Good Fences Make Good Neighbors

I suppose after this post I will most certainly join the ranks of the heartless and cruel. Nonetheless, I must be honest. I cannot hide the truth any longer. I must admit I am a member that notorious group that is perfectly willing to deport Marilu Lopez back to her home country of Guatemala.

Out of the shadows

When Lopez was arrested last May, it was the first time she had seen the inside of a prison. Lopez is one of about 170 Prince William inmates facing immigration charges, a population that has shot up by approximately 460 percent since jail officials began cooperating with ICE.

“Some of the people would normally have been bondable, but now that they have a detainer, they’re waiting for a court date, they’re going to be here,” said outgoing Superintendent Charles “Skip” Land, who will step down at the end of 2007.

“Farm-outs,” inmates who are held at neighboring facilities for an average of $50 a day, have increased threefold from a year ago, and lately have been fluctuating between 180 and 200. (from here)

It would appear that Prince William County’s new “immigration laws” are already having an effect. Naturally, the liberal news media is upset with this success. So to humanize the “victims”, they have gone looking for the most sympathetic victim they can find. As told this morning in the Potomac News (here and here), Marilu Lopez has a sad story. After fourteen years and five children, she got caught. Because Lopez is suspected of abusing one of her children, she was arrested. Is she guilty of child abuse? I do not know about the child abuse, but she is guilty of sneaking into the United States and using “free” public services.

Why do I want to see Lopez go back to Guatemala? Am I mean? Do I hate Marilu Lopez? Of course not. I just don’t want to live in a country like Guatemala. Lopez came here to escape Guatemala. Unfortunately, when she came here, she brought a little bit of Guatemala with her. In fact, whenever an illegal immigrant escapes their home country and sneaks into the United States, they bring a portion of their home country’s problems with them.


  • Is Lopez married? No. She had her children with two different boyfriends.
  • What does Lopez do to support herself and her five children? She works at low wage jobs.
  • Does Lopez speak English? Apparently not very well. After fourteen years in this country, Lopez still needed to speak Spanish when she was interviewed at the Prince William Adult Detention Center?

Of course none of Lopez’s problems are unique to illegal immigrants, and, undoubtedly, illegal immigrants bring some virtues as well as problems with them. Nonetheless, on the whole, these people are poorly educated and ripe for exploitation by the less scrupulous amongst us. Unrestrained, the continued influx of illegal immigrants into this country is causing our nation to fracture along economic and ethnic lines. For the sake of our own children, we cannot allow this fracturing to continue.

Our Christian heritage teaches us to care for the needy, but it does not require us to destroy ourselves in the process. To receive our aid, the Marilu Lopez’s of the world do not have to immigrate to the United States. It is the U.S. employers of illegal immigrants who have that requirement.

To put a stop to illegal immigration, we need to demand that domestic employers hire only U.S. citizens.


JK at NOVA’s Traditional American Blog also would be happy to see Lopez return to Guatemala (here).


elephantgop.pngWhen I wrote this post, I found myself puzzled. In my election analysis, I had noted that the chance of a major party nominee or an incumbent winning an election was quite high. So I was a bit surprised that Richard Stuart had won the race for Senate, 28th District. To “explain the discrepancy, I wrote the following:

Stuart’s success is an apparent anomaly. With no experience in government, he beat a Democrat with previous experience in the House of Delegates. Considering that his opponent also had better financing, that Stuart did win is somewhat remarkable.

Then a friend wrote an email that pointed out an error.

Prior to running for the Senate, Richard Stuart was Commonwealth Atty. for his area. Is that a lack of political experience?

Umm. Yeah, I guess that is political experience. I had goofed. However, since the election was over, I did not see any rush to correct the mistake. So I sat on it for a little while and cogitated (That’s a fancy way to say I procrastinated.).

For the record, Stuart does have have political experience (here). Why didn’t I know about it. Well, I did not do enough fact checking? I believed what I read in the newspaper (here).

Unlike Pollard, who previously distinguished himself in three terms in the House of Delegates, Stuart has no previous experience in government. However, he draws from both his role as a husband and father and his career history to give weight to his plans as senator. (from here)

Admittedly, believing what I read in the newspaper is not much of an excuse, particularly since the same article later said that Stuart was commonwealth’s attorney. Newspapers are notoriously inaccurate and confusing. I should have checked the candidate’s website. Well — it might have helped.

On the bright side, the close election, Stuart (R) 51 % and Pollard (D) 49 %, reaffirms the obvious.

It helps to be an incumbent and/or the nominee/endorsee of one of the major political parties. In only one case did an incumbent lose (highlighted in red here). No independents won. To gain a reasonable chance at victory, you have to win the nomination of one of the major political parties.

