Yesterday I mentioned reviewing my entries, to prevent repeating myself or beating an issue to boring death. But, some things, I think, need to be kept in focus or they’ll just get swept up in the tide and forgotten.
That brings me to illegal immigration one more time. As previously mentioned, the state of Arizona has enacted its own law to try stemming the flow of Mexicans into the state illegally. Officials say that the risks and costs of illegals to the public and government are huge, brought on by violence, vandalism, tax evasion, medical care, hospitalization, childbirth, as well as the expense of policing, trials, imprisonment and the like.
Now, the federal government has stepped in. The Department of Justice has filed suit in federal court to overturn Arizona’s law, because, according to the DOJ, border protection is a federal matter and tied into several other functions having to do with major crimes and illegal drug sale prevention, among other issues.
On the surface, this seems to be simply a matter of jurisdiction and which laws, state or federal, should apply. However, I don’t think that’s really the case at all. Because, if you go back to the beginning and peruse the facts you find that Arizona’s law enactment came about because it’s pleas for federal help were ignored for a significant amount of time.
Beyond that, the federal government claims that immigration laws have to be consistent for all border states, therefore it’s the federal government’s job to enact them, yet it’s done nothing in that regard while the border deterrents have more holes than Swiss cheese.
Then, along came the president who said that his worry is that more border states will try to enact their own laws if this one stays in place, and there will be inconsistency in border patrol and safety, incursions to individual’s rights and potential havoc. That being the case, he insists that a federal law be enacted regarding all these issues, and oh, by the way, there’ll probably be something in there giving the 12 million illegals already here some kind of citizenship and, of course, voting rights.
As a practical matter, I really can’t blame the president regarding his goals. I think any politician would do whatever possible to try to help himself. But, I don’t think this is so much about what’s being attempted; I think it’s the how. Because it seems Arizona’s been painted into a corner.
They have a huge problem caused by illegals jamming their streets, hospitals and courts, caused by federal failure to protect the border. Yet, when they try to help themselves, the same federals tell them they can’t do that, it’s the federal’s job. Naturally, one could look at these circumstances and say, isn’t a shame how things like this happen. It’s just another example of government ignoring problems until they get out of hand, and then trying to cover the issue up before it embarrasses them completely. But, I don’t think that’s the case here at all.
I believe this situation and its ramifications have been manipulated from the beginning. Because there’s practically no chance that if those here illegally gain the right to vote, they’ll vote any other way than Democrat. That’s a significant number for any other opposing party to deal with.
So, once again, this entry isn’t so much about what politicians do, but about the way that they do it, readily sacrificing the safety, welfare and perhaps lives of citizenry to garner better chances of re-election. And, that, above all else, is their primary (no pun intended) goal. But, as I wrote yesterday, I think the clock really is ticking this time around, and the folks carrying the burden of politician’s purely self-centered arrogance have had enough. And, perhaps, those same politicians will cross the same border the other way, looking for somewhere to hide when they’re all thrown out.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
BloggeRhythms 7/6/2010
Like all writers, I guess, I go back and re-read my entries. To see if I’m getting repetitious or tending toward boring. Doing that this morning, I told myself “look at what your own stuff is illustrating clearly.”
To begin with, we all read, see or hear the same news in a general sense, regardless of the source or slant, and, sooner or later discover the truths. But, at the same time, we do it in increments, a day or so at a time. And, perhaps, the information accumulates in our heads -or maybe not- depending on our level of interest. Then most of us move on to something else. That’s why even my own notations hit me with a jolt now and then…because I wonder why so much of what disturbs us in the world, we actually caused ourselves.
This came quite clear to me in the last few days, thinking and writing about July 4th. And how a band of disgruntled folks went out and began building the greatest nation on the planet. While they accomplished much more than I think even they truly expected, their primary goals were independence and freedom. Especially in regard to benefitting directly from the fruits of their labors and avoidance of paying taxes without representation to those who did absolutely nothing to earn them except, by birth, theft or extortion functioned as the ruling class.
Now its two hundred thirty-four years later, and most hard-working, succesful Americans are in almost precisely the same boat as our founding fathers…except, there’s a major difference in how we got on board this time.
Because, its always been clear that there are those who rise to the top of every endeavor, be it business, social, intellectual, athletic, or otherwise -simply because they possess natural ability and talent, enhanced by the will to succeed. And, as a rule, the remainder are either middling or fall to the bottom, due to ineptitude, laziness or disinterest, it really doesn’t matter which. And, that’s not a supposition or biased opinion; it’s simply how it works.
