Let me begin by stating that I fully support our troops and our effort in Iraq.  It was the right war, at the right time.  Iraq, under Sadam Hussein was a powder keg waiting to explode.  He had WMDs (perhaps they're in Damascus right now).  He had used them on his own people before and surely would have used them wherever he felt he needed.  The fact that we are fighting al-Qaeda (not "insurgents"), shows that we are in the right place.

Now, on to the problem with Iraq.  We have been there for about four years now, and we've not walked away with a resounding victory.  Of course, it took us four years to defeat the Germans and Japanese in WWII, and that was with a military that wasn't decimated by the previous administration.  We fought the Cold War for over 40 years, but there were no troops in combat with that.  Our troops have done a great job with the situation they have been thrown into.

Having said that, I'll explain the situation.  We look at Iraq from a western perspective.  We in America have our differences, but we are generally accepting of one another.  We have our common ground.  That is not the case in Iraq.  Iraq is actually a conglomeration of three distinct peoples; Sunnis, Shi'ites and Kurds.  These three peoples don't share much culture or other aspects of society.  The Sunnis and Shi'ites are Muslims, but from factions that have been fighting for centuries and many of the Kurds are Muslims, but their cultural differences don't cause them to side with either of the other groups.

To end this problem, early on in the war, Iraq would have needed to have been divided into three distinct countries.  This would have allowed each to set up a government which favored their separate beliefs and cultures.  The problem with this was the oil; who would have controlled it?  Most of the oil is in the south.  The Shi'ites and Kurds would not have stood for this.  So, something would have had to been done to bring equity in dispersion of the monies.  Allowing the UN (think food-for-oil scandal) to handle it would have only led to corruption.  They had enough of that under Sadam.

Without this division of the land, peace may never be truly achieved.  This will make it all the better when we can turn over security and policing to the Iraqi people, but don't expect things to be smooth.  Look for widespread violence to continue and human rights to be violated.  That will happen, though, no matter how long we stay.  Ultimately, they will just have to learn to get along.

So, pray for our troops while they are over there.  Send them a thank you email or note and pray for a quick return.  By the way, as of this writing, General Petraeus is predicting a drawdown of US forces by summer '08, as Iraqi forces become ready.

"They are just hard working, law-abiding people."  How many times have we heard people describe illegal immigrants that way?  They are trying to paint the picture that they are good for the economy, good for the country and good for our communities.  If you happen to disagree, you are labeled "anit-immigration."

The first thing I always have to say to that line of thought is that are not law-abiding citizens.  The very fact that they are in this country without going through the proper channels, being here illegally, smacks that statement in the face.  There are laws for obtaining entrance into our country.  They are choosing to ignore and break those laws.  In many cases, they are very flagrant about it, too.

Next, many of them are criminals trying to escape the justice of their country or get involved in criminal activity here in our country.  The rise of the Hispanic gang, MS-13, is well documented in many cities and could likely become a larger threat to our safety and sovereignty than all the radical Islamic terrorist groups combined.  Add to that the 4000 people per year killed by illegals, through either drunk driving or general homicide and they are killing more each year than the terrorist killed on September 11.

As for being good for our country, this is a joke as well.  How many of the 12-20 million illegals are clogging emergency rooms and enrolling their children in our public education?  They don't put into the coffers nearly as much as citizens do, yet they are getting all the benefits, including Social Security (from stolen Social Security numbers - that "law-biding" thing again).  The idea that they are doing jobs Americans won't do is laughable.  They are doing jobs Americas won't do for substandard pay.  This in turn hurts wage earners far more than a low minimum wage, because there are times when they are making less than that minimum wage, anyway.

They are not good for communities, either.  Again, their children are crowding our schools, requiring English Language Learner teachers, without putting much into the community tax coffers to make up for this added cost.  Their refusal to do learn and speak English causes problems at local markets, banks and such.  The time and cost of doing business is rising because of it.  They demand to be accommodated and never try to assimilate.

