PM
Hitler had plans to kill the Jews that went way back, idiot. A defender of Hitler. Yup. The paulbot SCUUUUUMMMMMbags are in force.
Jack in Wi.| 8.26.11 @ 5:40PM
Nonsense: Hitler wanted to harrass the Jews to make them leave Germany. That was his policy until 1942. It is much similar to your plan to force the Palisitinians out. Hitler was a Zionist. He believed the Jews should have their own country. He was allied with the German Zionists in their efforts to bring the Jews to Palistine. Those are the only Jews he would talk to and negotiate with. They signed the Transfer Agreement. That was an agreement that if a Jew wanted to leave Germany with any money he had to go to Palistine. Read the book the Transfer Agreement by Edwin Black. That is the ADL aproved version. For a differnet view check out the sites of the AntiZionist Jews. Hitler later wanted to put all the Jews in Madagascar. He was a horrible person, but that is historical fact.
W| 8.26.11 @ 8:44PM
Assuming for the sake of argument that your history is accurate, the fact remains that the Nazis killed the Jews, and the question is why did they kill the Jews. You imply by your version of history that Hitler really didn't want to do it, but...you know...he had no choice...because you know...those Jews didn't want to go to Madagascar or Zanzibar or Palestine. So you know he had to kill them. Is that about right?
You do not even question why it was even legitimate for Hitler to want the Jews to leave Germany? You accept the premise that they should have left or remain to die. That is similar to your premise about Israel, that it should retreat to the 67 borders, get rid of its nuclear deterrent, open its borders to all Palestinians, and if it does not does not do this, then suffere the consequences.
Nick| 8.27.11 @ 12:10AM
Jack-boot in Wi.,
"Hitler wanted to harrass the Jews to make them leave Germany. That was his policy until 1942."
Excuse me?
How were the Jews supposed to leave when Hitler was locking them up in concentration camps during the 1930's?
Or, when he was ordering the Einsatzgruppen, the SS death squads, to massacre the Jews of Poland, Ukraine, White Russia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, after the war started? These sick psychos would take Jewish babies and smash their heads against trees.
History according to Jack-boot in Wi.:
Adolph Hitler. Friend of the Jews.
Your propaganda is disgusting.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:14PM
Uhhh, yes, yes it could have been much worse. The Soviet leaders were assholes after Stalin, but they were rational men. The Nazis were not rational.
Nice history degree out of the cracker jack box.
Jack in Wi.| 8.27.11 @ 9:02AM
The History is correct. Go read the sources I gave you. Hitler worked with the Zionists to get the German Jews to go to Palistine. Well over 100,000 did and they got to take some money with them.Eichman even went there to look the place over. The Zionist newspapers were the only Jewish newspapers allowed in Nazi Germany. I mean this is knowledge that even the ADL has had to acknowledge. Abe Foxman wrote the forward on the Transfer Agreement book that I have in my basement. The plan to ship the Jews to Madagascar is also well known. In fact the pre war Polish government was thinking of doing the same with it's Jews. Nobody claims Hitler was a friend of the Jews. I just dispute the fact that the Holocaust could not have been avoided by sane and commonsense leadership.
Hitler only decided to kill as many Jews as possible when he saw he might be going down himself. It is the old saw. If I have to go down. I may as well take my enemies with me. It would have been the prudent thing to get as many Jews out of Germany as and it's conquered territories as possible. Hitler, after protests from the Arabs, refused to let any more go directly to Palistine. Hitler offered to send all his Jews out if someone would take them. The British offered t0 take up to 500,000 in there empire. They probably would of been spread out all over Africa.. The Zionists always demanded that they go to Palistine and queered the deal. That left all those poor Jews stuck with Hitler. This was not a good idea as we found out.
Nick| 8.27.11 @ 2:59PM
Jack-boot in Wi.,
All good propagandists use some truth, or half-truths, to spread their lies. The master of this technique is, of course, Satan.
Hitler made his views about the Jews, and the Slavs, perfectly clear in the pages of Mein Kampf, in the mid-1920's. He considered both races sub-human, deserving of no rights.
You stated that Hitler just wanted to "harass" the Jews to make them leave Germany, "until 1942." I guess if you call stripping away their citizenship and civil rights, destroying their businesses, throwing them in concentration camps, and killing them "harassment," then, yes, Hitler harassed the Jews, Poles, Czechs, and Slavs.
Because he did all those things before 1942.
You are a nazi apologist, Jack-boot.
Are you also a holocaust denier?
Jack in Wi.| 8.28.11 @ 2:46PM
Baloney: Hitler didn't like Jews and Slavs but that was hardly so radical at the time in Germany. of the mid 1920's. Jewish communists had mudered millions of Christians in Russsia before Hitler ever got a vote in Germany. The Commnnists also had tried to over throw every government in Eastern Europe. They were a huge presence in German politics right up until the time of Hitler. The Jewish Historian Richard Pipes has stated Hitler was impossible without the rise of Communism. I agree with him. I also will say that communism caused a huge rise in anti semitism all over Europe and even here in the United States.
As for the Slavs. there had been bad feelings because millions of Germans were trapped in Slavic countries by the Treaty of Versallies. Hitler didn't kill the Jews in large numbers until 1942 because he still had hopes of making peace. When that didn'thappen he turned on the Jews with a vengence.
Nick| 8.28.11 @ 6:41PM
Jack-boot in Wi.,
"Hitler didn't like Jews and Slavs but [...]."
