Well it is 2 days until Cinco de Mayo and it is 2 days since Pinko de Mayo. It is nice when the Universe shows Symetry isn't it?
I wish I could take credit for this play on words but cudos belong to Hog on Ice in
I do know one of the latest blogs I found in my sitemeter referals, The DK Republic will agree his May 1st post read
"Happy May Day Pinkos! 05/01/06
Want to give a quick shout out to all the left-wingers. Enjoy your May Day, a day for you to express solidarity with all your fellow commies. Of course May 1st being International Labor Day is part of the reason America Celebrates its own Labor Day back in September. Not that Pinkos have much to celebrate anymore, thanks to the complete annihilation of the Soviet Union That caused the extreme left a little bit of a problem, namely, the tyrants before which they supplicated themselves for so long were gone. But never fear, They found themselves new ones. Nevermind that their new Islamo-Fascist overlords don't even bother with the usual leftist clap trap of joyful collectivization and "From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs." What matters is that they are against America and the West. So congratulations to the Pinkos. Today is Your Day."
Now we don't just label folks Pinkos and Poslyene Idioti (Useful Idiots) because they happen to do something on May Day. No in this case it is not necessary to make that leap.
All we have to do is look at the main organisation that organised these demonstrations ANSWER.
" Reports from May 1 Boycott & Actions: A.N.S.W.E.R. organizers are participating in May 1 activities in cities throughout the nation. In Southern California alone, we'll be attending no less than six activities that day. We'll report on what happened in LA and around the country.
* What's Next for the Immigrant Rights Movement? After the boycott, what's next? We'll discuss ideas about how to build a network of activists in Southern California to work on concerted campaigns to win amnesty for all immigrants. You'll also hear an update on what's happening with the immigration issue in Congress. Bring your ideas and energy to take action.
You will notice I did not hyperlink. That is what google is for I would not add one single link to their count. Not after reading this
Demand Full Rights for Immigrants!
!Exijo Derechos Plenos para los Inmigrantes!
Sign the Peoples Petition / Firme la Peticion Popular
Legalization Now! !Legalizacion Ahora!
English: I demand full rights and equality for all immigrants living in the United States. Neoliberal economic policies targeting Latin America, like NAFTA and CAFTA, have pushed millions of people into abject poverty. Immigrants are forced to come to the U.S. to look for work. Nobody should be criminalized for attempting to survive. No human being is illegal. Racism against immigrants emanates from the same forces behind the U.S. war to conquer and control the wealth of Iraq.
Espa?ol: Exijo derechos e igualdad completa para todos los inmigrantes que viven en los Estados Unidos. Las politicas economicas neo-liberales impuestas en Latino America, como el CAFTA y NAFTA han forzado a millones de personas a vivir en condiciones de pobreza y olvido. Son estas politicas economicas las que obligan a los inmigrantes a venir a los Estados Unidos en busca de empleo. Ningun ser humano debe ser criminalizado por simple hecho de tratar de sobrevivir. El racismo en contra de los inmigrantes, proviene del mismo lugar donde se genera la guerra de ocupacion en contra de Irak, la cual es una guerra para controlar los recursos de ese pais."
Remind you of the UN cute little plan to create something they call the Universal Right to Immigration?
The UN's "Borderless" World
Citizens are demanding that their government ensure effective protection at the borders against more illegal entrants, who at the very least will become tax burdens on the American people and could pose a much more serious security threat. Congress and the President must decide what to do about this mounting problem, consistent with the tenets of the U.S. Constitution. Our democratic institutions can and must handle this situation without any outside interference.
The United Nations sees the matter differently. Its bureaucrats envision a ?borderless? world where immigration is treated as an international human rights issue and used as a global development tool to encourage free movement of the developing countries? poor to developed nations. This philosophy underlies their preparations for the United Nations High Level Dialogue concerning international migration and development, scheduled to take place in conjunction with the fall 2006 General Assembly session. They want the agenda for this Dialogue to center on the relationship between international migration and the economic and social development of the poorer countries in the world.
The UN bureaucrats? aggressive push into the immigration debate fits in with their dogmatic belief that international treaties should trump national sovereignty prerogatives ? in this case, a UN treaty that codifies the internationalization of immigration policy called the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families. This Convention was adopted by the General Assembly in 1990 but went into effect in 2003 after the twentieth signing country formally ratified it. It is heavily biased against countries like the United States which receive the lion?s share of illegal aliens.
Still it is not the Day they chose nor just the philsophy they espouse on their website that justifies the Pinko label but the origins of this group.
