Outrageous News!

The Webster dictionary describes the adjective "outrageous" as: "Going beyond standards of decency, utterly intolerable in a civilized society." Other sources describe it as "beyond all reason and being beyond the bounds of good taste."
The jury decision not to hand down a sentence of death for Zacaraias Moussaoui is a reference that should be included in the dictionary in the definition of Outrageous. How can we justify giving the death penalty to single murderers when a jury fails to find sufficient cause to give the admitted participant in the murder of hundreds. Mitigating circumstances be damned! The radical Muslims will begin taking hostages in his name once he is incarcerated, demanding his release or they will kill the hostages. When will the "bleeding hearts" and liberals realized that weakness only encourages those that hate us, to be more aggressive in their quest to kill the "infidels".
On a nationally broadcast radio program this week one of the professors at a Big Ten Law School made his case for the reducing or eliminating standardized tests used to determine who gets into Law School. He advocated using the performance of the law student in the first year be the deciding factor in who gets to complete a law school education. This is this "liberal" professors idea for increasing the number of "needed" minority lawyers in our country.
Forgive me if I misunderstood the role of graduate schools such as Medicine, Law, Dentistry, and "PhD" programs. I really thought it is to graduate and send out into the real world the best and brightest not a graduating class that is marginally proficient, but perfectly "Balkanized" and politically correct! This is just another attempt to destroy the merit system that makes our graduate programs in all fields the envy of the whole world. With any luck this concept will fail!
The proposal to ban soft drinks except diet sodas in primary and high schools is another example of the government meddling in our lives that will surely bring unwanted results.
Not only are most diet drinks loaded with chemicals that have been linked to cancer, but how are they planning to enforce this ban? Yes, they can remove all the dispensing machines, but who will be designated to be sure the students won't bring in sugar loaded drinks. The "food police"! Teachers are having a hard enough time teaching our children to read, write and do basic math. Now they have to check back packs?
What will be next? The banishing of meat in the lunch room. After all, it has fat in it in varying amounts which can contribute to obesity. There is no end to the lengths that people with "good intentions" will go to accomplish their goals.But how about the individuals rights?

Looking for Legal Precedent?

Amidst the hundreds of articles written in the past few weeks about the illegal immigrant problem, the is one very important issue being overlooked. Perhaps it is being "ignored" by the Media for their personal leftist bias.
Yesterdays protest pictures show demonstrators waving signs that say, "Today we march
tomorrow we vote." To me this is the most threatening aspect of the demands being put forward by those who march and advocate "amnesty" for the 12 million illegal immigrants.
No amount of sugar coating or appeals to "Our" sense of compassion will mask the fact that what we have before us is an attempt to turn the constitution on end and shake it up so that all the rights of legal United States citizens will be granted to people who have broken the law and become residents of The United States.
If "amnesty" is granted to these people they will be legal residents of our Country with all the rights and privileges that a legal citizen is entitled to.
Some will say this is the only way to solve the problem. It is logistically impossible to round all the illegals up and ship them back to whence they came from.
This is probably true, but once Congress and the President grant amnesty to these people. Does this not set a legal precedent for all illegals who will certainly pour over our borders if this travesty is allowed to happen.
I can see it now the first place an immigrant, now no longer considered illegal by precedent, coming through our porous borders will head straight for the nearest voting precinct or auto license bureau to register. Those on the left side of the Congressional aisle, and all those leftist advocates of this amnesty push, will have accomplished their goal. A further shift toward a "socialized" America with less emphasis on the rule of law. Do we really want to let this happen? Or will we run to the polls in November and throw the "buggers" out who buy into amnesty for illegals!

Don't Expect to Find This in Mainstream Media!