Didn't like?
Try, hated, Jack-boot. Hitler hated the Jews and Slavs.
And, Jewish communists? Communists came in all stripes, Jack-boot. But, those Jewish communists got what they deserved, didn't they?
Let me guess? You have a signed copy of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, handed down from your grandpa, don't you?
"Hitler didn't kill the Jews in large numbers until 1942 because he still had hopes of making peace."
That is a flat-out, complete lie.
Do you sleep with a picture of Hitler over your bed?
Why don't you tell me how 6 million Jews didn't really die in the death camps, along with 6 million others.
You are a disgusting anti-Semite, der scheisskopf-fuhrer.
Jack in Wi.| 8.28.11 @ 2:55PM
You stripped and are stripping the Palistinians of all their civil rights and kill and harass them everyday. You treat them worse then Hitler treated you until Kristal night of 1938. Then in the largest pogrom of prewar Nazi Germany about 100 Jews were killed and thousands were beaten and imprisoned. The Isreli's have been averaging more then that every years since 2000. Your policy is as bad as Hitler's prewar policy. In fact I think it is worse. I read crazed Zionists calling for nuclear and other genocides and expulsions for years on the internet. Calling Hitler bad names is like the pot calling the kettle black. Hitler deserved any names he is called and so do you.
Nick| 8.28.11 @ 6:43PM
There's a big difference, Jack-boot.
The Arabs deserve it. Because they are terrorists.
And, they disgusting anti-Semites.
Like you.
Nick| 8.28.11 @ 6:47PM
Oops! That should be: They are disgusting anti-Semites.
Jack in Wi.| 8.28.11 @ 7:37PM
You are no Catholic to say that the Palistinians who have lived on these lands for thousands of years haven't got a right to full civil rights and Equality. Hitler called the Jews of Germany Communists and traitors. That was his excuse for his crimes. You call everyone who wants justice and peace in Israel Palistiene, Terrorists or antisemites. You and Hitler are soul brothers. That is how you extreme Zionists justify calls for expulsion an genocide.
Nick| 8.28.11 @ 8:53PM
Jack-boot in Wi.,
You are no Catholic. Christ was also a Jew.
I guess He was just "harassed" and wasn't well "liked" by the Sanhedrin, Herodians, and Romans, huh?
Go away nazi apologist Jack-boot, der scheisskopf-fuhrer.
RCV| 8.28.11 @ 9:35PM
You, Jack, are a Nazi thug. It amazes me to think that someone who pretends to be a libertarian defends a totalitarian like Hitler. It's clear that the reason you like and admire, Father Coughlin, Adolf Hitler and Ron Paul, is the common thread of antiSemitism.
Alan Brooks| 8.27.11 @ 6:54PM
You're buttering-up gays to get votes next year. But if you win your 2nd rate president will be torn fown as Bush was. It was unfair for his detractors to call him Hitler, but he was no Reagan.
Those days are over.
Alan Brooks| 8.27.11 @ 7:30PM
"I am sympathetic to Ms. Pando not because she's gay"
I don't really mean to pick on you, Mr. Kaminsky, not much-- or joke around as much because you are a serious writer-- and you write well BUT you are:
a) not conservative;
b) you are libertarian;
c) sympathetic to gays (or perhaps not);
d) but not pro-gay (at all, apparently);
e) in sync with with a few AS readers;
f) but not many.
Perhaps we have something in common: we are both mavericks.
Clint Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 9:12AM
Like my brother Alan I find any mention of lesbians as well as hterosexuals disgusting. Only homosexaul men Like my brother Alan I should have special rights. Those young beaners have such tight cuddly asses, leave them alone.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 9:20AM
"Like my brother Alan I find any mention of lesbians as well as hterosexuals disgusting. Only homosexaul men Like my brother Alan I should have special rights. Those young beaners have such tight cuddly asses, leave them alone"
Just for that I'm voting for Ellen Degeneres as a write-in candidate.
Doctor Right| 8.26.11 @ 11:14AM
We Nazi Fags Rule.
Bob Grant Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 2:14PM
Hey what about me. I'm gay & a goat wrangler.
^00^| 8.26.11 @ 10:30AM
Alan Brooks,
If you want to see how the readers of American Spectator can "stealth-pick on gays," read yesterday's posts on "Either-Or Conservatism."
You will grasp the mentality of AmSpec's hardcore reactionary readership by their breathtakingly evil attacks on gays.
They are a bitter, angry, desperately unhappy people--that's for sure.
But we've got more important thoughts on our minds here in Virgina Beach. Irene! I've got to get out and make preparations.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:15PM
Shut up, Clint. Not Alan.
Clint| 8.27.11 @ 6:46AM
Those First Two Ain't Mine, Israel Firster Screwball,Tool Job.
What Goes Around,Comes Around,Israel Firster Screwball,Tool Job.
Tell Your Israel Firster Girlfriends To Stop Poseur Punk Posting.
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 8:13AM
This is a very common reaction to this sort of story. I understand it though I think it's not economically realistic.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 9:41AM
"Like all liberals you give preferences to politically correct groupings of certain people over others when it comes to enforcing laws."
Golly, I didn't know you are a flaming liberal, Mr. Kaminsky. Are you eating a piece of quiche for breakfast right now?
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 12:43PM
I had huevos rancheros for breakfast if you must know.
