GraniteGrok

As the debate rages on over whether to grant “amnesty” to those persons having violated US laws as their first act on our sovereign soil, the question of securing the border completely remains unsolved. To be sure, improvements are being made, but the end result continues to be a porous border. Like water, as certain points and locations are sealed, new paths of slight resistance will open up, allowing the flow to continue unchecked. Inexplicably, many politicians and “leaders” fail to see any need to rectify a situation whereby laws that they themselves created regarding immigration to the United States are being ignored wholesale. Most ordinary Americans don’t understand why our borders can’t be defended and protected.

“Oh, Doug. There you go- being an anti-Hispanic bigot!” Huh? Who said anything about being “anti-Hispanic?” I am simply anti- ILLEGAL immigration- or to put it more plainly, anti- INTRUSION. It is my firm belief that in the post 9-11 world, we cannot allow completely unknown persons entry to the homeland undetected. As I have often stated, this is one of the main reasons we even have a government- As the Constitution says, it was created to “establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” With an enemy bent on our total destruction, we must defend ourselves, or there may be no “posterity.” I contend that politicians standing in the way of complete border security violate their oaths of defending the Constitution- including President Bush.

The problem is quite simple: While the vast majority of illegals crossing the border are coming only to find work and betterment for themselves, it stands to reason that there can be some “bad apples” mixed in. Doesn’t this seem an easy way for enemies sworn to our destruction to get here? Does it seem so implausible to imagine a few terrorists here and there, mixed in and hidden by the sheer numbers of persons streaming into America?

Consider these words of Osama bin Laden from his 1996 “Declaration of War Against the Americans”: “Due to the imbalance of power between our armed forces and the enemy forces, a suitable means of fighting must be adopted i.e using fast moving light forces that work under complete secrecy. In other words, to initiate a guerrilla warfare,
where the sons of the nation, and not the military forces, take part in it. And as you know, it is wise, in the present circumstances, for the armed military forces not to be engaged in a conventional fighting with the forces of the crusader enemy (the exceptions are the bold and the forceful operations carried out by the members of the armed forces individually,
that is without the movement of the formal forces in its conventional shape and hence the responses will not be directed, strongly, against the army).” Sounds familiar.

“Oh, but Doug- we are the United States- how could he really hurt us? These people you call the ‘enemy’ live in caves, for crying out loud! We need to keep the borders open so that we can get people here to do all those jobs Americans won’t do! It’s good for the economy!” What’s really amazing is that people can hold such views given the 9-11 attacks- but there are plenty who do. “But,” they say, “other than a lucky shot like what happened September 11^th, they can’t REALLY do much more.”

The website “Digger History” writes about a not so insignificant piece of the infamous January 1968 Tet Offensive: “While the world was watching the drama unfolding at Khe Sanh, however, NVA and VC regulars were also drifting into Saigon, Hue, and most of South Vietnam's cities. They came in twos and threes, disguised as refugees, peasants, workers, and ARVN soldiers on holiday leave. In Saigon, roughly the equivalent of five battalions of NVA/VC gradually infiltrated the city without anyone informing or any of the countless security police taking undue notice. Weapons came separately in flower carts, jury-rigged coffins, and trucks apparently filled with vegetables and rice. There was also a VC network in Saigon and the other major cities which had long stockpiled stores of arms and ammunition drawn from hit-and-run raids or bought openly on the black-market. It was also no secret that VC drifted in and out of the cities to see relatives and on general leave from their units. Viet Cong who were captured during the pre Tet build up were mistaken for regular holiday-makers or deserters. In the general pattern of the New Year merry-makers, the VC's secret army of infiltrators went completely unnoticed.” Must history repeat itself before we learn?

Posted by Doug at 6:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

 I just saw this at www.lucianne.com - it pretty much sums up how I feel today.  More on that later when I get my thoughts in order.

Hat Tip to Lucienne.com! (and once I learn a little bit more, will set up the proper linkage I know that I should be doing). 

Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American G.I. / Marine / Sailor / Airman / Coast Guardman [slight edit to mention all branches- Skip].
One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.  Thank them both today.

Posted by Skip at 7:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sargent York in WWI, Audy Murphy in WWII. Newsreels and movies richly honored them. It used to be the norm to see reports of the bravery and courage of those in our Armed Services:

Today, I ask “where are our heroes?” Why does our media refuse to show us the dedication and unselfishness of those that serve? Frankly, I believe it is partisanship, that the Powers-That-Be believe that by honoring our military is tacitly acknowledging something they do not wish to support - war.

This is not about supporting or opposing a war. This goes beyond politics. We need to keep in mind that their sacrifice, courage, bravery, and devotion (notions seemingly judged to be quaint nowadays) are qualities worthy of awe.

“Be proud of being an American. Our father came to this country, became a citizen because it was the right place for our family to be”. These are the words of Sergeant Rafeal Peralta’s last letter to his younger brother.

A Mexican immigrant, Peralta joined the Marines the day he received his green card. America was his all; hanging in his room were the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. He proved his love of country on 11/15/04. Serving with Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 3rd Marine Regiment, he was the embodiment of the Marine motto: Semper Fidelis (“Always Faithful”) - to his family, his squad and his adopted country.

Fallujah came into the American consciousness with images reminiscent of Somalia; American bodies burned and hung across a bridge. Located in the Sunni Triangle, it was filled with former Ba'athists and Islamic terrorists. Ruling as the Taliban did, their intent was to stop the upcoming elections. They turned the 1,000 city blocks into micro-fortresses. When it came time to clear the city of these Islamofacists, the Marines were responsible for clearing many of the buildings of those blocks. Dangerous work that was conducted one house, one flight of stairs, one room at a time. Sargent Peralta entered history that day in the third room of the fourth that day.

He opened the door, ready to clear the room of any terrorists. Unlike the first two rooms, this one was occupied. As it swung open, Peralta was immediately hit by the fire of jihadi AK-47s, shots registering in his body and face. He fell backward.

Taking him for dead, the other Marines stepped over him and rushed in, weapons firing. Suddenly, a foreign made grenade rolled back through the door, putting all of other Marines not directly involved in the firefight in mortal danger.

Except Peralta had not died in that opening salvo. He knew that if it went off, most of his brothers-in-arms would die. Quietly reaching out, he grabbed the grenade, and tucked it under him, his body absorbing the worst of the blast.

Without hesitation, he willingly made the ultimate sacrifice to save his buddies. That day, he joined that long, proud history of Marines that he had studied in Boot Camp who sacrificed their all for something greater than themselves – their fellow Marines. Instinctively, he put their needs before his. He demonstrated that he learned well the lesson that others mattered more than he. Like all the others struggling to earn the title of Marine during Boot Camp, he had heard and absorbed the examples of those who preceded him. He showed that sacrifice is not yet gone from our culture.

He has been nominated for the Congressional Medal of Honor.

Morale of the story? For some, there is none, for they will declare it a wasted life in an immoral war not seeing the moral of this story. For others, supreme gallantry. Some, a lesson to ponder.

For me? That there are times that call for standing for something larger than myself.

I was once asked if my country was good enough for which to die. While my answer was “Yes”, all I had to do was answer. Sargent Peralta answered that question and more, paying the cost in full without a blink.

It was later said to one of the other Marines "You’re still here, don’t forget that. Tell your kids, your grandkids, what Sergeant Peralta did for you and the other Marines today."

No, we will not forget.

Posted by Skip at 5:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Simple - my son had called from Kuwait - the first step  of coming home from Iraqi where he had been stationed at Al Asad air base for the previous 6 months.  "Hey Dad, I'll be arriving sometime early Saturday morning somewhere in Maine!"

"That's great!  We'll be there.....er, which one?" I asked.....his response was typical - "How should I know?  They don't tell me that!".  My response - Thank GOD for the Internet.  I had remembered a story about some group that met troops at an airport - the Maine Troop Greeters.

