What I think we should do about immigration.

    First of all to all of those that used to read this blog when I was active how are you doing? I actually had been trying to get into this blog for awhile, but I never could remember what my user name was after taking five years off. It just came to me a couple of secs ago. This started has a Facebook post. I was going to post What I think we should do about immigration. Then I started thinking about how long of a post that would be and I thought I'd try to come to my old blog and post it here instead. So that's what I will do.

     The whole immigration debate has now gotten so out of hand that apparently democrats were willing to shut the government down. Now I have my own opinions about President Trump which if I decide to continue making post in the future I'm sure you will learn about. However considering the Democrats shut the government down over something that was not urgent or even related to a spending bill it's hard to see how you can blame anyone but democrats for not at least voting to pass that CR last night. Now on to what I want to say about immigration.
     
    The immigration debate is complicated ans confusing in several ways. First off I don't really think most people are looking to get rid of people who were bought here when they were kids and have lived several years without causing any problems. Of course the issue is then what do you do? We can't just allow them to stay and keep the status quo because if we do in 30 years we are going to be doing the same thing over again. We know this because about 30 years ago Reagan granted amnesty to illegal immigrants and now we are in the same situation we were then. So there is no way America should do anything without first making sure this is the last time we will have this problem. This thing with people being deported five times then committing a major crime has to stop. If we deport someone it needs to be almost a certainty that person can't just walk back across the next day. This obviously means a wall/border security. Now if we can get the border security to make sure this is the last time we will have this problem what do we do with the people who are already here?

     My solution would be to allow the people who were not born here to apply for permanent residency, but not citizenship. The children that were born here are citizens. Anyone who thinks anything else just as a reading comprehension issue. The constitution is very clear that if you are born in America you are an American. So if you want to get rid of people who have kids in America you are advocating separating children from their parents and grandparents and I just can't agree with that line of thinking, which is why I support permanent residency for those people. I also wouldn't go try and track down every illegal that lives in the country and deport them. I mean if they aren't causing any trouble and they are not voting what's the point? Now I would be for deporting any illegal who commits a felony or a major misdemeanor. Misdemeanor assault for example would be something that could be a deport-able offense. However we shouldn't be checking immigration status on speeders unless it's someone going 90 in a 45 or something along those lines. Minor traffic violations do not need to turn into high speed chases causing death because the person behind the wheel thinks they will be deported if they pull over.

     In conclusion there is really no reason to be stupid about this issue. It's really not that hard. Get the border secured, and then treat the people who are here, and who have not caused any issues while they have been here like human beings. However the key to all of this is getting the border secured. Republicans aren't going to give an inch until they get that done. They took the Democrats word on border security thirty years ago and here we are right back in the same place.