I do have to say I am impressed with how long you can keep up the appearance of someone with so little intelligence, but then perhaps you're not faking it.
Alan Brooks| 8.26.11 @ 2:20PM
No, I come from a bright family of military heroes, my ancestors include Benedict Arnold and George Custer.
Alan Brooks| 8.27.11 @ 7:43PM
I feel bad for picking on YOU, Mr. Kaminsky, you are brighter than me and more serious- you keep the horsing around to a minimum.
But you are almost damning gays with faint praise, and immigrants too: you are writing you are not anti-gay, but not pro-gay; not anti-immigrant, but not pro-immigrant. If you were any more even-handed, you would be ambidextrous.
You obviously think fast and are quite educated, but you are smarter than you are focused; all over the road politically. Me. too- however at least I know it.
I decided to make up my mind about gays: I like them and am pro-gay. "love the sinner but hate the sin" is... confusing; not double-minded, yet IMO it is somewhat fuzzy.
As for immigrants: it is tempting to be open-border however it may be the greatest long term threat to America. So on that topic I'm as fuzzy as you are on gay issues.
Miss Annie Tetterton| 8.28.11 @ 12:22PM
Can anyone PLEASE tell me why puppies sleep so much?
Miss Annie Tetterton| 8.28.11 @ 12:25PM
"Little Miss Annie Tetterton" is what my friends and family call me. Any ideas on why puppies sleep so much, anyone?
I've been diagonsed with Compulsive Liar Syndrome. Just thought you ought to know that.
Alan Brooks| 8.28.11 @ 3:14PM
Jack-boot in Wisconsin has too. Plus he has been diagnosed with compulsive crypto-Nazi disorder (CCND), a fatal malady.
Timothy L. Pennell| 8.26.11 @ 7:15AM
That's a nice story. A sad story. The problem is, that THEY ALL have a sad story
We can either enforce the Laws that are on the books? Or, we can cease to be a Sovereign Nation.
LOOK AROUND. The WEST is being DESTROYED, by good intentions.
Nobody else allows this kinda Bullsh*t.
Only in the West.
And it's killing Western Civilization.
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 8:15AM
I agree, Timothy, though I would hope that there is a middle ground between the crowd that wants to slash LEGAL immigration numbers and the crows that wants open borders and amnesty.
I want much more legal immigration, and much better enforcement of our border and existing law, until that law is changed.
Mike 3/505| 8.26.11 @ 8:51AM
Mr K.
We already have that middle ground. It's called legal and metered LEGAL immigration. If we want to fix something, how about the arduous beauracratic process. That said, there is no excuse to rampant disregard for the law.
Regards,
Mike
Michael Tomlinson| 8.26.11 @ 10:04AM
Mike,
Good post. We should reform our laws to allow more educated and technically skilled people into our country while carefull reducing the number of unskilled workers.
In June Mexico's unemployment rate was 5.4%. In the first 2 years of Obama it was barely over 3%. I think it is time Mexicans went home to enjoin the jobs their economy is producing and left us to suffer in the hell hole Obama has created.
RCV| 8.28.11 @ 2:19PM
Why don't you just join them if you think the US is such a "hellhole"?
FAEN| 8.26.11 @ 12:07PM
Mike-GLBT Americans and their spouses want nothing more than to follow the law, get in the immigration line however there is no line for us to get in which is why DOMA is being taken to court.
NotALibertarian| 8.26.11 @ 12:48PM
Of course there is a line. Have your "spouse" apply for citizenship just as any other unmarried person would.
YeloStalyn| 8.26.11 @ 3:14PM
If I read your comment correctly, you say that there are American's that are trying to migrate to... America?
Don't you mean GLBT NON-Americans and their "spouses" want nothing more than to follow the law (except DOMA which IS the law), get in the immgration line etc. etc.?
Be honest or lose respect.
Michael Tomlinson| 8.28.11 @ 5:29AM
Unless they have skill beneficial to the US they should be denied entry.
darcy| 8.26.11 @ 5:09PM
What is your opinion, Mr. Kaminsky, of the 1965 Nationality and Immigration Act? wherein our government decided it was 'fair' to open immigration to peoples of third world, non-Western societies, and reduce immigration coming from European, Western countries? And what affect on America's cohesiveness as a Western nation has third-world immigration had? And how beneficial to our society has multiculturalism proved to be in so far as perpetuating our freedoms and maintaining what remains of our Founding principles, rooted as they are in common law and our Judeo-Christian heritage?
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:12PM
I worked in a NM prison. Eliminate the illegals and the halls would have been whistling empty much of the time.
I don't think we should be paying for illegal health care, education, or prison for these scum, and no anchor babies. If an illegal breaks the law, shoot him and drop the corpse over Mexico City. They'll get the message.
But we need more legal young people because the babyboomers are scum and didn't have enough kids. Further, given the next world war due in the next 20-25 years (or sooner), we're going to need enough young'ins to supply the 100 division army we're going to need to win. They'll need parents.
griffinrc | 8.26.11 @ 7:43AM
The law is the law of the land and should be followed by the political servants regardless of their personal opinion. If there's a desire to change the law on immigration so be it. They need to take it through the legislative process rather than trying to score cheap political points.
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 8:13AM
Exactly right.
Conrad Spiracy| 8.26.11 @ 8:17AM
Let us, as the liberals on the collective SCOTUS bench desire, look to international law.