As a frequent flyer, I know that airports are dark, dreary places early in the morning.  Shops are shuttered, lights are dimmed, and the public spaces are deserted.  Those few individuals that might be present wander about  bleary eyed and alone.  This is not a place most people wish to be, and believe me, most frequent flyers try to avoid it at all costs.

That early (4:20am) Saturday morning, Col. Wakeman and his warriors from the 2nd Marine Air Wing, Squadron 1 (the "Banshees") found themselves in a much different place.  Ten to twelve members of the group called the Maine Troop Greeters happily and forcefully welcomed these sleepy travelers home.  This is a a group of retired veterans (mostly) of all branches who have made it their mission to not allow a repeat of what returning Vietnam vets had happen to them.  Each and every Marine, soldier, sailor, and airman, no matter their rank, gets a handshake, a smile of thanks, and people more than happily delivering phrases such as "Good morning....Thank you for your service.....Welcome home....Welcome back to the USA".  The ladies of the group often give out hugs to anyone willing to accept it.  Lined up one after another, the returning service man and woman  is received by each and every Greeter, ensuring that their message is heard.  At the end of the line, another Greeter directs them to their office, offering free snacks and the use of one of the forty-odd donated cell phones to call home to family and friends.  

And they have done this action over and over and over again.  And they do it with gusto and enthusiasm.  First coming together during the Gulf War, they have met every flight to Bangor (which I discovered to be a major way-point for the troops), inbound or outbound, during Operation Iraqi Freedom. This is a total of well over 1400 flights greeting over 275,000 troops.  And tonight, this was the second inbound flight - a group of Navy personnel arrived first at 1:30am.  And this intrepid group then stayed afterwards so as to be able to greet the Marines’ flight.  Not content to just quickly greet, members  make it more personable by staying, befriending, and talking with the troops until their layover is out.  Purpose?  Simply to let them know that someone cares and is thankful for what they are doing.

The Greeters must be doing a good job and many units have shown them that this volunteer service is appreciated.  Display case after case is filled with coins and the walls festooned with unit patches from those units grateful that someone was willing to put themselves out on their behalf.  

Why do they do this?  One word: Vietnam.  One seasoned citizen, a lady of 90 years, said it was the right thing to do and looked forward to greeting all these young people, her eyes twinkling even as she viewed some the more experienced Marines whose "high and tight" haircuts were flecked more grey than dark.  Others said that they had wished someone had done it for them, so they were going to ensure that they did it for today's armed service members.

Yet, the Maine Troop Greeters are not the only ones in helping the troops.  The airport management donated the large glassed in office space right next to the walkway that the troops use.  Sam's Club donates snacks and cookes (the Greeters supply the candy, relying on donations from anyone except the troops they serve).  The coffee shop, which at this time would normally be closed at any other airport, opens up for every flight.  The Gift Shop, too, lights up and throws the doors open.  The Sheraton makes it's lobby computer available for use as well.  Anything to make it more special.  Basically, a community cares.

One of the members, a Navy vet, said that he'd probably burn in hell for saying it, but he enjoys seeing the Marines - "they seem to walk a little bit straighter, smile a bit wider, and appreciate it a bit more than the others".

Another Greeter wore a red and yellow sweatshirt with the Eagle, Globe, and Anchor with the words "Not quite as mean" (actually, one would be hard pressed to find a more gentle mannered, soft spoken guy), "not as lean" (to be kind, very much an understatement), "but still a Marine" (truer words never spoken - still putting the care and welfare of other Marines above his own).

Supporting the Troops?  You bet!   Each and every day, several flights are met by these folks, putting our troops ahead of their needs.  Wwe are thankful for the work of the Maine Troop Greeters that make it a little less weary for those that deserve it.  For without their service, we'd never have known where Dan would have arrived!

