Musings (or Rantings, Depending on Your Point of View)

Global warming, or climate change, is still making headlines. It gets blamed for everything and mankind gets blamed for global warming, even though there is evidence out there that man does not have that big an effect on the environment. There are ways, of course, that people can be better stewards of the earth, but those ways are best implemented on a local, personal level. Scientists can help, if they will actually follow the scientific method and not get into politics and personal agendas. Real information will help real people make real decisions about their personal stewardship responsibilities.

Education is a major concern, too, because it shapes the thinking of the rising generation. It seems that only liberal ideas and propaganda are welcome in schools these days. A true education comes with looking at all sides of an issue and thinking clearly and critically about them all. It also comes from an honest survey of the past in history and other writings to learn lessons that only history and the past can teach us about what works and what doesn't. Rewriting history or editing some of it out doesn't help anyone--it only hurts us all. Then there is this whole self-esteem thing. What good does it do a child to be praised or rewarded for doing things wrong? Does it really prevent hurt feelings? No. A child knows when he doesn't deserve praise or a reward. And as far as trying to prevent hurt feelings--well, that doesn't do much to prepare someone for real life, does it?

Feminism strikes me as being selective for liberal causes. It also strikes me as training women to see oppression everywhere, even when it isn't there in reality. And what about the oppression of women in the Middle East? That is a real, honest-to-goodness problem and yet feminists remain strangely silent on the subject. I can only presume that it is because supporting change in the Middle East doesn't fit the liberal agenda. It is a larger and more important example of what feminists did with Bill Clinton--sexual harassment was bad unless it was perpetrated by Mr. Clinton. I am sure there are consistant feminists out there somewhere, but I haven't been hearing from them. Certainly they aren't making the news.

Immigration is a tough problem. Yes, we all want to be charitable, but in my view, when someone commits a crime (coming the the United States illegally) and benefits from that crime, then things are seriously out of whack. It's frustrating, too, when some play the race card and accuse those of us who want the laws enforced of being racist. It isn't true and surely they know it, but it gets attention and stops any honest debate on the subject. It's the same with accusing people falsely of being homophobic because they believe that marriage is only for one man and one woman, and that school children shouldn't be subjected to all sorts of indoctrination about what constitutes a family and about what sexual behavior is acceptable.

There are so many ways that we allow government to intrude into our lives and go well beyond what they are constitutionally permitted to do and yet so many don't seem to realize that our freedom and liberty is at stake. Taxes leap to mind. So do things like hate-crimes legislation, laws to ban transfats and other things that someone has decided are bad for us (they may be bad for us, but it is not government's place to decide).

Certainly conservatives aren't perfect, either. The thing is, though, that most conservatives look at the big picture and see the problems that will arise when "feel-good" legislation is proposed and when education is one-sided and when those opposing them indulge in name-calling instead of addressing the actual issues and debating ideas honestly.

I understand that there are those opposed to my viewpoint and that is their privilege. What I can't understand is why they won't even consider that they might be thinking about some things in the wrong way--or, worse, not thinking at all, just blindly following the liberal agenda. Well, I suppose that is what they think about me. I just want people to be more objective and to think things through in a more complete way. I want to see real, honest debate in the presidential campaigns instead of candidates who tailor what they say to fit a poll they've seen or an audience they are speaking to.

Reflections

I just wrote an email to a friend and have decided to post some of the thoughts that the email stirred up in me.

I never meant for Scholar to be only a political blog. I want to write about many other subjects, too, without leaving politics out. But I also find myself discouraged by the negatives in the political arena. It seems like so many are headed Left toward policies that history tells us won't work. I know that not everyone is an extremist, but it sure seems like those in prominent positions of leadership are making some major mistakes and that they have plenty of supporters.

I also get discouraged that so many seem to speak out against patriotism, America, the military, and religion. Too many are in favor of abortion and socialism and peace at any cost. I'm for peace, but not at the cost of freedom and liberty. There are prices to pay for those good things. There are prices to pay for the bad things, too. I would rather pay for the good things.

