Archive for May, 2010

Gem of the Week: Brussels Biden

May 29, 2010

Or Belgian Joe, if you prefer. That’s right. Looks like the VP is a really big fan of the capital of Belgium.  (That’s Brussels for any of you who aren’t in the know.)  Earlier this month, the inimitable Vice President gave a speech before the European Union, which is based in Brussels, and said the following:

“As you probably know, some American politicians and American journalists refer to Washington, D.C. as the ‘capital of the free world,’ but it seems to me that in this great city, which boasts 1,000 years of history and which serves as the capital of Belgium, the home of the European Union, and the headquarters for NATO, this city has its own legitimate claim to that title.” 

So yes, ladies and gentlemen, we present to you that great beacon of liberty, that last bastion of freedom: Brussels!  Home of the original Waffle House.  Now, I like my waffles (and sprouts) just as much as the next fellow, but Brussels? The capital of the free world?  I’ve mentioned Biden’s nuttiness before, but now I’m beginning to think he’s been smoking some of the President’s stash.

Anyway, next month Biden plans to celebrate that great capital of world culture: Pyongyang, North Korea.

Another round of Flemish Red please!

—————————————————————-

For a related post on this topic, link to:

https://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/this-universal-healthcare-thing-is-a-big-fing-deal/

Advertisements

TRAITORS ALL!

May 27, 2010

se·di·tion (n.)

1. Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of a state.  2. Insurrection; rebellion.

There’s been a lot of throwing around of the word “sedition” by liberals these days.   (Funny how they never brought that word up during the Bush Presidency.)  Anyway, a few weeks ago, Time Magazine columnist and all-around Obama butt-boy, Joe Klein, said that comments made by Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck criticizing Obama come “close to being seditious.”1  And now just this week, uber-liberal Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick said that Republican opposition to the Obama agenda is “almost at the level of sedition.”2  

Of course, neither of these left-wing geniuses cited any examples to back up their assertions.  But that’s okay.  If they want to talk about sedition, let’s talk about sedition. 

The definition of sedition (above) entails language or conduct that either incites rebellion or is tantamount to rebellion against a state.  Well, what about the spectacle that took place on the floor of the U.S. Congress last week?  I’d say that just about qualifies.  There you had the leader of a foreign country, “El Presidente” Felipe Calderon of Mexico, appear as an invited guest of the Democrats in Congress, and bash the State of Arizona’s new immigration law.  Speaking from the podium, Calderon had this to say:

“I strongly disagree with the recently adopted law in Arizona.  It is a law that … ignores a reality that cannot be erased by decree, [and] introduces a terrible idea using racial profiling as a basis for law enforcement.”3

Now, while this comment may have been ugly, tactless, undiplomatic and even insulting to most Americans — not to mention a display of complete ignorance of the law in question (Hey, maybe this guy should go to work for the Obama administration!), — none of what El Presidente had to say has anything to do with sedition.  Calderon is a foreign leader and, while he may be an indelicate third-world clown, he is allowed to say just about whatever he wants.  More the fools we as a country are for inviting him to say it in the House of Representatives during a joint session of Congress. 4

No, the sedition occurred immediately following Calderon’s remark: when every single Congressional Democrat, together with key Obama administration officials including the Vice-President, gave this obnoxious foreigner a standing ovation.  The sedition occurred when Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), acting in her capacity as Speaker of the House, chose an ovation to the leader of a foreign power over the duly enacted law of a sister state.  The sedition occurred when Eric Holder, acting in his capacity as Attorney General, chose an ovation to the leader of a foreign power over the duly enacted law of a sister state.  The sedition occurred when Janet Napolitano, acting in her capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security, chose an ovation to the leader of a foreign power over the duly enacted law of a sister state.  The sedition occurred when Senator John Kerry (D-MA), acting in his capacity as an elected representative of the State of Massachusetts, chose an ovation to the leader of a foreign power over the duly enacted law of a sister state.  The sedition occurred when Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), acting in her capacity as an elected representative of the State of California, chose an ovation to the leader of a foreign power over the duly enacted law of a sister state.  The sedition occurred when Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), acting in his capacity as an elected representative of the State of New Jersey, chose an ovation to the leader of a foreign power over the duly enacted law of a sister state.

