Arizona Law - Constitutional?

Before we get into this immigration law I'd like to take a moment and give my personal thoughts on immigration. My solution to the Hispanic illegal alien problem is very simple. Armed troops with authority to shoot anyone crossing the border at any place other than an authorized check station. We do this in other police actions to control movement half way around the world. Surely our own borders should be no less a priority. This would be very effective. You only have to step over a few dead bodies before you reconsider your method of entering this country.

Second, we need to make it MUCH easier for immigrants to enter this country to work as productive members of society. I am not against immigration. It is what makes this country strong. I am against illegal aliens crossing our border damaging our social services and creating a drain on our nation.

Now to the Arizona law.

I have two issues with this law that I believe violate your constitutional rights.

1. The law allows police officers to stop and question anyone they "have reason to believe" may be in the country illegally. What could this possibly mean in Arizona other than a hostile environment for anyone of Hispanic dissent. It is very plausible that a single individual driving to work could be stopped multiple times for simple having brown skin. This is the Hispanic version of "driving while black". This is not acceptable.

2. This law requires all individuals to carry on their person documentation showing their immigration status. This could mean a green card for an immigrant, or a social security card or birth certificate for a citizen. The problem with this is that it places the burden of proof on the accused. Rather than the principle accepted by the Supreme Court since the very inception of our country as a the standard of guilt.

This second point brings to mind the gestapo asking you for your papers. You have a right in this country under the 4th amendment to a reasonable degree of privacy and security in your person. In my opinion this law is a clear violation.

Some have criticized my opinion as hypocritical as I want to shoot people crossing the boarder with out due process. Depriving them of their life without a trial constituting a violation of their 5th amendment. To these people I retort that those crossing the border are not citizens of the United States, and therefore not protected by the bill of rights. However I will concede that it may be best to claim a few hundred feet this side of the border as military base property, thereby making a trespass an invasion.

Selling My Home in the New Government Era

About a month and a half ago my wife and I listed our home with a real estate agent. We have been renting for the last few years as we waited for the market to improve. In the mean time we had renters in our home to assist us pay the mortgage. We signed the papers with our realtor on a Friday morning. Friday afternoon she placed the sign in our yard. The house was shown Saturday morning, and that afternoon we had an offer in front of us. Wow, we were happy. While it wasn't quite full asking price, it was close.

{cue the "Imperial March" music}

Enter the government. The buyer of our home is doing so through a government guaranteed loan, so of course there will be an inspection to ensure the house meets minimum requirements. The inspector asked that we:

Replace a few shingles - No problem. I have extras.
Repair flashing around Chimney - Not a big deal.
Update outlets - Sigh. Okay.
Repair cracked window in basement. Fine.

Enter bank appraiser who asks for a vapor barrier under the addition. (This is a 10'x8' room. - Why do they care. It was fine when we bought it 5 years ago.

Enter City inspector who demands we:

Replace all smoke detectors. - Why? They still work! The city just wants new ones.
Replace 60amp electrical box with 120amp. - At this point I'm pulling my hair out. The city is requiring more than even the federal government. Oh by the way, if you don't make all repairs they will not allow the transfer of the deed. UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY?

Of course you have to use their "approved" electricians. (There are only two.) You can't do the work on your own. How can this be constitutional?

It is no wonder the housing market is hurting. The government forces so many regulations that it eats up all your equity, if you are lucky enough to have some.

Is it Time to Repeal the 17th Amendment?

The 17th amendment to the constitution states that United States Senators will be elected by a vote of the people in the states. What else would we do? Well prior to the 17th amendment Senators were chosen by state legislators to represent the state at the federal level. They had control over the U.S. Senator in that they would even tell them how they were expected to vote on various bills.

Originally the people of the states would vote for their U.S. House representatives every 2 years, and the state legislators would appoint a U.S. Senator every 6 years. This gave the people representation in the government, but also allowed the state, as a state, to be represented.

In 1835 8 U.S. Senators were forced by their states to resign from their posts after not following the states will in their voting regarding President Andrew Jackson's war against the Bank of the United States. So you can see that consequences to Senators under this system are swift and severe. Contrast that with today where U.S. Senators only face voters every 6th year.