So, what that result illustrates is that in most walks of life the fewest are those who are the best. Thus, those whom have the most to give are the least in number and most often wind up carrying the rest on their backs. And, when times are good, those hauling all that weight simply grin and bear it, because with so much gained from their efforts, why worry about the scraps?
Yet, sooner or later there must come a time when that bubble has to burst, because the tonnage piles up to where even the best of the best can’t carry that much. And, in a political structure, that leads to revolt.
What form the next uprising will take is yet to be seen, but I believe there’s little doubt its inevibility exists, and that the clock is ticking.
Except this time around, I don’t think the cream of the crop will relocate somewhere else to start over. They’ve work too hard to attain whatever they’ve still got left. So, regardless of how huge the number of takers and thieves has grown to, it looks like they’re the ones that will have to start packing up pretty soon. And, worse than that, if they want to survive, they may eventually even have to -pardon the expression- do some work.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
To begin with, we all read, see or hear the same news in a general sense, regardless of the source or slant, and, sooner or later discover the truths. But, at the same time, we do it in increments, a day or so at a time. And, perhaps, the information accumulates in our heads -or maybe not- depending on our level of interest. Then most of us move on to something else. That’s why even my own notations hit me with a jolt now and then…because I wonder why so much of what disturbs us in the world, we actually caused ourselves.
This came quite clear to me in the last few days, thinking and writing about July 4th. And how a band of disgruntled folks went out and began building the greatest nation on the planet. While they accomplished much more than I think even they truly expected, their primary goals were independence and freedom. Especially in regard to benefitting directly from the fruits of their labors and avoidance of paying taxes without representation to those who did absolutely nothing to earn them except, by birth, theft or extortion functioned as the ruling class.
Now its two hundred thirty-four years later, and most hard-working, succesful Americans are in almost precisely the same boat as our founding fathers…except, there’s a major difference in how we got on board this time.
Because, its always been clear that there are those who rise to the top of every endeavor, be it business, social, intellectual, athletic, or otherwise -simply because they possess natural ability and talent, enhanced by the will to succeed. And, as a rule, the remainder are either middling or fall to the bottom, due to ineptitude, laziness or disinterest, it really doesn’t matter which. And, that’s not a supposition or biased opinion; it’s simply how it works.
So, what that result illustrates is that in most walks of life the fewest are those who are the best. Thus, those whom have the most to give are the least in number and most often wind up carrying the rest on their backs. And, when times are good, those hauling all that weight simply grin and bear it, because with so much gained from their efforts, why worry about the scraps?
Yet, sooner or later there must come a time when that bubble has to burst, because the tonnage piles up to where even the best of the best can’t carry that much. And, in a political structure, that leads to revolt.
What form the next uprising will take is yet to be seen, but I believe there’s little doubt its inevibility exists, and that the clock is ticking.
Except this time around, I don’t think the cream of the crop will relocate somewhere else to start over. They’ve work too hard to attain whatever they’ve still got left. So, regardless of how huge the number of takers and thieves has grown to, it looks like they’re the ones that will have to start packing up pretty soon. And, worse than that, if they want to survive, they may eventually even have to -pardon the expression- do some work.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
Monday, July 5, 2010
BloggeRhythms 7/5/2010
I'm not the best predictor in the world. If I was, I'd have a much better showing for the days I spent at the trotters. But, sometimes my guesses are right on the nose. And yesterday proved that point.
We've spent many Fourth of July's at the home of one of our closest friends, and traveled there yesterday once more. My premonition was that the day would be perfect, and it was. And, if things can be better than perfect our day met that measure too.
Aside from the fact that my pal's home is a great place by itself, large rooms, huge kitchen, expansive windows everywhere, two decks, one large, one smaller -there's the location. This place is on a strip of land on the north shore of Long Island in a community having only 254 homes all told. The total population consists of 184 families and 625 people. Of that small group of homes about 40 of them are on Long Island Sound. My friend's place is right in the middle of that row of residences, and his back yard is a sandy beach leading right down to the water.
Since the weather was magnificent, warm but with no humidity and light breezes off the sound, after our arrival, I never left the beach til' dusk. And, I must say there's something very pleasant about lolling next to the water for hours and only having to wave toward the house when you need another cold one.
