All Gave Some, Some Gave All. Never Forget.

In Flanders Fields

By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918) Canadian Army

In Flanders Fields the poppies blow

Between the crosses row on row,

That mark our place; and in the sky

The larks, still bravely singing, fly

Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago

We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,

Loved and were loved, and now we lie

In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:

To you from failing hands we throw

The torch; be yours to hold it high.

If ye break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow

In Flanders fields.

World Center of Speed

Not a One in a Million Shot

To listen to the media and the politicians, you would think the BP oil platform that is leaking oil is the only rig in the Gulf of Mexico.

Not true.

Not by a long shot.

Check it out:

The big thing to remember here is that these platforms have been there for years, mostly with no mishaps.

And, that each one of these platforms seeps just a very small amount of oil as part of the normal drilling process.

But what's more important is that the earth itself has thousand of natural fissures and cracks in its mantle that routinely spill extremely large quantities of oil, and that it's a natural phenomenon in those cases.

Which is why we should be allowing drilling where it is somewhat less environmentally risky, here on land.

And, why we should be pursuing the development of oil extraction from oil shale, opil sand, and existing land based wells that could uses steam extraction.

But, our politicians have known that for years.

Note: The Oldtimer is off to the world center of speed for a few days, so posts will be intermittent until his return.

The President Authorizes the Murder of Americans

That headline is NOT hyperbole.

It's a reality that most Americans could never believe would ever occur.

But occur it has, and it's getting precious little discussion, outrage, or even coverage by the major media outlets.

The notion that the government can, in effect, execute one of its own citizens far from a combat zone, with no judicial process and based on secret intelligence, makes most legal authorities deeply uneasy.

And it should make every American outraged.

Because as noted above, there is absolutely no due process, and no accountability for the precedent it sets.

It doesn't matter who the person is, or what crimes they may have committed, the America I know and love follows the law, follows the Constitution, and guarantees its citizens rights.

If not, then bring all our soldiers, sailors, and airmen home, because there is nothing worth fighting for.

The person in question is the American-born radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, who is hiding in Yemen.

Clearly, not a nice person, but one who has American citizenship nonetheless.

To even eavesdrop on this terrorism suspect,  intelligence agencies would have to get a court warrant.

To do that, they would have to follow the law, follow the Constitution, and proceed through due process.

That's what warrants are for --- to insure our rights are protected.

But that's inconvenient, intrusive, and too much of a bother for the O-man's administration.

So instead, they trageted him for death and authorized his killing --- with no due process.

Designating him for death, as C.I.A. officials did early this year with the National Security Council’s approval, requires no judicial review.

No pesky preservation of rights.

Administration officials take the view that no legal or constitutional rights can protect Mr. Awlaki, a charismatic preacher who has said it is a religious duty to attack the United States and who the C.I.A. believes is actively plotting violence.

The attempted bombing of Times Square on May 1 is the latest of more than a dozen terrorist plots in the West that investigators believe were inspired in part by Mr. Awlaki’s rhetoric.

Believe, but haven't proven.


President Obama, who campaigned for the presidency against George W. Bush-era interrogation and detention practices, has implicitly invited moral and legal scrutiny of his own policies.

But like the debate over torture during the Bush administration, public discussion of what officials call targeted killing has been limited by the secrecy of the C.I.A. drone program.

Representative John F. Tierney, who on April 28 held the first Congressional hearing focused on the lawfulness of targeted killing, said he was determined to air the contentious questions publicly and possibly seek legislation to govern such operations.

The reported targeting of Mr. Awlaki “certainly raises the question of what rights a citizen has and what steps must be taken before he’s put on the list,” said Mr. Tierney, Democrat of Massachusetts and chairman of a House subcommittee on national security.

But not everyone is so concerned.

“American citizenship doesn’t give you carte blanche to wage war against your own country,” said a counterterrorism official who discussed the classified program on condition of anonymity. “If you cast your lot with its enemies, you may well share their fate.”

Harold Koh, the State Department’s legal adviser, said in a March 24 speech the drone strikes against Al Qaeda and its allies were lawful as part of the military action authorized by Congress after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, as well as under the general principle of self-defense.
 
By those rules, he said, such targeted killing was not assassination, which is banned by executive order.


But the disclosure last month by news organizations that Mr. Awlaki, 39, had been added to the C.I.A. kill list shifted the terms of the legal debate in several ways.

He is located far from hostilities in Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the perpetrators of 9/11 are believed to be hiding.

He is alleged to be affiliated with a Yemeni branch of Al Qaeda.

Intelligence analysts believe that only recently he began to help plot strikes, including the failed attempt to bomb an airliner on Dec. 25.

