I know that liberals like to blame many of the world’s ills on racism and white citizens, but I’m still amazed at the stupidity of those who oppose MCRI. Basically, it says that race should not be a consideration in university admissions. Proponents feel that grades, test scores, interviews, awards, and extracurricular activities are important, and that the amount of melanin in someone’s skin shouldn’t matter. These individuals are supporting the color-blind society liberals pretend to support, but undermine at every point.

I’d make the argument that those who oppose MCRI are actually the racists. They’re giving an unfair advantage to certain students based solely on their race. If this were being done for the benefit of white students, they’d be the first to complain, yet they see no problem with extending it to other racial and ethnic groups. By the way, could someone tell liberals that many of these students don’t need the extra help, and that I’m sure many would oppose receiving preferential treatment.

Of course, they wouldn’t listen. This just fits right into their “us vs. them” mentality. Liberals talk a good game, but it’s becoming more and more obvious that they’re the ones obsessed with race and ethnicity.

Arizona Senator John McCain gets criticized for speaking the truth

Recently, Arizona senator John McCain mentioned that illegal aliens who traveled over our porous border might have been responsible for recent wildfires out west. Once the liberal activists and apologists for the illegal aliens heard this, they were all over his remarks. Congressman Raul Grijava had this to say:

Late Monday, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) said that his state’s culture is “as toxic as I have ever seen it,” as “every misfortune is blamed on undocumented immigrants.” McCain’s comments, he said, continue to provoke an extreme anti-immigrant and anti-Latino atmosphere in Arizona. This level of intolerance has reached a new low.”

Of course, McCain’s critics seem to ignore one very important fact: He’s merely repeating what the Forest Service has said. Essentially, they have seen evidence that people crossing the border have started campfires that weren’t properly extinguished, leading to fires. That’s it.

If you’re mystified by how someone’s statement (based on fact) could attract such a venomous response from proponents of illegal immigration, then you aren’t familiar with the liberal talking points. Here they are:

* Undocumented workers Illegal aliens don’t take from the U.S., do anything wrong, or cause other problems.

*Undocumented workers Illegal aliens are a positive force who make the U.S. better.

*If you criticize undocumented workers illegal aliens, then you’re a racist.

That’s their story, and they’re sticking to it.

Eric Holder supports civil rights...for some people.

Eric Holder says he has “reinvigorated” the Department of Justice’s civil rights division. Acording to holder:

“We’ve also expanded enforcement efforts to guarantee that in our work places, our military bases, in our housing and lending markets, in our voting booths in our border areas, in our schools and places of worship. And I mean all places of worship,”

That’s right. Holder’s DOJ protects the civil rights of everyone…except for white guys who are threatened by club-wielding members of the New Black Panther Party. If you think I’m wrong, think about how quickly Eric Holder would have acted if black voters were intimidated by armed members of the Ku Klux Klan. If that’s not a case ofreverse discrimination, I don’t know what is.

Members of the New Black Panther Party dressed up in paramilitary outfits and held clubs in polling places.

Again, just look at the picture above. Picture white men in Ku Klux Klan uniforms holding clubs outside a polling place. If that had occurred, this situation would have been handled properly. Unfortunately, the AG chose to look the other way. I guess only some people need to have their rights protected.

Barack Obama celebrates his Irish heritage.

Did you know that Barack Obama is Irish? Well, from what I understand, neither did he until just recently. It turns out that Barack O’Bama’s great great great grandfather came to the United States from a small town in Ireland in the mid 19th century. On a recent trip, O’bama visited the town, met an eighth cousin, and hoisted a Guiness in a pub.

I’ve read some critiques of his visit. Some have said he decided to visit Ireland to appeal to Americans who claim Irish ancestry. Others have said it was done to stress that he is half white. Who knows if either of these played a role. All I know are two things: The photo ops were corny, and there’s no way you will see him visit Kenya before the next election.

While at the Cannes Film Festival promoting the documentary The Big Fix, Peter Fonda shared some of his thoughts on President Barack Obama:

“I sent an email to President Obama saying, ‘You are a f—— traitor,’ using those words… ‘You’re a traitor, you allowed foreign boots on our soil telling our military – in this case the coastguard – what they can and could not do, and telling us, the citizens of the United States, what we could or could not do’.”

Those are pretty strong words. What I find funny is the lack of outrage from the left. Why is it that the left will criticize a Tea Party member, sometimes calling them racists, for supporting limited government, but not a fellow left-winger who calls the President a traitor in a profanity-laced tirade?

This is some of the most obvious hypocrisy I’ve seen, and it raises some questions. First, is Barack Obama losing the the far left? It looks that way. Second, is it safe to criticize the President without being called a racist? Just wondering.

French Presiden Nicolas Sarkozy

“It’s a failure,” Sarkozy said of multiculturalism. “The truth is that, in all our democracies, we’ve been too concerned about the identity of the new arrivals and not enough about the identity of the country receiving them.”

I couldn’t agree more. Think about it: By allowing, and often encouraging immigrants to keep their own culture at the cost of assimilation, aren’t we weakening our national identity? If millions of immigrants take up residence in a country, consider themselves to be separate, and raise children to believe the same, how will that country survive? How will its people exist without a shared identity?

Most politicians in the United States would be afraid to make a statement similar to Sarkozy’s. Instead, they would likely recycle the same old line about the United States being a nation of immigrants who strengthened out country. Of course, the elephant in the room is that the immigrants of yesterday did a much better job assimilating than the immigrants of today. Do you need an example? How often do you see signs and documents written in Spanish? Ask a 90 year old if it was common to find signs and documents in Italian or German 60 years ago. It wasn’t, and those people who came hear needed to adjust.

