Doesn't matter which side of the aisle you view, this mess about protecting our borders--particularly our Southern border with Mexico is absolutely disgraceful! I've heard Michael Chertoff, head of Homeland Security, talk about the "virtual fence," 28 miles completed. Chertoff looked straight into the camera's eye and told us the fence was good to go. That was a few weeks ago. Now the "virtual fence" is on hold for at least three years. Are they kidding!
The virtual fence is a total waste of money already spent as well as money to be spent. The Border Patrol claims this fence will not meet its needs in stemming the influx of illegals (but why respect the people who actually do the work)! I don't believe protection means "watching" illegals cross and deciding if they are or are not carrying backpacks. Gimme a break! Am I really supposed to believe this will keep me safe?
Build a REAL FENCE. Make it high enough and sink it deep enough to stem this unwanted flood across our borders. Me--I'd electrify it too--but that's really hopeful thinking.
The Dems don't want to stem the tide; they want to legislate ways to make these people Democratic voters. Just keep giving--driver's licenses, social services, etc. The Republicans don't want to alienate Hispanics already on the voting rolls.
Neither party seeks to change the catch and release that's going on now--and I'm not talking about undersized fish! Sanctuary states and cities are governed by members of both parties. It all stinks, and we are the ones who pay and who can be hurt. No wonder Congress' dismal approval rating makes the President's ratings seem like Mt. Everest! Congress is totally useless.
And, of course, enemies of the U.S. cheer. No way to stop them from entering--drug transporters, coyotes with paying human beings stuffed in their trucks, potential terrorists.
On this issue, none of the Presidential candidates and neither party can be counted on to work in OUR INTEREST to solve this problem. It is in their short-term interest to be as bad as they are being today, pandering to a growing and powerful voting bloc.
Border security "border+security" Congress Democrats Republicans Chertoff "Michael+Chertoff" "homeland+security" Hispanics illegals "illiegal+aliens" "illegal+immigrants" fence "border+fence" "virtual+fence" terror terrorists
Friday, February 29, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
SHUMER & HALL--PART OF NEW YORK'S BLIGHT
Both Senator Chuck Schumer and Congressman John Hall voted against their respective versions of the Surveillance Bill (FISA) that would allow at least a continuation of some specific means of gathering intelligence until Congress could deal with working to protect us. Meanwhile Congress adjourned for its "much needed" February recess, allowing the bill to expire.
Schumer and Hall may not be the biggest wastes on Capitol Hill, but you've got to wonder why people actually voted for them. Neither is doing his job for us. Here's a copy of the email I sent to them when I learned how they blithefully abrogated their responsibilities to their country and to their constituents.
"Have you ever read the Federalist Papers? I doubt it; if you had, you would know that the primary function of our government is to protect us, and you certainly stray from that purpose because you voted against a way to possibly identify those seeking to harm us.
You know darned well that the techniques deal with "key word" recognition and things like that rather than with individual names until a pattern is recognized. You just count on the ignorance of the public not to understand that. You want them to assume that their conversations are being monitored. Makes the present administration look sinister, a look you like to advance for very partisan, and in this case, unpatriotic reasons.
And then, when the communications companies help the government, you want to let leech-like lawyers go after them. Intelligence assistance equals lawsuit. You're hardly acting in the interest of the country or of its citizens. You're not acting for my well being at all, for my protection, for my right to safety or in any other way the Constitution and the Federalist Papers explain your role.
How about putting partisanship aside and acting as your role dictates, and probably as your conscience dictates although you choose to ignore that little fellow sitting on your shoulder.
By the way, did you have time to pop in and deal with Congress' important business--steroids in Roger Clemens. You all should be ashamed of yourselves."
You know darned well that the techniques deal with "key word" recognition and things like that rather than with individual names until a pattern is recognized. You just count on the ignorance of the public not to understand that. You want them to assume that their conversations are being monitored. Makes the present administration look sinister, a look you like to advance for very partisan, and in this case, unpatriotic reasons.
And then, when the communications companies help the government, you want to let leech-like lawyers go after them. Intelligence assistance equals lawsuit. You're hardly acting in the interest of the country or of its citizens. You're not acting for my well being at all, for my protection, for my right to safety or in any other way the Constitution and the Federalist Papers explain your role.
How about putting partisanship aside and acting as your role dictates, and probably as your conscience dictates although you choose to ignore that little fellow sitting on your shoulder.