Most significantly, he is an American, born in New Mexico, arguably protected by the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee not to be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”

In a traditional war, anyone allied with the enemy, regardless of citizenship, is a legitimate target; German-Americans who fought with the Nazis in World War II were given no special treatment.

But this administration, and those before it, have refused to classify the war on terror as a traditional war, or even make an official declaration of war, so those provisions are not in effect.

“Congress has protected Awlaki’s cellphone calls,” said Vicki Divoll, a former C.I.A. lawyer who now teaches at the United States Naval Academy. “But it has not provided any protections for his life."

"That makes no sense.”

"Some judicial process should be required before the government kills an American away from a traditional battlefield." she said.

It's amazing that the media is all up in arms about the Arizona immigration bil because some illegal might have his rights infringed upon and be sent homw to Mexico, but here we have a total stripping of rights with no due process, and a targeted assination, and nobody cares.

What if a member of the press becomes a target?

Do you think they might be outraged then?

Do you think maybe just a little judicial review and due process might be a reasonable expectation?

Apparently not.

A former C.I.A. lawyer, John Radsan, said prior judicial review of additions to the target list might be unconstitutional. “That sort of review goes to the core of presidential power,” he said.

Actually, it goes a bit deeper than that.

It goes directly to the protection guaranteed American citizens by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

And the last I checked, Presidential powers don't include shredding that document.


The Framers of the Bill of Rights did not purport to "create" rights. Rather, they designed the Bill of Rights to prohibit our Government from infringing rights and liberties presumed to be preexisting. ---- Justice William J. Brennan, 1982

No man is above the law and no man below it. ~Theodore Roosevelt


 
PORK OF THE DAY:
$380,000 by Senate appropriator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) for construction of a recreation and fairgrounds area in Kotzebue. That works out to $123.30 for each of Kotzebue’s 3,082 residents. Perhaps the town should have used the approximately $350,000 it spent on lobbying since 2000 for the fairgrounds, saving federal taxpayers a bundle. Even the Anchorage Daily News was outraged by the project: “The federal dollar that the stimulus might have spent on recreation projects is no different from the federal dollar spent on recreation in the pending appropriations bill. It all comes from the same pot of borrowed money.”

Eric Holder's Credibility Gap

Everybody's talking about the recently passed (and modified) Arizona immigration law.

Media talking heads, local politicians, members of various civic groups, and yes, even the Attorney General of the United States.

And just what has Attorney General Eric Holder had to say about the Arizona law?

"I think that [Arizona's] law is an unfortunate one," he said.

"We are considering all of our options. One possibility is filing a lawsuit," Holder told NBC's "Meet the Press."

Possible grounds for the lawsuit would be whether the Arizona law could lead to civil rights violations.

"I'm very concerned about the wedge it could draw between communities that law enforcement is supposed to serve and those of us in law enforcement," Holder said.  

Holder told ABC's "This Week" program that one concern about the Arizona law is that "you'll end up in a situation where people are racially profiled, and that could lead to a wedge drawn between certain communities and law enforcement, which leads to the problem of people in those communities not willing to interact with people in law enforcement, not willing to share information, not willing to be witnesses where law enforcement needs them."

Holder appeared on ABC's "This Week" and stated that he "understands the frustration that led to the law being passed, but we could potentially get on a slippery slope where people will be picked on because of how they look as opposed to what they have done."

Holder has been quoted in the past as stating that "America is a nation of cowards because it has refused to honestly confront the issue of race."

When asked if he still holds that view, Holder stated that "I think it's changed a bit. I still don't think we're at a place where we need to be. I think that we need to talk to each other more about race and the racial things that divide us especially when one looks at the demographic changes that this nation is about to undergo."

Holder clearly has strong opinions about the Arizona law, and its implications on American society.

And, quite frankly, that's exactly what a U.S. Attorney General should have --- strong opinions, particularly about things regarding legislation.

That's his job --- his primary area of responsibility.

But, the Washington Post reported today that:

"Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr., who has been critical of Arizona's new immigration law, said Thursday he hasn't yet read the law and is going by what he's read in newspapers or seen on television."

"Mr. Holder is conducting a review of the law, at President Obama's request, to see if the federal government should challenge it in court."

"He said he expects he will read the law by the time his staff briefs him on their conclusions."

"I've just expressed concerns on the basis of what I've heard about the law."

"But I'm not in a position to say at this point, not having read the law, not having had the chance to interact with people are doing the review, exactly what my position is," Mr. Holder told the House Judiciary Committee.

Excuse me?

You haven't read the freaking law?

You haven't managed to find time to read the ten whole pages of the revised Arizona law before you went on national television and shot your mouth off?