On the surface, this might seem like I'm just anti-immigration.  After all, don't all immigrants have issues such as these?  In some respect, yes, they do.  The system is set up to handle them, though.  For a bit of background on this subject, let me explain my position.

Two years ago, we adopted a child from Ukraine.  We went through two years of paperwork, much of which the scrutiny of the INS seemed to treat us as a problem at best, as terrorists at worst.  The fingerprinting and background checks became laborious and bothersome.  We had to abide by their rules, though.  I understood the rules, if everyone had to abide by them.  They are there to protect both the immigrant and the US.  We even had to sign a statement that we would not put our child on any government hand-out programs, such as Social Security or Medicade, the very programs illegal immigrants are taking full advantage of.  The objective was that our child would not become a burden on society.

Bringing a child from a situation where she was 70% likely to get involved in drugs and prostitution to a situation where she has a chance has been worth it.  She has never expected others to speak to her in Russian.  As a matter of fact, do you think Wal-Mart or the DMV will offer her instructions or assistance in Russian?  Yet, many times their phones begin by letting Spanish speakers know what button to push to hear their language, before a word of English is spoken!  I do not, therefore, consider myself anti-immigration.  My grandparents were immigrants.  I do believe, however, in everyone following the law and entering our country on level ground with everyone else.

If we do not get a grip on illegal immigration, our country will not continue to be a positive force in our world.  We will become divided and struggle economically.  It will weaken us and mock our freedoms.  As citizens, we must not allow our country and leaders to continue on the destructive course we are on.  We must take our nation back and send illegals back to their countries.

Over the last few years, separation of Church and State has been a very hotly contested issue. There are many who feel very strongly on both sided of the aisle. The problem is that most of the time, those who are against the Church are guilty of breeching the wall themselves.

When we think of the supposed wall of separation, we generally think of organizations, churches, and parents who want to put prayer into schools, introduce the theory of intelligent design in science classes, or use the Bible as a literary or history book. The problem is that if we intend to keep a true separation there, we need to look at all avenues where "spirituality" and "morality" are taught. For example, let's look at a few topics currently being accepted and just how they are climbing the wall.

First, there is the issue of sex education. I argue that by teaching our children the how's, why's, and what's of sex, we are in fact overriding the rights of the parents to teach it to their children in the manner they choose. When did it become the responsibility of teachers to promote or degrade specific ideologies regarding sex? Say the parents of little Johnny want him to learn only abstinence, why should their authority be usurped just because the school board believes that all children should learn the use of a condom? Are they not promoting their version of morality? Is that not what we are told the "wall of separation" was put their to protect against? Why, then, do we tolerate this blatant violation of our rights?

Next would be the idea of acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle. We are told that our children must be taught to accept this lifestyle in order to promote understanding and tolerance. In some cases, children are given information on what to do if they feel they are experiencing feelings for those of the same gender. What about those parents who choose to teach their children what the Bible has to say on the subject? The education system is becoming counter productive for these parents. Why does the school board attempt to become the moral authority in this issue, when in fact, it was not designed to exist in that role? I have a moral right to teach my children to accept other people, not necessarily their lifestyle. That is my spiritual choice, and we know that choice is very important in our country!

There are other subjects, as well, but the point of the matter is this; by teaching on moral subjects, the education system is just as guilty of violating the "separation" clause as any religious organization that is accused of doing so. It should not be the responsibility of educators to impart spiritual or moral standards to our children. They are there to teach them the basics of communication, reading, math, and science. When they begin to teach things which are the parents responsibility, whether those parents do so to their liking or not, they have overstepped their bounds. It is time, in America, that we take back our education system. If our teachers need only concentrate on teaching little Janie to read, rather than how to contact her "personal life guide," maybe she won't get to the working world and realize she doesn't know how to write a quarterly report with proper grammar and spelling.

As you watch the news, information on the bridge collapse in Minneapolis sickens the heart.  How could something like this happen in America?  We are the richest country in the world.  Our government brings in more money each year than many countries have in total.

One news report stated that it would take about $1.8 billion to bring every bridge in America up to standard.  That is a lot of money, but it would be well spent if it could prevent future disasters from happening.  We are made to believe, though, that the money just wouldn't be there without raising taxes.  I am so tired of this excuse.

