Obama Receives the Ultimate Insult: The Swede's Bozo Prize for Leftist Stooges.

Awash in meddling politics and eternally reeling in shame and remorse from a dozen decades when they instrumented gross horrors of war upon civilians (but which made great business deals that brought prosperity to the inbred Swedes) they recently burnt some sacrificial offerings to one of their Norse deities and received a message: The commandments from the altar have prompted them to absurdly award their coveted ‘prize’ to someone who has done nothing but promise and spend: B. Hussein Obama. Didn’t they play this phony carnival coupon card with Peanut Jimmy Carter too? Have they no shame?

The Swedes must still be worshiping Æsir gods and huddling in the old temple at Uppsala while frantically reading the ancient runes for inspiration as they grope for political and economic reality and, more importantly, money.  Grounded in their ceaseless belief that some tomtar[1] can work the levers of the outer worlds and bring peace and prosperity to those who grovel at the base of their altars, they trundle on with their greedy mission. But, for the record, they have worked their politics wisely (and profitably) such as when they substituted Hitler for one of their Norse Gods and licked his boots for money and profit. They made neat profits selling iron ore to Nazi Germany and allowed free passage across their lands for any German troops from 1940 to 1943.[2] They made a bunch off the Viet Nam war too.[3] The Swedes still apparently honor some mystical quasi-religious duality as they can honk and bang the peace drums and simultaneously run top-shelf war machines industries like Bofors[4] (owned previously by Alfred Nobel, of course). They are still profitably slithering around the world peddling guns and offering bribes to politicians and operating internationally as BAE Systems Bofors and Saab Bofors Dynamics. Isn’t it great to sell weapons while standing up on some rickety kumquat crate and lecturing the world on ‘peace?’ It is difficult to comprehend this tantalizing parcel of arrogance and ensnarled remorse that must drive this mental illness.

Today, in the same manner that Paul Krugman[5][6][7][8] was disgraced by praising his stilted political mangling of our understanding of elementary economics, Le Prix Noble has been again tossed into the dumpster. Meddling in science, politics and ‘peace,’ as autocratically and obscurely defined by the Swedes and their Norwegian lackeys, and waxing internationally for praise and recognition, they  have anointed yet another incompetent with the Mantle of Stooge Award[9] as unwittingly  and humorously defined by the Swedish Academy.[10] Our Afro-Leninist ideological racist[11][12], a consummate liar[13] and a Marxian advocate or stooge[14] and do-nothing promise-everything president Barrack Obama is dishonored with the same drippy socialist sputum as many losers before him. This Academy is besotted with far leftist political choices for prizes.[15]  Perhaps the Academy can find some prize for Jeremiah Wright[16] or William Ayers too.

The prize [le prix d'excréments] is issued according to strict monolithic adherence to leftist dogma and not according to truth, achievement or insight. Ideology to a fault is a proper reason to splash the recipients with this phony glory in the eyes of the far left. But, reeling backward into news and reality, this ‘award’ was not received well around the world.[17]

From Hamas and others in lands where Obama is orchestrating ‘peace’:

"Obama has a long way to go still and lots of work to do before he can deserve a reward," said Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri. "Obama only made promises and did not contribute any substance to world peace. And he has not done anything to ensure justice for the sake of Arab and Muslim causes."[18]

“Issam al-Khazraji, a day laborer in Baghdad, said: "He doesn't deserve this prize. All these problems -- Iraq, Afghanistan -- have not been solved...The man of 'change' hasn't changed anything yet."

Liaqat Baluch, a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, a conservative religious party in Pakistan, called the award an embarrassing "joke."

But, what does that matter if the drooling Swedes can ‘help’ Obama a bit?

Background on Political Sleaze of the Swedish Variety:

Various ‘prizes’ have been given to these ‘people’ [le papier de toilette pour les pervertis et les perdants]. Look at this sorry list of losers, criminals and worse who got ‘prizes’ from the Ignoble Nobel Circus:

1925: George Bernard Shaw[Fabian, yo-yo, avowed communist, anti-capitalist who called for soldiers to shoot their officers and go home.]

1962: John Steinbeck [drunk, loser]

1973: Henry Kissinger / Le Duc Tho (refused) [Idiot who groveled before the Communists and believed in their lies. Tho had more prestige and honor when he refused this joke of a Nobel Prize]

1971: Willy Brandt [An unwitting stooge of the USSR who kept a pet spy in his government who worked for the Stasi]

1977: Amnesty International [Far left political group who favors terrorism and revolutions.]