Everything you've been spouting to the media is based solely on "what he's read in newspapers or seen on television." ?

You're kidding, right?

You're "not in a position to say at this point exactly what my position is" ?

Isn't that exactly what you've been doing, to everybody who will listen?

You're out making public comments as the U.S, Atorney General on a law that is going to be a focal point of future immigration policy  and States Rights issues in the country, and you haven't even read the law?

Let me go back to what I said before:

"that's exactly what a U.S. Attorney General should have --- strong opinions, particularly about things regarding legislation. That's his job --- his primary area of responsibility."

Holder's got some legal chops, some good credentials.

But he just lost all his credibility.

Rep. Ted Poe, who had questioned Mr. Holder about the law, wondered how he could have those opinions if he hadn't yet read the legislation.

"It's hard for me to understand how you would have concerns about something being unconstitutional if you haven't even read the law," the Texas Republican told the attorney general.

You're not alone, Congressman.... you're not alone.

So, in the future, Mr. Holder, until you've actually read the legislation you're commenting on, STFU.

"Well, you know, the evidence develops, and I think we have to always try to be careful to make sure that the statements that we make are consistent with the evidence that we have developed." ----- Eric Holder

"The demographic changes we're about to undergo can, I think, be a real source of pride, real source of strength for this nation if we handle that change in the correct way. If we don't, it can be a very divisive thing. I think this is, I think, I think a teaching possibility that we have here, to talk about why people think this law is good, why other people think this law is bad, and then to unpack that and go underneath what those arguments are all about and have a very frank dialogue about what we really think about ourselves as individuals, as members of different ethnic groups. I think we need to have that courage and, and have those kinds of conversations." ---- Eric Holder

PORK OF THE DAY:

$3,500,000 for the Glatfelter Tree Farm - Senator Arlen Specter (R-Pa.). I would guess they are growing money trees.

Good Ol' Boys Solution to the Oil Spill

Ya know, every once in a while, something comes across your desk that makes so much damned sense that you go "Why the hell aren't they already using this?"

Such is the case with this simple, but effective means of dealing with the Gulf Coast oil spill.

Check out this video: http://www.wimp.com/solutionoil/

Leave it to a couple of Good Ol' Boys to come up with a simple and effective solution.

A couple of guys who aren't from the government, but who live in the real world and have the ability to tell the difference between good fresh hay and the hay that's already been through the cow.

And notice, they're entrepreneurs... they say right in the video that if somebody chooses to use this solution, they want to do the work.

I've got one other comment on this.

If hay would work, I'm betting wood chips would work as well, and the midwest and southeast have a lot of branches and logs on the ground right now from tornadoes and floods that could be chipped out and applied to the spill.

That would provide additional absorbency materials, while at the same time putting some much needed money back into those economies where natural disasters have cost so much.

The real, working people of this country don't need a lot of government red tape to solve America's problems.

They've been doing it quietly and effectively for generations.

Which is why the phrase "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you" strikes fear in the hearts of so many Americans.

As it should.


“Entrepreneurs are simply those who understand that there is little difference between obstacle and opportunity and are able to turn both to their advantage.” ---- Niccolo Machiavelli

“Entrepreneurs are risk takers, willing to roll the dice with their money or reputation on the line in support of an idea or enterprise. They willingly assume responsibility for the success or failure of a venture and are answerable for all its facets.” ---- Victor Kiam


PORK OF THE DAY:
$150,000 for salaries and expenses for the United States Senate-China Interparliamentary Group. According to Title 22, Chapter 7, Section 276n of the U.S. Code, “There is authorized within the contingent fund of the Senate under the appropriation account ‘miscellaneous items’ $75,000 for fiscal year 2004 to assist in meeting the official expenses of the United States Senate-China Interparliamentary Group including conference room expenses, hospitality expenses, and food and food-related expenses.” This project smells like moo shu pork.

Medusa or simply USA?

Medusa, USA, what's the difference?

“A man in debt is so far a slave.” ---- Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertions in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which shall enslave us” ---- George Washington

PORK OF THE DAY:
$4,850,000 for 13 projects by Senate Appropriations Committee Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), including: $500,000 for the Mississippi Forest Legacy Program; $350,000 for Hawkins Field in Jackson; and $100,000 for the West Point Historic Post Office. The Mississippi Forest Legacy Program seems like nothing more than an effort to prevent progress and development. According to the Mississippi Forestry Commission, 80 percent of Mississippi forests are owned by private, non-industry landowners and are “potentially threatened by conversion from urban and suburban growth or other threats.” Therefore, the commission recommends that these areas “be designated as Forest Legacy Areas so that willing landowners may nominate their property as a possible Forest Legacy Tract.”