The Ban Against Guns on Bases Has to End

A couple of days ago it was reported that the FBI was on the lookout for a man who planned to carry out a Fort Hood style attack. Today an attack was carried out at Ft. Hood and so far 4 people soldiers have lost there lives and 14 more are injured. For the record as of right now it appears that the two things have nothing to do with one another. This is a terrible tragedy one that should not be exploited for political gain. I only have one question, why weren't those soldiers carrying their weapons? It seems to me that if any one should be allowed to carry a weapon it would be a soldier. Our soldiers are trained to handle firearms and have shown bravery and honor on the battlefields in Iraq, and Afghanistan. When you combine that with the fact they were expecting an attack of this sort it just seems logical that there should have been an order given to have all soldiers armed on base. Of course it shouldn't take an order it should just be the norm. If those soldiers were armed the shooter never would've been allowed to take even one shot. We wouldn't even be calling him the shooter we would be calling him the idiot who tried to attack a military base full of armed soldiers. Actually we probably wouldn't be calling him anything at all, because if they were armed it would've probably prevented the attack from ever happening. Will someone please explain to me how we let our military bases become gun free zones. A lot of people will take this opportunity to take shots at President Obama. While I disagree with almost everything he does the rules barring soldiers from carrying on base far outlive his presidency. That decision was made by former President Bill Clinton. According to an article posted on the Washington Times on November 11, 2009. The article went on the say "Because of Mr. Clinton, terrorists would face more return fire if they attacked a Texas Wal-Mart than the gunman faced at Fort Hood." This article called for the ban to be lifted after the first Ft. Hood attack. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/11/end-clinton-era-military-base-gun-ban/#ixzz2xmjMinuC Wait a second Clinton, Obama didn't we have a President in between there? Yes the truth is a small part of the blame for the first attack could be laid at President George W. Bush's feet. He had eight years to lift the ban and failed to do so. I'm honestly surprised that wasn't one of the first things he did. Maybe the issue was just never bought up to him? However why you can lay a piece of the blame there for the first attack once there was an attack lifting the ban would just be common sense right? I guess not. For reasons staggering the imagination President Obama did not lift the ban in the wake of the second attack. Why? What possible explanation could there be? Honestly the only one I can think of is the President thought if he just increased security that it would prevent crazies from getting onto bases or maybe the President has a irrational fear of guns. Well Mr. President I have news for you, you can't stop crazy. No matter how much security is provided there is no guarantee that someone won't slip through the cracks, and while a gun was used to commit the act they could've also stopped it cold. Attacks like the two on Ft. Hood are almost impossible to prevent because they come from people that are believed to be allies. Maybe they were an ally at one point then they changed due to something they saw, or heard. In any event it is time to stop the madness. The only way to protect our soldiers is to allow them to protect themselves. Mr. President lift this ridiculous ban so we never have to read headlines like today's again.

I'm Back

Hey everyone, It's been a very long time since I have posted on this site. So long it took a day to figure out how to post with this new format. I updated my Paypal account yesterday not that anyone has ever donated but I figured I'd do it just in case. I love talking about politics, but it's alot easier to spend time posting when you are single. I've been married for almost four years. As you can see that's almost the same about of time it's been since my last post. I'm hoping I will start posting more now. I've said I would in the past and not kept my promise so I'm not making one this time. Feel free to leave me a comment on this post especially if you are one of the bloggers I used to keep in touch with.

Defending Nikki Haley

Governor Nikki Haley has been criticised by some in South Carolina for giving pay raises to members of her new staff. She is paying her Chief of Staff $125,000 a year. That is close to a 25% increase from the amount Governor Sanford paid his Chief of Staff. Trey Walker her 2nd in command will get a 40% increase and on it goes. Just looking at those numbers you would think Governor Haley had reneged on her promise to streamline government and was giving pay raises to everyone right? Wrong.

While Governor Haley is paying her staff more per person than Governors Sanford and Hodges she is actually spending $944,732 less on them overall. Governor Haley has hired less staff than the last two governors. So while they get raises they will have more responsibilities. This governor's staff will consist of only 16 people. Also while she is paying some of her staff more than Governor Sanford she is still paying them less than previous governors. Her Press Secretary Rob Godfrey is being paid $3,000 more than he was in Sanford's administration, but almost $3,000 less than Governors Beasley and Hodges paid their press secretaries. She also hired Sanford's top lawyer and is paying him $600 less a year than did Sanford.

It appears to me that critics of the Governor are grasping at straws to find fault where there is none. I used the example earlier today of a boss having two employees that each made $10 an hour. He fires one and gives the other guy a raise to $14 a hour the boss still cuts pay by 30% and this is what Governor Haley has done. She has hired less staff, but paid those staffers more while still cutting overall spending. If this is an indication of how she will govern I'd say we're off to a great start.
http://www.wltx.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=117656&catid=2
http://www2.wsav.com/news/2011/jan/14/haley-defends-her-staff-salary-increases-ar-1343760/

Passports Issued to Thousands of Registered Sex Offenders

The Obama Administration has been issuing passports to people involved in sex tourism since the beginning of his presidency. The reason, they did not know that in December 2008 then President Bush signed a law to deny these people passports. Considering Obama was the President-elect you would think that he might what to pay attention to what laws were going into affect right before he took office, or at least have someone pay attention for him. The GAO (Government Accounting Office) says that it wasn't until this April that the state department was informed of this law.