The 17th amendment was ratified in 1912. It took more than 85 years to become law since the first time it was introduced.

Obama, Not so Concerned With Amendment #4

Not too awful long ago I wrote a post regarding my change of heart concerning the patriot act. Mostly the reason boils down to that I don't believe you can trust the government of the United States, or any government for that matter, to do the right thing. Well that goes for Bush and Obama alike. You may have read the story recently where officials in the Obama administration said the following regarding tracking citizens via their cell phones without a warrant. Here is the full story.

In that case, the Obama administration has argued that warrantless tracking
is permitted because Americans enjoy no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in
their--or at least their cell phones'--whereabouts.

In the times we live it seems that privacy really has become something the government believes is not a right. The fourth amendment to the constitution disagrees and reads as follows:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

While cell phones obviously had not been conceived at the time, the word "effects" applies to all your possessions. Including a cell phone and it's where abouts.

Abortion Thoughts

I read a number of blogs of women who are ardently pro-choice. I don’t know why I read them. Perhaps it is just because I like to read the thoughts of people who have a radically different world view than my own. I am bored to tears reading the words of those who I agree with on most every subject. Especially if I disagree with the way the promote their ideas.

For some reason those who are pro-life have been labeled Super-Christians, murderers, haters, and so forth. I wish I could disagree with you, but when I look around I see much of the same even as a pro-life Christian. Here are some of my thoughts.

As a Christian you are called to love others. It is tough to do that standing in front of an abortion clinic holding a sign that calls scared teenage girls murderers.

As a Christian you are called to proclaim the good news of Christ, which is about forgiveness of sin. You are not called to convict others of their sin. That is the Holy Spirits job. You aren’t any good at it anyway.

Abortion is a sin…… So is hating someone. In fact it is the same as murder to God. I wonder if you are guilty of that. As you know, if you have broken just one of the laws you are guilty of breaking the whole law, hence the need for Christ and His good news.

Do I believe abortion is a good thing? No. But I believe as Christians we are fighting the wrong battle. Instead we should love those who are hurting, provide food for those in need. We should provide medical care for those in need, and show the lost world that there is a better way. Not doing so with an air of contempt, but with compassion and understanding.

Women who have had abortions have not done so on a whim, and many times they are hurting over the difficult decision. Standing in front of them calling them murderers is not what Christ would do. He would show compassion. Will you?

American Community Survey

I received my survey in the mail a few days ago and have been mulling it over ever since. At this point I am leaning towards not filling it out. The questionnaire comes with a little pamphlet that portends to tell you why it is so important that you don't simply throw it in the trash. For instance it is used to determine your representation in the House of Representatives and is used for State redistricting purposes. This by the way is the only use outlined by law. It then goes on to say that it is used for the purposes of deciding where new schools and hospitals will be built. No it doesn't. First of all schools are decided on by the local school boards and hospitals are built by private entities. Unless of course our government is planning to take over both sectors of our workforce.

All that is fine and dandy, but all they really need to know is number of people in the house. Perhaps the sex of those living in the house and the ages. That is all, perhaps it would be good to know ethnicity, but I don't see the need.

Question to which I take exception:
House Hold Info:
#1 First and Last Name
Housing:
#1 What best describes this building? (mobile home, single family, apartment, etc)
#2 When was it built?
#3 When did you move in?
#4 How many acres?
#5 What were last year's agricultural sales from the land?
#6 How many rooms?
#8 Is there; hot water, flush toilet, tub or shower, stove, refrigerator, telephone?
#9 How many vehicles are kept at this home?
#10 What fuel do you use for heating?
#11 What is your electric/gas/water/other heating bills?
#12 Did anyone in your house receive food assistance last year?
#13 How much is your condominium fee?
#14 Do you own your home?
#15 How much is your rent?
#16 What is your dwelling worth?
#17 What are your property taxes?
#18 How much is your home owners insurance?
#19 Do you have a mortgage?
#20 Do you have a second mortgage?
PERSON 1:
#7 Where were you born?
#8 Are you a citizen?
#10 Have you attended school or college in the past 3 months?
#11 Education level?
#14 Does this person speak a language other than English?
#15 Previous address?
#16 Does this person have health insurance?
#17 Difficulty hearing or seeing?
#18 Have any physical, emotional, or mental conditions?
#19 Marital status?
#29 Last week did this person work for pay at a job?
#30 Where?
#31 How does this person get to work?
#32 How many people ride to work in the same vehicle?
#33 What time did this person leave for work?
#34 How long does it take to get there?
#41 What type of business did this person work in? (private, non-profit, Gov't, self)
#46 What were this persons duties at work?
#47 What was your income last year?

