COMMON SENSE; Revisited
-
Entitled to White Guilt
May 13, 2010 at 03:19 pm by Wayne KlingerArticle under:Entitled to White Guilt
Once again we enter the realm of political correctness and so-called "entitled" rights that somehow exist in this make-believe Constitution people think we should have ("living document" as they would call it). I'm talking about the latest bold step real Americans have stood up for in Arizona, the immigration bill that has caused a firestorm in the media, through pundits on the left and the right and many interest groups abroad. Anytime a state or persons step up to the plate, people find some means to find it "unconstitutional" and like these rights are just to appear out of thin air because we haven't done anything as far as laws or borders for ages. So of course, the mentality is "Why start now?". The pure drive and thinking of just because I stepped foot on American soil, I'm obligated on the whole smorgasboard of healthcare, handouts, housing, etc that goes along with it and not think twice that the American "legal" taxpayer has to suck up the tab.
What kills me on this whole thing is how the media and special interest groups are mainly focused on the "illegal" part of it and not the 64% of Arizonians that support and over 60% of Americans who do not live in Arizona. What is focused on is the media reporting on truckers will boycott, but in fact they fail to mention these are LATINO truckers and not your average American load-hauler that are the main protesters. Boycotts from California to stymie business and contracts in Arizona that include computer maufacturers, janitorial supplies, a publishing house, fertilizer makers and human resources companies just to name a few let alone the tourism industry, which trickles down to car rental companies, hotels and restaurants. Even more idiotic is the boycott on "Arizona" Tea. It's just the name stupid!! The actual tea is made in New York!
Keeping up with the Jones' is the usual suspects of Sharpton, Frankin, the ACLU, La Raza, MALD (Mexican American Legal Defense) and even Eric Holder, the U.S. Attorney General mentioning the federal government may challenge the bill. A referendum was filed on April 28th and Arizona has until July 1st to get 76,000 signatures to get this on the ballot to be voted on in November. If the state fails or the referendum people try to stall things somehow, the bill would have to wait until 2012 and you know damn well, everyone and anyone will be trying to do whatever it takes to stall it. Phoenix, Tucson and Flagstaff leaders are also against the measure and have also filed against the law. On the flipside, you have politicians running for governor in Minnesota, Colorado and Texas that support the measure and would as much as incorporate the law into their own states.
With all that said, the focus again, not on the Americans who support it, but the sob stories we hear of like "Julio", who is 33 and has a wife and kid back in Mexico and needs to support them....he's been illegal for the last 10 years. First off "Julio", keep the damn thing in your pants and use your other head and get into the U.S. legally, then worry about the wife and kid. Is that so hard? Then we have other illegals who have actual illegals in the school system. They work, DON'T PAY TAXES of any kind but yet, we pay for their kid to go to school while the money they make goes back to Mexico. Another woman's comment, "Mexico doesn't have a lot of opportunities," she says. "Here, we work honestly, and we have a better life." Work honestly? What's honest about sneaking into the country?? Please tell me, what point am I missing here that you can't do this LEGALLY?
What really gets the goat of politicians and illegals is this simple phrase in the bill: "For any lawful contact made by a law enforcement official or agency of this state...where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien who is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable attempt shall be made, when practicable, to determine the immigration status of the person." Boy, that sounds so harsh doesn't it? I don't see this quite mounting up to the status of water-boarding do you? They, of course, want you to feel that way however....that's where the "White guilt" comes in. We had this problem when Obama was running for office, now it's the Latinos' turn. Again, who has the stones to step up to the plate?
Atlanta's Neal Boortz pretty much hits on the head to but again, people don't see it for what it is. Neal's comment: "Oh .. message for Congressman Luis Guitierrez, the HMWIC of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. They're not the "undocumented community." Cut the PC crap. They're the invaders; the illegal community. They're criminals. They broke the law coming into this country. They break the law staying in this country. They break the law working in this country. Get it? They're criminals!" I think I don't need to give kudos or explain this one, he's right on the money.
A study of immigrants in Arizona published in 2008 found that non-citizens, mostly in the country illegally, held an estimated 280,000 full-time jobs. The study by researcher Judith Gans at the University of Arizona examined 2004 data, finding that they contributed about 8 percent of the state's economic output, or $29 billion.
Losing hundreds of thousands of unskilled laborers wouldn't hurt the state's economy in the short term, but it could limit the economy's ability to grow once it recovers, says Marshall Vest, director of the Economic and Business Research Center at the University of Arizona's Eller College of Management. Legal workers who are willing to take any available job now will become more choosy if the unemployment rate falls back to low levels seen before the recession hit.
"That's really the question, as to whether the existing population is willing to work those (low-level) jobs," Vest says. "I think economics provides the answer. If job openings have no applicants, then businesses need to address that by raising the offered wage." Vest makes a good point here since we always hear about the "jobs Americans won't do". I somewhat agree with that since there's an embarassment for some if they have to be a janitor or flip burgers all day; the class envy card which works against us just like political correctness and that "even playing field" the marxists, socialists and progressives want so no one is better than the other. Again, I never got a job from a poor person, have you?