Suppose Shane M. Bauer and Joshua F. Fattal, the two American hikers held in an Iranian prison since 2009 and recently sentenced to eight years in prison, were to plead clemency of the mullahs because they are in fact married. And suppose they were caught consummating in their cell. What do you suppose the Iranian government would do to them?
Should we do the same with Ms. Pando and her significant other? Just askin’.
I vote for simple deportation. She can go elsewhere in Mexico away from her abusers, or perhaps seek even warmer climes to the south.
Michael Tomlinson| 8.26.11 @ 10:08AM
Conrad maybe we should adopt Mexico's immigration laws and employment regulations for foreign workers. Oh, that's right it has draconian immigration laws and doesn't allow foreigners to easily work in Mexico.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 8.26.11 @ 8:22AM
If the U.S. Congress was deported that would be a good start.
cowgirl| 8.26.11 @ 9:30AM
It is like - what is ten congressmen chained to the bottom of the sea... A good start...
Michael Tomlinson| 8.26.11 @ 10:09AM
First extradite Obama and Holder for conspiracy to murder for their parts in the Fast and Furious plot to arm narco-terrorists.
Margie| 8.26.11 @ 12:52PM
Amen to that.
Igloo in Clintonsville| 8.26.11 @ 1:26PM
Margie,
Have you and Old Texican ironed of your difficulties. I recall a shrill message to him that you posted on this blog accusing him of all kinds of mean things.
I hope you have apologized for your un-Christian behavior.
Margie| 8.26.11 @ 1:42PM
It went both ways, TROLL.
Now, go crawl back into your igloo in Bill Clintonsville.
Igloo in Clintonsville| 8.27.11 @ 4:47AM
Mercy! I just asked a question.
My prayers are for you and Old Texican to forgive each other. Forgiveness is such a huge part of the Christian message.
Margie| 8.27.11 @ 1:57PM
Trolls never "just ask questions."
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:08PM
Margie and Ken are grown-ups. What the hell does this have to do with anything, false Eskimo?
I just hope the two of you could reconcile, is all. I like you both. Up to you though. I think you're fantastic, Margie (and your hubby).
Alan Brooks| 8.28.11 @ 3:23PM
funny handles this weekend:
"Miss Annie Tetterton" and
"Igloo In Clintonsville"
Miss Anne is a funny bunny:
"Miss Annie Tetterton| 8.28.11 @ 12:25PM
'Little Miss Annie Tetterton' is what my friends and family call me. Any ideas on why puppies sleep so much, anyone? I've been diagonsed with Compulsive Liar Syndrome. Just thought you ought to know that."
The Bishop| 8.26.11 @ 8:29AM
Mr. Kaminsky has done a great job of framing the basics of prioritizing law against sympathetic life situations. Ms. Pando's plight is indeed tragic and the tragedy was fed by many who are not even in the narrative that we know. But, human sympathies aside, public policy and law are what order our society. And it is obvious the current administration will use prosecutorial discretion and executive orders to write their own laws - the people's legislature be damned.
The public's memory is shorter than a decade when they easily forget the role of our current Attorney General in the pardon of fugitive Marc Rich. Holder is a holdover from the corruption of the Reno Justice Department and the Bubba Administration. Every decision he makes is suspect.
And everybody here knows that Brooks is an American Spectator stalker.
JP| 8.26.11 @ 8:48AM
I side with the people who insist we enforce immigration laws. Anyone who has visited Arizona and other border states can see what is happening. Add on security issues and the issue is a no-brainer.
But there is another side of the story. The sad fact is we need these people. And I'm not talking about migrant workers, or jobs that Americans refuse to do. I'm speaking of raw numbers. We have an inverted demographc (ie a demogrpahic that has far more older people than younger ones. )Our housing market will not return to former glory for the simple fact that the inventories are too large when compared to the number of people who are in the market for homes. And in Wall St, many analysts forecast a steady drop in P/Es as the number of retirees explode in upcoming years. That is, there will be more people cashing in thier stocks (retirees) than buying them (younger investors). It's all a numbers game. Consider that the median age in the US is now almost 38 (in 1970 it was 27) and you get the picture (In Europe it is 45). Older societies consume less food and energy. They also purchase fewer consumer goods.
And that puts us in a quandry. The Hispanic demographic is the only group that has children in any significant amount (about 3.6 children per female according to the 2010 Census). Overall, our nation fertility rate is 2.07. Subtract Hispanics and it falls to 1.7 . Deport all of the illegals and our population will significantly age and then fall. And there goes your economic growth.
Despite these numbers I support deportation on security and moral grounds. However, the end result will not be pretty.
Michael Tomlinson| 8.26.11 @ 10:11AM
Thank Roe v. Wade for our demographic problems.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 4:58PM
Indeed, Michael, Indeed.
Sorry, I had to fight like a Wolverine to adopt my son while UNICEF did its best to shut down international adoptions from Guatemala. I also paid out of state tuition and watched my tuition climb between freshman and senior years 1000 percent (bill passed after my freshman year during summer break---no hint of it the year before when applying).
When it comes to illegal aliens, I don't support them. No how, no way, no reason.
