Irony Unbound

The supreme irony wrapped up in the demonstrations last weekend held to compel U.S. intervention in Sudan and the May Day celebrations hoping to compel amnesty and citizenship for millions of Mexicans is almost too much to bear. Though the Washington Post in an article titled "Divisions Cast Aside in Cry for Darfur" maintains that the 10,000 who marched in Washington cut across party, ethnic and ideological lines, nevertheless, the organizers and many of the speakers were fierce and virulent Democrat opponents of President Bush and this administration. I happened to tune in when House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi was speaking. Here's a woman who not only wants to impeach the commander in chief during a war, but wants the U.S. to get out of Iraq ASAP, apparently, in order to have troops available to invade Sudan. And yet, it was the Bush team that negotiated a cease fire when the African Christians were the targets. Now we have Muslims slaughtering Muslims abetted by the Chinese who desperately need Sudanese oil. In an op. ed. in the Post on Sunday Robert Kagan of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace titled “League of Dictators?” made the case that Iran and Sudan are in some measure extensions of the 20th century conflict between free people and dictators. In that sense, just like the U.S. intervention in Vietnam, any action in Sudan is taking on China by proxy. I don't recall this nuance being discussed or even mentioned at the rally, but it is for sure a complicating factor. And, any intervention would surely invite some kind of reaction beyond Sudan. In addition, I cannot recall Ms Pelosi or any of her comrades having the same sympathy for those buried in the mass graves in Iraq. Do these people have some sort of secret criteria for sympathy and compassion that the rest of us just do not understand. Fast forward to Monday and many of the same people are marching or supporting the march of people who are in this country illegally. Between the Mexican flags and derogatory signs of the first marches, the rewriting of the National Anthem, the protests by Mexican unionists in Mexico City in support of illegals here, these people have turned a person, namely me, who was inclined to support the establishment of a immigrant worker program into a borderline fierce opponent of anything except securing the border. For once I seem to be in sync with the majority of Americans as most polls reflect this reality. But, once again Howard Dean has missed the boat. He's on the side of the marchers and he believes this will get him control of Congress and through that the ability to overturn the last election. The problem for Mr. Dean is his compadres in this matter. Number one is La Raza, a branch of which is not just after legalization, but secession of most of the western part of this country back to Mexico. La Raza receives several million dollars from U.S. taxpayers--I would like to know where that money goes and who votes for those appropriations. Number two is Hugo Chavez who is apparently helping with the funding and publicity for the marches. And number three is the likely next President of Mexico, the socialist anti-American Mayor of Mexico City, who has already declared that he will ally with Chavez. These people all have interests directly in opposition to those of this country and Howard Dean and his Democrat allies fit right (or should I say left) in with that agenda.