A year without illegal aliens, ahhhhhhh.....

Too comfy cozy for illegal immigrants:

Along with stiffening Employer sanctions our Congress should do the job right and repeal all federal mandates that pander to Latinos.

Our representatives should go further and require Basic English competency before a child enters public school.

No more legal requirement that an illegal immigrant is entitled to an interpreter at a hospital emergency room.

In fact I wish they would boycott all the below for a year as well as their menial and middle skill jobs. Let’s see if this lowers our American unemployment rate even more.

Let them boycott driving on our roads for a year. Let’s see if our auto insurance rates go down and our fatalities go down.

Let them boycott our emergency rooms for non emergency needs.
Let’s see if this lowers the cost to our hospitals and see if our medical insurance will go down.

Let them boycott our public schools too for a year, which will repeal the forced bilingual education our English speaking students are currently subjected to. Let’s see if school test scores go up. Let’s see if how much we spend on education is reduced by not having to purchase Spanish language text books and support the beuracracy that has grown under bilingual education.

Let them boycott our social welfare programs for a year too, a year without illegal immigrants; no more social welfare programs for anchor babies born of illegal immigrants.

Let them boycott our public libraries and see if we can reduce government expenditures on Spanish language books.

Let them boycott our prisons too. Let’s see if it lowers Los Angele’s prison expenditures and the need to keep building larger and larger prisons.

Let them boycott all business that pander to Spanish language customers and see if our prices come down because they don't have to invest in bilingual advertising, telephone menus etc.

Until we address all of the feel good legislation and rules that supports non-assimilation we are only doing half the job.

There are two sides to the illegal immigrant question. There are the benefits and the costs. We have never taken the time to publicize the costs and measure them against the so-called benefits.

The non-English speaking children in our schools, non-emergency care in our hospitals, our social welfare programs, our crime rate and vehicular violation rates, and our diminished tax base, all cost America.

What is that cost?

Add in all they contribute and subtract what they cost.

The last study was that the United States loses $10,000 dollars per illegal alien in our country.

Let's see $10,000 X 11 million= at 11 million $110 BILLION dollars.

Hmm, that's an awful lot of levies for New Orleans, hmmm...could offset our costs of Iraq quite handsomely...hmmmmm

Old Democrat....

Please boycott more often!!

Impeach President Bush?

Presidential Oath of Office, No secure borders until a guest worker program is offered?
Uh, what about defending our country whether you get your way or not?

Mr. President,

My admiration of you in so many ways runs deep. It has been shaken however. Your statement that,” Unless the House Bill on immigration reform includes a guest worker program, you will not defend our borders”. This is a threat to the very families of the boys defending freedom in Iraq. The ironies of ironies, you care for the boys over there so much, yet allow porous borders to the south during time of war, placing their own families in danger here at home. You must do everything you can as President, make every effort, to not place these family members in greater danger. Do not place my family in greater danger sir.

You might want to get your legal advisors on this. If you show such a blatant disregard for our safety because you want a guest worker program, then your political enemies, if they choose, can bring impeachment hearings against you. Does the country really need to go through this while at war, when it is well within your powers as President to fully honor your oath of office?

You took an oath to defend this country. There was nothing in the oath that said you will defend this country only if you get your way. These two issues are NOT so intertwined that you disregard you oath for a political victory.

Mr. President, put up this wall (virtual or real) and secure our borders. American rights and safety take a higher priority than illegal alien “rights”, don’t you think?

My apologies go out to my illegal alien friends; this issue is about my homeland. I’m sure you can understand and realize it’s nothing personal. You love your homeland too, right?

Old Democrat......

May Immigration Rallies, showing solidarity or backlash inducing demnonstration?

I wrote Cindy Rodriguez this.It might be a good read.
crodriguez@denverpost.com

May 1st anti immigration reform rallies. Backlash inducing demonstrations or coherent solidarity?

Cindy,I’ve always enjoyed your columns, if for nothing else, for their passion. I at least know precisely where your prejudices are.

If I could spend ½ hour with the national rally organizers I would try to convince them of a few things.I cannot go into all the reasons for this but I will tell you why as best I can.

