Sanctuary Cities and the ‘Rule of Law’

English: U.S. Sanctuary Cities Map: cities tha...

English: U.S. Sanctuary Cities Map: cities that have adopted “sanctuary” ordinances banning city employees and police officers from asking people about their immigration status. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

We have had much to say in the last few years about the “Rule through and under the law”. It is the very basis of why our society works. Without the security of our property, there is no valid reason to build a small business, invest, or in truth do almost any of the things that have made America.  David Harsanyi over at The Federalist had some thoughts the other day, as well.

So let me get this straight: America is thrown into an overwrought political debate about the Confederate battle flag—a relic that has absolutely nothing to do with the shooting in Charleston—but is unwilling to engage in a conversation about the deliberate disregard of federal law that directly leads to the murder of at least one young woman?

That’s basically where we stand. After sending mixed signals, The Hill reports that Democrats will be making a concerted effort to defend San Francisco’s sanctuary laws and killing of Kathryn Steinle along the city’s famous waterfront.  Most Republicans will avoid the matter altogether for the sake of political expediency. Soon enough, I imagine, it’ll be xenophobic to bring it up at all.  One of these conversations, after all, is risk-free, jammed with self-satisfying preening about the right sort of evils. The other, morally complex—especially for the supporters of immigration reform (like myself) [and me, Neo]—and fraught with electoral consequences.

But let’s set aside immigration politics for a moment and consider a detail that’s often lost in this debate: Fact is, some people in America are free to ignore laws they don’t like, while others are not.  Hundreds of jurisdictions nullify federal immigration law, not because they question the constitutionality of law, but because they find those laws ideologically problematic and immoral.  And when I say “some” jurisdictions, I mean entirely liberal ones.

One of my British friends, yesterday, commented to me in an email that they didn’t understand how Hillary Clinton wasn’t in jail, instead of standing for president. I wish I had an answer myself.

Generally speaking, the Tenth Amendment is viewed as an artifact of a regressive time that is only used to advance racism and impede progress. So 1990s! So when Jan Brewer signs an Arizona law requiring police to determine whether a person was in the country legally critics claim it will mean an explosion of racial profiling by the state, and the Obama administration does everything it can to stop it. Immigration law is a federal matter, as you all know.

And when the administration is unsatisfied with Texas and other states enforcing the same federal law, Obama unilaterally, and without any of the oversight from the democratic process he pretends to cherish, exempts undocumented immigrants brought to the country as children from the law. Now, immigration is a matter ofWashington edict, not something for the states or, perhaps, even Congress, to worry about.

But San Francisco, well, it’s the purview of the city council to decide what happens—as long as those decisions comport with long-term liberal goals.

When cities—more than 200 of them—decide to pass their own laws “protecting” illegal immigrants, we are not talking about some calibration or prioritization of “enforcement” levels. The media often use a euphemism about a “lack of cooperation” between cites and DC when, in fact, jurisdictions are simply invalidating federal law. Can you imagine the reaction from the administration if Dallas passed an ordinance allowing local police to free criminals who had broken federal gun laws or hate-crime laws?  Can you imagine what would happen if 200 cities did the same?

Sanctuary Cities Represent The Worst Kind Of Liberal Lawlessness.

It seems to me, that one of the most pernicious effects of this entire thing, not excluding what appears to be the politicization of the Supreme Court, is the very obvious fact that it undermines the respect for the law. So many of us love Who Shot Liberty Valance not least because we have an instinctual knowledge that the rule of the law is preferable to the rule of the gun. Even when the gun is carried by a good man, it is always better to be under the rule of objective law. increasingly, we are not, and because of that very fact, our society is disintegrating, and becoming little more than a well equipped jungle.

When Ransom Stoddard is judicially murdered, we will have to go back to Tom Doniphan. It’s that simple, and that terrible.


Whittle, Rowe, Common Sense, and Common Core

Mike Rowe had some advice on his Facebook for a guy, a while back. It applies to all of us, and here it is in its entirety.

Saturday Mail Call

Hey Mike!

