Texas Regains Its Senses
Feb 10, 2011 Political
Yesterday the news was out that a few schools in Texas were going to require children to learn the Arabic language and about Arabic culture. Let me be clear, this was not an elective offering, this was a mandatory class for children.
The school system imposed this requirement under a grant from The Department of Education which has deemed Arabic the language of the future. Parents of these children were caught off guard and said they knew nothing about this new requirement.
It looks as if, for now, the program is on hold. Seems the uproar has but the brakes on this whole mess.
As well it should.
I have no problem with children learning to speak Arabic as long as it is something they get to choose. Children are not forced to learn any other language and they should not be forced to learn Arabic. Most of the parents who objected did so based on this aspect of it.
If schools want to teach about Arabic culture then they can do so as part of a class that teaches about a multitude of cultures.
I have no idea why it is the federal government thinks that the Arabic language is the language of the future when the people who speak it are still living in the 7th century.
What I also have a problem with is The Department of Education has decided that it will force our children to learn a foreign language when our own government will NOT force immigrants to learn English. If you want to make this a better place then FORCE immigrants to learn English. Then we will never hear “for Spanish, press 2.”
Besides, the way America is going some form of Chinese will be the language of our future…
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: arabic, forced indoctrination, mandatory language, texas
Smartest POTUS Evah!
Aug 30, 2010 Political
The Far Side had a cartoon some years ago where a door to the school for the gifted had a sign that read “Pull” and a supposedly gifted kid pushing (here). Interestingly, we have some very gifted people occupying the White House. They just passed through a rainy New Orleans on their way home from their 8th vacation this year and Barry and Michelle had a few problems.
Two things are troubling about the above picture. One is that Michelle is ducking as if she is tall enough to hit the top rail that is the focus of troubling thing number two. Barack Obama, the smartest POTUS evah, is holding the umbrella in such a fashion that he cannot get through the gate. Obama does not appear to be lowering the umbrella acting instead as if he can get it to pass through the metal crossbar. Well, they say he can walk on water…
Smartest Evah……
Environmentally Friendly Rally Attendees
The Restoring Honor Rally was Saturday. The people who attended that rally, the ones who were raised to take care of themselves and to respect the property of others, left no mess. They picked up their trash and left the place clean. This is a stark contrast to the Obama inauguration where those who believe in dependence on government and cradle to grave care left tons of trash lying about for someone else to clean up. This also begs the question about which group actually cares more about the environment.
I read that some lib websites were claiming the group cleaned up to deprive parks employees from getting work. Don’t they have jobs to do whether or not there is trash to pick up?
Not So Smart Congresswoman
Eddie Bernice Johnson is in a bit of hot water. She used money allocated to the black caucus to award scholarships to children in her family and to children of a top aide. This was not allowed according to the guidelines for awarding the money. The awards are invalid and the rules state the money must be repaid.
Johnson claims she did not do this deliberately and that names come across her desk and that others handle this blah, blah. Her two grandchildren were recipients and it is unlikely their names came across her desk and she did not recognize them. She was aware of the rules and should have investigated further (maybe it was kids with the same names). She did not do what she was supposed to and I find it very unlikely that she made a mistake.
I believe she is in a safe Congressional District that was drawn up to favor her party and she felt safe in an environment where the word racist flies as soon as someone has an issue with a black politician. She was using funds to help her family and the children of her aide.
This is wrong and should be fully investigated.
Already Enough Boobs In Politics
A Venezuelan politician is holding a raffle to raise campaign cash. He is raffling off a set of breast implants in order to raise money for his campaign. I wonder if he is running for an official office or a titular position…
I hope it does not come down to this in America. Our political system already has way too many boobs in it…
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: environment, johnson, moron, Obama, restoring hope, scholarships, texas, umbrella
I Thought The Feds Handled The Border
May 27, 2010 Political
The Arizona law has a lot of people in a snit. The opponents of the law that allows police officers to check the immigration status of anyone who has some interaction with police (a traffic stop, etc) continually mischaracterize the law and spread fear that it might lead to racial profiling.