The rallies should be held at every Mexican Consulate in the cities targeted.
I know the rally is for a show of ‘solidarity’ and protesting the coming legislation regarding illegal aliens. That point is not lost on me. This is futile in the sense of accomplishing anything but backlash. Then of course your villain list can grow and you have more to write about the ‘racist’s ‘among us. That aside however, there will be backlash and possible violence.
The organizers have not articulated what they want.

Weakness #1:

You and others know what you’re against, but there is no goal, a specific idea to be offered in remedy. They must develop this.

If they were to protest the Mexican situation in their own country, it would show two things to the American redneck like me.

First they are assigning a responsibility for their current plight in the right direction. What else brought them here? They re not ‘caught’ in a national debate, most endured hardships that brought them to the place they are now. It was a conscious decision on their part.

So if they protested what brought them here, I, looking at the news coverage would say, “Hoorah! Now their cooking with gas!”.

I am certain this would quiet many of the rednecks.

A side bonus is that speaking Mexican, holding Mexican flags and Spanish language banners would be okay with us. We don’t feel ‘threatened’ by a foreign language, we just feel that a common language is what makes every country coherent in vision and thought and should not be compromised.It’s really as simple as that Cindy. There is no neurosis in that.

They should also make clear in speeches and banners that they are for strong immigration laws if the Government would streamline the process of getting here legally. Citizenship should be streamlined too.

If the speakers truly understood those that are ‘against’ them, they would say, “We understand your concern, we agree as we are concerned in our homeland with South American illegal immigrants coming into Mexico. We do not wish to destroy strong immigration standards; we only wish to change the current method of legally entering the country.

We respect your laws, it is not out of disrespect that we come here; it is out of necessity due to the conditions in our own homeland and we stand here in protest of that, first and foremost.”

If I heard and saw that on the evening news, I being a redneck would know that the ‘movement’ is on the right track These people are then showing courage by protesting their own government. They have families there and could be placing them in danger possibly. They are brave for doing this.

However, as long as the uninvited guest’s demand of their host, the general feeling among us rednecks is, if you don’t like the party, leave. It is impolite to come here uninvited by the vast majority, and then demand things. Not good Cindy and I don’t think any of the left’s socialist guilt ridden self righteous bullshit is going to change people’s minds on that. In fact if the situation were reversed these illegal aliens would be very upset if Americans protested in the streets of Mexico, demanding things.

The operative word Cindy, which you always drop is illegal or a more understandable term can be substituted “uninvited”.

If you scoff at the law, if you shun it and think you are above it, then don’t expect it to protect you. That is what I would say to the illegal aliens. I don’t begrudge them a better life, I do begrudge them expecting to ‘change’ the rules by threat and attempting to make me feel guilty for wanting to protect that which they so obviously want.

The wanting it is not wrong, the demands for our not having the right to control over who comes into our house is. I earned it, my father earned it, I have a right to protect it, period

It is perfectly okay for us to not want uncontrolled immigration. If I came into your house uninvited because I was not treated well at my house, you would want the right to say no. When can I start living at your place?I’m a little Irishman that can make you laugh, I’ll dump your trash, clean your bathroom pubic hairs off the toilet bowl without complaint, I promise, and I’m an American citizen that supposedly won’t do that job. (Smile please)

I hope that the illegal aliens in this country show respect the American forefather’s who fought for this country as I have. In that respect they show respect for our laws.

Cindy, it is okay to have American laws for Americans and how we treat those that come here as our guests. I’d say 99% of all rednecks agree with this redneck on that. Respect first.

These rallies should have the tone of ASKING to stay, explaining why, and then cheer for the country they want to stay in while protesting the Government of Mexico, the country they felt forced to leave. As long as they make themselves out to be victims, there will be disagreement from the majority of our citizens.

“We’ll jump through the hoops, we’ll ‘sign up’ just show us how, but make it streamlined, our conditions at home warrant your concerns. Thanks for allowing us to share in your freedom!”


Cindy, now that you’ve had a good laugh delete this or forward it to someone you know within the movement.

It could go a long way to alleviate this tension now between us and the illegal alien community.If the rally organizers do not see the wisdom in this, then I don’t blame them. After all it is from a racist redneck.

Old Democrat

A Challenge for FairTax.org

Honorable Mark Udall,

This letter is written in reference to HR 25 now before Congress; The Fair Tax bill.
A challenge is given to the Honorable Mark Udall, the Honorable Ken Salazar, the Honorable Bob Beauprez and the Honorable Wayne Allard; by a Colorado citizen.

