Serve the Divorce Papers Democrats

By: K Marsala www.right2think.8m.com
cnuseeme@cox.net


By now, the name Cindy Sheehan has become synonymous with far leftist notables such as Michael Moore, Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Howard Dean, and organizations like MoveOn.org, Code Pink, Crawford Peace House, and Air America.

Cindy Sheehan, an American mom who tragically lost her son a year ago. Cindy an American mom, who after meeting with President Bush last year remarked, "I now know he's sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he's sorry and feels some pain for our loss. And I know he's a man of faith." Cindy, an American mom living in the land that promises us the right to change our minds and to speak our minds. Cindy, an American mom who was used by the worst of those who defile the name Democrat.

In our country, the two main political entities have been the Republicans and the Democrats. Over the course of political history, there have been some rotten people in both political bodies. There have been those who have spied, coerced, committed perjury, and resigned from their positions on high. There have been those who have held office that have brought great shame upon our political system and reflected a depraved disregard for themselves, their cabinet, and their country.

However, in the case of Cindy Sheehan, those who have used this unstable bereaved woman… they have taken the prize for being the oozing pervasive scum of our political history.

Anyone who has followed the news over Cindy Sheehan’s loss of her son (an adult who decided to join the military in 2000 and then re-enlist for a second tour. Tragically, he was killed while volunteering for a rescue mention outside Sadr City) felt the pain of this parent, just as we have for other parents who have lost their loved ones. Those who believe in freedom admire, appreciate, and have a deep respect for all of those who continually make the ultimate sacrifice for all.

Most Americans do not have a problem with those who are anti-war, nor for those who question our involvement in the war on terror. The majority of American’s and our President are not “pro-war” they despise war, but due to the evidences given, they see no other alternatives if we are to survive as a nation and gain a foothold in our future against terrorism. Ask yourselves, when has any president of the United States ever gleefully spoken a word that they cannot wait to send our men and women over and have them murdered by terrorists? It mourns this country greatly when our service people or innocent bystanders are murdered by those who hate the ideals of freedom. This is why Americans understood the pain Cindy Sheehan experienced when she first learned her son had given himself for our freedoms.

For the haters of America who cannot seem to recall history and why we have reached the point that we can no longer ignore the terrorists abroad, let us recall history for a moment:

· 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by a Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40.

· In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.


· In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

· During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.


· In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

· In 1985 the cruise ship Achilles Lauro was hijacked and a 70-year-old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.


· In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens, and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

· In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.


· In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

· In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.


· On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and, of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

· In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.


· In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40.

We have been at war… long before most of us ever wanted to admit it or deal with it.

Cindy Sheehan in her bereavement fell victim to those who are not worthy of their political party… yes, there are those who do not deserve the privileges so many have fought and died for. Their continual irrational bombardment of abuse has left stains of excrement upon what those who have fought and died for so bravely. They have shown their black-hearted disdain for our freedoms through their hate America first in their films, books, articles, speeches and their contemptuous use of a woman overwrought by her loss. Those who used Sheehan to promote their agenda of anti-American rhetoric should be ostracized and asked to make their political home elsewhere. Their abuse of Sheehan is loathsome. This bereaving mother-needed kindness, comfort, and counseling, not what the derelict giddy orc feasting far leftist did to her soul. Their hatred for America and for what we stand for as a nation- has turned these despisers of America into such vile creatures of putrescence that they have become an embarrassment to the rest of the Democratic Party. How disgusting these “Hate America First” individuals and groups have become, to use a distraught mother who has lost her son.

This minority of indecent human beings have pushed their hating agenda against America too far. There is a point when the line is crossed. There is a point that comes to every group of people, to every establishment; to every party when there must be a cut off from those who are bringing their evil ilk of disturbing revulsion upon the good name of its association. Does the Democratic Party really want the majority of Americans or the world to gaze upon them as being these despicable monsters of repugnance?

The majority of those who sit under the name Democrat are hard-working, family raising, parent loving, patriotic citizens who love this land of ours. They may be soft in comparison to those in the Republican Party on topics such as healthcare and fiscal spending, but they are not those who use bereaved women to do their dirty deeds of turning a nation against its military. Those who have used Cindy Sheehan are contemptible creatures and they have brought reproach upon the Democratic Party.

Perhaps there has never been a time in American history when a party in order to survive, as a legitimate alternative in politics, needed to literally detach itself unequivocally from an ideal of such poison as this. The Democratic Party, if it is to survive, needs to amputate the gangrene that has attached itself to its patriotic name. It is time for the Democratic Party to serve her divorce papers.

We Are Packing Our Burros and Moving to Los Estados Unidos

K Marsala

Recently the Pew Hispanic Center conducted surveys in Mexico. One survey presented confirmed that about four of every ten adults in the Mexican population would migrate to the United States if they had the resources and opportunity and that two of every ten were willing to reside and work here without legal authorization. The proclivity to migrate, even illegally, is apparent in all sectors of Mexican society. This willingness consists of the middle class and the well-educated as well as those who are poor and who have only completed low-levels of schooling. The citizens of Mexico realize that with a better education in hand, there is more money to be made in the land of the free, even if they do it illegally.

