Check out the latest 3 year quality ratings from JD Power. Automobiles were divided into 19 categories, and the highest quality model in each category was identified. Of note, General Motors vehicles came in at the top spot in 8 of the 19 categories, far more than any other manufacturer. Ford garnered 4 of the top spots.
All Japanese manufacturers combined for only 6 of the top vehicles. Still think Japanese quality exceeds that of the United States?
Story here.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
Where do Suicide Bombers Come From?
A few years ago, when radical jihadists began blowing themselves up on Israeli buses, I thought the trend would be short lived. After all, who hates others so much that they're willing to die, just to kill others? How many murderous fanatics can there be who place such a small value on their own life?
Unfortunately, it seems the Muslim world has a bountiful supply of suicidal, homicidal maniacs. In a story published out of Scotland today, it seems that one of the recent hellbound murderers came from France, by way of Great Brittain! Here is the story.
Unfortunately, it seems the Muslim world has a bountiful supply of suicidal, homicidal maniacs. In a story published out of Scotland today, it seems that one of the recent hellbound murderers came from France, by way of Great Brittain! Here is the story.
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
How to Love Your Country, by MoveOn.Org
Check out this latest publication from MoveOn.org, titled "50 Ways to Love Your Country". I'm not really inclined to support MoveOn.org, so I won't be purchasing this book. Besides, we could all probably guess 5 or 10 of MoveOn's top 50, couldn't we? Here's my take on what made MoveOn's list of how to "love your country":
These are only 8 agenda items I suspect are in this great new publication from MoveOn.org. I can only imagine the other 42 items on their list.
- Tax the wealthy out of existence.
- Provide government funded abortions for everyone, and ensure parents of minors are never informed of their children's efforts to seek abortion.
- Shut down America's military industrial machine and rely on the U.N. to protect our borders.
- Cap profits on all US corporations. Any profits in excess of the cap to be redirected towards international debt relief.
- Mandate racial and gender based hiring quotas for all businesses.
- Melt down all US coin currency, and re-issue coins without "In God we Trust".
- Remove tax exempt status from Christian organizations. Use new revenue to compensate prisoners "tortured" at Gitmo.
- Roll out a one time tax on white men of 25% of net worth. Proceeds to be used for reparations, minority scholarships, and federal meals on wheels programs for immigrants crossing our boarders illegally.
These are only 8 agenda items I suspect are in this great new publication from MoveOn.org. I can only imagine the other 42 items on their list.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Gitmo "Too Tough" on Would-be Murderers
Check out this story from CNN about the treatment of a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It seems that the US military is accused by Congressmen (Hagel and Feinstein) of using excessive force in their attempts to gain information from detainee Mohammed al-Qahtani.
The horrors included making Mr. al-Qahtani urinate in his pants, late night interrogation sessions, and awakening him with dripping water if he fell asleep. In fact, the staff at Gitmo went so far as to awaken Mr. al-Qahtani with Christina Aguilera music. Oh, the horror! No wonder the Muslim world hates Americans!
By the way, it is widely believe that Mohammed al-Qahtani was to be the fifth hijacker on Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. According to the Pentagon, al-Qahtani told interrogators that he "had been sent to the U.S. by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the lead architect of the 9/11 attack; that he had met Osama bin Laden on several occasions; that he had received terrorist training at two al Qaeda camps; that he had been in contact with many senior al Qaeda leaders."
So putting all the pieces together, let's summarize: The United States has an admitted terrorist in custody, a man who has been dedicating his life to learning how to murder Americans, and attempted to enter the United States to participate in the September 11 attacks. In order to gather information from this man, we've humiliated him and made him listen to Christina Aguilera. Am I the only one who thinks that our interrogation techniques do not even approach "excessive"?
The horrors included making Mr. al-Qahtani urinate in his pants, late night interrogation sessions, and awakening him with dripping water if he fell asleep. In fact, the staff at Gitmo went so far as to awaken Mr. al-Qahtani with Christina Aguilera music. Oh, the horror! No wonder the Muslim world hates Americans!
By the way, it is widely believe that Mohammed al-Qahtani was to be the fifth hijacker on Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. According to the Pentagon, al-Qahtani told interrogators that he "had been sent to the U.S. by Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the lead architect of the 9/11 attack; that he had met Osama bin Laden on several occasions; that he had received terrorist training at two al Qaeda camps; that he had been in contact with many senior al Qaeda leaders."
So putting all the pieces together, let's summarize: The United States has an admitted terrorist in custody, a man who has been dedicating his life to learning how to murder Americans, and attempted to enter the United States to participate in the September 11 attacks. In order to gather information from this man, we've humiliated him and made him listen to Christina Aguilera. Am I the only one who thinks that our interrogation techniques do not even approach "excessive"?
Thursday, June 09, 2005
Jihadists in America
Check out this story from WorldNet Daily about the Islamic Thinkers Society (ITS). The blood-thirsty members of ITS recently produced a video of would-be assassins stomping on the American flag, and calling on all Muslims to join the fight against all other religions in order to achieve Islamic world dominance. If the video were shot in Tehran, this wouldn't be news. But the ITS operates out of New York City, where the video was shot.
These members of the "religion of peace" are quite outspoken about their hatred for America, and acknowledge that they do not recognize any American authority including the president, congress, etc. These "thinkers" equate mixed-gender prayer with eternal damnation. They live in the United States, and use the freedoms granted by our Constitution to advocate the overthrow of our government.
