And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going (to Stop Digging This Hole)

David Weigel | January 2, 2007

Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Prester John's kingdom) has taken to the pages of USA Today to showcase his particular version of "damage control." It's a brand new year when people may be ready to forget his jihad against Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison and Muslim immigration in general. What's Goode write?

Let us remember that we were not attacked by a nation on 9/11; we were attacked by extremists who acted in the name of the Islamic religion. I believe that if we do not stop illegal immigration totally, reduce legal immigration and end diversity visas, we are leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion, rather than working within the Judeo-Christian principles that have made us a beacon for freedom-loving persons around the world.

OK. Look. As Ronald Bailey (who has the pleasure of being represented by Goode in Congress) pointed out, Rep. Ellison is not an immigrant. He's a black Minnesotan who converted to Islam. And it's worth pointing out that this convert to Islamism has avoided helping terrorists infiltrate the U.S. or plant bombs in the IDS Center. He's, you know, assimiliated into the political mainstream. But he wants to make a token nod to his faith as he's sworn in, so let's get ready to send a surge of troops in to democratize Minneapolis or something.

Comments

|1.2.07 @ 11:52AM|#

Ellison will also be making token nods to the Constitution while he's in office. He's, you know, assimilated into the political mainstream.

|1.2.07 @ 11:53AM|#

We need to reduce immigration, because those Latinos who make up most of our immigrants are so plaintly hostile to Christian culture.

But, in Rep. Goode's defense, he does demonstrate an inspiring degree of courage by not apologizing for having the Ten Commandments on his office wall. Because that's so risky.

Jacob T. Levy|1.2.07 @ 11:54AM|#

"Diversity visas?"

|1.2.07 @ 12:00PM|#

This whole thing has been ridiculous and Ellison should be able to swear on any old book he likes. That said, I see another round of fun with this topic after the swearing in when some Muslim group or another accuses those infidels involved of mishandling the Koran, even if it's just for touching it with their dirty hands.

Larry A|1.2.07 @ 12:14PM|#

Let us remember that we were not attacked by a nation on 9/11; we were attacked by extremists who acted in the name of the Islamic religion.

So we should encourage response by extremists acting in the name of the Christian religion?

I believe that if we do not stop illegal immigration totally, reduce legal immigration and end diversity visas, we are leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion

As opposed to Goode who wants to mold the U.S. into the image of his religion?

rather than working within the Judeo-Christian principles that have made us a beacon for freedom-loving persons around the world.

See: Crusades, Inquisition, Witch trials, Burning heretics, Etc.

As a lifelong Christian I believe Jesus Christ was a libertarian. Nowhere in the New Testament does He start a sentence with, "The government ought to..."

|1.2.07 @ 12:17PM|#

As a lifelong Christian I believe Jesus Christ was a libertarian. Nowhere in the New Testament does He start a sentence with, "The government ought to..."

Interestingly, Paul left the public payroll upon his conversion...

Sam Franklin|1.2.07 @ 12:19PM|#

As a lifelong Christian I believe Jesus Christ was a libertarian. Nowhere in the New Testament does He start a sentence with, "The government ought to..."

I am not much of a Bible freek, but isn't there something about giving unto Caesar (I think he was referring literally to money and/or taxes -- alegorically who knows?? -- Jesus was a master of allegory (which is one reason it is good to go to Church at least weekly)).

|1.2.07 @ 12:19PM|#

Goode is a veritable beacon on a hill, isn't he?

|1.2.07 @ 12:20PM|#

And I Am Telling You I'm Not Going (to Stop Digging This Hole)

Is this about the Big Dig?

Warren|1.2.07 @ 12:21PM|#

Doesn't this guy have any staff, or other people about him? Or is his whole circle just as Whackaloon? Sooner or later this sort of moonbat craziness has got to catch up with him. Doesn't it?

|1.2.07 @ 12:34PM|#

I don't know that Jesus would be best described as a libertarian so much as an anarchosocialist (sell all of your belongings and give the money to the poor) with violently anti-free market leanings (disrupting commerce at the temple) and a somewhat distorted sense of materials necessary for survival (telling people that god would provide for them like he did the little birds, while personally harboring the ability to multiply foodstuffs, transubstantiate water to wine when he wanted one more for the road and go for weeks without food and water).

Jesus always struck me as remarkably similar to a trust fund hippie.

|1.2.07 @ 12:44PM|#

I think he was referring literally to money

Money at that time tended to have the image of Caesar or whatever current emperor was in power on it. There were all sorts of laws about graven images and scandals involving support of paganism among the Jews since those emperors often became deified.

That particular saying can be interpreted many ways. It's interesting.