This is hogwash but it has not stopped groups who advocate illegal activity from spreading the lies and the fear anyway. The Attorney General of the US, Eric Holder, is looking into challenging the Arizona law in court on Constitutional grounds. Holder, who did not read the law before condemning it (a common trait in the Obama regime), believes that enforcement of immigration laws is a federal government job and that states do not have the authority to enforce federal laws. As an aside, Arizona’s laws is a state law that makes it a crime to be in the state illegally. The only way to establish that is to check and see if people are in the country illegally.
This position is somewhat ridiculous. State and local police officers enforce federal laws all the time. Bank robbery is a federal crime but if a bank in any state is robbed the local police respond and have the authority to arrest the bank robbers. Can you imagine what would happen if FBI agents showed up and were told that the criminals were there with the police but they had no authority to enforce federal laws by arresting them so they let them go?
Kidnapping is a federal crime but state and local police respond to that crime. The same holds true for a number of crimes and no one seems to care that local officers are involved. For some reason though, people get uptight when the law deals with securing our borders or illegal immigration.
Surprisingly, Barack Obama has ordered 1200 National Guard troops to the border in Arizona (looks like the law is working) but has ignored a similar request from Texas. I don’t understand why Obama needs to give the order. If he takes charge of them they are not allowed to perform police functions. The NG belongs to the states so the governor of the state is in charge of them. If Texas or Arizona need Guardsmen on the borders then they should just deploy them. States have the right to keep people from crossing their borders illegally and if the governors deployed the NG then the soldiers could perform law enforcement functions. They could detain illegal entrants.
The federal government has been bellowing about the federal functions and how the security of the border is their job blah, blah. But an interesting thing happened today.
Texas was warned about the possibility of terrorists trying to enter the country illegally across the Mexico-Texas border. If stopping these illegal entrants is a federal job and the feds are the ones who should be enforcing their laws, why alert the local police? Why not send federal agents to guard the border and look for the terrorists?
One could make the argument that the state has the right to stop people at the border but that once they are here illegally the states have no authority to check immigration status or to detain people for being here illegally. Immigration being a federal job and all.
So if one of these terrorists crosses the border unseen but two days later an officer recognizes him from a photo, is the officer allowed to confront the guy and ask for identification? Can the officer check the immigration status of the terrorist?
If the answer is no then why alert Texas law enforcement and ask them to be on the lookout? If the answer is yes then why is the Arizona law wrong?
I have been thinking about the Arizona law and even though I have no problem I have a solution that will guarantee that no one is profiled. It will not please the left or any of the illegal immigrant groups who are aiding and abetting the criminals but it will work.
They should have immigration checkpoints. These would be just like sobriety checkpoints, would be random, would move from place to place and would require all people in every car that passes through the checkpoint to provide proof that they are here legally. Children would be considered legal if the adults in the car are legal.
The police could have cruisers set up to look for people who turn around to avoid the checkpoint. That would be probable cause to check their status.
The people who do not like Arizona’s law will not like the checkpoints but the courts have ruled sobriety checkpoints legal so long as they are random or everyone is checked. Illegal immigrant checkpoints are a great way to go. The law says that to check for immigration status the people have to make contact with police for some other reason first. No problem, just say the checkpoints are sobriety checkpoints and then ask everyone, and that is the key, for proof of status.
This could obviously be tweaked to work without violating the law or the Constitution.
The stops could also serve another purpose. Police could hand out literature explaining that there are sanctuary cities not far from Arizona and include a list of those cities and directions to get to them.
Arizona would be happy to send its illegals to California. Hell, the federal government will probably not take any referrals to ICE so Arizona might as well send the illegals where they are wanted.