The house itself was filled with people, many of whom brought food and drink, so whatever your pleasure it was likely there. From the traditional raw clams and steamers, to six foot hero's, seafood and green salads, dips, chips, salsas, pasta dishes, stir-fries, burgers and dogs, and even grilled racks of ribs, then countless desserts. Nobody went home hungry.
Toward the end of the afternoon a tugboat pushed a barge along the water, three hundred yards or so out from the beach, stopping midway of the row of beachfront houses. Around dusk, bonfires were lit up and down the shore. Then at twenty past nine in the evening the skies erupted. Because the barge was full of fireworks, putting on an incredible show. Likely, the event was also seen by folks in Darien, Norwalk, and Westport Connecticut, directly across Long Island Sound.
All in all, as I indicated from the start, I've been to these celebrations often, so I anticipated a marvelous day, and that's exactly what I got. But, there's another side to this story.
Obviously -I think- my friend lives where he does because he's earned the right through significant business success. And, the same goes for his neighbors. In fact, for many of them their beach houses are second homes, used only for summer weekends and perhaps, vacations. Though, likely they travel other places to really get away. Nonetheless, the fourth has always been a festive day up and down the beach.
Most all of the residents use the fourth to kick off their summer. Huge gatherings of invitees normally fill the homes and, naturally, the beach itself. Softball games, football tosses, Frisbees, kites, even horse-shoe pitching. All kinds of toys in the water, floats, catamarans, kayaks, jet skis, goggles, masks and snorkels, you name it. Later in the day, two nearby neighbors brought in music -one a disco group, the other a six piece live band. So, music, songs and laughter filled the air.
But not this year.
The house to my friends left had, by my guess, perhaps twenty percent of the usual guests. There were no throngs up and down the wide beach as there have been in the past. All told, the scene was relatively quiet, especially since there was no music at all from either of the homes usually providing it. They, it seems, decided this year was time to thin the crowds that were "getting out of hand."
And, if that's true, crowd-thinning was the goal, they both did an excellent job, because there surely weren't any crowds to speak of. As for my friend's relatively new immediate neighbors to the right, they didn't even show up themselves, so for the first time to my recollection, that house was completely dark.
So, what does all this paring down really mean? Unfortunately, I think the answer can be found by flipping a few pages of the Wall Street Journal, or tuning in Fox business news. Because, in prior years I never got the sense anyone having a party in a home on that beach cared for a second how many folks showed up. There was always room for more. But today, it's a little different. Because aside from all those fireworks blowing up, so are their investments -and those huge beach parties are very, very expensive.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
We've spent many Fourth of July's at the home of one of our closest friends, and traveled there yesterday once more. My premonition was that the day would be perfect, and it was. And, if things can be better than perfect our day met that measure too.
Aside from the fact that my pal's home is a great place by itself, large rooms, huge kitchen, expansive windows everywhere, two decks, one large, one smaller -there's the location. This place is on a strip of land on the north shore of Long Island in a community having only 254 homes all told. The total population consists of 184 families and 625 people. Of that small group of homes about 40 of them are on Long Island Sound. My friend's place is right in the middle of that row of residences, and his back yard is a sandy beach leading right down to the water.
Since the weather was magnificent, warm but with no humidity and light breezes off the sound, after our arrival, I never left the beach til' dusk. And, I must say there's something very pleasant about lolling next to the water for hours and only having to wave toward the house when you need another cold one.
The house itself was filled with people, many of whom brought food and drink, so whatever your pleasure it was likely there. From the traditional raw clams and steamers, to six foot hero's, seafood and green salads, dips, chips, salsas, pasta dishes, stir-fries, burgers and dogs, and even grilled racks of ribs, then countless desserts. Nobody went home hungry.
Toward the end of the afternoon a tugboat pushed a barge along the water, three hundred yards or so out from the beach, stopping midway of the row of beachfront houses. Around dusk, bonfires were lit up and down the shore. Then at twenty past nine in the evening the skies erupted. Because the barge was full of fireworks, putting on an incredible show. Likely, the event was also seen by folks in Darien, Norwalk, and Westport Connecticut, directly across Long Island Sound.
All in all, as I indicated from the start, I've been to these celebrations often, so I anticipated a marvelous day, and that's exactly what I got. But, there's another side to this story.
Obviously -I think- my friend lives where he does because he's earned the right through significant business success. And, the same goes for his neighbors. In fact, for many of them their beach houses are second homes, used only for summer weekends and perhaps, vacations. Though, likely they travel other places to really get away. Nonetheless, the fourth has always been a festive day up and down the beach.