On the other hand, the solution to JP's problem is to open the legal immigration floodgates. After the WMD attacks on the US during the Paul administration, which is going to be brought to us by Hitler apologists like Jackboot Cheesehead above, we will need immigrants to flesh out our 100 division army we're going to need to crush the Islamists. I have no problem with lots of legal immigrants---we need those decent people to make up for the kids Clint thankfully did not have because no woman would spawn with him.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:06PM
Sorry---that was Medical School at University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston. Freshman tuition $1400.00/yr in 1984-'85. Senior tuition $14,400/yr. Screw the flinkin' DREAM act. Illegals deserve a bullet to the head. Nothing more.
gearjammer| 8.26.11 @ 8:50AM
At least gay couples do not breed like rabbits and ask the family down the street to pick up the tab.
gearjammer| 8.26.11 @ 8:50AM
At least gay couples do not breed like rabbits and ask the family down the street to pick up the tab.
gearjammer| 8.26.11 @ 8:50AM
At least gay couples do not breed like rabbits and ask the family down the street to pick up the tab.
gearjammer| 8.26.11 @ 8:50AM
At least gay couples do not breed like rabbits and ask the family down the street to pick up the tab.
POST American| 8.26.11 @ 9:27AM
----AS the Rock--F--L--O /Globalist
EUGENICS OP swings into high gear in
the first world west (ie fornication/ adultery/
divorce/ A---BORE---shun and sodomy as
'self realization') ---and as birth rates and,
indeed, fertility itself plunge ---all against a backdrop of a
deeply entrenched, highly ILLEGAL, psychopathic
USURY serf-generating establishment
going for the final kill -----the case is made, we NEED aliens ( ie population) to pay our bills afterall!
-----Are we begining to miss those 50 MILLION 'Oprah lifestyle' terminated unborn yet?
----------------OH, YOU WILL...
lillian| 8.26.11 @ 10:36AM
Lovely, POST. Keep posting your poetry.
Alan Brooks| 8.28.11 @ 3:24PM
Timothy Leary poetry!
C Smith| 8.26.11 @ 9:57AM
"Section 3 of DOMA, which defines marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife," has been deemed unconstitutional by the Obama Administration," but not by....
"And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing them rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; And he said, Behold now, my lords, turn in, I pray you, into your servant's house, and tarry all night, and wash your feet, and ye shall rise up early, and go on your ways. And they said, Nay; but we will abide in the street all night. And he pressed upon them greatly; and they turned in unto him, and entered into his house; and he made them a feast, and did bake unleavened bread, and they did eat. But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof. And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door. And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it. And Lot went out, and spake unto his sons in law, which married his daughters, and said, Up, get you out of this place; for the LORD will destroy this city. But he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons in law. And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot, saying, Arise, take thy wife, and thy two daughters, which are here; lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city. And while he lingered, the men laid hold upon his hand, and upon the hand of his wife, and upon the hand of his two daughters; the LORD being merciful unto him: and they brought him forth, and set him without the city. And it came to pass, when they had brought them forth abroad, that he said, Escape for thy life; look not behind thee, neither stay thou in all the plain; escape to the mountain, lest thou be consumed.... Haste thee, escape thither; for I cannot do any thing till thou be come thither.... The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar. Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven; And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground. But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar of salt. And Abraham gat up early in the morning to the place where he stood before the LORD: And he looked toward Sodom and Gomorrah, and toward all the land of the plain, and beheld, and, lo, the smoke of the country went up as the smoke of a furnace" (Genesis 19:1-28).
W| 8.26.11 @ 11:58AM
get lost.
FAEN| 8.26.11 @ 12:02PM
What does god or any religion for that matter have to do with treating tax paying American citizens equally under the law?
Margie| 8.26.11 @ 1:04PM
"Their partiality witnesses against them; they proclaim their sin like Sodom, they do not hide it. Woe to them! For they have brought evil upon themselves.
Tell the righteous that it shall be well with them, for they shall eat the fruit of their deeds.
Woe to the wicked! It shall be ill with him, for what his hands have done shall be done to him.
My people--children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people, your leaders mislead you, and confuse the course of your paths."
Is. 3:9-12.
Hootch| 8.27.11 @ 4:48AM
Missed your shock treatment session this month, Margie?
Margie| 8.27.11 @ 1:56PM
Seems to me you could use a genuine shock treatment from God.
Maybe in His mercy He will see fit to wake you up to reality.
I hope so.
NotALibertarian| 8.26.11 @ 1:09PM
You're not looking for equal treatment. You're looking for special treatment.
YeloStalyn| 8.26.11 @ 3:05PM
A gay man and a straight man have the same rights. They can both marry whichever woman they choose. It's not society's fault that one of these people will feel compelled to exercise this right while the other does not.
Soo... where's the unequal treatment under the law?
Hint... it's not there. And to say that it is... well... that's a flat out lie.
Brandon| 11.7.11 @ 11:39PM
CSmith ... You are going to Hell.
Pete| 8.26.11 @ 10:04AM
It's the double whammy. Gay AND illegal...as reliable a Dem vote as a dead person. I'd like to see an illegal get lawlessly naturalized and then sue Holder for "Fast and Furious." I bet we'd see some really selective law enforcement then.
Buck Ofama| 8.26.11 @ 10:47AM
They should deport this dyke, Napalitano.
And send that fahg Oblowme with him.
FAEN| 8.26.11 @ 12:03PM
So I take it you have nothing of value to add.