Note: since this was originally written, the Maine Troop Greeters have now greeted over 300,000 of our armed forces.  This is "supporting the troops" indeed!

Posted by Skip at 5:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

With Memorial Day upon us, it seems a fitting time to share some thoughts and reflections regarding a recent trip with my children to Washington, D.C. One of the sites we visited was the newly-dedicated World War II memorial. It was nothing less than breathtaking. The strength and might and heroism that was the “greatest generation’s” America and her soldiers has been captured for posterity and quite impressively depicted in an appropriate work of monumental art. The grand design is simultaneously simple yet majestic in its homage to the brave soldiers who fought and died in the defense against world domination by evil dictators and regimes. Additionally, this latest addition to the monuments gracing the nation’s capital boldly radiates the sense of unity and single-purposeness that characterized the America of that time. I proudly stood with awe and respect of my American forebears, honoring the memory of those who gave the ultimate sacrifice.

Leaving the WWII edifice, we headed for the Vietnam Wall. Nestled in a lightly wooded area off to one side of the Reflecting Pool, the memorial, while starkly different from that which we just left, was in no way less powerful an experience. Passing a bronze statue depicting three weary, yet defiant US soldiers, the somber wall sections come into view. Forever immortalizing the names of those who never returned, the memorial evokes strong feelings of respect, honor, and yes, sadness. For it was those listed on the polished black wall and their loved ones left behind who received a double hit- that of death coupled with the abandonment of the mission and lack of support displayed by their fellow Americans at that time.

Today, of course, we live in a new time, with a new war. The bravery, duty, and sacrifice continue. Since July of 2001, the following New Hampshire (or NH affiliated) soldiers have made the ultimate sacrifice: Marine Adam R. Brooks, 20; Army Alan J. Burgess, 24; Army Nicholas R. Cournoyer, 25 (Gilmanton); Army Richard L. Ferguson, 45; Marine Timothy M. Gibson, 23; Marine Robert L. Moscillo, 21; Army Jeremy F. Regnier, 22; Army George R. Roehl, Jr., 21; Army Robert E. Rooney, 43; Army Randy S. Rosenberg, 23; Marine Peter j. Sora, Jr., 19; Army Jeremiah Jay Holmes, 27; Marine Matthew L. Bertolino, 20; Navy Daniel R. Healy, 36; Army William J. Tracy, 27; and Marine Sean M. Hughes, 20.

           The author of the following words is unknown. They seem perfect as we take the time to honor our nation’s fallen soldiers: “I want you to close your eyes and picture in your mind the soldier at Valley Forge, as he holds his musket in his bloody hands. He stands barefoot in the snow, starved from lack of food, wounded from months of battle and emotionally scarred from the eternity away from his family surrounded by nothing but death and carnage of war. He stands though, with fire in his eyes and victory on his breath. He looks at us now in anger and disgust and tells us this...

Posted by Doug at 7:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

The debate over illegal immigration rages on. The President, late to the dance, has finally weighed in on the subject. While getting (rightfully) panned by conservatives for continuing his soft stance towards illegals already in the country, he did hit on several points during his recent prime-time address that have long needed to be said in a public forum. For this, he should be applauded, followed by a close watch to keep him moving in the direction of implementing real solutions to America’s illegal immigration problem. He started by stating the obvious: “For decades, the United States has not been in complete control of its borders. As a result, many who want to work in our economy have been able to sneak across our border, and millions have stayed.” It is said that acknowledging a problem is step one towards solving it.

President Bush continued, “The United States must secure its borders. This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration, and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.” I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. My only question for the President is, “What the heck took so long?” Apparently everybody but Bush was aware of the decades long problem of poor border security. Better late than never, I guess.

As you know, President Bush said that he will be deploying National Guard units to our southern border to augment the existing border patrol. I think this is a great idea long overdue. Unfortunately, the citizen-soldiers will leave their weapons and ammo behind at their barracks. “The United States is not going to militarize the southern border,” said the Commander-in-Chief. Why not? How will they stop or deter those truly determined to enter our country- spitballs? How come the notion of using the military to defend the country’s borders is so difficult to understand? We’ve done it for Japan, Europe and South Korea for over 50 years- why not our own?