1984: Desmond Tutu [Bigot, racist]

1988: United Nations Peacekeeping Forces [Phony group--there never was any peace.]

1990: Mikhail Gorbachev [Drooling Communist who ‘believed’ in Communism.]

1992 Rigoberta Menchú Tum [Liar, some Communist  wrote this fulff.[19][20]]

1993: Nelson Mandela [convicted and confessed terrorist bomber]

1994: Yasser Arafat [terrorist, liar and he took 500 million from his people for himself]

2001:  Kofi Annan [liar and criminal who diverted billions in Iraqi petrodollars.]

2002: Jimmy Carter [Idiot, anti-Semite, Marxist stooge]

2007: Al Gore [flunky, criminal, Marxist Stooge, EcoNazi[21]]

This event has done little other than to move the goal posts a bit farther from reality for president Obama and publicly emphasizes that he has accomplished nothing but shovel out loads of promises he cannot fulfill. If he spends us into another depression maybe the Swedes can conjure another ‘prize’ for him in economics.

rycK

Comments: ryckki@gmail.com

The Old Brown Lady of the New York Times [Old Gray Lady] Mumbles Dootifully about the Criminal Good Time Charlie Rangel

 We are always privileged to read the New York Times, the Main Propaganda Engine and Slime Slinging Machine of the far left. This nearly bankrupted ragzine is celebrated daily by the drug-addicted and rabid abortion crowds and their Islamo-Fascist allies.  This is always a treat for me as I can have fun with my bolding and bright colors. As to my blog format, my choices for the particular font colors and boldness provide emphasis for the names and comments from the  New York Times’– which I think should be celebrated as the Walter Duranty Papers [1]--and are based loosely  on the banner and poster colors[2] of the Communist and Bolshevik politics of 1919 and fractured artistic interpretations thereof. Other selected colors frequently represent my political caricatures of the busy various little workers that haunt the lower catacombs of that newspaper.

For today’s exciting episode, Gail Collins[3][4], the journalist of the day, is represented by a singular emphasis in shade.  Lacking inspiring cognitive skills, a praiseworthy countenance or even approaching the electric prose style of the other old lady at the Times [Maureen Dowd], I have chosen to give her a slightly different color, also based on her [rather plain] hairdo and not, necessarily, in honor of her politics. Thusly, she can be thought of as The Old Brown Lady[5] of the Old Gray Lady. [Do they still use bowls for haircuts like that?] The NTY staff is a menagerie of cast-off leftist hangers-on from the 60s and 70s some of whom survived drug rehab and whose collective purpose in life is to stodgily turn the political crank against capitalism.  A secondary mission is to blindly endorse any far left Marxist for any office or judgeship anywhere this side of Jupiter. Such a philosophy probably has its roots in the angst of reverse bytch-slapping or something related to ceremonial flagellation:  Verbero totus insquequo caput est mortuus.[6]

In today’s little piece Mx  Collins stimulates her keystrokes wearing the literary  mantle of The Mumbler following the authorized agenda she has been given as she attempts to water down  the nasty case of Good Time Charlie Rangel, the Criminal and Tax Cheat, and tries to offer us alternate rosy  paths to wander down to deflect some heat off her homie’s ugly case.

 The Launch!

 “In my capacity as a person who has held the House up to public ridicule on numerous occasions, I would like to go on record as saying I do not need any 79-year-old committee chairman to help me do it.”[7]-- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins Op-Ed Columnist

Published: October 7, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

We must presume that she is alert and Johnny on the sweet spot as she objectively analyzes the various political entities who would ‘represent’ us in the lower half of Congress. Omitted from her last quoted paragraph [by me] she includes the name of Tom Delay. Spite? With such an introduction we might expect, if we were not reading the NYT, to read about some advice on how to deal with her homie Charlie. Let us see what she offers:

 She Continues:

 “The Republicans are, however, completely right about Rangel. Whenever a powerful committee chairman has so many problems that you need a timeline to keep all the allegations straight, he is a liability. When those problems revolve around things like failure to pay taxes, it is not a good plan to have him be in charge of tax policy.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

This is a crude attempt at offering a concession to the opposition—a favorite deception in propaganda pieces although a little weak here. This is vague, on purpose, as Gail falls short of discussing or offering any new accusations and discusses the ‘problem’ as if she were analyzing some chess ending problem from some recent tournament. The political elastic word liability used here may simply mean that, again, the left[8] need to find some way to ameliorate Charlie’s dance in the public view and shift the focus onto Sarah Palin or other such maneuver.