This is dereliction of duty by the President and his Sec of State. To not be aware of a law that is supposed to keep children safe from sexual predators is abhorrent. Oh and it gets worse, "In one case study, the sex offender was issued a passport in his name while in prison, which is allowed under federal law, while another was issued a passport after becoming delinquent in child support, an offense for which State must deny passports. Based on interviews with local police departments, several of our cases showed that sex offenders left the country and moved to Mexico." Mexico is a country listed as a sex tourism destination by our State department. I guess these people are now having a good time having sex with children in Mexico.

Now you would think the State Department would just take responsibility say we'll make sure this doesn't ever happen again and be done with it. However their response was something quite different, The State Department also took issue with the title of the GAO report, "Passports Issued to Thousands of Registered Sex Offenders," calling it "misleading." We are concerned that it conveys more 'shock value' than factual accuracy," reads the response. The title also fails to convey that GAO found no evidence that the offenders used their passports to commit sex offenses abroad," the letter reads.

Well of course these people didn't use their passports to commit sex crimes abroad they just wanted to go to a country that the U.S. list has a sex tourism destination to get a tan. GIVE ME A BREAK! Now I'm not saying every person that goes to Mexico is involved in sex trafficking, but if your already involved in that industry I think it's a pretty good bet that's why your going there.

Surely that's all the bad news out of this report, unfortunately no.

Additionally, 30 of the sex offenders who are federal employees were identified through salary data provided by the Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Postal Service and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service.

"It also is disturbing that the GAO found examples prior to that new law where the State Department issued passports to convicted sex offenders who fled law enforcement, received government housing subsidies and work for the Post Office. This report raises a lot of serious questions about how effectively the government protects us from child predators," Grassley said.

WOW! Let me see if I have this right not only were they fleeing from law enforcement that were also give government housing and jobs. Not just any jobs, but jobs in the postal service which means they might be putting the mail in my box every day. If that doesn't scare you I guess nothing does. I think it should go without saying that sex offenders should not be allowed to have federal or state employment. I like to think we could find a better character of person to work in our government, but wait there's more.

According to GAO, about half of the 4,500 sex offenders who received passports lived in five states -- California, Texas, Florida, New York, and Michigan -- and at least 12 individuals were approved landlords in the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Section 8 housing program during the two years before the study's time frame.

So it's not bad enough that people have to live in government housing, but now they have a sex offender has their landlord. Would you want a sex offender coming to your door collecting rent once a month. I'm not saying they need Donald Trump to be the landlord but could we at least find someone who isn't a sex criminal.

Finally, "The GAO acknowledged that the number of sex offenders it found receiving passports might have been low, because the data compared passport database records to the National Sex Offender Registry, which could lack or contain invalid Social Security numbers."

So the GAO is saying that with all the bad news in this article the situation is probably worse than we know.

Now not all this happened on President Obama's watch, but President Bush signed a law aimed at dealing with this and President Obama basically didn't bother to find out about that law. How can you be President and not know about a law that was signed about one month before you took the Oath of office? It's not like it was signed 30 years ago and everyone had forgotten about it, or that it was an unimportant and seldom used statue that just appeared in a line of a bill. This was a law written to protect children and punish sex traffickers from other countries.

The GAO lays out some examples of what it is talking about on pages 11-13 of it's report. You can find the report at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10643.pdf
However I should warn you that it is very disturbing.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/15/thousands-sex-offenders-issued-passports-travel-abroad/

Captialism defeats Socialism at the World Cup.

Anyone watching the World Cup knows that the French embarrassed themselves while the Americans fought through adversity to win their group for the first time since the first world cup. I believe the reason for this can be found in comparing freedom to socialism.