We have heard that in my home state of Tennessee for several years.  Four years ago, we fought an income tax, even though the state government threatened health care for the indigent and education.  Now, four years later, without the income tax, our government had a $400 million surplus for this year alone, and close to $1 billion total.  Through all this, health care and education spending increased.

We hear the Democrats harp on tax cuts and the need to increase taxes.  Unfortunately, they never consider program cuts.  Every year millions of dollars are spent on government programs like the National Endowment for the Arts and National Public Radio and Television, to name a few.  Tax increases and defense cuts take a higher importance than cutting these programs.  Now, we find that we have thousands of bridges that are deficient, all because we don't want artists to starve if they refuse to work.

Most of us work hard to provide for our families.  If we can't make ends meet, we either find a new line of work or work additional hours or jobs.  Yet, the NEA is designed so that artists don't have to work.  They simply apply for a grant for their "art", and viola, they don't have to work.  The excuse is that without this program, art would suffer.  To be honest, from some of the art I've seen that YOU and I have funded, we wouldn't miss much.  If their art was worth while, it would support itself.

NPR and NPTV are another idea whose time is gone.  Started when television and radio were new and needed help to survive, there is now cable and satellite TV and radio.  Advertisers pay well for programs that are popular.  There is no reason these two dinosaurs couldn't work the same way and get our of our pockets.

On top of it all, much of the time, they produce material that is at odds, or offensive, to many of us.  Yet, we are expected to support it.

It is time that our government look at priorities.  Which is more important; starving, offensive artists or old, defective bridges?  Where would you rather spend your hard earned dollars?  We need to let our representatives know, because the last time I checked, we are still a government, of the people, by the people and for the people.

I was serving in the Army in 1986 when President Reagan sent bombers to Libya.  I had been in three buildings where bombs from terrorists had been found, thankfully before they went off.  We lived every day with the concern that some lunatic was going to do his "Islamic" duty and blow up himself and us.  We tried not to let it get to us, but you could sense that everyone had it, at least, in the back of their mind.

Then, on that fateful morning, the President sent a few bombers with a "message" for President Khadaffi.  That message cost the terrorist funding leader the life of his daughter.  It was a message that rang loud and clear and brought an end to his stage.

President Reagan responded to terror with strength.  He realized that was the only thing Khadaffi would understand.  He didn't wait for 16 UN resolutions to be ignored, or for European leaders to give their consent.  He wasn't even worried about how the other oil-rich Middle Eastern nations would react.  He saw what needed to be done, and he did it.

The important thing is that he didn't want to repeat the mistakes of Vietnam.  In that war, we were more concerned with collateral damage and world opinion than with winning the war and ending tyranny.  We hamstrung our troops and allowed an enemy who cared nothing about life, even young children.  It was the North Vietnamese who were sending in children strapped with bombs, yet our soldiers were blasted for protecting themselves from them.  It was the North Vietnamese who were torturing and detaining prisoners, not our side.

Today, we see the same things happening.  We are not allowing our troops to pursue terrorists for fear of what the rest of the world will think.  All the while, terrorists are sending in children to do their dirty work, and humiliating and beheading prisoners, even civilians.  We are trying to finesse an enemy who only understands one thing; strength.

Islam translates "submission", not "peace."  The demand submission through any process.  Until we realize these radicals will use any means necessary to obtain it, we will struggle with this war for many years, and lives, to come.  If there truly are moderates in the Islamic world, they must be made to stand up and fight against the terrorists as well, bringing them into submission.  If Islam wants to be a religion of peace, they must use strength to subdue the radicals.

If we are to win this war on terror, we must follow the example of Ronald Reagan.  We must ensure the terrorists know who is the stronger.  To fail, would be catastrophic.  Future generations, under the heavy hand of regimes such as the Taliban, would look upon us with disdain for not fighting as though it mattered.  We cannot fail.  The cost is too great.  We must fight the right way.