Hyphenated Americans

With all the discussion and debate surrounding the illegal immigration issues, one thing stands out: the continued use of hyphenated-American as a descriptor of the people who may be affected by these laws.

When this country's first immigration policies were established, one of the provisions was that immigrants assimilate themselves into the American culture.

In fact, as early as 1906 a requirement to speak English as the language of America was enacted, and has yet to be rescinded.

And, in that early immigration legislation, it was established that the final comment in the citizenship ceremony would be: "Congratulations, you are now Americans."

Not Jewish-Americans, Polish- Americans, or German-Americans.

Just "Americans".

In 1917, illiterates (those unable to read or write English) were added to the list of excluded immigrants, a requirement thta is still on the books today.

In the fifties and sixties, additional immigration reforms were enacted, but the common theme among immigrants continued to be wanting to become Americans.

Not an Hispanic-American, Irish-American, Black-American, or Japanese-American.

Just an American.

America was built on immigrants.

They are the fundamental component of the blended fabric that has made America a strong, unified, nation.

Immigrants who followed the path to legal immigration, meeting the criteria, complying with the laws of this country.

Those immigrants rapidly assimilated into American society, mostly becoming productive, patriotic supporters of their new, beloved, adopted country.

It was a two way process: America adopted them as citizens, and they adopted America as their country.
But now, large numbers of illegal immigrants want recognition as Mexican-Americans and Hispanic-Americans, even though they are here illegally, and are not, in fact, Americans at all.

They want full benefits of being American without making the full commitment to be Americans.

In short, they want the protection without the effort, the social benefits without the contribution.

Being American requires assimilation.

That means speaking English.

Saluting our flag, not the Mexican flag.

Observing our holidays with the same enthusiasm as theirs.

Playing by our rules, not theirs.

In short, being an American requires becoming an American, not just talking the talk.

The sad thing about the illegal immigration problem is that many of these illegals want only to be a Mexican in America, not to be an American in all that they do.

And there are literally hundreds of thousands of people who want to immigrate here from other countries who are willing and able to enthusiastically and fully assimilate into American culture.

They want to become Americans, not some type of hyphenated American.

So here's a tip to the illegals: If you want to be an American, you better be prepared to do the whole course, and become an American, not just a pseudo, hyphenated American.

Because when it comes to immigration, you're either an American or you're not, you're either legal or you're not.

And if you're not, your time is becoming more limited every day.

America is historically a tolerant, benevolent country.

But that benevolence requires constructive actions on your part as well.

Do not mistake tolerance for weakness, acceptance for apathy.


“From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently. Equality before the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict with each other; and we can achieve either one or the other, but not both at the same time.”  ---- Friedrich August Hayek


“As long as I have any choice, I will stay only in a country where political liberty, toleration, and equality of all citizens before the law are the rule.” ---- Albert Einstein


PORK OF THE DAY:
$11,000,000 for the East-West Center in Hawaii. In a moment of rare candor, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) admitted in 2007, after receiving an award from the East-West Center, that there were no congressional hearings before it was created in 1960. The State Department, which was given the responsibility and funding for establishing the East-West Center, knew nothing about it, the senator said, and for years tried to kill it by putting no funding for the center into its budget.

If Not Us......

Well, as we expected, there's been a huge bruhaha about the BP oil spill in the Gulf.

And to be sure, it is a pretty major spill.

One that is likely to impact fisheries in that area for quite a while.

A bunch of polticians now want to put a moratorium on all offshore drilling in our waters.

Now disregarding what that is likely to do to our continued dependence on foreign oil, and disregarding what it will do to the price at the pump, and disregarding the fact that we really have nothing else operationally viable as alternative power as yet....

There's another thing that these politicians haven't figured out.

Something far more logical and far more impactful than what they've come up with so far.

It's that we're not the only country in the world.

There are other countries all around the Guld of Mexico, the Carribbean, the Pacific, the Atlantic, the Mediterranean, and the other parts of the world.

And they all want oil.

Cuba, merely 90 miles off the coast of Florida, is already licensing drilling rights to China, Russia, and Eastern European countries.

Venezuela, at the southern end of the Gulf, is licensing drilling rights to its own buddies as well.

And, China is also working to gain drilling rights off the coast of Baja California in Mexico.

So, merely curtailing US drilling offshore isn't going to do diidly squat to prevent another oil spill there.

In fact, it might actually increase the odds of one occurring.

Foreign drilling is not subject to the same regulations, checks, inspections, and protective measures we require in the United States.

Which means that foreign drill rigs are inherently more dangerous, and more likely to cause a spill.