Facts from you, our Government:

It costs Americans 10 billion dollars a year to monitor compliance of our tax code.

Yet we lose over 261 Billion dollars a year in tax revenues due to non-compliance.

That is not including the billions lost each year to the under-ground economy. Estimated loss is at 300 billion dollars. Illegal Alien labor tax losses amount to billions in lost revenue. Do you truly wish to rectify the situation? Show me. Don’t talk to me, show me.

This challenge is not without help already offered by leading Economists from 8 major Universities such as Stanford, Rice, Boston University and MIT.

Polling data of the American people was gathered by a research organization. A question was asked by a research group made up by a diverse group of Americans from all walks of life. The question was this, “We know you don’t like being taxed, but if you had to have a tax system what would it look like?”.

The answers were taken to some of the best economists at leading Universities. From their evaluation a common theme came from the American people. Their answer to all of these concerns voiced by the Americans polled was a consumption tax.

There is a deep resentment toward the IRS. This adds tremendously to the costs of non-compliance. This all stands to reason, right? If we truly resent something deeply enough we ignore. We don’t comply.

The very first step is to cut the 10 billion dollars and 98,000 bureaucratic jobs now used to monitor a 2.1 million word tax code through the IRS. Close its doors. Stop using a branch of government to insidiously intrude into the lives of Americans, working or not. Our Government should respect and protect the privacy of its citizens.

In one step we could reduce the number of ‘points of compliance’ from hundreds of millions to hundreds of thousands. From every individual to the number of retailers.

Hold on to your hat, because here comes a really ‘wild’ idea.

Our government taxes our consumption not our productivity.

Give us all of our paychecks.

Give the poor a “pre-bate” equal to the difference between their income and the poverty level along with their entire paycheck. Their effective tax rate is 0%. You can finally say that there is a bill before Congress that addresses their needs more directly than the deductions they must suffer through at minimum wage. Let the progression in our tax code (0% for the poor and 23% for those of us that have the money and the inclination to go out and buy the newest, most expensive toy) reflect how we spend, not how much we produce.

Let’s stop this childish rhetoric about making sure the rich pays their fair share.

Let the rich spend freely. As they spend, your revenue goes up. You get to pay for all of our Great Societies, our experimental bilingual education, or what ever the latest feel good legislation that we are for at the time. We will know exactly how much you spend, because that is reflected in the percentage we have to pay. This would remove from our lives the smoke and mirrors of ‘hidden’ costs that are in everything we pay for.

Here’s another contradiction. We say we promote saving, then punish saving by levying a tax on it. Taxing savings is a disincentive to save.

Employee Withholding and Corporate Employment Taxes:

The cost of compliance with corporate taxes and employee withholding taxes is built into every product. These taxes place a drag on the engine of our economy. An analogy would be, we are constantly applying the brakes of a car and telling everyone we’re doing our level best to win the race. How many would believe us?

This one regressive tax has seen the greatest increase of all other taxes over the past 50 years.

This drives down wages and limits employment. If you want businesses to thrive, then release the brake of all corporate taxes. Even if there is no increased consumption brought on by lower prices, your programs will be paid for because the economists have based their entire math on our Government’s current spending levels. All we need to do is release that brake.

We pride ourselves in saying our economy is based on small business and these should be nurtured, then we levy a self employment tax. How is levying a tax against someone because they practice self reliance, encouraging self reliance?

Whoever talked us into this piece of logic was good with words. Let's see, is this the double speak predicted by the book "1984'? It reminds me of a Carney shell game. Now you see it, now you don’t.

Every politician I’ve heard says they want to take care of our elderly, those that gave us this great life. Then we levy a tax on Social Security and retirement accounts which is earnings already taxed multiple times before.

You as a Representative say that all Americans should comply with the law, and then you offer us a 60,000 page tax code. Is this a rational way to levy taxes and expect full compliance? It’s too easy to make a mistake by an honest person and it’s too easy to cheat by those of us that are dishonest.

No wonder 18 million Americans failed to file last year and 25% more that did file didn’t pay any taxes. Doesn't this place an unfair burden on those that do comply and have to pay? What is the cost of this to each American? $2000 a person that does pay.

