Do You Want To Join The Crusade Against Arizona? You May Find That You And Your Fellow Crusaders Can All Fit Into A Single Bus

Before you start ranting about the GESTAPO tactics of Arizona’s cops who will be using the new immigration status law to humiliate and harass Hispanics, remember something you may not even know yet: Arizona is one of twenty-three US states that have what is called “stop and identify” statutes. In those states, the cops can stop you — for “reasonable suspicion,” which is less than “probable cause” — and ask you who you are. Arizona and Florida have such laws, but TLB has been frustrated in its search for details of either statute. Californians do not have to identify themselves to the cops, as that part of the state criminal code was declared unconstitutional by the federal supreme court in 1983 (Kolender vs. Lawson); details here.

Right away you can see that the pre-existing “stop and identify” law in Arizona is considered constitutional, and that its status is unlikely to change. The highest court in the land has not felt it necessary to tell any state other than California to behave itself. (That was done simply because California’s chronically incompetent legislature wrote a sloppy law.)

To belabor the point: this means that if “stop and identify” laws were bad, in the sense of a violation of the civil rights of the people, something would have been done about it. These days, all “stop and identify” laws are clean. Many of the arguments against the new Arizona law are off target, and it could be very hard to get the statute thrown out by a court; if it’s OK to demand “papers,” why would determining residential status be beyond the pale? Judges are going to have to come up with some imaginative sophistry to tell Arizonans they are wrong.

There are two additional facts about the new Arizona law that require your consideration before you get stains on the wallpaper. First, it appears that about seventy percent of the voters in that state like the law. Second, Arizona’s illegal aliens (yes, that is an accurate and acceptable term for them) are in many cases thinking of leaving the state before they have any contact with law enforcement.

Translation: the law is overwhelmingly popular and already showing signs of being extraordinarily effective.

Eventually, the immigration boondoggle will be solved, if it takes a constitutional convention to do it. If that happens, the amendment will not be subject to judicial review — a point that will not escape an angry and frustrated electorate.

It seems that Obama knows that effective reform of the USA’s failed immigration policy would be gratefully received by the public. He’s taken his proposed legislation off the table, presumably because he knows it’s so “progressive” and “multiculturalist” that it will generate a lethal tsunami of opposition. The Tea Party Movement cannot be far from his mind.

Fact: for decades, Uncle Sam has made it very difficult for would-be immigrants to be legal, and very easy and very rewarding for them to be illegal. That’s insane. People are sick of the madness, and they are angry.

Whatever this or that federal court decides, the public already realizes that Washington has caused a crisis that a state has tried to deal with. The political implications of that are considerable.

At some point, the central government is going to have to end its dereliction of duty — or hand authority to the states to clean up the mess. The public simply won’t tolerate this shameful breakdown of governance much longer.

Before you start declaiming on the rights of man and how Hispanics are considered sub-human by a bunch of rednecks and retards who go to Tea Parties, inform yourself about the constitutional issues. Next learn something about Mexico’s immigration laws and how they are enforced; find out how other “developing” nations control their borders, and what they require of non-citizens living within them. Look at the facts of US immigration policy, and read what the polls and press say about the attitude of the nation’s swing voters.

Obama The Easy Target

You may have noticed that this newsletter is increasingly littered with objections to Obama’s policies and statements. Of course in some circles, that will be explained as racism. Others may decry it as bitterness over the outcome of the last presidential election. A few words of explanation are in order.

Racism is a charge that cannot be refuted. Those who level it “know” the “truth” behind any and all appearances. Accordingly, TLB will neither defend itself against accusations of genetic bias nor discuss them. Believe what you will.

Unfortunately, the president is under virtually continual assault for his appointments, decisions, strategies, policies, pronouncements and goals. TLB should reflect that fact.