 “I say this with great sadness because Rangel is my congressman.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

 What is sad about justice and catching crooks?

 “Despite my great stake in keeping Rangel in his current post of power, I’m not prepared to argue [really?? Ed] that you can have a chairman of the tax-writing committee who failed to declare $75,000 in rental income on a Caribbean villa on his tax returns. Or one who seems to think you can turn yourself into a resident of two different cities if it gets you cheaper housing — and that the House only requires its members to list their financial assets beginning with the letters F through M.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

 A list of alleged crimes outlined for us? Then what? She wants to keep him in power so what do we do about criminal law and tax evasion? The logic  here is doubly circular.

 When you come to a fork in the road take both paths with you.

 “The Democrats made no attempt whatsoever to defend Rangel when the Republican resolution came up in the House. They just swiftly and sullenly referred it to the ethics committee, which is currently embarked on Year Two of its Charles Rangel investigation.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

 Here is the point of the moment! Can she criticize the Democrats for sweeping this rotting mass under some political banner? The Ethics committee will just sit on this matter.

 Now, she strays off into the wilderness.

“Speaker Nancy Pelosi claims the current Congress is the most ethical and open one in history. And given what’s gone before, who knows? Pelosi actually has instituted some reforms, and punished some bad apples, or at least nudged them out of critical posts.

But this is a test of whether the Democrats will follow through when it’s really, really hard.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

Yes! And what will this process be??

 “There are tons of people in Congress who have huge egos and impatience with the minor irritations of life. If the Democrats made Rangel step down, it would be a reminder that holding public office means you have to be more conservative about drawing the line between proper and improper behavior than your humblest constituent.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

 Poof! And there the argument evaporates as a whiff of marijuana smoke! Argument finished. Moral relativism as an element of justice! She said nothing at all.

 The non ending:

 “It would be worth it even if my neighborhood never does get a bridge to nowhere.” -- The Lion King in Winter By Gail Collins

 This is the second cheap shot against a fallen Republican and an example of the rare use of the future past perfect subjunctive tense. She mumbles. She can rain veiled spittle drops upon her political enemies, but cannot bear to even suggest that Charlie’s case be opened up to investigation.  There is no call for him to resign or even step down. By her definition, this liability is only a temporary political liability and hopefully bigger and more sensational problems will distract the state-run media and sick them on the political opposition.

 Gail Collins said exactly nothing in this pedestrian article, but did toss out some inferences that, on balance, prove, or tend to prove, that our tax cheat Charlie is no worse that Republicans who could be mentioned. I wonder if she thought about Dan Rostenkowski, another crooked Demo who spent some time in the jug. She could have appeared up to date by mentioning Former Democratic fund-raiser Norman Hsu who was just sentenced to 24 years in the slammer. She was a good friend of Hillary Clinton? Did Nancy Pelosi comment on Hsu lately?

 Charlie has what is known as Rostenkowski’s Disease:[9] he is a criminal and a leftist parasite. Among Charlie’s exalted colleagues and not discussed is Rep. Cold Cash Jefferson[10], another criminal that sat in our government. He is gone now.  He also shares some of the Marxist attributes of another high congressional chair Commie Jim Wright.[11] Since Tipsy O’Neal, we have had a string of drunks, Marxist stooges, criminals and social parasites as chairs of the Ways and Means Committee.[12] Apparently Gail forgot to mention them for balance.

 Pelosi may be correct in some respects: People like Rangel have yet to sink to the slimy depths where serpents like Rosty and Jimmy Wright sank.  He is  a simple tax cheat—not a thief as far as we know. Sometimes, we are forced to think in relative terms—especially if the task is to mumble and say nothing about a major criminal in power in Congress.

 Thanx, Gail, for a masterful and well-balanced piece. You are dedicated to the cause. You said nothing of importance as was your charge. Dooty first!  But, to be fair, and with full consideration of Gail’s cognitive station in the journalistic world, she did her very best and we can thank her for a fine performance.

 rycK

 Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The Babbling Brooks of the NYT Babbles about The Wizard of Beck

Abstract: David Brooks attempts to show us that conservative Talk Radio and TV personalities have no influence in American politics and produces a litany of filtered proof statements to prove his strange point. He claims they force outcomes in reverse. He fails to mention that his 0wn bankrupt paper endorsed Hillary and she lost.  Brooks, in a performance from the Wizard of Oz flies around like the Winged M0nkeys spreading leftist droppings in all directions except toward the future. We learn that Glenn Beck has no power and his works produce the opposite intended results.  So much for tokenism; we shall see.

