illegal aliens our president doesn't get?
You don't have to like the law, but it is the law. Those who enter our country without going through the established legal channels are CRIMINALS. Many talk about the rights of those who come here illegally.
They do have rights related to their treatment after capture. They have no rights to anything else here in our country.
I live in one of the most porous areas of our nation here in south Texas. There are tens of thousands of illegal aliens here. We feed them, hire them, clothe them, treat them medically, educate them, and jail them when they break other laws. None of them contribute one red cent to the U. S. Treasury. Their earnings (cash) are not subject to withholding. so they make more per hour than those who are here legally.
They are not cleared medically upon entry, so they bring in all sorts of dangerous diseases. Most of those from Mexico are easily recognized by dress, physical size and appearance, and behavior. But, not all those entering this country are from the "Latin Nations", many are Asian, Middle Eastern, and other ethnicities who are blocked because of their danger to the U. S.
Those who are either here from Mexico legally, or who are American citizens who were born here and have Hispanic surnames, are not in favor of giving amnesty to those who have circumvented the system. So, it is not a racial issue, but a legal issue. People who live here know how much of a drain these illegal aliens place on our local, state, and national economies.
Our president is clueless on most issues, and his comments and position on the illegal immigration problem is further evidence of why he should be removed from office.
Everyone must provide proof of citizenship on a regular basis. Local law enforcement should have a legal policy in place to handle those who are obviously here illegally.
We must expel those people who are here illegally, and we must make a greater effort to seal our borders to uncontrolled entry. No country can survive unrestrained illegal immigration.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
"Rather than protesting the greatest expansion of government in U.S. history, Tea Party attendees should be thanking Big Government for all it's done. At least, that's what President Obama thinks. As the Associated Press reported Thursday, the president said he was 'amused' by the Tea Party faithful gathering in cities across America to protest soaring government spending, ballooning debt and the explosion in taxes that will be needed to pay for it all. 'You would think they'd be saying thank you,' he said. And why should they be thankful? As the president himself said on his weekly radio address a week ago, 'one thing we have not done is raise income taxes on families making less than $250,000; that's another promise we kept.' In fact, that wasn't his promise at all. Here's what candidate Obama really said in September of 2008: 'Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.' Got that? 'Not any of your taxes.' The claim of no tax hikes on those below $250,000 as a result of the current administration's policies is completely and utterly false. A report from the House Ways & Means Committee's GOP members notes that, since January 2009, Congress and the president have enacted $670 billion in tax increases. That's $2,100 for each person in America. At least 14 of those tax hikes, the report says, break Obama's pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $250,000. Roughly $316 billion of the tax hikes -- 14 increases in all -- hit middle-class families, the report says." --Investor's Business Daily
"Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction." --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Wilson Nicholas, 1803
"Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction." --Thomas Jefferson, letter to Wilson Nicholas, 1803
Monday, April 19, 2010
"I developed an interest in colonialism in Africa at a young age after reading "Something of Value" by Robert Ruark. It was written in the late '50's and concerned the Mau Mau wars in Kenya during that time. It is a work of fiction and a great read on that level. More importantly, it is as good a description of the Mau Mau's early struggles against colonialism one can find. Ruark followed up with "Uhuru", meaning "freedom", in the early '60's. Another great work of fiction, it is the better of the two novels in my opinion, and charts the final struggle against the British in Kenya in the '60's.
Ruark gives equal treatment to both sides in these novels, but it is clear that it is his opinion that so far as the races and cultures involved, the twain shall never meet. He was correct in his assessment.
Throughout the '60's I watched with interest as Britain turned its African colonies loose one by one. WWII had devastated the British economy and after the war the country was firmly in the grip of hard line socialists whose policies prevented the British economy from fully recovering. The country simply could no longer support its colonies. In addition, British socialist theories of "social justice" required that the downtrodden folks in the colonies be freed.
As a result, Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia), Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), and Kenya were turned over to native governments in the early 1960's.
The primary industry in Northern Rhodesia was mining. Not being tied to the land, most whites simply left when conditions under the new government became unbearable. As a result, Zambia went back to the jungle.
In Southern Rhodesia and Kenya, the primary industry was farming. Most of the farmers had been there about three generations and had turned unproductive land into extensive farming and ranching operations. Southern Rhodesia declared its own independence and established a white government. After several years of sanctions imposed by the UN, Britain, and the US, not to mention an ongoing guerrilla war, the white government gave in and a black government was established.
The result is that the white population has dropped from around 270,000 to 40,000 with most of those remaining being elderly people who were born and raised there as well as a few very rich whites who are allied in business ventures with black politicians. The government seized most of the white farms, around 5,000 of them, a few years ago and gave the land to blacks. The result of that move is that most blacks in Zimbabwe are now starving. The economy has been totally destroyed with a loaf of bread, providing one can be found, costing 100 trillion Zimbabwean dollars. What was once called "the breadbasket of Africa" is now a poverty wracked cesspool.
