I am working on another upgrade of www.agplus.net. That is the way it is supposed to be when you’re running a business. You should always be looking for new ideas and better ways to do things. If you’re not doing that then you’re not moving forward. What do you think?
By Lou Dobbs
NEW YORK (CNN) -- The Bush administration and the leadership of the Democratic Party are preparing to take another legislative leap at imposing a massive illegal alien amnesty on American citizens.
And the mainstream media are complicit in advancing this thinly veiled blanket amnesty. Instead of asking and answering important questions about why our immigration laws aren't being enforced and why we're permitting pervasive document fraud, the national media seem hell-bent on trying to obfuscate the issue, shamelessly playing with language, equating legal immigration with illegal immigration while obviously trying to preserve the illusion of objectivity.
Too often, the language of the national media describes illegal immigration as "migration" and illegal aliens as "undocumented immigrants," even though many of them have lots of documents, most of which are fraudulent or stolen. Some media outlets have taken to calling illegal aliens "entrants." Whether such language is meant to engender sympathy or to intentionally blur the distinction between legal and illegal, the mainstream media are taking sides in this debate
Harold Thinks! This is a well written article that covers more than immigration and makes the point that I have made to you from time to time, which is that the news media has tried to change the way we think by changing the words they use. Immigration is an important issue and Dobbs points out the perils of not fixing the problem properly. The last immigration reform bill might just have worked had they enforced the laws that where passed. Now they are trying harder to enforce them but we have created a problem for the 12 million people who have entered this country since it was passed. We need to resolve the issue fairly with them. Once that was settled, if I was running things, anyone coming to this country illegally would be finger printed, have DNA samples taken and never be allowed to enter the country again. Let’s clean up the mess and put some laws in place that will benefit the country and the people who in the future want to immigrate to our great land.
Organized labor was perhaps the biggest winner of last November's congressional election. The Democratic leadership has moved quickly to begin paying off its campaign debt. Observes Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee: Nancy Pelosi "knows union political operatives are largely if not primarily responsible for making her speaker, and union officials want votes on card check." Thus, the House has passed, and the Senate will soon consider, legislation to replace elections with the so-called "card check" process, which would enable labor organizers to intimidate their way to union recognition. That's not how labor activists put it, of course. But they want to drop today's system, which requires a secret ballot election whenever 30 percent of workers sign a card supporting a union, with automatic recognition if 50 percent-plus-one workers sign a card. Supporters of the legislation say they want to drop the inconvenient step of representational elections to prevent employer intimidation, though evidence of systemic problems is scant. In fact, a secret ballot makes retaliation against rank-and-file workers well nigh impossible. an the National Labor Relations Board reports few cases -- under two percent -- in which vocal union organizers are fired.
Harold Thinks! If this story doesn’t make you cry out for campaign reform then I don’t know what I am missing. I still believe that we should elect our representatives and when they go to Washington that they should be working for us not the highest bidder or the cause selected for them by big press. I see no good in this legislation and, in fact, if you read the article the union doesn’t believe it either unless it can be used to their advantage. Here is a thought for you. If you have big press pushing issues and swaying public opinion does that make it the right course for the country. I don’t believe so. Just because we read the paper or listen to the news doesn’t mean we are experts on issues. Our elected officials should do what is best for the country not what is best for their re-elections. If I ran for office I would last one term before I was voted out because I would vote in the best interest of the country and not the way my opinion polls were leaning. What do you think?
