Life or Death Decisions

I’ve discussed this subject before but I am becoming more and more confused by the liberals every day.

 

There are (and have been for years) several battles brewing concerning life or death decisions. The subjects at hand are:

 

1. The Death Penalty.
2. Abortion.
3. Mercy Killings.
4. and the latest — The killing of unborn children when the mother is murdered.

 

My original piece concerned the top three but now we are debating the fourth.

 

The liberals want to abolish the death penalty for the most heinous of crimes (especially the killing and or raping of little children).

 

The liberals do not want mercy killings no matter how far gone the patient’s state.

 

The liberals do want abortion up to and including the sucking out of the brains of near-born infants. (I wish the people who want this would be forced to watch one of these abortions. I’ll bet they would quickly change their mind.)

 

Now we are embarking on a debate over whether the killing of a pregnant woman and her fetus consists of two murders (I can’t see how this squares if one receives the death penalty for ANY murder).

 

Now let’s examine why I may be confused:

 

It’s OK to kill unborn children who have not yet had the enjoyment of coming into the world, let alone living the good life but NOT OK to kill them after they are grown and have murdered someone else.

 

It’s OK to kill unborn children who have not yet had the enjoyment of coming into the world, let alone living the good life but it’s NOT OK to provide a person who is already on their death bed the mercy of letting them go without enduring more and more pain (especially if that is their choice).

 

It’s OK for society to kill unborn children but it’s NOT OK for a murderer to kill an unborn child. Also it’s NOT OK to kill the murderer after he kills the mother AND the unborn child.

 

I’m sure I have forgotten (or failed to see) other scenarios but I’ll bet you’re already confused after reading this. I know I am!

 

 

Treatise on Our Failing Court System

The following is another discussion of the failings of our court system: The Decline of Adherence to the Constitution I admire the framers of our United States Constitution immensely! It is difficult to imagine how they managed to generate a document that has stood the test of time and remained erect and strong. An assist to what they were thinking is contained in the “Federalist Papers.” If you would like to read them they can be found on the internet at URL http://memory.loc/const/fed. A list of the Federalist Paper numbers is shown and you can select which one you wish to read. They provide some understanding as to why the sections of the Constitution were written the way they are (background reasoning). Some excerpts have been included in the text with footnotes It took a great deal of insight to see into the future. It is my opinion, however, that because they had an abiding confidence in the learned men of their time, they allowed two large flaws to creep into their thinking: These two problems have occurred because of the pressure of politics on the selection process of judges and the trend of the Country to become ‘politically correct’ (I think that phrase came about during the Clinton years). 

1)     Appointing judges for life — Every other arm of the government was given specific term limits of each elected government representative (except the President. That has been corrected). Federal judges of course, are appointed for life – Why! Federalist Paper No. 78 says “– all judges appointed by the United States are to hold offices DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR –“. The words apparently are capitalized for emphasis. The question I have is: Who decides what is NOT GOOD BEHAVIOR for a judge and what is done about bad behavior? That is apparently decided by other judges (oh my goodness – talk about foxes in the henhouse)! Surely many of the recent decisions fall into that category. 

2)     No Supreme Court oversight — Every other arm of government oversees (on an adversarial basis) every other arm, except for the Supreme Court. There is no overseeing authority for any ridiculous decisions made by them. I think it was Winston Churchill who said, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” I believe the framers of the Constitution believed that, so why did they not provide a ‘watchdog’ organization of the Supreme Court? Some lawyers that I know have told me that they did that so that judges would be even handed in their decisions without having some other arm of government second-guessing them. GEE WHAT A SHAME IF THEY GET SECOND GUESSED! If second-guessing is wrong, there are certainly a great many people in this country who are wrong. During the Iraq war, everyone in the military has been second-guessed from the lowliest private to the commanders and that includes President Bush – IN SPADES! Somehow they seem to get the job done in spite of the sniping. It now appears that decisions are being made to keep from BEING SECOND GUESSED BY THE LIBERALS IN CONGRESS. Just recently it has been noticed that the recent decision concerning the fact that homosexuality is OK was perhaps directly influenced by a brief submitted by a foreign country and the UN. I was told that this practice is not unprecedented. Two or three or four wrongs don’t make a right. Who is the Supreme Court supposed to be supporting and who pays their salary? Certainly NOT the UN or any country in the world! The entities responsible for the decline of adherence to the Constitution in order are: The Federal Courts (including the Supreme Court – maybe I should say most particularly the Supreme Court)The Legislative branch of the government (Congress)The Executive branch of Government (office of the President)The State Court SystemThe State Legislatures The State Governors There are five MAIN (and many ancillary reasons) for this decline in adherence to the Constitution:  