These are certainly not all the questions that are no business of the government, only the most egregious. A single individual would answer 72 very personal questions if they filled out this questionnaire. Am I the only whack job that has a problem with this? These questions do not serve the purpose of the census as described in the constitution.

Article 1; Section 2; Clause three of the constitution outlines that the census be taken every ten years for the purpose of determining the number of people living in each state. Here is the text if you wish to read it.

Same Sex Marriage Fails Again

Same sex marriage still has a zero percent passage rate when put to a vote by the people of ANY state. Zero percent. That isn't very good. Is it?

(photo from AP story)

Uncle Sam Doesn't Trust Me

I am currently fighting to restrain an all too familiar feeling. I have had this feeling while sitting in the DMV office, post office, or pretty much any other pathetically run government agency.

A few weeks back my wife and I applied for our passports. We both went to the post office, the only place to take care of this in our county. We both presented birth certificates along with drivers licenses as proof of identification and citizenship.

Today we checked the mail to discover that while my wife received her passport no problem, I get a letter from the field office in Seattle. It reads, and I quote, "Unfortunately the identification you provided is not sufficient for passport purposes."

WHAT? Actually it must be, otherwise you wouldn't have issued my wife's passport. Or it isn't actually enough, and you issued hers anyway. Either way I have deemed your office inept.

Well, that is what I would like to say to them when I call tomorrow, but I won't. I'll call the office to see exactly what I can do to resolve this matter. I will do so in a polite and courteous manner. I will jump through all their hoops until they have deemed my lack of an Egyptian accent sufficient to be rewarded with a passport.

Admitting a Mistake

Directly following 9-11 I was filled with a flood of emotion. They were mixed. My initial reaction was one of fear, but within hours it was replaced with anger and pride. I was indignant that someone would come to my country with an intent of harming my fellow countrymen and women. I can only imagine that others felt the same. At that moment I was willing to hunt them down and string them up for all to see as an example to those who would plot harm against us in the future.

As a nation we reacted much the same way. We gathered up our warriors and sent them on a mission to hunt down those responsible. In addition we passed sweeping legislation nearly immediately granting our government the ability to bypass our bill of rights.

At the time I was on board. I was wrong. At the time I didn't see this as handing over our rights willingly, but rather as a tool to hunt down terrorist. In short I was trusting our government to use the powers it was granted by congress, and thus the people, wisely.

The Patriot Act which had a sunset, but continues to be renewed, says that the FBI need not show probable cause, nor even reasonable grounds to believe, that the person whose records it seeks is engaged in criminal activity. It also allows for further investigation by the FBI if they simply don't like the books you are checking out from the library, or what you are writing on your blog for that matter.

This was a mistake. It was passed through Congress based on our fear. We were wrong. We should have headed the warnings of those sounding the alarm that we were giving up our civil liberties.

Do I still believe in hunting down those responsible. Yes. I do not believe we should change who we are to do so.

Gun Toting Hate Mongers

Beginning late in the Clinton administration I've been noticing a growing gulf of ideals between the two major political parties in the United States. From Lewinsky to Bush Lied People Died, to now, town hall meetings with protesters carrying guns. Are these things just an example of citizens exercising their rights to disagree with government? Or, are we growing more and more divisive in our vision for this great country?

Maybe I'm the only right winger willing to be honest about this subject, but the carrying of guns to protest the health care bill is not a simple, "I'm carrying because it is my right to do so." It is instead, "I'm carrying this gun to remind you that the 2nd amendment exists to allow citizens to rise up against a corrupt government." And I'm a supporter.

