Could the Internet Actually Be Preventing Crime?

When one reads the obscene material that appears on some forums, you start to realize that the Internet just might be a safety net for potential serial criminals with fantasies and fetishes common to psychopaths.  Some seem to have a need to be insulted in the most degrading way, often with allusions to homesexuality  with innumerable sordid connotations. Some seem not only to invite it, but relish it. They seem to dish it out with full expectations of receiving replies in kind. 

The Golden State Killer started out with petty crimes,  accompanied by a fetish for feminine underwear and jewelry.  During his home invasions, he often took samples of both with him. When he got discovered by a victim of a burglary,, he began raping and killing.  He always maintained a home, a  respectable job and a modicum of civil respect, a necessary front to live a double life of crime, and at the same time deflect suspicion. One wonders whether society might have been spared many of his outrageous burglaries, sexual assaults and murders, if he had had an outlet like the Internet to live out his fantasies vicariously, interacting with people of similar thoughts and fantasies. 

It goes without saying that it takes a sick person to sit behind a keyboard almost 24/7 and gutter converse almost entirely about the most degrading homesexual fantasies, whether uttering them,. or receiving them.  Obscene innuendo is often probably just disguised as "insults," for it appears there are often two people indulging feverishly and simultaneously.  One shudders to think what sort of outlets they would use to satisfy their fantasies, if it were not the Internet. .

Conservatives Need to Remind Trump of Who Elected Him

"Unity through Diversity"

That's what I read on the T shirt of a major-college co-ed recently.  If you think about the origin of the word "diversity" and realize that it is a cognate of "divide," a light will suddenly flash through your head and make you realize that the phrase is the epitome of an oxymoron. It is as dumb as saying, "Chill out by walking through fire."

Yet, exploitation of the clichés of mush-brained college students and liberals could be the only possible argument of certain Congressmen in trying to cram another amnesty for illegal aliens down our throats last week.  They have been trying to do it since the Gang of 8 was commissioned by Bush 43 to hammer out another amnesty for illegal aliens; one that can be force-fed down the throats of conservatives.  Call these "advocates" part of the "Deep State," for they have no affinity with patriotic America. They will not give up; and if we are not vigilant, they will find a way to dupe us again and leave sane Americans scratching their heads in befuddlement.

We are talking about those disciples of open borders that came close to passing another amnesty bill last week.  And they had the blessing of  President Trump.  True conservatives need to remind Trump that we are not quite as dumb as we were when Reagan and Bush 41 pushed the last general amnesty down our gullets in 1987--and the two follow up amnesties (to take care illegal aliens that "fell through the cracks" of the amnesty of 1987).  Specifically, the "follow-up" amnesties were called "245(i)," and "Extension of "245(i)," respectively.

Conservatives  need to remind Trump who put him in office. For our most recent salvation from another amnesty, we can thank a new coalition in Congress called the House Freedom Caucus.  True conservatives in Congress have found a way, at least temporarily, to stop the insanity in Washington; an insanity that is the enemy of the nation and the friend of open borders. The new strategy of patriots in Congress involves compromise with some Democrats, but it can be compared with the another old cliché "Fighting fire with fire."   Read about it here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/05/republican-leaders-confront-an-immigration-revolt-on-two-sides/560729/

Will We Have Sports Betting in Texas?

Yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled that individual states may now have sports betting. Will this affect Texas?

Are you kidding me?  The only sure bet you can make is that Texan sports fans that want to bet legally will still have to go to New Mexico, Louisiana or Oklahoma.

Texas politicians' most precious cash flow has come from the political contributions from the gambling interests from our bordering states: Louisiana, Oklahoma and New Mexico.  All these states have gambling casinos and sports betting.  A big chunk of their revenue comes from Texas big money gamblers--and the border stares do not want any competition from Texas.  They want that Texas money to continue to flow into their states--not out of it (should Texas voters legalize sports gambling). Hence, the out-of-state casino owners will dig deep into their pockets and use their dollars, which is synonymous with political clout, to keep sports betting out of Texas. And our politicians will be happy to accommodate them as long as the lucrative "political contributions" keep coming from the out-of-state gambling interests. 

It took us nearly a century to get parimutuel wagering on horses legalized in Texas, but professional gamblers do not bet much on horse races.The big races are held at racetracks (out of state), where they combine casino gambling with horse betting, both available at the tracks.  Those slot machines bring in far more money than the races. It is casino money that made possible those big purses like the annual WinStar graded stake race at Sunland Park, NM

Keep that in mind when you vote for the "god old boy" politicians that put on their pious faces at Sunday School, but on Mondays, take money from the big gambling interests.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/14/politics/sports-betting-ncaa-supreme-court/index.html

Caravan Asylum Seekers are Guilty of Criminal Fraud

 All  members of that “caravan” that came to our border through Mexico, or bordering Central American countries, seeking “asylum” in the U.S., are guilty of criminal fraud under under Federal law.

8 USC 1182(a)(6)(C)

Misrepresentation

(i)            IN GENERAL.—Any alien who by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact seeks … entry into the United States or other benefit provided under this act is excludable (and prosecutable for a felony that includes imprisonment for up to five years).

Precedent decisions governing asylum have made it clear that an applicant for asylum must be seeking

“…to escape immediate danger or imminent persecution…”

First we need to clarify that Central America is not a country. The geographical area includes several countries that are in no way united as a single country. None of the caravan members can show that, after they “escaped” their home country, where they allege they were in "immediate danger or imminent persecution” afterwards, as they continued the journey toward our border.

If the caravan members had been bona fide asylum applicants, they would have applied for asylum at the first border they crossed while leaving their “persecuting” country. The fact that they were freely allowed to leave their home country is prima facie evidence that they were not "oppressed" in their home country. Our asylum laws were developed mostly to aid refugees from oppressive Communist countries that built walls to keep  people in. The Mariel Boatlift event of 1980 proved that oppressive regimes have become wiser and now recognize the opportunity for getting rid of their non-productive population by SENDING them to the U.S. (To be fair, there were a few bona fide refugees in that event.)

The U.S. has diplomatic relations with all those “Central American” countries whence come the fraudulent refugee applicants (the caravan), and it seems that it would be a slap in their faces for our Government to declare that they were oppressive to  humble, poorly educated peons with no demonstrable  political beliefs.  However,these countries' leaders well know that their economy benefits enormously from remittances of money sent home by emigrants to relatives in the their home countries. The banana republic leaders know as well as you and I that these peon asylum frauds are simply seeking to better themselves economically (mainly through welfare; very few will ever become financially solvent, if allowed to stay in this country). 

Until recent years, most asylum seekers were embroiled in politics, making their well-documented claims of "imminent danger" credible. We used to require proof―such as jail records and newspaper accounts of oppression of the specific applicant (and his/her immediate family). Our corrupt, incompetent Congress has created a monster by watering down asylum laws to effectively include economic refugees--poor people with no credible proof of oppression for their religious or  political beliefs. American religions have gotten involved, hoping to build up their tithers--supporting Sinclair Lewis’ statement (through a fictional character) that "If Fascism ever comes to this country it will come “wrapped in the flag,  holding a bible.” An overload of perennially-needy, illiterate, third-world imports will help us along the road to socialism, a fact of which Democrats are joyously aware.

For further reading on requirements of applicants for asylum, see:

https://www.proskauerforgood.com/2017/12/illegal-or-fraudulent-entry-into-the-u-s-and-its-effect-on-asylum/?utm_source=Mondaq&utm_medium=syndication&utm_campaign=View-Original