We all love our freedoms.  They are guaranteed in the Constitution.  We have freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom to pursue our own course in life.  Those freedoms cannot be taken advantage of, though.

Freedom is what our country was founded on.  These freedoms need to be protected at all costs.  When someone speaks out, whether we agree or not, they are exercising their freedom.  They are guaranteed that.

The one thing, though, that we are not guaranteed is that there will be no repercussions from our exercise of those freedoms.  Yet, when someone is caught by the consequences of their actions, they often seem surprised.

We see this more and more in the court system.  When a criminal is tried, lawyers, especially the ACLU, want to blame everyone but the criminal for the crime.  They blame their parents, society, culture, just anybody else.  They do whatever they can not to take the blame.

This has bled over into the judges.  We see softer and softer sentences for hardened criminals.  The judges are concerned about reforming the criminal rather than punishing them and letting them experience consequences for their actions.  As we remove more and more of these consequences, the result is that there is no deterrent to crime and anarchy will surely follow.

As a parent, I do my best to protect my children, but the one thing I can't do is completely remove consequences from their lives.  If I ever did that, they would not be deterred from further careless actions.  Some might say if I loved them I'd protect them from any possible harm, but what would that really teach them?

If we never allow people to suffer the consequences of their actions, society will suffer.  If we are to ever have a society in which freedoms are truly cherished, we must allow people to suffer consequences.  Simply, there is no personal freedom without personal responsibility.

So, here we are, seven months into the "new" Democrat controlled Congress.  What have we gotten for our hard earned tax dollars?

Well, we're about to find out about some people Bush fired, who he sole discretion on hiring and firing.  We've had two attempts to pass an immigration bill that 80% of Americans opposed.  Our troops are in harms way, but are being played as pawns in the political game of chess that is Washington, D.C.

But, hey, 1.7 million minimum wage earners got a pay raise, most of whom are high school students needing the extra money so they can afford iPhones!

Each day, I listen to the news and talk radio so I can keep up with what's going on in Washington.  I contact my Congressman and Senators four to five times a month regarding legislation.  What do I hear?  I hear of a Congress that has done less of what the American people sent them there to do.

For six months last year, the full election cycle, we hear nothing buy diatribe after diatribe of how the Republicans had mishandled power and gotten nothing done.  The Democrats promised that if they were put into power, they would turn things around.  They told us they would bring ethics back to Washington.  They would restore the people's faith in government.

As you read the latest polls, the unthinkable has happened; their numbers are even lower than the President's.  It seems that only about 14% of Americans are happy with the job the Democrats are doing running Congress.  Yet, the Democrats, undaunted, trudge on in trying to defund and abandon our troops, press on with hearing after hearing into why the Administration fired 8 Federal Justices (instead of 95 as Clinton did, I suppose), and they try to push an amnesty immigration bill on us (and promise it'll be back).

This is a party so out of touch with America, it is not even funny anymore.  They are so indebted to the far left of their party, the anti-American, socialist, humanist side of the party.  They have so hamstrung America, it may take many years to get out of this mess.

What's going on with our courts?  Are judges using any common sense at all?  Are they using their brains at all?

For some time, we've read about judicial activism.  We're familiar with off-the-beaten-path judges pulling rulings out of the air, justifying their decisions with anything from foreign law to "well, it ought to be this way."  They are changing the course of America and stealing the ballot box from us in the process.

We've read about the frivolous law suits against doctors and corporation, which are driving up health care costs, insurance costs and the cost of the products we buy.  Not many would argue that some of these lawsuits need to be laughed out of the courtroom rather than awarded multi-million dollar settlements.  They are a waste of our time and money, and only display the laziness and stupidity of some people.

I'm not talking about any of that, though.  I want to address a far worse problem with our justice system.  I want to look at how some of the most violent offenders in our land are sent from the courtroom, usually with little more than a slap on the wrist and a "wink-wink" from the judge.