So, by preventing US offshore drilling, not only do we not reduce the likelihood of spills, but we concede all the oil in those areas to countries who can sell it back to us, worsening our trade deficit, and increasing our dependence on foreign oil.

The United States consumes nearly one-fourth of the world's oil but produces only about 10%.

Its 1.76 billion-acre Outer Continental Shelf, which extends from about 3 to 200 miles offshore, is prime oil hunting ground.

In 2006, a consortium led by Chevron proved that oil could be produced from a geological area about 175 miles from Louisiana that's estimated to hold 3 billion to 15 billion barrels of oil.

By most estimates, at least 18 billion barrels of oil can be produced from areas that these politicians are saying should be put off-limits, on top of 68 billion barrels in other areas where drilling is likely to still be allowed.

Louisiana has had offshore drilling since 1947.

About 172 active rigs dot the Gulf of Mexico waters off the coast, producing about 79% of the oil and 72% of the natural gas that comes from drilling off the nation's coastlines.

The state gets about $1.5 billion annually in oil and gas revenue, a figure that will grow when it starts receiving part of oil companies' royalty payments in 2017 under federal law.

California was home to the first U.S. offshore oil production in 1896.

There are 26 oil and gas drilling platforms off the southern California coast and 1,500 active wells.

Those in federal waters have produced more than 1 billion barrels of oil and 1.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas since the 1960s.

Now even with all that coastal oil production, since the 1969 spill until this most recent BP spill,  they've spilled only 852 barrels of oil in California and Louisiana, the result of better technology and regulatory vigilance.

When viewed in terms of the millions of barrels of oil these operations have produced safely, that's an infintesimally small percentage, less than one one thousandth of a percent.

Coast Guard reports show that the amount of oil spilled from all sources in U.S. waters dropped from 3.6 million barrels in the 1970s to less than 500,000 in the 1990s.

A report by the National Research Council found that offshore oil and gas drilling was responsible for just 2% of the petroleum in North America's oceans, compared with 63% from natural seepage and 22% from municipal and industrial waste.

Read that again.

63% of the oil spilled into the oceans off America's coasts come from natural seepage.

Yep... 63% of the spilled oil occurs because.... the earth leaks.

Only 2% comes from offshore drilling spills, and that's throughout North America, including Canada and Alaska.

The BP spill is terrible, no question.

But it's also the first major US offshore spill in over 25 years.

As usual, our politicians are more concerned with regulating risk out of every human endeavor in America than addressing the true problem.

But when you legislate to eliminate all risk, you also eliminate all initiative to be better, all endeavors to improve, all incentive to excellence.

And in this case, all you succeed in doing is to let other, higher risk entities do the drilling.

So they can sell the oil back to us.


“There will be those who strongly disagree with this decision, including those who say we should not open any new areas to drilling, But what I want to emphasize is that this announcement is part of a broader strategy that will move us from an economy that runs on fossil fuels and foreign oil to one that relies more on homegrown fuels and clean energy. And the only way this transition will succeed is if it strengthens our economy in the short term and long term. To fail to recognize this reality would be a mistake.” ---- Barack Obama, March 2010

“We import 70 percent of our oil at a cost of $700 billion a year ... I have been an oil man all my life, but this is one emergency we can’t drill our way out of. If we create a renewable energy network, we can break our addiction to foreign oil.” ---- T. Boone Pickens


PORK OF THE DAY:
$167,000 by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), House appropriator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), and Reps. Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) and Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.) for exhibits at the Autry National Center for the American West in Los Angeles. Rep. Schiff, with his Gun Owners of America rating of F minus, may want to know the museum recently showcased an exhibit called “Pistols: Dazzling Firearms.”

Cinco de Mayo? .... Hell No, It's May 5th

On any other day at high school in Morgan Hill, California, no student would even be noticed for wearing a T-shirt adorned with a graphic of the American flag.

But apparently May 5th is not any typical day on a campus with a large Mexican American student population.

Four students were sitting at a table during brunch break when the vice principal asked two of the boys to remove American flag bandannas that they wearing on their heads and for the others to turn their American flag T-shirts inside out.

When they refused, the boys were ordered to go to the principal's office.

Neither bandanas nor T-shirts are against the dress code in that school, so what could the problem be?

The American flag, that's what.

"They said we could wear it on any other day, but today is sensitive to Mexican-Americans because it's their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today." said one of the boys.

The administrators called their T-shirts "incendiary" and said that they would lead to fights on campus.

"They said if we tried to go back to class with our shirts not taken off, they said it was defiance and we would get suspended."

The boys really had no choice, and chose to go home to avoid suspension.
 