The general impression is that ‘the rich’ use ‘loopholes’ to get out of paying taxes anyway, what use is it to supposedly take a higher percentage from the rich?

With the HR 25 when the rich spend, as the rich will do, they are taxed at the maximum 23%. No longer will they have the loopholes, yet they too will be free from the regressive tax system now in place. But they are free from Capital Gains taxes, because under HR 25, the levy on Capital Gains is repealed. This gives freedom to the rich to reinvest and grow and hire.

You also have the opportunity to level the playing field in our world market.

Do not tax our exports and what we produce domestically instead tax foreign consumption at the same rate as we pay, 23%. This will invigorate and bring back manufacturing jobs to America. The only way we could win World War II was our ability to manufacture goods domestically. What has happened to that ability? Does it not affect our National Security more than most things we now concentrate on? A new world order is all good and fine, and globalization is great, but not at the expense of our soveriegnty. Not at least until all that would be our enemies are vanquished. Then we can talk and trust. Until then, let HR 25 level the playing field for Global American Corporations and bring jobs back here. You know, the good ones............

Foreign investments would increase because of the tax advantages.

How many billions, if not trillions of dollars, would be recovered from off-shore accounts now being used as an end run around our current regressive tax code?

Often the most progressive ideas are the simplest. I know that this is the case with HR 25.

Do not allow the nay-Sayers to deter your resolve. Represent the majority too. It has been shown time and time again, when offered this alternative, the vast majority of Americans agree with this type of taxation.

We need to throw the levy on our prosperity out. It can’t be ‘fixed’.

This is unfair taxation in spite of representation.

All it takes is your one vote.

If you are not for this measure please respond as to the reasons and maybe I can help you understand this important bill better. If you sit on the fence, please explain why, maybe I can help.

I look forward to your personal reply.



Kindest Regards,
An Old Democrat

Illegal Aliens Saving American Businesses?

Illegal Aliens Saving American Businesses?

I’m not an expert on much of anything. The only thing I’ve got going for me, some would say, is that I have 61 years worth of life experiences. I’m a hick from Virginia. This hick has been ahead of his time considering how I was raised.

I was left of center, for integration in the 50’s and 60’s. I was right of center for winning in Vietnam, not that I’m for war but I fought in it. Has anyone reading this ever done something they didn’t want to do, but had to do? That was this author in 1969 when I joined the armed services.

What are my credentials to claim I am a hick?

I grew up in the rolling hills of Virginia, just northwest of Leesburg in the little hamlet of Purceville, Virginia.

My grandfather was the manager of a 1700 acre dairy farm. He had a 2nd grade education. His ancestry was Native American and German. My uncles, aunts and cousins lived in separate houses along the dirt roads that connected various segments of the farm. We grew a lot of corn, beans, peas and potatoes as well as raise dairy cows. We slaughtered hogs for our bacon and cooking grease. We butchered a portion of our herds for beef. We pasteurized the milk of close to 200 cows. I remember my Granddad squirting me from the udder of a cow and laughing.

During that War the farm was used to house German males. They worked the land and were not allowed to leave the farm. One of the German ‘inmates’ made advances toward my Grandmother. My Granddad, who was a giant of a man, being the runt of his brothers, stood 6 foot 3 and weighed 245 lbs.

He had huge hands. I had heard adults comment many times on how massive this man was. Each finger was as thick as a well steamed Ball Park hotdog. When he heard about the advances made on his wife he immediately went into the pump house and confronted the man. The German came out of the pump house first and whirled to hit my Granddad. The witnesses, German and American, later said that my Granddad took that first blow square in the mouth. My Granddad then threw the punch that broke the man’s jaw and snapped his neck enough to sever the spinal cord. He had broken the man’s neck from the force of a single blow. The German dropped in a heap paralyzed.

The sheriff said it was self-defense. Case closed. The man was taken to the hospital. The Germans saw this as an opportunity to raise a little havoc. They had admitted to the circumstances of the fight, but they still decided to lynch my Granddad.

I remember my Uncles and Granddad standing on the porch of the main house one night with shotguns holding off the German workers. They were using various tools as weapons and stood en mass at the porch.

The Germans were yelling threats toward my Grandfather, promising him a lynching. An American had killed a German. This meant retribution.

As armed as they were, they were also staring down the throats of four double-barreled 12 gauge shotguns; with my aunts inside the house with two more. One of my older cousins had been dispatched to town to get the sheriff.