There is a positive side to all of this however, which you won't hear from the media but supporters of the law hope it creates jobs for thousands of Americans. It's been an arguement for years of the cheap labor practices by industries and shutting the door on Americans due to the Latino community will work for much less an hour."We want to drive day labor away," says Republican Rep. John Kavanagh, one of the law's sponsors which makes the arguement that it would benefit the actual citizens of Arizona. The emphasis is not on these things however. There's way too many illegals in the country, too many groups made up of lawyers, pundits and associations that Arizona will have it's hands full.
I do have this to say however. If Arizona can keep up the momentum and have the balls not to cave in to the demands of the special interest groups, lawyers and other states, this law will pass and be on the books and will give hope to states like Minnesota, Colorado and Texas of governing in the same way and implementing the same type of law in their own states. Just takes one small voice to get people motivated. Again, this is not a racial thing like they are spinning it to be. It will also help in aiding people with bogus licenses, ID's and even possible terrorists that are roaming in the state and they are all of different races themselves if you haven't noticed lately. So stop the nonsense and "White guilt" of profiling people. It will be these people's fault for being of the "entitlement" mentality that's going to get us killed some day. -
Agriculture and the Constitution Today
July 24, 2009 at 09:34 pm by COMMON SENSE; RevisitedPost under:What role was the Federal Government to play in Agriculture?
As we all are aware, the federal government now plays a dominant role in agriculture in America. The government picks and chooses as to which types of agricultural choices receive subsidies. Many recent articles have been written as to how small farmers have been driven out of business by the billions of dollars that are given to huge farming operations. The political clout of big agriculture continues to ensure payments are made to them, despite market prices rising ever higher for their commodities.
Who receives what subsidies is clearly controlled by the political and monetary clout of the various producers. I can assure you that the "little guy" has little chance of "equality" in this process. For example, the small, local organic producers of vegetables that are now so highly prized by the consumer for their superior quality receive no benefit whatsoever from the government. In fact, the government has done everything possible to stack the deck against these type of producers, all at the prodding of big agriculture.
The Food and Drug Administration allegedly exists to protect the people, despite the known practices of big agriculture improperly influencing and controlling the process of what is "approved" by the government. The relatively recent "rubber-stamping" of genetically modified seeds as "the same" as what nature created is an example of how the process actually works.
Without the government's involvement, the people's choices themselves would govern which products the producers produced. A free market, governed by supply and demand, and protected by the civil justice system is far superior to any government's decision making process. It literally costs we, the people, billions upon billions of our dollars every year that we pay to run these unconstitutional bureaucracies so that we, the people, can suffer from their unending consequences. If one subscribes to the concept of "do less, and accomplish more," all we would need to do is to return to the founders' constitution, eliminate these improper departments and consequently save billions every year while dramatically improving how agriculture works in our country.
I believe the fundamental error in how this has all been created actually resides with the people. We collectively have lost our understanding of the role of the people, vs. the role of the government. We have succumbed to pleas from politicians that they will solve our problems for us, if we would only "trust them". It is said that you get what you deserve in life. I would like to see us "deserve" something better than paying dearly for abuse heaped upon us from false "saviors".
-
Fritz Grogtzkruger
July 08, 2009 at 03:58 pm by COMMON SENSE; RevisitedQuote under:
Clyde Cleveland, Edward Noyes, Restoring the Heart of America (Better Books, LLC, Iowa, 2002) p. 127, 128.In all that I’ve heard about the animal confinement issue, I find that people on both sides can’t see the forest for the trees…In promoting regulation of the livestock business the anti-corporate people have transferred the responsibility of people to government. This fact has, in every case,worked against the anti-corporate cause. They shoot themselves in the foot and go on like mind-numbed robots demanding more government intervention in our lives. The corporates smile all the way to the lagoon as they see the rights of the people handed to government and independent farmers quit. Their buildings keep going up and there’s nothing we can do, because property rights have become a forgotten concept. If their stench pollutes our picnic we can’t complain, because they’ve complied with the regulations we begged for, and the legislature passed to buy votes. In a world without all these regulations, the stench would be called an infringement on property rights, the building wouldn’t have been built, and the picnic wouldn’t stink.
-
National Public Radio's "All Things Considered" (2007)
July 07, 2009 at 08:01 pm by COMMON SENSE; RevisitedQuote under:
National Public Radio, "All Things Considered," (July 31, 2007)Mayors across the nation are trying to do something meaningful in their communities to address climate change. More than 600 have pledged to try to meet the target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions set by the Kyoto Protocol, even though the federal government won’t make the commitment.
-
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
July 07, 2009 at 07:56 pm by COMMON SENSE; RevisitedQuote under:
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., from a speech published in the Chicago Tribune (May 16, 2003).The federal government is America’s biggest polluter and the Department of Defense is the government’s worst offender…The Pentagon is responsible for more than 21,000 potentially contaminated sites and, according to the EPA, the military may have poisoned as much as 40 million acres, a little larger than Florida. That result might be considered an act of war if committed by a foreign power.
-
Admiral Eugene Carroll
July 07, 2009 at 07:46 pm by COMMON SENSE; RevisitedQuote under:
Eugene Carroll, before the First International Conference on US Military Toxics and Bases Clean-up (1997).In a mindless, criminally negligent process, we poured resources into military expansion both at home and abroad without any regard for the environmental consequences. Pollution was ignored on the grounds that ‘national security’ took absolute priority over all other considerations.