They say they're angry they were not allowed to express their American pride, regardless what day it is.
 
Their parents are just as upset, calling what happened to their children, "total nonsense."

"I think it's absolutely ridiculous," Julie Fagerstrom, one's mom, said. "All they were doing was displaying their patriotic nature. They're expressing their individuality. This is still America"

But to many Mexican-American students at Live Oak, this was a big deal.

They say they were offended by the five boys and others for wearing American colors on a Mexican holiday.

"I think they should apologize because it is our Mexican Heritage Day," Annicia Nunez, a Live Oak High student, said. "This is our country, and we don't deserve to be get disrespected like that."
"I'm not going to apologize. I did nothing wrong," Galli said. "I went along with my normal day. I might have worn an American flag, but I'm an American and I'm proud to be an American. I didn't try to stop them from wearing their Mexican flags for Cinco de Mayo. They shouldn't stop me from wearing my flag."

Fortunately, the district school board does not concur with the Live Oak High School administration's interpretation of either board or district policy related to these actions.

The boys will not be suspended and were allowed to return to school Thursday.

All four again wore American flag T-shirts and bandanas.

As they should have been allowed to do on May fifth.


"But then I came to the conclusion that no, while there may be a serious immigration problem, it isn't really the biggest problem. The most serious problem is lack of assimilation." ---- Samuel P. Huntington


"More than one-third of Mexicans in the United States own property in Mexico, nearly 80 percent send money home and 25 percent have a spouse in Mexico. Assimilation and becoming an American citizen are not the objective for many of them." ---- John Shadegg


PORK OF THE DAY:
$18,335,000 for 17 projects by House THUD Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Olver (D-Mass.), including $950,000 for the National Council of La Raza for community redevelopment activities. There was a heated debate on whether to include funding for groups like La Raza in the 2008 housing bill which resulted in them not being included, but that didn’t stop Rep. Olver from finding money for the group elsewhere.

Either Way is Fine With Me

Now that we've captured the Times Square bumbler, there are a couple of things that should be noted.

First, everybody in the administraton is praising "alert citizens and great police work" for "preventing" a terrible disaster.

Now, I'll not be the one to take anything away from New York's finest, but truth be told, they did nothing to "prevent" a terrible disaster.

They did a damned fine job of catching the inept wannabe bomber, but truth be told, they didn't prevent anything but him leaving the country.

By the time the "alert citizens" and the New York Police did anything at all about the bombmobile, the bomb had already failed to go off.

They reacted to the smoke from the firecrackers, which if the bomb had worked, they never would have seen because of the shrapnel and carnage.

Fact is, we got lucky... damned lucky.

Again.

And now that we have the slapstick clown of bombers in our custody, there's another issue that's being raised.

Because he's rather inconveniently, an American citizen.

Which makes it hard to try him because us citizen types have those pesky "rights".

Some say we should strip him of his citizenship and try him as an enemy combatant.

There appears to be some precedent for that.

Others say he should be tried like a common criminal, in a civilian court, complete with all the circus atmosphere trials like that normally acquire.

We already have one Muslim extremist bomber we're going to try to bring to justice that way, so what's  one more?

I'm not in favor of trying him as a common criminal.

It costs too much, puts too many other citizens at risk, and doesn't give the desired end result.

So, I say either strip his citizenship and try him as an enemy combatant, or do something similar in severity: let him keep his citizenship, and try him for treason against the United States of America.

Both of those options can get him the death penalty... which should make almost everybody happy.

We get serious about consequences for these lunatics, we preserve the rights that we give them that they give no one else, we send a message to other wannabe's, and, of course, Ali Bumbler gets his 23 virgins or whatever the number is.

Like I said... Either way is fine with me.


“To be left alone, and face to face with my own crime, had been just retribution.” ---- Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

"To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure conviction of a private criminal would bring terrible retribution."  ---- Louis D. Brandeis


PORK OF THE DAY:
$500,000 by then-House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee member Tom Udall (D-N.M.) for the Galisteo Basin Archeological sites. The Galisteo Basin Archaeological Sites Protection Act, which designated 24 sites in New Mexico as archaeological protection sites, was signed into law in 2004. Two years earlier, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill “could affect direct spending” but “any such effects would be negligible.” Only in Washington, D.C. is $500,000 “negligible.”

Mexico Comments on the Arizona Immigration Law

In what has to be one of the more comedic aspects of the media dust-up surrounding the newly passed Arizona State immigration law, Mexico has weighed in.

Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona signed the law that requires police to ask for identification or other proof of immigration status if they come into legal contact with a person they believe is in the country illegally.

