Observations:
Letters to the Editor:
Submitted by:
Dave Willis January, 2019 – The head of the League of Women Voters has registered her opposition to a wall between the U.S. and Mexico. In case you aren’t familiar with the LWV, they are the “nonpartisan” organization which consistently trumpets the ultra-liberal point of view, just by repetitive coincidence, of course.
In her statement she says, “What will keep our nation secure is not a wall, but a comprehensive immigration plan executed through a fully funded government.” Oh yes, have to love those tax-and-spend liberals. If you noticed, there isn’t an ounce of substance in her program, just feel-good words like “comprehensive immigration plan,” yada, yada, yada. Also in her statement, she claims that a wall will not keep us safe, but that impressive sounding concepts like “comprehensive immigration plan” will do the trick.
How about this: we can paste signs along the border that read, “No illegal foreigners allowed.” We have all seen how effective signs of that ilk have been in forbidding guns to be taken into schools, theaters and shopping malls.
If she watches CNN, and I suspect she does, she should have seen their reporter walking along a wall between the U.S. and Mexico, pointing out that no one was attempting to enter our country illegally, demonstrating conclusively that walls do work, and a complete wall will work completely.
Dave Willis December, 2018 – Do you folks remember a few years back when Governor Rauner refused to sign a budget bill that was some $4 billion in excess of projected revenues? The Democrats and mainstream media were all over him for the hardships caused by his refusal to sign the bill. You see, the Illinois constitution mandates that the budget must be balanced in order to gain approval. However, it was the Democrats that kept submitting the out of balance budgets, all the while castigating Rauner for doing the right thing by not signing them.
On Dec. 27, the Register Star published an Associated Press story that, in effect, blames President Trump for the current government shut down. The headline reads, “Trump signals no end to government shutdown,” putting all the blame on him.
Approximately one year ago, the president reluctantly signed a continuing resolution that did not include funding for the wall. He signed it on the condition that Congress approve the funding for the wall within one year. Of those in Congress who agreed to that, many were Democrats who saw the need for such a protective shield. Now that it is time for them to keep their promise, they are off in left field again, refusing to cooperate with Mr. Trump. Not because the wall is a bad idea, just that it is something upon which President Trump is campaigning. You may be interested to know that many prominent Democrats were ardent proponents of a wall between the U.S. and Mexico until President Trump started working toward getting it funded. Now they unabashedly show their hypocrisy in working against that which they once supported, only because Trump started working for it. That is petty politics at its worst.
Reportedly, the president and the Democrats in Congress are negotiating over this aspect of the current budget bill. The aforementioned article quotes Nancy Pelosi as saying, “So President Trump, if you want to open the government, you must abandon the wall, plain and simple.” The story later attributed that statement to Chuck Schumer, so I’m not sure who said it. It would appear the AP doesn’t know either, but why would a little thing like accuracy in quotations bother them? In any case, I guess that would be the Democrats idea of negotiating — hard-nosed do it my way or else.
The aspect of all this that has never been explained to me is this, President Trump wants the wall for the purpose of national security. Mexico is either a conduit for, or a main source of, drug trafficking, human trafficking, hard boiled criminals and illegal immigrants who soak up billions of our tax dollars for welfare, housing, medical services, schooling, with the extra cost of interpreters, and the list goes on and on. In view of all that, what could possibly be the Democrats’ motive in protesting a mechanism that will improve life in our country by leaps and bounds? The $5 billion or so cost can’t be the issue, because the wall will save many times that amount every year after its construction. Could it be that the Democrats know that the illegal alien free loaders will illegally vote for them in order to perpetuate their free ride at the expense of American tax payers? Let’s see, that would make the Democrats unstoppable, wouldn’t it?
I am unaware of any country in the world, excluding ours, that would tolerate anywhere near the level of illegal trafficking that we do. In fact, there are countries where entering illegally would result in longterm, harsh imprisonment or death. Why then is it that we tolerate this level of deleterious activity the Democrats champion, at enormous cost to us as a nation?