1. The continual insistence of the Supreme Court to make law instead of interpreting it.

2. The extremely expensive round of decisions which turned the whole court system in the country upside down – meaning the tendency to accept excuses for personal behavior, the constant tendency to put the criminal’s ‘rights’ above the victim’s, and the really stupid laws which hinder the police from doing their job. Even after the 9/11 disaster the liberal courts are still trying to allow some of the terrorists to get away scot-free.

3. The lack of knowledge of almost any subject by the elected representatives (what to do about corporate financial meltdown, how to handle terrorism, how to be a good congressional citizen, what to do about the Southern Invasion, etc.).

4. The lack of the elected officials to do as the MAJORITY of the people wish rather than minority self-interests or lobbying by the various lobbying organizations.

 The obstructionist tendencies of the Legislative arm of government (especially the Senate). Witness the blocking of Mr. Bush’s judgeship appointments. But I maintain that most of the attack on the Constitution is coming from the liberal judiciary. We see it over and over again every day, of course, as a result of liberal appointments to the Supreme Court by liberal Presidents which are immediately OK’d by a liberal Senate, who then attempt to block any conservative appointments to the Court. The ACLU was once a great defender of the American people’s liberties. In the past few years they have turned so liberal they are defeating their own purpose! The following are some examples of Supreme Court liberal interpretation of the Constitution. Let’s begin with the first amendment.  The exact words of the 1^st Amendment are as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances.” Now, let’s break these phrases down one at a time –  “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or the free exercise thereof–“  Nowhere in that sentence can I find the words “and there shall be a law restricting the Government from they themselves exercising religion –“, either specifically or implied. Also I cannot find any of the three words: separation, church or state. It is most interesting to recognize that a liberal interpretation almost always defies the original intent and the meaning. Maybe it’s just that I have lost my ability to read and interpret the English language, but I don’t think so. My opinion (and apparently that of more and more Americans) is that THERE IS NO suggested separation of church and state.  The Constitution says, “Congress (the federal government) shall not limit the establishment of religion or inhibit the free exercise of religion.” That means keeping the government out of religion. It says nothing about keeping religion out of the government! As a matter of fact I believe that every session of Congress begins with a prayer, that our currency motto is “In God We Trust,” Our pledge to our beloved symbol of freedom the flag contains the word God, etc., etc., etc. So where does the Supreme Court get the separation of church and state from? (Of course they are in the process of killing the pledge because of the word God—one more abortion of our constitutionals rights). The constitution says – keep the government out of religion but not the other way around. Therefore it is perfectly legal to have any form of religious activity in the schools, in the pledge to the flag and in any government function (especially when paid for by the people’s taxes).  DUH! - THERE IS NO SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE EVEN IMPLIED IN THE CONSTITUTION!

