Crazy People Should Not be Allowed to Purchase Guns.

More Mentally Ill Barred from Guy Buying
USA Today
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal list of mentally ill people barred from buying guns has doubled in size since the Virginia Tech shootings, and U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey encouraged more states Thursday to add information to the database.

In his first policy speech since taking over as attorney general early this month, Mukasey said stepped up reporting by states has added information about 393,957 mentally ill people to the federal database used to screen the backgrounds of potential gun-buyers. In July, three months after the Virginia Tech shootings, the database had 174,863 names.

"Instant background checks are essential to keeping guns out of the wrong hands, while still protecting the privacy of our citizens," Mukasey said. Link

Gun Play
Bredesen blasé about lunatics buying firearms
by Jeff Woods

The annual low comedy that is the Tennessee legislature is well under way, and the shenanigans again this year include bills letting supposedly law-abiding citizens carry pistols into saloons, state parks and all sorts of other new places. The Second Amendment is paramount at the Capitol, which behaves like an adjunct of the National Rifle Association. No one mentions the inconvenient truth that any of these thousands of Tennesseans exercising their right to go strapped could have been wearing a straitjacket in a mental institution a few hours earlier.

Yes, even lunatics apparently have the right to buy firearms in Tennessee. Almost 10 months after the massacre at Virginia Tech, where the young killer could buy guns even though he had been found mentally unsound, no action has been taken in Tennessee to prevent such a tragedy here. Link

Folsom Prison Blues
By Johnny Cash

When I was just a baby my mama told me. Son,
always be a good boy, don´t ever play with guns.
But I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die
now every time I hear that whistle I hang my head and cry..

Comment: Crazy people should not be allowed to purchase guns.

Top Stories

Why They Hate John McCain

It appears that John McCain has the Republican nomination all but locked up and will almost certainly be the Republican nominee, yet it seems that John McCain is disliked more by some members of his own party than he is by Democrats.

Those on the outrageous and righteous right loath John McCain. Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Glen Beck, Sean Hanity, Michael Savage, Rev. James Dobson, Laura Ingraham, and a host of Internet bloggers and chatters seem to try to out do each other in proclaiming their contempt for John McCain. Many would prefer a Hillary Clinton or Obama victory to a McCain win.

Rush Limbaugh said, “If I believe the country will suffer with either Hillary, Obama or McCain, I would just as soon the Democrats take the hit rather than a Republican causing the debacle. And, I would prefer not to have conservative Republicans in the Congress paralyzed by having to support, out of party loyalty, a Republican president who is not conservative."

Ann Coulter has said she will campaign and vote for Hillary Clinton if John McCain is the nominee.

Reverent James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, said, “I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances.” He sited a statement McCain made that appeared tolerant of gay marriage and the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance reform legislation as the reason for his dislike of McCain. "Values Voters are not going to carry the water for the Republican Party if it ignores their deeply held convictions and beliefs," he said.

The basis for this extreme dislike for John McCain is varied but boils down to a claim that McCain is a liberal. With a rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action of only 15%, and a lifetime rating from the conservative American Conservative Union of 83%, it is hard to support the contention that McCain is a liberal. In any objective look at voting patterns, McCain stacks up with the icons of the conservative movement.

The Dobson argument is that McCain is weak on the values issue. Others are angry because he did not support the initial Bush tax cuts although McCain has said he would oppose their repeal. Others site McCain’s efforts as a leader of the “Gang of fourteen” that negotiated a conciliatory compromise on a parliamentary procedure in the Senate. The result of that effort benefited Republicans in getting conservative judicial nominees approved by the Senate, yet some seem angry that McCain found a congenial compromise rather than ramming the will of the Republican majority down the throat of the Democratic minority. Others are mad because McCain does not think the US should engage in torture of prisoners of war.

Despite these issues however, the two overwhelming issues that make the right livid is that John McCain disagrees them on immigration reform and global warming. On global warming, John McCain accepts the prevailing science about global warming and he supports a policy of cap and trade that would do something about it.