As we read the NYT—aka the Walter Duranty Papers[1][2]--a turn-of-the-crank Marxian siren, we must always be prepared to suffer through episodes of violent assaults upon simple logic or the corruption of the meaning of even five word declarative sentences or, most likely, endure a redacted and spun version of political and economic reality ensnarled with the news and spun into a web of current burning pleadings from the despotic left. Today, we are treated to an intercalated parody of the story of the Rise of Glenn Beck fractured, in part, by revisiting the Wizard of Oz as a reference point and well of ideas.[3]  Usually, Maureen Dowd, the Old Red Lady [4][5][6]offers us fleeting pleasures when she sandwiches literary clichés and newsworthy characters with leftist political realities, but today our Chief Babbler David Brooks[7],[8] [9] speaks as a conservative token from the financial graveyard of The Old Gray Lady, and instructs us in the lack of influence of conservative pundits. Obviously, he does not insult himself in this little piece [or does he?].

Brooks begins:

“Let us take a trip back into history. Not ancient history. Recent history. It is the winter of 2007. The presidential primaries are approaching. The talk jocks like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity and the rest are over the moon about Fred Thompson…..”[10]--The Wizard of Beck By David Brooks Op-Ed Columnist Published: October 2, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

To save us  all some misery, I truncated this blather because we all know that the favored conservative candidates somehow fell in battle while John McCain, the pick of the NYT, strangely, or perhaps not so strangely, went on to defeat with the aid of the spendthrift idiot George Bush and his ‘silly economics.’ What is of interest here is the explanation of just how the process failed and therein lays the story behind this narrow and juvenile redaction of history.

The distorted system of primaries has produced early lopsided victories for hopefuls that eventually went down to absurd national election loses for many. The New Hampshire Primary is a freak show circus with spangles and tinsel where the locals need to be ‘first’ and can peddle pancakes, hair cuts and ‘listen’ to the candidates. Unfortunately, we must play this game.

Some history:

According to CNN polls[11], we had the following ratings during the NH contest:

McCain had the support of 34%of registered Republicans.

Mike Huckabee, [winner in the Iowa Republican caucuses] was at 21%.

Rudy Giuliani had 18% [dropping way down from first place in Dec of the previous year.]

Mitt Romney had 14 percent.

Sen. Fred Thompson was there with 6 percent.

Rep. Ron Paul of Texas was at 5 %

Rep. Duncan Hunter was last at 1%.

And for the Democrats:

Hillary Clinton was at 49 percent [up 9% from December]

Obama had 36 percent, [up 6%from his December level].

Brooks, in search of text, asks hisself this intriguing question:

“So what is the theme of our history lesson? It is a story of remarkable volume and utter weakness. It is the story of media mavens who claim to represent a hidden majority but who in fact represent a mere niche — even in the Republican Party. It is a story as old as “The Wizard of Oz,” of grand illusions and small men behind the curtain.”--The Wizard of Beck By David Brooks Op-Ed Columnist Published: October 2, 2009

Have we forgotten that the NYT, the financially and morally bankrupt platform for the far left, who rarely get one of their anointed into the White House [Stevenson, Humphrey, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry, etc.], missed a projection or two along the political path?  I wonder why we cannot use the evidence above, particularly in the Clinton Case, to show that the NYT had no influence as well. Hillary [aka Colonel Klebb] came in third in Iowa and won New Hampshire?!.[12]She was at her all-time apex with 49% approval rating and lost?? She lost the nomination with a war chest of more than 300 million dollars? A close study of the primary system leads me to the conclusion that the outcomes are either random or decided by the Winged Monkeys who spirited Dorothy to the edge of the desert protecting Oz. That is a healthier hypothesis than David Brooks presents here.

My view at the time [blog of 27 March 2008] was that since the NYT endorsed Colonel Klebb and tried to first dump[13] and then undump[14] Obama, a perusal of local logic suggested that they should continue to endorse Hillary.[15] Ted Kennedy was probably the major lever in this mechanism at the time. A lot of interesting fumes have emanated from brown bottles and bestowed inspiration to the left especially in Massachusetts. Hillary now sits behind Obama on TV with sour wrinkles on her aged, splotchy face and scowls at reality. Bill has the trembles. She would be President? Better we let Obama crash in this episode. We can learn some new instruction about racism from him and his staff and savor those lessons for 2012.  Besides, a lot of ‘moderates’ in this country need some elementary instruction in economics and tax policies and functions of big government. Some might even retain their homes if they save enough money.

