by baldilocks

Earlier today, I wrote this on Facebook:baldilocks

Conservatives need to learn the difference between constrained and unconstrained vision of politics, political struggles, and life philosophy in general.

I see all too many conservatives in my time line who think that some of us are advocating anarchy because of our wariness of the militarization of police forces around the country (as recently demonstrated in Ferguson MO).

Seriously, are some of you so limited in your thinking that you are unfamiliar with moderation? Or is everything one extreme or another?

One can be for law and order while being, at the same time, alarmed by local police forces taking over the role and equipment of state and federal armed forces.

The same persons are often unable to grasp the magnitude of institutional and societal mission creep–the magnitude of change, a change in the works long before heralded by change’s most infamous booster.

As a kid, you’re (possibly) taught a simple concept: obey the law, and you won’t get arrested. And the law is usually clear and easily-learned. If the sign says “no parking”, you can’t park there. You can look up the legal code; to avoid getting arrested, you just have to follow those written-down rules.

But the “failure to obey a lawful police order” misdemeanor on the books in most places seems like a formula for trouble. The law is largely intended for situations like, “back away from the accident scene” or “don’t touch that” or other circumstances where a civilian could interfere with police business.

It’s the only law that Washington Post reporter Wesley Lowery and Huffington Post reporter Ryan Reilly could conceivably be charged with breaking when they were handcuffed and taken into custody Wednesday night; both were released without any charges. Suddenly the law isn’t necessarily what’s written down or posted; it’s whatever the guy with the badge, gun, and handcuffs says it is. To avoid getting arrested, you have to obey the guy with the badge, and his definition of a lawful order is up to him and his colleagues.

What many cannot grasp is that nearly all of our government institutions–from federal to local–have embraced the unconstrained vision, as demonstrated above. This is also known as chaos, and I can’t see any difference between the institutionalized chaos ticks infesting our system(s) and the rioters, looters and arsonists of Ferguson, MO–except that practitioners of the latter are more honest in their barbarism than the former.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!


by Fausta Rodriguez Wertz

Thomas Jefferson, farmer, architect, at age 33 one of the writers of the Declaration of Independence and later one of the framers of the U. S. Constitution, ambassador, and President, is known as the sage of Monticello, after the essay written by Inez Nellie Canfield McFee in 1913 (and part 6 of a 1981 biography by Dumas Malone).

Jefferson’s talents were many and bright, a true son of the Age of Enlightenment, for it is Jefferson’s work that helped bring about American democracy.

It is then particularly insulting to have The Economist draw a parallel between Thomas Jefferson and José Mujica.

“José who?”, you may ask.

José Mujica, president of Uruguay, a.k.a. Pepe, which The Economist exults as The sage of Montevideo.

About the only thing Jefferson and Mujica may have in common is their ownership of farms, albeit, in Mujica’s carefully-burnished image as the world’s ‘poorest president’, Mujica’s estate is no Monticello.

Indeed, the friend of George Soros has a nasty background, which even The Economist can’t ignore,

Another ingredient in the mystique is his extraordinary personal history. In the 1960s he was a leader of the Tupamaros, an urban guerrilla movement.

And just what was Pepe after?

Contrary to leftist myth, Mr Mujica did not fight a dictatorship. The Tupamaros bombed, kidnapped and murdered in a bid to turn democratic Uruguay into a version of Fidel Castro’s Cuba.

The result?

They succeeded only in helping to precipitate a right-wing military takeover (after Mr Mujica was jailed).

The fellational “Bello”, author of The Economist piece, considers Mujica “Latin America’s most original leader.”

National Book Award winner and Yale University professor Carlos Eire, who knows a thing or two about Fidel Castro’s Cuba through personal experience, is not as kind on Pepe: Uruguay’s President Mujica: Avatar of all things Latrine, and comments about the article,

If you want to know why so many countries in Ibero-America deserve to be called Latrine American rather than Latin American, read this article

But hey, The Economist is copacetic with Pepe’s “most original” leadership.

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics and Culture at Fausta’s Blog.

…in tribulation

by baldilocks

In light of horrible events, both national and international, I present the following from Philippians 4:4-9.

4 Rejoice in the Lord always: and again I say, Rejoice.

5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.

6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.

7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.

8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

9 Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you.