On immigration, McCain does not think we can round up and deport 16 million people. He supports a humane immigration reform policy similar to that proposed by President Bush that many have wrongly characterized as “amnesty.” In fact, the legislation proposed by McCain would actually increase the penalty for those who illegally entered the United States and it would establish a way for illegal immigrants to come out of hiding, register as guest workers, pay a penalty, and earn the right to apply for citizenship if they desired to do so. For these two rational pragmatic policy positions he is reviled.

Top Stories

Bob Dole to Rush Limbaugh: Lay off McCain.

Below is the text of an open letter former Republican presidential candidate, Senate Republican Majority Leader and long-time Kansas Senator Bob Dole sent to radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh. I appreciate Bob Dole for speaking out. It is time someone with good Republican credentials publicly stood up to that blowhard windbag Rush Limbaugh. Rush does not speak for all Republicans and no one gave him the authority to define who is and who is not a conservative.

I am disgusted by the attempt of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and the Internet bloggers and chatters who are demonizing John McCain. They want to narrowly redefine what is “conservatism” and want everyone to march in lockstep to a narrow agenda. I doubt Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, or William F. Buckley could pass their purity test.

Like Bob Dole, I do not always agree will the policy positions of John McCain, but John McCain is an honorable man and has served his country, party, and the conservative movement well. He has a lifetime rating from the American Conservative Union of 82.3%; hardly a liberal. We need to be trying to mend the splintered Republican coalition and not reading people out of the party. Thank you Bob Dole for coming to the defense of John McCain and standing up to Rush Limbaugh.

Rush,

I have not seen you in a long time but I do hear you frequently and I know that you have serious reservations about Senator McCain. Not that many care but I have not been involved in the Republican Primary contest because Elizabeth, a good conservative, is running for reelection in North Carolina where Romney, McCain and Huckabee each enjoy considerable support.

I was the Republican Leader from January 1985 until I left the Senate voluntarily in June 1996. I worked closely with Senator McCain when he came to the Senate in 1987 until I departed. I cannot recall a single instance when he did not support the Party on critical votes.
(At my age, I cannot be entirely certain but here are a few key conservative examples:)
1. Consistent pro-life record
2. Strong advocate for strict constructionist judges (We were misled on the Souter nomination)
3. Supported voluntary school prayer
4. Supported Constitutional Amendment for a Balanced Budget (needed two-thirds and lost by one vote - 66-34)
5. Strong advocate for reducing spending and opposing pork barrel “ear marks” which has, I might add, angered some of his colleagues
6. Consistent on defending Second Amendment rights
7. Opposed “Hillary Care” which would have been devastating
8. Probably the Senate’s strongest advocate for strong national defense

Of course he has cast many votes since I left. I totally disagreed with the McCain-Feingold legislation. On immigration, Senator McCain was not in the Senate when Congress passed President Reagan’s immigration legislation which passed overwhelmingly. It granted amnesty to 2.7 million illegals. It was not much different than the 2007 McCain, Kennedy, Bush effort.

I disagree with his votes against the Bush tax cuts but I believe his pledge to make them permanent and I do not agree that Governor Romney ever suggested a timetable for troop withdrawals in Iraq.

McCain is a friend and I proudly wore his P.O.W. bracelet bearing his name while he was still a guest at the “Hanoi Hilton.” I believe our major candidates are mainstream conservatives and that our nominee will address our concerns by keeping taxes low, reducing corporate taxes, protecting and assisting the vulnerable, strengthening our traditional values, and above all, keeping America strong militarily, whatever the cost.

Whoever wins the Republican nomination will need your enthusiastic support. Two terms for the Clintons are enough.

Gob Bless America,
BOB DOLE

P.S. Rush, I just came across a document from the Senate Library which shows Presidential Support scores. Let me give you ratings for “Mr. Conservative” Senator Helms through 2002 (Helms retired in January 2003) and Senator McCain through 2004.