Most all of the residents use the fourth to kick off their summer. Huge gatherings of invitees normally fill the homes and, naturally, the beach itself. Softball games, football tosses, Frisbees, kites, even horse-shoe pitching. All kinds of toys in the water, floats, catamarans, kayaks, jet skis, goggles, masks and snorkels, you name it. Later in the day, two nearby neighbors brought in music -one a disco group, the other a six piece live band. So, music, songs and laughter filled the air.
But not this year.
The house to my friends left had, by my guess, perhaps twenty percent of the usual guests. There were no throngs up and down the wide beach as there have been in the past. All told, the scene was relatively quiet, especially since there was no music at all from either of the homes usually providing it. They, it seems, decided this year was time to thin the crowds that were "getting out of hand."
And, if that's true, crowd-thinning was the goal, they both did an excellent job, because there surely weren't any crowds to speak of. As for my friend's relatively new immediate neighbors to the right, they didn't even show up themselves, so for the first time to my recollection, that house was completely dark.
So, what does all this paring down really mean? Unfortunately, I think the answer can be found by flipping a few pages of the Wall Street Journal, or tuning in Fox business news. Because, in prior years I never got the sense anyone having a party in a home on that beach cared for a second how many folks showed up. There was always room for more. But today, it's a little different. Because aside from all those fireworks blowing up, so are their investments -and those huge beach parties are very, very expensive.
That's it for today folks.
Adios
Sunday, July 4, 2010
BloggeRhythms 7/4/2010
July 4th, the day we celebrate our independence from the imperious Brits, who taxed and penalized our founders so unmercifully they finally forced them to revolt.
The country those brave, industrious freedom seekers began grew to become the most powerful nation on Earth. Not only outpacing all others, but reaching a point where the British themselves often ask their recalcitrant offspring for help.
Looking back at what was achieved over our relatively short history is almost beyond belief. Starting with nothing but their bodies, minds and a fervent desire to succeed, a nation was built that wanted for nothing. Between our shores and borders everything man could ever want could be found and reaped.
And, then…something changed. Doers, movers, and shakers were somehow replaced by hordes of takers, hangers-on and frauds. Hands that were once used to work now reach into other folks pockets, stealing whatever they can find there. And, leaders not only no longer lead, they don’t follow either, instead caring only about what they can do for themselves.
So, what has become of this once all powerful, self resourceful nation? Well, the resources are still there as plentiful as ever, maybe more-so. I doubt anyone will find out soon what the truth is though, because group after group will complain and bicker about what harm’s being caused by our trying to help ourselves.
And since we must keep our air pristine, our waters clear and our forests overfull with trees we’ll keep making Arab oil Sultan’s richer, import our cars from Japan and Korea, bring our food in from Mexico and overseas and our lumber from Canada. Our clothes come from nations whose names can’t be pronounced and our business calls are answered in India. At times it seems the only thing we really make here is noise.
But, I’m still going to go out this afternoon and celebrate my independence. I’ll sit on the beach at my friend’s house, sip some beer and at dusk I’ll watch a barge-full of fireworks go off. And the fireworks are really good ones, they’re made in China.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
The country those brave, industrious freedom seekers began grew to become the most powerful nation on Earth. Not only outpacing all others, but reaching a point where the British themselves often ask their recalcitrant offspring for help.
Looking back at what was achieved over our relatively short history is almost beyond belief. Starting with nothing but their bodies, minds and a fervent desire to succeed, a nation was built that wanted for nothing. Between our shores and borders everything man could ever want could be found and reaped.
And, then…something changed. Doers, movers, and shakers were somehow replaced by hordes of takers, hangers-on and frauds. Hands that were once used to work now reach into other folks pockets, stealing whatever they can find there. And, leaders not only no longer lead, they don’t follow either, instead caring only about what they can do for themselves.
So, what has become of this once all powerful, self resourceful nation? Well, the resources are still there as plentiful as ever, maybe more-so. I doubt anyone will find out soon what the truth is though, because group after group will complain and bicker about what harm’s being caused by our trying to help ourselves.
And since we must keep our air pristine, our waters clear and our forests overfull with trees we’ll keep making Arab oil Sultan’s richer, import our cars from Japan and Korea, bring our food in from Mexico and overseas and our lumber from Canada. Our clothes come from nations whose names can’t be pronounced and our business calls are answered in India. At times it seems the only thing we really make here is noise.