Dave Willis October, 2014 – In a recent TV ad, I saw Pat Quinn say that Illinois has recovered under his leadership, or words to that effect. I thought that was a strange statement, given the stagnation of the Illinois economy. I did some checking, and what I found is interesting.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Illinois has the highest jobless rate in the Midwest. North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio have all seen reductions in joblessness in the past 5 years. Illinois alone has seen an increase during the same period.
After the tax hike of 2011, passed exclusively by Democrats, our jobless rate went from 9.4% to 10.2%. During that same time, Illinois experienced a net loss of 69,198 residents. The primary beneficiary of our state’s largess was Indiana, but all contiguous states gained population at our expense. Along with those people went their incomes, concomitant tax payments, and buying power.
We have an election in November. If you want more fantasy “recovery” with results like those above, vote for Democrats. If, on the other hand, you want real recovery, vote for conservative Republicans who will enact policies that will return Illinois to solid ground.
Dave Willis June, 2014 – Liberal democrat Kelly Cassidy of Chicago has introduced a bill in the Illinoishouse (HB 4715) that, if passed, would require everyone in Illinois who owns a gun to register it with the state.
The liberals in Connecticut just got away with cowing all their citizens into registering their guns. Are the residents of Illinois next? You may recall that in 1928 Germany, the Weimar regime outlawed guns. While this was originally designed to disable groups like Adolph Hitler’s Nazi party, it eventually worked to their advantage, once Hitler came into power. In 1938, Hitler extended the gun verboten law, thereby leaving the German populace utterly defenseless in the face of despotic governance. The first move toward total gun confiscation is merely requiring citizens to register their guns. How long will it take after this (for our safety of course) to require all guns be kept at the local police station? Once they are registered, it will be easy for officials to force accountability for each weapon.
This is somewhat reminiscent of Lisa Madigan’s idiotic idea of making the names and addresses of every FOID card holder public. Naturally, the state will claim that this information is strictly confidential. They might try telling that to the people who have had their personal information compromised lately, who have simply used credit cards at stores. If (make that when) this data bank were hacked, criminals would know, not only who owns guns, but what they are, and where the prize weapons are to be found.
Once all our guns are in the local police station, it is a simple matter for them to simply disappear. Springfield will tell us, now that all the guns are gone, we are safe. They are already telling us that we are safe in gun free zones like schools, theaters, and shopping malls. They won’t factor in the guns possessed by criminals, who clearly are not going to surrender their weapons. Neither will they mention a despotic government against which we are completely helpless once we are all disarmed.
The second amendment to the U.S. constitution is the ultimate in simplicity and straight forward rhetoric. It reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” I would like to cite, for emphasis, two short passages from that amendment. “Being necessary to the security of a free state.” It was the framers accurate belief that we could not stay free for long without an armed citizenry. “Shall not be infringed.” That means the government does not have the authority to meddle in the possession or carry of private weapons. The exceptions are, of course, convicted felons, people with a violent past, or those who are mentally disturbed. If we allow this governmental intrusion to take place, the security of our free state will be short lived indeed. I hope you are disturbed enough by this pathetically short sighted and pernicious bill to contact your state representative and senator to insist they vote against this nonsense.
Peggy Klopfenstein House minority leader Nancy Pelosi has claimed that Democrats will “stand tall” by the “success” of Obamacare in the 2014 midterm elections. In 2012, while on the campaign trail, Congresswoman Cheri Bustos said, “It lowers costs for small businesses and makes sure you have coverage than cannot be taken away.”
Well, it’s currently January of 2014 and millions have been dropped by their insurance companies and businesses have seen premiums almost double in some instances due to Obamacare. It seems that The Affordable Care Act isn’t so “affordable” anymore.
Congresswoman Cheri Bustos has been pretty quiet about this whole issue. Does she stand by Obamacare with Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat Colleagues? Or does she stand with the millions now without coverage? Her district wants to know…