[To see the year by year data, click here: " Bob Dole" . The evidence is clear that John McCain's record stacks up well against that of Senator Helms, the senator often regarded as the most conservative man in the Senate. Rod]

Top Stories

Fred, Why Did You Not Say It?

I was disappointed to see that the Fred Thompson presidential campaign never caught fire and that Thompson withdrew from the race. Fred was criticized for never having the drive and zeal necessary to win the nomination. I see a paradox in that I think that anyone who wants the job bad enough to do the things necessary to get it, may not be worthy enough to deserve it.

I admit that Thompson almost lost me a couple times. His verged on the edge of appealing to the worst in people on the immigration issue and he walked a fine line between being adequately pro American and pro defense and being jingoistic. I also was disappointed that at times Thompson seemed to be playing to the crowd that is dismissive of the science of global warming.

Nevertheless, I thought Thompson was the best candidate in the running. Thompson struck me as a person who was intelligent and thoughtful, and I thought he was the most mainstream reliable conservative in the race. I admired Fred Thompson for speaking the truth on social security and for advocating market solutions for health care reform.

What disappointed me in Thompson, was that I felt he never let loose and was himself. He never did do much to distinguish himself from the pack.

Columnist David Broder writes in a recent column of a meeting he had with Fred Thompson last summer in which Thompson discussed his plan to run. Broder writes that Thompson emphasized that the only reason he saw to run was to raise issues that the other candidates were too timid to address. Those issues included the need to expand military manpower and increase the Pentagon budget and taking on the out of control entitlement spending programs.

Broder writes:

Thompson was particularly critical of farm subsidies, and when I asked if he was really going to take that message to Iowa, he said, ‘Yes, but I'd like to keep that off the record until I announce out there.’ I agreed to omit that detail from my column but reported that he was going to enter the race with rhetorical guns blazing, and that was his reason for running.”

Then I sat back and waited -- and waited. In time, Thompson unveiled a serious proposal to attack the long-term deficits in Social Security -- another of the major entitlements. But I never heard the speech on the farm subsidies. When I asked for a follow-up interview with Thompson, his new press secretary found reasons to put me off.

Would a bolder campaign delivered with some of the personal passion I saw in Thompson at that lunch have produced a different result? I don't know, but given what he said about his motives, I suspect that Thompson would feel better today if he had followed his instincts instead of becoming a more conventional conservative.

I would have liked to have heard the speech that Thompson never gave. I sent Thompson a modest campaign contribution, but never developed a lot of enthusiasm for the campaign. If Thompson would have made the farm subsidy speech I could have dug deeper and become more passionate about the Thompson candidacy.

Our farm policy is irrational and expensive. It is the epitome of liberal economic policy making. It makes food cost billions more for Americans, it is bad for our health, it keeps families farming that don’t need to farm, it enriches the corporate factory farmer, it harms the environment, it keeps agriculture from flourishing in undeveloped countries and it undermines American leadership as an advocate for free trade. Yet, the policy continues and hardly anyone but the farmer pays any attention.

Fred, when you had the microphone, why did you not say what you knew needed to be said?

Top Stories

Prophet Gore Preaches the Inconvenient Truth at Baptist Gathering.

Last Thursday, former Vice President Al Gore preached the gospel of environmentalism to the New Covenant Baptist Celebration meeting in Atlanta. Over 15, 000 people were attending the event which brought together people from over 30 different diverse denominations that call themselves “Baptist”.

Gore presented his slide show of melting glaziers and stranded polar bears and read Bible passages as he called the faithful to take action to stop global warming. Gore criticized politicians who he said, “instead of acting decisively have tried to talk their way out of the crisis.”

As reported in the Tennessean: “Gore asked his listeners, whether Republican or Democrat, to pressure presidential candidates to stop talking and act on global warming. When asked for specific suggestions, Gore told them to pressure politicians to approve a new global climate treaty and to push for a carbon tax”.

God bless Al Gore. He is not just promoting Live Earth rock concerts. He is not just raising awareness. He is not preaching a muddled message of soft environmentalism. Like a prophet of old, Gore is not mincing words or sugar coating the truth.