After Calderon made his offensive utterances, these legislators and these White House officials — supposed representatives of the American people — had a choice, and they chose to conduct themselves in the vile, seditious manner in which they did.  They chose the facile expediency of political correctness over fealty to their own country.  They chose the distorted, ill-informed, self-serving policy pronouncement of a corrupt foreign power over the duly enacted law of a State of the Republic.  In short, they publicly and flagrantly betrayed the State of Arizona and, in so doing, betrayed us all. 

What’s more, the sedition occurred (and continues to occur) when John Morton, the Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — the man supposedly charged with enforcing the nation’s immigration laws — says he’s not necessarily going to enforce the law insofar as it pertains to Arizona.  Uh-huh.  Why?  Well, because he says he doesn’t think it’s all that great of a law.  “I don’t think the Arizona law, or laws like it, are the solution,” he said. 5  Who the hell cares what you think you elitist asshole!  Who says you get to pick and choose which laws to enforce?!  Do your job and enforce the law! 

And so… [composure regained] these are all rank traitors.  So brazen are they in their treason that they are effectively pledging allegiance to a foreign sovereign state and a foreign flag: the Mexican flag.  They are doing so in their capacity as duly elected officials and government employees.  They are doing so on government soil and during a high-profile exercise of their solemn duty and sacred oath to represent the citizens of these United States, not the corrupt interests of a foreign sovereign.  They have betrayed that duty and that oath.  And they have betrayed the trust of the American people. 

It is one thing to use speech (language) to criticize a particular leader and his policies.  That is what Palin, Beck and many others including your humble writer here do.  That is political debate and political discourse and is at the essence of a free and open society.  However, it is quite another thing to attack the society itself and the very laws that undergird it; that is what these Democrat politicians are doing and that is sedition.  Simply, they are traitors all! 6

Now in the good old days, traitors were hanged, drawn, and quartered. Sadly that’s no longer the practice and as long as these thugs remain in power they will escape any punishment.  Elections have consequences, don’t cha know!  However in November, you the American voter can have your own little treason trial: where you get to be judge, jury, and hangman right there in the voting booth.  Be sure to make these villains pay for their high crimes.  And as for the biggest traitor of all, well I guess we’ll just have to wait for 2012 to come around.  But that’s okay.  We can wait, Mr. President. 

——————————————————————————–

Footnotes:

Fn. 1: Joe Klein:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36020.html

Fn. 2:  Deval Patrick:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/

2010/05/patrick_says_ob.html

Fn. 3:  Felipe Calderon before Congress:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Americas/2010/0520/Felipe-Calderon-calls-Arizona-immigration-law-racial-profiling 

(For a video excerpt of this speech, see the Comments Section of this post.)

Fn. 4:  As an aside, an inquiring mind might ask why he is so against the Arizona law? Is it because Señor Felipe Calderon is such a big proponent of civil rights in a country where he tolerates half of his population living in abject poverty?  No, it’s because Arizona just made it just that much more difficult for him to unload that half of his country into our country.  (According to official figures, in 2009 Mexico had more than 50 million people living in poverty, roughly 45 percent of the population, and those numbers are increasing.) 

Fn. 5:  John Morton:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/21/official-says-feds-process-illegals-referred-arizona/

Fn. 6:  Of course, throughout Calderon’s speech the Re-pubes just sat on their hands.  It would’ve been nice to have had a Patrick Henry moment and seen them get up and walk out en masse but I guess we just don’t have that kind of bravery anymore.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU BY OUR PROUD SPONSOR:

www.enforceazlaw.com

 

Gem of the Week: Woody the Fascist

May 20, 2010

 

“It is a fool’s prerogative to utter truths that no one else will speak.” 1

In a recent interview published by a Spanish language newspaper, film director and comedian Woody Allen had this to say about Barack Obama: “I am pleased with Obama. I think he’s brilliant. The Republican Party should get out of his way and stop trying to hurt him… It would be good…if he could be a dictator for a few years because he could do a lot of good things quickly.” 2

Dictator? Really?  Sounds ridiculous, right?  And coming from a nutty—albeit highly accomplished and creative—guy like Woody Allen, it’s to be easily dismissed. Or is it?  Perhaps Woody himself is unaware of just how germane his comment really is. 