Two topics that will surely not be covered at all by the so called "mainstream media"are the prospect of foreign countries drilling for oil off the coast of the Southern tip of the Florida Keys. And the real reasons for gasoline prices being so high.
In 1977 the United States signed a treaty with Cuba guaranteeing that Cuba has exclusive right to an exclusive zone of commercial exploration up to 50 miles off its coastline. Cuba is approximately 100 miles from the southern most tip of the Florida Keys, so this gives them mineral rights for an estimated 4.6 billion barrels of crude oil beneath these waters. This estimate was given in a speech on the Senate floor by Idaho Senator Larry Craig recently. The environmentalists and fellow travelers like Senator Martinez of Florida have managed to forbid passage of legislation allowing offshore drilling to provided the crude necessary to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. But the Cubans have already discovered oil offshore with the aid of the oil exploration company Repsol from Spain. Cuba is now in negotiations for drilling and production agreements with Repsol of Spain, Sherritt of Canada and (surprise-Surprise)the Communist Chinese company Siopac. Undoubtedly soon oil will be flowing to one or all of these countries while we Americans continue to suffer at the gasoline pumps.
The second thing you will not hear or read from "old" media is the main causes of the high cost of gasoline at the pump. It is not the price gouging of "Big Oil" as they and the Washington politicians would like us to believe. The real reasons are as follows.
1. The world increase in demand due to economic expansion both at home and in developing countries like china and India. These two countries have 8 times the population of the U.S. and are developing rapidly. Requiring more oil products.
2. Available supply of gasoline has been reduced Hurricane Rita and Katrina reduced U.S. refinery output by 5%. Government mandates for ethanol have reduced the refineries ability to produce gasoline. They can't produce them at the same time. Addition government regulation requiring the additive MTBE be put in ethanol for environmental reasons has delayed refinery retooling and increased time away from the production of gasoline.
3. The government tariff of 54 cents on the importation of foreign ethanol from countries like Brazil has reduced the supply of a government mandated product. This done by Congress to protect Midwestern corn farmers, especially Iowa.
4. Government failure to allow the building of additional refineries for the last 30 years.
5. Federal and State taxes cost an average of 50 cents a gallon. In some states it is higher.
6. Oil production in the United States has fallen by 44.5% since 1971, and since 1996 alone it has dropped 12.3%. Diminished supply always increasing demand and higher prices for what is available.
7. Today we have dropped the demand for fuel efficient cars, and have purchased many more gas guzzler SUVs and Pickup trucks.
So you see it isn't the money grubbing oil companies who are to blame. Some of the big companies like BP, the 2nd largest oil corporation in the world reported a net loss in profit of 15% for this years first quarter.
Just a few things to think about the next time you are filling your gas tank while cursing 'Those Damn Oil Companies!"

History Might Repeat Itself Again?

In 1773 the British Parliament repealed the Townshead Act which had forced American colonists to pay taxes on everything imported. But the repeal exempted the tax on tea from the repeal. This tax of approximately British shilling per pound of tea of this tax the colonist entrepreneur's, somewhat like old Joe Kennedy, decided to "bootleg" tea from Holland to avoid paying the tax. These laterday smugglers did it in a big way and managed to bring enough tea to America for sale to effectively put the British sponsored East India Tea Company close to financial disaster. To help the desperate EITC the British Parliament passed the "Tea Act" in May of 1773. This act allowed the East India Tea Company to sell directly to American colonists bypassing the colonial merchants who we selling the tea from Holland. The taxes and duties collected by the British were refunded in large part to The EITC as a "subsidy" to help them succeed. This enraged the colonists who began the chant, "no taxation without representation". This resulted in the ports of New York and Philadelphia refusing the Tea ships to dock at their ports. Boston allowed three ships to dock, but the dock workers refused to unload the tea,and on the night of 12/16/73/16/73 "The Sons of Liberty", about 60 men dressed as Indians, boarded the three ships and dump into the harbor 342 chests (45 tons) of tea valued at 18,00 pounds British Sterling. Because of this act of "revolution" the British parliament passed the "Intolerability Act" which effectively eliminated self government for the Massachusetts colonists,and closed the Boston harbor. Thus was the match struck that lit the fuse that led to the explosion of Revolution against the British in 1775. Today the issue is taxes in excess of what Americans at the polls in November of 2000 and 2004 voted for. The majority of Americans voted for politicians who promised to limit the size of government and the tax burden on us Americans. The exact opposite has occurred. Government and the spending has grown out of control. Not all of it can be explained by our war against terrorism. Too many expenditures for pork projects by incumbent members of congress for their special friends back home has been a big cause of the budget busting.
Now the oil crisis has hit us, and too many members of congress think the way to rein in the high cost of gas if through taxation. Tax increases at the pump and repeal of tax breaks for exploration and drilling for new sources of oil are in the proposals by various members of congress. No mention, not even by president Bush, of a roll back of the 18 cent federal tax per gallon of gas. Just more punative "acts" to force us and American industry to use less oil. The motor that runs this great country. When will the American people realize that it is time to revolt at the ballot box and vote out of office those that refuse to stop spending and taxing like we are the "colonists" and they are the British "masters". In the free enterprise way of life it is not a "sin" to make a profit. Especially when the stockholders and pension funds that hold the stock are beneficiaries of the profit. It is a "sin" when government makes us work from January 1st to May each year just to pay for their spending habits!