The French team came to the World Cup by way of a handball goal against Ireland. Even the most novice soccer fans knows your not suppose to use your hands in soccer. Then after getting here they embarrassed themselves. Nicholas Anika was sent home after an argument with their head coach Domenech. This resulted in the French team boycotting practice the next day. Then of course Domench retaliates by keeping the French captain Partice Evra off the field for the final game which South Africa won 2-1. France still could have made the next round with a win. After the game Domenech refused to shake the hand of the South African coach. There's also a video of one of the French managers throwing a clipboard but I can't seem to locate that. You probably saw it on ESPN anyway. Let's compare this to the Americans

The United States ties heavily favored England to open play, Then goes down 2-0 in the first half to Slovenia and comes back to tie. Then has their game winner disallowed by a terrible call by a official. Today the U.S. again has a goal disallowed by a terrible call. They have to score in extra time to advance. Meanwhile there was no skipped practices no one was sent home for being mean to the coach and the captain Landon Donavan scored the winning goal.

So what was the difference in the two teams. The French team was more talented by most accounts. They didn't get anywhere near the amount of bad breaks the Americans did. I think the difference is the France felt entitled to be here. The French team believed everything should be handed to them, much like it is in France. When things started going poorly for them they looked for someone to blame instead of sucking it up and playing hard. The coach blamed the captain the team blamed the coach the manager just quit and has a result the French managed all of one goal in the world cup and even that came when they were behind by two.

Capitalism teaches us that we are responsible for ourselves no matter what the circumstances. In other words when the going gets tough the tough get going. Socialism teaches that when the going gets tough go look for someone to blame then tell them to give you their money. Of course were experiencing a little of that with this administration here in America but I'm praying that doesn't last past
2012. Capitalism will always defeat Socialism and this is just another example.

You Can't Clean Up Oil Wthout Fire Extinguishers and Life Vests?!?

Today the oil clean-up was halted by bureaucracy. The Coast Guard stopped barges that were to be used in the oil clean-up because they could not confirm the boats had fire extinguishers and life vests. "We are all in this together. The enemy is the oil," said Coast Guard Lt. Cmdr. Dan Lauer. Unfortunately this appears not to be true the enemy of Louisiana and the rest of the Gulf Coast is bureaucracy. The barges have now sat for twenty four hours while thousands of barrels of oil have spilled into the gulf coast. Of course Governor Jindal tried to contact the White House without success. However Jindal is not the only governor that is having problems.

Governor Riley of Alabama is also experiencing difficulty trying to get anything done.

"The governor said the problem is there's still no single person giving a "yes" or "no." While the Gulf Coast governors have developed plans with the Coast Guard's command center in the Gulf, things begin to shift when other agencies start weighing in, like the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

"It's like this huge committee down there," Riley said, "and every decision that we try to implement, any one person on that committee has absolute veto power."

Hey President Obama put one person in charge of the decision making. If you want them to run it by you first by all means, but quit allowing bureaucracy to harm the country. You can't keep having different people giving different answers to every question. Put one person in charge. Oh wait you did, your in charge! At least you say you are. Take control of this situation before all of the beaches on the East Coast are covered with oil. Or at least ask someone else too. Maybe a President with a backbone who knows something about oil. Kinda like the last guy we had in there. I think I'm going to go out and by one of those President Bush miss me yet shirts.

Seriously, this is what happens when you allow someone with no experience running anything to run a country. You almost can't even blame Obama for this, He doesn't know what to do because he never learned. He had no experience running anything before he became President. I mean Heck he only served 153 days in the U.S. Senate before his campaign started. I'll admit he probably had no business running for President having no experience, but 53% of the country voted for him. I guess this really goes back to an old saying, "Be careful what you wish for you just might get it." I wonder if Obama is wishing he had left this President thing to someone who has a clue how to lead.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/bp-oil-spill-gov-bobby-jindals-wishes-crude/story?id=10946379&page=1

It's Game 7!