My question: Why aren't these scumbag anarchists locked up somewhere? If they do not recognize any American authority, then they should not be granted the rights contained in our Constitution. Secondly, why do liberal political organizations, such as the ACLU and the Democratic National Convention, persistently work towards weakening the Patriot Act? The fact is that we have enemies living on our soil. The fact is that these murderous vermin are devoting their lives towards toppling America as we know it, and killing Americans in the process. Isn't now the time to strengthen the Patriot Act? Isn't now the time to give our intelligence and law enforcement agencies the ammunition they need to lock these scumbags up for life? I'll gladly make a small sacrifice of my personal freedoms if that is what it takes to defeat the jihadists living on our soil.
These members of the "religion of peace" are quite outspoken about their hatred for America, and acknowledge that they do not recognize any American authority including the president, congress, etc. These "thinkers" equate mixed-gender prayer with eternal damnation. They live in the United States, and use the freedoms granted by our Constitution to advocate the overthrow of our government.
My question: Why aren't these scumbag anarchists locked up somewhere? If they do not recognize any American authority, then they should not be granted the rights contained in our Constitution. Secondly, why do liberal political organizations, such as the ACLU and the Democratic National Convention, persistently work towards weakening the Patriot Act? The fact is that we have enemies living on our soil. The fact is that these murderous vermin are devoting their lives towards toppling America as we know it, and killing Americans in the process. Isn't now the time to strengthen the Patriot Act? Isn't now the time to give our intelligence and law enforcement agencies the ammunition they need to lock these scumbags up for life? I'll gladly make a small sacrifice of my personal freedoms if that is what it takes to defeat the jihadists living on our soil.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Why is this Not a Surprise?
John Kerry finally released his academic record from Yale University, and the record shows that is academic performance is very similar to that of President Bush.
Of course, the Kerry campaign made every effort to portray their man as the intellectual compared to the bumbling Bush. The DNC relied on innuendo and media reporting to build up Kerry's intellectual image. After all - aren't all neoliberal proponents of infanticide far superior to right wing Christian neocons? But once again, another supposed pillar of the Kerry candidacy has been revealed to be a facade. For those of you keeping score at home, that's a 2.0.
Of course, the Kerry campaign made every effort to portray their man as the intellectual compared to the bumbling Bush. The DNC relied on innuendo and media reporting to build up Kerry's intellectual image. After all - aren't all neoliberal proponents of infanticide far superior to right wing Christian neocons? But once again, another supposed pillar of the Kerry candidacy has been revealed to be a facade. For those of you keeping score at home, that's a 2.0.
Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Once Again, Amnesty International Playing Politics
I wrote an article last May in USANow about Amnesty International's annual report. I chronicled the background of Secretary General Irene Khan, who is the first woman and the first Muslim to head up Amnesty International. She has been quoted as comparing modern day Muslim aggression to the Crusades, but at the same time stated that there is no need for a War on Terror. Under Khan's direction, Amnesty International was harsh in their judgement of the USA last year, and this year is no different.
States the report: "When the most powerful country in the world thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights, it grants a licence to others to commit abuse with impunity." Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are again cited as examples of human rights abuses. Granted, abuses took place at Abu Ghraib, but has there been any evidence that those abuses exemplify US policy? And other than faulty reporting from Newsweek, have there been reports of abuses at Guantanamo Bay?
During the past year, the world has witnessed be-headings and car bombings in Iraq perpetrated by Islamic militants, child molestation by UN officials in the Congo, and ongoing genocide in the Sudan (perpetrated by Islamic militants). If Islamic militants in Iraq and Sudan followed the US human rights example (as suggested by Kahn), millions of civilians would still be alive today (it is estimated that 2 million people in southern Sudan have been murdered at the hands of Muslims from northern Sudan). Yet Ms. Khan states that it is the example of the United States which causes others to commit abuses! How am I not surprised? Because we had a couple of rogue guards force prisoners to get naked, Ms. Khan excuses Islamic militants of torture and murder. Do you think she's perhaps just a little biased by her religion?
Given her political and religious background, as well as her history writing these annual reports, I suggest she go ahead and write the next 20 years worth of reports today. She could start every report like this: "The USA is guilty of human rights abuses. The ten-fold murderous response by the Muslim community is justified because of the United States' example."
States the report: "When the most powerful country in the world thumbs its nose at the rule of law and human rights, it grants a licence to others to commit abuse with impunity." Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay are again cited as examples of human rights abuses. Granted, abuses took place at Abu Ghraib, but has there been any evidence that those abuses exemplify US policy? And other than faulty reporting from Newsweek, have there been reports of abuses at Guantanamo Bay?
During the past year, the world has witnessed be-headings and car bombings in Iraq perpetrated by Islamic militants, child molestation by UN officials in the Congo, and ongoing genocide in the Sudan (perpetrated by Islamic militants). If Islamic militants in Iraq and Sudan followed the US human rights example (as suggested by Kahn), millions of civilians would still be alive today (it is estimated that 2 million people in southern Sudan have been murdered at the hands of Muslims from northern Sudan). Yet Ms. Khan states that it is the example of the United States which causes others to commit abuses! How am I not surprised? Because we had a couple of rogue guards force prisoners to get naked, Ms. Khan excuses Islamic militants of torture and murder. Do you think she's perhaps just a little biased by her religion?
Given her political and religious background, as well as her history writing these annual reports, I suggest she go ahead and write the next 20 years worth of reports today. She could start every report like this: "The USA is guilty of human rights abuses. The ten-fold murderous response by the Muslim community is justified because of the United States' example."