President Bush Missed the Mark!

Today our president gave another of his speeches which he apparently hopes will raise the American public awareness of his recognition of the impact on us of high gasoline prices. The problem with his speech and apparent misunderstanding of the cause of this national problem is that he believes "Americans are addicted to oil."
What he should have said is that too many members of Congress are addicted to the largesse of the Environmental "wackos" who have managed to get enough members of both houses of Congress to derail any legislation which would allow United States to drill oil in ANWAR and offshore. We presently import sixty percent of the oil consumed to run our world class economy from countries who really don't like us. In fact some countries like Iran and Venezuela hate us!
No additional oil refineries or even modernization of existing plants have been allowed in over 20 years due to the influence of environmentalists and people like ex-Vice President Gore.
With the increased demand from economical developing countries like China and India, who each have over a billion in population. The demand has vastly increased world wide resulting in inflation of the barrel cost for crude oil. China has grown 9% per annum and India 7% In order for OPEC countries to keep up with this increased demand it is predicted by reliable experts that they will have to increase crude oil production by one million barrel's a day!
Another point president Bush failed to mention, is the impact: state, local and federal taxes have on the price of gas at the pump. This average of 46 cents per gallon we pay does not all get used for highway improvement,but like all other taxes goes into that large barrel which congressmen and women can dip into to fund their "pork" projects that keep them in office.
I am happy President Bush is our president and I shudder to think what would have happened if Mr. Kerry had won the election, but I am a little weary of our president failing to call out the real culprits in this oil problem. Not the usual suspects mention over and over by liberals wherever they speak or write, but those in Congress, primarily democrats who have failed to allow United States to become less dependent on Foreign oil. We need oil to keep our standard of living and prominence in the world of leading developed counties. Fancy speeches about alternative fuels and different modes of propulsion won't help,but hinder and mask the real need. More oil from American sources.

Small But Important Facts

One hundred and seventy (170) years ago this year Texas won its independence from Mexico in the great battle of San Jacinton. Sam Huston and his brave army of "Texicans" defeated the renowned General Santa Anna. Texas came into existence as a separate independent country and remained this way until 1845 when it joined the Union by way of "Treaty". The treaty, still in force today, allowed Texas to break up into five individual states if they wished to do so.
Can you imagine what would happen to the political lanscape if that happened. The way our government is now structured there would be ten (10) more Senators for sure, and who knows how many more representatives elected to congress. The balance of power would certainly be effected in the Senate with the probability of most of the Senators being elected to represent the Republican party. Not a bad idea!
Why our Country leadership continues to " kiss-up" to Communist China" and Russia, which I believe is still a haven for dedicated Communists, is beyond my comprehension. I know diplomacy with these people is better than overt hostility toward them. Never the less, both Countries are anything but friendly allies. China has sold and is still selling "silkworm" missiles to our enemies. China also is alleged to be exporting nuclear technology to Iran, and Russia not only provided ""SAMS"" to North Vietnam to kill American pilots, but is still supplying them, and the new "TOR" missile to North Korea with whom we are technically still at war but in a state of truce. The Russians lead by former KGB agent President Putin have publicly stated they will not support a UN resolution sanctioning Iran for continuing to work toward development of nuclear weapons. If this is what we accept from our "friends" being wined and dined at the White House. What do we expect from our enemies? Just one thing. Eventually they will use those weapons against us and/or our real allies.

Reflection of Grieved Man

Having recently returned from a long car trip to my oldest daughters funeral. I want to publicly proclaim my deep sorrow in losing one of my children. Not any child, but my first born, who was the kindest, most thoughtful person I have ever lost to death. Of course,like many people in my advanced age group, I have lost both my mother and father. Both at an early age. They too were kind and loving persons, but I have a special place in my heart for my first born who is now gone. I know my religious beliefs tell me she has gone to a "better place". And now is with those other loved ones that have crossed over to the "other side". But I still grieve and wonder why the "Good Die Young?"
The anguish experienced by parents who lose a child to wars or tragic accidents is certainly no less than mine, and I have empathy for them. The world suddenly becomes a more empty place, and the process of going on with our lives is harder.
The one thing I was impressed with was the large numbers of co-workers who attended her funeral. Obviously Her goodness and kindness were evident to all who came in contact with Susan. May God open his arms and embrace Her as I wish I could one more time.
What is the message I am trying to relay to you who take the time to read this? I seek but one thing. No not sympathy, but awakening to the fact that our lives are very fragile. One minute we are here and the next we are gone. So, don't be too busy to tell your loved ones that you love them, and take the time to make personal contact with them. Hug them while you still can!