W| 8.26.11 @ 4:01PM
get lost, buck
Gary| 8.26.11 @ 11:14AM
Immigration law aside, I am fed up with this gay thing, "marriage" lifestyle, on and on and on in the news, movies, books, schools, etc. I am SICK of hearing about it and all the associated butt kissing (pun intended} of gays, in essence the glorification of sex that is unnatural, yes, as it surely isn't part of biologic or evolutionary necessity. Because it exists doesn't make it "natural." It's like saying it's normal to be born with physical defects. I don't hate them but neither do I like or glorify their sexual proclivities, just keep them out of my face, as unlike a physical defect, it is a behavioral one that doesn't have to be flaunted.
Drunken Sailor| 8.26.11 @ 11:47AM
Did I read the story correctly. She was discoverd to be a illegal alien in 2008 and they started deportation procedures, got married in 2010 (Why she hadn't been deported during that 2 year period isn't covered) and now the she got married after entering illegally they are using that as the defense to stop deportation? Did I read that right?
If so, then using that logic I should be able to rob a bank, give all my money to charity, and then claim you can't arrest me. Same logic, she commited the crime of illegal immigration before she got married, got married to try to stop the deportation and now claims the crime no longer exist.
Only in America
FAEN| 8.26.11 @ 12:04PM
She wouldn't have been an undocumented save for DOMA. That's the whole point.
Drunken Sailor| 8.26.11 @ 12:28PM
You missed my point or ignored it. She was undocumentd and discoverd first. She then tried to change that and stop deportation by getting married. DOMA would have still resulted in getting her deported. They are now arguing that DOMA should be ignored and if ignored she should be allowed to stay now that she is married after the fact.
I wasn't even discussing the fact she is in a same sex marriage. My beef is since when do we not follow through on prosecuting a crime (Illegal immigration is a crime) simply because someone trys to use a loophole after the fact?
Ross Kaminsky | 8.26.11 @ 12:45PM
I agree with you on this point, Sailor.
YeloStalyn| 8.26.11 @ 3:08PM
No... the whole point is that the LAW says she's not married... and the LAW says she's here illegally. And the LAW says she should be deported. HOLDER says ignore the law and, voila, we can say she stays.
THAT is the point... and it's illegal.
What do liberals do in school that makes them completely void of logic and common sense?
Jerry| 8.26.11 @ 12:00PM
It is indisputable, with the legalization of homosexual marriage we are in the process of redefining the legal meaning of marriage, so how's this for a hypothetical: If marriage becomes definable as anything you want it to be, including polygamy, I can foresee the day when an enterprising immigration "mule" can get unlimited numbers of illegals into this country by having 1 legal U.S. citizen marry any desired number of illegals, and presto-chango they are no longer illegal.
FAEN| 8.26.11 @ 12:01PM
As one half of a binational couple I welcome this news but more needs to be done. We are tax paying citizens stuck between a rock and an impossible situation. We want nothing more than to be treated as equal citizens and DOMA prevents that. If my partner and I were straight this would not be an issue.
The extreme stress involved just trying to stay together has made me physically ill, mentally exhausted, constantly fighting depression. Life shouldn't be this way. Either get rid of DOMA and let us sponsor our spouses like other Americans or pass the Uniting American Families Act in the interim.
Drunken Sailor| 8.26.11 @ 12:30PM
Or immigrate legally. Yes, the current system needs changing but since 2006 the US has more legal immigrants than all other nations combined. It can be done. By the way, changing the system does not mean simply granting every illegal immigrant clemency and opening the borders, it means stream line and make the process more efficient.
NotALibertarian| 8.26.11 @ 12:45PM
"We want nothing more than to be treated as equal citizens"
Oh, no you don't. I have some news for you: You already are being treated as equal citizens. What you want is for society to make a special EXCEPTION for you. You want society to change "husband and wife" for "adult and adult".
Guess who else is not treated as "equal citizens" by your criteria: polygamists, incestuous family members, people who are sexually attracted to inanimate objects, and people who are attracted to animals. Some of them use your same arguments to claim they aren't being treated equally under the law. Why do you think the your preferred change to "marriage" is any less subjective than theirs?
buckeyeman| 8.26.11 @ 2:23PM
Leaving aside animals and inanimate objects, the salient question is polygamy. This is an accepted domestic format TODAY in many countries. It is accepted in the Bible and the Koran, and, to my knowledge, the Bible never repudiates or revokes its acceptance of polygamy (or slavery, but that's a different matter).
It would be much, MUCH more logical do determine that polygamy or polyandry should be legal before homosexual marriage, but at least we should acknowledge the obvious: if legal acceptance gay marriage is required under our constitution, then so is acceptance of plural marriage. Refute this if you can, but I don't think you can.
Your rant about "stress" makes no sense at all. Live your life. Do it however you want. Where's the stress? (Oh yeah, it's stressful trying to get everyone else to change the law to accommodate what YOU want. Why don't you move back to the home country of your "partner"?)
BTW, regarding your handle: Is it a coincidence that "Faen" is the Norwegian word for Satan? Uff da!
NotALibertarian| 8.26.11 @ 12:12PM
They're playing the Embryonic Stem Cell game. This woman could plead for asylum on the grounds that she is afraid of the people/person in Mexico who originally tortured her. As with embryonic stem cells, which are totally unnecessary for medical research (since adult stem cells have actually yielded positive results), her "marriage" was completely unnecessary. But because it provides a sympathetic storyline for SSM activists, the NYT and the Obama Admin jump.
Libs have yet another way to lie and present a false dilemma: recognize her SSM, or she must be sent back to Mexico and her torturers.