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
HISD and Abe Saavedra Success Story
The Houston Independent School District (HISD) made news last year in their efforts to find a new Superintendant. The search became a racial issue when the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) stated the new Super "must be Hispanic". After creating a short list of candidates who were being pushed out of their current jobs, HISD select Abe Saavedra, who himself left Corpus Christi amid a wave of controversy.
I was critical of LULAC's insistence on an Hispanic superintendant. Their logic, ironically enough, was that HISD is a majority Hispanic so the leadership must be Hispanic. Funny how they don't see things this way when Hispanics are the minority). I was also critical of HISD's approach to the hiring, as it was done in a manner that basically ensured Saavedra would get the job.
Fast forward to this year, and it's worth reporting on a major HISD success story. Last fall, Saavedra, along with 500 other volunteers, personally visited dropouts of 8 HISD high schools in what Saavedra calls a "dropout walk". The dropouts were not only asked to come back, but they were asked how the district could help them get back in school. In one instance, as reported by the Houston Chronicle today, the district helped a young mother find a job and arrange health care for her children. She was one of 291 kids who returned to high school as a result of HISD's personal appeal. This weekend, she is graduating from Furr High School along with 47 other students who had previously dropped out.
Congratulations to Saavedra and to HISD for a job very well done. The program will be expanded next year to include dropouts from 16 HISD high schools.
I was critical of LULAC's insistence on an Hispanic superintendant. Their logic, ironically enough, was that HISD is a majority Hispanic so the leadership must be Hispanic. Funny how they don't see things this way when Hispanics are the minority). I was also critical of HISD's approach to the hiring, as it was done in a manner that basically ensured Saavedra would get the job.
Fast forward to this year, and it's worth reporting on a major HISD success story. Last fall, Saavedra, along with 500 other volunteers, personally visited dropouts of 8 HISD high schools in what Saavedra calls a "dropout walk". The dropouts were not only asked to come back, but they were asked how the district could help them get back in school. In one instance, as reported by the Houston Chronicle today, the district helped a young mother find a job and arrange health care for her children. She was one of 291 kids who returned to high school as a result of HISD's personal appeal. This weekend, she is graduating from Furr High School along with 47 other students who had previously dropped out.
Congratulations to Saavedra and to HISD for a job very well done. The program will be expanded next year to include dropouts from 16 HISD high schools.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
American Automobile Quality
The 2005 JD Power Inital Quality Study was released this week. This report measures the total number of reported problems per 100 vehicles sold.
Once again, Lexus achieved the industry's highest marks, with 81 problems reported per 100 vehicles. What's more notable, however, is that Buick and Cadillac once again made the top 5 list of manufacturers with 100 and 104 problems per 100, respectively. Buick and Cadillac received higher quality marks than Toyota, Infiniti, Nissan, Mercedes, Acura and Honda. Overall, 5 American brands achieved better-than-average quality ratings, as did 5 Japanese, 4 European, and 1 Korean. In addition to Buick and Cadillac, Hummer, GMC, and Lincoln came in better than the industry average.
With respect to individual models, American vehicles came out on top in 7 of the 18 automobile categories, including all three pickup categories, entry midsize sedan, premium midsize sedan, and large sedan.
Perhaps this report will help dispel the notion that American cars do not match the quality of Asian or European competitors.
As an aside, both of my vehicles (Chevrolet Suburban and Lexus IS 300) came out #1. To date, the Suburban has proven to be the more reliable and better made vehicle.
Once again, Lexus achieved the industry's highest marks, with 81 problems reported per 100 vehicles. What's more notable, however, is that Buick and Cadillac once again made the top 5 list of manufacturers with 100 and 104 problems per 100, respectively. Buick and Cadillac received higher quality marks than Toyota, Infiniti, Nissan, Mercedes, Acura and Honda. Overall, 5 American brands achieved better-than-average quality ratings, as did 5 Japanese, 4 European, and 1 Korean. In addition to Buick and Cadillac, Hummer, GMC, and Lincoln came in better than the industry average.
With respect to individual models, American vehicles came out on top in 7 of the 18 automobile categories, including all three pickup categories, entry midsize sedan, premium midsize sedan, and large sedan.
Perhaps this report will help dispel the notion that American cars do not match the quality of Asian or European competitors.
As an aside, both of my vehicles (Chevrolet Suburban and Lexus IS 300) came out #1. To date, the Suburban has proven to be the more reliable and better made vehicle.
Monday, May 16, 2005
Why Immigration is Good for America
In reviewing my blog I've noticed that the three most recent posts seem to cast a negative light on immigration into the United States, especially with respect to Hispanic immigration. Let me clear the air: Legal immigration is GREAT for the United States of America. It is only illegal immigration that serves to hinder our economy and undermine our national security.
As our economy becomes more global, it is essential that our industries remain competitive worldwide. This requires a labor pool far greater than than is available in this country. If the United States is to remain an economic super power, clearly we must continue to attract immigrants from all socio-economic backgrounds. We need computer programmers, doctors, and manual laborers. We need professors, athletes, youth ministers, and entrepreneurs. I'm fortunate to know Hispanics who work in each one of these fields, and they are part of what makes America great. Likewise, I know professionals from Lithuania, Pakistan, India, Kuwait, China, Viet Nam and Russia. Each one of them is an important cog in the American economy.