President Bushs' Public Welcome of a Tyrant!

As a life long republican,who strayed away once to vote for President Kennedy, I am disturbed by the public pronouncements of our president during his press conference welcoming the Chinese Communist "president" at the White House.
All the platitudes and "diplomatic correct" verbiage used for public consumption will not obscure the fact that Communist China could become the 21st century equivalent of "the axis of evil". No matter what the Administration PR people tell us will be discussed in private meetings regarding Chinas' persecution of religion, lack of human rights and disgracefully low wages for the Chinese worker. It is the public images and words spoken at the White House that will be carried all over the world by television and radio. Even in China.
There are too many problems in China to bring to an article like this, but I will attempt to elaborate on three that are particularly troublesome to me.
First, is the ever present but seldom spoken military threat posed to the United States and its allies in Asia. In 1953 the North Koreans invaded South Korea. In the ensuing five years over fifty thousand American service men and women died with the aid of Communist troops from China and their weapons fighting the North Korean aggression. We still face the threat of further North Korean warfare to "re-unify " Korea. But the greatest threat comes from the Nuclear build up in China, and their stated treat that any attempt to help defend our ally Taiwan if China decides to invade Taiwan would result in a nuclear attack on United States. Classified Chinese documents, specifically "Document 65" indicate that China has presently nuclear ICBMs targeting U.S. West coast cities. This according to the book "The Chinese Threat" by Mr. Gertz. This The result of the largesse of the Clinton Administration when it allowed the technology for missile guidance to be sold to Communist China.
The Second, is the failure of china to allow religious freedom despite President Bush's appeal to the Communist leaders during his "state visit" in 2005. The Communist regime has an established State controlled religion, but any other denomination (Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Buddhist, or Jewish) that worships in secret for fear of reprisals is considered a "cult", and an "evil influence". The punishment for participation can be one or many of the following: fines, imprisonment, torture, welfare payment deductions and withholding medical care. It is also common practice to confiscate Church valuables and property. Recently Cai-Zhoohua pastor of a Chinese Protestant church was sent to prison for three years and fined the U, S. equivalent of $20,000 for printing and distributing Bibles!
Lastly, the worse than "third world" wages paid to Chinese workers making goods for sale in the United States. Unfortunately, "Free Trade" with China results in one thing only. Access by American Companies to "cheap labor".
I don't usually take the position of anti-free traders and Unions, but on this one I have to agree. When Chinese workers are paid 23 cents an hour to make Ralph Lauren shirts, and Nike shoes are made by workers who work 16 hours a day six days a week to make Nike shoes for a paltry $3.00 a day, there is something wrong with this picture. The Wall Street Journal published a recent article praising Communist China stating, "More efficient Chinese production has slashed the price of consumer goods". Why not substitute the words "slave labor" for "efficient production". In the last five years the average Chinese workers wages have been slashed by as much as 80+ percent. American companies continue to send billions of dollars to China for production of cheap goods that can be sold here for huge profits. Nothing wrong with the profit motive, but when it contributes to a regime that is totalitarian and oppress it people as do the Chinese Communists. There has to be a better way.

The Politics of Double Speak.

