By Jim Posmer - 06/18/13 11:54 PM EDT
Illinois Sen. Dick DurbinDick DurbinSpending bill doesn't include Cruz internet fight Overnight Tech: GOP says internet fight isn't over | EU chief defends Apple tax ruling | Feds roll out self-driving car guidelines | Netflix's China worries Reid blasts Cruz over internet fight MORE and other Democrats want new immigration
laws, including a path to citizenship for those who broke the current
laws and are here illegally.
Some will say they only broke the law so they could have a better way of life. Yes, this really tugs at your heartstrings, but how many people struggled and came here legally, and even now, some of their relatives are not allowed to immigrate here?
Some say illegal immigrants do the jobs that Americans will not do. But the reason for that is it because they have driven the wages down because they are here illegally and unscrupulous employers take advantage of them while the government fails to enforce the existing laws that made this illegal. Some say we cannot deport all those who broke the law because there are too many of them — it would just be too hard. Again, I ask, is that a reason to ignore and not enforce our laws?
In 1986, Congress passed an immigration reform bill with a pathway to citizenship and a promise to secure the boarders and stop the flow of illegal immigrants. Our government told us this would stop illegal immigration. After the 1986 immigration bill, more than three million illegal immigrants became citizens, and now we are talking about more than 10 million people who broke the law and came here illegally being rewarded with citizenship. Could it be that we sent the wrong message and only invited more illegal immigration?
Politicians used the same arguments in 1986 as they use today. Congress made the same promises. The next time they call for a path to citizenship or amnesty, and you can bet there will be a next time, will the number of those who will break the law and come here illegally be 30 or 50 million?
There is an old saying: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”
Polk City, Fla.
The defense industry has but one loyalty
From Matt Southworth, legislative associate for foreign policy at the Friends Committee on National Legislation
We should all be alarmed — if not outraged — by recent revelations of Lockheed Martin’s plans to look overseas for business in the face of the sequester.
Repeatedly these defense corporations, including Lockheed, have come to Congress to testify about weapons modernization and the need for a strong defense industry. Taxpayers, arguably without their knowledge, have poured trillions of dollars into procurement, research and development of weapons systems over the decades, all while investments in education, infrastructure and other human needs have taken a back seat. Many of these costly systems — such as Lockheed’s F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — are grossly over budget and fail to deliver on the capabilities promised.
Here’s a simple fact: Without enormous investments by U.S. taxpayers, these defense companies would most likely not be profitable, let alone exist. Lockheed may be concerned about $825 million in arms sales, but what of the billions invested in Lockheed by taxpayers? When these companies take their underwritten products overseas, we won’t get a cut of the profit to recoup our losses. That’s just not right.
As a veteran, what bothers me most is that it shows the defense industry’s true colors. They’re not red, white and blue, and they have nothing to do with freedom. They’re green and have everything to do with greed. The defense industry has one selfish loyalty at the end of the day: its bottom line. Maybe it’s time to let Lockheed and others give the true “free” market a try.
US military intervention does more harm than good
From Dr. Michael Pravica
Given Bill ClintonBill ClintonClinton announces guests for first debate Cuban will pose media distraction at debate, should be banned Trump must avoid an 'Aleppo moment' in first debate MORE’s horrible track record of illegal and vicious bombing of Serbia to distract public attention from the Monica Lewinsky affair, he should be the last person to give advice to Obama (“Carney: Obama ‘welcomes’ advice from Bill Clinton on Syria,” June 13). The West is playing the same dangerous game in Syria as it did in the former Yugoslavia by supporting religious extremists — particularly Islamic extremists — in the view that the “enemy of my enemy must be my friend.” As a result, the desperate, illegal and unilateral interventions in Syria, Libya, Yugoslavia, Egypt, Afghanistan and elsewhere by Western powers are destroying nations (and international law), and creating religiously fanatical and ethnically “pure” banana republics in their stead. This is causing tremendous instability throughout the world and may lead to WWIII very soon.
Considering that our nation is still in the midst of a horrible economic crisis with nearly $17 trillion of debt, we can ill-afford yet another expensive and illegal intervention in a faraway nation.