So many pussyfooting environmentalist want to tell us to simply change light bulbs and properly inflate our tires. They put out list of “100 easy things you can do to help the environment.” None of those suggestions are going to matter a hill of beans. Global warming will not be stopped by turning down your thermostat, turning corn into ethanol, or tightening CAFE standards. Global warming will not be stopped by making people feel guilty for driving an SUV or letting them feel virtuous for wearing a sweater.

Just as not enough people will turn from their sinful ways so that society can do away with policemen and jails, neither will enough people be persuaded to voluntarily live a carbon neutral life-style to stop global warming. Any thing short of the call to action put out by Mr. Gore is just feel-good environmentalism. As Al said in his sermon, “As long as pollution is free, the earth will be treated like a sewer.”

It is disappointing that so many people who have long warned of the dangers of global warming will not endorse the solutions to combat it. I am not sure who is doing more to keep us from solving the global warming crisis, the global warming deniers or the reality deniers. I am not sure who is the best friend of global warming, those who don’t believe in science or those who don’t believe in economics.

Those bearded, flannel-shirt-wearing, vegetarian, leftist, old hippie environmentalist who think we only need to love mother nature and conserve are doing more to advance global warming than all of the Rush Limbaughs and oil company lobbyist put together.

I hope Al Gore is not a voice crying in the wilderness.

Top Stories

FBI Investigates 14 Firms in Subprime Crackdown

Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:39pm EST
By Randall Mikkelsen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI has opened criminal investigations into 14 corporations as part of a crackdown on improper subprime lending, agency officials said on Tuesday.
FBI officials told reporters the probes involved potential violations, including accounting fraud and insider trading.

They did not identify the companies. But the probes reached across the industry to include developers, subprime lenders, companies that securitized loans and investment banks that held them, said Neil Power, head of the FBI's economic crimes unit.
"Currently there are ... 14 investigations, inquiries open right now," he said.
Cases involving individual loans have also risen sharply in a crackdown on subprime lending irregularities, officials said.

"We anticipate in the next year that another wave of adjustable rate mortgages will reset and with that we anticipate that the mortgage corporate fraud potential cases to increase," said Sharon Ormsby, head of the FBI's financial crimes section.

The FBI is investigating the corporate cases in parallel with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which has opened about three dozen civil investigations into the subprime market collapse. Some of the probes overlap, an official said.

Targets of the SEC probe include Swiss bank UBS AG and U.S investment banks Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Bear Stearns, as well as bond insurer MBIA.
The SEC, which has formed an internal subprime mortgage task force, is looking at how financial firms priced mortgage-based securities and whether they should have told investors earlier about the declining value of those securities.

The U.S. attorney in Brooklyn, New York and the FBI earlier launched a criminal investigation into two mortgage-related hedge funds at Bear Stearns that collapsed during the summer.
There are also state investigations.

The corporate investigations are part of an FBI crackdown on improper subprime lending, which also includes a focus on fraud in loan origination.

The agency has about 1,200 active cases, up 40 percent from 2006, with 321 criminal complaints or indictments, officials said.
"Subprime loans are decreasing but ... suspicions of mortgage fraud are increasing," Ormsby said.

Some of the loan origination cases are spurred by individuals lying to qualify for mortgages, but about 80 percent of the cases involved fraud for profit, Power said.
Particular problem areas included California, Texas, Arizona, Florida, and the Midwest, officials said.

My Comment: As a housing counselor, I see people all of the time who are losing their home and who got loans they should never have gotten.

Many times there is not a lot of reason to feel much sorrow for the borrower. Often the sub-prime Adjustable Rate Mortgage with a teaser introductory rate allowed the borrower to buy more house than they could afford and they got into the house with no money down. If they lose the house, they are not really losing anything, since they have no equity in the home. They wanted a $200,000 house when they could only afford a $120,000 house. The borrower just knew they wanted that house and did not pay attention to the details of the financing. The borrower was greedy and irresponsible. Don't waste your compassion on these people. They got to live beyond their means for two year, and now they have to face reality. In these cases, they need to lose the home, learn a hard lesson and just start over and do it right next time.

