It is my opinion that there is no more important topic these days than terrorism. In light of the events in England the past few days, all Americans ought to be concerned for the safety of people here at home.
Charles Krauthammer, at townhall.com, has some shocking statistcs from our friends across the pond. It seems that a surprisingly high number of muslims over there either agree with the terrorists, or at least sympathize with them. It seems to me, that if the truly moderate muslims in the world want to distance themselves from the cowards that blow up innocent civilians, then they need to start saying so, and in very clear terms. The longer they stay silent on the issue, the more I think that they actually agree with the thugs. As for the Fatwa recently issued in the United States, I am sceptical. Read this post at the Counterterrorizm Blog on the subject. It seems that the so called "moderate" muslims in the States want to create the illusion that they are against the attacks. I'm not so sure. They have some pretty shady connections to some of the extreme terrorist groups.
And lastly, if you have not seen the video of the soldier that was shot in the chest by the terrorist sniper, only to immediatly recover and search for a target, go here. It is truly inspirational, and thanks to Jack Army for the link, and some other updates about the story.
Friday, July 29, 2005
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Terrorism
I don't know if you ever listen to Rusty Humphries on the radio, or not, but on his last Saturday Night America broadcast on July 23, he was making fun of terrorists. I enjoyed it very much. After all, you have to wonder about people who can be convinced to strap a bomb on themselves and then go blow themselves up. Obviously, it is a tragedy when they kill innocent people. That, I hope, goes without saying. But, it shows that when you are dealing with those kinds of people, the only way to stop them is to kill them. That is why we have a Global War on Terror that we are engaged in.
Now, the left will try to tell you that the War in Iraq has nothing to do with Terrorism. "Everybody knows that Sadam Hussein has nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. There is no link." I beg to differ. That is a lie that has been repeated by the left because they don't like to admit that George Bush is succeeding. However, prior to 2001, is was common knowledge that there was a link. ABC news even did a story about it. The folks over at Powerlineblog have the video. Additionally, Deroy Murdoch over at National Review Online has written extensively making the connection.
The left will also tell you that the War in Iraq has made us less safe. The problem with that is, in order to believe that, you must believe that if we were to be attacked again, it would be in response to the War in Iraq. There are a few problems there. First, According to the left, the War in Iraq and the War on Terrorism are not connected. Second, how many times were we attacked before the War in Iraq, and how many times since? Well, The two Trade Center bombings (1992 and 2001), the Cole, and the two embassy bombings in Africa, just to name a few before we went into Iraq. Since then, aside from those terrorists in Iraq, .........NONE.
The bottom line is this: The War on Terrorism will be fought in one of two places. Either over her, or over there. Better for us that it is over there. And, thankully, we have a military filled with the best people in the world who are willing to take the fight over there and keep us safe here.
Now, the left will try to tell you that the War in Iraq has nothing to do with Terrorism. "Everybody knows that Sadam Hussein has nothing to do with Osama bin Laden. There is no link." I beg to differ. That is a lie that has been repeated by the left because they don't like to admit that George Bush is succeeding. However, prior to 2001, is was common knowledge that there was a link. ABC news even did a story about it. The folks over at Powerlineblog have the video. Additionally, Deroy Murdoch over at National Review Online has written extensively making the connection.
The left will also tell you that the War in Iraq has made us less safe. The problem with that is, in order to believe that, you must believe that if we were to be attacked again, it would be in response to the War in Iraq. There are a few problems there. First, According to the left, the War in Iraq and the War on Terrorism are not connected. Second, how many times were we attacked before the War in Iraq, and how many times since? Well, The two Trade Center bombings (1992 and 2001), the Cole, and the two embassy bombings in Africa, just to name a few before we went into Iraq. Since then, aside from those terrorists in Iraq, .........NONE.
The bottom line is this: The War on Terrorism will be fought in one of two places. Either over her, or over there. Better for us that it is over there. And, thankully, we have a military filled with the best people in the world who are willing to take the fight over there and keep us safe here.
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Supreme Court Nominations
So it begins. President Bush did his Constitutional Duty the other day and made his pick for the Supreme Court known to the world. Then the Left began it's predictable rant about what had better happen during the confirmation process, and what John Roberts "needs" to do to get the job.
It started with Harry Reid. He actually accused the White House of making their announcement when they to so as to take Carl Rove off the front page. (As an aside. If Carl Rove were "The Leak", why is Judith Miller still in jail?) Reid is just mad that there is a story that people actully care about, and it makes the President look good, because he is doing his job, not whining and complaining about everyone else.