But, I’m still going to go out this afternoon and celebrate my independence. I’ll sit on the beach at my friend’s house, sip some beer and at dusk I’ll watch a barge-full of fireworks go off. And the fireworks are really good ones, they’re made in China.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
Saturday, July 3, 2010
BloggeRhythms 7/3/2010
I wanted to mention the following story yesterday, only for the simple purpose of giving myself credit for seeing through the sham bill the house Democrats used to get funding for escalating our efforts in Afghanistan, while those same politicians ran on platforms promising to bring all our troops home. But, if I did stick it in, the blog would have been four pages long.
What they did was to not only wrap the additional war costs in a convoluted bill covering all sorts of other things congressfolks wanted, they buried the war costs so far down they didn’t even have to mention them when voting.
In effect, when the House debated a “supplemental spending bill” to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they never cast a single, direct vote on those issues. Most of the debate focused on funds for teachers, Pell Grants, summer jobs and three different ways to extract U.S. forces from Afghanistan. And that’s what happens when so-called leadership is reluctant to vote on something in a contested election year. Their way out is to “vote” on something else.
Since September 11th, Congress approved a series of “emergency supplemental spending bills” paying for military operations overseas, starting in Afghanistan and then Iraq. They know they can’t vote against these packages because they’d be portrayed as “Anti-American” or “voting against the troops.
War bills were easier shortly after 9-11, when Republicans ran the White House and both houses of Congress. But, Democrats control all three today and are primarily anti-war to start with. And though a troop drawdown is underway in Iraq, President Obama did, it seems, promise to focus more attention on Afghanistan. The U.S. and NATO added 40,000 troops there just last year.
But many liberal Democrats want the U.S. to devote its resources instead to education, jobs and other “pressing” social programs as usual. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said, “Every dollar we spend, every life we waste is a waste. It does not enhance the security of the United States.”
So Nancy Pelosi faced headaches as the Pentagon demanded the money and liberals prepared to say no. “There is unease in our caucus about Afghanistan,” she said last week. Even one of her top lieutenants, Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) said, “A lot of us very much want to vote no on spending the money and staying there. If we were to win, how can you tell?”
So Democratic leaders had to craft a way to pass the bill, yet not vote directly on the legislation. Pelosi typically dodged when reporters pressed her on what this package could look like, saying, “When the Rules Committee completes its work, we will see what form it will be in. But suffice to say, whatever form it is in, whatever actions we take, our men and women in uniform on the ground will not be lacking in what they need.”
The bill’s “form” was unique, parliamentary in nature, confounding aides, journalists and members trying to decipher exactly what the House was doing. The Senate had already approved the war money in May, so it dispatched the bill to the House. And since the war money was in that package, the House now had a great head start.
The bill title didn’t even mention Afghanistan, Iraq, the military, the Pentagon or the troops, but instead was called “Making emergency supplemental appropriations for disaster relief and summer jobs for fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.”
Then, the war issue never went to a definitive, up or down vote for passage, nor was there an individual vote on it. Instead, there was a specific vote to add funds for teachers, Pell Grants, summertime jobs and covering natural disasters.
Pelosi later had to appease those opposing the war. Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-CA) amendment required a withdrawal from Afghanistan. Another would have stricken money for the operation. And others proposed asking the president to create a withdrawal timetable. In short, Congress approved a bill to continue the war while also voting on three proposals to end it.
I guess what it’s come down to is that politicians are so used to lying to constituents and screwing them without compunction; it’s a quite natural occurrence to turn around and screw their political allies and friends as well.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
What they did was to not only wrap the additional war costs in a convoluted bill covering all sorts of other things congressfolks wanted, they buried the war costs so far down they didn’t even have to mention them when voting.
In effect, when the House debated a “supplemental spending bill” to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they never cast a single, direct vote on those issues. Most of the debate focused on funds for teachers, Pell Grants, summer jobs and three different ways to extract U.S. forces from Afghanistan. And that’s what happens when so-called leadership is reluctant to vote on something in a contested election year. Their way out is to “vote” on something else.
Since September 11th, Congress approved a series of “emergency supplemental spending bills” paying for military operations overseas, starting in Afghanistan and then Iraq. They know they can’t vote against these packages because they’d be portrayed as “Anti-American” or “voting against the troops.
