Lawmaker’s beliefs defy Constitution
U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., is urging Washington not to cooperate with the immigration law recently passed in Arizona. It is inconceivable that an elected U.S. representative would condemn an enacted state law prosecuting illegal immigrants.
It appears Rep. Grijalva is ignorant of the United States Constitution that he is sworn to uphold.
Arizona’s immigration law requires officers to arrest and jail felons. And, counter to some Americans’ concepts, an illegal immigrant is a felon and in violation of U.S. immigration laws.
Contrary to Rep. Grijalva’s misguided beliefs, the U.S. Constitution he swore to uphold and support clearly conveys to the several states the unalienable right to enact and enforce laws within their own boundaries as long as such are not in conflict with the Constitution.
Why would an elected United States representative possibly be adverse to a law that actually goes after criminals, regardless of race or creed?
Perhaps the legal citizens of Arizona will have an answer for Rep. Grijalva’s concern for foreign criminals come November and arrange for him to join the rabble of lawbreaking protesters permanently, and they, arm-in-arm and in lockstep, march proudly south across the U.S. border.
CHARLES DAVID
SLIGER
Shelbyville, Tenn.
Don’t cry foul when outvoted
Isn’t it interesting that when President Obama and the elected majority in Congress passed the health care bill the process was termed by the Free Press side “muscling it though.” But when those also elected, but in the minority, used all their power in an effort to prevent its passage, they were standing on principle, defending the Constitution, acting for fiscal responsibility (take your pick). These are not direct quotes but many times promoted editorially as the province of one party and not the other.
I helped elect people to go to Washington and vote for the best legislation they could prepare. I suppose most people do. That’s democracy even when it isn’t functioning at its best. Let’s get used to the process and stop crying foul when our side gets outvoted.
JIM DAVENPORT
Cleveland, Tenn.
Elderly will suffer under ObamaCare
Democrats promise to pay for health care by spending less for Medicare. If they could eliminate fraud it would have been done already. The elderly will suffer. When they get their program going good, there will be rationing.
On national TV in July 2009 Obama told a woman whose 100-year-old mother got a pacemaker and is still living five years later that, under ObamaCare, maybe it would be better to just give her a pain pill instead of surgery. Maybe old people aren’t worth much to liberals unless they are rich political donors.
Bush started the border fence, but Obama stopped it dead. Yes, Google Janet Napolitano and Mexico fence and you can read about it.
Ever since the 2006 elections, Democrats have had control of both houses of Congress (with help for a while from two independents caucusing with them). Why did they start the bailouts, and why did Obama so greatly expand them? As for big business, look at all the Goldman Sachs executives Obama hired along with favors to rich donors.
CLINTON GRANT
Rossville
American citizens must be informed
Weeks ago, Democrats breathed a sigh of relief as their health care plan finally passed. Regular citizens joined the celebrations, hailing it as the solution for the problems that ail modern health care.
What’s troubling is the number of people who don’t actually know what it entails. They know their party supports it, so they throw the power of their collective ignorance behind it.
Anyone see a problem here?
To fully explain Obama-Care would take hundreds of pages. Actually, it’s closer to 2,000 (over 13 times the length of our Constitution.) With such length, it’s no surprise not all of Congress read it. Maybe that’s what led to the support for repealing the bill. Turns out, when House Speaker Pelosi suggested, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,” she was partly referring to Congress. Shame.
I wonder, what are those people missing? What don’t they know?
Regardless, it is not my intention to offer counterproductive criticism. Actually, I wish to see an end to the snide repartee from both sides. What we need more than anything is to be informed. That, my fellow Americans, is the true solution.
LEIGH STANFIELD
Soddy-Daisy
We must demand accountability
It is becoming obvious we are relinquishing freedoms our forefathers sacrificed to give us. Our generation and progeny are at crossroads and should examine the legacy we are leaving.
Obama and Congress are not only bankrupting our country but every newborn is burdened with nearly $100,000 indebtedness at birth. We must deal with these unethical consequences.
A cardinal rule of ethical living is assuming responsibility for our choices without passing the burdens to others and blaming our predecessors. It is unethical to continue support of this reckless deficit spending, rolling it over year after year, reborrowing interest and principal. It is obvious this profligacy falls on generations not yet born.
Over half of this horrific indebtedness is owed to foreign lenders regularly demanding higher interest as ability to repay diminishes. We are in the terminal stage of the most gigantic pyramid scheme in history.
As President Reagan was leaving office, he admonished, “Let us be sure that those who come after us will say in our time we did everything that could be done. We kept the faith.”
At a time when economies are failing, unemployment is rampant and war is raging, it behooves to give pause, consider the undesirable consequences and demand accountability.
JOHN J. SPITTLER
Signal Mountain