THE CNN EXPERTS HAVE FINALLY FIGURED IT OUT

So now that CNN "experts" say that pulling out of Iraq is a bad idea. I wonder what their first clue was.

Sorry about the sarcasm ... but why does it take so long for some people to realize the obvious? For years the Commander in Chief of our armed forces has been telling us that pulling out of Iraq would invite disaster; bloodshed on an unimaginable scale. Now it takes a panel of CNN "experts" repeating what George Bush has been saying all along to make it a fact.

Here's a paragraph from the story:

"Sectarian violence could erupt on a scale never seen before in Iraq if coalition troops leave before Iraq's security forces are ready. Supporters of al Qaeda could develop an international hub of terror from which to threaten the West. And the likely civil war could draw countries like Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Iran into a broader conflict."

Now what part of that scenario sounds good to you Democrats? Remember .. this is the course of action preferred by your party! Your heroes, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Murtha and the rest of the Defeatocrat caucus have been working for just this scenario! What is it about sectarian violence on a massive scale, an Al Qaeda base for terror in oil-rich Iraq and a broader Middle East conflict that makes them so happy?

It's clear: Iraqis still need our help to build the country they have been denied for so long. Pulling out now would undermine the legacy of every soldier and civilian life lost in Iraq. Defeatocrats are basically saying that those who died serving in Iraq did it for nothing, there will be no resolution worth dedicating to their sacrifice. Nice, real nice. Let's just spit in the eye of every person serving in Iraq. Liberals love this stuff. Me? Not so much.

We can all admit that this could have been handled better, but what's done is done. Can we put aside the partisan bullshit (I won't be able to say that on the air ... sad) and just come together to get the job done over there? Pulling out --- surrendering, if you like -- is the path to disaster. Accomplishing our stated goals can lead to huge dividends for peace.

DIDN'T I TELL YOU THAT GLOBAL WARMING WAS BECOMING A RELIGION?

If there is one thing that is consistent in every hotel room (well, at least in America) it is that you can get your hands on a Holy Bible, typically in the nightstand drawer. Well, one hotel in California has replaced Jesus for Gore...Al Gore that is. You might remember him from such things as serving as the Vice President to the United States, failing to win the bid for presidency in 2000 (ouch) and, oh, leading his latest world-wide campaign against "global warming."

Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" must be pretty inconvenient for Jesus who got the boot! The Gaia Napa Valley Hotel and Spa will provide its guests with copies of "An Inconvenient Truth." This is fanaticism at its best. First it was a slide show, then a book, then a movie about the slide show, then instant Hollywood fame. Now he even gets a hotel. Well isn't that special.

Maybe I should work with hotels to start replacing their Bibles with The FairTax Book! After all, the vice president of Marriott says, "We have a social responsibility." If he wants to be responsible, how about saving his company, and his guests, millions of dollars by implementing the FairTax plan. Talk about responsibility.

What's even more amusing about Al Gore and his global warming campaign is that "going green" is very hip and trendy, particularly among Hollywood celebrities. I know I'm no spring chicken, but Al Gore isn't what I would consider the beacon of cool and hip either. How did he land such a gig? Maybe it's the extra 40 lbs and the fake tan...

And hey, I'm not the first to suggest the global warming movement is actually a religion.

VETO

Any discussion of the president's veto of the Democrats surrender bill must begin with the realization of one simple, basic, incontrovertible fact. The Democrat leadership of this country awakes every single day with one desire on their mind: They want a day of bad news from Iraq. Those Democrat leaders who actually pray are praying for our defeat in Iraq. Every bit of bad news from Iraq brings smiles to Democrat faces. Every bit of good news brings sadness.

Democrats are totally invested in our defeat in Iraq. They believe that their chances of taking the White House and keeping the congress in the 2008 elections is to nurture the idea that many American voters have that what they call the "Iraq War", but what is really the Iraqi front in the war against terrorism, is absolutely lost and is only being further pursued by George Bush to achieve some nefarious anti-American and ungodly goals. Democrats know that Americans love winners, and that Americans want to win. If Americans begin to believe that that the achievement of our goals in Iraq is, in fact, possible; that a victory can be won, they will turn against the Democrat's ... and there goes the Democrat majority and a Democrat in the White House.

The Democrat -- and media -- hatred of George Bush has its genesis in the 2000 elections. Democrats did everything they could to bring about a recount in Florida -- but only in those areas which vote Democrat. They worked extra hours to try to disqualify votes from American citizens serving in our armed forces overseas. They pulled out all of the stops to change the outcome in Florida. They held hearings about intimidation of black voters in Florida, but could not come up with one single voter willing to appear before a Congressional hearing to tell his or her sad tale of being turned away from the polls. They tried it all, folks .. and still Bush was certified the winner.