Brooks axes:

“Over the years, I have asked many politicians what happens when Limbaugh and his colleagues attack. The story is always the same. Hundreds of calls come in. The receptionists are miserable. But the numbers back home do not move. There is no effect on the favorability rating or the re-election prospects. In the media world, he is a giant. In the real world, he’s not.”-- The Wizard of Beck By David Brooks

The negative side of this little snippet is not addressed by Brooks. Rush came ever so close in saying to his flock that they should let McCain go down [Yes!!!] and afterward apologized for having to ‘carry water’ for people like Bush. George Bush is an idiot and history has confirmed this if only in the minds of liberals and selected Methodists.  McCain lost this race because he alienated the right-wing of the party.[16] The Moron McCain now wants to reshape the Republican Party in his own center-right image.[17] The NYT ought to re-endorse McCain now for 2012 and give him a much needed boost. He could be offered an open platform in the op-ed section where he can questioningly raspberry Rush, Glenn, Bill, Mark, Mike and Sean and, my favorite, Ann Coulter. They all need some reeducation by McCain.

My advice of [6 Feb 2008] was:

“McCain is an idiot, but is the lesser threat. The choice here is very clear, so the best approach is to pretend to rail against McCain, howl about high taxes and then vote for the idiot in November. We could all do much worse than that. He cannot be much worse than Nixon, Ford or either Bush. Our 401(k)s seemed to perform well in those eras. Fortunately, we have skilled folk in business, the undesirables being left to the government for jobs.”[18]

Our Babbler calls the battle’s outcome years before the next elections:

“So the myth returns. Just months after the election and the humiliation, everyone is again convinced that Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and the rest possess real power. [Who said that??  They didn’t. Ed.] And the saddest thing is that even Republican politicians come to believe it. They mistake media for reality. They pre-emptively surrender to armies that don’t exist.”-- The Wizard of Beck By David Brooks

I am wondering why we cannot reverse this theory and calmly blame the NYT for their follower’s errors when they mistook “media for reality” in the Clinton case. Hillary was the anointed one.  For the left there is only one outcome when it comes and even if it doesn’t come: we win and you lose [paraphrasing Ronald Reagan in his war against the USSR]. Fortunately, they lose most of the time. Obama is going to be the biggest loser of all time in my not so humble view.

Brooks sums up his essay:

“The rise of Beck, Hannity, Bill O’Reilly and the rest has correlated almost perfectly with the decline of the G.O.P. But it’s not because the talk jocks have real power. It’s because they have illusory power, because Republicans hear the media mythology and fall for it every time.”-- The Wizard of Beck By David Brooks

Looking at reality, it seems that dolts like Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford and Bush1 caused much of the decline of the G.O.P. from time to time. We voters owe a similar debt to Jimmy Carter and Hillary’s healthcare follies. As with Dorothy’s Silver Shoes, our Brooks may go anywhere he wishes—and he does. Was Van Jones dumped because of the media and political power of Glenn Beck?? If so, then Brooks Babbles Baloney.

This prattle is, of course, preemptive in nature. David Brooks was sent on a mission to discredit a ‘fellow conservative’ as we all know. Traitors are esteemed in the ranks of the left as long as they are other people’s traitors. Then there is Ralph Nader. We can essay some famous shills of our times and see things in the Magic Mirror from the past and sometimes from the future. What the Times wants is for their tokens to honk and wheeze like the Wizard of Oz and try to defuse such persons as Glenn Beck whose ratings are soaring even in the ‘sleepy 5 pm slot’ according to Frank the Crank.[19] Perhaps, because of the frolicking antics of Toto, the ropes of the Green Balloon [a premonition of the demise of EcoNazism??[20]] will break and Brooks, like the Wizard, and his colleagues will float off into space reminiscent of the Silver Shoes and be lost for some time.

The ugly facts are that that Obama has done nothing to stop this financial and economic crash into depression[21] other than waggle a bucket of promises to all and then spend a lot of money we don’t have on his party and big government and, thusly, his pledges are all so much crap at this time. The unemployed, growing and heading for depression levels like %15 in the next 2-3 years will get sick of his shallow promises. Then, there is the spectre of inflation. He can do nothing—it is too late—and those whose savings are all but gone.

It is better that McCain lost, as Rush was probably thinking  early on, so that even some Dems can hail Obama as the New Hoover and they will lose elections for decades to come.

Brooks mistakes his own “media for reality.”