Getting back to Hispanic immigration, specifically, there are several other points to be made as to why their presence is a good thing for America. Most importantly, the Hispanic culture tends to place a high value on the family. Based on U.S. Census Bureau data, 21% of white men over 15 have been divorced at least once. Within the Hispanic community, this figure is only 13%. Secondly, there can be no doubting the work ethic of Hispanic immigrants. While I don't subscribe to the "they'll take jobs others won't" theory, I do believe Hispanics work harder and for longer hours than do non-Hispanics. Part of this is driven by the first point - that is the importance of providing for one's family is a key motivator in working long hours in tough conditions. Finally, Hispanics bring a strong Christian influence to our nation.
To summarize, when Hispanics come to this country, they bring with them strong family bonds, hard work, and their Christian faith - three ingredients always welcome in the American melting pot.
As our economy becomes more global, it is essential that our industries remain competitive worldwide. This requires a labor pool far greater than than is available in this country. If the United States is to remain an economic super power, clearly we must continue to attract immigrants from all socio-economic backgrounds. We need computer programmers, doctors, and manual laborers. We need professors, athletes, youth ministers, and entrepreneurs. I'm fortunate to know Hispanics who work in each one of these fields, and they are part of what makes America great. Likewise, I know professionals from Lithuania, Pakistan, India, Kuwait, China, Viet Nam and Russia. Each one of them is an important cog in the American economy.
Getting back to Hispanic immigration, specifically, there are several other points to be made as to why their presence is a good thing for America. Most importantly, the Hispanic culture tends to place a high value on the family. Based on U.S. Census Bureau data, 21% of white men over 15 have been divorced at least once. Within the Hispanic community, this figure is only 13%. Secondly, there can be no doubting the work ethic of Hispanic immigrants. While I don't subscribe to the "they'll take jobs others won't" theory, I do believe Hispanics work harder and for longer hours than do non-Hispanics. Part of this is driven by the first point - that is the importance of providing for one's family is a key motivator in working long hours in tough conditions. Finally, Hispanics bring a strong Christian influence to our nation.
To summarize, when Hispanics come to this country, they bring with them strong family bonds, hard work, and their Christian faith - three ingredients always welcome in the American melting pot.
Friday, May 13, 2005
Mexican President Slams U.S. Immigration Policy
It what should come as no surprise, President Vicente Fox of Mexico complained bitterly about new U.S. immigration laws yesterday.
Said Fox: "We will present a firm and formal complaint against this policy. We will always defend our countrymen and their human rights." Since when does denying an illegal immigrant a drivers license constitute a violation of their human rights? And does anyone else see the irony in calling illegal immigrants "countrymen"? Wake up Vicente, these people are leaving Mexico like bats out of hell - I don't think the word "countrymen" applies.
Said Mexican Interior Minister Santiago Creel, "Building barriers is not the sign of a good neighbor." Excuse me? We educate your "countrymen", we provide them free healthcare, their children automatically jump to the head of the class for college admissions. On the other hand, our children go to Mexico to play soccer and are greeted with chants of "Osama" and flag burnings. And this guy has the gall to claim we're not good neighbors? Who would he prefer - Syria? Sudan? Russia?
The fundamental problem is that the Fox government is unable to provide basic economic opportunities to their "countrymen". After all, who in their right mind would leave their family, illegally enter another country, cross a desert, only to take a job making minimum wage? Clearly, the general Mexican population is desperate for economic opportunities, and the nation as a whole is desperate for foreign sources of income. In fact, cash receipts from Mexicans working in the United States are Mexico's second greatest source of foreign income, after oil exports. Mexico's immigration rhetoric is a desperate attempt to mask the ineptitude of the government, and ensure Mexican workers in the U.S. keep sending $16 billion annually back to Mexico.
Said Fox: "We will present a firm and formal complaint against this policy. We will always defend our countrymen and their human rights." Since when does denying an illegal immigrant a drivers license constitute a violation of their human rights? And does anyone else see the irony in calling illegal immigrants "countrymen"? Wake up Vicente, these people are leaving Mexico like bats out of hell - I don't think the word "countrymen" applies.
Said Mexican Interior Minister Santiago Creel, "Building barriers is not the sign of a good neighbor." Excuse me? We educate your "countrymen", we provide them free healthcare, their children automatically jump to the head of the class for college admissions. On the other hand, our children go to Mexico to play soccer and are greeted with chants of "Osama" and flag burnings. And this guy has the gall to claim we're not good neighbors? Who would he prefer - Syria? Sudan? Russia?
The fundamental problem is that the Fox government is unable to provide basic economic opportunities to their "countrymen". After all, who in their right mind would leave their family, illegally enter another country, cross a desert, only to take a job making minimum wage? Clearly, the general Mexican population is desperate for economic opportunities, and the nation as a whole is desperate for foreign sources of income. In fact, cash receipts from Mexicans working in the United States are Mexico's second greatest source of foreign income, after oil exports. Mexico's immigration rhetoric is a desperate attempt to mask the ineptitude of the government, and ensure Mexican workers in the U.S. keep sending $16 billion annually back to Mexico.
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
Finally - No Drivers Licenses for Illegals
This week Congress has passed legislation which requires states to prove applicants are in the country legally prior to issuing a driver's license. Although this legislation is long overdue, immigrants rights advocates are in an uproar.