First, need we remind ourselves that Obama and his party control the White House and both houses of Congress.  As Commander in Chief, he of course has full control over the military.  And in less than two years, the Obama government:

  • controls at least one-sixth of the American economy through the new healthcare law;
  • controls a large part of the automotive industry with the bailout and takeover of General Motors;
  • controls or exercises daunting power over the insurance and financial industries with the bailout of the banks and AIG;
  • controls 96% of the housing market through quasi-government housing finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;
  • will have unprecedented control over a large part of the energy sector with the passage of “Cap and Trade” legislation;
  • will have unprecedented control over news and other media outlets that it doesn’t already have de facto control over (i.e., NBC and MSNBC) with the passage of the “fairness doctrine” or its equivalent.
  • will have unprecedented control over the Internet with the passage of so-called “net neutrality” or its equivalent.
  • is attempting to infiltrate and exercise control over the nation’s churches through a new faith-based initiative program that merges churches with the EPA.
  • is attempting, through the Justice Department, to usurp control over a state’s right to duly enact laws to deal with immigration problems within the state (Arizona);
  • is publicly contemplating, through the Justice Department, a modification to the Miranda laws with respect to certain U.S. citizens.

It would seem all President Obama needs now is some kind of national catastrophe or emergency (real or contrived) as justification for enacting his own form of “enabling” law to sweep away any remaining dissent and fully suspend all freedom of speech and civil rights.  So I’d say Woody is just one Reichstag Fire away from getting his wish. 3  But Woody may want to be careful what he wishes for.  His people don’t have a really good history with dictators, don’t cha know. 

——————————————————————————

Footnotes:

Fn. 1: Attributed to Neil Gaiman, in Dream Country

Fn. 2: For Woody Allen quote:

http://entertainment.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/05/17/woody-allen-president-obama-dictator/

Fn. 3: For more information on the German Reichstag fire click here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

Pelosi to Young Americans: Tune In, Turn On, Drop Out; We Got Your Back

May 19, 2010

This week, that great thinker and illustrious leader of ours, Nancy Pelosi, had this to say about one of the many benefits of her new healthcare legislation:

“We see it as an entrepreneurial bill.  A bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care.” 1

So in other words, for all you kids out there (and by that we mean adults in your twenties), no need to be productive, just tune in, turn on, drop out and the government’s got your back.  It’s easy to see how Nancy can relate to this, being an old hippie chick herself.  You know, Haight-Ashbury and all that.  For the hippies of the 1960s, and for those who are still living that dream (most of whom are still in San Francisco), that was the way to go.  It was the cool thing to drop out, smoke weed, get high and take up the bongos or guitar; then go hang out at Woodstock or somewhere and protest the war or whatever was the latest thing going around on campus (besides herpes.)

But of course back then things were a little different.  Back then you had those good old capitalist pigs Mom and Dad to take care of things for you.  You see, in the 1960s your parents still made their money the old fashioned way: they earned it.  But today, the hippies are Mom and Dad.  And with Big Nanny Nancy in charge, they’re also running the country.  And guess what, they make their money the old fashioned way too: by taxing the American citizens (or at least those who still work for a living.)  That’s how the new healthcare law works!  Ain’t socialism just grand!

—————————————-

Fn. 1: For the Pelosi quote:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/65950

ON IT!

May 14, 2010

 

Attorney General Eric Holder on the Arizona Immigration Law:

“I have not had a chance to [read it] — I’ve glanced at it.” … “I’ve only made the comments that I’ve made on the basis of things that I’ve been able to glean by reading newspaper accounts, obviously, television…” 1

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on the Times Square Bomber:

“We have no evidence that it is anything other than a one-off.” 2

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on the Gulf Oil Spill:

“I don’t honestly think it opens up a whole new series of questions, because, you know, in all honesty I doubt this is the first accident that has happened and I doubt it will be the last.”…  “[I] wouldn’t characterize it necessarily as a worsening situation.” 3

Golly gee, thank goodness we don’t have to worry about that incompetent George Bush administration anymore! 

Yes we can!