War bills were easier shortly after 9-11, when Republicans ran the White House and both houses of Congress. But, Democrats control all three today and are primarily anti-war to start with. And though a troop drawdown is underway in Iraq, President Obama did, it seems, promise to focus more attention on Afghanistan. The U.S. and NATO added 40,000 troops there just last year.
But many liberal Democrats want the U.S. to devote its resources instead to education, jobs and other “pressing” social programs as usual. Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) said, “Every dollar we spend, every life we waste is a waste. It does not enhance the security of the United States.”
So Nancy Pelosi faced headaches as the Pentagon demanded the money and liberals prepared to say no. “There is unease in our caucus about Afghanistan,” she said last week. Even one of her top lieutenants, Rules Committee Chairwoman Louise Slaughter (D-NY) said, “A lot of us very much want to vote no on spending the money and staying there. If we were to win, how can you tell?”
So Democratic leaders had to craft a way to pass the bill, yet not vote directly on the legislation. Pelosi typically dodged when reporters pressed her on what this package could look like, saying, “When the Rules Committee completes its work, we will see what form it will be in. But suffice to say, whatever form it is in, whatever actions we take, our men and women in uniform on the ground will not be lacking in what they need.”
The bill’s “form” was unique, parliamentary in nature, confounding aides, journalists and members trying to decipher exactly what the House was doing. The Senate had already approved the war money in May, so it dispatched the bill to the House. And since the war money was in that package, the House now had a great head start.
The bill title didn’t even mention Afghanistan, Iraq, the military, the Pentagon or the troops, but instead was called “Making emergency supplemental appropriations for disaster relief and summer jobs for fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, and for other purposes.”
Then, the war issue never went to a definitive, up or down vote for passage, nor was there an individual vote on it. Instead, there was a specific vote to add funds for teachers, Pell Grants, summertime jobs and covering natural disasters.
Pelosi later had to appease those opposing the war. Rep. Barbara Lee’s (D-CA) amendment required a withdrawal from Afghanistan. Another would have stricken money for the operation. And others proposed asking the president to create a withdrawal timetable. In short, Congress approved a bill to continue the war while also voting on three proposals to end it.
I guess what it’s come down to is that politicians are so used to lying to constituents and screwing them without compunction; it’s a quite natural occurrence to turn around and screw their political allies and friends as well.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
Friday, July 2, 2010
BloggeRhythms 7/2/2010
I read the following on Fox news website. I copied in the first two paragraphs, to be certain I got it right and ascertain that I hadn’t made the stuff up. But, according to Fox:
“Mexico gets a say in one of the lawsuits challenging Arizona's immigration enforcement law. A U.S. federal judge on Thursday granted Mexico's request to be allowed to file a legal brief supporting the challenge. That means the judge will consider the brief Mexico submitted previously.
Mexico says it wants to defend its citizens' rights and that the law would lead to racial profiling and hinder trade and tourism. It also says the law would hinder work against drug trafficking and related violence.”
This all has to do with Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, signing the law on April 23 and changes on April 30. Lawyers are defending the law in court. But, last week, Brewer stated she was "very disappointed" to learn of Mexico's filing, reiterating that "Arizona's immigration enforcement laws are both reasonable and constitutional."
Meanwhile, until 2008 Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense. Anyone arrested for violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. That was changed in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but the law still reads an awful lot like Arizona's.
Arizona's policy, which Mexican President Felipe Calderon derided during a recent U.S. trip as "discriminatory," states police can't randomly stop people and demand papers, and the law prohibits racial profiling. Yet, Mexican law, “demands foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues."
Meanwhile, Amnesty International recently issued a report claiming illegal immigrants in Mexico -typically from Central America- face abuse, rape and kidnappings, and that Mexican police do little to stop it. When illegal immigration was a criminal offense in Mexico, officials were known to seek bribes from suspects to keep them out of jail. But Mexico said it has a legitimate interest in defending its citizens' rights and that Arizona's law would lead to racial profiling, hinder trade and tourism, and strain the countries' work on combating drug trafficking and related violence.
So, as I understand all this, if you illegally migrate into Mexico, you get all kinds of grief, including fines and stays in prison. But If Mexicans do the same in the USA, Mexico thinks that’s alright and illegals should be left alone. That leads me to believe that perhaps the Mexicans are just paving the way so that Central Americans can walk right through Mexico and cross an unmanned border into the United States, funneling their problems to us.