What a con.
YeloStalyn| 8.26.11 @ 3:10PM
I was thinking the same thing about asylum.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:01PM
At the same time, the Liberals try to keep babies from being adopted from Guatemala by American families, usually religious and Conservative. They and the Paulbots are vermin, fit only for scraping off the bottom of my shoes. Craven scum.
cicero| 8.26.11 @ 12:55PM
Just in case no one was paying attention, the rule of law breathed its last during the Clinton administration. We are no longer a nation of laws, but have become a nation governed by the whims of the men/women who are in charge of the engines of government at any given time. The major cause of this is the judicial system, aided and abetted by the liberall politicall class.
Heaven help us. We are at a point where we actually believe that we can save our culture/society by importing poor, uneducated, third world peoples to breed for us. That should work out very well. I can't wait for the next futurist movie depicting the wealthy liberal class being pursued by the underlings for use in the cooking pot, because they have run through the entire accumulated wealth of this society, and it wasn't quite enough.
Oldefarte| 8.26.11 @ 1:23PM
Speaking of gay [aka homosexual] marriage, it's just been reported that Perry will sign a pledge to support a constitutionaly amendment to define marriage between one man and one woman if elected president. That pretty much does it for me, and he can be assured of at least one vote for him positively!!!!!!
RCV| 8.28.11 @ 2:23PM
States rights only when it conforms to what conservatives want. So much for principle!
Just as people ignore the reality that under Perry, Texas has created two government jobs for very one private sector job.
What hypocrites!
Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.28.11 @ 3:20PM
I don't bother with silly reality, being so stupid, and such an idiot, I sanctimoniously espouse about hypocrisy, when it is common knowledge I sanctimoniously espouse what a devout churchgoing expert I am on real Christian love, compassion, and the Bible, and sanctimoniously espouse what a lifelong student and expert of the founding fathers and the constitution I am, while I sanctimoniously support abortion, sanctimoniously support the party of abortion, sanctimoniously support partial-birth abortion, sanctimoniously support the party of partial-birth abortion, sanctimoniously support the president who supports partial-birth abortion, sanctimoniously support homosexuality, sanctimoniously support the party of homosexuality, among other sanctimonious support of stupid idiocy, on not letting a little sanctimonious hypocrisy prevent me from continuing to post like the pathetic despicable douchebag asswipe I truly am matters.
RCV| 8.28.11 @ 5:04PM
Man up, Skip. Zzzzzzzzzzz .....
Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.29.11 @ 12:52PM
I don't bother with silly sanctimonious hypocrisy matters.
RCV| 8.29.11 @ 2:28PM
Skip, man up and post under your own name.
Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 8.29.11 @ 5:58PM
I don't bother with silly sanctimonious hypocrisy of whining about my posts being pointed out for the pathetic and despicable drivel they are, as I'm so stupid, and such an idiot, it doesn't dawn on me my posts are archived matters.
RCV| 8.29.11 @ 6:13PM
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......................................
Margie| 8.26.11 @ 1:26PM
Alright!!
Thanks for the news Oldefarte!!!
Oldefarte| 8.26.11 @ 3:28PM
Marg, you BETCHA! Speaking of which also, he supposedly described Washington DC as ''''SEEDY''''' [in addition to the 'treasonous' description of Bernanke's/Fed's QE inflationary policies]. I do like his Texas [tell-'em-like-it-is] style!!!!
Hootch| 8.27.11 @ 4:51AM
Margie, dear, all right is two words. Your frequent spelling errors diminish your credibility.
Oldefarte| 8.27.11 @ 1:20PM
Margie was replying to '''MY'''' post [and not yours], and communication between myself and her is frankly, NONE OF YOUR DAMNED BUSINESS [so take your crediblilty and spelling issues and STICK 'EM WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE, please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Margie| 8.27.11 @ 1:53PM
Apparently Hootchie-koo up there sweats the small stuff. (Oops, did I spell your handle wrong?)
From Merriam-Webster (that's the dictionary for those who don't know)~
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alright
Hootch| 8.27.11 @ 7:06PM
Alright is substandard.
Do you spell "a lot" as one word, as in :
Old Texican and I used to have alot in common, but now, alas, we've drifted apart.
Dixie Pixie| 8.26.11 @ 1:48PM
SHOCKED I AM....To find a Liberal Federal Judge putting Liberal Legal Fashions in place of Logic, Law, Tradition or over millenniums of legal precedent by every prior civilization.
SHOCKED, SHOCKED I AM....That a Federal Judge would undermine the foundations of the Federal government by putting Liberal Legal Fashions in place of legal principles especially the concept of “Consent Of The People”.
SHOCKED, SHOCKED, SHOCKED I AM....That by putting Socialist Fashions first, that a Federal Judge would embody the leftest motto “ If it comes to betraying my Friends or my Government, my I have the courage to betray my government”.
WE Must Close The Crooked Casino That Is The Federal Judiciary IMMEDIATELY.
Now where is Carl with my government check?
buckeyeman| 8.26.11 @ 2:27PM
"It's hard not to have sympathy for Sujey Pando."
Not at all. Easiest thing I've done since I got out of the hot tub a little while ago. I don't know Sujey Pando. I don't care to know her. She is here illegally. Deport her. The shame is that the rest of her rotten family crawled over the border and gets to stay.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:03PM
No. I have sympathy for other little kids in Guatemala with ear deformities like my son who are being denied legal adoption by Liberal scum like Hillary "I like anal sex with Jihadists" Clinton.
