Nightly Ramble Thursday

Welcome one and alter the most intense nightly read anywhere on the web ; the BitsBlog Nightly Ramble.

• A LIE BY ANY OTHER NAME I notice Ed Driscoll who is filling in for Glenn Reynolds  has an extended post up as regards to yet another lie about Vietnam service.  He asks the question, and rightly so, WHY WOULD ANYONE NEED TO LIE ABOUT HAVING BEEN IN VIETNAM?I suppose the easiest answer to that is to suggest that they would need to lie about it for the same reason that John Kerry would need to change his middle name to”Served in Vietnam”.  I’m going to go a step further here; The left is beginning to understand in a way they didn’t back in the day that they had the whole Vietnam thing wrong.  Why else would they seek credibility under the shelter of having served there?
• OH, CRAP! My wife is a big one for herons.  Being, small, doesn’t matter.  So usually when we do a family outing one of the things that such family outings involve is going where the herons live.  One thing we’ve learned over the years is that it is supposed to be a good omen to see a a heron flying. But what does it mean when a regular feature of watching a heron fly is  watching it take to dump on your car? That’s happened about every other week for the last month or so.  I begin to think somebody’s trying to tell me something.
• QUESTION FOR OBI-WON: Observe the following video:
  
  now, observe the following quote once again:

  “I think the Arizona law has the potential of being applied in a discriminatory fashion.”

  Let’s ignore for the moment and the fact that there is no real difference between the Arizona law and the current Federal law.  The only difference being that Arizona will actually enforce said law, and the Federal government demonstrably will not.  Hence, the problem.  But Neil Boortz asks an interesting question today ….

  How many laws do you know of that do not have the potential of being applied in a discriminatory fashion? The Arizona law actually says that it cannot be applied discriminatorily .. but does that mean that the potential for discriminatory application is not there?

  So after our own president stands up and criticizes one of his own states for daring to enforce the law … the Mexican president stands up to get his two-cents in. Calderon says that Arizona’s law is discriminatory and would “[force] our people to face discrimination.” He then warns that Mexico would reject any effort to “criminalize migration.” OK .. let’s stop right there. Migration? Get a grip. No one has a problem with people migrating LEGALLY to this country. The problem is ILLEGAL immigration .. people who break the law by coming to this country without bothering to adhere to the rule of law and get proper paperwork. These people are criminals. Why is this such a hard concept for some people to understand?

  Well, exactly so.  It is I said yesterday; Mexico sees illegals from their country in our country to be to their advantage or they wouldn’t be fighting to make it easier.  It’s really that simple.