The saddest thing about it is that Nancy Pelosi and the president either don’t understand what’s going, or perhaps, think it’s alright.
What a country.
As a footnote, the House of Representatives OK'd a $60B bill Thursday to pay for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and fund a variety of other programs like education, Pell Grants, natural disaster relief and relief efforts following the earthquake in Haiti.
Though many Democrats opposed the bill, concerned about the length of the conflict in Afghanistan, President Obama threatened to veto the package if House liberals tried to tie his hands with an amendment to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. A senior presidential advisor said, “If the final bill presented to the president contains provisions that would undermine his ability as commander in chief to conduct military operations in Afghanistan, the president’s senior advisers would recommend a veto.”
I threw this in simply as a reminder because the president was the guy who said the wars were purely driven by greed and a quest for oil by fat cat Republicans and their friends. He campaign promised to have the troops on their way home the day after his inauguration. But now that he's in office he's demanding the right to keep troops in Afghanistan for as long as he likes, with no restrictions at all. So, how come the press never mentions that?
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
“Mexico gets a say in one of the lawsuits challenging Arizona's immigration enforcement law. A U.S. federal judge on Thursday granted Mexico's request to be allowed to file a legal brief supporting the challenge. That means the judge will consider the brief Mexico submitted previously.
Mexico says it wants to defend its citizens' rights and that the law would lead to racial profiling and hinder trade and tourism. It also says the law would hinder work against drug trafficking and related violence.”
This all has to do with Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, signing the law on April 23 and changes on April 30. Lawyers are defending the law in court. But, last week, Brewer stated she was "very disappointed" to learn of Mexico's filing, reiterating that "Arizona's immigration enforcement laws are both reasonable and constitutional."
Meanwhile, until 2008 Mexican law made illegal immigration a criminal offense. Anyone arrested for violation could be fined, imprisoned for up to two years and deported. That was changed in 2008 to make illegal immigration a civil violation like it is in the United States, but the law still reads an awful lot like Arizona's.
Arizona's policy, which Mexican President Felipe Calderon derided during a recent U.S. trip as "discriminatory," states police can't randomly stop people and demand papers, and the law prohibits racial profiling. Yet, Mexican law, “demands foreigners prove their legal presence in the country before attending to any issues."
Meanwhile, Amnesty International recently issued a report claiming illegal immigrants in Mexico -typically from Central America- face abuse, rape and kidnappings, and that Mexican police do little to stop it. When illegal immigration was a criminal offense in Mexico, officials were known to seek bribes from suspects to keep them out of jail. But Mexico said it has a legitimate interest in defending its citizens' rights and that Arizona's law would lead to racial profiling, hinder trade and tourism, and strain the countries' work on combating drug trafficking and related violence.
So, as I understand all this, if you illegally migrate into Mexico, you get all kinds of grief, including fines and stays in prison. But If Mexicans do the same in the USA, Mexico thinks that’s alright and illegals should be left alone. That leads me to believe that perhaps the Mexicans are just paving the way so that Central Americans can walk right through Mexico and cross an unmanned border into the United States, funneling their problems to us.
The saddest thing about it is that Nancy Pelosi and the president either don’t understand what’s going, or perhaps, think it’s alright.
What a country.
As a footnote, the House of Representatives OK'd a $60B bill Thursday to pay for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and fund a variety of other programs like education, Pell Grants, natural disaster relief and relief efforts following the earthquake in Haiti.
Though many Democrats opposed the bill, concerned about the length of the conflict in Afghanistan, President Obama threatened to veto the package if House liberals tried to tie his hands with an amendment to withdraw troops from Afghanistan. A senior presidential advisor said, “If the final bill presented to the president contains provisions that would undermine his ability as commander in chief to conduct military operations in Afghanistan, the president’s senior advisers would recommend a veto.”
I threw this in simply as a reminder because the president was the guy who said the wars were purely driven by greed and a quest for oil by fat cat Republicans and their friends. He campaign promised to have the troops on their way home the day after his inauguration. But now that he's in office he's demanding the right to keep troops in Afghanistan for as long as he likes, with no restrictions at all. So, how come the press never mentions that?
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
Thursday, July 1, 2010
BloggeRhythms 7/1/2010
As I understand the story, this nation was founded by folks who wanted freedom so much they were willing to travel to an unknown place, thousands of miles away and start from scratch. All they began with was their brains and brawn and willingness to work. In time, their founding effort grew to become the greatest country on Earth.