On the other hand, I also see people who could have qualified for a good loan, but were sold a very bad sub-prime product. I also see cases of falsified loan applications. Usually in the case of the falsified loan application, the falsification was started by the loan officer. The loan officer types up the app and gets the borrower to sign it. Either the borrower never notices the incorrect information or the loan officer explains away the discrepancy and tells the borrower not to worry about it, that that is just how things are done. I also see inflated appraisals. I have seen "flipping" of loans which is when loan is refinanced over and over each time eating up the equity in the house until the person can't refinance anymore and loses the home.

Buying a home, for most people is the biggest financial decision they will ever make and is their primary method of creating wealth. They should use caution and make sure they understand what they are doing. However, many borrowers are not very sophisticated or educated, and financing a home can be complicated. Many borrowers assume their loan officer will get them financing that is in their best interest. There are many honorable, honest loan officers who do just that and over the years I have worked with many people for whom I have the up most respect. There are, however, a lot of unscrupulous crooks waiting to prey on the unsophisticated borrower. They target the elderly, minorities, and anyone who they think they can get by with victimizing. They lie, mislead, and withhold vital information. I am all for a person making an honest buck, but to rip people off by putting them in a bad mortgage product when the borrower could have qualified for a good product is unconscionable.

I do not believe this culture of greed and corruption in the mortgage business started at the level of the loan officer. I must believe that it was condoned higher up the chain of command. I will be delighted to see some CEO's go to jail. I hope it happens.

Top Stories

Guns in Bars

Senate passes bill to allow guns in bars

By John Rodgers, jrodgers@nashvillecitypaper.com

The state Senate passed a bill today to allow gun carry permit holders to take their firearms into bars.


Don't Take your Guns to Town
By Johnny Cash

A young cowboy named Billy Joe grew restless on the farm
A boy filled with wonderlust who really meant no harm
He changed his clothes and shined his boots
He combed his dark hair down
And his mother cried as he walked out

[Chorus]
Don't take your guns to town son
Leave your guns at home Bill
Don't take your guns to town

He laughed and kissed his mom
And said your Billy Joe's a man
I can shoot as quick and straight as anybody can
But I wouldn't shoot without a cause
I'd gun nobody down
But she cried again as he rode away

[Chorus]
Don't take your guns to town son
Leave your guns at home Bill
Don't take your guns to town

He sang a song as on he rode
His guns hung at his hips
He rode into a cattle town
A smile upon his lips
He stopped and walked into a bar
And laid his money down
But his mother's words echoed again

[Chorus]
Don't take your guns to town son
Leave your guns at home Bill
Don't take your guns to town

He drank his first strong liquor then to calm his shaking hand
And tried to tell himself he had become a man
A dusty cowpoke at his side began to laugh him down
And he heard again his mothers words

[Chorus]
Don't take your guns to town son
Leave your guns at home Bill
Don't take your guns to town

Filled with rage then
Billy Joe reached for his gun to draw
But the stranger drew his gun and fired
Before he even saw
As Billy Joe fell to the floor
The crowd all gathered 'round
And wondered at his final words

[Chorus]
Don't take your guns to town son
Leave your guns at home Bill
Don't take your guns to town

Comment: Having been in a bar or two in my lifetime, I do not think firearms and alcohol are a good mix. This is a bad idea. I hope the House rejects it and if passed, the Governor should veto it.

Top Stories

They are taking our American jobs!

The politics of envy and resentment is usually a left-wing populist position and is based on the premise that if someone else has more, you have less. Populist see the economic pie as fixed and think it is important that everyone have a more equal slice. Conservatives believe it is more important to bake a bigger pie than redistribute shares. They know that the size of the pie is not fixed.