Says Michelle Waslin of the National Council of La Rasa: "This is clearly an anti-immigrant bill that’s going to have a very harmful impact on the Latino community and all immigrant communities. It doesn’t make us one iota safer. Not a single immigrant is going to be returned to his or her home country if they’re denied a driver’s license." Apparently Ms. Waslin believes that the only litmus test of any immigration legislation is whether or not our nation will be safer. How about simply honoring our borders, Ms. Waslin? Does she really believe that, unless we roll out the red carpet to illegal immigrants, that we're being "harmful" to the "Latino Community". The only Latino communities which may be harmed are those comprised of illegal aliens. Most Latinos will never feel the impact of this legislation. As for the Latinos who don't honor our borders, I suspect they will be able to get drivers licenses in their home countries.
Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Council on Civil Rights states "America is a country of paradoxes: We are a country of immigrants, yet we attack immigrants". Gee, Wade, denying an illegal immigrant a driver's license is "attacking" them? How ironic, for it seems to me that the 10,000,000 illegal immigrants who get a free education, free healthcare, yet pay no taxes in our country, are the ones doing the attacking.
Other critics have stated that there will be fewer drivers with insurance since there will be fewer licensed drivers. Say what? First of all, it's doubtful that a person who fails to honor our immigration laws will honor our auto insurance regulations. Secondly, the entire purpose of the bill is to discourage illegal entry into our country. If life is made more difficult for illegal aliens, fewer will come. It's quite simple. Fewer illegal immigrants + no driver's licenses for illegals = fewer uninsured illegals driving.
Let's hope this is but the first step in securing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws.
Says Michelle Waslin of the National Council of La Rasa: "This is clearly an anti-immigrant bill that’s going to have a very harmful impact on the Latino community and all immigrant communities. It doesn’t make us one iota safer. Not a single immigrant is going to be returned to his or her home country if they’re denied a driver’s license." Apparently Ms. Waslin believes that the only litmus test of any immigration legislation is whether or not our nation will be safer. How about simply honoring our borders, Ms. Waslin? Does she really believe that, unless we roll out the red carpet to illegal immigrants, that we're being "harmful" to the "Latino Community". The only Latino communities which may be harmed are those comprised of illegal aliens. Most Latinos will never feel the impact of this legislation. As for the Latinos who don't honor our borders, I suspect they will be able to get drivers licenses in their home countries.
Wade Henderson, president of the Leadership Council on Civil Rights states "America is a country of paradoxes: We are a country of immigrants, yet we attack immigrants". Gee, Wade, denying an illegal immigrant a driver's license is "attacking" them? How ironic, for it seems to me that the 10,000,000 illegal immigrants who get a free education, free healthcare, yet pay no taxes in our country, are the ones doing the attacking.
Other critics have stated that there will be fewer drivers with insurance since there will be fewer licensed drivers. Say what? First of all, it's doubtful that a person who fails to honor our immigration laws will honor our auto insurance regulations. Secondly, the entire purpose of the bill is to discourage illegal entry into our country. If life is made more difficult for illegal aliens, fewer will come. It's quite simple. Fewer illegal immigrants + no driver's licenses for illegals = fewer uninsured illegals driving.
Let's hope this is but the first step in securing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws.
Tuesday, May 10, 2005
United States Socializing Medicine for Illegal Aliens
In what might be the most ill-conceived government program of all time, federal dollars will be used to pay the health care costs of illegal immigrants.
Liberal lunacy in regards to socializing medicine in the United States is difficult to comprehend, but socializing medicine only for foreigners who have crossed our borders illegally is completely assinine. We can't take care of our own homeless, handicapped, and unemployed....yet we're giving Mexicans free health care? Unemployed US citizens are passed on to collection agencies and their credit ratings are destroyed when they face a medical crisis, but Guatemalans get a free ride?
I can hear the conversation in Chihuahua, Mexico right now:
Juan: "I've got liver problems, and my kidneys are failing".
Jose: "What will you do".
Juan: "I'm saving up to visit a specialist in Mexico City".
Jose: "Forget that - sneak into the United States, and you'll get FREE health care!"
Juan: "What? How could I get free health care in another country?"
Jose: "I don't know - but the US Government set aside over 1 billion dollars just to pay for the medical expenses of people who sneak into their country."
Juan: "Nice knowing you Jose, I'm headed to San Antonio!"
To be clear, I do not advocate turning away emergency patients who happen to be illegal immigrants. But this crisis is threatening to bankrupt many of our nation's hospitals. The state of California alone provides $500 million per year in health care for illegal immigrants! Federal funding is not the answer. We must collect for services, and/or send illegals home for health care. Here are three options which make far more sense:
Liberal lunacy in regards to socializing medicine in the United States is difficult to comprehend, but socializing medicine only for foreigners who have crossed our borders illegally is completely assinine. We can't take care of our own homeless, handicapped, and unemployed....yet we're giving Mexicans free health care? Unemployed US citizens are passed on to collection agencies and their credit ratings are destroyed when they face a medical crisis, but Guatemalans get a free ride?
I can hear the conversation in Chihuahua, Mexico right now:
Juan: "I've got liver problems, and my kidneys are failing".
Jose: "What will you do".
Juan: "I'm saving up to visit a specialist in Mexico City".
Jose: "Forget that - sneak into the United States, and you'll get FREE health care!"
Juan: "What? How could I get free health care in another country?"
Jose: "I don't know - but the US Government set aside over 1 billion dollars just to pay for the medical expenses of people who sneak into their country."
Juan: "Nice knowing you Jose, I'm headed to San Antonio!"