We should rejoice for God’s grace while it’s still relatively easy. The Bible says that there will be a time when there is a famine of the Word of God. For tens of thousands, that famine is occurring now, but there is no guarantee that we of the First World will be spared this.

In order to do this, we need to…ahem…renew our minds each and every day. Else we get bogged down in the horrors of this world and begin to be fooled into thinking that there is no escape and that the good guys don’t win in the end.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!Baldilocks mini



by baldilocksJohn-Mccain

I always found the term “fear-monger” to be a tell about the person using it.

A person who mongers is, using the traditional definition, a dealer or a trader who sells a finite set of commodities. The second connotation goes this way:

[the promotion of] a specified activity, situation, or feeling, especially one that is undesirable or discreditable.

Many recall that Senator John McCain (R-AZ), during his 2008 campaign for the presidency, (in)famously stated the following at a townhall meeting:

I want to be president of the United States, and I don’t want Obama to be. But I have to tell you, he is a decent person, and a person that you do not have to be scared [of] as President of the United States.

Six years, many violations of the US Constitution, wars, pestilence and the rumors thereof later, we find that Senator McCain was…right.

The intentional actions of the Obama Administration pose grave threats to our personal survival and our survival as a nation–but we don’t have to be afraid of them. By that, I mean that we don’t have be paralyzed by fear–the overwhelming sense that there is nothing that we can do to thwart our destruction.

A counter-example: many believe–and I am among this number–that members of our legislative and judicial branches are afraid to take meaningful steps to rein in the executive branch. Afraid of what? Only they know for certain. But, assuming the belief is correct, that unnamed fear has immobilized the other two branches. And, as a result, this country has suffered outrage after outrage.

So, Senator McCain was correct, though probably not in the manner he intended.

Back to fear mongering, or the allegation thereof. When you try to warn someone of a reasonably-calculated possible danger and that person calls you a fear-monger, she does it in order avoid acknowledging her own fear. Acknowledging fear is the first step in getting past it and acting decisively in the face of it, armed with the truth–for starters. Rather than do that very tough work, such a person would prefer that you shut up. But, the truth is that they are buying what you are not selling. We know who the salesman is.

From that, we discover that failing to do what’s right because of the fear of subsequent consequences is a form of baldilockssloth. That God hates cowards is no mystery.

And on that note, I find myself praying often, that certain people act decisively in the face of legitimate fear. May it be an ironic beginning.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!


Since the dawn of time, individuals, people of various races and ethnicities, and nation-states have all craved the elusive concept known as “peace or tranquility.”

As a matter of historical record, President Roosevelt stressed that people all over the world “shared Americans’ entitlement to four freedoms: the freedom of speech and expression, the freedom to worship God in his own way, freedom from want and freedom from fear.”

The book of Job which is found in the Hebrew Bible attempts to give humanity a glimpse of how to deal with peace and tranquility when a person’s world is completely upended.

The book of Job is perhaps one of the most inscrutable books to be found in the 39 books of the Old Testament.

The Old Testament or Hebrew Bible is broken down into three sections:  (1.) The LAW or Pentateuch; (2.) The Prophets; and (3.) The Writings).

The central protagonist in the book of Job is the man in which the book is named after – Job himself.

Job lived in the land of Uz (modern day Iraq).  A quick thumb nail sketch of Job’s life reveals that he was a

  • Holy Man ( a man of tremendous Prayer to GOD who is called “The El Shaddai”)
  • A Married man with 10 children (7 sons and 3 daughters)
  • A Very Wealthy Man with many servants
  • Known for his tremendous Wisdom, Stature, and Standing within the community that he lived in
  • A Patriarchal leader in his region of the world.

Job’s upright character was later referenced with the utmost respect by the prophet Ezekiel (Ezekiel 14).

The vicissitudes of life hit Job in rapid succession and he goes from being an extremely successful and prosperous man to a human being who literally finds himself “on the ash heap with no answers” (JOB 2:8-10).

Unbeknownst to Job, an evil celestial adversary known as “Satan” or “the Accuser” has asked GOD – “The El Shaddai” – for permission to strip Job of his family and possessions and secondly, to afflict Job with terrible bodily affliction.

Job’s wife is in such heartache and misery that she tells her husband to forsake his integrity and commitment to GOD and to curse GOD and then die.