From the beginning, and in view of their own efforts and sacrifice, they kept the entry doors open to all others who wished to come here too. Provided that those others went through the process of immigration, and once accepted, agreed to play by the rules. For the most part, the mixes and blends of arrivals into the system proved beneficial to all.
Jumping ahead to today, while the process of legal immigration remains in place, there’s another wrinkle. A continual flow of people tries to circumvent the system by entering illegally, mostly from Mexico, to date amounting to upwards of 12 million people.
If those were just folks showing up, melting into the pot and paying their way, as done by the others before them, there likely would be no problem. But, it seems, there’s been a slight change in perspective. These people don’t want to meld into our system at all. Their goal is earning income however that might be done, legally or not, no contribution to any kind of taxes and the grabbing of public and social services with both hands, especially from our medical system.
In order to try to cope with the overwhelming costs and dangers caused by illegal immigration, the state of Arizona recently passed a new law, requiring those suspected of an infraction to prove who they are. All this law really says in effect is, if you’re a citizen of the U.S. or are here legally otherwise, prove it. For most, that’s a thirty second chore.
But now the ABA and ACLU have jumped into the fray, by objecting to Arizona’s new law. They say, “if the law is implemented, it will promote racial profiling, lead to unlawful and unreasonable detentions and cause increased burdens and new obligations for the state's indigent defense system, courts and prosecutors.”
So what are we supposed to do? Walk away, stick our heads in the sand and pay the costs of illegals because profiling is a “no-no.” That’s ridiculous. But so are the ABA and ACLU on most occasions.
So, how about this. Why don’t both organizations back down a bit, give the new law a chance and see what happens before they shoot off their mouths full of what-ifs? Because, let’s suppose for a moment that the combination of law and beefed up border patrols really does reduce illegal immigration. Maybe the word will go out that the USA isn’t so easy to breach anymore, and maybe some illegals in jail will scare many others off. Then there won’t be this overwhelming number of folks to arrest or clog up the courts.
And I know this next one is a tough one for the ABA and ACLU to consider, but for once maybe they could both do something for their fellow citizens by keeping quiet instead of representing every downtrodden cheat and illegal crook they can find.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
From the beginning, and in view of their own efforts and sacrifice, they kept the entry doors open to all others who wished to come here too. Provided that those others went through the process of immigration, and once accepted, agreed to play by the rules. For the most part, the mixes and blends of arrivals into the system proved beneficial to all.
Jumping ahead to today, while the process of legal immigration remains in place, there’s another wrinkle. A continual flow of people tries to circumvent the system by entering illegally, mostly from Mexico, to date amounting to upwards of 12 million people.
If those were just folks showing up, melting into the pot and paying their way, as done by the others before them, there likely would be no problem. But, it seems, there’s been a slight change in perspective. These people don’t want to meld into our system at all. Their goal is earning income however that might be done, legally or not, no contribution to any kind of taxes and the grabbing of public and social services with both hands, especially from our medical system.
In order to try to cope with the overwhelming costs and dangers caused by illegal immigration, the state of Arizona recently passed a new law, requiring those suspected of an infraction to prove who they are. All this law really says in effect is, if you’re a citizen of the U.S. or are here legally otherwise, prove it. For most, that’s a thirty second chore.
But now the ABA and ACLU have jumped into the fray, by objecting to Arizona’s new law. They say, “if the law is implemented, it will promote racial profiling, lead to unlawful and unreasonable detentions and cause increased burdens and new obligations for the state's indigent defense system, courts and prosecutors.”
So what are we supposed to do? Walk away, stick our heads in the sand and pay the costs of illegals because profiling is a “no-no.” That’s ridiculous. But so are the ABA and ACLU on most occasions.
So, how about this. Why don’t both organizations back down a bit, give the new law a chance and see what happens before they shoot off their mouths full of what-ifs? Because, let’s suppose for a moment that the combination of law and beefed up border patrols really does reduce illegal immigration. Maybe the word will go out that the USA isn’t so easy to breach anymore, and maybe some illegals in jail will scare many others off. Then there won’t be this overwhelming number of folks to arrest or clog up the courts.
And I know this next one is a tough one for the ABA and ACLU to consider, but for once maybe they could both do something for their fellow citizens by keeping quiet instead of representing every downtrodden cheat and illegal crook they can find.
That’s it for today folks.
Adios
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)