I’ve spent this last year trying to figure out the right career for myself and I still can’t figure out what to do. I have always been a hands on kind of guy and a go-getter. I could never be an office worker. I need change, excitement, and adventure in my life, but where the pay is steady. I grew up in construction and my first job was a restoration project. I love everything outdoors. I play music for extra money. I like trying pretty much everything, but get bored very easily. I want a career that will always keep me happy, but can allow me to have a family and get some time to travel. I figure if anyone knows jobs its you so I was wondering your thoughts on this if you ever get the time! Thank you!

Parker Hall

Hi Parker

My first thought is that you should learn to weld and move to North Dakota. The opportunities are enormous, and as a “hands-on go-getter,” you’re qualified for the work. But after reading your post a second time, it occurs to me that your qualifications are not the reason you can’t find the career you want.

I had drinks last night with a woman I know. Let’s call her Claire. Claire just turned 42. She’s cute, smart, and successful. She’s frustrated though, because she can’t find a man. I listened all evening about how difficult her search has been. About how all the “good ones” were taken. About how her other friends had found their soul-mates, and how it wasn’t fair that she had not.

“Look at me,” she said. “I take care of myself. I’ve put myself out there. Why is this so hard?”

“How about that guy at the end of the bar,” I said. “He keeps looking at you.”
“Not my type.”

“Really? How do you know?”
“I just know.”

“Have you tried a dating site?” I asked.”
“Are you kidding? I would never date someone I met online!”

“Alright. How about a change of scene? Your company has offices all over – maybe try living in another city?”
“What? Leave San Francisco? Never!”

“How about the other side of town? You know, mix it up a little. Visit different places. New museums, new bars, new theaters…?”

She looked at me like I had two heads. “Why the hell would I do that?”

Here’s the thing, Parker. Claire doesn’t really want a man. She wants the “right” man. She wants a soul-mate. Specifically, a soul-mate from her zip code. She assembled this guy in her mind years ago, and now, dammit, she’s tired of waiting!!

I didn’t tell her this, because Claire has the capacity for sudden violence. But it’s true. She complains about being alone, even though her rules have more or less guaranteed she’ll stay that way. She has built a wall between herself and her goal. A wall made of conditions and expectations. Is it possible that you’ve built a similar wall?

Consider your own words. You don’t want a career – you want the “right” career. You need “excitement” and “adventure,” but not at the expense of stability. You want lots of “change” and the “freedom to travel,” but you need the certainty of “steady pay.” You talk about being “easily bored” as though boredom is out of your control. It isn’t. Boredom is a choice. Like tardiness. Or interrupting. It’s one thing to “love the outdoors,” but you take it a step further. You vow to “never” take an office job. You talk about the needs of your family, even though that family doesn’t exist. And finally, you say the career you describe must “always” make you “happy.”

These are my thoughts. You may choose to ignore them and I wouldn’t blame you – especially after being compared to a 42 year old woman who can’t find love. But since you asked…

Stop looking for the “right” career, and start looking for a job. Any job. Forget about what you like. Focus on what’s available. Get yourself hired. Show up early. Stay late. Volunteer for the scut work. Become indispensable. You can always quit later, and be no worse off than you are today. But don’t waste another year looking for a career that doesn’t exist. And most of all, stop worrying about your happiness. Happiness does not come from a job. It comes from knowing what you truly value, and behaving in a way that’s consistent with those beliefs.

Many people today resent the suggestion that they’re in charge of the way the feel. But trust me, Parker. Those people are mistaken. That was a big lesson from Dirty Jobs, and I learned it several hundred times before it stuck. What you do, who you’re with, and how you feel about the world around you, is completely up to you.

Good luck –


PS. I’m serious about welding and North Dakota. Those guys are writing their own ticket.

PPS Think I should forward this to Claire?

Hat tip to Chicks on the Right

I’ve nothing to add to either one of these, other than “Rock on Bill and Mike”


And just to round out the problems, a couple of short excerpts about Common Core

Common Core Illustrates that We Just Don’t Get It

The following came to us courtesy of   We’ve seen some of this ‘math’ brought home and the process challenges us and confuses us because for the most part we simply learned arithmetic  and when it came time to figure what 15-7 was we learned to do it in our mind—we didn’t even have to take our mittens and socks off.  Apparently, this is how Common Core teaches ‘critical thinking’.

In any event, we hope you can figure out the correct answer after you’ve already done so in your head without the contortions involved in Common Core.