A corrdidor for both drug and human smuggling, Arizona is home to an estimated 460,000 illegal immigrants, and Arizona lawmakers argue that the federal government has dropped the ball in securing the border.

Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs Patricia Espinosa said:  "The government of Mexico regrets that, despite the overtures made at all levels by Mexican federal and state officials, the legislators who passed this measure and the governor of Arizona have not taken into account the valuable contributions of migrants to the economy, society and culture of Arizona and the United States of America." 

"The Mexican government took various steps to express to the Arizona government its concerns about the law without obtaining a positive response", Espinosa said.

"Nevertheless, when a measure such as SB 1070 has the potential of affecting the human rights of thousands of Mexicans, the Mexican government cannot remain indifferent."

"Criminalization is not the way to resolve undocumented immigration," Espinosa said. "The existence of cross-border labor markets requires comprehensive, long-term solutions."

"Shared responsibility, trust and mutual respect must be the bases for addressing the shared challenges in North America."

Beyond those comments, the Mexican Senate unanimously passed a resolution condemning the law.

President of the senate, Carlos Navarrete Ruiz said in a letter to the Governor and the O-man, "The Mexican senators are concerned about the anti-immigrants actions in Arizona, which we consider against the human rights."

Really?

I don't think you've got your story straight, Carlos.

But you surely exemplify the clear double standard demonstrated time and time again by leaders of Mexico where the issues of immigration and border security are concerned.

Consider this provision of Mexican law that addresses the penalties that Mexico imposes on aliens who are found to be in violation of Mexico's immigration laws:

"Under Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison.

Immigrants who are deported and attempt to re-enter can be imprisoned for 10 years. Visa violators can be sentenced to six-year terms.

Mexicans who help illegal immigrants are considered felons as well."

The law also says: "Mexico will deport foreigners who are deemed detrimental to economic or national interests, violate Mexican law, are not physically or mentally healthy or lack the necessary funds for their sustenance and for their dependents."

That's right, under the Mexican law, illegal immigration is a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison.

And Arizona only wants people to have their identity checked?

Everybody here is all upset just because we want to see if they're here legally, and then deport them if they're not?

Give me a flippin' break.

Meanwhile the president of Mexico and our own politicians (who are supposedly representing citizens of the United States), yell bloody murder that the United States needs to provide a pathway to United States citizenship for illegal aliens - individuals who, under his country's laws would be facing two years in a Mexican prison!

Do you think President Calderon is about to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform in Mexico?

Do you think he will provide any sort of amnesty for illegal aliens in Mexico?

There is one lonely, rational voice in the American wilderness on this issue: Congressman Steve King of Iowa,  who is also the ranking Republican on the House Immigration Subcommittee.

Congressman King summed up the situation succinctly with this one sentence quote: "Why would Mr. Calderon have any objections to an Arizona law that is less draconian than his own, one he has pledged to enforce?"

Why indeed!

The CIA reports that the Mexican unemployment rate was recently only 4%, lower than 150 other countries and significantly lower than the unemployment rate of the United States.

Each and every year illegal Mexican aliens working in the United States send more than an 20 billion dollars back to their families in Mexico.

Twenty Billion Dollars.

With a "B"!

And this is only the "visible money" that can be traced, transferred through companies like Western Union.

Large amounts of additional money are also smuggled back to Mexico by illegal aliens revisiting Mexico, and even more money is smuggled back to Mexico from the Mexican drug cartels and people smugglers.

This is money that enriches the Mexican economy while draining money from our economy.

The fact is that Mexico now considers Mexicans who breach our nation's borders to represent the first or second most lucrative source of revenue for the Mexican economy.
 
By providing Mexican citizens with the ability to earn money in the United States and then send it home to their impoverished families,  the U.S. insures that Mexico has one of the most profitable economies of Latin America.

Giving  young and physically fit male Mexicans an open corridor to the United States- albeit an illegal pathway- these men are kept busy working in our country and not making demands of the government of their own country.

So Mexico gets the revenues they generate, while we get the expenses they create... which helps Mexico to maintain the economic status quo that is favored by the wealthy and powerful of Mexico.

But even more helpful is the total disregard for American laws by the government officials charged with enforcing them.

Consider:

"in 2009, Virginia State Police contacted ICE for nearly 12,000 criminal inmates, but ICE picked up only 690."

"In 2008, 2.9 million foreign visitors on temporary visas never officially checked out. About 40% of the illegal alien population are visa overstays."

DHS Secretary Napolitano recently stated that to deport 10.8M (her numbers) illegal aliens “the sheer logistics of doing that are overwhelming.”

And even the O-man recently called the Arizona bill "misguided".

Misguided?