As for Texas. It should tell the federal government to come look for the terrorist so that the state does not run afoul of federal immigration laws…
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: arizona, eric holder, illigal immigrants, lies, national guard, terrorists, texas
The Tenth Amendment Becomes Hip
Jul 25, 2009 Political
Well, Governor Rick Perry has rediscovered (or at least begun to assert) the terms of the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, you know, the one that declares that all powers not specifically granted to the Federal Government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to it by the Constitution, are the specific powers of either the State government, or the people.
This is in regards to all the various programs Hussein wants to cram down the throats of the states. Hussein wants the states to do this, because acceptance of the money would begin to erode the rights of the states that would take the money.
Gov. Rick Perry, raising the specter of a showdown with the Obama administration, suggested Thursday that he would consider invoking states’ rights protections under the 10th Amendment to resist the president’s healthcare plan, which he said would be “disastrous” for Texas.
Interviewed by conservative talk show host Mark Davis of Dallas’ WBAP/820 AM, Perry said his first hope is that Congress will defeat the plan, which both Perry and Davis described as “Obama Care.” But should it pass, Perry predicted that Texas and a “number” of states might resist the federal health mandate.
“I think you’ll hear states and governors standing up and saying ‘no’ to this type of encroachment on the states with their healthcare,” Perry said. “So my hope is that we never have to have that stand-up. But I’m certainly willing and ready for the fight if this administration continues to try to force their very expansive government philosophy down our collective throats.”
star-telegram.com
It’s not just about healthcare- that is just the problem du jour with the Hussein administration, which keeps hammering at the door of State’s Rights, hoping to weaken this fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution.
It is a fact that the various states know better than the Federal Government just what specific concerns the residents of a specific state need- that is so simple and true that it needs no further elaboration, but in their quest to have the federal government supreme in its authority (contrary to the Laws of the Constitution), it has hoped, begged, pleaded, and threatened the various State governments to take the bait, er, money.
Alaska declined. In what would be Sarah Palin’s last official act, she reasserted the soverignity of State’s Rights with regard to Alaska- so far, only two states have signed this statement, Tennessee being the other one. Hope reigns supreme that other states regain their sanity, as well as their pride.
This statement was defeated in the Texas Legislature, by the same Democrats who thought that running off to Oklahoma was a good idea, instead of doing the job their constituents had elected them for. As far as I am concerned, they are traitors- turncoats who refuse to truly represent their electorate.
Nevertheless, Governor Perry knows that there is now a need and a time to draw the line in the sand, and just say no, in the strongest possible terms.
It really is a state issue, and if there was ever an argument for the 10th Amendment and for letting the states find a solution to their problems, this may be at the top of the class,” Perry said. “A government-run healthcare system is financially unstable. It’s not the solution.”
Perry heartily backed an unsuccessful resolution in this year’s legislative session that would have affirmed the belief that Texas has sovereignty under the 10th Amendment over all powers not otherwise granted to the federal government.
In expressing “unwavering support” for the 10th Amendment resolution by state Rep. Brandon Creighton, R-Conroe, Perry said “federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens and its interference with the affairs of our state.”
star-telegram.com
In our society, every part of the various governments have their place- county, state, and federal all have a place in this mosaic we call government, but when one part threatens to overwhelm the others, and attempt to assert an overwhelming and illegal control over the others, well, then it is time to tell the federal government to back the hell off.
That time is now.
Former Rep. Arlene Wohlgemuth of Burleson, a senior fellow for healthcare at the conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation, echoed Perry’s assertion that the Obama plan is the wrong approach and could have disastrous financial consequences for Texas.
Under the Senate version of the bill, she said, an expansion of the joint federal-state Medicaid program for the poor could cost Texas $4 billion a year.
“There are good solutions” to the country’s healthcare problems, Wohlgemuth said. “This isn’t it.”
Perry said the plan is another example of the Obama administration’s “massive takeover of the private-sector economy.”