Common Core Math is Ridiculous

Christine Rousselle

10/4/2013 12:00:00 PM – Christine Rousselle

“Quick! What’s 15-7?

From Objective Conservative

Title: Common Core Meets Education Reform: What It All Means for Politics, Policy, and the Future of Schooling
Translator / Editor: Frederick M. Hess & Michael Q. McShane
Publish Date: 2014
Publisher / Edition: Teachers College Press

In 2006, resident education policy expert at the D.C.-based American Enterprise Institute (AEI) Rick Hess wrote in his book Common Sense School Reform about a conversation he had with a school leader:

I told him that the first steps in real improvement had little to do with instruction and a lot to do with sensible management… and that no amount of new spending, professional development, or instructional refinement would change that…. These truths went overlooked year after year because reformers kept approaching school improvement as a matter of educational expertise rather than common sense.

Common Sense School Reform draws broadly on the experience of successful education organizations. Hess promotes reforms that drive educators toward constant improvement through management structures that include incentives for good performance and disincentives for poor ones. This is inarguably a “common sense” approach.

From Online Library of Law and Liberty

There you have it: two home Runs and to strike outs. Could be worse I suppose, follow the links and think for yourself, and for your kids as well. You are supposed to be parents, not your child’s best friend.


Enhanced by Zemanta

Hate Speech, San Francisco Style | Power Line

English: Photo of Pamela Geller

English: Photo of Pamela Geller (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

We all have different voices, which is what makes us different from the left. I say things differently from anybody else as does John Hinderaker. And so especially does Pamela Geller, none of us sugar coat things for you but, Pamela puts it out there especially straight. I may not be comfortable saying things the way she does (I’m not that brave) but that does not mean I don’t agree with her.

Because I do.

I read her blog and sometimes feature things from it, although my emphasis is somewhat different here. But this story is so over the top that the Power Line blog (another great blog you should be reading) featured it last night. This is so unbelievable that I just have no way to describe it to you. So, I’ll let John (and Pamela) speak for themselves.

The American Freedom Defense Initiative is a Pamela Geller-led organization that seeks to inform Americans about the dangers of Islamic extremism. Among other things, AFDI has placed advertising on buses in several metropolitan areas that contain educational messages. Many Muslims regard these posters as dirty pool, because they are so unfair as to quote the actual words of respected Islamic clerics.

The latest round is taking place in San Francisco, where AFDI has placed this placard on ten buses:

Those are hateful words, to be sure: “Killing Jews is worship that draws us close to Allah.” They come from Hamas, and it would be impossible to overstate the evil of that organization. For just one example, check out this post on how Hamas teaches kindergarteners in Gaza. How hateful can you get?

AFDI’s bus posters have proved controversial. One might expect that the organization would get credit for exposing Hamas’s crazed ideology, but no:

A controversy has been re-ignited this week as ten new ads go up on San Francisco Muni buses containing quotes used by terrorists.

“Killing Jews is worship that draws us closer to Allah,” reads one of the ads, which has people debating the line between free speech and hate speech.

Really? Is that a tough one? Hate speech is saying that killing Jews is worship, right?


Several San Francisco city leaders, including District Attorney George Gascon, have condemned the campaign.

“San Francisco won’t tolerate Islamophobic bigotry,” said Gascon. “The only thing necessary for evil to prevail is for good people to look the other way and do nothing.”

Board of Supervisors President David Chiu said the American Freedom Defense Initiative is made of “well-known hate extremists” and said he is introducing a resolution at Tuesday’s board meeting to denounce the ads.

Continue reading Hate Speech, San Francisco Style | Power Line.

Over the top PC or something much worse?

The Train to Nowhere



You all know that I’m fond of trains, they’re the indispensable transportation link in the United States. You can’t build airplanes, airports or truck and highways without them. That’s just the way they are. For all practical purposes we killed passenger traffic (outside of the Northeast corridor) a half century ago, when we took the mail away from them, we also mortally wounded the postal service.

From about 1850 to (stretching a bit) you could go nearly anywhere in this country by train, Most of my life I’ve lived in towns of less than 1000 population, all of them either have, or mostly had, train depots. An American Passenger train in say 1935  was the wonder of the world, fast, safe, comfortable, and usually air conditioned, and for the most part, on time.