Then came Chuck Schumer. Apparently, the Senator from New York thinks that the Senate is the end all be all of power in Washington. He said that it is up to the nominee to prove to us that he is worthy, not up to the Senate to prove that he is not. Is he for real? So I guess that the Senate is supposed to assume that the President of the United States has nominated a Schlub, unless it is proven otherwise. He is also warning the Roberts better answer all the questions posed to him during the confirmation process Never mind that Ruth Bader Ginsburg declined to answer some questions. That, of course, was proper.
Folks, remember this, Article Two Section Two of the U.S . Constitution states that the President shall nominate Justices to the Supreme Court with the Advise and Consent of the Senate. It does not say the the Senate gets to decide who the next Justice will be. Evidently, some Senators on the left just can not get past that fact.
It started with Harry Reid. He actually accused the White House of making their announcement when they to so as to take Carl Rove off the front page. (As an aside. If Carl Rove were "The Leak", why is Judith Miller still in jail?) Reid is just mad that there is a story that people actully care about, and it makes the President look good, because he is doing his job, not whining and complaining about everyone else.
Then came Chuck Schumer. Apparently, the Senator from New York thinks that the Senate is the end all be all of power in Washington. He said that it is up to the nominee to prove to us that he is worthy, not up to the Senate to prove that he is not. Is he for real? So I guess that the Senate is supposed to assume that the President of the United States has nominated a Schlub, unless it is proven otherwise. He is also warning the Roberts better answer all the questions posed to him during the confirmation process Never mind that Ruth Bader Ginsburg declined to answer some questions. That, of course, was proper.
Folks, remember this, Article Two Section Two of the U.S . Constitution states that the President shall nominate Justices to the Supreme Court with the Advise and Consent of the Senate. It does not say the the Senate gets to decide who the next Justice will be. Evidently, some Senators on the left just can not get past that fact.
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Taxes!
If you didn't know, I currently live in the great State of New Hampshire, the "Live Free or Die" state. New hampshire has one of the lowest tax burdens of any state in the country. Right next door, is Maine. Maine has one of the highest tax burdens in the country. I also work with several people from Maine, and I can not for the life of me figure out why they would pay so much to live there. I spend a lot of time listening to WLOB, talk radio in Maine, and it just reinforces my belief that it's better to live here.
New Hampshire has no income tax, and no sales tax, except for "Hotel and Food" tax. This means that there is sales tax at hotels and restaurants. We do have state and local property tax, but as for income tax, we pay only the Federal tax. This brings me to the reason for this post. As I have said in the past, I am a cop. And though I am not complaining about my salary, we all know that cops are not paid as well as some other professions. However, in my town there is a lot of state road construction, which means construction details, which do pay very well. Keep in mind that I work those in addition to my 40 hours per week on duty
I was having a conversation with a fellow cop, who is single (I am married with two kids). He told me that he does not like to work details all that much, because he ends up working for free. It seems that making extra money causes him to be bumped into a higher tax bracket, and more gets witheld. Meanwhile, I have more deductions, so as a percentage of my pay, my taxes don't go up even if I work 70-80 hrs a week.
This just does not sit well with me. In my view, it is time to get rid of the IRS, and replace the federal income tax with either a flat tax, or, even better, the Fair Tax. This would be a national sales tax, where you would get to take home every penny that you earn, and only pay tax on what you choose to spend. The details are too numerous to write about here, but visit their site. Then, write to your congressmen, and tell them to support it. We will all be better off for it.
New Hampshire has no income tax, and no sales tax, except for "Hotel and Food" tax. This means that there is sales tax at hotels and restaurants. We do have state and local property tax, but as for income tax, we pay only the Federal tax. This brings me to the reason for this post. As I have said in the past, I am a cop. And though I am not complaining about my salary, we all know that cops are not paid as well as some other professions. However, in my town there is a lot of state road construction, which means construction details, which do pay very well. Keep in mind that I work those in addition to my 40 hours per week on duty
I was having a conversation with a fellow cop, who is single (I am married with two kids). He told me that he does not like to work details all that much, because he ends up working for free. It seems that making extra money causes him to be bumped into a higher tax bracket, and more gets witheld. Meanwhile, I have more deductions, so as a percentage of my pay, my taxes don't go up even if I work 70-80 hrs a week.
This just does not sit well with me. In my view, it is time to get rid of the IRS, and replace the federal income tax with either a flat tax, or, even better, the Fair Tax. This would be a national sales tax, where you would get to take home every penny that you earn, and only pay tax on what you choose to spend. The details are too numerous to write about here, but visit their site. Then, write to your congressmen, and tell them to support it. We will all be better off for it.
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
Borders
Borders, Ladies and Gentlemen. That is the theme today. We must get serious about securing our borders. Now, I know that I will be called a racist for this view, but I am not. I want to be clear about that. After all, the vast majority of the population today are at least decendants of immigrants. However, there is a legal way, and an illegal way, to enter this country.