As I do every morning I was perusing the articles posted on the internet which had been written by political notables and pundits. This morning among the numerous stories about the immigration "amnesty", generals criticizing the way secretary Rumsfeld is waging the war, and should be replaced. I found two articles that deserve consideration. The first was President Bush going on the "stump" for more women in the academic fields of Mathematics and Science. This at first "blush" sounds like a good idea since most of those presently enrolled in American universities are men. But a further review of what is going on here reveals that our President is pushing for another "affirmative action" in mathematics and science for women. Such benefits of this type of program would be grants in aid earmarked only for women, quotas for Universities to fill with woman in these academic disciplines,and penalties incumbent upon non-compliance. What we don't need in this wonderful country is another program that decides who gets valuable training in the fields of scientific effort. We need to have gender and color-blind selection by admissions committees if we want the best scientists. Not the most politically correct.
The second article was written by former Mayor of New York City, Mr. Ed. Koch. In his article concerning how the Democrats, he is one himself, can win back control of the federal government. In this article were numerous things which the Democrats must offer in their platform, in lieu of "Bush Bashing", to win back Congress and eventually the White house. The one that hit me between the eyes was to "offer a comprehensive National health care plan that is based on "the resources available".
This political speak for two things. Rationing of care and increasing the taxes on those who pay taxes. Are the American people ready to hand over the decision for who gets care and who doesn't because of age, rate of survival based on past statistics,or failing to follow government dictated standards of eating and drinking. This doesn't even consider what the increase in tax liability would be if such a comprehensive plan were adopted.
In her "first year in office", Hillary got together a large group of "eggheaded" Liberals to draft a plan for "socialized Medicine".When the American public discovered what was going on behind closed doors we were outraged. Now she is on the "stump' only this time she is not running for "first lady", but for the whole enchilada. President of the United States of America. Don't think for a second that she has changed her core beliefs. Along with reditstribution of wealth through expansion of the unearned tax credit, her election will certainly lead us further down the road to socialism.
The average American works from January to May presently to pay his taxes, which currently consumes twenty percent (20%) of our Gross Domestic Product! Can we allow people like Hillary and her left wing followers in Congress to continue taxing us so they can live like the 21st century equivalent of Royalty?

Will We turn to Law by Protest?

The recent past, and I am sure in the not too distant future we saw street "protests" for amnesty and voting rights for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now here in the United States. The "leftist" media and the politicians concerned with their own tenure in Congress all seem inclined to grant their demands.
It is understandable why the Democrats want these 12 million illegals to become legal by changing our immigration laws. Trashing them would be a more appropriate way to describe what they are doing.
But no matter how you describe their actions the end result is legislation driven by protest! Not a protest by and for the legal citizens of this country, but a protest by and for people who have broken the law which from the signs seen on television indicate they feel are unfair and by some, "RACIST"!
WHAT IF ALL LEGAL CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTRY AGE 20 TOOK THE STREETS to protest the unfair laws that prohibit drinking until they are 21.This arbitrary age discrimination is more onerous than the immigration laws that protect our borders. Even though an argument can be made that the present law is not enforceable, as demonstrated by the 12 million illegals currently in our Country. But the problem is not the law, but the lack of will to enforce the existing law. Proposed new immigration law will have even more provisions which will be next to impossible to enforce as long as this issue is a political "football".
One way we could reform our immigration law is to repeal or amend the law passed in 1965. This law ,sponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, cut the percentage of European immigrants down to half what was allowed until this law passed, and raised the number of "Third World" immigrants to increase to 85% of the total legal immigrants allowed each year. What good would this do? History shows us that European immigrants with similar Judeo-Christian values assimilate quicker and a greater percentage find work quicker. They come here to make a life better for themselves and their families. Not to come to America to participate in our growing welfare state.
It goes with out saying that we must police our bordes better. Maybe even build a "wall", but we need to recognize one fact if no other in this debate. No other group has demanded and obtained bilingual education in our elementry schools, steets signs in Spanish and even ballots in their native tongue. If we are not vigilant, Mr. Kennedy and his friends will "Balkanize" our beloved counrty in the name of "fairness". Fairness to whom? That is what I want to know.

Europe First United States Next?

In the not too distant past we have seen the frightening images of riots in France and Holland by Muslims who emigrated to those counties. These riots have involved mass destruction of property and some loss of life. In Holland Mr. Van Gough was murdered by radicals who didn't like his writings. The Palestinians and Israelis have been "Warring" against each other for years, resulting in many murders and bombings.
All of this involving demands and guarantees by "outsiders" in all instances except the ongoing Israeli conflict. Europe is gradually becoming a cultural and political "appendage" of the Arab/Muslim world.
What has this got to do with our present situation in the United States? The corollary can be drawn with a comparison of what has happened in Europe because of unregulated immigration of Muslims, and what has begun here with the 11 or 12 million illegal aliens. Demands by people who have broken the law of the land by entering this country illegally, for our government to accept their demands for amnesty and eventual full citizen rights,including the right to vote.
There have been two "marches" by the "immigrants",which in the first March on our Nations Capital included representatives of CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations), ANSWER (act now to stop Racism. Free Palestine Alliance, American Solidarity Network,and the Nicaragua Network. All Leftist organizations that are for "open Borders and, if not anti-American are at least against the way of life as it presently exists in America. These were not all Hispanics hoping to become part of the American dream. Immigrants asking for help.
The demonstrations were nothing more than actions showing "naked power" in numbers while waving Mexican flags, burning American flags,and carrying derogatory posters about our President and Americans in general.
As could be expected the reaction from the majority of Americans was extremely negative. Next came "act two"! The PR people realized hey had to give the leftist media something to show the American people that wasn't so militant and anti_American. Thus,we had the marches again which were more like peaceful celebrations of holidays. Gone were the Mexican flags. Replaced by American flags and no more anti-posters! Be not fooled the first demonstrations held nationwide was the real problem we face here in its early stages. "Outsiders demanding their way with utter disregard for law and order.