Eventually my Uncle Clyde, who later became a Pentecostal minister, convinced the men that it would be in everyone’s best interest if they returned to their quarters and continue to serve the needs of the farm. He reminded them that this was war time and different measures can be employed to control this type of behavior. One example was the use of No.2 shot from a double barreled 12 gauge shotgun. So if they had any doubts as to who was going to kill whom, they should put them to rest and go back to bed.

They were just turning toward their quarters when we saw the lights of the police coming up the dirt road between a long line of oak and pine. We never found out what had happened to the man paralyzed the day before.

During the long humid summers of Northern Virginia the convicts from the various penitentiaries and local jails would descend on our roads and work them. Laying new pavement, digging ditches for lines or pipes.

I remember prisoners being used in the apple orchards that sprawled against the tree line.
I remember the prisoners being fed at lunch by local women that had been paid by the state. Home cooked meals. I guess maybe they didn’t find it a problem in getting ‘volunteers’.

In the early 60’s I began to lose sight of prison labor. Now most prison labor is confined to sweat shop jobs on the prison grounds, citing security and transportation cost savings. To me this view approaches being myopic because it completely disregards the cost exacted from the local communities in higher labor for roads, utilities, construction and welfare costs accompanying prison in-house manufacturing.

What to do to turn off the magnet that brings people here illegally and at the same time not place our economy in jeopardy by a rapidly deflating labor force with increased control and deportation. Why not offer a "guest worker program" for non violent criminals in our agricultural areas? Why not offer prison population construction crews for our roads and utilities?

There wouldn’t be as much draining of our money to Mexico. Can we not do a better job in forcing Vicente Fox to deal more successfully with a situation that has forced millions of his countrymen to leave their homeland?

Can we not build our prisons in closer proximity to major agricultural areas?

Can we limp along for two years until the wall to the south is built and prisons are built?

Can we not have prisoners paid by the growers a federal prisoner wage of 2 dollars a day with no housing or transportation costs exacted from the farmer? This is the business incentive most often cited as ‘forcing’ American businessmen into hiring illegal aliens. As Mike Rosen says, it’s perfectly understandable that a businessman would do this if his competition will bury him by them doing it and he not.

Isn’t the vast majority of our prison population in prison for non-violent crimes?

Much of the cheap labor can be done in a more economical way. Whatever extra cost to our prison system could be offset by savings in welfare and law enforcement costs associated with the massive influx of illegal aliens. We could get return on our $30,000 per year investment in each inmate too; of which 17% to 25% are illegal aliens.

The same logic can be applied to most jobs now being filled by illegal aliens. The same business logic applies where those businesses affected so much by low labor costs in their survival could tap into the prison population even more cheaply than hiring illegally the aliens that flood our communities.

Is this thinking too much out of the box?

I guess so because nobody is talking about it after two solid weeks of discussing labor costs being the prime motivator in hiring illegal aliens.

In 1955 the power struggle for social engineering had not reached full bloom yet by the left. Regulations had not been changed yet that would preclude the use of prison labor. Our prison population became victims instead of people that made bad decisions to atone for.

The debate shifted to so called more humane treatment of prisoners that guaranteed a sense of self worth for every individual.

Is the debate now holding our attention covering all the possibilities that need to be considered?

Could we not accomplish more by not addressing our illegal alien problem in such narrow ways with amnesty, walls and deportation?

It seems to me that the two basic steps that must be taken is to deal with those here and slowing the traffic down to a trickle of illegal aliens crossing our border.

Addressing these two things so specifically without the inclusion of more economical ways to deal with our current and future labor problems seems to me a band-aid answer to turning off the magnet that attracts so many.

We can take away the incentive of so many business owners to purposely break existing laws and we don’t even have to use a double barreled 12 gauge shotgun.

God I wish I had a degree in economics specializing in labor costs. Then maybe someone would read this all the way through and not laugh out loud. Every one I’ve mentioned this to gets this dulled over look in their eyes. That can’t seem to connect the dots. Let me know if you can. Don't let me know if you can't because I've just blown my wad on this, I ain't got no more...............


Regards,
Old Democrat

Muslim, Islam, Bush, Religious Freedom, where are we now?

Muslim, Islam, Bush, Religious Freedom, where are we now?