This newsletter exists primarily to accomplish two goals: first, to prod its readers into thinking rationally, and second, to bring to wider attention items on the internet that may have been missed. TLB cannot ignore the many opinions surrounding Obama, nor can reason be discarded in evaluating them. Most of the time, they appear to TLB to be on target; they describe an administration that should provoke both alarm and opposition.

The world is not what we should prefer it to be. While opinion is always debatable, it is a fact that Obama is under fire from citizens who are literally shocked by his behavior. If you find that improper, you should nevertheless be informed of what people are saying about The One.

The nation appears to be coming to the realization that Obama was not and is not qualified to be president. His background, much of it shrouded in secrecy, did not prepare him for executive office. His legislative experience was trivial. Many condemn his political orientation as highly improper, and his foreign policy continually raises eyebrows. These facts are news, and they deserve to be discussed.

The Situation In Bangkok

It’s far too early to say that the tide has turned, but there are some preliminary and possibly misleading indications that the Red Shirts may be staring failure in the face. This newsletter felt victory would be handed to them by the police and the army, as both forces appear to be shot through with Thaksin supporters and those who are paralyzed by fear of the man. TLB clings to that view, even as the following events suggest it is an overstatement:

1. Red Shirts burst into a large government hospital, demanding to be permitted to search for police hidden the building. This display of paranoia distressed the hospital staff no end, and for a time, the Red Shirts prevented the hospital from transferring patients to quieter facilities. This outrageous misbehavior did not go unremarked.

2. There was already evidence that the public is growing restive with the authorities’ reluctance to remove the protesters. A crowd gathered outside the army barracks where the PM is safely headquartered, asking that somebody do something. Other small rallies were staged in various parts of Bangkok.

3. Bad publicity: a news report has it that a rural man in the big city to protest for Thaksin and the Red Shirt version of democracy approached an anti-Thaksin party office and asked for money so he could return home. He stated that he had been promised a good daily wage to go to Bangkok, and that he had not been paid. A number of his friends wanted to go home with him, he said, but all were destitute.

4. There are reports of a listless attitude behind the barricades. The joy and passion seem to have gone out of the protest, some say. Others point out that if a few wish to carry on, they need only set fire to the Red Shirts’ barricades, which are constructed of truck tires. The results would be terrible.

5. The closely-watched autopsy of a soldier is said to indicate that he was hit by a “high velocity” bullet. If true, this report means he was in a genuine military skirmish. Whether this is the last we shall see of this sort of fighting, no one can say, but the Red Shirts do have some weapons that match what the army has, and there are reports that some of the folks fighting the police and army are former military who have been hired as snipers. That cannot improve the public’s opinion of the protesters’ cause.

6. There is press speculation that the Red Shirts may abandon some crucial intersections and move on — but the rest is vague and cannot be called a true news report.

If the Red Shirts can cope with their psychological problems and stop blundering — the hospital was a major mistake they cannot live down — they can still win. Their clandestine allies in the army and police remain in place. The possibility of Thaksin’s return remains a palpable threat hanging over all officers who served under the man when he was PM, as well as menacing others who are just beginning their careers.

This would be an ideal time for pro-Red Shirt officers to pass messages to the people funding the protests. Thaksin is doubtless closely monitoring the situation, and if he transfuses his mercenaries with funds, the Red Shirt cause will regain strength.


Michael Yon is back with some amazing photos — and a troubling truth.

“Did anyone tell the president that his health care bill passed, so he can stop lying about its fiscal impact?” You can’t expect to say something like that without providing some backing for your claim. Check it out.

The NY Times tackles policy on illegal recreational drugs and concludes it’s a mess. For once the paper is pretty much correct, but it leaves the final answers obscure. Such reporting only contributes to malaise and hopelessness; it’s the Fallacy of the Unavailable Utopia at work. There are ways to improve things.

They did not tell us back in 1969 about this, perhaps because it was a real worry. Now how do you feel about the government’s candor regarding what they are up to today?