Unfortunately, when it comes to the issue of immigration, right-wing populist adopt the same politics of envy and resentment as their left-wing brethren. They see the number of jobs as fixed and believe that if an immigrant has a job then someone else lost a job. They often rant against immigrants “taking American jobs”.

The truth is that there is not a job that has your name on it. The government does not issue jobs. There is not a job fairy that reserves a job just for you. It is estimated that there are somewhere between 12 and twenty million illegal immigrants in America. If we assume the number is 16 million and most of them are working, we cannot assume that they displaced 16 million American workers.

While there has recently been a slight increase in unemployment, still the number of unemployed persons in America is only about 5 percent of the workforce which comes to about 7 and half million people. When you consider that at anyone time some people are always in the process of switching jobs, this is a relatively small number. If we were to erroneously assume that all 7 and half million would be working if the 16 million immigrants where not here, then that would still leave over 8 million jobs unfilled.

If we did not have the immigrant workforce however, would those who are now unemployed have jobs? No. A lot of the jobs are the jobs Americans do not want to do. An unemployed musician in Nashville, an unemployed construction worker in Chicago, or an unemployed office worker in Atlanta are not likely to move to Arkansas to pluck chickens. Most of them would not even except working for a lawn service company in their own city.

The immigrant population is not costing us “American” jobs but instead they are growing the economy. If we were to take 16 million workers out of the workforce, we would lose many more than 16 million jobs. By starting businesses, by supplying the labor needed for growing existing businesses, and by spending money in America, immigrants create more jobs than they fill. While immigrants increase the supply of labor they also increase the demand for labor. Many small companies would go out of business if they did not have their immigrant labor force.

If you talk to almost any employer who has employed immigrants he will tell you that they make good employees. They have a good work ethic and often work at jobs that employers would have a hard time filling. That they make good employees should not be surprising; after all, by self-selection these may be the best their native land has to offer. These are people who had the initiative to pull up stake, endure hardship and danger to come to a strange land where they did not know the language or the culture in order to have a better opportunity. They are obviously ambitious and adventurous. How many of us would do the same?

We live in a global economy where capital is flexible and can cross borders; we also need flexibility in the labor supply. Rather than shoot ourselves in the foot by removing 16 million hardworking people from the labor force, we need to recognize the value of that labor. It is time to establish a guest worker program.

Top Stories

U.S. Given Poor Marks on the Environment

By FELICITY BARRINGER
The New York Times,January 23, 2008

WASHINGTON — A new international ranking of environmental performance puts the United States at the bottom of the Group of 8 industrialized nations and 39th among the 149 countries on the list.

European nations dominate the top places in the ranking, which evaluates sanitation, greenhouse gas emissions, agricultural policies, air pollution and 20 other measures to formulate an overall score, with 100 the best possible.

The top 10 countries, with scores of 87 or better, were led by Switzerland, Sweden, Norway and Finland. The others at the top were Austria, France, Latvia, Costa Rica, Colombia and New Zealand, the leader in the 2006 version of the analysis, which is conducted by researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities.

“We are putting more weight on climate change,” said Daniel Esty, the report’s lead author, who is the director of the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy. “Switzerland is the most greenhouse gas efficient economy in the developed world,” he said, in part because of its use of hydroelectric power and its transportation system, which relies more on trains than individual cars or trucks.

The United States, with a score of 81.0, he noted, “is slipping down,” both because of low scores on three different analyses of greenhouse gas emissions and a pervasive problem with smog. The country’s performance on a new indicator that measures regional smog, he said, “is at the bottom of the world right now.”

Comment: This is embarrassing and appalling. The US has long been the leader of the Free World. This is the nation that liberating Europe from Hitler and defeated Japan. We defeating the Soviet Union and liberating half the world from Communist oppression. We have been the leader in providing aid to undeveloped countries, in conquering disease, in promoting democracy and stability in the world, and in promoting trade and economic growth and integration. We are the most powerful and influential country on the planet. Global warming may be the biggest challenge facing the planet and yet the US is absent in seeking a solution and is in fact one of the worse offenders among industrialized nations. The US should be a leader in solving this problem, not ranking behind Albania.