One thing you’ll notice if you keep reading these postings you’ll begin to realize the ideas put forth here are testable.

I’m no Drudge or Rush. I am just a 61 year old veteran that has been around the corner a couple of times. I think I’m just as capable of showing a path of logic to investigate.

In a previous posting I commented on the fact that our excursions into freeing the Middle Eastern countries from Muslim government rule will not be found in allowing it.

Both Afghanistan and Iraq have Constitutional Articles that declare that said country to be a Muslim country and government run by Islamic law. Iraq has stronger safeguards against certain specific issues in the Islamic world, as women’s rights would illustrate, but it is still essentially a country run by the Mullah’s and other types of clerics.

They have no real separation of church and state as is explicitly described in our Article that explains this relationship. A government that neither establishes a national religion nor restricts the practice of any religion is the only answer that has been historically successful.

How can this exist and still bring a man before a judge for converting to Christianity?

It doesn’t exist in Afghanistan. It doesn’t exist in all of the Muslim countries.

There is a basic core difference in the philosophy of Middle Eastern countries that go against the basic principles of the rest of the civilized world. You can trade with them, you can depend on their oil if you wish for a short time, but they are not our Allies.

I smile every time I hear a pundit talk about imposing our will on other countries and how basically this is wrong headed and lead by a wrong headed George Bush.

The pundits (read media and federal politicos) are no Ben Franklins, Thomas Jeffersons or Patrick Henrys, but they are educated people and have read the same history I have.

What made our founders so wise is that they looked at the mistakes illustrated by man’s history and acted on that, instead of their own personal preferences or what was popular at the time.

They wrote from looking at what had failed in the past and wrote our rules with that always in mind. At first the middle chose absolute sovereignty by each state. The Articles of Confederation did not work. Some of its broader concepts were later integrated into our present constitution, but a stronger central government was needed and states had to give up some of their absolute rights to join successfully in a Union.

As far as imposing our wisdom on others, it is a lot better to promote freedom from church rule than to defend a country’s right to enslave its people through religious or political ideology. Only where both can exist freely can progress towards peace be made.

The lack of fighting for this “wisdom of the past” only insures future conflicts; it does not bring lasting peace. Our goal should never waver.

We imposed this wisdom on Germany and Japan.

They did not bomb us on September 11th .

Those that say war only lays the seeds of future wars are not reading all of history. They pick and choose which history they quote, they never take the entire picture into account. This is what makes their ideology weak. It lacks perspective.

I remember when all hell broke loose when Bush mentioned the word, “Crusade”.
Oh my God was their ever a fuss from the politically correct crowd. As far as the majority of Muslims are concerned we are infidels unless we accept Mohammed as the only prophet of God.

I suppose that ‘progressive’ Muslims make up a small minority of the Muslim population that lives among us. I think the vast majority think of us as infidels where lying, killing, making treaties with and subverting a free government by using the guilt ridden left are all useful cards they play every day. They complain to the left about "Islamaphobia" yet try a man for converting to Christianity. This basic contradiction is seen in all their dealings with every country that is not Muslim especially the Palestinian fiasco.

I see no history recent or ancient that suggests otherwise.

I suggest that Bush called it right. There is a Crusade. It is not based entirely on Christianity against Muslims but this is the way Muslims define it. The Muslim’s jihad (struggle) is against religious freedom. This is the main weakness of political correctness.
It hobbles us in our effort to see things as they are, instead of how we wish they were.

With political correctness the picture becomes blurred, too complicated. We can no longer describe things as we see them, we must first pass the ‘acceptable’ test and this test distorts our perceptions. When people are confused no one path can be followed. We wander from one political bombshell to the next always wondering what is right.

Our forefathers had the gift of history, so do we. Will we use it?

If we fail to address this basic truth and deal with the Muslim world on their terms, our children and theirs will reap the winds of destruction. We must accept the fact that they are against freedom of belief. That is a basic core issue and will not be resolved with peace talks unfortunately. Unless they change that fundamental part of their religion, we are in a Crusade. A crusade to preserve the freedom to believe anything, not a crusade to eradicate a religion. If a religion stood in the way of this freedom, then of course they would have to be controlled, punished or what ever must be done to safeguard individual freedom. We must not leave them in control.

