Xý You posted this earlier tonight. Thanks.
I hope you don't mind my posting it again.
The left wing wackos are taking their lead
from the Klintonista damage control, as usual,
and are demonizing the Cuban-American community
and Elian's Miami family.
I wonder why ol' Serpent-Head Carville hasn't
made his sleazy appearance yet...? Oh, thats
right, he may be working for the Hill now.
Can't squander Hill's political resources.
She's gonna' really need him for the crunch.
Don't bother flaming me with your nonsense
folks. You don't have any valid points
to make, and I'm going to bed, anyway.
_________________________________________________
This e-mail was received from congresman Ron Paul:
Subject: Elian Gonzalez
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2000 15:57:03 -0400
Legislative Update
For the Week of April 24, 2000
There are those who would have us believe that the Elian
Gonzalez affair is all about the rule of law and a father's
right of custody. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Custody cases are properly handled in a family court, with
contesting sides present. After hearing the case a judge rules
with the loser having the right to appeal.
When one sides refuses to show up in court this in itself tells
us a lot about the circumstances and can't be ignored. If, in
this case, the father had lived in California he would have
been expected to come to Florida and state his case. No one
would have expected the child to be placed on an airplane and
delivered to someone at the other end without a hearing and
decision by a judge.
As important as it is that parents have custody of their
children, there are times when a distant single parent poses
a danger to the child. Family courts exists to examine the
circumstances of such controversial custody battles.
But the Elian Gonzalez case is not about "custody" and "the
rule of law" as Janet Reno professes. The rule of law, and the
Constitution has been completely ignored and a police-state
mentality dictated the actions by the Administration and
carried out by Janet Reno.
Family custody fights should be settled in local family courts,
not by Justice Department storm troopers in the middle of the
night. Reno did not have a court order to invade the private
home in Little Havana. She had no authority to snatch away
Elian and even if by the furthest stretch of the law Reno had
jurisdiction, a court order is required by the Constitution.
Common decency and morality would require knocking on the door,
not breaking in with a battering ram.
This case is about much more than what Janet Reno claims.
And it's very important. The administration is not driven,
as it says, to enforce the rule of law. That's a joke. And
it's not a concern for family values and a father's right
to custody. Janet Reno's express concern for Elian is no
more believable than her love expressed for the children that
burned to death at Waco. The administration and the media,
except for Fox News Network, have a passionate hatred for the
Cuban-American community and a love affair with Fidel Castro.
Liberals profess to champion the right of all minority
groups--except for Cuban-Americans who do not play the role
of victim. The best way to understand this antagonism is to
look at the way the liberal left treats Clarence Thomas.
The fact that Thomas made it all the way to the Supreme
Court should please those looking for successful members
of minority groups. Instead, the left passionately despise
Supreme Court Justice Thomas because he rejects the welfare
state, the tool used by them to maintain political control
over large minority groups willing to be victimized.
Cuban-Americans are conservative, mostly Republican, believe
in the work ethic, are patriotic, family oriented, right to
life, and above all else, despise Castro's communism. These
beliefs liberals find offensive and therefore the Cuban-American
community must be discredited.
The Elian Gonzalez case has provided an opportunity for
Castro's sympathizers to emerge enmasse. Can one only imagine
how the left would have responded if this case had involved
a Haitian child? Would anyone have ever considered sending
a Jewish child back to Nazi Germany? Would they have chanted
"Rule of Law" and "father's rights" under those circumstances?
But the overriding issue is the police state mentality that
exists in this country. And this is not a problem that just
started with the Clinton administration, although it delights
in firmly using the illegal powers that Congress has carelessly
allowed the Executive Branch to usurp.
One irony of this current tragic episode in modern-day American
justice is that many conservative critics of Reno's policies
have promoted legislation that federalizes much of our police
powers, especially in their efforts to fight the War on Drugs.
Police powers granted to the Executive Branch over decades have
been used by this administration and others to trample the
rights of citizens at places like Ruby Ridge, Waco, and now
in Little Havana. Unfortunately, many unpublicized episodes
of ruthless tactics by the DEA, BATF, the FBI, IRS and many
other federal agencies go unnoticed. If the flag amendment
had been passed, hundreds more would have been arrested in
Little Havana. In their frustration, the distraught
Cuban-Americans flew the flag upside down and tied a black
ribbon around it-acts that, if the amendment had passed,
could easily have been outlawed by federal law as acts of
desecration. We must someday develop a consistent opposition
to all federal laws nationalizing police powers. Most of
these laws are well intended but when individuals bent on
exerting power, like Janet Reno and Bill Clinton are in
charge, these powers are abused.
The founders never intended for the federal government
to send armed thugs into a private home, without a court
order to settle a custody case just because it was not
going the administration's way. An armed federal police
state is what this case is all about. Let there be no
doubt about it. Law enforcement must once again be made
a local responsibility. Reassuring us that the INS agent's
"finger was not on the trigger" and "the gun was not
directly pointed at someone's head" is the most ludicrous
justification for illegal armed might one can conceive of.
It always amazes me that the anti-gun forces, who would
take all the guns from all the people and trash the 2nd
Amendment are the first to champion the illegal and
dangerous use of federal bureaucrats to break into our
houses without warrants, armed to the teeth, to enforce
what they call the "Rule of Law." What bunk!
Where do the champions of father's rights now have Elian
Gonzalez? He is hidden away on a military base with custody
turned over to Castro with the US Military carrying out his
demands. Some believe this is a response to direct threats
from Castro for Clinton to do his bidding. Even a few cannot
be allowed to threaten a police state. A police state is too
easily undermined if not firmly entrenched. Our police state
is young and small but growing rapidly. The true believers
in a police state though, get nearly hysterical if its
powers are challenged and they do not hesitate to have a
show of force. Even if the challenge is by a single family,
desiring only to be left alone, as was the case with the
Randy Weaver family, it must be made clear that the Rule
of Might must prevail. If it's a non-militant group, but
non-conventional such as the Branch Davidians, the same is
true even if all must die, including the children.
This is what Janet Reno is reaffirming in Little Havana.
"Do not defy me; do not defy my power. The Constitution
has no place in this matter. Government agents must control
all the guns so do not challenge state authority even if
it's unconstitutionally obtained."
Americans must answer back to all the Janet Reno's and the
Bill Clinton's now infiltrating our government. Only with
a firm belief in the principles of the Separation of
Powers, and federalism as mandated by the Constitution
can we hope to reverse the rapid movement toward a police
state and preserve the American Republic.
__________________________________________________________ |