Whites in Kenya fared somewhat better. The white population has only been cut in half since the imposition of black rule; however, most of the white farmers lost their land due to government policies and emigrated. The various tribes there occasionally tie up and kill each other and economically the blacks, except of course for the politicians, are no better off than they were under colonialism.
Which brings us to South Africa. The Dutch, or Boers, have been in South Africa for 400 years. Contrary to what you may have read or heard, other than Hottentots living in caves along the coast and a few scattered tribes inland, there were very few blacks living in the part of South Africa first settled by the Dutch. The Zulus were far to the north. Over a period of 300 years, the Dutch moved north and the Zulus, conquering other tribes along the way, moved south. In addition, hundreds of thousands of blacks moved into the area controlled by the Dutch for the jobs the Dutch provided.
At some point, I don't remember precisely when, the English conquered South Africa and colonized it for many years. The Dutch remained and many English moved to the country. The Brits gave up South Africa after WWII and white, Dutch rule was established. This quickly evolved into the system of apartheid so denigrated around the world.
Blacks had no role in the government, had to sit in the back of the bus, suffered discrimination in jobs, and underwent various other indignities enforced by a white minority which was terrified of black rule. Nonetheless, the country became the most prosperous on the continent, spewed out geniuses such as Dr. Robert De Bake from its educational system, and had one of the highest standards of living for both races anywhere in the world but the US. At the same time, thousands and thousands of blacks from surrounding countries under black rule migrated to South Africa. They didn't mind sitting in the back of the bus because they knew they could feed their families and wouldn't be slaughtered because they were in the wrong tribe so long as the whites ruled the country.
Well, thanks to the US, Britain, and several other European countries, sanctions were imposed against South Africa, our only real ally on the entire continent, which were far more stringent than any we were responsible for against Saddam Hussein or Iran. White rule collapsed and the blacks took over the government in 1994.
For the past 16 years, South Africa can proudly proclaim the highest murder rate on the continent, or perhaps I should say the highest recorded murder rate. Most African countries do not keep adequate records, if any. They also have the highest AIDS rate and the standard of living for almost all blacks is actually lower than under apartheid. And now, as you will see in the below article, the government is thinking about seizing the white farmers' land.
Robert Ruark didn't think that the white settlers in the former British colonies discussed above would give in to black rule because they knew that to do so would ultimately lead to disaster. I didn't either. We were both wrong, at least so far as the whites giving up. The predicted disaster mostly certainly did ensue.
The Boers, however, are a different breed. They make up a higher percentage of the total population than whites anywhere else in Africa. Furthermore, unlike the British settlers, they have nowhere to go. They have been there four hundred years. We may see a terrible tragedy unfold in South Africa before it's over.
And for what? So smug Americans and Europeans can sit back and congratulate each other for bringing about black rule? Black rule is rapidly returning the most civilized and progressive country on the continent to the jungle, just as it has in the former British colonies in Africa. Furthermore, the ANC, the ruling political party in South Africa, was funded, founded, and governed by unabashed communists.
The ANC, as well as the much lionized Nelson Mandela, who is a product of the ANC, are no friends of America, yet without us, Mandela would still be languishing in prison.
Personally, I think sub Saharan Africa was better off under colonialism. The colonial powers did not allow the tribes to slaughter each other and saw to it that they were fed during famines. Today, they kill each other by the hundreds of thousands (Rwanda, Nigeria, and the Sudan are examples) and starve by the millions. The only people to profit from "freedom" are the ruthless dictators and tribal chieftains who took the place of the colonial rulers. They live quite well, thank you.
So as we wave good bye to the last civilized country in all of Africa, let's not forget that a large part of the cause of its demise was politicians in this country pandering to the black vote as well as regular folks here who pander to their own need to be relevant by imposing their view of life on others whether they want it or not....which is, I think, precisely the criticism they have leveled at colonialists."
Most of you probably had no idea what the situation in South Africa was, or what the history of the area really was. All you get from the major media sources are stories designed to sway you to the politically and socially correct mind set of those who would have you as their slaves.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
But, life is seldom as it seems.
a wayward act
can throw perceptions off their track.
a tender word
can let us know we’re not alone.
Life is life.
So, on we go
not so sure of what’s in store.
But, fearing less that great unknown.
Enjoying “little” more.
Monday, April 12, 2010
The ploy of Democrats (Those who occupy the positions of leadership) is to equate talking about a problem with actually doing something about it. We now have "Summits" to solve the world's problems. I guess we could call Obama, "The King of Summits." Once the Summit takes place and the participants talk about the problem, it is time to move on to the next one. If anyone in attendance expresses a view contrary to the King and his court, they are deemed to be obstructionist, racist, bigoted homophobes, or in the extreme, Tea Party participants. Remember this from the man who has blocked all record of his past. However, from what has leaked out and what is public record, we know our president is probably not qualified to enter the management training program in the fast food industry.