Christopher Hitchens lays this out perfectly in
Anti-War, My Foot The phony peaceniks who protested in Washington
"a dip into any database could have furnished Janofsky with well-researched and well-written articles by David Corn and Marc Cooper?to mention only two radical left journalists?who have exposed "International ANSWER" as a front for (depending on the day of the week) fascism, Stalinism, and jihadism.
fighting words A wartime lexicon.
Anti-War, My Foot
The phony peaceniks who protested in Washington.
By Christopher Hitchens
Updated Monday, Sept. 26, 2005, at 2:19 PM ET
Are they really "anti-war"?
Saturday's demonstration in Washington, in favor of immediate withdrawal of coalition forces from Iraq, was the product of an opportunistic alliance between two other very disparate "coalitions." Here is how the New York Times (after a front-page and an inside headline, one of them reading "Speaking Up Against War" and one of them reading "Antiwar Rallies Staged in Washington and Other Cities") described the two constituenciess of the event:
The protests were largely sponsored by two groups, the Answer Coalition, which embodies a wide range of progressive political objectives, and United for Peace and Justice, which has a more narrow, antiwar focus.
The name of the reporter on this story was Michael Janofsky. I suppose that it is possible that he has never before come across "International ANSWER," the group run by the "Worker's World" party and fronted by Ramsey Clark, which openly supports Kim Jong-il, Fidel Castro, Slobodan Milosevic, and the "resistance" in Afghanistan and Iraq, with Clark himself finding extra time to volunteer as attorney for the genocidaires in Rwanda. Quite a "wide range of progressive political objectives" indeed, if that's the sort of thing you like. However, a dip into any database could have furnished Janofsky with well-researched and well-written articles by David Corn and Marc Cooper?to mention only two radical left journalists?who have exposed "International ANSWER" as a front for (depending on the day of the week) fascism, Stalinism, and jihadism.
The group self-lovingly calling itself "United for Peace and Justice" is by no means "narrow" in its "antiwar focus" but rather represents a very extended alliance between the Old and the New Left, some of it honorable and some of it redolent of the World Youth Congresses that used to bring credulous priests and fellow-traveling hacks together to discuss "peace" in East Berlin or Bucharest. Just to give you an example, from one who knows the sectarian makeup of the Left very well, I can tell you that>b> the Worker's World Party?Ramsey Clark's core outfit?is the product of a split within the Trotskyist movement. These were the ones who felt that the Trotskyist majority, in 1956, was wrong to denounce the Russian invasion of Hungary. The WWP is the direct, lineal product of that depraved rump. If the "United for Peace and Justice" lot want to sink their differences with such riffraff and mount a joint demonstration, then they invite some principled political criticism on their own account. And those who just tag along ? well, they just tag along.
Oh and of course the usual rant is always
"Racism against immigrants emanates from the same forces behind the U.S. war to conquer and control the wealth of Iraq.
Which is ironic because
1) I have nothing against IMMIGRANTs I do have something against ILLEGAL Aliens and there IS a difference!
2) I am not alone I am in acord with the same sentiments as some LATINOS. Do they also exhibit racism against Immigrants?
From the Gates of Vienna I found a link to
"Josue Sierra, the proprietor of the blog Latino Issues. Mr. Sierra is one of the forgotten Latinos, because his parents are Cuban, and, as we all know, Cubans are not ?real? Hispanics. Their first sin is to reject Fidel?s socialist paradise. Then they tend to arrive in this country with a love for liberty and an enthusiasm for America, and that just won?t do, will it? Not only that, they often ? gasp! ? vote Republican."
Here is a taste of Mr Sierra
Reader, "I will vote for those candidates that will not tolerate illegal alliens"
"From a reader, here is what I suspect is going to be the true result of these mass rallies and the boycott.
While politicians like pandering to the masses--a problem from since the Roman Empire--in our country, the voters (you know, those citizens registered to vote) will decide.
I do not have symphaty with the illegals and the marchers of May 1st. I am a naturalized citizen myself, but I did it the legal way. I am going to the poll today and I will vote for those candidates that will not tolerate illegal alliens, especialy those people that hates America and carrying anti american slogans.
So I submit those who oppose the massive influx of Illegal Aliens are NOT racist, but those who have sponsored the drive for Immigrant Rights? have a political agenda that is contrary to our Democratic Way of Life.
Let your Congressmen know that you expect them to represent YOU and not ANSWER or the UN.
**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email the coalition and let me know at what level you would like to participate.