New Mexico’s Governor Bill Richardson and Arizona’s Governor Janet Napolitano recently declared a border situation of emergency. Most of the United States citizens concur with Richardson and Napolitano that individual states need to take matters into their own hands since our Federal Government cannot seem to control crime and violence related to illegal immigration. However, will tossing more money towards security improvements and bulldozing a Mexican border town popular with smugglers of humans and drugs really solve our homeland emergency?

Gov. Richardson plans to spend about $50,000 to fence the stockyards at the Columbus Port of Entry, but has no other plans for fencing along the 180-mile New Mexico-Mexico border. According to the Albuquerque Journal, Richardson is not favor of closing the border, and he does not favor the volunteer civilian boarder guards either. Richardson’s plans look to increase law enforcement as well to knock back illegal activity.

According to the Associated Press when Gov. Napolitano followed Richardson’s lead she declared Arizona’s counties Cochise, Pima, Santa Cruz and Yuma as border situation emergency area.

Together both governors’ actions have freed up $3 million combined in state emergency dollars to pay for law enforcement overtime, repair border fences, and costs related to illegal immigrants’ deaths. How will this combined $3 million help stop illegal immigration, drug running, murder, robbery and mayhem?

I have traveled many times through the counties declared as border emergencies. I have seen the “fences,” observed the border patrol vehicles driving through the miles of desert dunes, and witnessed illegal aliens slipping through, jumping and climbing over our border fences. All the sporadically strewn barbed wire fences and border patrol vehicles chasing up and down throughout our southern region has not solved an emergency that has been intensifying steadily for over twenty years.

We can take our $ 3 million dollars and compensate our overworked border patrol, but those who pour in here illegally daily still out number them. We can take our $ 3 million dollars and repair our border fences, but it only takes a pair of pliers to cut through the wire and a boost from a friend to leap over a wall. We can take our $ 3 million dollars and help offset the cost of related illegal immigrant’s deaths, but they will keep coming and they will keep dying in the scorching heat of the desert.
Shortly after Richardson and Napolitano made their declaration of border emergency according to an AP report, Mexico’s President, Vicente Fox stated, “that in place of signals we make proposals, instead of each working for his side that we work together” Fox believes that both sides need to bear the responsibility for lawlessness taking place on both sides of the border. President Fox wonders, “What is it that is being done on that side?”

However why is President Fox feigning surprise or hurt over Richardson and Napolitano declaring border emergency, when it was his government that has been producing pamphlets to help tell people how to enter illegally into the United States?

As citizens on both sides of the border, we can plainly see this is a multi-layered problem. Not only are we dealing with illegal aliens coming into the United States to work, we are dealing with terrorist slipping through alongside those seeking employment, and we are dealing with an enormous drug problem.

According to Capitol Media Services, Rep. Russell Pearce is constructing a measure he would like voters to give voice upon next year. His proposal is to erect, wherever possible along the 341 miles of Arizona/Mexico border, a climb-proof fence. The design is to be similar in structure to the fence raised by federal officials near San Diego. Arizona cannot build a fence exactly along the border, because it is federal land, but already there are ranchers speaking up and agreeing to let a fence be established on their property. Pearce believes a fence will provide a more permanent solution than the $ 1.5 million cash infusion to four border counties for law enforcement following Gov. Napolitano’s declaration of a border emergency.

Perhaps Rep. Pearce has a plausible idea here that many of Arizona citizens will agree with and be willing to help fund. Any deterrent may help reduce the amount of illegal aliens flowing into our country.

Still, as a tax paying citizen of these United States and a resident living in an area plagued by illegal entries I emphatically state that all the fixed fences, non climbable walls, volunteer militia men, proposals of new laws and an increase in law enforcement will not slow, or stop this problem. Nothing will impede the problem we are faced with until our government steps up and starts enforcing the laws that we already have established. Politicians can continue to try to dress up this problem and make it look like they are the saviors of illegal immigration and all that comes with it. However, nothing will change until those associated with the crossing, running, selling, buying, hiring and harboring illegal aliens are prosecuted fully under our laws we currently have on our books.

This is the bottom line and there is no way any politician or activist can defend or excuse the cost to this country daily:

We as Americans pay an estimated $8 billion annually for educating the children of illegal aliens.

The Center for Immigration Studies in Washington has estimated that illegal aliens have cost U.S. workers $133 billion in job loses.

Food stamps and medical benefits for undocumented immigrants cost Americans some $65 billion annually. Illegals have been running up a tab of $2.5 billion annually for Medicaid alone.

The American Hospital Association has said the cost of uncompensated care for patients, many of them illegal aliens, amounted to more than $21 billion in a recent year.

More than 75 percent of the illegal drugs in the U.S. come across our porous borders, according to experts.