By the way, did you have time to pop in and deal with Congress' important business--steroids in Roger Clemens. You all should be ashamed of yourselves."
politics Schumer Hall "Charles+Shumer" "John+Hall" Congress FISA Senator Congressman "Capitol+Hill" "Roger+Clemens" "Not-with-a-Whimper"
"New+York"
Saturday, February 16, 2008
NATIONAL SECURITY FOR WHALES OR FOR US?
Enviornmentalists' battle against the United States Navy's use of sonar equipment has been fomenting for some time now, and the battle might even end up in the Supreme Court. It's in the courts now, and some imbecilic judge feels that freeing the Navy from restrictions may just be a violation of our Constitution. Another jerk who has read neither the Constitution nor the Federalist Papers. Show me the animal stuff in there!
Here's the deal: enviornmentalists want the Navy to cease and desist from its use of sonar equipment to locate enemy submarines. The noise disturbs the whales and might cause them to become disoriented and beach themselves. The Navy, sensitive to the possible problem, limits the sonar decibles according to the proximity of whales, but that's not enough. The Navy asserts that when diesel fueled subs run on silent, they are no longer detectable by the "sonar pings" popular in 1990 movies. They ARE running silent and deep!
Here's another attack on our safety. Save the whales and welcome another Pearl Harbor--or worse. Imagine an enemy sub armed with nuclear weapons allowed to approach our shores because our prime concern is protecting whales, not citizens. It's almost surreal--but not quite. It's a real battle.
This is one more attack on security. Rules of engagement already escalate the rights of the enemy above our fighting forces. Enemy prisoners should not be made uncomfortable in any way that would coerce them to give up info--the milk and cookies approach to interrogation. Guantanemo prisoners have rights analogous to U.S. citizens although they are captured enemy combatants. Now the whales take precedence over my safety.
I take it very personally. It's a whale of a battle against you and me! Think about it before entering a voting booth.
politics whales enviornment enviornmentalists Navy sonar "Supreme+Court" Constitution "Federalist+Papers" "Pearl+Harbor" "rules+of+engagement"
Thursday, February 14, 2008
CREDIT FOR UPDATED GI BILL
An article in our local partisan rag, the Middletown Record, for a push to update the GI Bill neglects to give credit where it's due--to Fox News' Bill O'Reilly and retired Col. David Hunt, a tireless advocate of veterans.
Stemming from John Edwards' fallacious assertions that 200,000 homeless vets sleep under bridges each night as a result of the economy, O'Reilly called on the VA to explain. There are 150,000 beds available each night but no legal way to force vets to take them. The problem, they say, is not the economy; the problem is primarily substance abuse and mental health issues. No one can force these men and women to seek treatment, and our "rights" have actually created a crack through which they can fall.
As O'Reilly tackled the Jessica's Law issue, prompting many states to adopt this child protection law, he and Col. Hunt enlisted the help of Rep. Congressman Peter King and Dem. Congressman John Kerry to do something to help these and other vets. Philosophically apart on many issues, these men are united on this one. They are crafting legislation and attempting to give our military the benefits they deserve--whether it is health, education, parity among deployed forces or other concern--whether they are enlisted, reserve, or national guard. O'Reilly will be making monthly reports on their progress, and it behooves each and every one of us to make sure our representatives are behind them.
Regardless of your personal view on the war, you cannot deny that our volunteer military is part of what makes our country great, and these men and women deserve our support, encouragement, and thanks.
politics politicians "GI+Bill" vets veterans OReilly "David+Hunt" "Fox+news" "John+Edwards" "homeless+vets" economy "Jessicas+law" war Iraq
Stemming from John Edwards' fallacious assertions that 200,000 homeless vets sleep under bridges each night as a result of the economy, O'Reilly called on the VA to explain. There are 150,000 beds available each night but no legal way to force vets to take them. The problem, they say, is not the economy; the problem is primarily substance abuse and mental health issues. No one can force these men and women to seek treatment, and our "rights" have actually created a crack through which they can fall.
As O'Reilly tackled the Jessica's Law issue, prompting many states to adopt this child protection law, he and Col. Hunt enlisted the help of Rep. Congressman Peter King and Dem. Congressman John Kerry to do something to help these and other vets. Philosophically apart on many issues, these men are united on this one. They are crafting legislation and attempting to give our military the benefits they deserve--whether it is health, education, parity among deployed forces or other concern--whether they are enlisted, reserve, or national guard. O'Reilly will be making monthly reports on their progress, and it behooves each and every one of us to make sure our representatives are behind them.
