Time to Foreclose on America's Sub-prime President and Congress?

By John W. Lillpop

On a scale of 1 to 10, President Bush scored a resounding "F" with his pep talk on the sub-prime loan crisis. F, as in foreclosure!

To begin with, tweaking FHA rules slightly will do precious little because loan amounts are capped at around $360,000. In northern California, that amount of money will buy you a nice mobile home on leased land.

Likewise, refinancing adjustable rate mortgages through FHA sounds terrific. The reality, however, is that people caught in the sub-prime disaster are there because of poor credit history and or inadequate income which means that refinancing through FHA is unlikely.

Providing tax relief for those required to declare debt forgiveness as income could be helpful, but how long will it take to get that codified into the tax code?

Again, this is not likely to be of much help to those who do not have the money needed to make that mortgage payment due tomorrow and on each subsequent first day of the month.

Philosophically, both the president and congress are operating under the misguided notion that home ownership, AKA The American Dream, is an entitlement owed to the great unwashed masses by a socialist government obsessed with providing nanny services.

However, in a capitalistic society, the dream of home ownership should be viewed as an objective, an opportunity available to those with the determination, prudence, smarts, and work ethic to succeed.

Just as not all people are meant to be college graduates, so it is that not all people are sufficiently capable and responsible to qualify for home ownership. Those facts are not within the prerogative of government to change, regardless of how well intentioned and compassionate.

Affirmative action has been shown to be unworkable in education and employment for years.

President Bush and congress need to understand that it will not work in housing either.

Growing Weary of Fred Thompson's Announcement Marathon

By John W. Lillpop

Fred Thompson may be precisely what America needs in our next president. He may be more conservative than Ronald Reagan, as aggressive on terrorism as Rudy Giuliani, as unyielding on illegal immigration as Tom Tancredo, and as strong on family values as Mitt Romney.

But when it comes to actually announcing his candidacy for the presidency, Fred Thompson seems overwhelmed, bewildered, and over matched.

Remember July 4th? That was supposed to be the day when Thompson would throw his hat into the ring and end conservative insomnia.

Well Independence Day has come and gone and conservatives are still having nightmares about a Hillary Clinton presidency. Or even worse, a Clinton-Obama ticket.

So where in the Hades is Fred?

With the media and most of the civilized world waiting to hear from the Law and Order candidate, Fred Thompson finally delivered the goods on August 30. Sort of.

No, he did not actually announce his candidacy.

But he did announce that he would make an announcement on September 6.

Why is Thompson unable to simply say yea or nay, one way or the other? Why wait until September 6? What is with all this pontificating?

If Thompson is struggling this much with trying to initiate and manage a campaign, should America trust him with the awesome responsibilities involved in actually running the nation, especially in an increasingly complex and hostile world?

“Do You Speak any Foreign Language?” “Only English!”

Satire By John W Lillpop

Philip Yaffe hit the nail on the head with his insightful column (HSN, August 7) about the linguistic challengers of working abroad.

However, one need not work overseas, thousands of miles from home, to encounter significant language challenges. Indeed, English speaking citizens living in Northern California face a non-stop struggle to understand and be understood right here in America.

For example, a simple chore like shopping for groceries can turn into a diversity nightmare for anyone with the arrogance to have been born in America and who speaks English—and only English.

Ask a store employee where kidney beans are, for instance, and the barely intelligible response will usher you off to the meat department. There I found swine kidneys, on sale at $3.44 a pound.

What a great buy, that is! Except I wanted kidney beans for a chili, and can barely stomach the idea of eating the kidney of a swine, or the kidney of any dead critter for that matter.

Whizzing right along, one encounters shopper after shopper glued to cell phones, many shouting very loudly in Arabic or Spanish. The strangest, and most frightening, shoppers are those who shout alternatively in Arabic and Spanish.

Obviously, I look forward to checking out my groceries and returning home as quickly as possible.

