RSS

Daily Archives: January 10, 2010

Some thoughts on the mad cow scare . . .

I retrieved these thoughts from an e-mail I received “back when,” and I felt they might be of interest to viewers.

Think about these three things:

Cows, the Constitution and the Ten Commandments

COWS:

Isn’t it amazing that during the mad cow epidemic our government could track a single cow, born in Canada almost three years earlier, right to the stall where she slept in the state of Washington?

And they even tracked her calves to their stalls.

But they are unable to locate eleven million illegal aliens wandering around our country.

Maybe we should give each illegal alien a cow.

THE CONSTITUTION:

Our government drafted a constitution for Iraq.

Why didn’t we just give them ours?

It was written by a lot of really smart guys, and it has worked for over 200 years.

It’s available, because we don’t use it anymore.

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS:

This is the real reason we can’t post the Ten Commandments in a court house:

You cannot post Thou Shalt Not Steal, Thou Shalt Not lie, and Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery in a building filled with lawyers, judges and politicians.

It creates a hostile work environment.

Now think about this:

If you don’t want to pass this on for fear 0f offending someone, then you are part of the problem.

It’s time for America to speak up!

Yep, I passed it on!

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 10, 2010 in politics

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

A surgical solution to illegal immigration . . .

Our land border with Mexico cannot be closed.

The military could link hands from Brownsville, Texas to San Diego, California and the line would not slow the illegal entries. They will go under, over, through or around any barrier constructed, living or otherwise, by land, sea and air, and through tunnels.

Anyone who has lived or worked on the border for any significant length of time knows the border cannot be closed. I worked on the Texas-Mexico border for 12 years, with extended assignments at three land border ports as a Customs inspector trainee, journeyman and supervisor, and in a three-year stint at Customs Headquarters I covered every port on the Mexican border (also most international airports, seaports and land crossings on our border with Canada).

I know the border cannot be closed.

Bill O’Reilly at Fox News believes the border can be closed. He’s wrong—the border cannot be closed (he hasn’t asked me about this, but I would be glad to brief him).

I began my 26-year career with the United States Customs Service at the international border crossing in Progreso, a small town in the Rio Grande Valley a few miles south of Weslaco, Texas. The port director at Progreso had, in my opinion, a sure-fire way to dry up the flood of illegal immigrants—such persons have historically been called wet-backs, a highly descriptive term that has fallen prey to the current atmosphere of political correctness. I plan to discuss the term in a subsequent posting.

The then-port director at Progreso suggested that, regardless of nationality or country of origin, one finger be removed from the illegal immigrant the first time he (or she) is intercepted, then return him (or her) to Mexico, and remove another finger if that person is again intercepted entering our country illegally. If adopted, his suggestion would result in numerous nine-fingered illegals, significantly fewer eight-fingered, and virtually none with only seven fingers.

My only suggestion to his plan at that time was to remove the middle finger of one hand for the first offense and the middle finger of the other hand for the second offense, then another finger for the next illegal crossing, etc., etc. My rationale for that sequence was, of course, intended to prevent the offender from flipping the bird at any US federal officer in any future encounter. This led to the development of Operation FRET (Finger Removal Each Time).

I have since fleshed out my plan to control unauthorized immigration, and have also developed a plan to prevent members of Congress from growing old and rich in the “service” of their country. To that end I offer the following concepts: Operation FRET to control illegal immigration, and Operation OFFER to clear out some, perhaps most, of the deadwood in our Senate and our House of Representatives. Operation OFFER, over time, might even clear out all the deadwood and ensure that none of it reappears in Congress.

Operation FRET (Finger Removal Each Time) should not be confused with the acronym for fluorescence resonance energy transfer, a condition related to fluorescent lighting. Operation FRET is my term for a system that, if properly applied, could staunch the flow of unauthorized entries across our national borders. The system is suggested to control entries from Mexico, but to avoid any semblance of bias it should probably be instituted along our northern border as well, and for consistency the system must apply to illegal entries at any point in the nation, whether by land, sea or air.

Operation OFFER (One Finger For Each Re-election) is recommended initially for elections to our Senate and our House of Representatives, but the concept can be applied effectively to lesser elections, ranging from local school boards up to gubernatorial races. I would oppose any suggestion to make Operation OFFEE retroactive for sitting electees—now that would really be cruel!

I would also oppose any suggestion to extend Operation OFFEE to the highest elected office in the land—that worthy needs more fingers, not fewer, to accomplish his complex duties and responsibilities. Besides, any hint of such a suggestion, whether satire or otherwise, would bring down on the suggester the accumulative weight and heat of every national, state and local law enforcement agency.

A fellow blogger made these comments on my suggestion concerning digit removals for illegal immigrants, and his comments inspired me to develop Operation OFFER:

I think your immigration penalty may be a tad cruel.

Could we, however, use it for membership in Congress?