Our courts and politicians do not seem capable of recognizing the true facts. Even our cartoonists can see the point that our ‘leaders’ completely miss (or do not want to acknowledge – which is more likely) because they can make political hay. (By the way, some of our cartoonists would make great senators. I recently read a great Wizard of ID cartoon pointing out that very thing).Let’s continue: — “Congress shall make no law respecting abridging the freedom of speech or of the press–“ I don’t think Congress has made any such laws but the Supreme Court, in many cases, has interpreted this phrase backwards. The Supreme Court has consistently interpreted the words freedom of speech to imply freedom of ACTION or EXPRESSION. In my judgment, that is an outlandish stretching of the English language! Nowhere in Amendment I of the Constitution do the words action or expression ever appear or are even implied! That is one area where the Supreme Court is enacting laws that do not exist!  They have turned a non-action phrase, “Freedom of Speech,” into an action phrase. The same applies to the written word in the press. Nowhere does the Constitution even imply the word picture, drawing, graphic, etc. However one can stretch the meaning in the case of the press since it does not imply only the written word (although I suspect that is what the framers of the Constitution meant). What they really were after was to keep the government from forcing the press to print what they (the government) wanted, as do many other nations. What’s happening with the press since the Clinton Administration? 1). The Supreme Court has even ruled that it is OK for radicals to burn the symbol of United States freedom, our beloved flag. Again they have used the freedom of EXPRESSION or ACTION argument (which does not exist). 2) The Supreme Court has ruled that all manner of smut, vile language, specific sexual activity (not only in magazines and on TV but also on the internet), even using animals and children is permitted under Amendment I. They are again using the freedom of EXPRESSION or ACTION argument (which does not exist). The last two phrases:  “The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for the redress of grievances.”  These are self-explanatory and to my knowledge have never been misinterpreted by the Supreme Court. However, one must be a millionaire if one wishes to utilize the last phrase. Also, as Dr. Arnott has pointed out rather graphically in one of his pieces – Not allowing the people to petition the government through form rather than substance is certainly NOT living up to the Constitution! Previous decisions (and I’m sure future ones) have convoluted the intent and meaning of our constitution. It has gotten to the point where Congress has begun thinking of passing laws to reverse some of the decisions made by the Supreme Court; (AND THAT IS A GOOD THING), although I suspect that the raging liberals in Congress will never allow that to happen but its fun to think about. (See I told you)! The three main ones I’ve heard about are: the burning of the flag, the use of the word God in the pledge to the flag) and the recent ‘Public Domain’ decision. (We’d better include In God We Trust on our currency also. The liberals will be after that next. That has, sort of, happened with the new gold dollar. They have it on the dollar but in a very inconspicuous place that will be the first to wear off). How the States Felt Secularism By The Courts Somewhere along the way, the Federal Courts and the Supreme Court have misinterpreted the U. S. Constitution. How could fifty States be wrong?  My belief is that since the courts are becoming more and more radical left-wing, liberal and secularist. They did NOT misinterpret the Constitution, they knowingly interpreted it that way. As I said in two of my three books to date, “There IS NO separation of church and state. There is a separation of state from church but not church from state! All one has to do is read the Constitution, which the courts seem unable to do.
America’s founders (whether they were at the Federal level or the State level) did not intend that there to be a separation of God and state, as shown by the fact that all 50 states acknowledge God in their state constitutions. Please visit: www.iwishihaditmyway.com

Fix Social Security or Junk It

   I wrote my Senator eight different letters on the subject including the one from which I gleaned most of this section. I never got an answer which addressed the problem! I am thoroughly disgusted with the lack of action on the part of the Republican controlled House and Senate which was rightfully kicked out of office in the past election. In the election of 2006 I voted straight Democratic (figuring I’d give the outlandish blatherers a chance to correct what they continued to say was bad with no information as to what they would consider good). I had never before in all the years I voted have ever voted straight anything. I always took time to try and understand each nominee and voted for those who I thought most mirrored what I thought would be good for America. It never turned out that way but one can always hope. If an elected representative enters Congress with the right idea, people like Ted Kennedy will rapidly convince them they can get nothing accomplished if he doesn’t agree. I had hoped since the Republicans had control of both houses of the Congress and the Presidency that Mr. Kennedy would be quashed and something of note would have been accomplished. Instead, except for a tax cut, there was little or nothing accomplished. The 109^th Congress will go down in history as the Congress which accomplished the very least of any Congress ever elected. I have always been of the opinion that before any law is passed, three others should be repealed. Our set of laws is like Microsoft Windows. It is so complicated even the designers have no idea what it contains. We have so many laws that should be enforced that are not, and other laws which never should have been enacted in the first place that our set of laws is so complicated that even the people who passed them cannot unravel the ‘ball of spaghetti’.  PROBLEM:  The Federal Government seems determined to NOT ALLOW me to retire and enjoy it after working for well over forty years and must continue to do so! When Social Security was first invented by FDR (big mistake), he told us it was simply an adjunct to any other retirement we might have. The Federal Government has GOT to stop meddling in the Country’s Social affairs. I paid the top money into Social Security for years and following the suggestion of FDR my wife and I agreed between us to save 30% of our salary. We did that throughout our working years and also raised four kids. My wife stayed home and raised the kids – I worked my little tail off to try to live up to FDR suggestion that we consider saving for our own retirement. Now that we are retired, the Federal Government, in its infinite wisdom, considers 85% of our Social Security as taxable income by the IRS. That means both my wife and I, who are well into our seventies, have to work