My son was operated on at Mayo. Thanks to me. No thanks to UNICEF.
Vlady| 8.26.11 @ 2:33PM
An interesting article in the same vein...
http://townhall.com/columnists.....nd_bullies
Joe D.| 8.26.11 @ 3:26PM
Again the obama admin. and other government agencies giving special rights to homosexuals. If it was a man and a woman would we be talking about this. The marriage is a sham. I am going to be deported, lets get a fake marriage. That is what 70% of us American still know. And it is not changing even though some want it to.
Nick| 8.26.11 @ 4:20PM
The problem with the term "same-sex" marriage is that it is a misnomer, an oxymoron. Ther proper term should be counterfeit marriage. The Random House Dictionary defines counterfeit as: "made in imitation so as to be passed off fraudulently or deceptively as genuine; not genuine; forged".
I think that this describes two people of the same gender, who call themselves married, perfectly. It is fraudulent.
A marriage is between a man and a woman who love each other so much that they wish to swear an oath to God to pledge their lives to each other, till death do them part, for the purpose of raising children. This is the Christian view, anyway. But, it has its equivalent in almost all cultures throughout history.
A man cannot marry another man. The same goes for two women. It is like a quadraplegic declaring that he wants to be a trapeze artist. Or, a blind man wanting to be a bus driver.
It just can't be done. It would be counterfeit.
john| 8.26.11 @ 4:44PM
Amazing deportation proceedings take as long as they do, illegal is illegal, get them out the next day.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:03PM
Shoot them in the head immediately. Even easier.
Occam's Tool| 8.26.11 @ 5:14PM
Shut up, Clint.
Clint| 8.27.11 @ 6:38AM
WTF ?
Marc Jeric| 8.26.11 @ 5:56PM
There will come a time to prosecute all the criminal marxists in the federal government for their usurpation of our constitution and laws.
darcy| 8.26.11 @ 9:19PM
You promise? I can hardly wait to see the day.
Stan Redmond| 8.26.11 @ 6:37PM
So what if the rule of law has to be thrown under the Obama bus. Two more votes for Obama 2012 are worth it.
Mike DePinto| 8.26.11 @ 7:31PM
The problem is entitlement programs more than it is immigration in this case.
darcy| 8.26.11 @ 9:24PM
Entitlement programs are the magnet that draws them and keeps them here; but even entitlement programs are not the root cause of massive illegal immigration. The root cause is the thirst for power and money among our elected class and either their chamber of commerce or one world order cronies who gleefully siphon off not only America's wealth but her freedoms.
David| 8.27.11 @ 9:25PM
Oldefart, I appreciate the sentiment you express about Perry's support of an amendment, but.......my friend.
The fact that Perry supports a constitutional amendment to define marriage is meaningless. It is as meaningless as the conservative demand that all their presidential nominees pledge to support a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. Why? Because every presidential candidate since Reagan has made that pledge, and are we one single step closer to getting that done? No, absolutely nothing has been done with regard to an amendment. AFter 40 years of fighting abortion there has never been a serious effort to get the U.S. Constitution amended. Not even a single state has done that.
What Perry and other repubs actually mean is that if you people who vote for me do the work and get it done, then they will sign it.
What we need to demand from our candidates is that they pledge to actually get the process started and move it forward. I for one am sick of accepting meaningless pledges from our candidates.
None of that means that I will not vote for Perry. All it means is that we look ridiculous to demand that our candidates support this or that amendment (when nothing will be done) and that risks alienating a group of voters who may very well vote with the dems because of it.
Timely Renewed | 9.6.11 @ 12:07AM
Holder bases this attack on DOMA on the expansion of the 14th amendment through the Supreme Court's illegitimate addition of the "privacy" doctrine to the hopelessly vague first section of the 14th amendment. In order to have the rule of law, those charged with power in a polity must respect the original written text of the laws. If they are allowed a very broad discretion in the interpretation of the text, you quickly are reduced to the rule of men, where legal power is based on what the rulers can get away with rather than some pre-agreed foundational understanding. The 14th Amendment was about prohibiting government race discrimination. In expanding this original meaning, the Supreme Court arrogated to itself the power to effectively amend the Constitution, a procedure for which the document itself requires approval by super-majorities of democratically elected legislators. The real solution is to amend the 14th amendment to restore its original meaning as a ban on governmental race discrimination. This will end not only the Obama administration's move toward supporting the judicial imposition of gay marriage nationwide, but a host of other constitutional abuses by the modern Supreme Court. See http://www.timelyrenewed.com
Brandon| 11.7.11 @ 11:37PM
Timely renewed is just peddling the same right wing original intent garbage started by Scalia. The right wing elite came up with the spurious notion that they know what the long dead founders thought the Constitution should be. It is an insult to anyone's intelligent. As the founder who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, the "earth belongs to the living", not the dead. The founders themselves would be appalled. So when you empty the garbage this week, trash this nonsense as well.
Brandon| 11.7.11 @ 11:28PM
Equal rights are not subject to the capricious whims of elected officials. Gay people have been persecuted for no better reason than they love someone of the same gender. Period. Therefore DOMA violates the rational basis test. I don't care if you call it marriage or not, the State Department is still running the Diversity Lottery for the great unwashed masses from places where there isn't running water or a school and we still get screwed. End this travesty!