I also am a Christian--a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints--and I believe in God and in Jesus Christ and in the Holy Ghost. I believe what They teach us through the scriptures. So I find myself wanting to be kind, tender-hearted, and forgiving, and yet I feel that God expects us to stand up strongly for what is right and true. If we have to fight for right, so be it. Surrender to wrong is not an option.

I feel strongly, too, that people are more important than plants and animals, and yet I believe that God expects us to treat His gifts to us (the earth and all her resources for one) with respect and to be good stewards of those things. I love and appreciate nature and its wonders. I do not believe, however, that it is necessary to trash capitalism and confiscate private property in order to be good stewards of nature.

I feel sad for the people of the earth who live under oppressive governments and who live in poverty. However, I believe they should stay in their countries and fight for freedom and rights rather than becoming jihadists or illegal immigrants. I believe that we should welcome immigrants from anywhere and everywhere who come here legally and who come here with the intent of becoming Americans. Multiculturalism and diversity are overrated and taken to extremes. People should be free to practice their religion as they see fit and to keep alive their language and culture--to a point. But if they wish to settle in the United States of America, they need to also embrace our language and culture. They need to obey our laws. They need to live up to our ideals. And they should not come here with the idea of living on welfare and social security and using our schools and hospitals and so forth without contributing by working and paying taxes and becoming Americans. It is to their own benefit to do things the right way.

I feel, too, that we Americans need to put a stop to government growth and the Nanny State. We need to stop the dumbing down of our public education. We need to stop letting the Leftists in academia indoctrinate our children with wrong ideas and radical views. We need to wake up and stop expecting things to be easy and non-competitive. Work is essential for us. Developing our talents and abilities and increasing our knowledge are essential for us. We can't do those things if we put the government in charge of our lives from cradle to grave. We can't do those things if we give up our freedoms and if we don't stand up for truth and right.

America has so much, not only for itself, but to offer the world. Let's not throw it away.

The Immigration Problem--Updated

It is difficult to talk sensibly about the need for immigration reform without being labeled by the Left as "racist" or whatever other terms they are currently using in their effort to stifle debate and free speech, as well as honest efforts to solve the problems that face us today. The immigration problem is real and it is growing. We have got to handle it now. I am as sympathetic as anyone for people who want to come to America to improve their lives, but they have got to do it legally.

As usual, I have read some excellent articles that lay out the problems and issues and what needs to be done. The current immigration reform bill is most assuredly not the answer.

Here is a link to Phyllis Schlafly's excellent article at Townhall.com. The article is titled "Senate Immigration Bill is a Sellout, not Reform". There are numerous articles at Townhall.com and at Jewish World Review about immigration--you can easily spot them by their titles--but I wanted to highlight just a few that explain the issues especially well.

For example, Mrs. Schlafly writes about the so-called "benchmarks" in the bill:

The bill claims that bench marks must be met before amnesty/guest-worker provisions go into effect. But the bench marks fail to require that the U.S.-Mexico border be closed, fail to require that the border fence be completed as mandated by Congress in October and fail to require that the Department of Homeland Security implement the entry-exit visa system so Americans can know if visitors and guest workers actually leave. The bench marks also fail to require employee verification and fail to require that the Department of Homeland Security deports absconders, such as the 600,000 immigrants who have already been ordered deported.

She then gives some specific examples where the bill fails in these "benchmark" areas:

The only thing the bill actually requires is that Department of Homeland Security speedily process amnesty applications and green cards for chain migration.

The border security part of the bill calls for a 370-mile-long fence on the U.S./Mexico border. That is only half as long as the 700-mile-long fence ordered by the Secure Fence Act passed overwhelmingly by Congress and ostentatiously signed by the president in front of TV cameras just before the November 2006 election.

The Senate bill authorizes 4,000 new Border Patrol agents, but doesn't require that they be trained or deployed. It's difficult to hire and keep Border Patrol agents because of the way some have been prosecuted and sentenced to long prison terms after intercepting professional drug smugglers bringing in vans of illegal drugs.

