Saturday, March 03, 2007

Why America needs to fight this war!

9/11 was only one of the many attempts by terrorists to exterminate all those opposed to Islam. We are not safe from the threat of terror and our only prayer is that we continue to fight this war on terror both overseas and here in the United States. If we abandon our efforts to control this threat the issue will not be if, but when the next attach occurs.

Should we sit idle and not thwart these people of violence and allow them the opportunity to strike again? These men did not attack a military force. Nor, did they further a legitimate goal. They attacked innocent men, women and children at there place of business with one intent. To strike fear in the heart of the infidel. The time to unite against this ever present threat is now! Whether we agree with the president or not. Republican, democrat or otherwise, we are the United States. We defend our own. We will not be dominated nor will we be scattered. We will Unite for the greater good of mankind. Let our troops know how valuable there service is. Show support for the men and women laying down there lives. This war will not end quietly. There is little hope for peace. Pray for peace ever day and know that some peace can only be obtained through war.

Click this link: What ever American should know about Jihad.

Minimum Wage?

Who really benefits from an increase in minimum wage and who is hurt by it. The truth as I see it goes like this; if the government raises minimum wage, it means that restaurants, retail shops, auto parts stores, golf courses, etc. who are running on tight profit margins to begin with, have to raise prices in order to stay in business. Consequently, their suppliers in turn must also raise prices, same with the manufacturers, on up the line.

The employee's receiving the increase are lead to believe that it's aim is to help them out due to cost of living increases. I reality though, that pay raise translates into a cost of living increase. That same individual who could once buy a hamburger for lets say, $5.25 is now paying $5.50 for the same burger. Therefore, the value of their dollar remains the same in terms of purchasing power. The employee's already above minimum wage and not benefited from a wage increase, paying $5.50 for the same burger has actually lost value in the dollar he/she earns. We already know it temporarily hurts the business which then gets past on to the consumer, so who's this benefiting?

As I see it, the higher amount reflected on the minimum wage employee's W-2 form leads to an increase in tax revenue for the government. Everything from income tax to sales tax is incrementally that much more. So it seems the only one actually getting a raise, is the government. Thanks for your concern on the cost of living!!!

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

Whose Supporting our troups?

Whether or not you agree with the war in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or anywhere else, most Americans know that we have the troops to thank for our freedom. We can thank veterans for our way of life, for our protection and for the sacrifices they've made to ensure those things.

Even the most anti-war individual should hold an American soldier in high regard. They are our own. Fighting for us and protecting your right to whatever opinion you may hold about Iraq or war in general.

But the real question that we need to ask is how are veterans are being treated after sustaining injuries in battle. Who's supporting them now? The real answer may surprise you. I'm sure you've heard about Walter Reed? The military medical center for injured veterans? These issues are deplorable. Forget the middle east. It's time we focused on the forgotten hero's of this country. Read the story from the Washington Post for more info:

.. width="425" height="350">


The Ethanol Farse

What is the real cost of the Presidents alternate energy plan? Is ethanol really the alternative or simply the latest drain on the ecconomy? What is the REAL cost of producing ethanol and where are it's limitations? Read the story and find out.

Government Eavesdropping

Sacramento Bee; Feb 1, 2007 Written by The McClatchy Washington Bureau’s Greg Gordon

Dear Editor,

I feel strongly that the F.B.I and N.S.A. must have the ability to gather intelligence which may prevent future terrorist issues from arising, but that this power must never exceed the protection afforded by our civil liberties, protected by the U.S. Constitution.

For the government to go through the process of seeking warrants through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) each time they suspect some “foreign entity” may be linked to terrorist or otherwise extremist groups would appear to be a devastating waste of time. In point of fact, it is a necessary step in the process we have in place. We are after all, in a time of conflict and the government needs to do all it deems necessary to ensure the safety and well-being of the American people. With that said, there is a process in place, making allowances for these activities, to ensure that in the process there are not any infringements on our civil liberties. Security agencies, like the F.B.I. or N.S.A. can not be allowed to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance of Americans on the basis of preventative measures, this being one importance facet of due process. Our civil liberties are in place to restrict certain powers of the government. Due process sees to it that these restrictions are respected.

Clearly, the problem isn’t in the monitoring of people in the interest of National security. The problem lies in the complete disregard for the process of acquiring a warrant to conduct such activity. Unwarranted surveillance is illegal. In comparison, it is no different than opening somebody else’s mail. If deemed necessary, this must be processed through the FISA court to ensure that our civil liberties are not being trampled in the process.

The fact that some people feel as though the government is crossing the line, in respect to Americans' civil liberties and privacy, can not be a secondary concern taking a back seat to national security. Even though the right of privacy is not expressly given in the Constitution or clearly defined in our bill of rights. It is an implied right, inherent with freedom and protected by the Supreme Court decision in the case of Griswold v. Connecticut, which ruled that the right of privacy is protected by the Constitution. After which, the case of Roe v. Wade made the issue of a Constitutional right of privacy even more explicit. In addition, many state constitutions carry an additional protection explicitly outlining privacy.

Unlawful surveillance may also be construed as infringing on the Fourth Amendment, which protects the rights of Americans against unwarranted searches. The President does however hold an inherent constitutional authority to conduct warrantless “foreign” intelligence surveillance, based out of a November 2002 appeals court decision. This however, does not extend to unlawful or warrantless surveillance of Americans. Even counterterrorism powers granted by Congress under the USA Patriot Act did not allow for the internal surveillance of American citizens.

In conclusion, there has to be a clearly defined process of insuring that through surveillance, electronic or otherwise, there are parameters in place to protect against the infringement of civil liberties. This process is the FISA court. Anyone within the borders of the United States are protected, either through citizenship or residency by these civil liberties. Unlawful surveillance should never occur if we are to remain a free country with inherent Constitutional rights.

Monday, February 26, 2007

Social Security to illegal immigrants

It seems the government sees fit to give an already unstable system a little more drain. We have illegal immigrants who now qualify for Social Security benefits after only 18 months as opposed to U.S. citizens who qualify after 10 years of employment. One pro immigrant benefits position is that 2/3 of illegal immigrants pay taxes and therefore should be entitled to benefits. My feeling is, yes that's true. Two thirds of the illegal immigrants they "know" about probably do. It's the 80% they don't have tabs on that concern me. Specifically due to the drain they put on society in regards to border towns, hospitals, and government assistance. Second, why are illegal immigrants afforded more from our government than citizens? What are your thoughts regarding this issue?