TLB|1.2.07 @ 12:45PM|#

Goode didn't say that Ellison was an immigrant, he was refering to future immigration by Muslims. Thus, anyone who thinks that pointing out that Ellison is not an immigrant is a counterargument is an idiot. I'm, of course, not surprised that some would do that based on their past statements (tinyurl.com/yeq8jg).

As for whether Ellison is truly "assimilated", here's some local info (tinyurl.com/yzfhzf).

In order to cut to the chase, what I'd like Reason to do is advocate for, say, allowing one million devout Muslims from Saudi Arabia and Yemen to come here. Let's say over the next year a million wanted to immigrate.

Reason should tell us why we should allow them to do so. Not willing to do it? Oh.

|1.2.07 @ 12:50PM|#

I think Jesus was a first-class praxeologist. He taught people to desire different ends than the ones they were used to. Then he showed them how to pursue these new goals. If the story ended with death on a cross, it isn't particularly compelling, but if it ended with resurrection, ascencion, and pentecost, it's pretty incredible. I buy into the latter.

|1.2.07 @ 1:02PM|#

I don't think political philosophy was foremost on Jesus' mind. "My kingdom is not of this world" and all.

He meant taxes, literally:|1.2.07 @ 1:06PM|#

"Render unto Caesar…" is a phrase attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels. Jesus gives this answer to the question of whether it is lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar. The full sentence this phrase comes from is "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" ("Reddite igitur quae sunt Caesaris Caesari et quae sunt Dei Deo") (Matthew 22:21).

|1.2.07 @ 1:13PM|#

I'm wondering why Goode thought it important to reassure his constituents that he would not be swearing on the Koran. Were they somehow under the impression that he might be a crypto-Muslim?

Warren|1.2.07 @ 1:17PM|#

TBL,
Get a fricking clue. Reason has long advocated an Open Borders policy, allowing anyone with a valid ID into the country.

wha? Oh sorry, didn't see the "Don't feed the trolls" sign

Warren|1.2.07 @ 1:27PM|#

My last was directed at TLB of course. Normally I let my typos stand, but this being someone else's moniker I figured a correction was in order. Sorry about that.

|1.2.07 @ 1:29PM|#

In Virgil Goode's defense the Americans have backed a war with a country that did not attack us for fear of being attacked again by Muslims. If we are so terrified of Muslims and foreign terrorists that we have to have pre-emptive wars it only makes sense to end immigration. I don't believe that Muslim terrorist pose any threat to American society. As 3000 Americans were killed (in America) by Muslims in the last 5 years or whatever...how big of a threat can they possibly be? But if you are scared enough to allow your government to blow the hell out of some other country (just in case they might attack you) closing the borders makes sense. Give Goode some credit. At least he actually believes the fairy tale...unlike most Americans who just want to kill a bunch of Muslims for revenge.

|1.2.07 @ 1:29PM|#

Didjya ever notice that no Jew ever used the phrase "Judeo-Christian?"

David Weigel|1.2.07 @ 1:39PM|#

Didjya ever notice that no Jew ever used the phrase "Judeo-Christian?"

Actually, the most prominent American Jew who uses the phrase "Judeo-Christian" is Dennis Prager... who was the main antagonist in the Ellison controversy before Goode got involved.

Rhywun|1.2.07 @ 1:48PM|#

"Diversity visas?"

It's kind of a lottery for people from "under-represented" countries, i.e. not Mexico, Central America, China, etc. It's basically the only legal way for a single, non-genius person to immigrate.

And by the way, did it ever occur to this idiot that some (most? all?) people immigrate from Muslim countries in order to experience MORE freedom, not less?

|1.2.07 @ 2:02PM|#

I hope Ellison runs down the aisle afterwards and rubs the Koran all over Goode.

Just to see if it "burns."

Also, for the record, I originally spelled Koran as Kloram, which I might add, would be an excellent Superman villain name, once you add a hyphen.

|1.2.07 @ 2:34PM|#

In order to cut to the chase, what I'd like Reason to do is advocate for, say, allowing one million devout Muslims from Saudi Arabia and Yemen to come here.

Okay, I'll bite: sure, I could deal with this. Because once they get here, there's nothing they can legally do to stop wives from throwing off the burqas and divorcing their husbands (or - the horror - learning to drive), or homosexuals coming out of the closet, or their adult daughters wearing miniskirts and smoking and drinking and dating reprobates like me. I think once they discover that they can't defend themselves from the predations of American culture, they'll give up and either assimilate or get back on the boat.

Seriously, I'm not at all worried that they'll try to institute sharia courts here. I'm sure many would love to try, but it's illegal, and I'll happily support the vigorous prosecution of anyone who forgets that our laws take precedence over their traditions. The US has always done a better job of assimilation than Europe, and I doubt that we'll end up in a mess like the Dutch or Germans have.

|1.2.07 @ 2:35PM|#

"I hope Ellison runs down the aisle afterwards and rubs the Koran all over Goode."