Another bench mark is that "tools" will be provided to prevent illegal immigrants from getting jobs, including requirements for identification standards and an employee verification system. But the bill lacks a requirement that anybody actually use the tools.

What good will these "benchmarks" be if no one is required to comply with them in the real world? Mrs. Schlafly also discusses the incredible costs of this bill, which would, of course, be paid for by the American taxpayer:

The costs of the Senate immigration bill are mind-boggling, and the Senate has made no attempt to estimate or figure out how to pay them. The Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector puts a potential price tag on this bill of $2.5 trillion, which is five times the cost of the Iraq war.

As if that weren't mind-boggling enough, there is also a little-mentioned section that Mrs. Schlafly discusses as follows:

Section 413 calls on Congress to "accelerate the implementation" of the Security and Prosperity Partnership - announced by Bush in Waco, Texas, in 2005 - so that the United States can "improve the standard of living in Mexico." Do U.S. taxpayers want to take on the awesome economic burden of solving poverty problems in Mexico?

The Senate immigration bill states that the United States want to increase access to credit for "poor and under-served populations in Mexico," and expand efforts "to reduce the transaction costs of remittance flows" from the U.S. to Mexico now running at $23 billion a year.

The Senate bill also puts the United States into a "partnership" with Mexico for "increasing health care access for poor and under-served populations in Mexico," for "assisting Mexico in increasing its emergency and trauma health care facilities," and for "expanding prenatal care" in the border region. It looks like the Heritage Foundation and Rector's estimates are only the start of the costs that will put a truly incredible burden on American taxpayers.

Ah, our Congress can certainly be generous with other people's money, can't they? The truth is that we simply cannot afford all this. Money isn't the only problem, though. However many good people come across the border (and many do so illegally, which raises questions about their character, after all), there are criminals who come across, too, and lose themselves inside of the USA, to prey on ordinary citizens. We aren't just talking about natives of Mexico, of course--anyone from anywhere could travel to Mexico to come across our southern border, if they can't get in otherwise. This would include terrorists.

A set of three articles by Dr. Thomas Sowell is also highly recommended. They are "The Amnesty Fraud", "The Amnesty Fraud: Part II", and "The Amnesty Fraud: Part III". As always, Dr. Sowell brings common sense and intelligence to the discussion and brings out many points that few people appear to have considered.

I am more than a little weary of the Left calling those who try to gather information and discuss the issues by such names as racist, classist, mean-spirited, selfish, etc., etc. ad nauseum. We all know that there are those on the Right, as well, who call names, go to extremes, and so forth. Most of us, however, are trying to find the truth and figure out the best solutions for all concerned. Immigration is a huge problem. There are other huge problems that need to also be discussed and thought through. We have to stop throwing money at these problems and take the time to deal with them honestly and discuss them openly.

Update: I ran across an interesting editorial about the immigration problem at The New Media Journal that you might find interesting. It is "Immigration Reform Begins in Mexico" by Frank Salvato. Here is the beginning of the editorial:

As the debate over the issue of immigration reform rages, we would all be wise to examine, honestly, the reasons why more Mexicans emigrate to the United States than die in Mexico each year. While the common argument is that they come here seeking work, the true root of the problem is that the Mexican government has allowed corruption to reach such alarming levels – in both government and business – that the average Mexican cannot survive within the borders of his own country.

The above statement is not an exaggeration. In 2006, 559,000 Mexican nationals emigrated from Mexico to the United States while the Mexican Demographics Agency reported a total of 501,000 deaths among Mexico’s population. The question that begs to be asked regarding the massive emigration is why?

Mexico is a country rich with natural resources. With its wealth of petroleum, silver, copper, gold, lead, zinc, natural gas and timber, it has all the resources a country would need to keep it from becoming a destitute Third World country.

Further, the median age in Mexico is 25.6 years of age and the literacy rate for the total population is at 92.2%. This demographic, combined with their abundant natural resources and central location in the Western Hemisphere, are a perfect catalyst for an employment sector that would – under normal circumstances – compete on the First World economic stage.

Quite an interesting piece with a different viewpoint. Mr. Salvato provides a number of links, too, so you can look at his sources.