—————————————

Footnotes:

Fn. 1: Eric Holder:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/14/AR2010051404231.html

Fn. 2: Janet Napolitano:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/

politicolive/0510/

Napolitano_Times_Sq_car_bomb_potential_terrorist_attack.html

Fn. 3: Robert Gibbs:

http://www.google.com/

hostednews/ap/article/

ALeqM5gLiUWM39KjSOCwqEl9nZDVncfSlgD9FFSJ8O0

http://www.politico.com/

news/stories/0510/36652_Page2.html

U.N. Says Arizona Immigration Law Violates International “Standards”

May 12, 2010

Hahahahahaha!!!  Aah – Hahahahaha!!!  Aah – Hahahaha!  Aah – Hahahaha!  Ah – Haha–… uh, excuse me.  Just give me one minute.  Let me catch my breath.  Ok, I’m good. 

Six human rights “experts” over at the United Nations said Tuesday that Arizona’s new law on illegal immigration could violate what they say are international “standards” on issues such as discrimination and the terms under which a person can be detained: “A disturbing pattern of legislative activity hostile to ethnic minorities and immigrants has been established with the adoption of an immigration law that may allow for police action targeting individuals on the basis of their perceived ethnic origin,” the experts said, with a straight face. 1

Well, never mind that racial and ethnic profiling are specifically prohibited in the Arizona law.  Let’s just examine some of these international standards when it comes to illegal immigration, shall we?  Here’s a sampling: 

  • If you cross the border illegally in England, you are either immediately deported or jailed.
  • If you cross the border illegally in Germany, you are fined and required to work it off or pay it off.
  • If you cross the border illegally in China, you are deemed a spy and imprisoned indefinitely.
  • If you cross the border illegally in Cuba, you are thrown in jail as a political enemy of the state.
  • If you cross the border illegally in Venezuela, you are deemed a spy and imprisoned indefinitely.
  • If you cross the border illegally in North Korea, you are deemed a spy, imprisoned and sentenced to hard labor.
  • If you cross the border illegally in Saudi Arabia, you are jailed.
  • If you cross the border illegally in Iran, you are detained indefinitely and probably never heard from again.
  • If you cross the border illegally in Afghanistan, you are shot.
  • And if you cross the border illegally in Mexico, you have committed the equivalent of a felony punishable by two years’ imprisonment, or up to ten years’ imprisonment if you are re-entering the country illegally.  Furthermore, Mexico’s National Population Registry tracks and verifies the identity of everyone in Mexico, who must at all times either carry a citizens’ identity card, proper verification of visitor status, or be subject to arrest as an illegal alien. 2  

However, if you cross the border illegally in the United States, you get: a driver’s license, a social security card, a job or welfare or both, food stamps, subsidized rent or housing, free healthcare, free tuition, all government documents translated into your language, and you also get to proudly wave your country’s flag in protest of the very country that has given you all of the above for not giving you even more.

I must say those guys over at the U.N. sure have a great sense of humor!  But now that I think about it, maybe the U.N. is right.  Maybe Arizona and the rest of the United States should make every effort to adopt illegal immigration laws that are more in conformity with international standards.

The border between North and South Korea

——————————————  

Footnotes:

Fn. 1:  For full article, click here:

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/05/11/human-rights-experts-say-arizona-immigration-law-violate-international/

Fn. 2: Mexico, along with two delegates from the United States, one from Pakistan, one from Kenya, and one from Costa Rica, sits on the six-member panel of United Nations “experts” that opined on the Arizona immigration law.

———————-

For more great stuff on the United Nations, click here:

https://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/gem-of-the-week-u-n-elects-iran-to-commission-on-women%e2%80%99s-rights-seriously/

Gem of the Week: Wear the American Flag to School and Get Sent Home

May 9, 2010

Students at a California high school were sent home from school on Wednesday for having the unmitigated brazenness to wear T-shirts sporting the American flag.  The five teens were sitting around a table outside Live Oak High School in Morgan Hill, California, when Assistant Principal Miguel Rodriguez (pronounced, mee – gel / rod – ree- gez) asked them to accompany him to the principal’s office where they were ordered to turn their T-shirts inside-out or be sent home.  You see, Wednesday was Cinco de Mayo day, an annual holiday that is celebrated in another country called Mexico.  But it would seem it also is celebrated with quite a bit of hoopla at this particular California school.  On this day, school officials had enthusiastically encouraged the students to wear Mexican red, white, and green, but deemed the display of Old Glory as “incendiary.”  Hence, the disciplinary action against these students.