But, alas, the checker is blathering on and on into her cell phone in Spanish, pausing every few seconds or so to scan an item or two. At each pause, the checker glares intently at we shoppers; she is obviously miffed that all these inconsiderate mall freaks are interrupting her life or death telephone conversation.

Things get a little better with the next shopper because he speaks Spanish, so he is in and out in short order.

Just before I reach the head of the line, a young man who speaks perfect English replaces the Spanish-speaking checker. “Victory,” say I under my breath.

Score one for the Queen's English!

My victory celebration is short-lived, however, because the shopper right in front of me is an older man who speaks very broken English, that monster language created by the influx of illegal aliens into California from Mexico.

So, the young checker with perfect English has the formidable task of trying to explain to a Mexican alien that one cannot use food stamps to purchase liquor. And as that comedic exchange takes place, the line of anxious shoppers grows and grows.

It all works out, finally, and as I relax in my favorite recliner, I praise God that I am safe at home where good English communication is still possible.

At that moment the phone rings and I smartly answer “Good evening. This is John Lillpop speaking.”

My heart sinks in despair at the response. “Que?” asks the caller.

“Do you speak any foreign languages?” she asks.

“Only English, my dear, only English!”

Dubya Dallies, Liberal Democrat Rescues Ramos and Compean

By John W. Lillpop

It is tragic enough that George W. Bush has refused to act on behalf on former border patrol agents Ramos and Compean while moving at the speed of light to keep Scooter Libby out of jail.

Now insult has been added to injury by a liberal Democrat senator from California who has taken the lead on an issue that should have been addressed by the Republican president six months ago!

That liberal is Senator Diane Feinstein who, unlike our clueless president, has shown that common sense and dignity are not entirely dead in Washington D.C.

After a hearing on Ramos and Compean on July 17, Senator Feinstein asked Bush to pardon the two defenders of America.

God bless you, Senator Feinstein!

Two big questions remain for our retarded president:

Does Bush really want the borders to be secure in order to keep invaders out?

Does Bush give a damn about the fact that two former border patrol agents have had their lives ruined because they acted to defend America from invasion?

Why doesn't this foolish man just resign and spare the nation eighteen more months of grief and leadership failure?





John Lillpop is a recovering liberal.

Would America Be Better off Under Sharia Law?

By John W. Lillpop

In yet another instance of egregious Muslim misbehavior, several thousand devotees of the "Religion of Peace" gathered in London and declared that Islam will soon have sovereignty over both the United Kingdom and the United States.

In prophesying such an eventuality, one of the Muslim leaders, Anjem Choudary, envisions an Islamic takeover of the White House and the rule of the Quran in America. "Democracy, hypocrisy," Choudary chanted as the crowd echoed him. "Tony Blair, terrorist! Tony Blair, murderer! Queen Elizabeth, go to hell!"

WND:

New video messages from Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri, when added to Choudary's ranting and ravings, leave the distinct impression that Islamofascists are serious about taking over the world and about installing Islam as the only authorized law and religion.

Before jumping to conclusions, perhaps one should seek to answer the question: Would America be better off under Sharia law?
Let us first consider America as currently constituted.

America is without question the grandest and most inspiring success story in human history. Freedoms, liberties, and opportunities unimaginable in most other cultures flourish here, and are vital to what it means to be an American.

Just what makes America so great and this land and its people so special?

Credit our founding fathers with establishing a framework of moral and social values that have endured for more than 220 years. Those values have resulted in unprecedented opportunities and prosperity for hundreds of millions of people.

Boundless opportunity and freedom are uniquely American and are correctly celebrated as the "American Dream."

Which is not to say that our nation has been perfect or without grave shortcomings over the course of 220 years.

To begin with, it took nearly 90 years before the bane of slavery unsettled the moral consciousness of enough Americans to eradicate that barbaric practice from these United States.

Once slavery was identified as immoral and contradictory to the American spirit as found in the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights, a bitter civil war was waged in order to remove that hideous blemish from the innocent young face of the fair maiden known to the world as America.

Without question, it took far too long but Americans eventually rose to the moral occasion and did the right thing. After all, our founding fathers had been rather emphatic about "all men being created equal," the antithesis of which would be involuntary servitude and slavery.