To steal from one person is theft. To steal from many is taxation. -Daiell’s Law (a take-off on Felson’s Law)

to pay the extra income tax bill that really dumb law exacts from us. I understand that it is part of the liberals ‘share the wealth policy’ but the policy stinks! Why should I have put all that money and hard work into the Social Security ‘fund’ (misnomer) so that someone else can benefit from my labors? I completely fail to see how not returning my money to me in any way helps someone else. All it does is help keep Social Security from going bankrupt. THAT is a result of the way Congress handles Social Security which, as far as I can see, has NO bearing on whether I should receive the share I legally paid in. The following is the work sheet to determine taxable Social Security income (which, of course, should never be taxed). 

The current tax code is a daily mugging. - Ronald Reagan, 39th President of the United States - Labor Day address, Independence MO, 2 Sep 85

Line 17 is the offending line which defines the problem and is completely unfair to those of us who have worked all our lives to save for a decent retirement. Actually the whole work sheet and the taxation of SS should be eliminated! This describes perfectly why our money (money we worked so hard for) should NEVER EVER be under the control of any part of government, Federal, State or Local! This also points out what has been said many times: The liberals just do not ever consider how their decisions may affect the American people. Either they only think about how it will affect their ability to spend the American peoples’ money, how it will affect their (perceived) votes or how it will affect them personally. Since they have their own absolutely obnoxious retirement largess what the heck do they care? 

Partial IRS 915 and IRS SS work sheet form (shown below).  

I hope this helps the numb nuts in Congress who do not understand how much effort and sweat it takes to develop a livable retirement in this land of taxes, taxes and more taxes! Congress has got to rescind this stupidity even if they do nothing else to the SS system that certainly needs adjustment badly and soon!

A Treatise on the Republican Race for President

   This past week 1/23/08 – 1/30/08 has had some significant changes on both the Republican and Democratic sides. The Republicans are considered to be the conservative leaning party. The way things are going one would never notice.
   McCain apparently has taken over the lead in the primary race. What does that tell you? I have always looked at the candidate’s past actions first and their rhetoric last. If I can match the two in the majority of the cases, I believe what the person is saying. If I can’t make a match I go with the actions as being the truth.  
   I play bridge with some people who are liberal leaning. Last week we got into a short discussion (I try to keep them all short because I don’t have time for the diatribes). I made a statement that Senator McCain is a liberal. The retort came back, “He is a conservative.” I’m sure they said that because he is running as a Republican.  
   Using that as a base let’s take a really close look at Senator McCain. He claims he can work in a bipartisan way. There is no doubt the man has been active and has worked with the other side of the isle. Maybe more active than any other Senator but let’s look at what he has done and been famous for:

·                      He was a part of forging of the McCain/Feingold act

·                      He was a part of forging of the McCain/Kennedy act

·                      He was a part of forging of the McCain/Lieberman act 
 
   (Your homework assignment is to look up those proposed acts and determine for yourselves what they contain).  
   He also refused to vote for the President’s tax cuts and refuses to vote to make them permanent.  
   And to top it all off, he has been endorsed by the New York Times! Do you really believe that the New York Times would endorse someone they thought was conservative? The New York Times does nothing or says nothing that is not as far left liberal as one can get, even to the point of lying. We’ve seen that many times from that paper!   The two most conservative of the candidates on the Republican side have dropped out and the third is still hanging on but I fear not for long.  
   So what do we have ahead of us now? We have two far left liberals (one a possible dictator and the other a possible Islamofascist sympathizer) fighting it out for the Democratic nomination and a liberal and a somewhat conservative duking it out for the Republican nomination.   
   I’ll make a prediction! The Country is at a cliff and we can either step onto a hang glider and soar toward an “America As We KNEW It” or step over the cliff into a totalitarian form of government! My prediction - we will step off into the abyss!    Do any of you out there have any comment concerning my concerns? 
Please visit: www.iwishihaditmyway.com 

Enact the Fair Tax

   IT’S TIME FOR THE CHANGE IN OUR TAXATION LAWS! When I use the word ‘change’ I’ll tell you what I’m talking about (because not all change is good).

For instance the word ‘Progressive’ as the liberals mean it mean ’more of the same.’ I mean a description as follows:

    Its time to eliminate the over burdensome income tax and go to the Fair Tax system (H.R. 25, which already has one sponsor and 63 co-sponsors and S. 1025 in the Senate which has one sponsor and 4 co-sponsors). Those numbers of support are growing daily so that’s just a snapshot. 

The federal income tax system is a disgrace to the human race. — Jimmy Carter, 38th President of the United States (Notice Carter didn’t do anything about it)!

    The number of problems this would solve, the amount of money it would save the taxpayers, the more money it would put into the coffers and the fairness of the tax is absolutely amazing. GET IT DONE!     I know it will eliminate the loop holes for you elected officials but it is fair in that the individual will have control over how much he/she is taxed. Spend more, get taxed. Stop spending, stop getting taxed. A usage tax is far fairer than what exists today and there is a GREAT additional benefit – the IRS is eliminated! That automatically saves in the high millions.   

For those of you who have not read “The Fair Tax Book” by Neal Boortz and Congressman John Linder must get a copy and become familiar with the concept. There is a new version due out early in February 2008 that answers all the critic’s comments. Don’t miss it!    Several of the people running for President (all on the Republican side – what does that tell you?) have endorsed the FairTax. Most (if not all) people, who have taken exception to the idea, have never read the book or tried to understand the concept.    

   After reading the books(s) about it you will be able to answer the critics comments like: “But that takes away the real estate tax deductions” (Sir, you forgot – there is no longer a need for deductions) or “Its just a sales tax” (Sir, you forgot, the imbedded taxes will be eliminated and therefore it becomes a ‘wash’) or “Adding a sales tax of 27% will make everything more expensive” (Sir, you forgot the tax is in place of –, not an addition) or “It will hurt the low income people” (Sir, you forgot the low income people receive a rebate and don’t spend much anyway) or “It will benefit the rich”, (Sir, you forgot, the rich spend a great deal therefore their tax will be high).     None of those comments are true! Why do people say them then? Because the liberals, as usual, haven’t the foggiest idea what is going on in the Country and are just blathering because one of the cornerstones of liberalism is suggested being taken away. What cornerstone is that? Punishing the taxpayer and entrepreneur for making good! Also, the liberals will no longer be able to ‘use’ the IRS to harass people in order to punish their detractors.    The Country continues to make more and more jobs available to the people by the entrepreneur. So why punish him for keeping the economic base of the very Country operating in double time? And why continue to punish people who are industrious enough to make a good living for themselves (not for others).