Job rebukes his wife for engaging in folly.

It gets worse for Job in the fact that three of his “best friends” – three men named Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar – come to comfort him, but in their zeal to interpret why Job is suffering – they proclaim that Job must have some secret or unconfessed sin  – they end up exacerbating Job’s pain and suffering and send him recoiling into anger and self-defense.

Job declares that he is innocent of any hidden evil or secret sins and that he would like GOD to answer him and explain why he is experiencing all of this “gratuitous evil” pain and suffering.

Eventually GOD intervenes and alleviates Job’s suffering.

GOD engages Job in a dialogue, but GOD does not directly answer Job’s queries.

Instead GOD answers Job’s inquires by asking JOB a series of intriguing questions.

Job acknowledges the fact that GOD is GOD alone by responding to The El Shaddai with this humble response in Job 42:2-6:

“I know that You can do everything, And that no purpose of Yours can be withheld from You. You asked, ‘Who is this who hides counsel without knowledge?’ Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand, Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. Listen, please, and let me speak; You said, ‘I will question you, and you shall answer Me.’

“I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear, But now my eye sees You. Therefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes.”

GOD rebukes Job’s three friends for not speaking truthfully about GOD as His Servant Job spoke.

Job’s three friends could not understand how a truly righteous man could suffer evil and pain on such a massive scale.  Job’s three friends were guilty of an erroneous “worldview.”

Yet, if all of us are honest we wonder why there is so much pain, war, famine, disease, and evil in this world.

The philosopher J. I. Mackie wrote many years ago that “If GOD is omnipotent then why is there so much evil in the world?”

Time does not allow this writer in the confines of this essay to tackle that question today, but suffice to say some of the best answers to Mr. Mackie’s question can be found in the prolific writings of the brilliant Philosopher Dr. Alvin Plantinga.

Dr. Plantinga is the author of what is known as “The Free Will Defense.

The book of Job is a reminder to all human beings that Science, Literature, Politics, and Philosophy can only take us so far in answering questions such as “what is the ultimate meaning in life.”

The book of Job reminds the “faith community” – and humanity by extension – that ultimately there is a GOD who is aware of the pain and suffering that humans experience and that this GOD is never insensitive or indifferent to human pain and suffering.

Whether or not that pain in suffering exists in the Middle East, the Ukraine, the Ebola crisis in Africa, geopolitical perplexity in Russia, and or the uncertainty transpiring in North Korea, the Sacred Writings – both the Old and New Testaments – assure human beings that they are not alone and that The El Shaddai (GOD Almighty) is there and “He is There and He is Not Silent” (Francis Schaeffer 1972).

A slow and deliberate reading through the book of Job may be of assistance to us in the midst of a world that has gone “topsy-turvy.”

The book of Job provides a unique and transcendent point of view (this literature has been with mankind for at least 3,400 years!) that aids us in practicing “self-awareness.”

The vicissitudes of life shake everyone.

Reflection upon “Sacred Literature” is one means by which one may find strength, help, and peace to march forward into the uncertainties of daily living.

The Psalmist David said it best when he averred that,

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; For You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.”

As you know I’m very proud of my Magnificent Seven writers who have been producing excellent content for this blog for 10 months now.

Let me tell you right now, if I had a few more bucks to spend I’d be very happy to make it the Magnificent 14 because I’d love to have people  like the Lonely Conservative: who warn us of political vermin

Aaron Wolf is a downstate New York businessman running for Congress in an upstate New York district. He’s probably hoping that voters in the 21st District don’t read the New York Daily News, because if they do they’ll be kind of grossed out about his business practices. Wolf owns two food establishments that have been cited numerous times for health violations, like the presence of vermin.

And Zilla of the Resistance who even though she is not feeling better: gets it unlike the president

He did not allow our troops to win the war, but he did certainly surrender when he announced that America would be giving up in and getting out of Iraq. Al Qaeda was on the run and all that crap, right? Yeah, OK. Let’s see how all that’s working out:

If I had the extra dough I’d hire Stacy McCain, I hear he writes for money:

Liberal feminists don’t give a damn about the rights of women like Dartmouth student Taylor Woolrich. Liberals want to deprive her of the only real security for women like her whose lives and safety are jeopardized by violent criminals. You see, Taylor Woolrich told her story yesterday at the annual conference of Students for Concealed Carry, and liberal feminists hate the Second Amendment.