Monday, many learned of the case of a man accused of rape, Mahamu Kanneh, a Liberian, who was released because no translator had been found to assist him during the trial on his rape arrest from three years ago.  He comes from an area in the Western African nation with a rare language, only about 100,000 people in the world speak it.  Because no one was found to assist him during his trial, and because it had been three years, Judge Katherine Savage ruled that he was being denied the right to a fair and speedy trial.

From those facts, it might sound like he wouldn't be able to have much of a fair trial, but still, to dismiss a charge of raping a seven-year-old girl seems too lenient.  As the facts came out, though, it was learned that three translators were found, but they stormed out of the court, angry with the judge.  Also, Fox News was able to locate three other translators within hours of the announcement.  On top of that, and the most aggravating, Kanneh studied both high school and community college in the United States.  He spoke English to the investigators.

Clearly, this man should have stood trial, not just recently, but three years ago when he was first brought to the judge.  What this judge sees in freeing a potential rapists, a child rapists at that, is beyond me.  I would have thought a woman judge would have been more sympathetic to the rights of the victim than this.

Yet, this is not the first case of this kind of judicial chicanery.  Judges across the US have been either dismissing cases or giving such lax sentences against child rapists that you have to wonder where these judges heads are.  Teachers and priests and repeat offenders are getting off virtually scott-free, all the while destroying children's lives.  Is the Left's hatred for children come to this?  And they call this "compassionate."

The worst part is, most of these judges are appointed by Governors and Presidents, not elected by the people.  They feel they have no accountability to the very people they are supposed to be protecting.  The disregard victims rights in favor of criminals rights.  And who suffers?

We, as a people, cannot allow this to happen.  There must be safeguards in place for instances such as these.  There may be impeachment processes or recall processes that should be taken.  We must not stand by and watch our justice system fall apart.  We are a country of rule of law.  If we fail to use the system to protect the innocent, rather than the violent and guilty, we will fail as a society.  We must demand accountability of these rouge judges who feel they are above repercussions.  If it means opening them up to lawsuits from victims when they let a known predator walk, so be it.  We must reign them in.  Otherwise, we may just cease as a civilized nation.

Mandated State education.  Obama wants to teach 5-year-olds sex education.  The Left wants minors to have access to abortion without parental notification.  Schools want to teach without interference.

Yet, when a child gets in trouble, everyone wants to know where the parents are.

My last post was on the need for school choice.  I believe every parent should have the right to choose where THEIR tax dollars are spent to educate THEIR kids.  The Left believes that it takes a village to raise children.  No, it takes a village to raise an idiot.

One of the biggest problems I have with liberals is their idea that we, as parents, have no rights in regards to our children.  We can't decide where they are educated without it costing us above and beyond our tax (read: stolen) dollars.  When we place them into their care, we are then told we have no input into what curriculum they are taught, which includes "alternative" lifestyles and sex education even when those are completely counter to the parents beliefs.  It's as if the State believes they are better suited to raise them than us.

State funded education has proven to be a huge hole, into which we are convinced we should throw more and more money.  We are asked to ignore the results.  We are told that the important thing is that our children are being taught how to get along in a "diverse" society and feel comfortable with themselves.  Never mind that every year, top paying jobs are going to more and more foreigners, who are better prepared for those jobs by superior schools systems from around the world.  We are to be happy and fork over even more dollars.  They use scores to implore us to agree to tax increases, yet scores continue to fade.

If we are not careful, these indoctrination centers will steal our children further and further away from us, all the while robbing us blind.  We are not getting a good return for our money.  It's time we petition government and take our families back.  We must demand that schools teach the important subjects and leave to families those subjects they are better suited to teach, regardless of how the NEA feels about those ideas.  This government is responsible to us, not the lunatic Left unions and special interest groups.

Every year, about this time, I begin to lament the idea of choice.  Of course there are some in this country who are dead set against choice.  They feel that the government is better suited to make the decision than parents, so they fight like a rabid dog to keep it from us.

Of course the choice I'm talking about is school choice.

Our family decided to homeschool for the first seven years of our daughter's life, until finances dictated that my wife go back to work.  We are actively seeking a solution which will allow her to resume homeschooling.  As a result of our choice to homeschool, our daughter was far and away both her teacher's favorite students and brightest.  He was also impressed with our extreme interest in her education while in his class.