President Bush closed out his discussion on the illegal immigration issue really singing my song: “We must honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples. The success of our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of America.” I couldn’t agree more Mr. President! Let me be the first to suggest that you immediately issue an executive order replacing all multi-language government signs and documents with English-only ones, like it used to be. Include a mandate for English-only ballots too. Not only will this help persuade newcomers to quickly learn our common language- surely it will save millions of dollars worth of translation and printing costs as well. Nobody loses in this deal!

Posted by Doug at 7:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

In our local area, there are some Letter to the Editor types, on the Left hand side of the divide, who keep harping on about "the tax cuts" for the wealthy, insinuating that the tax cuts are responble for the on-going annual deficit.  So, I figured I'd look into it.

I actually agree with some of them, that the yearly deficit is large, and the actual debt is still growing.  However, when put into historical context, both have been far worse than what they are right now.  As per usual, there is the "however" part, and this holds for the effects of the tax cuts.

They keep forgetting: while the Executive branch proposes, it is Congress that spends.  And spend they have, especially the formerly frugal-sounding Republicans.  This Conservative is beside himself over the profligate manners of the Party that used to stand for smaller government.

However, back to the tax cuts, and to show that these folks are dead wrong.  Just as for Presidents Kennedy and Reagan, implementing President Bush's tax cuts has vastly raised federal revenues due to the effects on the economy (and state revenues have increased as well).  Details from the US Treasury (www.fms.treas.gov/mts/index.html) shows the following federal revenues (in trillions of dollars):

                                                              Lower Revenue

                          Year            Revenue      Months
 

                           1999          $1.857

                           2000           $2.042              

                           2001           $1.994            8

                           2002           $1.814            9

                           2003           $1.795            7

                           2004           $1.926

                           2005            $2.197
 

Where "Lower Revenue Months" stand for the number of months in that year where monthly revenues were less than the preceeding year.  Notice the drop in incoming funds right after the Internet Bubble burst, followed by the attach of Sept. 11.  However, the effects of the tax cuts started to take effect in 2003; that year, April was the last month where revenues were less than in the preceeding year.  Down at the beginning of President Bush's term, rebounding after the tax cuts made a difference.

Thus, 2004 had overall revenues 7.27% than 2003; 2005 was 14.07% better than 2004.  For the first three months of 2006, revenues are up 12.3% over those of 2005.

No, the problem is not the tax cuts.  In fact, the rich are paying more in taxes, in absolute dollars and as a percentage, than ever before.  For 2003 (last available numbers from the IRS), the top 5% of income earners pay 54.36% 34.36% of all income taxes, the top 10% pay 65.84%, and the top 50% pay 96.54%.

In other words, the bottom 50% of wage earners pay just 3.46%. 

Tax cuts?  Hardly.  Rather, the question should not be "should we roll back the tax cuts" (which actually means, "let's raise taxes!!" but who is paying their fair share?  My take is that this lack of balance it is not good for society for a few to be paying for the majority - everyone should have some "skinny" in the game. 

It is evident that once again, the tax cuts have stimulated the economy (as designed) and that the federal government has been the beneficiary of it.  Now, if we could only get the spending side back in balance..... 

Posted by Skip at 12:46 PM | Permalink

President Bush continued, “The United States must secure its borders. This is a basic responsibility of a sovereign nation. It is also an urgent requirement of our national security. Our objective is straightforward: The border should be open to trade and lawful immigration, and shut to illegal immigrants, as well as criminals, drug dealers, and terrorists.” I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. My only question for the President is, “What the heck took so long?” Apparently everybody but Bush was aware of the decades long problem of poor border security. Better late than never, I guess.