“I hope our leaders will look for solutions that don’t dig our country further into debt,” he said.
Perry called on Texans in the House and Senate to oppose the plan. “I can’t imagine that anyone from Texas who cares about this state would vote for Obama Care. I don’t care whether you’re Democrat or Republican,” he said.
Of those Texans who might consider supporting the plan, he said: “This may sound a little bit harsh, but they might ought to consider representing some other state because they’re sure not representing Texas.”
star-telegram.com
Yes, Texans need to represent Texas, no matter where they are on the political spectrum- now is definitely not the time to cowardly cave into pressure from the Feds, because ceding control to the Federal Government on this and many other initiatives the Hussein Administration has proposed or passed is to give up your liberty, your freedom, and your identity as a member of the state (in this instance, Texas) that you’re from.
Over the years, we, as a people, have become more homogenized, our regional identities softening, and in some cases disappearing entirely. This is not always a good thing. True, it is in some cases easier to understand someone’s accent from Maine, (or Texas) than it used to be, but the “Identities” of these regions have gone also, and that was always, for me, such a wondrous way of underscoring the fact that we were separate and very different states, held together by a federal government that allowed the states to retain their regional flavor.
That is no longer true, and while the slide towards a vanilla, tasteless, sameness has begun awhile back, this intrusion by the Feds would absolutely kill any individual state’s sovereignty, and that is not good, that’s bad.
Almost as bad as the Healthcare plan itself.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: federal mismanagement, healthcare, state's rights, texas
State’s Rights v Obama Administration
Apr 16, 2009 Political
The Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution says “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the People.”
This may end up being the single most important amendment in our lives at this moment, as His Anointedness attempts to do an end- around with respect to “offering” the states bailout money. If the Governors decline the money, the O’bama administration says that the respective Legislatures may override the Governors veto of the money.
If, however, the states do take the money, they will find the Federal government doing extensive oversight on these states, and intruding into state business in clear violation of the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment, but then this has been a trend for some time, and it needs to cease now.
States know better what their own citizens needs are than do the mokes in Washington, and perhaps there needs to be some failure and pain in this nation regarding the overspending of money, whether by an individual or a government.
After all, pain is a wonderful teacher- the lesson usually only needs to be experienced once to make an impression. There need to be consequences for actions taken, and a state that has been fiscally responsible should not have to take this money when so many unconstitutional strings are attached.
In Texas, two state lawmakers, Rep. Brandon Creighton, and state Sen. Robert Nichols introduced legislation in their respective chambers, asking the Federal Government to respect the rights of states, as defined by the Tenth Amendment. Will the Feds do so, or will they strong- arm the states, just so they can try to exert control? This is a dangerous game they play here.If the feds try this maneuver, many of these states will refuse, and that could lead to a confrontation over whose jurisdiction is pre eminent in this country.
The founders of this country put in the tenth amendment so some states, nervous that they would lose their autonomy in dealing with their people and the various needs with regard to ethnicity and religion, would sign on to the Constitution. Even as airlines and 24/7 news helps us grow together, we still find that it is not only the “buy locally” that makes sense here, but the “govern locally” also applies to the situations that come up in the day to day business that states do. I find it incredible that the Federal Government even wants to try to micro manage all the states this way. This is a plan that is a fast track to disaster for the feds, and it is an insult to all of our people in the states. The last thing we need is a mother- being coddled is not our nature.
We are Americans, we are independent, innovators, and explorers. We are inventors, and tinkerers- we find a way to make something out of what others thought was trash. This is what we are, and to stifle this by trying to coddle us from failure, when it is failure that toughens us. It makes us more determined to get it right, and get it right now. This is nothing more than an attempt to kill the American spirit. There are some in government who are jealous of the independence of the American spirit, and they seek to quash it, quell it, tame it for their own uses.
It will not succeed. It should not even be tried.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: constitution, law, Obama, tenth amendment, texas