To be clear, I do not advocate turning away emergency patients who happen to be illegal immigrants. But this crisis is threatening to bankrupt many of our nation's hospitals. The state of California alone provides $500 million per year in health care for illegal immigrants! Federal funding is not the answer. We must collect for services, and/or send illegals home for health care. Here are three options which make far more sense:
- Provide full services, then bill the home countries of those receiving medical care in the way of tariffs. Adjust the tariff each year based on total medical care expenses provided to citizens of that country. This option is compassionate, fiscally responsible, and would put an end to the travel brochures put together by foreign governments which teach citizens how to sneak into the U.S.
- Report undocumented workers to the INS upon hospital admission, and send the bill home with patients upon discharge. It is well known that the INS can handle only so many cases per year, so make it clear that undocumented workers who do not make minimum payments towards their medical bills go to the top of the list. Illegal aliens send billions of dollars back to Mexico and Central America annually, it is time they used their earnings on services consumed in the United States.
- Provide only the minimum level of services, and then use the $1 billion to transport the patients to the nearest hospital in their country of origin. Granted, this is the least compassionate of these alternatives, but free basic care and a free ticket home is far more than a US citizen could expect to receive (either at home or abroad).
Thursday, May 05, 2005
Pro Life? Support the ACLJ Today!
The American Center for Law and Justice works in the courts and the legislative arena protecting religious and constitutional freedoms. The ACLJ focuses on issues related to national security, protecting human life, and protecting the American family.
The ACLJ achieved a major Supreme Court victory against the pro-abortion forces in our country two years ago. The court voted 8 - 1 that Federal RICO statutes (originally designed to combat organized crime) could not be used to stop peaceful pro-life protests. But the pro-abortion lobbyists are back on the attack, and a lower federal appeals court has re-opened the case despite the previous ruling of the US Supreme Court.
This fight is another in a long line of legal battles being waged by the ACLJ against the likes of the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and NOW. Promoting a Culture of Life in the United States requires prayer, hard work, and dollars. Join the fray by making a donation to the ACLJ today. Thank you.
The ACLJ achieved a major Supreme Court victory against the pro-abortion forces in our country two years ago. The court voted 8 - 1 that Federal RICO statutes (originally designed to combat organized crime) could not be used to stop peaceful pro-life protests. But the pro-abortion lobbyists are back on the attack, and a lower federal appeals court has re-opened the case despite the previous ruling of the US Supreme Court.
This fight is another in a long line of legal battles being waged by the ACLJ against the likes of the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, and NOW. Promoting a Culture of Life in the United States requires prayer, hard work, and dollars. Join the fray by making a donation to the ACLJ today. Thank you.
Wednesday, May 04, 2005
Bush the Bridge Builder
One of the favorite talking points of Bush Administration critics is that the man is alienating the rest of the world, and creating enemies of the United States.
Although this point has been made before on USANow and by many others, Bush has achieved a major foreign policy victory through the bridge he has built with Pakistan, and their president Pervez Musharraf. Despite the fact that Pakistan is a Muslim nation, despite the fact that Pakistan is an enemy of our ally India, and despite the fact that large sections of the country are populated by violently anti-American citizenry, Pakistan has been perhaps our best ally in our fight against al Qaeda.
In yet another policy victory, it has been reported today that our two nations have collaborated in the capture of Abu Faraj Farj al Liby, Al Qaeda's #3 man (if a cave dwelling mass murderer can be called such a thing). al Liby reportedly was involved in the two recent assassination attempts against Musharraf, and was involved in planning attacks against the US homeland.
I'm not only proud of American and Pakistani forces for their continued efforts in tracking down al Qaeda members, I'm grateful for the political sacrifices made by Bush and Musharraf in fighting the war on terror.
Although this point has been made before on USANow and by many others, Bush has achieved a major foreign policy victory through the bridge he has built with Pakistan, and their president Pervez Musharraf. Despite the fact that Pakistan is a Muslim nation, despite the fact that Pakistan is an enemy of our ally India, and despite the fact that large sections of the country are populated by violently anti-American citizenry, Pakistan has been perhaps our best ally in our fight against al Qaeda.
In yet another policy victory, it has been reported today that our two nations have collaborated in the capture of Abu Faraj Farj al Liby, Al Qaeda's #3 man (if a cave dwelling mass murderer can be called such a thing). al Liby reportedly was involved in the two recent assassination attempts against Musharraf, and was involved in planning attacks against the US homeland.
I'm not only proud of American and Pakistani forces for their continued efforts in tracking down al Qaeda members, I'm grateful for the political sacrifices made by Bush and Musharraf in fighting the war on terror.
Thursday, April 28, 2005
Neoliberal Hatred, Maureen Dowd Style
Can anybody tell me why Maureen Dowd is employed by the New York Times? As an opinion writer, her columns are supposed to be thought provoking. As such, it is to be expected that her political agenda will bleed through into her columns, and many on the other side of the fence will be irritated, if not offended, by her opinions.
Unfortunately, Dowd consistently reveals herself to be a hate mongering dimwit, well equipped at tapping random thoughts of hatred towards all things conservative, but totally inept at developing a rational thesis. Dowd has done little more than reveal herself to the world as being neoliberal dimentia incarnate.