Top Stories

Charlie Wilson's War is a Great Movie!

I went to the movies yesterday and saw a great movie! I give it five stars, two thumbs up! It has it all: humor, intrigue, sexy women, and adventure. This is one of the best movies I have seen in a long time. It is a patriotic film which is a rarity from Hollywood which tends to focus on everything wrong with America.

Charlie Wilson’s War stars Tom Hanks as Congressman Charlie Wilson and Julia Roberts as Houston socialite Joanne Herring and is the true story of how a playboy Congressman, a renegade CIA agent, and a Houston socialite joined force to lead the largest and most successful covert operation in American history. Their efforts contribute to the defeat of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War.

For those old commie-libs who think the world was better off before the Evil Empire was defeated, you will not like this movie; for those who celebrate America’s victory over the Soviet Union, you will love it! Watching Afghan Freedom fighters shoot down Soviet helicopters was exhilarating.

To see the promo, click here: Charlie Wilson’s War

Top Stories

Round ‘em up and send ‘em home.

Get Real About Immigration

OK, first of all let me make the standard declaration: We need to control our borders and we need to know who is in our country.

Now: In almost any conversation about the issue of illegal immigration someone says we ought to round them up and send them home. OK, what would that entail?

First of all, how many are we talking about? Estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If we split the difference we are talking about 16 million breathing living human being. That is more people than the combined population of Sweden, Norway and Switzerland. That is a hell of a lot of people.

So, let us assume we will assemble a convoy of buses to send them home. The usual seating capacity of a passenger coach is 47 to 62 passengers with a maximum length of 40 ft or 45 ft. Assume we put 62 passengers to the bus that will require 258,064 buses. Assume our convoy of buses allows one bus length between each bus. The convoy will contain 58 busses per mile and stretch for 4449 miles. So, as the first bus reaches El Paso, the convoy will stretch to Nashville, but that is only 1280 miles, so we will stretch it to Washington DC, which adds another 660 miles. We are just getting started. If the convoy stretches from DC to Chicago, that adds another 710 miles. It the convoy stretches from Chicago to Seattle that is another 1733 miles, which would still be 66 miles up the road from the last bus. Can you see that convoy of buses in your mind?

OK, that is not practical so let us put them all on jumbo jets and fly them home. A Boeing 747 can hold 416 people. If we have one an hour taking off, we could do it in 38,461 trips. If a fully loaded jet per hour takes off, 24 hours a day, that will take 1602 days or 4 and a half years.

I doubt we can be so efficient as to dispatch a plane per hour. Anyway, we would have to hold them until their scheduled flight. So, we will have to build concentration camps to hold them. If we build some really big camps that hold, say, 2500 people each, then we will need 6400 concentration camps. How many guards will we have to hire? How much will it cost to build 6400 concentration camps? How much will it cost to feed, cloth, and care for 16 million people?

Now, keep in mind that these concentration camps are for people who committed the misdemeanor crime of illegally entering the country. That would certainly be bad PR. How would that look on the evening news in the rest of the world?

Now, where are we going to send them? Back where they came from, you say. Well, most of them, but not all of them, came from Mexico. If they can’t prove they are Mexican, Mexico may not take them. I would be surprised it Mexico wants to accept 16 million displaced persons. Mexico would certainly have to plan for the repatriation. Sixteen million unhappy unemployed people being dumped in Mexico and the sudden loss of the money they have been sending home could cause a crisis and a revolution in Mexico. That could create more refugees trying to enter our country.

What are we going to do about those who are married to Americans? Are we going to forcibly separate families? What about the children who were born here and are American citizens? Are we going to build a lot of orphanages to house them?

Any solution to the problem of illegal immigration must include a guest worker program and some sort of path to citizenship for people who are already here without a requirement that they go home and reapply. The eventual solution will not look that much different from the plan proposed by President Bush. It is time our gutless politicians stop pandering and get real about a solution to the immigration problem.