He certainly cannot express himself when he is off the teleprompter. He was trained by the radical terrorists of the sixties, and he surrounds himself with those who are behind the radical terrorists movements in this world today. Who writes all these complicated unconstitutional bills and edicts? This guy was the head of the Harvard Law Review and has no identifiable written work to prove he was ever there. His off prompter tirades defending all of his vast knowledge and super intellect sound like the babble of schizophrenics I've had the privilege to encounter through the years. Only those who pull the puppet's strings and their complicit publicity arm (The Media) keep telling us how smart he is. I've seen no evidence to support their claims.
His policies are obviously designed to destroy our nation as it was founded and make us a subservient non-entity to the larger New World Order. Fortunately there are quite a few Americans who are not willing to simply walk to the gas chambers.
Obama would have us believe that he cares about this country. However his new nuclear arms accord is diametrically opposed to that thought. He chides Sarah Palin for commenting on the problem when she has so little background for it. Mr. president, a fifth grader has a better understanding of the nuclear arms problem than you do.
He chides Virginia's governor, Bob McDonnell, for not mentioning slavery when announcing Confederate History month in his State. Perhaps he has forgotten the history of his birth father's own people in Africa, the black Muslims were the people who captured and sold other blacks to the slave traders. The only slaves who were addressed during the Civil War by the federal government, under Abraham Lincoln, were those in the Confederate States. The only slaves freed by the Emancipation Proclamation (1863) were those in the Confederate States. Slavery remained in existence after the Civil War in the other states. The issue of slavery was a hot button topic of the day designed to keep Europe, who had recently taken an abolitionist position, from aiding the South. The real cause of the war was northern industrial jealousy, greed, and the trampling of States Rights by the federal government. Better be careful when you point fingers. Obama should have remembered this from his remarks about the police being "stupid" in Cambridge, Mass.
The Democrats (Those currently in leadership) are fearful of the newly awakened American voters. They are lashing out in their usual style by lying, denying, and making ridiculous counter allegations. It won't work. The old go along to get along gang in the Republican party should also be looking for new employment. The Americans I'm encountering are not party line voters. They are made up of thinking Americans from all walks of life and all political parties. We are going to take this country back and we are going to do it real soon.
There is no week nor day nor hour when tyranny may not enter upon this country - if the people
lose their confidence in themselves - and lose their roughness and spirit of defiance.- Walt Whitman
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Let me tell you one thing I learned early in life; "Nothing is free." Someone pays for it. I know many Americans who agree with my position on the unfairness of it all, but at the same time think nothing of taking some bogus credit to purchase a vehicle, or get some energy saving appliance. It's all smoke and mirrors. Those are our tax dollars being passed out like candy by a greedy political machine to buy votes. Our tax dollars. "Well someone is going to get it why not me?" So, your position is, to heck with those of us trying our best to keep our country afloat. Those dollars you took were partially yours( if you pay taxes), but they were also the hard earned property of your friends and neighbors.
Those census adds make me want to puke. The census was established for one thing and one thing only; to determine the number of Representatives to assign to each region of the country by population. That's found in Article One, Section Two of the United States Constitution. It says nothing about redistributing the wealth. It says nothing about providing additional information on the people legally populating the geographical subdivisions of our country. But the adds imply our entire economy is dependent on your filling out the census form. Your personal prosperity quotient, as assigned to you by your benevolent federal government, is determined by the census. But, not one question about your citizenship. Social Security used to advertise itself as a retirement system funded by the government. It's broke now, but I remember when the adds used to have a little jingle that went along with a cartoon of an elderly lady gathering eggs in her hen house. The words were as follows: "I've got a nest egg just for me, and it's my Social Security." At my retirement seminar a representative from the Social Security Administration told us it was never meant to be a retirement system. I reminded him of the little jingle and he claimed never to have heard it. Where did all that money go? It was stolen by politicians to buy votes.
Who is in charge of the credits on Energy Saving Appliances currently in effect until the end of April? The Department of Energy. This behemoth was formed during the Carter years, if I recall correctly, to relieve our dependence on foreign oil. It has grown exponentially through the intervening years, and guess what? We are still dependent on foreign oil. But they want you to forget that by giving you some of your hard earned tax dollars back in the form of an appliance credit. It's not their money, but they are giving it away. Shame on the merchants and citizens who participate in these programs. Folks, we don't have any money. All our tax dollars can't even keep up with the debt we now have and the Democrats are daily lying and buying everything they possibly can with the worthless paper they are printing. Every State should exercise its rights to the sovereign powers granted to it by the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution and refuse to be dictated to by the federal government. The States and the people should hold the federal government accountable and refuse to cycle the money of its citizens through Washington. Washington is only due taxes to pay for the things they are constitutionally permitted to deal with. They have ignored our founding document and robbed our treasury without recompense or penalty. It is time to put a stop to this criminal action and try those who are in charge for treason.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
- Friedrich von Schiller
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Seems like only yesterday I was driving hard to reach the Valley. He beat us here by a few hours. I was able to hold him in the palm of my hand then. Now his legs dangle past my knees when I am called on to lift him from his booster seat. I'm sure it won't be long before the roles are reversed. Have a very happy birthday Aaron. Bebe and Pappy love you very much. I hope I can find my pirate hat.