From that moment on Democrats were dedicated to doing everything and anything the could do to destroy the Bush presidency ... and that includes working for a defeat of our country and our troops in Iraq. In pursuit of this goal the Democrats have had the willing help of two other powerful entities. The mainstream media and the Republican Party. The New York and Washington press corps, always supportive of Democrats at the polls, was more than willing to do whatever they could to join in the demonization of Bush. In the meantime the Republicans worked overtime to make sure that those voters out there who were actually in tune with Republican ideals of limited government and maximized personal responsibility would be so massively disappointed that they would sit on their hands when election day came around.

This Democrat urgency in setting a date-certain for surrender is borne of a hint that things might be turning our way in Iraq. With every hint of good news from Iraq Democrats become more determined to end the war before victory can be achieved.

Thank you, President Bush, for vetoing the Democrats surrender bill.

So now we have Harry Reid saying that now the president has an obligation to explain his plan in Iraq to the American people. At the same time Harry Reid has an obligation to explain to the American people his version of the consequences for setting a surrender date for the Iraqi front in the war against Islamic terrorism. Never in the history of modern warfare has a combatant set a surrender date in this manner. You don't say "We're going to surrender in six months." You do say "I'm defeated. I surrender .. NOW." Oh, but wait. I almost forgot. Harry Reid has been saying that we've been defeated, hasn't he?

Let's all have fun now watching the Democrats as they break out in a cold sweat every time news comes out of Iraq that carries even a small hint of success.

Is success guaranteed? No. Could America defeat these Islamic goons if we set our minds to it and pulled out all of the stops? Sure, but we're not going there. Can we win with the tactics not being pursued in Iraq? Yes, but the more the "loyal" opposition in this country condemns our efforts and in so doing gives aid and comfort to the Islamic fascist enemy, the more difficult, if not improbable, that victory becomes.

Someday, I fear, there is going to be a terrible price to be paid for the weakness that the Democrats and mindless peace-at-any-price leftists have caused us to show in the fight against terrorism.

BIG DEMONSTRATIONS FOR CRIMINALS ON TAP TODAY

It's May Day. This used to be the big day for Communists to celebrate their grand successes in bringing the world under Communist rule. Communists seem to be somewhat quite right now. They don't have a lot of successes to brag about. So it looks like the great May Day demonstration platform is wide open for some other group to occupy!

So ... how about the mob rule crowd! How about turning the May Day chanting over to those who don't think all that much about our rule of law, and who want to legitimize the Mexican invasion of the United States.

So .. prepare yourselves for demonstrations around the country for "immigration reform." Now what they mean by "immigration reform" is allowing those people who have broken the law by coming into this country illegally, staying here illegally and working here illegally to get special treatment from our government; treatment that is not afforded people who use the legal processes to enter America. In other words, the demonstrations you see today will call for rewarding criminals for their criminal behavior. Simple as that.

The supporters of criminal aliens are trying to tell us that there is no way the 12 to 20 criminal aliens in this country could possibly be sent back home ... that we're just going to have to find a way to accommodate them.

Wrong.

It can be done. Control over our borders can be established. We just have to be willing to take some rather strong steps to get it done.

Now this idea isn't original with me ... I've just adopted it because it works. Here's your plan for sending those who are here illegally back home while making sure that American businesses and agriculture will get all the workers they need to stay in business.

Step One: You enact harsh -- draconian -- penalties for any employer, no matter how large or small, who knowingly or carelessly hires someone who is in this country illegally. These employers are going to have to use the services of private sector firms that verify citizenship or legal residency. If the demand for such certifications is created, that demand will be met by private businesses. The law would require the federal government to cooperate in all respect with any companies in the business of certifying legal residency. There would also be harsh penalties for any landlord who knowingly or carelessly rented living quarters to anyone not in this country legally.

Step Two: All federal funds would be withheld from any cities or other local governments who refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities in the enforcement of our immigration laws. This would put an end to this "Sanctuary City" nonsense.

Step Three: A law would be passed that would allow U.S. Businesses to hire temporary workers who are not legal residents of the United States. All of this hiring would be done through federally licensed but privately operated employment agencies. The companies using the temporary labor would make all payments to the employment agencies, and the employment agencies would in turn pay the temporary workers. The penalties for any payments made by employers to temporary workers outside of this system would be harsh. Very harsh. Say, for instance, denial of any rights to hire temporary workers through this program again.

Step Four: U.S. law would require that any foreign person seeking work in the United States through the temporary worker program would have to have a temporary worker card issued by the United States. Without this card the employment agencies would not be permitted to bring these people into the U.S. for temporary work assignments.

Step Five: The temporary worker cards would only be issued in that worker's home country. Nowhere else. In other words, if you are already in the United States you would have to return to your home country to be issued a card. If you chose to remain in the United States you would be unable to find any work because you would be ineligible to be hired through the federally licensed employment agencies, and no employer would dare take a chance on the fines that would result from paying you outside of the federal temporary worker program.