I think most Muslims would consider that defacing the Koran.

Are you trying to provoke a jihad?

|1.2.07 @ 2:44PM|#

Are you trying to provoke a jihad?

Only if it's led by a evil, super-powered being of unknown origins named Klor-Am.

TLB|1.2.07 @ 3:11PM|#

Good for Nat! Unfortunately, they came close to creating ShariaLaw courts in Canada (tinyurl.com/y4l7d6). Given pandering politicians and the far-left infrastructure here it could indeed happen, as could the various issues that Oz and EU are having. And, because of that infrastructure the MeltingPot has stopped working, so if we did import a million devout Muslims at the very least they'd form their own separate communities. And, needless to say, because they're devout they'd prosletyze; for instance, a NewYork PrisonChaplain turned out to be an extremist. And, the story of the schoolkid who knew about the 911Attacks in advance appears to have been true (based on MSM reporting). Most Americans would agree that we need fewer not more people like that. Unfortunately, with this large mass of devout Muslims we'd get more not less.

But, here's a chance for Dave Weigel to shine! I'd like him to offer specific arguments in favor of importing one million devout Muslims. That's not too difficult a task, right?

And, it looks like we might get it in any case.

Jennifer|1.2.07 @ 3:23PM|#

I call for greater numbers of immigrants in hopes that their ethnic whateverness will dilute the insanity of our native-born jackass bigots like TLB Lonewacko.

|1.2.07 @ 3:23PM|#

It's generally considered to be the responsibility of those who propose to stick and gun in someone's face and prevent him from going about his intended business to explain why that's a good idea, rather than the responsibility of those who want to let people go about their business unhindered.

Also, we haven't "imported" anyone to this country since the slave trade was shut down. We're talking about letting people come here of their own volition, not "importing" them like Hondas.

|1.2.07 @ 3:25PM|#

Isn't it cute the way The Lone Whacko gets around his H&R ban by creating new nyms?

Kevin

TLB|1.2.07 @ 3:32PM|#

In order to help, let me provide this quote from IbrahimHooper of CAIR (someone even SalonMag has exposed):

"I wouldn't want to create theimpression that I wouldn't like the governmentof the United States to beIslamic sometime in thefuture... But I'm not going to do anythingviolent to promote that. I'm going to do it througheducation."

Now, some will of course say he's just a spokesman for some group. But, aside apparently from Babs (tinyurl.com/veh6g), most liberals and many conservatives bow before their PR onslaught and (IIRC) they've gotten people fired and such.

So, let's here Weigel's affirmative argument for importing a million IbrahimHoopers.

|1.2.07 @ 3:38PM|#

If we imported a million devoutly religious peopole who believe that education and persuasion, rather than violence, is the right way to make the government more holy, maybe they'd be able to get some of our home-grown religious loonies to see the light.

|1.2.07 @ 3:42PM|#

How about, if we stopped throwing up roadblocks in front of the Ibrahim Hoopers, it would be a lot harder for the Mohammed Attas to find fake documents and smuggling services.

The worst problem associated with illegal immigration is the black market it's created.

Jennifer|1.2.07 @ 4:13PM|#

If you're worried about the country turning Muslim, the best way to avoid that is to allow more Hispanic immigrants. Their Catholicism would offset any Islamishness, and their scantily-clad women would offset all the burkas.

|1.2.07 @ 4:16PM|#

INteresting take, except for that whole self sacrifice thing.....not sure how many hippies (Trust fund or otherwise) are willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of thier fellow man......

Jennifer|1.2.07 @ 4:25PM|#

not sure how many hippies (Trust fund or otherwise) are willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of thier fellow man......

Self-sacrifice is pretty easy when you only have to stay dead for a day and a half and then get to spend the rest of eternity as co-ruler of heaven. To get the hippies on board, just tell them that the pearly white ground fog you always see in pictures of heaven is actually pot smoke.

I. Self. Divine.|1.2.07 @ 4:34PM|#

TLB: What kind of tariffs would be imposed on these imported Muslims?

|1.2.07 @ 4:51PM|#

Allowing large numbers of Muslim immigrants hasn't affected civil liberties in the UK at all, why would the U.S. be any different?

Cyrus|1.2.07 @ 5:09PM|#

I don't know that Jesus would be best described as a libertarian so much as an anarchosocialist ... with violently anti-free market leanings (disrupting commerce at the temple) and a somewhat distorted sense of materials necessary for survival ...

The problem with ascribing any politics to Jesus is that the rules don't apply to him. I'm not trying to make some bizarre accusation of hypocrisy or something (for that matter, I'll also probably reveal my lack of theological training), just saying that if you take the Gospels as even just broadly accurate, Jesus is obviously not an ordinary guy. The one parenthetical I left in seems especially relevant. ("disrupting commerce at the temple...") It was not the commerce Jesus was objecting to, if I remember correctly, it was the fact that it was happening in his father's house. His dad is a landlord on the side, and the tenants were flagrantly and destructively violating the terms of the lease - how would you expect him to act?