The Tea Party Movement has internal issues, as would any rational attempt by groups of citizens to participate in their governance. Accordingly, some folks are offering advice on how the groundswell should be managed. That indicates a respect for the role of the electorate and for the power of the Tea Parties, which is good. It may also indicate an unease felt by a segment of society that is accustomed to its privileges; those privileges are often the result of the electorate simply saying, “I’m too busy with work and taking the kids to soccer, so you handle government.” Advice should always be considered grist for the mill, and assuming that it’s excellent is just plain stupid. Beware those who would manipulate you with some well-disguised condescension; they may be trying to blunt your impact or misdirect your aim.

Winners can be big, big losers, as these accounts demonstrate.

It’s time to discuss freedom of speech and press again, for South Park is up to its huge eyeballs in trouble with the Muslims. In case you are interested in how far over people will bend when confronted by a nutcase who hates Liberty, have a look at this comprehensive presentation of the mess; it’s useful (for all the links it provides) and insightful.

The folks who want to counter the Tea Party Movement call their effort The Coffee Party, and they want a more forceful, aggressive leader. They are spoiling for a fight. TLB thinks that would increase attendance at Tea Parties.

You say you want a theory of everything? Shucks, that’s easy, so here it is: science tells us that these little thingies hit each other, sort of like billiard balls colliding, see, which makes everything get bigger and more complex, and eventually you get Scarlett Johansson and Janet Napolitano, and from then on it’s just a matter of luck. — Not good enough? Well, it’s not much worse than the recent alternative, which also does not work.

Who knew? There are Muslim comics and video games. They aren’t what you might think.

Ruminations on the nature of the war between Islam and the West.

From The Lynx Bulletin’s But they are supposed to be healers folder come three short sentences that should set off alarms: “Psychiatry essentially shut off any further public discussion of this sort. And there’s a reason for this. In the 1970s, psychiatry felt that it was in a fight for its survival.” The horror story behind them begins with this interview.

Cap and Trade and other enormities, as seen by a Russian journalist. Interesting.

Getting even: a climate “scientist” lashes back, strikes at the media. Wrong target, Bozo!

The dream and shibboleth that is “green” energy.

AGW is an article of faith, as this newsletter has long insisted. Obama agrees, sort of.

Only for the cognoscenti: Charles Johnson before his epiphany. And here’s Chuckie making a, er, totally predictable response. If you don’t know what this is about, you don’t want to know.

The claim has been made that this is what the White House did in order to get Obamacare passed. It’s been denied. Maybe some day the truth will be known.

This account of links and improper influence will be a challenge for conspiracy theorists, amateur investigative journalists and obsessive Obama-haters, but it’s so complicated that it will never be more than an ignored link in a few computers. That might be a huge pity.

Obama as a “bully“? Oh, yes.

Advisory: this instructive video is not safe for work or appropriate for children. You should see it anyway. — So what’s “Freedomworks”? Find out here.

Report in NY Times, summarized: whatever we do to the Taliban won’t make any difference, unless we hurt them, in which case they will recover and their numbers will grow. Meanwhile our own efforts are making it increasingly difficult for us to carry on fighting. Eventually everybody is going to get fed up with us and tell us to stand down. (Read the report.) Now that’s journalism.

Is Congress fit to deal with the economy, or even a small aspect of it? “It didn’t appear that a single Senator understands what is involved in making a market in a security.” Read it all, and ponder the wisdom of allowing these ignorant people near important financial issues. Remember Barney Frank!

Related: Obama tells everybody he has the stock market all figured out, and has made foolproof plans for dealing with it. He thinks he knows what he’s doing, but….

Maybe this explains your daughter’s latest boyfriend.

Here are some interesting poll results from Arizona.

The FBI arrested a few militia members for planning to ambush and kill police officers. You would think the very idea of a crime like that would inspire prosecutorial zeal, now wouldn’t you? Sure; but then how can this boondoggle be explained? Could this be a case of a bunch of beer-swilling loudmouths being grabbed for sharing a juvenile fantasy?