Thursday, May 17, 2007

Go to Sleep America

At the Reform Club -- irony of ironies -- we have a site co-contributor criticizing those who worry over and dislike the closed door Congressional hearings (assuring that we "know nothing" of its subject) and the product of its effluent that is about to be unleashed.

And if amnesty (hush!) is as openly welcome to Americans as Senator Feinstein asserted in a soundbite released today, then why the closed door hearings? Talk about need for reform Mr Zycher: calling Mde. Feinstein less than truthful and less than courageous is in danger of becoming mandatory understatement.

Here is how I responded to The Rantings of the KnowNothings
Pascal Fervor said...

Recommending that your readers give in to any apparent fait accompli of law breaking seems strikingly out of place at a site dedicated to societal reform.

But what weight does my opinion carry here? I'm just a guest; perhaps less so after today.

I can listen to Establishment media and a handful of "rightwing" talkers (such as the Medwitts) if I wish to hear more efforts to anesthetize any groundswell of public outrage on this subject.

5:45 PM

This was followed by a not atypical middling response by the Reform Club's host, my fellow Angelino:

Tom Van Dyke said...

I'd just like someone to explain why this is better than doing nothing. Me, I'm a big fan of doing nothing.

There are many cracks in society's floor that are best left uncaulked, and absent any real reform, this is one of them.

6:21 PM

Crack Tom? This is a veritable breach.

Maybe this explains why my old teacher and Hudson Institute president, Herb London, has absented himself from the Reform Club for so long. Jolting his students awake -- perhaps the most important lesson he drilled into me -- was that man's primary goal.


  1. Oh, Dr. London ascended to emeritus status a long time ago. He's off doing his Herb thing.

    As for Dr. Zycher, I largely agree with him, and am always happy when (our new name) goes against the conservative grain whether I agree or not. We're a little too monochromatic for my taste, and you're invited and welcome to correct us when we stray.


    In this case, Ben calls for the end of incentives like free health care. Unfortunately, as long as Los Angeles County (and dozens of others) dispense it freely to illegals on a don't ask, don't tell basis, no federal legislation will make any difference. (Think of it as a federalism of sorts.)

    And Los Angeles' mayor tells a crowd of protestors the other day that "there are no illegal people here." I dunno what law could get him to see them.

    I'm sorta for a wall, but do I think it'll do any good? No.

    So the only result I see from this legislation is amnesty, and more Democrat voters. My middling response is that we're better off with no legislation.

    (Nice to hear from you, man.)

  2. Thanks Tom for coming here to set the record straight on your desires.

    I can well understand one not wanting to step on ones co-contributers opinion too often, but still I wish your personal inclination were stated more clearly on your own site. Sometimes your investments in ambiguity can be maddening.

    And, yes, it was good to hear Fred Thompson take a native populist stance on the amnesty.

    Romney did too, but I have unanswered questions about him. I recall Romney acting like a man taking a dive late in his senatorial run against Teddy in 1994. Did someone make him an offer he couldn't refuse? If so, what's to keep it from happening again a la Perot (after that man initially pulled out of the Prez race in 1992 and thereby destroyed his lead)?


View My Stats