Hey guys I'm getting a post about the SC Democratic Party ready to post, but I think It will have to wait until tomorrow night. Game 7 Boston vs L.A.

Gather your Armies

I just saw this ad on O'Reilly and I thought it was the best thing I have seen since McCain's Celebrity Ad. If you haven't seen it watch it now if you have seen it watch it again.




The Left is saying that the ad implies that we should overthrow the government by force. I guess they've never heard of a metaphor. The ad is obviously about overthrowing the bums in congress. It's amazing how soon the left forgets about free speech when their not the ones speaking.

Another one Bites the Bus?

It appears has Ken Salazar will be the next member of Obama's inner circle to be thrown under a bus. Before we get to Mr Salazar let's review a list of the other members of the bus club. First we have Our President's own Grandma who he called a racist to gain favor in the African American community. Then we have his pastor whose church Obama attended for the same reason. Then he threw Rev Wright under the bus with his Grandma when he realized that "white America" wouldn't accept a pastor that cursed America from the pulpit. Remember Arlen Spector, Here's a man who switched parties and was promised not to be challenged in the Primary. Of course he was and when he was down and needed the Presidents help President Obama, you guessed it, threw him under the bus. Let's not forget the situation when Obama threw police under the bus when they responded to a call about a possible break in at Henry Louis Gates house. They get there some guy outside says he lives there but can't prove that he does. So Our President says they acted stupidly. He even threw Israel under the bus after their soldiers responded in self defense to an attack aboard a ship illegally in their waters.

Back to Mr. Salazar he was appointed to his position by President Obama. Has Interior Secretary it is his job to make sure these oil rigs don't explode. So he should be fired. The problem is this comes after a long line of Obama appointees were tax cheats or felons. Those that weren't were seen as partisan choices like Leon Panetta to run the CIA. I already written about this on march 3rd if you want to read about it http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/2009/03/obama-first-instict-is-usually-wrong.html

The situation with the oil may have worked out differently if Obama had accepted help from the Dutch and many others that was offered immediately after the spill happened. The Dutch offered skimmers that would pick the oil out of the water. According to the AJC (hardly a conservative paper) the skimmers could have removed 4.4. million gallons of oil by now. 5 million is total have entered the gulf. That means that 88% of the oil could have been already removed from the Gulf Coast. http://blogs.ajc.com/kyle-wingfield/2010/06/09/oil-spill-why-did-obama-refuse-to-go-dutch/

Instead the spill is now a crisis. I guess his instincts haven't gotten any better in a year. However first he must show he is not to blame for the on going crisis and the best way to do that is to say that someone else is. However since Bush and Cheney have been gone for over a year it's going to be hard to lay this at there feet. Not that he didn't try last night, "Over the last decade, this agency has become emblematic of a failed philosophy that views all regulation with hostility -- a philosophy that says corporations should be allowed to play by their own rules and police themselves. At this agency, industry insiders were put in charge of industry oversight. Oil companies showered regulators with gifts and favors, and were essentially allowed to conduct their own safety inspections and write their own regulations." http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-nation-bp-oil-spill

Seriously this man has got to quit blaming the last guy for everything that goes wrong during his administration. This is one of the reasons no one trust him anymore. That and he can't deliver on anything he promised in the campaign. Of course most of us at this site already knew that. So since no one with a brain will believe this is the fault of President Bush he will have to find another fall guy. Mr. Salazar get ready I hear the bus coming.

Mexico upsets America ON OUR BORDER!

That's right America has just ceeded terrority to Mexico! The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service has closed part of a national park due to drug smuggling and other illegal activity on the border. “It’s literally out of control,” said Babeu. “We stood with Senator McCain and literally demanded support for 3,000 soldiers to be deployed to Arizona to get this under control and finally secure our border with Mexico.“

How are we going to keep Americans from going into this part of the park. More guards telling them to stay away perhaps, No! Instead we're using the time tested method of posting signs. I can see the press conference now. "President Obama two fourteen year old girls were killed on the border by Mexican drug lords today, what do you have to say about that?" President Obama: "Can't they read didn't they see those signs I had posted."