More than one-quarter of the inmates in federal prisons are illegals – costing taxpayers $900 million a year to feed and house them. (Newsmax)

President Fox you need stop worrying about us and start taking care of your own country’s problems. Your citizens who want to enter our country illegally are doing so because your country lacks something and perhaps that is where you need to be looking… not at us. Do not point the blame our way. Your citizens reasons for going to such great lengths, some even willing to die for a better promise and a brighter future for themselves and their loved ones, must mean something.

For too long the United States Government and the Government of Mexico have turned a blind eye and now we are faced with a crisis that may be beyond fixing.

For our own national security and safety of our future, the United States must enforce what is already law, whether Mexico wants to do her part or not. Building “The Great Wall of the United States” will not solve this problem, only the action of discipline will put an end to the endless dangers we are letting occur each day to our nation.

It is time to stop the illegally packed burros, and coyote runners before they ever set hoof, or paw over our borders and it is time to make our state and federal officials listen to its citizens- WE DEMAND that you uphold our laws!




http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/381099nm08-16-05.htm?splashtop

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/americas/08/17/mexico.drug.war.reut/index.html

http://pewhispanic.org/reports/report.php?ReportID=52

Sewer Art Has Become "The Art of Law" by: K M

Truthfully, art (and what some refer to as art) lies within the eye of the beholder. From time to time, we all have scratched our heads at what is termed art, whether it has been a lump of clay, a twist of metal, a bottle full of urine with a cross-placed inside, or an artist’s rendition of how they despise our country. All have been considered art by someone’s tastes and all people are guaranteed their rights to express their points of view by the United States Constitution.

Constitutionally speaking- we are all allowed to depict our own views. We are free to use an artist’s palette, the stroke of a pen, or the notes of song, but are we as taxpayers required to support the display of all forms of art?

Recently in the state of California, an exhibit of “art” constructed by lawyers was presented to the public. Being very reluctant to give this anymore credibility than it deserves, I am finding there is a need to speak out against those who batter the freedoms we all so richly enjoy.

No one would deny lawyer Stephen S. Pearcy’s work of “art” called T’anks To Mr. Bush his constitutional rights to espouse disdain for the Bush Administration, the Republican Party, Cops, the “fanatical patriotism” felt by Americans post 9/11, SUV’s, the conservative monopoly of the media and the list goes on. But why, when we are in fanatical upheaval over the displaying of the Ten Commandments at our local court houses, did California Attorney General Bill Lockyer (an official sponsor of the display of anti-American, anti-military and anti-Semitic “art,”) give his blessing according to a press release issued on July 12, 2005 by the California Arts Council? The display was set up within a taxpayer-funded entity; do the taxpayers have any say as to how they want public funded units decorated?

The news release quoted Lockyer stating, “It is an honor to co-host this powerful exhibit and display the talent of our legal community. Creative expression stimulates freedom of thought, appreciation for diversity and opens new windows onto the world in which we live. The collected works of these fine artists – and lawyers – achieve these worthwhile objectives with style and beauty.”

Art with “style and beauty,” -now that is subjective.

We must ask ourselves, as California taxpayers are being coerced into sponsoring said art, that if an artist had depicted the Gay Pride Flag being flushed down the toilet, or a banner depicting African American Pride being sucked down the euphemism would that have been called “worthwhile objectives with style and beauty?” Somehow, I doubt it. The call and outrage of racially antagonistic artwork would be denounced, as it should be, so why then is it okay to denigrate our country, military and the Jewish people?

Throughout the ages, the medium of art has been used to protest, praise, raise questions, and move us to feel, that is what art is about. However, in our outward display of dissatisfaction with our homeland, or in our differing opinions over religious viewpoints, or our disdain for a certain sect of people- should it be sustained without consent of the taxpayer and funded at the taxpayer’s expense?

Unequivocally, the answer is a resounding- NO! The laws written by our forefathers would validate and justify the premise that the American taxpayer should not be coerced into funding something they have not given voice to.

Mr. Pearcy can paint as many canvases’ he desires with disdain for his country, his military, his police force, his environment, and his disregard for those who appreciate this country and show daily our patriotism for her. He is free to display them at any privately owned land or privately funded function. California Attorney General Lockyer can ogle and espouse his insight of appreciation for what he terms artwork that is “worthwhile” and filled with “objective style and beauty” until he has ecstatically filled his senses, but he cannot take the taxpayers hard earned monies and oblige them into the support of a taxpayer funded structure.

It is time Americans that we speak up for our rights. This country is supposed to have representative government… a government for the people by the people. It is time we stand up and say no more to the hypocrisy and double speak. If we in this country, which was founded by our forefathers on Biblical principals, cannot even display one of the greatest works of arts inside or within the surrounding grounds (The Ten Commandments) of publicly, funded institutions then keep all of it separated unless the taxpayers get to vote upon it.

Enough of the “Sewer Art,” keep your waste of what you call “art” off our tax-funded establishments. Just like most artists do, find other venues that will carry your criticisms of disgust or accolades of praise for the things you either loathe or adore. The American taxpayers are done supporting what we do not agree with, we are stating unequivocally that we have our rights too, and California’s public display of “The Art of Law” has rallied those who say no more to treading upon our constitutional rights. There is an art of law, and it is time we started following it.