George Rebane
Retired lawyer and Union editorial board member Norm Sauer wrote another letter to the editor yesterday (here) about crime rates and gun ownership that predictably tied some undies of the looney Left in knots. A correspondent advised me that this caused one of these worthies, a critic and former employee of the newspaper, to even (gasp!) cancel his subscription. The point here again is that the Left demands that such voices as Sauer’s should not see print in a community newspaper. As the Gipper said, “There you go again.”
While we’re on The Union, the paper’s 20nov14 edition featured its lead editorial written by hard Left syndicated columnist Amy Goodman railing against the Keystone XL pipeline. Her argument centers on the claim of massive environmental damage that the pipeline will cause. Peripheral implications in the piece are the insane economic arguments made by our President and other prominent socialists. What she and her ilk will never understand is that it is only the richer and freer countries that can afford to maintain a good environment. Poor countries, especially of the collectivist kind, have had no ability whatsoever to successfully manage their environments. The poster children here are the USSR (now Russia) and China. Destroying a country’s economy is a sure way to guarantee that the country’s environmental concerns will disappear from its list of public priorities.
On amnesty and immigration reform we heard from President Obama last night that legalizing the residency of millions of illegal aliens is now something that he wants to abet, continue, and institutionalize in America’s new immigration policy. The actual process that this now formalizes consists of three steps – 1) get pregnant and sneak across the border, 2) lay low and give birth to a new American citizen, 3) apply for permanent residency as parents of an American child. The process, of course, has more steps that are the real reasons why our America Last political factions are in favor of Obama’s executive orders. For the recently interested in national affairs, these consist of 4) vote the Democrat ticket, and 5) support the Reconquista goals of La Raza and MALDEF.
Democrats are already denigrating their constituents by lying to them that Presidents Reagan and Bush1 did the same thing as President Obama. The truth is that the former presidents fixed an amnesty law with some oversights that was initially passed by Congress. This president is overwriting existing immigration law with imperial diktats fashioned from whole cloth – Congress has had no part in what Obama now intends.
In opposition to the continued porous border and lax immigration law enforcement policies is a growing group of the nation’s sheriffs and members of Congress. Organized by Sheriff Tom Hodgson of Bristol County, Massachusetts, they will gather on the steps of the Capitol on 10 December 2014 to join their voices in protesting the unconstitutional actions of our current federal government (more here). Sheriff Hodgson writes –
“As you know, the policies of recent years that encourage immigrants to illegally enter our country have created serious threats to our domestic and national security. The citizens of our nation are counting on the American Sheriffs to fulfill our oath to preserve law and order and live up to our responsibilities as guardians of the United States Constitution. Given the fact that 25 people in the United States are killed each day by illegal immigrants, and our schools are becoming overcrowded and more costly, our public health is threatened by new diseases and ailments introduced by people living in our communities illegally, and the fact that benefits are being given and violations of laws forgiven for a select group of non-citizens, makes clear our obligation to act now before we erode the confidence and faith citizens have in Sheriffs across the country and throughout our history.”
[update] Congressman Tom McClintock made this statement regarding the President's new immigration decree –
Last night, the President asserted a power to nullify existing immigration law by ordering the executive branch to ignore it. Further, he has ordered 34 million green cards to make possible the employment of illegal immigrants despite federal law that makes their employment a crime. This is a direct violation of his responsibility under Article II to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” and a usurpation of legislative authority which Article I grants solely to Congress.
The rule of law established in our Constitution forbids the President from selecting which laws he will enforce and which he will ignore or from choosing who must obey the law and who is above the law. It explicitly forbids him to make law by decree. This is the fundamental difference between a nation of laws and a nation of men.
Fortunately, the American Founders provided a variety of checks available to both the legislative and judicial branches. I expect these will begin now to be invoked.
[24nov14 update] RR reader/commenter and Union columnist George Boardman wrote what could be considered a hit piece on Sheriff Keith Royal in this morning’s paper. He led with the child porn investigation of county supervisor Terry Lamphier, but then spread out to cover other cases that Boardman thought was overreach by the Sheriff’s Department. The charge regarding Lamphier was that the sheriff, with undue haste, started what may turn out to be an unwarranted investigation that is now being pursued with unusual vigor.
What I missed in the column was the mention of any evidence that the sheriff had a choice in the matter of launching an investigation. Today the trafficking in and consuming of child pornography is a serious crime which when reported, especially in connection with a public official, must be duly investigated. In short, Keith Royal had no choice but to start an investigation as required by law.
And I also saw no evidence presented to back the column’s allegation that somehow the investigation has been prosecuted in an imprudent manner. To my knowledge there has been a minimum of information about the investigation released by the sheriff’s office, and most voices in the community are willing to wait for the facts and where they may lead. Supervisor Lamphier is innocent until proven otherwise, and would benefit from a timely resolution of this cloud over his head.
So the bottom line is that, while impugning Sheriff Royal, George Boardman did not connect the sheriff to the disclosure about Lamphier’s computer that led to the allegations and subsequent investigation. And neither did he substantiate anything amiss with the ongoing investigation. (But I will join Mr Boardman in being somewhat surprised that it required five, count them, five sheriff’s cruisers to assault the supervisor's residence in order to search the premises. By nature, experience, and reputation in the community, Mr Lamphier has been a most agreeable and non-violent person imaginable.)
rebanesruminations.com 
Leave a comment