It should come as no surprise that she hates Dick Cheney. But I was surprised to read about her hatred for Pope Benedict XVI in her recent column. This is Dowd's take on the Papal Conclave:
Dowd goes on to state: "the new pope is a Jurassic archconservative who disdains the "if it feels good do it" culture and the revolutionary trends toward diversity and cultural openness since the 60's." Only an imbecile like Dowd could feign surprise that the pope doesn't subscribe to the "if it feels good do it" club. Does she really expect the pope to subscribe to her dope smoking, gender bending, wife swapping, abortion as contraception culture? Furthermore, how can a man who shepherds 1.1 billion members of all racial and social backgrounds, not appreciate diversity?
I'll be the first to admit that it is a Herculean task to defend the neoliberal platform. Acting shocked that Pope Benedict doesn't preach "if it feels good do it" requires some serious talent. Claiming Cardinal Ratzinger stole the papal conclave election requires some serious credibility. Unfortunately, neither talent nor credibility are Dowd's strong suits. If Dowd is the best the New York Times has to offer in this regard, I can rest easy knowing the effluent that is radical liberalism is headed downwards into history's septic tank of flawed idealologies.
Unfortunately, Dowd consistently reveals herself to be a hate mongering dimwit, well equipped at tapping random thoughts of hatred towards all things conservative, but totally inept at developing a rational thesis. Dowd has done little more than reveal herself to the world as being neoliberal dimentia incarnate.
It should come as no surprise that she hates Dick Cheney. But I was surprised to read about her hatred for Pope Benedict XVI in her recent column. This is Dowd's take on the Papal Conclave:
- "The éminence grise who had long whispered in the ear of power and who had helped oversee the selection process ended up selecting himself. In Cheneyesque fashion, he searched far and wide for a pope by looking around the room and swiftly deciding he was the best man for the job."
Dowd goes on to state: "the new pope is a Jurassic archconservative who disdains the "if it feels good do it" culture and the revolutionary trends toward diversity and cultural openness since the 60's." Only an imbecile like Dowd could feign surprise that the pope doesn't subscribe to the "if it feels good do it" club. Does she really expect the pope to subscribe to her dope smoking, gender bending, wife swapping, abortion as contraception culture? Furthermore, how can a man who shepherds 1.1 billion members of all racial and social backgrounds, not appreciate diversity?
I'll be the first to admit that it is a Herculean task to defend the neoliberal platform. Acting shocked that Pope Benedict doesn't preach "if it feels good do it" requires some serious talent. Claiming Cardinal Ratzinger stole the papal conclave election requires some serious credibility. Unfortunately, neither talent nor credibility are Dowd's strong suits. If Dowd is the best the New York Times has to offer in this regard, I can rest easy knowing the effluent that is radical liberalism is headed downwards into history's septic tank of flawed idealologies.
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Liberal Rants from The Nation
I've been quite busy at work and home, so blog postings have been few and far between. There's probably 3 or 4 new items in the pending status that aren't yet worthy of posting because I haven't had the time to add the finishing touches. But as I've learned over the past couple of years in blogosphere, if you ever want some great neoliberal seed material wrapped up in a veneer of half-witted logic, head on over to The Nation. Here's what I found this evening.
- Says Katrina vanden Heuvel: "The nation is in the control of extremists who want to merge church and state. A line is crossed when religion demonizes politicians of certain religion--or no religion--and when the church-state separation is breached by people believing that their God is better than another God." Newsflash Katrina: Nobody on the right wants to merge church and state, we just want to protect our Judeo-Christian values from the likes of you. PS - your "extremist" adversaries recognize but one God. Few Christians have ever said "my God is better than your God", as that statement in itself is blasphemy. But then again, you've probably spent the better part of your adult life writing about the evils of the Ten Commandments in America's courtrooms, so I shouldn't expect you to understand.
- Says David Corn, "As House Republicans gleefully passed legislation to repeal the estate tax permanently, 42 Democrats--about one-fifth of the party's caucus in the House--went along for the limo ride. It's true that 160 Democrats did vote against this unjustifiable tax break for the wealthiest of Americans." David, are you aware that Americans are taxed annually on their incomes? And they're taxed daily on their purchases? Did you know dividends are already taxed twice (once at the corporate level and again at the dividend recipient level)? So why should the estate of American's be sliced up and handed out to other Americans? Where is the incentive to build wealth? When an American with a multi-million dollar estate has already paid millions of taxes over the years, why do you feel it's justified to tax his heirs yet again?
- Max Blumenthal, is outraged by "Justice Sunday", a gathering of Christian and political leaders bringing attention to Democratic antics related to keeping right wing Christians out of the judiciary. William Donahoe, head of the Catholic league, spoke about discrimination against Catholics among Democrat senators, saying "There is de facto discrimination. They've set the bar so high with the abortion issue, we can't get any real Catholics over it." Realizing he cannot counter Donahoe's claims, Blumenthal tries to undermine the coalition of Christian speakers by pointing out theological differences among Christian speakers. Dr. Albert Mohler, President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, shared the stage with Donahoe. Said Mohler in 2000 "As an evangelical, I believe that the Roman Catholic Church is a false church. It teaches a false gospel. And the Pope himself holds a false and unbiblical office." Blumenthal is mystified that Donahoe and Mohler now find common ground on the pro-life front. Wake up, Max. Despite differences in beliefs, Baptists and Catholics alike recognize abortion as intrinsically evil, and no theological difference will ever change that fact.
Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Habemus Papam!!
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger is the Catholic Church's 265th pontiff, and has taken the name Benedict XVI. I'm headed to Cologne, Germany this August for World Youth Day. Given Pope Benedict's German heritage, interest in World Youth Day 2005 has just cranked up a couple notches. Let's hope Pope Benedict will be the catalyst for a return to Christian roots among Western Europeans.