We happen to be lucky, I suppose, our local school is good quality (for public school, anyways).  The students seem for the most part well behaved and the teachers tell us the most of the parents are actively involved in their children's education.  Of the three teachers we have met and had a conversation with, they were dedicated, caring people.  They responded to our concerns and requests.

Unfortunately, for some, this is just not the case.  Every week I read stories in the news of teachers sexually abusing students, school curriculum which teaches the depravity of the left, schools hiding from parents what their children are being taught, and so forth.  I dread the day those issues come to our local school.

All the while that these issues are present in our public schools, grades, test scores and graduation rates keep falling.  The government still hasn't figured out that money won't solve every issue.  There is no substitute for caring parents, strict discipline and challenging workloads.  Our children are just not getting this from government schools.

They are getting them, though, from private schools and homeschools.  Children who attend these two alternate forms of education regularly do far better on college entrance exams and are far better prepared for college than public schooled children.  Trust me, I work with college students; they are ill prepared for the stresses of college coming out of public schools.

The best answer to this problem is competition.  In the business world, competition guarantees the public that they are getting the best product for their money.  In our neighborhood, two new grocery stores recently opened in close proximity to each other and one established store.  The price war began, and now we can get better prices and customer service.

If public schools had to compete for OUR dollars, rather than being guaranteed them, maybe reading and math would be more important than they currently are.  There would be no time for assemblies where porn stars teach the "virtues" of "safe sex".

Of course, those who would benefit the most from this would be the inner city children.  You know, the ones the Democrats claim to be the salvation of.  These children are forced to attend schools that continually fail them, and there is nothing they can do about it.  If they were allowed to take their tax dollars and spend them on a quality education, how much better would our country be?

In closing, I know of that which I speak.  The job my wife went back to was as a teacher.  She taught in the public school system for four years before our daughter was born, and went back to it last year.  We see first hand the problems, from the inside.  And, believe me, things have gotten a lot worse in the twelve years she was away from it.  "No Child Left Behind" (or as I like to call it, "Every Child Left Behind") has made public schools no better than they were before.  No government program can.

So, let's proudly proclaim our "Pro-Choice", school choice, stance.  The Democrats claim that Conservatives scream to protect the unborn, but do nothing for them after they arrive.  Since we want to offer them the best education available, I say we are more compassionate and concerned.

As soon as Harry Reid's timetable for surrender amendment was defeated at the end of his "pajama party" session the other night, he picked up his toys and left the playground.  Making as though the amendment was the only important item in the defense spending bill, he put the important funding bill on the shelf, determined not to bring it out again until Senators were willing to put in an amendment that few in America see as vital.  What great leadership these Democrats are providing!

While many Senators, including some from his own party, are interested in moving forward with the funding bill, Wacky Reid is content to let our brave men and women in the military suffer.  I've seen spoiled three-year-olds act more mature than this guy.  This is the very kind of reaction many on the Right knew would follow as the Left bought their way into power last year.

Plain and simple, these Democrat Senators were a hindrance to progress when they were in the minority.   What on earth made people think they were going to be any different if they were handed the majority?  With little to show from six months in power, now comes the task of setting fiscal policy, with little hope of progress I might add.

Technorati Profile

Rarely do I agree with Diane Feinstein.  Ok, I never agree with Feinstein.  Finally, though, I think she gets something.

Yesterday, the Senate finally got to the business of investigating the handling of the case against U.S. Border Patrol agents Ramos and Compean.  Senator Feinstein chaired that committee meeting in place of the absent Sen. Leahy.  In fact, she was the only Democrat who even bothered to show up.

As a result of the examination of the evidence and witness testimony of U.S. District Attorney Johnny Sutton, the panel came to the conclusion that the border agents were treated unfairly.  They have signed a request for President Bush to commute their sentences.

Agents Ramos and Compean were doing their duty when a suspected drug smuggler came across the Mexican border.  They demanded he halt to be searched.  He ran, they pursued and shot him in the rear.  It was not fatal, as he continued and crossed the border back into Mexico.  Almost 750 pounds of marijuana was found in his van.