A state requires its police force to enforce laws already on the Federal books because your administration won't, and you call it "misguided" ?

Sen. Reid and co-sponsors have just submitted their controversial immigration bill, Senate Bill 9.

The document has the following controversial language: that America must "move beyond detaining and deporting the undocumented... reunite deported families... reconsider the border wall that is a symbol of fear and intolerance... that those hiding in the shadows of our society are provided a rapid path to citizenship."

You're right, O-man.

Something is certainly "misguided".

But it's not the Arizona law.


"To admit foreigners indiscriminately to the rights of citizens, the moment they foot in our country would be nothing less than to admit the Grecian horse into the citadel of our liberty and sovereignty." Immigrants should be moved to citizenship carefully and deliberately "to enable aliens to get rid of foreign and acquire American attachments; to learn the principles and imbibe the spirit of our government; and to admit of a philosophy, at least, of their feeling a real interest in our affairs." ---- Alexander Hamilton

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birth place, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here." ---- Theodore Roosevelt


 
PORK OF THE DAY:
$71,000 by Rep. Nydia Valezquez (D-N.Y.) for Dance Theater Etcetera in Brooklyn for its Tolerance through Arts initiative. One of the group’s ongoing projects is Angels and Accordions, which according to its website is, “A site-specific performance/walking tour of Green-Wood Cemetery. Produced by Dance Theatre Etcetera and the Green-Wood Historic Fund, in conjunction with openhousenewyork. A cast of 30 angels, 10 accordions and a classical music ensemble guide visitors through Brooklyn’s historic Green-Wood Cemetery.” Perhaps that is where the taxpayers’ money is buried.

Big Government Knows Who You Are

The following video is a current television commercial being broadcast in Pennsylvania.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybcu2itqvEQ&feature=player_embedded

So, this Oldtimer wants to know how they can find one guy who owes a few thousand dollars to a state, and they can't seal our borders.

And how the government has the balls to implicitly threaten one of its legal citizens while doing nothing to punish the illegals.

Here's the thing: They know who the guy in the ad is.

They know where he lives, what he drives, and how long he's been there.

And, he obviously files his taxes, or he wouldn't be on the list of non-payers.

There were lots of rallies this past weekend.

Just as there are every May 1st.

May 1 is traditionally a rallying day for a lot of different groups, including labor unions and communist organizations.

You've seen the footage from Red Square and Beijing every May day.

And, as usually is the case, similar rallies were scheduled for the US as well, in places like Washington DC and Los Angeles, among about 90 other cities across the country.

Which explains how the rallies that were portrayed in the media as "ilegal immigrant rallies" got organized so quickly.

They simply showed up at other rally sites with their signs and then were welcomed into the fray.

Do you think there might have been even a few immigrations and customs agents there questioning people?

Hell no.

Which brings us back to the video.

Pennsylvania, other states, and the Feds are ratcheting up the pressure on American taxpayers, trying to recover amounts that pale in comparison to the amounts owed by illegals for working in the USA.

And, to catch the illegals, you don't need satellite surveillance or high tech methods.

Because existing Federal Law (since 1955) requires every immigrant in the US legally to carry their visa, passport, or green card on them at all times, just as Americans must carry their passport when visiting most foreign countries.

But for some reason, the O-man and his administration (as well as others before him) are loathe to touch the documentation issue.

So, let's go another way.

Turn the IRS loose on the illegals, and bust them all for tax evasion.

Start by subpoenaing every US to Mexico financial transfer document from Western Union and other such companies.

Tax the transferer, and do what the IRS usually does to Americans: assume they're guilty until proven innocent.

And then impose a 100% tax on all international money transfers by non-citizens of the United States.

We already require citizens to have verified identities when opening a bank account, cashing a check, or transferring money, so make illegals play by the same rules.

My point is, there are a lot of ways to go after the immigration issue.

If you don't want to secure the border, make illegals subject to identity verification like Arizona is trying to do.

If you don't want to do that, strangle their ability to get money out of the country.

If you don't want to do that, tax audit the employers and verify everyone's identity.

Start matching up corporate tax returns against employee tax returns and go visit those companies with discrepancies and verify everybody.

And, if you don't want to do that, round them all up for tax evasion.

Hey, it worked on Al Capone.


"Enforcement is the long overdue step to protect our Nation from external threats in a time of war. And then once we do that, we can effectively discuss a guest worker program." ---- J. D. Hayworth

"Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on." ---- Robert Kennedy


PORK OF THE DAY:
$47,575 by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) for the Harlem United supportive housing fund wind power project. While the organization’s website claims to serve an important need in the community, there is no mention of why they need money from the Department of Energy for wind power.