   In case you cqan’t remember all the taxes you pay, here is a list of a few of them. Many will be replaced by the FairTax.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Federal  Income Tax
Federal  Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing  License Tax
Food  License Tax,
Fuel Permit tax
Gasoline Tax (18.4 cents per gallon Federal plus 30.15 cents per gallon NC.                                     (Less in all other states)
Hunting License TaxFederal Income TaxHotel TaxMeals Tax
Inheritance Tax
Interest Expense
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges (Tax on top of tax)IRS Penalties (Tax on top of tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Property Tax
Real  Estate Tax
Service charge taxes
Social Security Tax
Road Usage  Tax
Sales Tax
Recreational Vehicle TaxSchool TaxSchool Books and SuppliesSchool Tuition
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Non-recurring Charges  Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax  

   Many of these taxes are tax on tax and some of them tax on tax on tax. Most of the time our money is taxed at least twice, and sometimes three times. You don’t believe it? Think about it – most of these taxes are paid by us AFTER we have had our salaries devastated by the income tax. Isn’t that double taxation? 
Please visit www.iwishihaditmyway.com  

Strongly Attack the Terrorists Worldwide

We MUST begin to think like Americans who are at war! Why? Because we are! I don’t know how much more is required for us to notice the need to admit it is a war! There were almost as many people killed in 9/11 than in the infamous attack on Pearl Harbor!

What is it going to take to make our elected officials and the public, in general, understand? The number of Islamofascist attacks against American holdings abroad the attack on the USS Cole and two attacks in NYC should all be a wake up call!

It would also help a great deal in this endeavor if we re-Instituted the draft. I hate to agree with Al Sharpton but I do, on this one, for far different reasons. How many wars have we fought where a draft was not instituted? The answer might be none? A re-institution of the draft would provide several benefits:

a) Keep our security forces at a level that we can handle any situation which arises. (We sure can use some additional forces trained to handle the type of door to door removal of insurgents). We also may need to go after Iran and Syria but we would need additional troops.

b) It will shed some fat off our kids and shape them for a future life.

c) It will teach them respect for authority.

d) It will teach them respect for themselves (no long hair, no baggy clothes, and no mutilation of their bodies).

e) Since the women want equal rights the draft should apply to both men and women.

The President has it right! We must attack the terrorist organizations at every opportunity, wherever they are. I can’t think of a war that was won by defensive tactics, can you? To do that over a sustained period of time we are going to need a large well equipped fighting machine that is trained to handle an insurgency that we were faced with in Iraq.

Our elected representatives in Congress had better ASAP come together in a united front against the enemy — soon! AND – this is most important – we have got to stop any movement to reduce our armed forces dead in its tracks. Slick Willie tried that and left us vulnerable.

Let’s not let THAT happen again!
Please visit: www.iwishihaditmyway.com

Hooray for a Michigan State Professor!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The story begins at Michigan State University with a mechanical engineering professor named Indrek Wichman.

Wichman sent an e-mail to the Muslim Student’s Association. The e-mail was in response to the students’ protest of the Danish cartoons that portrayed the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist.

The group had complained the cartoons were “hate speech.”

Enter Professor Wichman. In his e-mail, he said the following:

“Dear Moslem Association,

As a professor of Mechanical Engineering here at MSU I intend to protest your protest.

I am offended not by cartoons, but by more mundane things like beheadings of civilians, cowardly attacks on public buildings, suicide murders, murders of Catholic priests (the latest in Turkey), burnings of Christian churches, the continued persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt, the imposition of Sharia law on non-Muslims, the rapes of Scandinavian girls and women (called “whores” in your culture), the murder of film directors in Holland, and the rioting and looting in Paris France.

This is what offends me, a soft-spoken person and academic, and many, many of my colleagues. I counsel you dissatisfied, aggressive, brutal, and uncivilized slave-trading Moslems to be very aware of this as you proceed with your infantile “protests.”

If you do not like the values of the West - see the 1st Amendment - you are free to leave. I hope for God’s sake that most of you choose that option. Please return to your ancestral homelands and build them up yourselves instead of troubling Americans.

Cordially,

S. Wichman

Professor of Mechanical Engineering “

As you can imagine, the Muslim group at the university didn’t like this too well.

They’re demanding that Wichman be reprimanded and that the university impose mandatory diversity training for faculty and mandate a seminar on hate and discrimination for all freshmen.