It was determined that the border agents did not file the proper papers after discharging their weapons, and that the use of lethal force was not appropriate.  They were sentenced to 11 and 12 years in federal prison, where they are serving in solitary confinement.  The smuggler was granted immunity to testify, given a humanitarian visa, which he promptly used to smuggle another 1000 pounds of marijuana into the U.S.

During the Senate committee hearing, Feinstein questioned Sutton about the policy that required the agents not to discharge their weapons.  Feinstein is not known for her pro-gun stances, yet she came to the conclusion that if agents are not allowed to shoot at drug smugglers, it is no wonder we have a drug problem in this country.

Of interest to me is the idea that the smugglers testimony would even be used in the conviction.  If it were the other way around, say they had arrested him, then gotten caught in some indiscretion, the prosecutor would have moved to strike their testimony because of that.  The judge would have agreed, and the smuggler would have gone free.  Yet, even though he was caught and arrested for smuggling more drugs into the country while awaiting the agents trial, not only was he allowed to testify, but his immunity was extended not only from the initial crime, but ALL his crimes.  He walks free today, and is planning to sue the government for $5 million for damages; a bullet in the butt.

In agreeing with Sen. Feinstein, it is cases like this that answer the question as to why we have immigration and drug problems.  If we do not allow our agents to do their jobs, we will never have secure borders.  They must be allowed to be a strong deterrent to these illegal crossings.  Otherwise, who knows what the next illegal will smuggle across the border.

Agents Ramos and Compean were doing their jobs; protecting America.  They must be freed and their records expunged.  They should be returned to the border.  This would send a message to illegals and smugglers that we take our border very serious.

We all work hard every day, trying to earn enough money to buy a few things and take care of our families.  It's the American dream.  We believe if we work hard enough, we'll have a few of the things we like, provide some nice things for our children while they're at home, and retire in peace.  That's what we believe, anyway.

Have you looked at your paystub lately?  Income tax, Social Security, MediCare.  Then, you go to the store to buy some groceries or some clothes and at the bottom of the receipt there's sales tax.  Pay your mortgage every month and you're adding a little extra to pay property tax.  Now, the Democrats are telling us they need to raise taxes because they can't get the budget balanced!

Whose money do they think it is, anyway?

The amazing thing is that people just follow along like sheep going to the slaughter.  People believe they have no say, that it's the government's right to demand it.  Listen to the Democrats, they'll tell you.  They tell us that tax cuts are wrong, that we don't need or deserve them.  What?!

In my opinion, it's my money.  I work for it.  I earned it.  It's mine.

The same thing has happened with Social Security.  We pay and pay and pay, but when we retire, they tell us what we can do and can't do if we want to get it back.  Fact is, I don't care how much you make from side jobs after you retire, you paid in, you should get it out.  But, hey, they don't even want to let us control how it's invested.  They won't let us put it into retirement accounts that might actually earn something or that we can will to our children.  Well, that would just be...wrong.

Property tax is a sales tax that you pay every year on your home.  You bought it once, but property tax is the tax that keeps on taking.  If you are lucky enough to own and live in your house long enough, you'll pay in more in property tax than you originally paid for the house.  But, they have to have that to provide things for us that we don't need or use.

It's time to let our leaders know that they don't have a blank check.  It's time to let them know they've overstepped their bounds.  Government is paying for things they shouldn't be paying for.  Artist who don't want to get a real job to pay for their hobby, pet projects that benefit very few Americans, overpriced contracts and materials, and over paid representatives.

The Democrats promised to bring accountability back to government, but have failed to live up to that.  In fact, their talk of raising taxes and their idea of hiding the pork until it's too late are just the opposite.  If we don't take our government back now, it will be too late for our children.  God help them!

I hope Republicans take note and return to the roots that Reagan planted.  If they will apologize to the American public and truly change direction, returning to conservative principles, not only can they regain power, but American can once again become the great nation we were built to be.