Of Course Sheriff Paul Babeu had much more to say on the subject. We need support from the federal government. It’s their job to secure the border and they haven’t done it,” said Babeu. “In fact, President Obama suspended the construction of the fence and it’s just simply outrageous.” Oh great no fence either. Let me see if I have this right President Obama wants no troops, no barriers, is it possible he wants no borders?


This just makes me angry. The situation on our border is becoming unbearable. This is why we have to secure our borders now! Let's send some troops down there and stop the crime that is occuring on our border and the illegal immigration. Then after we have secured a permanent solution to the problem we can perhaps talk about Immigration Reform. However just like the oil spill it's hard to accomplish anything until you stop the leak. I think the sheriff sums this up best, “We need action. It’s shameful that we, as the most powerful nation on Earth, … can’t even secure our own border and protect our own families.”

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/06/16/closes-park-land-mexico-border-americans/

Obama and Bush in a dead heat.

A new poll as come out showing that when people are given a choice between Obama and Bush Obama only comes out with 50% of the vote. Bush actually gets 44%. I guess the other 6% were stoned. Now while this technically means Obama is still more popular than bush you have to remember that when President Bush left office his approval ratings were below 30%. I figure in about six more months Bush will be leading in this hypothetical matchup.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/obamas-december-standing.html
Obama has shown over and over again he is not a strong leader. From taken way too long on his decision on Afghanistan, to being all over the place on the public option and healthcare. If Obama wants to survive the midterms he is going to have to find his backbone if he ever had one to begin with.

Politically Correct Seasons Greetings:

I just saw this and thought everyone would enjoy it. Merry Christmas!

Please accept with no obligation,
implied or implicit our best wishes for
an environmentally conscious,
socially responsible, low stress,
non-addictive, gender neutral,
celebration of the winter solstice
holiday, practiced within the most
enjoyable traditions of the religious
persuasion of your choice, or secular
practices of your choice, with respect
for the religious/secular persuasions
and/or traditions of others, or their
choice not to practice religious or
secular traditions at all ...

and a fiscally successful,
personally fulfilling, and medically
uncomplicated recognition of the onset
of the generally accepted calendar
year _______, but not without due respect
for the calendars of choice of other
cultures whose contributions to
society have helped make America great,
(not to imply that America is necessarily
greater than any other country or is
the only "AMERICA" in the western
hemisphere), and without regard to the
race, creed, color, age, physical ability,
religious faith, choice of computer platform,
or sexual preference of the wishee.

- DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTABILITY -

(By accepting this greeting,
you are accepting these terms.
This greeting is subject to
clarification or withdrawal. It is freely
transferable with no alteration to the
original greeting. It implies no
promise by the wisher to actually
implement any of the wishes for
her/himself or others, and is
void where prohibited by law, and is
revocable at the sole discretion of
the wisher. This wish is warranted
to perform as expected within the
usual application of good tidings
for a period of one year, or until the
issuance of a subsequent holiday greeting,
whichever comes first, and warranty is
limited to replacement of this wish
or issuance of a new wish at the
sole discretion of the wisher.)

I'm Engaged

Just thought I'd let everyone know that on Thanksgiving Day I proposed to my girlfriend and for reasons defying explanation she said yes. We are planning on getting married in Feburary or thereabouts. I hope everyone is doing well. Merry Christmas!

P.S. Sorry I can't seem to get to this blog as much as I would like to. I don't have internet access at home. Hopefully this will change and I'll be back to blogging soon.

Thank you to our Veterans

On the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month the war to end all wars also know as World War 1 came to an end. Of course we now know that World War 1 was not the war to end all wars it wasn't even the war to end all world wars. Still this day as been chosen to honor all veteran's living and dead. I just want to take a moment to thank our soldiers who are fighting and Iraq and Afghanistan and who are stationed in foreign lands across the world. Their sacrifices along with the families of these soldiers is what makes America the greatest country on earth. Thank You you to all the soldiers who volunteer to protect this great land and even more thanks to the ones that never made it home.