Yes, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Pakistan etc. will eventually be free of religious persecution or not.

If we do not deal with this now, the United States, Russia, France, Germany, Italy, Eastern Block countries all will have a choice in our grand children’s lifetime; either become Muslim or be slaves.

Addictions, Muslim Oil, what we have not done.

Not too long ago we faced our greatest threats Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. America cast a deaf ear and a blind eye toward Europe. Our sailors and airmen entered a shooting war without their country being at war. We secured Iceland and relieved British naval facilities throughout the North Atlantic.

American men were dying. Still we waited and debated. Pearl Harbor woke us up. September 11th did not.
Truth came on September 11th as it did in December of 1941.

Still we turn a deaf ear, debating racial profiling, Halliburton, secure borders, deportation. We want to create and deal with a multitude of intellectual issues that keep us from focusing on our central weakness; our addiction to Middle Eastern oil.

We have flex fuel vehicles, over 11 million on our roads, but no supply/distribution system to supply them with E85. Nothing is mentioned from our leadership. Every truck and car that transports us and our needs could cut it’s usage of gasoline and diesel by 85%! Would that be enough to completely take away our need for Middle Eastern oil?

I see that nobody in the White House or Congress is calling our agricultural leaders together along with the leaders big oil (who already have the distribution network in place) to go on a 3-5 year plan where every gas station will offer E85.

Public works was used to build our roads and dams, no such effort is offered by our Congress, Senate or Presidency to move this country forward in isolating the needs to our own production of what energizes our economy. Farmers are being paid not to plant, where they could be supplying Ethanol?

Thomas Paine once wrote about commerce and the defense of our nation mutually dependent. Our economy is our strength in defending ourselves. The use of oil is basic to our economy. There is no magic pill, but precise steps can be taken to make our country self sufficient in this basic commodity.

The nay-sayers always say more time is needed. It is too expensive right now. (As if it will be less expensive in the future).

Where is the truth?

There seems to be no rush.

Who is sacrificing now? Ask the 2000 families that can no longer talk to Jason, Cami, John and Sallie. They died because of our need for Middle Eastern oil.

There is a Muslim culture that we depend on for our economy and self defense that is patient enough and bright enough to use every means to implement its goals. Where temporary treaties with the enemy are tools to use until the Muslim culture’s strength is strong enough to triumph.

Centuries mean little to most Muslims except for the firebrands. They too are useful for their constant harassment of the infidels. Then others of the same Muslim culture are those that espouse peace and love. They too are useful, for they lull the less vigilant of us to sleep and fosters our self imposed obligations to them.

This is what we depend on to secure our safety? The Muslim culture has shown itself world wide as one that is set on conquering all those that do not believe as they. They are no different than the menace of the rising sun or the swastika. Yet it is politically incorrect to say or write such things.

But how can we be truly at war with a Muslim controlled Middle Eastern country if at the same time we depend on the Middle East for our economic existence. This is not a left or right issue; although some, as masters of evasion and diversion, have attempted to make it so. Why must we be at war? Is it not for Muslim controlled oil? Are they breaking our economy over time as we did the Soviet Union?

I am afraid for my children. Their world, their future can change at any moment for the worse through nothing more than our dependence on Muslim Oil.

The idea that we are a global economy and must rely on the Middle East for oil, that we have no choice, is spouted by both parties. I hear no one saying, “We have created the need; we can create our independence too.”

Will Americans continue to slumber through the bombings, the beheadings, and the thousands of innocents dying over Middle Eastern oil?

Even establishing Democracies in the Middle East still leaves us with our dependence on Muslim Oil. . I am not saying we went to war in Iraq for oil, but I wonder if the whole question of democracy there would come up if we were not dependent on their oil.

I wrote much of this in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s to newspapers and networks. It’s been 30 years and now I’m 61 and still we sleep. Now 3 thousand people have died in an unprovoked attack. 2000 more have died to make Middle Eastern oil a safer supply. No network executive has taken up the challenge to relentlessly ask what are we doing about our dependence?

No President or Congress has either.

No lobbying groups from the auto manufacturers, from the oil companies or from the agricultural communities have stepped forward.

No trade unions, no pharmaceutical companies have stepped forward.

There isn’t a lobbying group in Congress that is not directly affected by Middle Eastern Oil supply. Yet still they sleep.

We sleep.