Time to Change Political Party Names

It is no longer appropriate or descriptive to describe the political parties we have, as major players in national elections,as Democrats and Republicans. Point in fact,neither name describes the political and/or philosophical objectives of these two parties with their present names.I will demonstrate this below.
A more descriptive name for the two parties would be" Conservative" and "liberal". The liberals would come from either of the parties, since we presently have members of both houses of Congress who ran in "conservative" districts, but in fact vote more often as advocates of the liberal position on most issues than a Republican has been expected to vote. Democrats in today's Congress with few exceptions,primarily those from southern states, are advocates of "creeping" Socialism. A perfect example is the debate going on in Congress presently regarding illegal aliens. Primarily Hispanics from Mexico and Latin America. Although not openly admitting it the democrat's and a few Liberal Republicans advocate "Amnesty" for these twelve (12) million ilegals. They already have passed laws which guarantee that these people who have broken the law to enter our Country and have babies while here not only get delivery of the baby and all costs associated with it free. They also get a legal citizen as their new baby and eventual sponsor for their legal entrance to our County. No line to wait in like all law abiding immigrants. The list of social benefits are known to all. Food stamps,housing allowance assistance,Medicaid,and many more. This is the "welfare state" for ilegals. Once they get amnesty they will demand and march in the streets for one of our most precious birthrights. The right to vote. Do you think for an instant that the Liberals won't give it to them? The Democrats,more correctly called the Liberals, want more people dependent on the government. When this happens,all those government dependents will continue to vote for those in office who give them the "hand Out".Ther is an old saying. "You can't shoot Santa Claus!"
At the present rate of people being added to the roles of those dependent upon the government. It won't be long before there are more beholding to the government for some or all of there livelihood than there are those who work for themselves and rely on themselves for their existence. At this point we will have turned the corner from which there is no return short of dreaded revolution. United States will be another "third rate" socialist country.
This is the reason we need to realize now, not when it is too late, that we have two kinds of politicians. Liberals who are advocating socialistic programs, no matter how much their rhetoric disguises their actions, and those who want to stop the stampede towards socialism by putting forth Conservative programs. Don't let the leftist Media confuse you. The Liberals are debating for illegal alien amnesty, not for the "poor immigrants who have come here for a better life." These people are lawbreakers,and the Liberals in Congress not only want to legalize them, but encourage more of them to come help build their socialist base. Are you going to stand for this?

Research or Money Hunting?

In this mornings news I came upon an article written by Fox contributor Maranda Hitti, that reports on a new release from the Columbia School of Medicine. The article states the hypothesis postulated by Columbia Medical School professor, Harvey Hilton M.D., that claims "lack of sleep causes High Blood Pressure, Obesity, Diabetes, Depression, Heart Attack and Stroke.
The first thing that screams out to me is the stretch used to link Diabetes to sleep deprivation. Diabetes is an organic disease caused by malfunction of the pancreas, altering the amount of insulin released into the blood stream. How sleep deprivation can effect this organ is a mystery to me.
But the most glaring factual problem, not included in the research reported by Ms. Hitti, is the relation between "sleep apnea" and the above enumerated causes of serious illness and death. Recently a beloved warrior on the football field died of complications caused by sleep apnea. Reggie White died because his sleep apnea caused him to stop breathing for long periods of time while he was still sleeping. Thus depriving his heart and brain of vital life supporting oxygen.
I have no argument with Dr. Holtons' claim that lack of sleep are detrimental to ones health, but it is possible that his claims are just another "Ivory Tower" residents attempt to garner more tax payers money for the Columbia University Medical School research Department and himself. Nothing works better than an article that scares the public,even if it has a few questionable "facts".