It is the VETERAN, not the preacher, who has given us freedom of religion.


It is the VETERAN, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press.


It is the VETERAN, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech.


It is the VETERAN, not the campus organizer, who has given us freedom to assemble.


It is the VETERAN, not the lawyer, who has given us the right to a fair trial.


It is the VETERAN, not the politician, Who has given us the right to vote.


It is the VETERAN who salutes the Flagand


It is the VETERAN who serves under the Flag

The Berlin Wall

I was nine years old when the Berlin Wall fell, but I still remember the event. Back then the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. were seemingly always about a moment from destroying each other. We were long past the days of duck and cover. (Perhaps because someone pointed out the absurdity of hiding from a nuke under a small wooden desk.) However the threat was still very real until the moment the Berlin Wall came down.

Their is great history behind the Berlin Wall. The Wall was completed on August 13, 1961. This closed the border between the communist East Berlin and the democratic West Berlin. The Wall was more than 87 miles long. Many families were separated and would not be reunited until the Berlin Wall fell. On June 26, 1963 President John F. Kennedy went to West Berlin and uttered the now famous phase "Ich bin ein Berliner" (I am a Berliner). The phase was intended to be a shot at the Soviets as well as the encourage people in West Berlin. Another American President would deliver a similarly iconic speech on June 12, 1987 at the Brandenburg gate. "We welcome change and openness; for we believe that freedom and security go together, that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. There is one sign the Soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!" Just a little over two years later the wall did come down.

The fall of the Berlin Wall was the first visible sign weakness from the Soviets. While it is now well known that many of their shows of might were just that shows in 1989 they were still viewed as the one of the World's two superpowers. When the people in East Berlin took their sledgehammers to the wall twenty years ago they did so under the threat or maybe in their minds the certainty of death. The people of East Germany and West Germany decided that they'd rather die than live one more day without freedom. Only because they were willing to die for freedom did they received freedom. Men can only have freedom if they are willing to die for it and can only keep it in the same way.

Here in America we must never forget as President Reagan so eloquently said, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." Here in America has long has we have brave men and women willing to go across the world to fight for freedom we will always be free.

The Revolution Has Started

Last night we saw a glimpse of what could happen in 2010 if Republicans stick to their guns and continue fighting run away spending and irresponsible government that is coming out of the Obama Admission. With Republicans winning the top three spots in Virginia for the first time since 1997, and with Chris Christie upset victory in New Jersey it became a big night for the Republican Party. On the downside upstart Doug Hoffman was defeated in the NY 23rd, but I expect him to run again as a Republican and win that seat a year from now.
Regardless of the results from last night we simply cannot become complacent. We must continue to call out our own party when they are in the wrong. We must demand accountability from all Republicans. I expect RINO's will see several primary challenges in 2010 and 2012. If conservatives are to take back this country it will be one election at a time. Last night was a good start, but that is all it was a start.

What I've been doing

Hello everyone,
Just wanted to take this time and let you know what I've been up to and why I'm not posting articles much lately. The first reason is that I'm now working third shift so I basically wakeup, go to work, eat, workout, sleep, eat, go to work. Not much time in the during the week for much of anything. The second reason is that when I'm not doing one of the above I'm working on getting a Young Republicans group started. I've attended a few meetings of my local republican groups and am making good progress on this front. I think it should be off the ground within two weeks. Thank You to all the people who still visit this blog. I'm hoping to have it up and running again soon.

Thanks
New Conservative

No You Don't Have to Go to College, seriously.

After graduating from college in 2007. I was all set to explode on the scene. Instead two years later I just took a job for $7 an hour from Wal-Mart. I have to admit I'm lucky to get that job in this economy. However what happened to college degree's being the gateway to success. How come I just spent $30,000 and my degree is basically worthless. It's because now everyone goes to college even people who don't need to. It has basically become the new high school diploma.