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com

The New York Times Laments the Rule of Law and Weeps over Illegal Aliens and their Lost Jobs.

The rabid left is quick to hack up and scatter the soggy sputum that signals some unbending allegiance to the Rule of Law unless there is some political advantage to be had. Sloth, sodomy and drug addiction as well as ballot-box stuffing ceremonies may be practiced with outgoing pride [California[1]] and song and these precious ‘rights’ must be kept above the law. Historically, when we focus in on other criminals such as illegal aliens who, according to the NYT ‘pay taxes’ we find some gaping hole in the law and a host of lawyers and intellectuals who would explain to us why no enforcement measures should apply. Illegal aliens do not routinely file state and federal tax forms as the laws mandates because they have stolen the numbers of honest citizens thus causing and interference at the IRS if they submit. They are compound criminals as they break numerous laws just being here. They are thieves, liars and worse, but they are loyal Democrats. As such, they claim the maximum number of dependents when they lie on their job applications, probably at the urging of ACORN and other parasitic leftist organizations that act as vultures upon our society, and fail to follow the law. For their sake, the Rule of Law must have a veil over her eyes such that ‘justice for all’ is just justice if it favors the rabid left and excludes most whites.

The Object of the Lament:

“An immigration crackdown by the Obama administration has led to the imminent firing of about 1,800 workers at American Apparel, the trendy clothing company whose downtown factory is one of the largest still left in Los Angeles.”[2]--Broken in U.S.A.  NYT Editorial Published: September 30, 2009 [Emphasis is mine in all quotes.]

The Sad Songs:

“The government has to enforce the law. But one has to ask who benefits from a crackdown like this.”-- Broken in U.S.A.  NYT Editorial

This is a peculiar statement and lends some form of self-aggrandizing conditionality to the statement.  There is no intent to enforce these laws in places like San Francisco, Oakland, New York City, Baltimore and many more.  We can safely translate this comment to state, reading what is not written but actually appears blatantly unwritten in the best traditions of the ‘Unspoken Words Theorem’ so aptly invented by Maureen Dowd the Old Red Lady [3][4][5]of the Old Gray Lady[6]

Using our newly-designed literary skills, giving deference and full acknowledgement—not to mention slobbering praise-- to Dowd, we can supply the missing words and meanings in the rest of this ‘editorial.’

“President Obama and Ms. Napolitano inherited a failed immigration policy. They have promised do better in setting priorities, hunting down abusive employers and pressing for comprehensive immigration reform that will give workers hope and a path to legalization.”--Broken in U.S.A.  NYT Editorial

The system is NOT broken.  The liars lie on applications because they know that left-liberal politicos will help them and need their illegal votes to win in the elections. This well-oiled system dutifully supplies illegal aliens for votes. We are missing much from this lament so why not add in what is missing al la Dowd:

“We hate gringos and will ‘punish them’ at the polls every chance we get.”—The chant of the Hispanic Supremacy Groups [Hispanic Supremacy groups such as La Raza, La Mecha^[7] , NCLR and MALDEF].

As for La Mecha they advocate: "…as Mechistas, we vow to work for the liberation of Aztlan." They are militant, Marxist and their official icon:”is an eagle holding a machete-like weapon and a stick of dynamite.”^[8]

That means a threat of violence and displacement of whites.  Is it racist to call “Anglos” gringos? The NYT seems to be blissfully unaware of this view, so we need to put in between the lines as Maureen would do.

Sobbing and more sobbing:

“A crackdown that forces 1,800 taxpaying would-be Americans into joblessness in a dismal economy is a law-enforcement victory only in the bitterest, narrowest sense. As a solution to the problem of unauthorized workers — 1,800 down, millions to go — it’s ludicrous.”--Broken in U.S.A.  NYT Editorial

A question:

Why should these illegal aliens become citizens? Did the editors scramble words when they put in would-be Americans into a slot that should have read would-be Citizens or do they have some inside information or premonition that many of these criminals are not from the Western Hemisphere?

The message here is clear: Illegal aliens are more than welcome in the US to fight shoulder-to-shoulder against the hated Anglos and their capitalism.  We need to ignore these alleged ‘criminals’ as we increase taxes and shift the wealth from whites to other colors.  As such, we can expect the editorial staff at the New York Times known more accurately as the Walter Duranty Papers[9] to structure their propaganda pieces according to this goal.

 This editorial was a poor example of progressive propaganda and they can do better. [10]

rycK

Comments to: ryckki@gmail.com