As you know, President Bush said that he will be deploying National Guard units to our southern border to augment the existing border patrol. I think this is a great idea long overdue. Unfortunately, the citizen-soldiers will leave their weapons and ammo behind at their barracks. “The United States is not going to militarize the southern border,” said the Commander-in-Chief. Why not? How will they stop or deter those truly determined to enter our country- spitballs? How come the notion of using the military to defend the country’s borders is so difficult to understand? We’ve done it for Japan, Europe and South Korea for over 50 years- why not our own?

President Bush closed out his discussion on the illegal immigration issue really singing my song: “We must honor the great American tradition of the melting pot, which has made us one nation out of many peoples. The success of our country depends upon helping newcomers assimilate into our society, and embrace our common identity as Americans. Americans are bound together by our shared ideals, an appreciation of our history, respect for the flag we fly, and an ability to speak and write the English language. English is also the key to unlocking the opportunity of America.” I couldn’t agree more Mr. President! Let me be the first to suggest that you immediately issue an executive order replacing all multi-language government signs and documents with English-only ones, like it used to be. Include a mandate for English-only ballots too. Not only will this help persuade newcomers to quickly learn our common language- surely it will save millions of dollars worth of translation and printing costs as well. Nobody loses in this deal!

Posted by Doug at 7:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

“In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”

The words are attributed to him by name, with no other accompanying information, other than a date. Thinking about using some “Teddy” for column material (no, not the reprobate “senior” Senator from Massachusetts), I thought I’d find out exactly which speech he delivered his profound thoughts on immigration assimilation.

As with all of those great quotes that anyone with an email address gets on a daily basis that sound too good to be true, I figured I’d better look it up, lest it be incorrect. A check at (www.urbanlegends.about.com) states, “Theodore Roosevelt indeed wrote these words, but not in 1907 while he was still president. The passages were culled from a letter he wrote to the president of the American Defense Society on January 3, 1919, three days before Roosevelt died.” TR focused on the immigration and assimilation issues in his later years. At the time, America was faced with massive immigration from Europe, and grappled with the right way to handle the situation. The ultimate result was a practical and orderly set of rules that served America well until the sixties generation came along and destroyed those along with everything else they touched.

Teddy’s concern was not just the protection of the American citizens. On October 12, 1915, the former President addressed the Knights of Columbus in New York City: “We cannot afford to continue to use hundreds of thousands of immigrants merely as industrial assets while they remain social outcasts and menaces any more than fifty years ago we could afford to keep the black man merely as an industrial asset and not as a human being. We cannot afford to build a big industrial plant and herd men and women about it without care for their welfare. We cannot afford to permit squalid overcrowding or the kind of living system which makes impossible the decencies and necessities of life. We cannot afford the low wage rates and the merely seasonal industries which mean the sacrifice of both individual and family life and morals to the industrial machinery.”

Back in the days of slavery, the owner had to provide food, shelter, clothing and medicines to the slaves he owned. He took care of his “possessions” to keep them in “good order.” Today, the employer of illegal (“undocumented”) aliens (“immigrants”) needs only to send a van (you know, the kind of van that the safety-Nazis won’t let school kids ride in) to a special area and pick up “day laborers,” use them for the day, pay them a meager salary and dump them back at the pen upon days end. Gone are the food, shelter, clothing and medicine. Compare yesterday’s slaves to the modern day “undocumented immigrant” and you will find that, other than the lack of whiplashes, there is little difference.

The result? Being a good and decent people, we Americans fill the gap with a generous social safety net- thereby subsidizing the modern-day slaveholders- and glossing over REAL “human rights” violations with money. The REAL “maverick” politician, Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo (www.tancredo.house.gov) tells us in an April 30th press release, “The net cost to the federal government in 2002 for public services provided to illegal aliens was $10.4 billion or $2,736 per household according to a report by the Center for Immigration Studies. Estimates for 2005 put the amount at $11.7 billion or $3,080 per household.” This is the price you and I pay to employ those who “simply do the jobs Americans won’t do.” This is also the price we pay to help those who employ those who “do the jobs Americans won’t do” become rich.