Of course we don't want to say that is really what the "gun toting" is about. But it is. And that is okay. That is the purpose of the the right to bear arms, so that in the event of a government growing corrupt, the people have a means to remove them, forcibly if necessary, from their positions of power.

Imagine a world without this right. It really is the teeth in the constitution. Pretend if you will for a moment if all guns were removed from the people of this nation. Then imagine that legislators decide all on their own that they will no longer require an election to maintain power. How would you remove them? You couldn't. They would have the force of the military behind them and you would have no means of defense.

Are you okay with that?

Saturday evening my wife and I called some friends following a week long excursion working the county fair. Although we were a bit tired from working late each evening and a tad sluggish from all the corn dogs and funnel cakes, we were excited about spending time with our friends.
Upon calling them we found that they were out in the hills just outside of town shooting. I'll admit I was a bit excited at this point, knowing my friend had recently purchased an AR-15. You can see a picture of one above. For those of you unfamiliar with this weapon, it is the quintessential assault rifle for home defense, or in our case defending the outskirts of our small town from watermelons that had somehow infiltrated our security. Town residents can sleep well at night knowing that there were 4 of us on the case. We were armed to the teeth with a semi-automatic .22 hand gun, .22 rifle, 20 gauge shotgun, .40 caliber handgun and of course the AR-15. The assault rifle made light work of the invaders. This weapon has only a slight recoil, but the compression is amazing. Standing 10 feet away I could feel the air compression from the explosion of the rounds.

It was a fun evening. I had always wanted to shoot one of these guns. Imagine we shot all those rounds and not a single liquor store was held up, and no one was killed. Weird.

Life Minus Men

Apparently a world with out men is closer than you think. Scientists have now created human sperm from stem cells. Of course this brings up the concept of life without men. As the sperm can be created from any stem cell, including that of women. You could literally have a child with only a mother. This prospect doesn't scare me. Even if women are able to somehow wipe out men, they will always keep a few around. Likely in a warehouse somewhere, or maybe each woman would have one in the closet. Men would be something along the lines of a vacuum, coffee maker, or other appliance. Women would pull out the man on occasion for specific purposes such as changing the oil in their car, killing a spider, and opening difficult pickle jars. Don't worry men you'll still have a place in this world.

If I had Voted for Barack Obama

I can only assume people voted for Barack Obama because they agree with his policy statements. So, if I had voted for President Obama, would I be happy with his performance to this point?

Obama Policy: Pull out the troops from Iraq. Keep them in Afghanistan.
Result: Well, I'm not exactly happy. Obama kept the EXACT time table set forth by Bush. But what else could he do. The war in Iraq was all but over, and the pull out would have been very difficult to have pulled off any sooner. There is now a major thrust in Afghanistan. Just where President Obama said we should be.

Obama Policy: Ensure every American has health care insurance.
Result: He is certainly pushing for it. I'm happy that possibly by next year I will no longer pay for health care what so ever.

Obama Policy: Improve diplomatic relations through talk as opposed to force.
Result: This is certainly what he is trying to do, thought it seems he is alienating some of our closest allies (the Brits, Israel) in an effort to be nice to Iran, Venezuela and others. This is what he said he would do. I'd like it if he could do this without upsetting our long time friends.

Obama Policy: Force "green energy on the public.
Result: While there have been some rumblings about this on a large scale cap and trade doesn't seem to be close to a reality yet. There are vouchers to buy greener cars. That is a step in the right direction. I'd still like to see Obama push to rid the world of coal fire power plants.

Obama Policy: Set up a system that rids us of the old model of "bubble and burst".
Result: Giving money to those troubled companies, and setting up government programs to ensure they are run properly in the future. Using tools like, pay czar, car czar x2. Economy seems to be getting better. Credit goes to Obama.

I guess if I'm an Obama supporter I have to be happy with his performance. I would have to say that as far as campaign promises go, Obama seems to be more serious about keeping them than most presidents. Or perhaps he just has the majorities to get it done.