You know, I had never really given much thought before to Cinco de Mayo.  But Señor Assistant Principal Rodriguez has inspired me.  From now on, I am going to make the effort to celebrate it every year.  In my own special way.

Incendiary enough for ya?

——————————–

For more on good schools gone bad, click here:

https://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/04/16/gem-of-the-week-glen-or-glenda/

https://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/03/06/gem-of-the-week-2/

News Media Reports: Times Square Bomber’s Motive “Shrouded in Mystery”

May 9, 2010

CBS News reports that Faisal Shahzad (you know, he’s that guy who tried to blow up Times Square about a week ago) is somewhat of a mystery man.  An enigma of sorts, one might say.  His motive is “shrouded in mystery,” report those hard-hitting news folks over at CBS. 1

Now I’m thinking, well, if the smart-as-a-whip guys and gals over at CBS News can’t figure him out, then how the heck am I, your typical Joe Six-Pack, going to be able to do it?  Well, I guess I’ll just have to give it the old college try.  So here are some of my theories:

Theory Number One: Shahzad is a Tea Partier.

I think NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg hit the nail right on the head when, before they had even arrested anybody, he speculated to Katie Couric of CBS News (there’s that CBS news again!) that it was probably somebody “home-grown, maybe a mentally deranged person or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the healthcare bill or something.” 2  Katie’s journalism instincts immediately kicked into high gear, and she responded with a knowing look.  So Bloomy nailed it: it’s those damn government-hating Tea Partiers!  I think that makes a lot of sense.  Double-plus good, Mike!  I mean, anyone who’s crazy and racist enough not to want free healthcare must be so mentally deranged they’d want to blow up Times Square and kill innocent people right?  Also, if Shahzad was willing to blow himself up too, then he obviously wouldn’t have had any need for healthcare because he’d be dead!  But he didn’t blow himself up.  Okay, maybe this theory isn’t so great after all.  That’s too bad.  I was really hoping I could blame this on those damn tea baggers! 

Theory Number Two:  Shahzad Suffers From Post-Home-Foreclosure-Derangement-Syndrome.

So some really creative psychologists have come up with this new disease for the new economy we’re in: post-home-foreclosure-derangement-syndrome.  Or at least I think that’s what it’s called.  Anyway, the idea is that people who are about to lose their homes go out and do wacky stuff like blow people up in Times Square.  Well, it just so happens that the mortgage on Shahzad’s Connecticut home was in foreclosure.  Or about to be foreclosed or something like that.  Hey, times are tough!  You know, it’s that lousy Bush economy we’re still mired in.  I know, I know, it’s been almost two years since Bush has been out of office, but according to the media, Bush put us in such a hole that… Oh, wait, that’s right, now we’re supposed to be in a recovery.  Isn’t that what Obama said?  The “jobless recovery.”  So is it Bush’s recovery or Obama’s recovery?  Maybe the jobless part is Bush’s and the recovery part is Obama’s?  I’m so confused!  All right, let’s move on to another theory, shall we?

Theory Number Three:  Shahzad is a Right-wing Republican and Talk-Radio Listener.

Okay, try to stay with me on this one.  There are reports (probably also from CBS News) that the radio in Shahzad’s SUV was tuned to an AM station!  Now, follow this logic.  Who is on AM radio?  Rush Limbaugh!  That right-wing extremist and rabble rouser.  See what I’m sayin here?  Shahzad is a right-wing Republican and AM radio listener.  As for why that would make him want to blow up Times Square, I uh… well I refer you back to Theory Number One.

Theory Number Four: Shahzad is Anti-Disney or Anti-Lion King, or Maybe Just Anti-Lion.