I have a new idea. I think students should be set on individual paths after eighth grade. In my scenario students would could chose one of three options. Option one would be to go to college. Many jobs do involve a high level of math and foreign languages that you just can't get in high school. Someone who wants to be a CIA operative would probably what to learn Arabic and Chinese. Engineers need high levels of Algebra and even calculus to be successful. Also someone who wanted to teach should go to college and learn about what he or she would be instructing. Doctors and lawyers would also still need advanced degrees.

Now that we've discussed what people need to go to college for now let's talk about option two skill based education. Any kid who has decided they want to learn a skill such as locksmith, plumber, carpenter, or welder just to name a few should not bother with college. We should have a separate track for these young men. For instance I had to take four English classes to graduate high school. If you can explain to me how poetry helps someone become a better pipe fitter or work on an assembly line in a plant I'm all ears, but if you can't, and face it you can't, does it make any sense to force these young men to learn poetry. Instead wouldn't we be better off if they took classes that helped them in their chosen profession. In some cases Algebra would be needed in others Geometry. If you needed a 5/8 wrench (by the way I have no idea what that is or if it even exist) you would probably want to know how much 5/8 was. Therefore a faction based math class might be necessary for some professions. I went to college with kids who couldn't do fractions. I never had any problem with factions, but some people could use a course on them in high school.

This bring me to option three business based education. The American dream is to come from nothing and succeed. When someone achieves the American dream it is usually because they started their own business. Sam Walton, the founder of Wal-mart is a good example of this. As is Dave Thomas, founder of Wendy's and of course Bill Gates, Microsoft founder. What if we taught some high school students how to start a business? Admittedly many businesses fail, but is that a reason not to give someone a chance to go after the American dream if they want to.

The final thing I would change is this need to require more education than necessary for almost everything these days. With few exceptions such as speciality doctors, lawyers, and engineers. Most profession should only require a four year degree.
Now don't get me wrong some jobs obviously require not only college but Master's Degrees. Lawyers, Doctors, engineers, and scientist just to name a few. However many government jobs require Master's degree's and then offer salaries that you can barely live on.

Of course the problem with the track system is what if someone changes their mind. Well here's an idea we allow them to change tracks. Any class that overlaps curriculum, and many would, could count toward the new track. However the student would have to start from scratch with the other courses. Yes this means it may take longer for a student that switched curriculum to graduate than one who did not switch. What if someone gets tired of being a plumber and wants to go to college? Well we still have technical college where you can go for two years and then transfer. Who knows maybe some four year institutions would who took different tracks. Also no system would be perfect, but I believe this system is the best out of all possible options.

If we adopted this model for education I believe we the dropout rates would drop tremendously because the kids wouldn't be bored out of their minds in school. They would wake up in the morning wanting to attend school instead of dreading attending school. Crime would drop because the kids that used to join gangs would now have a trade or be opening up their own business. Maybe I'm just being an optimist, but I think if you teach kids how to make money legally that won't go sell drugs and risk being thrown in prison. Of course we don't live in a utopia. No matter what the system some people will try to cheat, steal and even kill their way through life. However I believe if more of these kids could learn a skill or how to open their own business we would all benefit.

Time to make some changes

When I started this blog I intended to make it different from other blogs, but I found that to be difficult especially in an election year. I ended up posting about what I saw on other blogs and searching the internet for interesting news articles. I gave my opinions on these articles, but now I want to do what I intended in the first place.
The New Conservatives was meant to attract new people to conservatism and changing the minds of some conservatives on issues like the Environment. Don't get me wrong I haven't become a global warming fanatic. I meant looking after the environment the way hunters would like us too. In my mind hunters are environmentalist. On Energy I believe the all of the above approach we have the right message, but on Education and the Environment I think we could use a little work on our message. Tomorrow I'm going to write an article about overhauling our education system. I hope you will stop by and read my article.