Government to Monitor Your Blog

Watch what you are saying boys and girls on the blogosphere, Uncle Sam wants to make sure you are on the up and up. According to reports from the AP, The Federal Trade Commission is set to monitor blogs to ensure any product review you make, is not made in exchange for compensation. According to the FTC many bloggers have received $500 gift cards or even thousands of dollars for a 200-word post. Apparently under the new regulations which are expected to be approved latter this summer a simple graphic ad with link for which you receive compensation, would be enough to trigger oversight.

Is this really necessary? Are there really throngs of people out there buying products based on anonymous reviews. Where is the personal responsibility? Are we really going to pay people to read and monitor blogs to make sure you aren't getting paid?

If you follow this trail to it's logical conclusion it does not end well for the individual. Imagine you tell your friend to shop at Wal-Mart because they always have the lowest price. (or so they claim) But soon you are being sued by the federal government because you own stock from Wal-Mart from back when you worked there in college. Sure you had forgotten all about it, but never the less, you have an interest in the company.

Perhaps I'm being a bit overly dramatic, but maybe not.

How does Obama Differ from Chavez Again?

I'm sure they're different. I just can't seem to remember how at the moment. Apparently Obama not wanting to be out done by his friend in the southern hemisphere is seeking more power to seize the companies that he has deemed necessary for the American Economy. Here is more from the story written in the LA Times.

Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would
have new powers to seize key companies -- such as insurance giant American
International Group Inc. -- whose failure jeopardizes the financial system.
Currently, the government's authority to seize companies is mostly limited to
banks.

So, just to clarify. Chavez bad for seizing privately held companies. Obama good. Hmmm. So I guess Obama gets to decide which companies would jeopardize the financial system if they fail. Or maybe we should appoint a czar for this task. After all Senate approval and over site of something of this magnitude is not really necessary. No, as with all the czars he will answer directly to Obama. I guess we didn't really need the separation of powers, as dictated in our constitution.

What Do You Want From Your Government?

The basic decision in this year's election is whether you want the federal government to grow, or grow faster. In an effort to provide full disclosure I'll be voting for John McCain tomorrow morning when the polls open, however, if there were a candidate on the ticket who would shrink government, I'd be voting for them. And I don't mean a candidate who has no hope of attaining the presidency.

I feel like an orphan at this point. Left on the door step of the monastery by W, now 4 years later they are coming back pandering for my vote. Sad part is that just like an abused child who no matter how injured by the parent, continues to seek after their approval. Okay I'm getting off topic. Here is what I want my government to do.

1. Provide a military so powerful no one dares threaten our security.

2. Provide for a court system to settle disputes both civil and criminal.

3. Provide an interstate transportation system second to none.

4. Protect citizens abroad.

5. Ensure states make no law infringing on rights granted in the constitution and bill of rights.

I do not want my federal government to get involved in:

1. The economy

2. Education

3. Making life fair

4. Health care

5. Providing a safety net

If a state wants to get involved in those areas, great. As long as they don't infringe on your rights. What do you want your federal government to "do" for you?

Capitalism: A Failed Policy

"Capitalism doesn't work in today's market place." This was a phrase I heard yesterday as I was standing around the coffee pot before any actual work began. This from the brain of a college student majoring in BUSINESS. I could hardly believe my ears, but yes this is the wisdom being taught at our colleges and universities today. Here is the thought process.

Due to the cold war the media went on a massive propaganda campaign to demonize socialism. It really isn't a bad thing, it's a good thing, in fact it may be the best thing. You just believe it is a bad thing because you have been brainwashed by the media. Capitalism doesn't work. It is only good for the employer, not the employee. As proof of why capitalism doesn't work this person then pointed to the collapse of the current banking system in the United States. "See that is what capitalism gets you. And it just hurts the common people."

Although I am tempted to explain why this kid is ignorant, uninformed and just plain wrong. I'll let this one stand on its own.

The ATM is CLOSED!

Shortly after turning 18 I made my first trip into a casino. I remember being overwhelmed when I walked through the doors to find all the bright flashing lights, all around be were the sounds of gamblers winning at the machines. Interesting isn't it that when the machines give you a little more than you put it, the bells begin to sound, the lights flash and you envy the person whose machine is announcing their big win.