As an aside, in relation to the fact that this is the greatest country on the planet, tell me this. What other country has such a problem keeping people out.
Back to my rant. I can not for the life of me figure out why there is such opposition to the enforcement of our immigration laws. It seems to me, that if you are here illegally, then when you are found, you should be sent back. Now, I know that the INS is swamped with deporatation hearings, and that we do not have the room to house illegals when they are picked up to await their hearing. There is a pilot program, however, that will put an electronic bracelet on these people while they await their hearing, so that we can find them later, if they do not show up for their hearing.
This seems like common sense to me. But there is opposition to it. Pro-illegal groups say that it puts a stigma on these people. Well, Duh! There should be, they're illegal! After all, we put bracelets on some citizens when they are out on bail, before they are even convicted of anything.
And then there is the opposition to the Minute Men. These are the volunteers that watch the border where border patrol is strectched too thin. When they see illegals come accross, they notify Border Patrol, and follow until they are apprehended. Again, sounds like common sense. Kind of like a Neighborhood Watch for the border. Again, Pro-illegals think that this is a terrible idea, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why.
It seems to me, that especially in a post 9/11 era, we all ought to be supporting efforts to secure the border. After all, this being the greatest country in the world, we want to keep it that way for all the legal people to enjoy.
As an aside, in relation to the fact that this is the greatest country on the planet, tell me this. What other country has such a problem keeping people out.
Back to my rant. I can not for the life of me figure out why there is such opposition to the enforcement of our immigration laws. It seems to me, that if you are here illegally, then when you are found, you should be sent back. Now, I know that the INS is swamped with deporatation hearings, and that we do not have the room to house illegals when they are picked up to await their hearing. There is a pilot program, however, that will put an electronic bracelet on these people while they await their hearing, so that we can find them later, if they do not show up for their hearing.
This seems like common sense to me. But there is opposition to it. Pro-illegal groups say that it puts a stigma on these people. Well, Duh! There should be, they're illegal! After all, we put bracelets on some citizens when they are out on bail, before they are even convicted of anything.
And then there is the opposition to the Minute Men. These are the volunteers that watch the border where border patrol is strectched too thin. When they see illegals come accross, they notify Border Patrol, and follow until they are apprehended. Again, sounds like common sense. Kind of like a Neighborhood Watch for the border. Again, Pro-illegals think that this is a terrible idea, and I cannot for the life of me figure out why.
It seems to me, that especially in a post 9/11 era, we all ought to be supporting efforts to secure the border. After all, this being the greatest country in the world, we want to keep it that way for all the legal people to enjoy.
Sunday, July 10, 2005
No Better Country
As the title of this blog suggests, it is my belief that there is no better country in the world than the United States. Now, that's not to say that we're perfect. That is because we are made of individuals, and indiviuals are not perfect. However, here in the U. S., we have the framework set in place to allow each individual a shot at their dream.
Here at No Better Country, I plan to offer my views on the direction that this country is headed, and what can be done to keep this the Greatest Country on the Planet. I will admit upfront that my political leanings are to the right. But that should not stop others from submitting their thoughts to me in the comments section. I would appreciate input from anyone, because even if I don't agree with you, I like to exercise my brain in debate. I forces me to really think about why I believe the things that I do.
I would also like to take the time right now to personally thank the men and women in the Armed Forces who put thier lives on the line to ensure that we all get to keep our freedom. One of them is my brother, who's blog you should check out at Liberty Unlimited. Words alone cannot express the gratitude thatI feel toward these people.
And lastly, being a cop who works 60-80 hours a week, and having a family that I love to be with, I don't know how often I'll be here. However, you can bet that the next time I am screaming at the news about, say, an idiotic Supreme Court decision, I'll be expounding about it here. Until then, just remember that your Freedom is not Free.
Here at No Better Country, I plan to offer my views on the direction that this country is headed, and what can be done to keep this the Greatest Country on the Planet. I will admit upfront that my political leanings are to the right. But that should not stop others from submitting their thoughts to me in the comments section. I would appreciate input from anyone, because even if I don't agree with you, I like to exercise my brain in debate. I forces me to really think about why I believe the things that I do.
I would also like to take the time right now to personally thank the men and women in the Armed Forces who put thier lives on the line to ensure that we all get to keep our freedom. One of them is my brother, who's blog you should check out at Liberty Unlimited. Words alone cannot express the gratitude thatI feel toward these people.
And lastly, being a cop who works 60-80 hours a week, and having a family that I love to be with, I don't know how often I'll be here. However, you can bet that the next time I am screaming at the news about, say, an idiotic Supreme Court decision, I'll be expounding about it here. Until then, just remember that your Freedom is not Free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