Sore Loser or Action Based on Hatred?

The latest questionable action by one of the Senate "Progressive",aka. Leftist liberals,is an attempt to find some traction in the Congress to "Censure" President Bush. The grounds for his action are based on what the junior Senator from Wisconsin, calls "illegal" wire taping of suspected terrorists. So far not many of Mister Feingolds' Senatorial colleagues have stepped up to the plate to support his action, with the exception of the usual left wing ilk consisting of Senator Boxer, Senator Feinstein,Senator Kerry, Senator Clinton and Representative Conyers. Failed presidential candidate and ex-Senator Gore also has joined in their quest.
My immediate question about this absurd action during a time of war is are these people doing this because they hate President Bush and all the good and decent things he stands for, or is this the action of a "sore loser"? When the Senate passed the Patriot Act in 2001 there was only one (1) Senator that voted against the Bill. Senator Feingold! And when the amended version of the Patriot Act was passed March 6, 2006 he was one of ten (10) senators to vote no for the bill that passed 89-10. Sounds like Feingold just can't swallow the fact that in a time of war against a dangerous and very hard to find enemy, he/she must be identified anyway we can. Before another attack similar to 9-11 kills thousands of us. We need to locate those within our borders and outside who pose a threat to our very existance.
The twice divorced Democratic Senator may be pandering to the far left wing of the Democratic party in preperation to make a run for President in '08, but this "nobody" from a "red" State thinks his actions border on "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" during a time of war! What do you think?

Unintended Consequences

The Congress of the United States has begun debating "Immigration Reform". The House wants to enforce the laws on the books currently,and generally make an effort to stop illegal immigration, but the Senate and the President seem Hell bent on an "amnesty" plan with a number of so called "requirements that must be adhered to by the illegals presently here and those which continue to flow over our borders at an even greater rate then the estimated 1300 per day that are now illegally entering border states with Mexico.
Even though a large portion of legal Americans,probably a majority, oppose any attempt to not enforce our immigration laws. It would seem democrats and liberal Republicans, including unfortunately President Bush, want to pass a bill which would reward all those who are here illegally, yes broke the law, with a program that essentially leads to legal status.
Lets take a moment to review a few facts. Princeton University professors have estimated that 66% of all illegals pay social security taxes, and 62% pay income taxes. This leaves 34% that pay no taxes, but they all are permitted by law to obtain emergency care in our hospitals. They are also allowed by law to send there children to our public schools, which in most cases have to provide ,at tax payers expense, bi-lingual teachers. The prisons in this country are already overcrowded,and more illegals entering our Country will undoubtedly have a percentage of criminals. The unmentioned consequences of all this "immigration reform" is the continued growth of government. The more people you allow into our country with any form of "Worker Program". The more people the tax payers will have to pay for monitoring compliance with the many requirements of the program. Of course the Democrats love this, because the large base of unemployed, government employed (and there will be many more}, teachers union and the 12 million illegals will vote democratic.
It would not surprise me if this issue doesn't allow the democrats to regain control of the House and Senate in the next mid-term elections. And the real catastrophe will be if the Republican and Southern conservatives stay home in the 2008 elections, and Hillary makes it to the seat in the oval office!

Less Emotional Talk and More Facts are Needed

While doing my usual morning review of the contributing authors columns in the "Townhall" site. It occurred to me that the problem with the debate going on in congress regarding what to do with the illegal immigration problem is there is too much emotion and not enough facts in the debate.
Those who are for addressing the problem seem to think the best way to solve their dilemma is to sweep it under the rug with the "guest workers" program.
How can you refer to 12 million illegal aliens as guests? I voted for President Bush twice,but could somebody please wake him up. 92 percent of those polled by IQ research said "securing our borders should be a federal government priority.Of those polled by Time magazine, 72% said they believe,"illegal aliens increase the likelihood of terrorism." Even New York Times columnist, Paul Krugman, wrote "illegals don't pay enough taxes to cover the cost of the government benefits they receive".
All the latest polls show a majority of Americans want the federal government to get tough on illegal immigration. As one author said, "we can't be the world HMO."
If only our elected representatives would listen to those who voted for them and quit worrying that they will offend or alienate the Hispanic population, and look at the facts they might have the courage to stop the tide of illegal and potentially dangerous people coming in to our country. There is enough evidence that many of these illegals work in government subsidized farm production which ends up being stored in government paid for storage. All of which takes another bite of poor "Joe Six Pack" in his taxes withheld from his paycheck.
We need to start refusing to re-elect those members of congress who don't stop this illegal problem. Are we willing to stand up and be counted?

