Holder Must Go

  It may be well past the time when our illustrious attorney general, "Eric Holder," was relieved of his position and sent packing back to his law firm made famous for it's pro bono defense of Guantanamo detainees and their general sympathetic approach to terrorist activity. It's clear that he is in no position to prosecute terrorists or even find a suitable venue to do so. His original and obvious political decision to try Khalid Sheihk Mohammed in New York city was a public relations disaster, which has since been walked back. Of course he was trying to send a message that the Bush administration was unlawful in their pursuit of terrorist information through enhanced interrogation and the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay. Rather than find justice he was willing to produce a show trial while terrifying New York City with security and logistical nightmares. The public understood his intentions for what they were....ideological, theoretically driven, with not a hint of practical or national security related safeguards. He has hired nine attorneys in the justice department who have either advocated or represented terrorist detainees.

This week he was questioned before a congressional committee and refused , through a verbal contortionist exercise, {watch video here}, to acknowledge that radical Islam might be a motivating factor for the three most recent terrorist attempts on this country. It would have been funny, but the sobering reality is our chief prosecutor in charge of bringing these people to justice can't even acknowledge their motive. Rather than calling terrorism for what it is, he seems to want to pacify and endear himself to the terrorists and their sympathizers which in reality is emboldening them by signaling weakness and fear. This gentler and kinder approach to terrorism has not abated the attacks and in fact they have ticked up. Of the thirty failed attacks on this country since 9/11, ten have occurred in the last year since the announcement of the closing of Guantanamo Bay.

We have him last Sunday pronouncing that the new Arizona immigration enforcement law could lead to racial profiling. But this week when asked at that same congressional hearing room, {videos shown here}, if he had read the law, and he said he hadn't. He also revealed he had picked up his opinion about the law from media accounts, or things he's read or seen on television about the law. Well, we all know what direction that is going to push someone. Even though there is overwhelming support for this new law, the media spin continues to misrepresent what the law says and they incessantly focus on protests and boycotts of Arizona. It would be prudent for the AG to actually read, and perhaps study the law before he gets in front of the microphone and condemns it while signaling he may file suit against it.

I don't know about you, but when an attorney general of the United States seems to be taking an ideological approach to every issue before him without regards to the safety and well being of the American people, it can be very unsettling. Arizona's new immigration enforcement law is simply applying the existing federal law to state enforcement, because the federal government is not doing it's job and the result is chaos in that border state. The Arizona law actually goes further in the statute to avoid racial profiling then the federal law. You can not make a claim that this law violates civil liberties while claiming the federal law does not, unless their claim is that they aren't enforcing federal law so therefore it can't have a racial profiling element. But, that begs the question, "why isn't the attorney general enforcing existing laws?" 

If the attorney General wants to make the claim that border security is a federal mandate and the states have no right to engage in the enforcement of that, you could possibly have a point. But, inherent in that claim is the obvious admission that the federal government is not doing it's job. The Racial profiling angle is ludicrous and without merit and is an obvious attempt at racial division for political gain. The problem with this tactic is that it is not working. If anything the Arizona law is gaining greater support, with the exception of the councils in sanctuary  cities that claim illegal immigration is a boom to their economy as they vote to boycott Arizona. Maybe the governors of border states should offer free one way transportation of all illegals to those sanctuary cities. Or better yet, maybe law biding citizens who believe we are a nation of laws should boycott those  cities for failing to adhere to our immigration laws.

As a conservative, I relish the fact that the administration and the attorney general's tack on this issue as well as their approach on terrorism is a huge political loser for them. My natural inclination is to encourage them to keep it up, because the American people and their common sense will sift through the ideological rhetoric and discover the truth and punish them in November. But, the stark reality is they are putting our country at risk, and the luck they've encountered from the last several terrorist attacks will eventually run out. The porous border will at some point enable a backpack bomb or a suit case nuke into the country, and put at risk thousands of American lives. So, my patriotic duty must call for the removal of Eric Holder as Attorney General, over my desire to see them continue this political suicide mission that will result in the decimation of the democrat party this November. Although, there is still a part of me that hopes they push an amnesty bill before the midterms...Shame on me!
check out my other blog.....Con-Men 4 Palin
Link