Now, it seems that those from other countries are asked to make few, if any adjustments. While the greater culture is de-emphasized by the politically correct, “cultural diversity” is upheld as a virtue. Gradually, nations will pay a price for political correctness.

Confederate General Nathaniel Bedford Forrest

There is currently a proposal in Mississippi to honor Confederate General Nathan Bedford Forrest on a new license plate. Supporters feel it is well-deserved, since General Forrest was considered a tactical genius. His attributes haven’t been disputed, but the fact that he was an early leader of the Ku Klux Klan has caused many to raise eyebrows.

Those who support the attempt to honor him see his time as a leader of the Ku Klux Klan as a blip in what they consider to be a stellar career. Proponents would argue that some transgressions shouldn’t cloud the totality of a person’s life. Is it really appropriate to hold some bad decisions against someone? I would argue it is appropriate.

Any rational person would acknowledge that the Ku Klux Klan is a racist, hateful group that has participated in violent acts throughout its history. Nathan Bedford Forrest wasn’t just the member of this group, he was a leader. I’m not sure anyone knows what specific acts he participated in or ordered, but it is very likely violence against fellow Americans was most certainly a part of his tenure. These actions need to be repudiated, not honored.

As for those who would highlight his positive contributions, I would argue that all people have positive attributes. Even the most vile dictator or criminal has had moments of accomplishment, selflessness or charity. They may be wonderful examples, but they wouldn’t wipe away the evil that was committed.

Robert Byrd took pride in excessive government spending, especially when he brought it back to his native West Virgina. The “King of Pork” never saw wasteful spending he didn’t like, as long as it benefited his state. Of course, this wasn’t the worst of Robert Byrd’s actions.

In case you weren’t aware, Robert Byrd was a proud member of the Ku Klux Klan before he entered Congress. According to him, it was a good way to start his political career, and later on he apologized for being a member. Personally, I never believed his explanation. If he would allegedly join the Ku Klux Klan because it was politically expedient, then wouldn’t this same man also not hesitate to criticize this group because of its current political expedience?

Let’s not forget that besides being a member of the Ku Klux Klan, he fought vehemently against the Civil Rights Act in 1964 and filibustered the bill. This was about 20 years after he left the Klan. It seems like his membership in the Klan might have been a bit more than a youthful indiscretion.

Of course, Byrd’s supporters would also tell you about how much he loved his country. Again, I feel this is exaggerated. If you need proof, just look at this letter Robert Byrd wrote to Senatore Theodore Bilbo of Mississippi in 1944, at the age of 26:

I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side… Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

That doesn’t sound like a man who loved his country. That sounds like a devout racist who put his evil beliefs above his country. Robert C. Byrd was a racist who didn’t deserve to serve in the halls of Congress. There are also signs that his behavior continued well into his life:

As late as 2001, Byrd used the phrase “white niggers” in a nationally televised interview. He later apologized and said, “The phrase dates back to my boyhood and has no place in today’s society.”

Byrd endorsed Barack Obama for president in 2008, but waited until after West Virginia’s Democratic primary, which Obama lost badly.

What I find disgusting is the way people all over the country will pay tribute to this man. I have no doubt he will be honored by Democrats from around the United States. These are the same people who will call Republicans racists for opposing illegal immigration, yet they conveniently ignore the racist in their presence. I wonder if Robert Byrd ever lynched anyone when he was a young man?

Are you a hypenated-American?

I remember talking to my friend and her son a few years ago, and someone described a person as being “black”. Her son, who was about 11 years old snapped that the term “African-American” should be used. I disagreed then, and I disagree even more strongly now.

As a caucasian white guy, I’m not offended by being referred to as “white”. What really bugs me is when people hyphenate themselves. My great-grandparents came to the United States from Italy in the early 1900′s. I don’t refer to myself as Italian-American, and I wouldn’t want anyone else to place this label on me. I’m tired of hearing about how people are Italian-American, African-American, Mexican-American, Chinese-American, or Irish-American. The common thread in all these atrocious labels is “American”. Unfortunately, many of us seem intent on watering down our American identity by holding onto something from our past that will never compare.

In the United States, we have a terrible tendency to separate ourselves into discrete, useless categories. We are fortunate to be citizens of the greatest country on Earth. When someone comes to the United States, they come here for opportunities that aren’t present in their country of origin. 100 years ago, my great-grandparents recognized this lack of opportunity and decided to come to the United States. Why would I want to attach a label to myself that is nothing but a reminder of what my ancestors were trying to escape? Something, that in my opinion, gives the impression of being a semi-American.

I have no doubt there are many who disagree with me and will cite pride in their ethnic heritage. It is a part of their identity they don’t want to lose. On a micro scale, this might be understandable to some, but on a macro scale, it has the potential for cultural destruction. When it gets to the point where we feel the need to separate ourselves from our fellow citizens, we will continue to move further away from being one nation.

Historians also faulted Mr. Reid’s curious reference to the Senate civil rights debates of the 1960s. After all, it was Southern Democrats who mounted an 83-day filibuster of the 1964 Civil Rights Bill. The final vote to cut off debate saw 29 Senators in opposition, 80% of them Democrats. Among those voting to block the civil rights bill was West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd, who personally filibustered the bill for 14 hours. The next year he also opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Mr. Byrd still sits in the Senate, and indeed preceded Mr. Reid as his party’s majority leader until he stepped down from that role in 1989.

Imagine that. 80% of the Senators who opposed the Civil Rights bill were Democrats. I think Senator Reid should “slow down” and read some history so he doesn’t make a fool out of himself again.