Tuesday, April 12, 2005
Did the Pope Worship Mary?
In light of the Pope John Paul II's intense devotion to Mary, the mother of Jesus, as well as his Last Will and Testament, and in light of the "M" engraved on his coffin, it might seem as if JP II worshipped the mother of Christ.
Consider the fact that this man likely prayed over a hundred thousand Hail Mary's during the course of his life. Furthermore, his motto was "Totus Tuus ego sum", which is Latin for "I am totally yours" in reference to a total devotion to Mary. In his will, the pope stated:
Wow! Can we conclude that the pope worshipped Mary? He actually put the future of the Catholic Church, and all humanity, in the hands of the Blessed Virgin!?! On the surface, this comes across as blasphemy, and a direct sin against the first commandment.
Of course, a comprehensive discussion of Catholic theology is beyond the scope of this post. But let me do my best to summarize Catholic beliefs as follows:
Catholics believe our Blessed Mother is in heaven with God, and with his son Jesus. I assume all Christians would agree.
It is not inconsistent to tell our spouses that "I am totally yours". Being devoted to and totally trusting of a person is not mutually exclusive with having a total devotion to God. I assume all Christians would agree.
Souls in heaven continue to worship our Lord in heaven. I assume all Christians would agree.
Mary, as the Mother of Christ, has a more intimate relationship with Jesus Christ than any other person who has ever lived. I assume all Christians would agree.
It is beneficial to solicit the prayers of others in our times of need. Clearly, Christ is the only intermediary between God and man, but the prayers of other men/women are heard by God. I assume all Christians would agree.
Souls in heaven can and do assist us by praying for us in heaven. I assume non-Catholics would disagree.
If we are to turn to any soul in heaven to serve as our advocate, Mary is clearly the best choice given her relationship with Jesus. I assume all Christians would agree.
We can conclude that, if you believe that souls in heaven hear our prayers and in turn pray for us, it is most beneficial to solicit the prayers of the Mother of God the Son. It is also safe to conclude that devotion does not constitute worship. In summary, the only aspect of John Paul II's devotion to Mary inconsistent with most Protestant beliefs is the idea that souls in heaven can/do pray on our behalf.
To further make the point that JP II was devoted to Mary (as opposed to worshipped Mary), let's take a quick look at another revealing quote from his Last Will and Testament, which serves to clarify his relationship with God, and the Blessed Virgin Mother:
"Once again, I wish to entrust myself totally to the Lord's grace. He Himself will decide when and how I must end my earthly life and pastoral ministry. In life and in death, Totus Tuus in Mary Immaculate."
In other words, even though he was devoted to Mary and consistently asked for her intercessory prayers, he recognized his total dependence on God's grace, and his total reliance on Christ as our redeemer.
Consider the fact that this man likely prayed over a hundred thousand Hail Mary's during the course of his life. Furthermore, his motto was "Totus Tuus ego sum", which is Latin for "I am totally yours" in reference to a total devotion to Mary. In his will, the pope stated:
- "I desire to follow Him, and I desire that everything making up part of my earthly life should prepare me for this moment. I do not know when the moment will come, but like everything else, I place it too in the hands of the Mother of my Master: Totus Tuus. In the same maternal hands I leave everything and everyone with whom my life and vocation have linked me. In these Hands I leave, above all, the Church, as well as my Nation and all humanity."
Wow! Can we conclude that the pope worshipped Mary? He actually put the future of the Catholic Church, and all humanity, in the hands of the Blessed Virgin!?! On the surface, this comes across as blasphemy, and a direct sin against the first commandment.
Of course, a comprehensive discussion of Catholic theology is beyond the scope of this post. But let me do my best to summarize Catholic beliefs as follows:
We can conclude that, if you believe that souls in heaven hear our prayers and in turn pray for us, it is most beneficial to solicit the prayers of the Mother of God the Son. It is also safe to conclude that devotion does not constitute worship. In summary, the only aspect of John Paul II's devotion to Mary inconsistent with most Protestant beliefs is the idea that souls in heaven can/do pray on our behalf.
To further make the point that JP II was devoted to Mary (as opposed to worshipped Mary), let's take a quick look at another revealing quote from his Last Will and Testament, which serves to clarify his relationship with God, and the Blessed Virgin Mother:
In other words, even though he was devoted to Mary and consistently asked for her intercessory prayers, he recognized his total dependence on God's grace, and his total reliance on Christ as our redeemer.
Thursday, April 07, 2005
Biggest Gathering Ever @ St. Peter's Square
The funeral for Pope John Paul II is drawing larger crowds than even the Vatican predicted. In addition to an expected crowd of 2 million faithful, the funeral will be attended by dozens of world leaders. Reuters is reporting that four kings, five queens, at least 70 presidents and prime ministers are expected to be in attendance, as are at least 14 leaders of other religions.
I'm amazed, and greatly appreciative of the worldwide support for Pope John Paul II. Hopefully all Christians gain strength and inspiration by the sheer number of faithful pilgrims paying their last respects in Rome this week. More importantly, I pray that the continuing coverage will serve to evangelize Christians worldwide who may longer be active in their faith.
I'm amazed, and greatly appreciative of the worldwide support for Pope John Paul II. Hopefully all Christians gain strength and inspiration by the sheer number of faithful pilgrims paying their last respects in Rome this week. More importantly, I pray that the continuing coverage will serve to evangelize Christians worldwide who may longer be active in their faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)