If It Is Good For Presidents Why not Senators and Congressmen/Women

For very good reason,too numerous to enumerate now,we have term limits for our President. Why not for our members of both houses of congress?
With all the rhetoric about political influence and corruption surrounding the activities of Jack Abramhoff. There are many suggestions being floated as to how lobbyist reform is a must,and the definitive answer to this obvious adverse effect on our representative form of government. No one has come forward to propose what I think is this best way to stop this daily corruption of some of our elected representatives. Term limits for all members of congress. One term of six years or two of four years should help to reduce the need for members of congress to spend half of their time in office looking for money to get re-elected. The original framers of our constitution did not intend the elected members of congress to be career politicians. Citizen representatives of the people who elected them was the original intent. But now we have career politicians who learn to savor the power, prestige and special life of the inhabitant of a seat in the house or senate. Where the majority of the money comes from in incumbent re-election campaigns is not from "joe six-pack" who went to the poles and pulled the lever that put he or she in office. It is from the major lobbyist groups with special interests in mind that contribute or deny contribution to those who don't "play ball". Lobby groups like AARP, AIPAC, AFL-CIO, and NRA pour hundreds of millions of dollars into their support or opposition to re-election campaigns. This is a well documented fact. This will never change under our current system of government. Special interest groups can't be effectively legislated away by those who stand to gain the most by their continued existence. A national referendum which mandates term limits for all elected officials is the only way to get back to a elected congress that truly represents those that elected them. With no need to worry about being re-elected, maybe we would get back to real representative government. Not one that reflects special interest!

Truth In Advertising?

One of the most often used methods of advertising on both radio and television is to us a sports figure or a talk radio personality as the person encouraging you to buy a particular product or service. After extolling the merits of the product or service,and promises of life altering benefits from your purchase of the thing they are being paid to promote. The "celebrity" usually concludes the promotion with a statement similar to this. "I drive one myself", or "I sleep on one myself"! What they don't tell you, and should have to reveal if the add was truthful, is did he/she actually buy the product. Or was it given to them free as part of the promotional package, thus influencing their opinion. In this day of such great hero worship of sports and entertainment people it is easy for the average person to be mislead by the "hired gun" who is selling the products know there is always the "buyer beware" axiom , but many people are influenced by their "heroes and idols". It is only fair that they reveal the whole story about why they use what they are "hawking". That's my two cents worth on this subject.

Peace Activist Released

Peace Activists Release
In the most recent news of the rescued "peace activists" release in Iraq a great deal of anti-American words were spoken by those released. Nothing was said in gratitude to and for the heroic armed service personal who were instrumental in their release. This brings to mind a weird thought of mine. I wonder if these "peace" people were complicit in their own capture, so that they could get a world wide audience for their anti-American statements when they were released. They show no sign of any harm or brutality being inflicted on them as have many others whom terrorists have captured. At any rate, whether this was arranged for political and/or ideological reason or not is not as important as the fact that these people were, as Prime Minister Tony Blair recently said, "Pandering to Terrorists" and "feeding it's growth". The next captives may not be as lucky as these ingrates, because their anti-American rhetoric does give aid and comfort to our enemies in a time of war.

Random Thoughts About Todays News.
The minority leader of the senate is quoted as saying,"50 Iragis a day are being killed". "This is a low grade civil war". First, it is a gross exageration to say 50 are killed everyday. Add the numbers, and we would have over 20,000 a year killed. Typical democratic hyperbole! Also, is a little civil war somewhat like being "a little Pregnant". Senator you can't have it both ways. Either it is or is not a civil war.
The current roar over the "Da Vinci Code"forthcoming movie is puzzling to me. Either you believe in the Bible or you don't! No amount of heated rehtoric will change any minds. I guess it makes for interesting reading, but when you end it all . It is all hearsay which has been passed down for 2000 years by believers in Jesus as God.
Was Hitlers' Nazi regime more dangerous to us Americans than the present radical Muslim threat to our existance? Or is the lack of media attention to Radical Islams treat related to the fact that during WWII we had no groups of visible nazis living here. However, we do have a rather large population of white and black muslims living here with access to the media? Have great Day,JaxGeorge