So why did Stuart win? I do not know. Because this race was so close and I did not follow it closely, I do not think I could honestly defend any conclusions about the results.

As much as I would like to think Stuart won because he was the more conservative candidate, I cannot prove it. However, you can read the same new article that said that Stuart had no political experience (here) and ascertain that Stuart was the more conservative candidate. 😉

Don’t you love politics? 🙂


campaign.pngTwo pieces of news about Del. Robert G. Marshall left me feeling mildly disgusted and elated.

Free Speech Issue

The first bit of news I found in the Gainesville Times (here). In a letter to the editor, Marshall thanked his constituents for the opportunity to serve again, and he laid out his agenda. For the most part, I was pleased with Marshall’s priorities. However, his first goal left me floored. See what you make of this.

Many people commented about the very negative election mailings in many of the districts. Some mailings were sent by the state political parties without the candidate’s knowledge or authorization.

At the suggestion of one of my constituents, I intend to introduce legislation which will require political party mailings to receive the authorization of the candidate the mailing is intended to benefit.

I believe this will bring more accountability to the political process and hopefully result in issues being explained with more light than heat.

There is a first amendment issue here. When a political party wants to speak out, since when does it require the permission of its nominees? Does Marshall also think that tails wag dogs?

I agree Marshall has a point. Something should be done. While political parties do nominate candidates, we elect individual people, not political parties, to political office. Each candidate is entitled to run their own political campaign. Each candidate has the right to control their campaign’s message. The voters also have the right to expect a certain amount of honesty in political party mailings. However, what Marshall proposes to do is excessive. Nominees do not have the right to muzzle political parties.

What I suggest is a bill that requires all political mailings clearly specify two things:

  • The entity that paid for the mailing.
  • Which candidate(s) approved or authorized the mailing. If no candidate authorized or approved the mailer, that should be clearly stated.

With such caveats, voters will not confuse political party mailers with candidate mailers.

Possible US Senate Candidacy

It appears Marshall is considering a run for the Senate (here) (H/T to The right-wing liberal (here) and 750 Volts (here)).

Thanks to his own efforts and the anger of the liberal media, Marshall has state-wide reputation. However, since Marshall has not run for state-wide office before, his campaign would be something of a long shot. Nonetheless, I agree with the The right-wing liberal) that this is a great development. Marshall has an unparalleled conservative record. Moreover, because Marshall campaigns for office with a reasonable amount of humility, he generally does not scare voters or come across as uncaring.

Humility is something we should all aspire to, but humility is a must for any leader.

Philippians 2:3

Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves.


Marshall also mentioned in his letter to the editor that he will hold a town meeting (which the Gainesville Times published as “town mating”) on Dec. 13 at 7 p.m. in the Manassas City Council Chambers.

* Edited for clarity.


pilgrim-cornfield.jpgTo put it succinctly, Mayflower by Nathaniel Philbrick is a good read. If that is all it takes to get you to read the book, then skip this review and go read the book.

We like to think of the Pilgrims as portrayed in the little picture I have included with this post. That picture, however, only presents a small portion of what these people must have been like. Philbrick’s book helps us to understand the Pilgrims a little better. Yes, the Pilgrims who landed in 1620 at Cap Cod (see here) were a neat and very proper people, but they were also a determined people who struggled and suffered greatly for their faith.

Mayflower begins England where, suffering persecution, the Pilgrims are scheming to escape to Holland. Their escape is only partially successful. Their plans go oddly awry, and only the men escape. Fortunately, their women and children were allowed to join them latter.

Eventually, fearing contamination of their religion by the Dutch, the pilgrims decide to form a colony in the New World. One can only imagine what the pilgrims expected, but their daring deserves our respect. The ocean voyage alone entailed great risk. Try to imagine sailing across the Atlantic to an unknown land, populated by a primitive and dangerous people.  Then consider what it must have been like to know that due to unexpected delays in the start of your journey, you would  arrive at your destination with inadequate supplies just before the beginning of winter. That story of survival, by itself, would be enough to make a good book.

Philbrick continues, however, and tells the story of a succeeding generation and of the dreadful tragedy that was King Phillip’s War. While many of us are familiar with the Indian Wars fought in the American West, few appreciate seriousness of the battles between the early colonists and the Indians. Yet in proportion to population, the casualties from King Phillip’s war rank it as the worst in American history. Each side fought ferociously; neither side felt inclined to offer the other either mercy or forgiveness.

The feast we celebrate at Thanksgiving Day reminds us of the bounty of the Lord and a hard won peace the Pilgrims gained with the local Indians. King Phillip’s War, less well remembered, is the story of how men less able and wise cast that peace away.