Glenn Reynolds is right btw Stacy’s series of feminism really should be a book.

I’d hire the Right Wing Granny who was smart enough to leave Massachusetts and makes the single best case for voting GOP in the fall.

This stonewalling of the work of the IG’s is unprecedented. Unless Congress acts quickly, the actions of this administration will damage our representative republic irreparably.

In three months voters in America will go to the polls. You may love your Congressman, but if he is running interference for a corrupt administration, he needs to be voted out of office. Your freedom depends on it. Please vote carefully.

and Bob Belvedere who like me foolishly stays because somebody sane has to stay behind

That glorious invention, known as The United States Of America, was the most legitimate government ever conceived and implemented.  What we are living under now is not — in any way, shape, or form — that kind of government.  If it bears a resemblance to that form of government gifted to us by The Founders and by Nature’s God, it is only because the current regime is engaging in a grand masquerade, is setting-out to deceive it’s citizens into believing that it has any legitimacy.  It does not.

That last paragraph could have easily been about Massachusetts.

I’d toss in the Catholic Bandita who  notes the Bishop of San Pedro isn’t mimicking the open borders crowd

Our bishops in the United States should listen to Bishop Emiliani. Our bishops need to stop sending the message that these children are right to make this perilous journey. Our bishops need to join with Bishop Emiliani in saying that the countries of Central America must stand up and protect their children. It would be excellent if our bishops would stop taking money from the U.S. government to care for these children, as it is the duty of the U.S. government to send them back. Our bishops should encourage our government to do more to help Central America, not to spread the illusion that Central America is Satan and that the United States alone is Jesus.

Funny how he gets no press

And finally Elder of Zyon who gets down to the bottom line of what was happening in Gaza:

We had all of it on tape, but wrestled with the dilemma of what to do with it. Two considerations weighed on our mind. One, the fear which hobbles the reporting such material: fear of reprisals from Hamas against us and those who worked with us, fear of inviting an Israeli response on the spot (these have been known to miss). Two, we needed to be 100 % sure that this was a rocket launch site. So we did nothing, setting off on our assignment for the day, mulling over the material in our possession. 

Hey that reporters job isn’t to get himself killed but now that he is safely out the truth can be told.


Right now things are kind of lean here so we won’t be seeing any of these magnificent people contributing to DaTechGuy’s Blog, but you never know.


by Fausta Rodriguez Wertz

From the BBC: Guatemala, Mexico and the United States have reached a deal to try to prevent migrants from jumping onto a freight train in an attempt to reach the US, according to Guatemalan officials.

The three countries said they would establish more checkpoints.

Let’s look at this for a moment: The Mexican government, which until rather recently had some of the strictest immigration laws in our hemisphere, is allowing tens of thousands of foreigners to travel unimpeded thousands of miles through Mexican territory to reach the U.S. border, and “more checkpoints” are going to change that?

Particularly considering the money the cartels are making from all the human trafficking?

“The Chinese are paying $50,000, the Indians are paying $10,000 to $20,000, [for] all the Central Americans the average is about $7,000 and the Mexicans are, especially [from] southern Mexico, are paying $3,000, so it’s a huge, huge money event for the cartels, probably even more lucrative than the drug business,” Dr. Michael Vickers of the Texas Border Volunteers told Infowars.

The border surge started during Obama’s first term:

President Obama’s executive actions on immigration did not begin with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) in mid-2012. It began in 2011 with his announcement of “prosecutorial discretion” on deportations. A few months later the border patrol noted the first uptick in unaccompanied children at the border.

The campaign of misinformation goes on, but more and more questions add up; two days ago Pat wrote about Gov. Jindal’s questions,

He’d like to know, among other things, where the children are:

Jindal wants to know where the children are living, the timeline for determining their ultimate status and whether the federal government plans to kick in dollars for their education and health care. He also wants to know how the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services decided where to place them.

As the resources of the country as a whole and the states in particular are diverted to cope with this invasion, I leave you to ponder Mark Steyn’s words,

One of the reasons why so many Americans oppose amnesty and a “path to citizenship” for illegal aliens is because, even if one buys it in utilitarian terms, to accept that an honorable American identity can be born from an illegal act seems to mock the very essence of citizenship and allegiance.