Did you know that Shahzad’s SUV was supposedly parked right near the theater that shows the Broadway musical “The Lion King?”  Coincidence?  I don’t think so.  You know, it is Disney’s The Lion King.  So maybe Shahzad was anti-Disney. Or maybe he just saw a performance of The Lion King and really (I mean really) hated it.  Or maybe he just hates lions!  Hey, we need to cover all the possibilities here.  After all, Big Sis Janet Napolitano—our beloved Homeland Security apparatchik—reassured us all that Shahzad probably acted as just a “one-off.”  So maybe his “one-off” thing is that he’s anti-lion!  It’s possible!  Okay, maybe this one is a little thin.  Next!

Theory Number Five: Shahzad is a Violent Islamic Extremist and Terrorist

Now, I realize I’m going way out on a limb here, but maybe, just maybe, Shahzad is an Islamic terrorist.  I know, it’s that tired old canard again, and I can find hardly anyone in the news media to back it up, but I guess it should kind of be considered, no?  Ok, I’ll back off.  Sorry for sounding so politically incorrect and racist and all that.  I mean I really am so in agreement with MSNBC’s news anchor Contessa Brewer on this one.  Speaking on the liberal Stephanie Miller’s radio show, Contessa offered up this trenchant analysis:

“I get frustrated… There was part of me that was hoping this was not going to be anybody with ties to any kind of Islamic country… There are a lot of people who want to use terrorist intent to justify writing off people who believe in a certain way or come from certain countries or whose skin color is a certain way. I mean they use it as justification for really outdated bigotry.”  (Emphasis added.) 3

Contessa is just so right.  I much prefer her form of trendy, up-to-date bigotry instead.

 ———————–

 Footnotes:

 Fn. 1: See the full CBS News article on Times Square Bomber’s Motive here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/05/national/main6462351.shtml

Fn. 2:  Excerpt of Bloomberg interview with Couric:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brent-baker/2010/05/03/cbs-features-ny-mayor-bloomberg-speculating-bomber-was-mad-about-obamac

Fn. 3: For the Contessa Brewer quote:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/scott-whitlock/2010/05/04/msnbcs-contessa-brewer-frustrated-times-square-bomber-muslim-0

Gem of the Week: U.N. Elects Iran to Commission on Women’s Rights (Seriously!)

May 2, 2010

The United Nations, that august body of the world’s great statesmen, has decided in its infinite wisdom to elect Iran, yes, Iran, to its Commission on the Status of Women, a committee charged with the mission of worldwide “gender equality and advancement of women.”

Snapping into action, Iran immediately announced it would be leading the charge on various cutting edge women’s rights issues around the world.  Top of the agenda: henceforth, all public stonings and lashings of immodest women will only be permitted on Tuesdays and Thursdays, with severe beatings to take place on Fridays. 

Next up for the United Nations: North Korea to head the new U.N. Task Force on Human Rights in Emerging Democracies.  Keep up the good work, U.N.!

President Obama Troubled By Anti-Government Rhetoric

May 1, 2010

Today, President Obama used his commencement speech at the University of Michigan to say that he is “troubled” by all the anti-government rhetoric he is hearing these days.  He further warned that such language can signal to extremists that “perhaps violence is … justifiable.”

For once, I actually agree with the President.  For example:

  • Anti-government rhetoric that states that a duly enacted law is misguided, irresponsible and a threat to civil liberties is troubling;
  • Anti-government rhetoric that criticizes government officials and those who are charged with enforcing a duly enacted law is troubling;
  • Anti-government rhetoric that suggests that the government is acting beyond its constitutional authority and that legal challenges should be brought to overturn a duly enacted law is troubling.

These are all very, very troubling statements.  But most troubling of all is when these statements are made by you, Mr. President.

Yes, Mr. President, it was you who said that the duly enacted Arizona immigration law is misguided and irresponsible and poses a threat to civil liberties; and this is very troubling.  It was you, Mr. President, who criticized government officials of the State of Arizona and suggested that police officers charged with enforcing the law will violate their constitutional oath and harass ordinary American citizens; and this is very troubling.  And it was you, Mr. President, who suggested that the government of the State of Arizona exceeded its constitutional authority and ordered your Justice Department to examine whether the law violates the Constitution; and this is very troubling.

So shame on you, Mr. President.  After all, we don’t want your anti-government rhetoric to signal to potentially violent extremists and other violent individuals that perhaps violence is justifiable, do we?  Because that would be very troubling indeed!