Yes, we can! (I must admit that I pilfered that slogan from the 2008 presidential campaign). If the OFFER concept (One Finger Removal Each Re-election) became law, it’s doubtful that we would ever have more than a handful (so to speak) of nine-fingered senators or representatives, even fewer with only eight fingers and probably none with three fingers missing. I assume the writer meant to remove one finger on the initial election to Congress, whether to the Senate or to the House of Representatives, and the second on the first re-election, etc. And I also assume the same sequence (middle fingers first) would apply to the members of Congress. However, I feel that the system should apply to re-elections only. Under Operation FRET, the illegal immigrant has broken federal law, while the first term electee to Congress has broken no laws. Operation OFFER would ensure that no senator or representative would serve more than one term unless, of course, they would be willing to sacrifice a digit in order to remain on the federal dole and continue feathering their nest—not likely, that.

It is doubtful that the law could be made retroactive, principally because many of the senators and representatives would be minus all fingers as well as both thumbs. And there is actually the possibility, albeit it very remote, that reelections to the Senate and the House of Representatives would be eliminated—one can only dream.

I would oppose any suggestion to make Operation OFFER retroactive for sitting electees—now that would really be cruel! I would also oppose any suggestion to extend Operation OFFER to the highest elected office in the land—that worthy needs more fingers, not fewer, to accomplish his complex duties and responsibilities. And any such suggestion, whether satire or otherwise,  would bring down on the suggester the accumulative weight and heat of every national, state and local law enforcement agency in the nation.

A special note for anyone who peruses (reads) this posting and believes it, or is repulsed by it, or considers it cruel and un-American:

Hey, lighten up!

This is satire and nothing more—no investigation by the AFRC (Anti-Finger-Removal Czar) is needed, nor do we need a BOLO for international border crossers with fingers missing from either hand, specifically middle fingers.

Our newspapers, novels, movies and television presentations are saturated with crime reports, either true or fictional, so everyone should know the meaning of BOLO. However, this explanation is provided for the edification (enlightenment) of the three persons (estimated) in our population of 330 million (estimated) that do not know:

BOLO is an acronym for Be On Look Out (for). Don’t you just abhor (hate) it when someone uses a word, whether verbal (spoken) or written, then immediately defines (explains) it in the belief that the reader lacks eruditeness (having great knowledge) and won’t know the word’s meaning?

I also hate it when someone does that, whether speaking or writing.

I completely understand, and I feel your pain.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 10, 2010 in Humor, law enforcement, politics

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The way it was—then and now . . .

From Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Guest:

Edgar Albert Guest (August 20, 1881, Birmingham, England – August 5, 1959, Detroit, Michigan) (aka Eddie Guest) was a prolific American poet who was popular in the first half of the 20th Century and became known as the People’s Poet.

The poet authored 25 books from 1920 to 1927. In the interests of full disclosure, I confess that whenever I want to express my feelings and my words fail me, regardless of the subject, I will cheerfully and respectfully, without hesitation or remorse, use the words of another to convey my thoughts, with due credit being given, of course, to the other person.

Edgar Guest authored 25 books from 1920 to 1927. The poem which follows is from his All That Matters, published in 1922. I find it amazing that some 87 years ago someone could express so eloquently how we feel about our children and how proud we are of them. This posting is an effort to let our three daughters know how much we love them and how proud we are of them and their families. And perhaps any parent or parents that view the posting may choose to allow Edgar Guest to speak for them. The image below faced the  poem—it’s reproduced from a painting by Robert E. Johnston—this is the then part of the above title.

WHEN THE YOUNG ARE GROWN

Once the house was lovely, but it’s lonely here today,
For time has come an’ stained its walls an’ called the young away;
An’ all that’s left for mother an’ for me till life is through,
Is to sit an’ tell each other what the children used to do.

We couldn’t keep ‘em always an’ we knew it from the start;
We knew when they were babies that some day we’d have to part.
But the years go by so swiftly, an’ the littlest one has flown,
An there’s only me an’ mother now left here to live alone.

Oh, there’s just one consolation, as we’re sittin’ here at night,
They’ve grown to men an’ women, an’ we brought ‘em up all right;
We’ve watched ‘em as we’ve loved ‘em an’ they’re splendid, every one,
An’ we feel the Lord won’t blame us for the way our work was done.

They’re clean, an’ kind an’ honest, an’ the world respects ‘em, too;
That’s the dream of parents always, an’ our dreams have all come true.
So although the house is lonely an’ sometimes our eyes grow wet,
We are proud of them an’ happy an’ we’ve nothing to regret.

And this is the now part of the title— it’s a recent photo of our children’s parents, and is included to show viewers how little—or perhaps how much, depending on the viewer—we resemble the parents in Edgar Guest’s poem.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on January 10, 2010 in Family

 

Tags: , ,