Top Stories

RE: Who is Barack Obama? (fwd)

by Rachel Williams

“Somethin' to consider Rach”.

Ok. Now, here is something for you to consider. Not everything one reads is true. I'm quite tired of receiving emails which are passed on with blind enthusiasm. I receive them on a regular basis, and I receive them on a variety of topics. From the origins of the word "shit" (see http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-s-word.htm) to 9-11 conspiracy theories to political messages intended to promote right-winged agendas--feels like I've read it all. It's not that I mind getting them (usually I find them as a source of humor), it's the whole blind enthusiasm that I'm hung up on.

This email about Barack Obama is atrocious. A complete attack on his character, his reputation, his up-bringing, and most obviously, his personal relationship with God. Not to mention the offensive nature towards Muslims. I take offense to this email not because I am a staunch supporter of Obama (Funny thing is, I'm not), but because it isn't right.

It's one thing to tell lies, but it's another thing to pass them on with a judgmental, unquestioning nod of the head, with those myopic lenses donned. It abrades me to no end when people do not question. Don't get me wrong, it isn't that I don't get duped by accusations of a false nature; sure I do! This is in line with human error, human nature.... But if something sounds fishy, then do a little research! Or if you're not going to research it, then for heaven's sake, don't pass rumors on as truth!!!!!!

Upon receiving this email, It took two seconds to open another tab in my internet browser, go to google, and type in the words "obama muslim email". In 0.19 seconds, I had thousands (about 174,000) of results. The first one was this website:http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

Please, go there yourself. Read the article. And then, pass it on to everyone you know. If you aren't familiar with Snopes.com, which I am assuming you are not, here is a link to wikipedia about the website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snopes

Here is an appropriate quote from that wikipedia article: "Snopes directs people to more information about various hoaxes, especially in regard to chain e-mails. Although they research their topics heavily and provide references when possible, not all of their sources (especially those which are personal interviews, phone calls, or e-mails) are fully verifiable. Where appropriate, pages are generally marked "undetermined" or "unverifiable" if the Mikkelsons feel there is not enough evidence to either support or disprove a given claim."

The snopes article about this Obama email sites a dozen sources, two of which are from Obama's own autobiographies. Again and with all seriousness, please follow the link (and pass it on). Just in case you don't pass it on, I have taken the liberty to copy every email in the forwarded email that you initially sent me. For once, you did me a favor by failing to delete all that junk preceding the email's body (I hate scrolling through that mess!). And so, if you are reading this email, wondering who in the world is "williamsra82" and why is she writing me---I got your email from my sister's forwarding of the Barack email.

Love ya Sis

Have a great week!

Rachel

(Following is the orginal email to which Rachle is responding.)

Subj: Fwd: Who is Barack Obama?

Who is Barack Obama?

Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice. If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts...this is very scary to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States...better heed this and pray about itand share it.
We checked this out on "HYPERLINK "http://snopes.com/" \nsnopes.com". It is factual. Check for yourself.

Who is Barack Obama? Probable U. S. presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was bornin Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia.

When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocate to Indonesia. Obamaattended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, "He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic School." Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that he is not a radical. Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education.

Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama' s mother, Ann Dunham,introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Koran. Barack Hussein Obama will NOT recite the Pledge of Allegience nor will he show any reverence for our flag. While others place their hands over their hearts, Obama turns his back to the flag and slouches.

Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!! Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!!!

My Comment: The above entry is written by my daughter Rachel Williams in response to an email she received from a close family member. The original email, follows her response. Both are printing unedited except for deleting the names and email addresses of the sender. I have encounterd variations of this allegation on numerous web sites and chat groups. Many are trying to create the impression that Obama is some kind of Manchurian Candidate-like radical Muslim. The truth is that for four or five years, starting at age 6, Obama attended Indonesian public schools and Catholic Schools in Indonesia. The public school was not a Madrassas. He was not sworn into office on the Koran. The email is lie upon lie.

Please People: Stop spreading lies.

Good job, Rachel.

Top Stories