Jesus always struck me as remarkably similar to a trust fund hippie.

Well, as we have established, his father does/did own quite a bit of real estate...

clone12|1.2.07 @ 5:17PM|#

Let's say over the next year a million wanted to immigrate.

In 30 years, no one would be left in Saudi Arabia.

We win!

Larry A|1.2.07 @ 7:32PM|#

And by the way, did it ever occur to this idiot that some (most? all?) people immigrate from Muslim countries in order to experience MORE freedom, not less?

Right. We get the Muslim Feminist Cowgirl types.

|1.2.07 @ 8:01PM|#

Isn't it cute the way The Lone Whacko gets around his H&R ban by creating new nyms?
===============================
H&R bans people? Hey, that's not cool. I was once banned from freerepublic.com (5 posts in, I think I criticized Israel, Bush, and the war), and I was really pissed. Banning people is rotten, unless they're spamming. I hoped Libertarians would do a little better than their neo-con counterparts.

|1.2.07 @ 8:23PM|#

Or we could see who Keith Ellison really is from people who live and follow him in Michigan...

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/015106.php

|1.2.07 @ 9:52PM|#

Don't feel bad about bannings. I was banned a couple years ago because I said Eminem didn't have the best album of the century..or something along those lines.

And on the topic,
I would like to ban people like Virgil Goode put them back on the boat.

TLB|1.2.07 @ 10:48PM|#

Perhaps I should have corrected this earlier, but I don't think I've been banned here. They do, however, "moderate" comments with over one link. And, as I've discussed in the past, like many other bloggers, they fell for the nofollow scam.

I have, however, been BannedByRedState after posting ~75 entries (not comments) there over 1.5+ years. I'm currently trying to get them to remove my copyrighted content, and I may end up having to take legal action.

|1.2.07 @ 11:59PM|#

Has any one noticed that the Oath of Office is not even taken on any book at all.

In fact the Constitution calls only for an oath or affirmation, such was the influence of Quakers and other non-conformists who objected to swearing oaths at the time of the writing of the Constitution.

Jennifer|1.3.07 @ 12:16AM|#

I'm currently trying to get them to remove my copyrighted content, and I may end up having to take legal action.

You. . . posted comments on somebody else's board and now you want to sue because people can read what you posted?

|1.3.07 @ 12:45AM|#

I guess if I'd o' just booklearned that there psychomological stuff I'd have a clue as to why our visitor is so affeared of brownskinned folks.

But then if my ancestors had only done their bit to control immigration his kind would still be stuck in their bogs in Ireland or their abject grinding poverty in Eastern Europe.

dhex|1.3.07 @ 1:01AM|#

is there a "libertarian stance" on jewish courts for civil disputes? (beth dins (sp?) don't count for our more excitable forumgoers, we presume, due to the lack of foreign devilry association)

and a hearty "viva mexico!" to our good friend lonewacko. amigo, eres loco!

|1.3.07 @ 1:22AM|#

People, please get a clue about the Constitution. Is Civics a dead letter here in Merika?

What Isaac Bartram said. Article VI, reads, in part, "... no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States." Requiring Bob Q. Congresskritter to swear on a bible, or a torah, or Wiccan Principles vol II, would constitute a religious test. Which would be supremely ironic, since the members, sworn in en masse, would be violating the constitution as they swear to uphold it. So they just raise their right hands, and let the left hang there, I assume.

If anyone thinks having a picture taken with a book threatens the fabric of this nation, well, they're just plain stupid.

|1.3.07 @ 8:46AM|#

is there a "libertarian stance" on jewish courts for civil disputes? (beth dins (sp?) don't count for our more excitable forumgoers, we presume, due to the lack of foreign devilry association

As long as both parties agree to use the court, go ahead. Freedom of contract includes freedom to specify means of dispute resolution.
There's a parallel with shipping law, where a lot of contracts specify "London [ie English law] arbitration". Even if it's a contract signed in Malta between a Nigerian oil exporter and the Greek owners of a Panama-registered tanker with a Filipino crew and a Russian captain, both sides will want London arb - but they could choose US law, or Canadian, or whatever instead, but London happens to be the industry standard.

|1.3.07 @ 3:27PM|#

As a constituent of Keith Ellison, I must say that I'm sick of all those Michigan immigrants. They should stay in their own state.

Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|1.3.07 @ 8:32PM|#

then is it not fair to ask, faith in what?

Adam Smith

Thomas Paine\'s Goiter|1.3.07 @ 8:32PM|#

Oops. Wrong thread.