Step Six: When a U.S. company need some workers, construction, agricultural ... whatever, that company would go to one of the federally licensed employment agencies and put in an order. That agency would then arrange to have the needed workers brought into the country and would arrange for their temporary housing. The employer would be billed for these costs. When the temporary work assignment was over the agency would provide transportation either back to the temporary workers home country or to the next temporary job. All payments to the temporary workers would cease until another assignment was found.

We have all of these illegal criminal aliens in this country because there is a demand for them. This program would eliminate the demand. Workers would be available through the temporary worker program. Going outside of the program would be unthinkable, considering the harsh penalties involved. Illegals already here would simply have to go back to their home countries to get that temporary worker card. We could even give them preferential treatment in issuing those cards ... just so long as they return to their own country to get them. The demand for illegals would dry up ... and those who truly need and want to work would, in spite of the inconvenience, abide by the law to accomplish their goals.

In many ways this idea gives the Republicans what they want, labor for American business. The problem in getting a program like this implemented is that it would most certainly NOT give the Democrats what they want ... more votes. Democrats see every one of these illegal aliens as a potential vote. Why, after all, do you think there are voter registration drives being promoted today? Just who are they trying to register? And which party is it that screams bloody murder whenever suggested that people voting or registering to vote show some ID or prove that they are eligible? 'Taint the Republicans. Connect the dots.

MAY DAY: OPEN-BORDERS MATH

By Michelle Malkin

Let's start off today's May Day illegal alien rally day with some misleading immigration numbers:

The Drudge Report trumpeted the NYTimes spin by headlining this stat:

Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials, facing intense political pressure to toughen enforcement, removed 221,664 illegal immigrants from the country over the last year, an increase of more than 37,000 — about 20 percent — over the year before, according to the agency’s tally.

221,664.

It sounds like we're getting serious about immigration enforcement--until I remind you of this inconvenient truth that will get glossed over in all the MSM sob stories today:

U.S. Can't Account for 600,000 Fugitives
March 26, 2007

Teams assigned to make sure foreigners ordered out of the United States actually leave have a backlog of more than 600,000 cases and can't accurately account for the fugitives' whereabouts, the government reported Monday.

The report by the Homeland Security Department's inspector general found that the effectiveness of teams assigned to find the fugitives was hampered by "insufficient detention capacity, limitations of an immigration database and inadequate working space."

Even though more than $204 million was allocated for 52 fugitive operations teams since 2003, a backlog of 623,292 cases existed as of August of 2006, the report said.

The number of illegal immigrants in the United States has been estimated at between 11.5 million and 12 million. About 5.4 percent of them are believed to be "fugitive aliens," those who have failed to leave the country after being ordered out.

The inspector general found there is not enough bed space available to detain such fugitives and that agents are hampered by an inaccurate database. Other factors that limit the teams' effectiveness are insufficient staffing, the report said.

Until the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, attempts to catch such fugitives were mostly carried out by teams not exclusively devoted to the task. After the attacks, an Absconder Apprehension Initiative was created within the Justice Department to find, apprehend and deport such immigrants. When the Homeland Security Department was created in March 2003, it assumed responsibility.

Plans for the new office stated that it aimed to eliminate the case backlog by the end of 2012, although a field manual put the timetable at 2009, the report said.

Yet "despite the efforts of the teams, the backlog of fugitive alien cases has increased each fiscal year since the program was established in February 2002," the inspector general said.

221,664 "removed" illegal aliens vs 623,292 released illegal alien fugitives.

That's right, people.

There are nearly three times as many officially designated illegal alien fugitives freed by the feds as there are illegal aliens who have been removed over the last year.

Just doing the context-setting and number-crunching the rest of the MSM won't do...

***

Guess what else? More and more of the illegal aliens caught by immigration authorities and ordered to appear for deportation hearings are skipping out. From the Department of Homeland Security's Inspector General:

As the IG explains:

Each year, thousands of illegal aliens fail to respond to orders to appear at their scheduled immigration hearing. In most of these cases, the Immigration Judge (IJ) will conduct an in absentia (in the absence of) hearing and order the alien removed from the U.S. However, a failure to appear does not always result in an in absentia order. In 4 percent of the cases the IJ may also administratively close a failure to appear case without ordering the alien removed. Of the 461,556-immigration judge decisions and administrative closures issued by the Executive Office of Immigration and Review (EOIR) between FY 2001 and FY 2004, 39 percent (181,807) were issued to illegal aliens who had been released but later failed to appear at their respective immigration hearings.

Although the percentage of released aliens who failed to appear at their respective hearings has declined in recent years, the total number of aliens failing to appear is increasing.

During FY 2001, 42,030 aliens failed to appear compared to 52,890 who failed to appear during FY 2004, a 26 percent increase.