Posted by Doug at 7:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My father had a laryngectomy due to smoking – all my memories of him are with a hole in his throat. He could only speak by burping - I never heard his true voice. My stepfather died from complications of COPD from long term smoking.

We’ve known for decades that many smokers will contract lung cancer. Others suffer from lesser effects of smoking – increased incident / intensity of diseases, hacking coughs, and nicotine addiction. In many locales, it is illegal to smoke indoors, outdoors near certain buildings, and in a few places, disallowed even in your condo. Add in the expense - taxes on tobacco products continually rise and at $4/pack at 2 packs/day, the yearly cost is $2,290. Warnings have appeared for years in the media of the dangers of smoking as well as on the packs and cartoons themselves. Anti-smoking advocates never cease to figure out new ways to keep people from smoking.

The smoke lingers in the air, spoils the taste of food, and I hate the smell of cigarettes in my clothes when around those that use them.

I heeded the message: I’ve never smoked nor ever intend to. No one is allowed to smoke in my car or around my home (ask my adult son what the penalty is if I ever catch him smoking on my property, even in the driveway!).

Given all that, I can’t figure out why anyone would start or continue to smoke given all that.

With all this as background, our NH Senate recently voted down HB 1177 that bans smoking in all restaurants by a vote of 12-11.

Good for them!

My father had a laryngectomy due to smoking – all my memories of him are with a hole in his throat. He could only speak by burping - I never heard his true voice. My stepfather died from complications of COPD from long term smoking.

We’ve known for decades that many smokers will contract lung cancer. Others suffer from lesser effects of smoking – increased incident / intensity of diseases, hacking coughs, and nicotine addiction. In many locales, it is illegal to smoke indoors, outdoors near certain buildings, and in a few places, disallowed even in your condo. Add in the expense - taxes on tobacco products continually rise and at $4/pack at 2 packs/day, the yearly cost is $2,290. Warnings have appeared for years in the media of the dangers of smoking as well as on the packs and cartoons themselves. Anti-smoking advocates never cease to figure out new ways to keep people from smoking.

The smoke lingers in the air, spoils the taste of food, and I hate the smell of cigarettes in my clothes when around those that use them.

I heeded the message: I’ve never smoked nor ever intend to. No one is allowed to smoke in my car or around my home (ask my adult son what the penalty is if I ever catch him smoking on my property, even in the driveway!).

Given all that, I can’t figure out why anyone would start or continue to smoke given all that.

With all this as background, our NH Senate recently voted down HB 1177 that bans smoking in all restaurants by a vote of 12-11.

Good for them!

In my humble opinion, they have made the right decision for the proper reason. They have seen past what seems to be obvious subject, banning the foul habit of smoking, and instead zeroed in on a more fundamental one: choice.

Tobacco usage is legal by adults. It is their choice to use or quit. And choice is the operative word as it is the fullest expression of freedom. And lately, choice has been getting rather short shrift. What seems to be the logical choice (ban smoking) is really a loss of choice. Thus, another freedom disappears under the guise of “it’s good for you and society”.

In the land where the motto is proudly “Live free or die”, it is time to start taking a stand to keep from loosing our ability to make choices, one at a time.

In this case, self-styled crusaders believe that everyone should stop smoking. My word for them is a less high sounding one: Busybodies. They are the shock troops of the Nanny State; the folks that believe that they know best. They will do whatever it takes and use government to regulate anything they deem is wrong to protect you from yourself. Underlying their arguments is the basic thought of "it's for their own good!" Frankly, I translate it as "listen moron, if you can't take care of yourself, we’ll do it for you”. While their issues may be good (smoking ISN’T a good thing!), the results are the same – tactics that take away choices. Seatbelts, smoking, snack foods, soda - the list goes on and on.

This attitude, unfortunately, also gives rise to a society that sheds responsibility and just puts up with it.