Regardless of your personal view on the war, you cannot deny that our volunteer military is part of what makes our country great, and these men and women deserve our support, encouragement, and thanks.
politics politicians "GI+Bill" vets veterans OReilly "David+Hunt" "Fox+news" "John+Edwards" "homeless+vets" economy "Jessicas+law" war Iraq
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
CONGRESS GETTING SPORTS' AUTOGRAPHS--AGAIN
Congress, primarily composed of self-aggrandizing politicians, must feel that this country has no greater problems to solve than steroids in baseball--now known as the "Roger Clemens Hearings"--and dishonesty caused a missing Patriot football tape (thanks to PA's Republican Senator Arlen Spector who is committed to making our country run better--duh?).
Here's how sports inquiries work in regard to the major issues we face:
HOMELAND SECURITY: Zilch
ECONOMY: Zilch for the good. I'd like an accounting of how much money these hearings cost taxpayers. Bet we never hear that figure.
DRUG USE: Proves that the only way to get ahead in sports--remember Roger and Andy are winning and extremely highly paid Yankees--and look at the "bod" on Clemens' wife--is to use drugs to bulk up and be competitive. You may or may not be caught, and the millions you've earned will carry the family through. OK you may not make Cooperstown. Ask Pete Rose--oops that was gambling.
HONESTY: "Just say No" Barry Bonds apparently proves how effective that is. If you choose to make a lot of money as a trainer, like McNamee, you better use whatever works. BUT just in case you get caught, keep good records and old needles.
FULFILLING THE AMERICAN DREAM : I put this in because when these politicians leave office, they take with them very valuable collectibles which they might sell on ebay to supplement their pensions. Ha Ha. I wonder how many photos were taken with Clemens as he made his rounds of congressional offices prior to the hearings! Bet Clemens gave these pictures (and maybe autographs) as freebies. Watcha think?
Isn't it nice to know we live in a country without problems concerning war, security, immigration, sub-prime mortgages, health care problems, social security breakdowns, poverty, educational inequities, inner-city deterioration, equality, energy crises, etc.? Or maybe it is not so difficult to understandwhy Congress has a 20% approval rating--that is the new, Democratic Congress that promised great things if elected.
politics politicians sports autographs Congress "Roger+Clemens" Patriots "Arlen+Spector" Republicans "Homeland+Security" security economy honesty drugs "Andy+Pettite" "Pete+Rose" "Barry+Bonds" McNamee collectibles war "social+security" healthcare poverty energy equality Democrats
Here's how sports inquiries work in regard to the major issues we face:
HOMELAND SECURITY: Zilch
ECONOMY: Zilch for the good. I'd like an accounting of how much money these hearings cost taxpayers. Bet we never hear that figure.
DRUG USE: Proves that the only way to get ahead in sports--remember Roger and Andy are winning and extremely highly paid Yankees--and look at the "bod" on Clemens' wife--is to use drugs to bulk up and be competitive. You may or may not be caught, and the millions you've earned will carry the family through. OK you may not make Cooperstown. Ask Pete Rose--oops that was gambling.
HONESTY: "Just say No" Barry Bonds apparently proves how effective that is. If you choose to make a lot of money as a trainer, like McNamee, you better use whatever works. BUT just in case you get caught, keep good records and old needles.
FULFILLING THE AMERICAN DREAM : I put this in because when these politicians leave office, they take with them very valuable collectibles which they might sell on ebay to supplement their pensions. Ha Ha. I wonder how many photos were taken with Clemens as he made his rounds of congressional offices prior to the hearings! Bet Clemens gave these pictures (and maybe autographs) as freebies. Watcha think?
Isn't it nice to know we live in a country without problems concerning war, security, immigration, sub-prime mortgages, health care problems, social security breakdowns, poverty, educational inequities, inner-city deterioration, equality, energy crises, etc.? Or maybe it is not so difficult to understandwhy Congress has a 20% approval rating--that is the new, Democratic Congress that promised great things if elected.
politics politicians sports autographs Congress "Roger+Clemens" Patriots "Arlen+Spector" Republicans "Homeland+Security" security economy honesty drugs "Andy+Pettite" "Pete+Rose" "Barry+Bonds" McNamee collectibles war "social+security" healthcare poverty energy equality Democrats
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
DON'T LET THE MEDIA CHOOSE OUR CANDIDATES
Don't let the press choose our candidates for us. The press has taken sides and has chosen its favorites. Now the journalists just sit back and hope we'll follow their lead.