The point is that enormous social, political, economic, and legal change was brought about because of the moral infrastructure handed down by our founders. Slavery was wrong, Americans recognized that fact, and corrected the problem.

Other major injustices have violated our system of values over the course of U.S. history. Among the more egregious are discrimination against women and minorities in employment, housing, and education, internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, and Jim Crow laws in Southern and border states between 1876 and 1965.

Jim Crow laws were particularly grievous because these laws required that public schools, public places and public transportation, like trains and buses, have separate facilities for whites and blacks. "Separate but equal" was the delusional litany of those who favored segregation based on race.

But once again, the American spirit of fairness and true equality ultimately prevailed. With the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Jim Crow laws joined slavery in the dustbin of regrettable and sad moments in American history.


And yet another ugly blemish was removed the face of the beautiful maiden who is now universally recognized as the best and brightest hope for all of human kind.

Moreover, America has dealt the same way with discrimination, racism, child labor abuse, corporate irresponsibility, unlawful confinement of American citizens, and other travesties. All have been have been, or are in the process of being, eradicated from the American experience.

By contrast, the basic tenets of the Muslim faith as set forth in the Quran specifically require adherents to practice discrimination, abuse, murder, and inhumane punishments. The faith provides zero tolerance for non-believers.

Specifically, Sharia law would result in the following changes in American life and deviations from the moral and constitutional framework upon which this marvelous nation was founded:

There would be no religious freedom. Islam would be the only religion permitted and "infidels" would be subject to severe punishment, including death.

Muslim leaders would command offensive, aggressive, and unjust Jihads

Unmarried fornicators would be whipped and adulterers stoned to death

Husbands would be allowed to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear aggressiveness from their wives

Homosexuals would be executed

Muslim critics of Muhammad, the Quran, and even Sharia would be put to death

Highway robbers would be crucified or mutilated

An injured plaintiff would be allowed to exact legal revenge—physical eye for physical eye

Thieves (male or female) would have a hand cut off

Drinkers and gamblers would be whipped

Adoption of Sharia law would take America back several centuries and wipe out all progress in the areas of human right, equality, and tolerance.

In short, there is no moral underpinning to Islam.

Sharia law: America and the world can live most effectively without it!

Cardinal Mahony: Hiding Behind the Cross to Serve Beelzebub

By John W. Lillpop

Cardinal Roger Mahony, Archbishop of Los Angeles, is "blessed" with an uncanny ability to triangulate moral decadence, spiritual fraud, and craven greed into anti-American political activism.

Even more distressing is the cardinal's gall in anointing himself as a moral and spiritual beacon, while working non-stop to protect pedophiles and perverts who serve at the will and pleasure of Beelzebub.

Hypocrisy is seldom as blatant as is the case with this meddling old man who touts himself as spiritually and morally superior, yet who has nothing but affection for 12-30 million criminals who have invaded America and who are squatting here illegally.

Being the out of touch elitist that he is, Mahony has little time or regard for those who believe in homeland security, fortified borders, rule of law, and preservation of American sovereignty, language, and culture.

Given his druthers, Mahony would legalize each and every one of the criminal invaders, and would place all of them on a fast track path to citizenship as well.

And what is the root cause behind Cardinal Mahony's blatant disregard for America, and Americans, and benevolent deference to invading criminals from the third world?

Spiritual concern for the poor and downtrodden? Compassion for new comers simply looking for a better life? Healing and unity through forgiveness and assimilation?

Actually, his hollowness and the church he represents are motivated by an unholy obsession with green--as in cold, hard cash.

That obsession intensified dramatically with the recent disclosure that the Archdiocese of Los Angeles has agreed to pay the tidy sum of $660 million dollars in order to settle sex abuse law suits filed by victims/parishioners.

MYWAY:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070715/D8QD0BDO0.html


Turns out that hundreds of innocent people were allegedly abused by priests whose crimes were then covered up by powerful church officials.