Now the local chapter of CAIR has jumped into the fray. CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, apparently doesn’t believe that the good professor had the right to express his opinion.

For its part, the university is standing its ground in support of Professor Wichman, saying the e-mail was private, and they don’t intend to publicly condemn his remarks.

===================================================

The Professor is right! Fight back! We are in a war! This political correctness crap is getting old and killing us!

===================================================

Professor Wichman E-mail

Claim: A Michigan professor sent an e-mail telling Muslim students to leave the country.

Status: True.

Please visit: www.iwishihaditmyway.com

Roe vs. Wade, etc.

    I have steadfastly taken the position that the federal government and its associated legal system should stay completely clear of passing or enforcing any law which is in the realm of a social problem.

   The liberal ‘decision makers’, as usual, cannot make up their minds about any subject.  Take the subject of the killing of human beings. It would be nice if once and for all they decide how they want to handle killing and then leave it alone! We decide we will not use the death penalty for the most horrendous crimes, we decide we can kill unborn and near born babies with no penalty, we decide we have to fight a horrific war without damaging any civilians, we are pushing for ‘cloning’ for the most heinous of reasons, etc. Many of these ideas are diametrically opposed to others. Let’s get it right and keep it that way!

   The Federal government must get completely out of anything having to do with social decisions! In one case we can’t decide how to eliminate criminals and in the other case it’s OK to suck the brain out of a fetus when it is about ready to be born. Seems to me that’s just a little backward but that’s the liberals for you.  This problem has come about because of federal government involvement and because the liberals are so completely inconsistent in their approach. I suspect this is done on purpose – for what nefarious reason I cannot imagine. The Supreme Court on 4/17/07 decided with a 5 to 4 vote (what an overwhelming majority) that partial birth abortion was not acceptable. Interesting verdict because it was a case which, if things had gone properly, would never have been heard since the original Roe vs. Wade case should not have been heard in the first place.

   There is something in the brain of liberals that insists upon getting involved in all manner of things they have no business getting into in the first place.  For instance, there is a case before the Supreme Court on this date 1/9/08 concerning whether lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment.

   There is no doubt that it is NOT cruel and unusual punishment but the Supreme Court should never have agreed to hear the case in the first place! It is a state problem! Maybe some states would like to use lethal injection, others use the electric chair, others hanging, and others a shot to the head. Maybe some states would allow the convicted to select their own way of being put to death. But gee, wouldn’t that cause criminals to have to make a decision in which state they committed their crimes? Yeah, so what? You know what that’s called in a free state – its called freedom! Freedom of choice is what a free state is all about.
Please visit www.iwishihaditmyway.com.  

Things That Need To Be Fixed In America

   We are at war on two or more fronts but we cannot forget the things that have gotten screwed up on the home front either. One important note: Except where I will definitely specify that government do something, I will steadfastly repeat that the Federal Government must divorce itself completely from passing any laws having to do with social decisions. Those decisions should be left up to the states.

“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” — Plato

   Oh, I know that each state will have a different decision! So What? You know what that’s called – No? It’s called FREEDOM! There have been many instances where one state said ‘yes’ to a particular subject and others said, ‘no.’ Again so what? I am suggesting returning the Country to some semblance of the great Country we USED to have, not necessarily that the Federal Government has to do it. As a matter of fact, much of what is indicated in this Chapter are things that have come about BECAUSE of government interference.

   Many of the items mentioned will need to be repealed by the Federal Government since they stuck their nose into all those things where it didn’t belong. Government cannot EVER succeed in passing laws to control human nature! It is obvious, when reviewing the actions of the Federal government in the past 50+ years, that protecting our borders since 1985, developing a military that will protect us and handling the infrastructure will require all the effort the Federal government can handle without them getting involved with social decisions. The events on the Southern Border, the 9/11 attack and the condition of our utilities and roads certainly support that!

See the list as I defined it in Chapter 4 of my new book entitled “the Demise of America (As We KNEW It)” which may be purchased by going to: www.iwishihaditmyway.com