It's no secret that journalists covering Barak Obama are smitten. His charm and the likeablity factor that alludes Hillary are intricate parts of his personality. But what they aren't covering are the details of his positions. He's allowed to make statements without ever offering a plan to implement them. But he's still a golden boy. Beware.
With Hillary, no one challenges her past. The media certainly does not. When she calls Bill's eight years in the White House her experience and adds another eight as a do-nothing NY Senator, what is she taking about--the travel agency debacle, the failed and embarrassing stab at health care reform, the lost records that sat on her coffee table and mysteriously disappeared? The press doesn't deal with those things, and hope we've forgotten. Search high and low for the positive contributions of her senate year, but it will be like searching for WMDs in an Iraqi desert.
Duncan Hunter was a blip on the journalistic screen. The press ignored him, and he quietly went away. Guiliani was counted out by the press as was Fred Thompson. And did you know that by suspending rather than stopping his campaign, John Edwards is still eligible for government campaign funding? Is he angling for a position in the next White House? The press hasn't covered that possibility.
The press is definitely anti-Huckabee, and keeps asking when he's going to give up and go home. Huckabee has to keep repeating that he's in this thing for the long haul. Defending his run has superseded talking about issues--his tax reforms, for instance.
According to the media, John McCain is the Republican candidate of choice. He's far from conservative stances, and his rebellion against the Republicans is glossed over. His dalliances with some of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate like Ted Kennedy please the press, so the media is all for him. They didn't call him on his lies about Mitt Romney's war position, and they apparently want to push him to the forefront. The press keeps suggesting that it's time for Romney to call it a day as a presidential candidate. They've left him on his own.
It's bad enough the the press can't or won't treat the candidates neutrally. It's worse that we tend to listen and follow their suggestions. If it's inevitable that McCain will get the nomination, we think, then why not vote for him in the primary? If the Clintons have an unbeatable machine, why not vote for her now?
The fact that we are treated as stupid doesn't mean we have to act that way. Use your own reasons for voting for a candidate. Most important--VOTE for the person who is closest to your personal choices.
politics primaries "Super+Tuesday" Hillary Obama Huckabee McCain Romney Edwards Guiliani Thompson Hunter "political+commentary" analysis media candidates press journalist "Not+With+A+Whimper" "political+blogs"
It's no secret that journalists covering Barak Obama are smitten. His charm and the likeablity factor that alludes Hillary are intricate parts of his personality. But what they aren't covering are the details of his positions. He's allowed to make statements without ever offering a plan to implement them. But he's still a golden boy. Beware.
With Hillary, no one challenges her past. The media certainly does not. When she calls Bill's eight years in the White House her experience and adds another eight as a do-nothing NY Senator, what is she taking about--the travel agency debacle, the failed and embarrassing stab at health care reform, the lost records that sat on her coffee table and mysteriously disappeared? The press doesn't deal with those things, and hope we've forgotten. Search high and low for the positive contributions of her senate year, but it will be like searching for WMDs in an Iraqi desert.
Duncan Hunter was a blip on the journalistic screen. The press ignored him, and he quietly went away. Guiliani was counted out by the press as was Fred Thompson. And did you know that by suspending rather than stopping his campaign, John Edwards is still eligible for government campaign funding? Is he angling for a position in the next White House? The press hasn't covered that possibility.
The press is definitely anti-Huckabee, and keeps asking when he's going to give up and go home. Huckabee has to keep repeating that he's in this thing for the long haul. Defending his run has superseded talking about issues--his tax reforms, for instance.
According to the media, John McCain is the Republican candidate of choice. He's far from conservative stances, and his rebellion against the Republicans is glossed over. His dalliances with some of the most liberal Democrats in the Senate like Ted Kennedy please the press, so the media is all for him. They didn't call him on his lies about Mitt Romney's war position, and they apparently want to push him to the forefront. The press keeps suggesting that it's time for Romney to call it a day as a presidential candidate. They've left him on his own.
It's bad enough the the press can't or won't treat the candidates neutrally. It's worse that we tend to listen and follow their suggestions. If it's inevitable that McCain will get the nomination, we think, then why not vote for him in the primary? If the Clintons have an unbeatable machine, why not vote for her now?
The fact that we are treated as stupid doesn't mean we have to act that way. Use your own reasons for voting for a candidate. Most important--VOTE for the person who is closest to your personal choices.
politics primaries "Super+Tuesday" Hillary Obama Huckabee McCain Romney Edwards Guiliani Thompson Hunter "political+commentary" analysis media candidates press journalist "Not+With+A+Whimper" "political+blogs"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