Remember the story about the frog? Put into a pot of boiling water, it will struggle mightily to get out. Starting out with cool water that is then heated to boiling, however, the frog will just sit there. But no matter which way it gets into hot water, the outcome is the same. The loss of something priceless (certainly to the frog)

The moral? Question anyone that tries to limit something. No matter how good it may seem, examine it well. If it requires a loss of choice, you may be trading freedom for a pittance.

Hot water indeed.

Copyright David “Skip” Murphy, 2006

Posted by Skip at 7:40 PM | Permalink

This is a nation governed by the rule of law peopled by legal immigrants.

We have been treated to massive demonstrations from those who have crossed our borders without following our laws.
And they are demanding citizenship.

“Undocumented” has supplanted the word “illegal”. “Rule of “law” means “do not enforce”. “Secure the borders” translates to “open borders”.
Isn’t this spin on a massive scale?

When laws are created, they are to be followed and enforced. We say we trust in the rule of law. Justice is rightly judging behavior by the standard of law and not by feelings. I want our border and immigration laws enforced. Does this make me a racist, bigoted, or mean spirited?

The demonstrators? They are NOT those that have waited years, stayed within our legal process, who often have given up much to legally obtain their citizenship.
The demonstrators are not quietly following the lawful path to citizenship.

Coming from other countries, mainly Mexico, they feel they are owed US citizenship. They want to cut in line in front of those dutifully following our laws. They claim that they only want their part of the American dream.
They have crashed our gates and are demanding citizenship.

They displayed their countries’ flags with honor and pride. They flew them above an upside down “Old Glory”. They stopped only when they realized that their actions were outraging American citizens who saw the lack of respect for our national symbol for which millions have given their lives.
They are demanding American citizenship while giving their home countries more honor than America.

Why do we have to keep asking our leaders over and over “What part of ‘illegal’ do you not understand?” We are told we need “guest workers” yet illegal aliens take jobs away from the least skilled American workers by undercutting wages, not paying taxes, and gaming the social safety net.
Why do our leaders allow our laws to be flaunted?

Our leaders in the Senate offer amnesty but refuse to call it that. They propose laws offering citizenship by asking illegals to prove length of stay, paying of small fines, learning English, and paying back taxes.
Why do they give away our priceless American Citizenship to gate crashers?

Why will they not enforce our laws by deporting these lawbreakers, and heavily fining the lawbreaking employers who hire them? Why do they not dry up the incentives for illegals to come here (like all other countries do)?
Why don't we demand more from them?

Our Democratic and Republican leaders are not listening to the majority of their citizens; only content to make political deals that puts themselves first instead of the country. Has politics degenerated so much such that they so little value American Citizenship?
Why do we not demand more from them?

No other country would allow Americans to demonstrate for the same rights asked of us. The Mexican constitution denies foreigners many of the rights that they, foreigners in this country, believe they are owed.
They demand citizenship.

Their organizations, MEChA and La Raza, elevate Mexican / Atzlan culture (“Everything for the race. Everything outside the race, nothing”) and labels ours racist. Reconquistas want to turn back the clock 160 yearsl they want the US Southwest returned to Mexico. They work in concert with A.N.S.W.E.R, who has ties to organizations that would be happy to see America brought down. They show us by their actions that they do not wish to assimilate.
They demand citizenship.

They claim that we are a nation of immigrants, that anyone should have the rights of a US citizen. They refuse to acknowledge that the word “illegal” means what it means. If they did, they could not ask for what they feel what is owed them. They refuse to acknowledge that our recent ancestors followed the law.
They cannot respect our laws and they are demanding citizenship.

Under the guise of multiculturalism, they claim that we have to recognize them. That we should recognize that our nation’s borders have no meaning, that our laws are racist and bigoted.
They demand citizenship.

They are demanding citizenship?

From me?

No.

Copyright 2006, David “Skip” Murphy

Posted by Skip at 1:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)