There is something that is just not right in the world that gives me an unsettled feeling. Kind of like when there is background noise from a fan running. It isn’t obvious, but makes you edgy. It comes from a couple things that I have held to be true my whole life that are now being ignored.
Currently, illegal immigration is a big issue. The federal government is standing in the way of Arizona enforcing federal law. It isn’t that alone that gives me an unsettled feeling. It is the apparent reason that the federal government is doing it. Opposing the Arizona law is being called the largest voter registration event in history. That is where my brain can’t compute. I have this belief ingrained in me from my school days that a benefit of citizenship is the right to vote. So if the right to vote is only granted to citizens, resident aliens, legal or illegal, still don’t have the right to vote. This is a law without any regulation, apparently. ID is not required in most polling places. There are lots of regulations, not even laws, that have many more inconvenient rules that you dare not break. When did regulations begin to carry more weight than laws? Let me clarify, laws are made by our representatives whom we have elected for that purpose. Regulations are rules made up by government bureaucracies to carry out their mission which could be environmental protection, education, food production and distribution, drug oversight, etc. Laws should be regulated, and regulations should not carry more weight than laws.
Another belief I hold, learned from my public school education, is that a president has to be a natural born citizen. I am not saying our president is or isn’t a natural born citizen. I am just saying that he hasn’t proved that he is. I don’t understand why the law is that you have to be a natural born citizen is not regulated. Why don’t you have to give proof that you are a natural born citizen when you file the papers to run for president? That documentation is required to get a driver’s license or a passport. Had that been a rule and the president followed it there wouldn’t be any question as to his citizenship status.
I think our country would not be in the trouble it is in today if we understood the difference between laws and regulations. Laws need more regulation, and regulations should not carry the same weight as laws.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Am I the only one who noticed?
It is hard to believe that in these days of 24/ 7 news and an abundance of commentary on three full time news stations on tv and countless radio shows that there is something that has been missed in a big news story. There are two recent news stories that the pundits seem to have missed out on. The first one is the episode with Al Gore and the massage therapist. I have heard VP Gore’s bizarre behavior blamed on everything from drugs to Bush Derangement Syndrome. There is a very logical explanation that I haven’t heard anyone suggest. “Massage” has long been a euphemism or front for prostitution. In recent years with legitimate massage maybe we have forgotten that. I think that when Al Gore told his assistant that he needed a massage a legitimate massage therapist was hired, when what Al Gore was expecting was an old fashioned massage, aka a prostitute. I’m not sure if that will help his public relations, but it makes his actions understandable.
On a completely unrelated topic, did anybody notice how President Obama introduced Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court. In his first line of introduction President Obama said, “I have selected a nominee who I believe embodies that same excellence, independence, integrity, and passion for the law -- and who can ultimately provide that same kind of leadership on the Court: our Solicitor General, and my friend, Elena Kagan. “ (emphasis added) In fact, Obama and Kagan first met years ago at the University of Chicago Law School where they both taught. It just doesn’t seem like the American way to place your friends in positions, especially the highest positions of influence in the country. I’m not saying you can’t have a history with a nominee, or not like who you nominate. I just believe that when you choose people for very important jobs that you cast your net farther than your circle of friends and you look for people who are the best qualified for the job. Noting Kagan’s thin resume it makes you wonder what indicates she will be a good judge. Naming friends to high places always seemed like what they do in other, not American countries. The kinds with dictators. Maybe he was just calling her friend to be friendly, but I don’t think so.
On a completely unrelated topic, did anybody notice how President Obama introduced Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court. In his first line of introduction President Obama said, “I have selected a nominee who I believe embodies that same excellence, independence, integrity, and passion for the law -- and who can ultimately provide that same kind of leadership on the Court: our Solicitor General, and my friend, Elena Kagan. “ (emphasis added) In fact, Obama and Kagan first met years ago at the University of Chicago Law School where they both taught. It just doesn’t seem like the American way to place your friends in positions, especially the highest positions of influence in the country. I’m not saying you can’t have a history with a nominee, or not like who you nominate. I just believe that when you choose people for very important jobs that you cast your net farther than your circle of friends and you look for people who are the best qualified for the job. Noting Kagan’s thin resume it makes you wonder what indicates she will be a good judge. Naming friends to high places always seemed like what they do in other, not American countries. The kinds with dictators. Maybe he was just calling her friend to be friendly, but I don’t think so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