I remember sheepishly asking my brother, "How do these things work?", a little embarrassed that I didn't know how to use the machine instinctively. "Easy", he said, "put your money in here", I did, "and pull the lever". I did. Soon what appeared to me to be a random group of pictures appeared on the machine, the bells flashed and 20 dollars in quarters came spilling out of the machine. My first quarter and I was a winner. If this is what gambling is all about, I like it.

It didn't take long, however, to discover that my first experience was not the norm. Shortly thereafter I had extinguished the 20 dollars I had won and was just enjoying the free pepsi. Can you imagine? All the soda you want.. for free. This place is great.

A friend of mine had a little bit different story. You see he had an endowment. So instead of 20 dollars, he put in 100. Hey, I guess if you can afford it, good for you. Then after that he went to the ATM and took out another hundred, followed by another hundred. All to chase after that original hundred dollars the house now owned in addition to the extra money he sent in after it. My friend had a gambling problem. The only way to stop him was to keep him away from the casino, AND the ATM.

My friends we, the United States of America have become that man. We have lost our tail in risky ventures in the financial industry and now we are going back to the ATM making a withdrawl of almost a trillion dollars more, hoping a fools hope that we can recover what we have lost.

If we are to save this country we love lets admit we have a problem, accept the loss, and tackle congress before they make it to ATM. After all, it is not only our money on the other side of that ATM it is also our kids and grand kids.

Life... Taking a Poo on Me

Have you ever been driving down the city street and wished the vehicle next to you would, "do something" about that noise emitting from their vehicle. That was the thought running through my mind as I rode my motorcycle home following a wonderful dinner with friends.

After a couple of blocks though, I realized it was my vehicle making the noise. Not only was it making a noise, I began to smell fire. A scary prospect when riding on only 2 wheels. My wife and I quickly pulled into a nearby parking lot. That is when I discovered the most horrifying fact. Someone had "hit and run" me while I was enjoying my meal in the restaurant. They had backed into my bike, severely denting the fender and pushing it up against the tire, causing the noise, and the friction causing the paint to burn. I was not pleased. I called the authorities.

Now I don't know if you know it or not, but the police have more important things to deal with than simple hit and runs. Matter of fact, they won't even send an officer to take a report. I went from "not pleased" to very angry. I called my insurance company.

After going through the mind numbing prompts, I got an agent on the phone. She told me that I could pull the fender off the tire if I wanted to, but if I did, she couldn't guarantee they would pay for the damage. She could have someone out to look at the damage the following day. Due to the fact that I didn't feel much like walking the 5 miles home, I asked how in the world she expected me arrive home this evening. She asked if I was expecting a tow. Apparently she thinks a city wrecker can tow a motorcycle. If you are wondering... they can't. At this point I went from "very angry" to livid. I pulled the fender off the tire and drove back to the restaurant cringing at every bump.

To my surprise there were some witnesses to the accident in the outside seating area. They identified the vehicle and license plate. Suddenly the police decided this was worth their time. They would send a patrolman. The anger barometer began to decline, I called back the insurance company.

This time I spoke to a very reassuring agent named Wes. Wes was very kind and assured me that though the adjuster would not be able to look at the vehicle until the following day they would most assuredly pay for the damage. Almost back to tolerable to be around. We drove home.

The accident happened around 6:30PM, at roughly 11:30 the police arrived to take a statement. They have tracked the offending vehicle to a rent-a-car company, and believe they can ascertain who was driving at the time. I am gleeful at the idea of putting behind bars whoever may be responsible for the damage to my precious motorcycle. If only the death penalty could be extended to hit and run.

Today's sermon was about forgiveness. Darn you preacher.

Wrong on Ramsey Case

Officials cleared the immediate family of JonBenet Ramsey in her death Wednesday thanks to new DNA evidence that links the murder to a still unknown man.

I believe I'm the kind of person that can admit when I'm wrong. I'll have to admit I've thought all this time that one of the Ramsey's committed the murder of this little girl. I mean there is just too much funny stuff with this case. Perhaps they had something to do with it, but the recent DNA evidence to come back suggests otherwise. Were you wrong too?