Yet, putting aside the soon to be amnestied millions, it seems to me the deformation of law necessary to accommodate the armies of the undocumented is having a broader corrupting effect on the federal bureaucracy. For example, can you think of anything more risible than working for something called “US Customs & Border Protection”?

How’s that for a “train deal”?

Fausta Rodriguez Wertz writes on U.S. and Latin American politics and culture at Fausta’s blog.

by baldilocks

When did being in a majority with respect to a given opinion become the sole prerequisite for the validity of that Baldilocks miniopinion? Even Christians, who have a long record at their disposal, can’t seem to grasp a simple pattern: when the majority is moving in one direction, it is often wise to move in the opposite direction.

This phenomenon is called the Bandwagon Fallacy, which is

committed by arguments that appeal to the growing popularity of an idea as a reason for accepting it as true. They take the mere fact that an idea suddenly attracting adherents as a reason for us to join in with the trend and become adherents of the idea ourselves.

This is a fallacy because there are many other features of ideas than truth that can lead to a rapid increase in popularity. Peer pressure, tangible benefits, or even mass stupidity could lead to a false idea being adopted by lots of people. A rise in the popularity of an idea, then, is no guarantee of its truth.

(Emphasis mine.)

There are countless examples from which to choose, but here’s one relevant to August of 2014: that raising the minimum wage benefits any employee base. It’s easy to figure out why this is false.

  • If an employer must pay his employees a higher minimum wage,
  • The fewer employees that employyer will be able to afford, and separately
  • Producers of goods and services will, naturally raise their prices.

Therefore high minimum wage produces fewer jobs and higher prices.

But don’t try to tell majority of minimum wage earners this or any minimum wage advocate this. Most of both groups think that more of anything–especially paper bank notes– is better. Tell to the Zimbaweans.

And then there’s the “majority opinion” Israel-Hamas conflict…

“Majority rules” are two words that should scare the crap out of any thinking person.

Like Dr. Sowell, I wonder if thinking has been abandoned. Or maybe it has merely been squashed by covetousness.

The results are the same, in the long run.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!

by baldilocks

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.baldilocks

–John 18:36 (KJV)

As the birth pangs of the new Caliphate intensify, I am mindful of the assertion of many atheists and pacifists that almost all wars and massacres are religious or sectarian in origin.

We need not look too far back in history to see  some of the truth of this: the Armenian Genocide, the Iran-Iraq War, the perennial wars between modern Israel and her Arab-Muslim neighbors, and of course the Holocaust.

But then, there are the recent wars and massacres which were not religious, per se: World War I, Japan’s crimes in World War II, Holodomor and Stalin’s other purges, Mao, Pol Pot, and the Rwandan genocide. (One might label the forgoing as tribal wars.)

But, if we go much further back we can see that the original assertion may be valid.

From a Christian perspective, however, I ask this question: why wouldn’t most wars be religious in nature? Since the successful temptation of Adam by the Enemy, that Enemy has been trying to con as many of us as possible in as many areas as possible, the primary one being the nature of God and the nature of our relationship with Him.

And, if we human beings are still prone to being conned, it seems to me that the con would be in this manner: adapting a religion or world-view that puts self before anything and anyone, including God. Or, overtly, considering oneself to be God. I’m not only referring to religions outside of Judaism and Christianity, but sects “within the fold,” such as Liberation Theologies and Prosperity Doctrines. I-deologies.

Our Enemy got thrown out of Heaven due to his pride and it seems to me that pride is the primary lure he uses to blind us to the true nature of God and, therefore, blind us to our own sinful nature. After all, it’s easy to love ourselves, but it takes a lot more work to “love God and love our neighbor as ourselves.

So, when self is primary—when self is worshiped–it’s a lot easier to view others as secondary or of no account whatsoever. If that’s so, then we might be able to say that all wars are religious in nature, even when one side has an objectively righteous grievance. That’s not to say that war is wrong; it is a byproduct of this world since the Fall and this world belongs to the Enemy. This means that some individual or group somewhere is always on offense in the name of “god” or on defense against the former.

It’s always about God—or about god, depending on which one you’re serving.