Which means that Cardinal Mahony and his minions will have to write a check for nearly two thirds of a billion dollars to drive away the scandals wrought by corrupt "Fathers," acting in the name of God, and their gutless and immoral leaders.

The total amount paid out by the U.S. church since 1950 is more than $2 billion, with about a quarter of that coming from the Los Angeles archdiocese.

With increasing regularity, intelligent American parishioners are leaving the church to escape the clutches of pedophiles and perverts who prey on the young and defenseless under the guise of being "men of the cloth."

As the number of American parishioners decline, illegal aliens are desperately needed to replace those departing parishioners, and to bolster the church's dwindling cash flow.

The bottom line: Cardinal Mahony's bleeding heart foolishness in support of illegal aliens is much more about cash debits and credits, than right and wrong.

But given the contemptible record of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles when it comes to morality and decency, Cardinal Mahony would be well advised to just shut up!

Why Is It Impossible To Deport Illegal Aliens, Mr. President?

By John W. Lillpop

President George W. Bush has undertaken the onerous task of converting Muslim dictatorships and theocracies in the Middle East into enlightened democracies.

The president apparently believes that America can, and should, determine the form of government that more than a billion Muslims live under.

But while our commander-in-chief is downright eager to impose American ideology on Muslims in nations thousands of miles removed from our shores, he is downright squeamish when it comes to defending America's own borders and enforcing our immigration laws.

Most distressing is Bush's assertion that deportation of millions of illegal aliens is “impossible.”

How in the world can it be “impossible” for the most powerful and technologically advanced nation in the world to remove criminals who have invaded our nation at time of war?

Surely the greatest hope for the civilized world in the global “war on terror” is not helpless when it comes to criminals inside its own borders? Some of who are most likely terrorists?

If America is really that impotent, Osama bin Laden and other Islamofascists will see that as great news, and a source of inspiration for continuing their Jihad on the civilized world.

Moreover, if America is unable, or unwilling, to control who enters and who stays here, victory for terrorism and world domination by Islamic extremists are all but assured.

Is that really the message you wish to convey to the world, Mr. President?

The great-unanswered question in all of this is:

Why does President Bush always act on behalf of illegal aliens, rather than America?

Why does he arrogantly and foolishly deny the truth?

Namely, illegal aliens:


* Feed at the public trough for health care, education, food, housing and other vital services to which they were not entitled.

* Overwhelm American hospitals, medical clinics, and emergency rooms and refuse to pay for medical services received.

* Force medical facilities into bankruptcy, resulting in the loss of vital medical services for American citizens.

* Manage to send $30-40 billion a year back to Mexico while dumping their medical bills on the backs on U.S. taxpayers..

* Refuse to learn English, and demand that America provide services in Spanish at considerable cost to American citizens.

* Impede the education of American children because of language and cultural issues.

* Demand driver’s licenses despite being in America illegally, and demand that driver instruction and testing materials be in Spanish.

* Demand reduced tuition rates offered to American students here legally.

* Vote in U.S. elections and alter election results.

* Overwhelm America's penal system, making it impossible to deal effectively with the citizen inmate population.

* Engage in wholesale forgery of vital public documents and commit identity theft in order to secure employment, education, credit, and access to public services.

* Take to the streets to protest pending legislation that would tighten border security and enforce the nation’s immigration laws

* Wave the Mexican flag and scream “Yes, we can!” and “We are America" in Spanish as they march to protest the rule of law in America

* Cry “racism” every time they are criticized for being in America illegally or challenged to learn English and assimilate into American society.

In other words, this corrupt bunch of third-world banditos is under the misguided notion that America has no sovereign rights or borders, and that our great nation should be open to every Mexican peasant that decides unilaterally to squat in America.

And the government of Mexico has violated the sovereignty and borders of America by encouraging millions of illiterate peasants to invade America.

Again, the unanswered question: Why does U.S. President George W. Bush consistently side with Mexico and illegal aliens, instead of fighting on behalf of Americans?


John Lillpop is a recovering liberal