In fact, according to DHS's Detention and Removal Office, 85 percent of the illegal aliens released that have been issued final orders of removal, will abscond. That goes not just for illegal aliens from Mexico, but for illegal aliens from terror-friendly and terror-sponsoring nations:

Illegal Aliens from Special Interest Countries (SIC) and State Sponsors of Terrorism (SST) Countries. A significant number of OTMs that are apprehended and released each year originate from SIC and SST. From FY 2001 through the first half of FY 2005, 91,516 SIC and SST aliens were apprehended of which 45,000 (49%) were later released. It is not known exactly how many of these SIC and SST aliens were ultimately issued final orders of removal and were actually removed since such data is not tracked by DRO. However, assuming SIC and SST aliens are being removed at the same rate as other apprehended and released aliens, 85 percent of the SIC and SST aliens released who eventually receive final orders of removal will abscond.

One more updated graph for you from the immigration court bureaucracy shows that failure to appear rates rose again in 2005 and held steady through 2006:

And there's this truly frightening reality:

[The Detention and Removal Office] estimates that in FY 2007 there will be 605,000 foreign-born individuals admitted to state correctional facilities and local jails during the year for committing crimes in the U.S. Of this number, DRO estimates half (302,500) will be removable aliens.

Currently, most of these incarcerated aliens are being released into the U.S. at the conclusion of their respective sentences due to the lack of DRO resources.

Homeland security? What homeland security?

IT'S WORSE THAN WE THOUGHT

By Doug Patton

Earlier this year, I wrote that congressional Democrats would disappoint their liberal base because "holding power means compromise." I was wrong. Democrats are doing their level best to please their radical leftist constituencies, and it's worse than we thought. In their first 100 days in control of Congress, they have introduced legislation that would cripple small business, surrender in Iraq, socialize our medical care and extend the redundant hypocrisy of "hate crimes" to gays.

The Dems recently passed the "Employee Free Choice Act" through the House. This Communist-inspired legislation (no kidding...the Communist Party USA has proudly endorsed it) removes a worker's right to a secret ballot when deciding whether or not to join a union. Unions could invade workplaces with a "card-check" system that lets them organize if a majority of workers sign up.

Imagine a burly Teamster showing up at your home on a Saturday morning, pressuring you to vote in favor of the union. A small business owner with three employees could be forcibly unionized if two of those employees sign the card. Employees who don't want to work in a union environment would lose their right to vote on this issue.

If you think having unions infest America's 22 million small businesses, demanding absurd wages and outrageous pensions, is a good idea, ask General Motors. After being systematically eviscerated by the United Auto Workers for the last 50 years, GM has now fallen behind Toyota as the world's number one maker of automobiles.

From there we move on to the condescending protection of "minorities" in the form of superfluous hate crimes legislation. The latest attempt has been named the Matthew Shepard Act, in honor of a Wyoming meth addict killed in a drug deal gone bad. The fact that he happened to be gay apparently entitled him to more protection than your average straight meth addict.

Do we really believe that a murderer is going to pause in the commission of his crime and say, "Wait, you're not gay, are you?" What if the killer himself comes out of the closet while on trial? Is it no longer a hate crime? And what are the ramifications for a preacher who dares to tell his congregation what the Bible says about homosexuality? Suppose the next day a homosexual is beaten up in that community? Is that preacher's sermon now "hate speech?"

Then there is the issue the Dems think is their ticket back to the Oval Office: THE WAR. The "This Is Hard So Let's Give Up" bill is set to cross the president's desk this week with a date certain for U.S. surrender to the terrorists in Iraq. Predictably, it will be vetoed. This legislation was passed so that Dems can go back to their districts next year and say, "We tried to bring the boys home, but Bush wanted them to stay and get killed." One of the few Democrats I know of who has consistently hoped for our troops to fail is Dennis Kucinich. The fact that Dennis Kucinich is now a Democratic trendsetter may just be the saddest thing ever.

And, of course, there is the constant Democrat drumbeat to return to the tired old concept of "universal health care." This idea will not die, despite the utter failure of such programs in Europe, Canada and elsewhere.

Several other pieces of legislation are in the works. One is an elaboration of the original 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which would cost businesses millions and give even more paid leave to new parents. How on earth did we, as Americans, ever manage to have both kids and jobs before 1993? The average family today has fewer children and more disposable income than any previous generation, and yet we need even more time off than they did?

Democrats are singing the same socialist tune they have since FDR declared himself Nanny-in-Chief. It goes something like this (especially since the sixties): "You cannot take care of yourself. You deserve more than others. Rich people owe you. Armed conflict is never the answer, especially when it takes longer than a month. You deserve free medical coverage. If you are gay, non-white, female, 'transgendered' or whatever, you need even more protection."

Here's the reality: we are Americans. Let's start acting more like adults and less like Democrats.