Juliette Akinyi Ochieng blogs at baldilocks. Her first novel, Tale of the Tigers: Love is Not a Game, was published in 2009; the second edition in 2012. Her new novel, Arlen’s Harem, is due in 2014. Help her fund it and help keep her blog alive!

When one surveys the events taking place in the “international landscape,” it is quite easy to understand how a sense of appalling dread could consume a person’s emotional, mental, and physical faculties.

One might ask of what particular incident or incidents would this writer be referring to.

The rejoinder would be that the litany of tragic world events is too numerous to enumerate within the small confines of this article; however, a brief overview will suffice.

North Korea.

Kim Jong-un is the current premier and leader of the  Democratic People’s Republic of Korea; he is 31 years old.   North Korea has been under the sponsorship of Communist China since the outbreak of the Korean War (1950 to 1953).  Over the last 50 plus years, The United States of America has placed as many as 28,000 to 40,000 or more troops into the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ); we (the USA) are also pledged to come to South Korea’s immediate assistance if Kim Jong-un and his country attempt a hostile takeover.

President Eisenhower ended The Korean War more than 60 years ago and yet the persistent effects of that war are still with the family of nations today.


During the height of the “Cold War” between the Soviet Union and the United States of America, the USA placed more than 320,000 troops into the European theater to protect the free European nations from possible Soviet inspired domination.

The “Cold War” officially ended in the 1988 through 1991 time period when the Soviet Union dissolved and today the United States’ actual troop deployment numbers are only 1/10 of what they were (32,000) during the “Cold War.”  The United States spent billions of dollars annually to assist with preserving the hard-fought gains won during World War II.


The former Soviet Union – today formally known as Russia – is led by President Vladimir Putin.  Mr. Putin is serving his second tour of duty as Russian President; he once remarked that “the greatest tragedy of the twentieth century was the breakup of the former Soviet Union.

One might ask, “Is Mr. Putin kidding and what world does he hail from?”

Those of us living in the West must be scratching our heads and wondering if this is what we bargained for after engaging in more than 70 years of strategic and at times often politically perilous gamesmanship (detente) against “Soviet-style” oppression against “Jews,” “Intellectuals,” “Free Speech advocates,” “Russian Orthodox Christians” – and anyone else who dared to buck the Soviet party line.  One would wonder what the late Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn would think of Mr. Putin if he were still alive today to share his thoughts.

Finally, no discussion could end if one did not at least touch on the events in the Middle East which pertain to Israel, Hamas, and the Palestinian state / land question.

Let the discussion first circle on some unassailable facts about the group known as “Hamas”:

It is a fact that “Hamas” is a terrorist organization that is devoted to destruction of Israel and to the Western Community.

It is a fact that “Hamas” uses propaganda and terrorism on a multitude of different fronts to achieve their strategic and military ends.

It is a fact that The United States of America was one of the first nations to formally recognize Israel’s right of existence in May of 1948.

Today the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is beleaguered on many different sides.  It appears that world opinion is turning against Israel as they seek to root out the terrorism of Hamas (as an aside the group Hamas is officially outlawed in the United States).  Secondly, Hamas is using “human shields” and making it appear that Israel is the villain in this conflict.  Thirdly, the Obama Administration is attempting to project a nuanced approach to this Middle Eastern conflict which makes Israel wonder if they could trust the USA to come to their aid if a more serious conflict occurred.

The Middle East has unstable governments in Egypt, Iraq, and Syria – to simply name a few – and may soon have a “nuclear Iran” added to this volatile mix.

What is one to make of all of this “International mess?

Perhaps the former political philosopher Thomas Hobbes was right when he warned us of what happens without a “stable world order.”

People who have flocked to the United States across the last 2 centuries know what many native-born Americans often fail to remember:  “The International community is and always has been one dangerous family of nations.”

The Peace and Security in which Americans have historically enjoyed is not the norm within the global family of nations, but rather the rare (freedom is a perilous experiment?) exception.

This is why it is imperative that our American governmental officials of all of the respective political parties must get a grip and seriously deal with the two aspects of immigration policy which are essential to our survival as a nation:(1.) Border Security and (2.) Legal Entry.

Immigration policy is not a panacea for the overall health and safety of the United States, but it would at least be one less variable that America would have to contend with in the midst of an unruly and unstable world order.