But we killed it with subsidized air travel and highways, it’s not going to come back, It disrupts freight traffic too much.

But in an insane case of California Dreamin’, California wants to build a light rail line from Los Angeles to San Fransisco. Never mind that they can’t fill Amtrak’s Daylight which runs right down that beautiful coastline, and you can even take your bike. Oh, and California’s broke, and it’s citizens love their cars. I guess they figure if they build they will come but, they won’t and it will never get built. It as bad a boondoggle as as any American government has ever gotten it’s crony-capitalist hands on. From Troy Senik of the Center for Individual Freedom.

A USC/Los Angeles Times poll conducted in May showed a whopping 59 percent of Californians saying they would oppose the plan if presented with it again.

“This is a courageous step forward for California’s future.”

Those were the words recently uttered by Jim Wunderman, a man who must be accounted an optimist given the general consensus that “California’s future” is something of a bear market. The occasion for Mr. Wunderman’s remarks, however, reveal him to have crossed the line from optimism into delusion.

Wunderman, you see, is the president and CEO of Northern California’s Bay Area Council, a business group made up of denizens of Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay area that has long championed California’s plans to build a high-speed rail line connecting Los Angeles to San Francisco. And his effusiveness was occasioned by the state legislature’s decision to allow California to issue $4.6 billion in new debt for initial construction on the project, supposedly revolutionizing the state’s often-sclerotic transportation system in the process.

Wunderman may be the last man in the State of California who feels this way. In truth, government-initiated high-speed rail has never commanded the imaginations of a broad swath of Californians.

When the project came to the ballot in 2008 as Proposition 1A, it passed with the support of less than 53 percent of voters. Granted, a simple majority was all that was needed for victory, but a look down ballot provides some much-needed context. Proposition 8, the state’s controversial prohibition on gay marriage, passed with only 4/10 of a percentage point less support than high-speed rail. The same liberals who have denounced that decision ever since as the unjust verdict of a “slim majority” have proceeded as if the plan for Golden State bullet trains has the mandate of heaven.

The public shortcomings of the project, however – foremost among which is the fact that, nearly four years after being authorized by voters, not a single inch of track has been laid – have led to undeniable cracks in that façade. A USC/Los Angeles Times poll conducted in May showed a whopping 59 percent of Californians saying they would oppose the plan if presented with it again….

For the sake of the nation, let’s hope that the high-speed rail project finally terminates California’s role as a national bellwether. If not, the consequences could be grim. Take it from those of us on the West Coast: we’ve seen your future … and it doesn’t work.

Continue reading The Train to Nowhere: The Dream of California Liberals Becomes a Nightmare – John Malcolm.


Pelosi’s New Archbishop Warns: America Could Be Moving Toward ‘Despotism’ |

In what seems to becoming a regular series here, another Catholic Bishop checks in on religious freedom (or its loss) here in America.

( – Recent government attacks on religious liberty have made him fear the United States might be headed toward “despotism,” the newly appointed archbishop of San Francisco—a city represented by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi—warned in a recent speech.

“When I saw what was happening and my eyes were opened, it made me fear that we could be starting to move in the direction of license and despotism,” the Most Reverend Salvatore J. Cordileone said at a May 24 conference on religious liberty at the Ethics in Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.

And a quote from Cardinal James Gibbons–who served as archbishop of Baltimore in the late 19th and early 20th centuries–gave in Rome in 1887.

The Catholic Church has been “forced to struggle for her existence wherever despotism has cast its dark shadow, like a plant shut out from the blessed light of heaven,” Gibbons said in that speech. “But in the genial atmosphere of liberty she blossoms like a rose.

“For myself,” Gibbons continued, “as a citizen of the United States, and without closing my eyes to our shortcomings as a nation, I say, with a deep sense of pride and gratitude, that I belong to a country where the civil government holds over us the aegis of its protection, without interfering with us in the legitimate exercise of our sublime mission as ministers of the Gospel of Christ.

“Our country has liberty without license, and authority without despotism,”

Continue reading Pelosi’s New Archbishop Warns: America Could Be Moving Toward ‘Despotism’ |

%d bloggers like this: