Nick Russell on July 20th, 2010

Last week the NAACP created a media firestorm when it accused some supporters of the Tea Party of “explicit racist behavior” and accused the Tea Party of a “drive to push our country back to the pre-civil rights era.”

While I am not a member of the Tea Party, and while some of its most vocal supporters have accused me of being on the other side of their platform, I have to ask, just which organization is really racist?

Doesn’t the NAACP play the race card with it’s very name – the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People?  How much hell would be raised if somebody formed a National Association for the Advancement of White People?

The first page of the NAACP website is filled with links to articles against the Tea Party. If you were to believe these guys, the Tea Party is nothing but a bunch of neo-Nazis who spend their time burning crosses.

As I understand it, the NAACP is all about protecting those civil rights that they accuse the Tea Party of trying to destroy. So how come the NAACP (and people like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton, for that matter) didn’t spring into action when the Justice Department declined to prosecute two Black Panther Party members who were accused of intimidating voters outside a polling place during the 2008 election? If the roles were reversed, and the Ku Klux Klan were accused of scaring off black voters, the group would be demanding Senate hearings, and Jackson and Sharpton would be pounding their fists on their pulpits, and leading protest marches through the streets.

Do I agree with everything the Tea Party says and does? No. But then again, half the time I second guess myself after the fact. Do I think they are racist? No, not as a group, though I have heard some people who claim to support all that the Tea Party stands for make some pretty racist statements. Then again, I have also heard soldiers, school teachers, truck drivers, and RVers say the same things. I don’t think we should judge any group by the actions or words of a few individuals.

Like it or not, there are a lot of people who do allow racism to impact their feelings about our President. If you don’t believe that, you may need to have a long, honest talk with yourself. I get their forwarded e-mails and jokes every day.

But, just because somebody disagrees with President Obama and his policies doesn’t necessarily make them a racist. That is what the NAACP fails to recognize.

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

Nick Russell on July 13th, 2010

Beginning July 1, the State of Utah is cracking down on welfare fraud by reviewing the cases of illegal aliens who are receiving public assistance in the form of food stamps. Under the state’s new policy, food stamps were cut off to some 2,200 families of illegal aliens, and thousands more have had their benefits reduced.

The measure is the result of the state’s new policy to fully count the income earned by all members of a household when determining eligibility for food stamps. In the past, only a portion of illegal aliens’ income was included in the food stamp calculation, due to limitations of the state’s computer system. In some cases, a family with several illegal aliens members, who did not report their income, qualified for food stamps, although a family of native Utah citizens, making and reporting the same amount of money, might not.

The result is that families with illegal aliens are showing up at food banks asking for handouts. “But, of course, I have to feed my family,” said a mother of five who is an illegal alien, who works as a housekeeper at a nursing home and recently lost $300 worth of food stamps a month, in an article in the Salt Lake Tribune.

Some of the illegals who have lost benefits, or had them cut back, are questioning whether Americans are being given preference over them.

Preference? What preference? Talk about cojones! These people are criminals, they are breaking the law just by being here, and they have the audacity to complain because American citizens may be getting preference over them! And yet we have people and legislators who still don’t believe that these freeloaders are draining our economy and our resources dry!

If that illegal alien mother doesn’t like the changes, here’s an idea. Take your kids and go back where you belong. I bet there’s an American mother who will be more than happy to take that housekeeping job! I bet there is an American citizen who could use that $300 a month you have been getting, that you have no right to.

Okay, let’s do some real basic math here. This is one family of leeches who were getting $300 a month in benefits, and Utah has cut off 2,200 illegal families. If we were to assume that each family was getting the same amount (and we have no idea how many were getting that much, or more), that comes to $660,000 a month that was being given to people who don’t even belong here.

But wait, there’s more! One newspaper report said as many as another 6,000 to 8,000 families of illegal aliens in Utah will now get reduced benefits. Just for the heck of it, let’s split the difference and call it 7,000 families, and we’ll just say they will all get just $100 less every month. That’s another $700,000 a month saved, if my calculator is working right. That’s over $1.3 million a month in just one state! A state that doesn’t have nearly the population of illegal aliens as Florida, Arizona, Texas, or California. Do you get an idea now of how many billions of your tax dollars these people are costing us every year?

The administration says it would cost millions of dollars to deport all of the illegal aliens in this country. No problem, I just found you $1.3 million in Utah alone that you can put to that effort. Multiply that by 50 states, and I think we can get the job done.

But we won’t, of course. Because unlike the maggots who are feeding off of all of us, and who then complain that our own citizens are getting preferential treatment, the people we have elected to office don’t have the cojones to do what needs to be done!

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

Nick Russell on July 9th, 2010

In a lawsuit filed this week, the Justice Department challenges Arizona’s new immigration law, claiming the law, which only seeks to enforce existing federal law, is too broad. The government says Arizona is unrealistic in wanting every illegal immigrant caught and deported. The government says that’s just too big a job, and that dealing with the estimated 11 million illegal aliens in the United States would overwhelm the system.

Instead, the Justice Department wants to continue with its policy of focusing on “dangerous” immigrants like drug runners, gang members, and threats to our national security, while leaving “law abiding” illegal immigrants alone.

Huh? How can you be both “law abiding” and “illegal?” Isn’t that kind of like being a “little bit” pregnant? Either you are, or you aren’t!

So how’s it going, dealing with those drug runners and gang bangers? According to every news report I read out of Arizona, not too well so far.

Each and every illegal alien in this country is a threat to our national security. They are undermining our economy and draining our resources. The monies that are spent having them here could be used to improve our national security and to improve life for our legitimate citizens. If we spent every dollar on putting soldiers on our border, and in hiring police officers, maybe we could do something about those drug runners and gang members the feds say they are so worried about.

The government worries that other states will follow Arizona’s lead, and that if they do, it would overwhelm federal agencies with illegal immigrants, costing the government millions of dollars to deport them.

Do you give a damn how much it takes to rid our country of these illegal invaders? We have a lot of pedophiles in our society too. Should we just ignore them, because it would cost less than to arrest and punish them? How about bank robbers? We could save a fortune if we just ignored them, right?

Americans are fed up with the federal government’s lack of response to this problem. One poll says that 70% of Americans nationwide support Arizona’s new law. An Associated Press news story released this week said that citizens from across the country have donated $500,000 to help the state of Arizona answer the government’s challenge to its law. Most of that was in donations amounting to less than $100. That’s a lot of people who are making it very plain that they are willing to put their money where their mouth is, even if Washington will not.

Doesn’t that tell the idiots running the government something? What ever happened to majority rule in this country? I hope people remember this, come election time, and that they clean house from the top all the way down. Yeah, it’s time for change all right!

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

Nick Russell on July 4th, 2010

If you are an American, today is your birthday. America is 234 years old today, and even though we certainly have our share of problems, and some of them seem to get worse every year, we’re still privileged to be citizens of the greatest nation the world has ever known.

Just think about it. We have freedoms and a standard of living that most people in the world can only dream of. Most of you reading this have never gone to bed hungry, or wondered where your next meal was coming from. We may not like our nation’s leaders, but we have the freedom to say so, loud and long, without fearing storm troopers kicking in our door in at night.

If you don’t like your job, you have the freedom to quit and do something else. If you grow disillusioned with your community, you can work from within to change it, or you can pack up and leave any time you want to.

You can be a Baptist, a Lutheran, a Catholic, a Mormon, a Buddhist, an agnostic, or an atheist, and nobody can tell you how to worship, or what to worship.

In America, you can work as hard as you want to, and achieve any measure of success you want, as long as you are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to make it happen. Or, you can be a happy underachiever, leading a low pressure lifestyle, if that’s what floats your boat.

And why do we have this freedom that millions of people in the world would be willing to die for? Because so many of our countrymen have died to preserve it! From the days when farmers and shopkeepers clenched their muskets and faced off with the British at Concord Bridge, to Gettysburg and Shiloh, to the trenches of Belleau Wood, the blood soaked beaches of Normandy and Iwo Jima, the frozen hills of Korea, and the steaming jungles of Vietnam, and on to today’s battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan, America’s soldiers, sailors, Marines, and airmen have answered the call, and beaten the tyrants of the world into submission so that you and I can have the lives we do today. 

Freedom is not free. It comes at a very high price. A price that our fathers, uncles, brothers, husbands, sons, and yes, sisters and wives too, have paid for us, again and again.   

Ahh… freedom. That’s about the best birthday present anybody can get!

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

Nick Russell on July 2nd, 2010

I think Shakespeare had it right when he wrote “the first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.” We might all be a lot better off. Every time I turn on the TV, some ambulance chaser is urging me to sue somebody for something.

I mean, really, is it McDonald’s fault that I’m so fat? Did that goofy clown hold a gun on me and force me to eat that double order of French fries? If I stick a hot cup of coffee between my legs and spill it while I’m driving down the road texting, is Starbucks responsible for my burned willy?

I don’t think so, but a legion of legal beagles would disagree. I once tripped over my own shoelace while running across a parking lot in the pouring rain, trying to get into a restaurant. Before I could pick myself up and get inside, an attorney who was dining there and saw the episode was sticking a business card in my face and loudly telling the restaurant owner that he was my representative and that I was obviously injured due to his lack of concern for his customers’ safety. I told him I fell due to my own clumsiness, and the only injury I had suffered was to my ego, but he wouldn’t hear any of that nonsense. Somebody had to pay! I finally had to tell him about the injuries he was about to suffer to get him to back off.

These shysters are everywhere, and these days justice has less to do with reality and more to do with who has the deepest pockets, and how far we can reach into them.

Consider the case of illegal immigrant Cecil Harvey, from Barbados. Harvey was arrested over and over again for a series of crimes, and eventually deported. But when some sleazy lawyer sued the City of New York on Harvey’s behalf, because it was determined that he had been in jail for about a month longer than the law permitted, the case was settled out of court for $145,000. Now that’s a nice going away gift, isn’t it?

Or how about George Black, who was playing softball when the sun blinded him while attempting to catch a ball. It hit him in the face, breaking his glasses and causing an injury to his eye. Black sued the owner of the field where the game was played, because there was no kind of shade to block the sun. Why do the courts even accept cases like this?

Then we have Melanie Shaker, who is suing a Chicago hair salon. Not because of a bad haircut, or a bad dye job. No, after dinner and drinks at a nearby restaurant, Ms. Shaker got into an argument with her husband on the sidewalk outside of the salon, and while attempting to kick him, she fell through the plate glass window and suffered cuts on her arm, back, and feet. Her lawsuit claims that the salon was negligent in not having safety glass in case of an accident like hers, since the sidewalk is “frequently traveled by intoxicated pedestrians.” Apparently hoping for a “two-fer,” Shaker is also reported to be suing the hospital where her injuries were treated, claiming that an employee stole her jewelry and Blackberry phone.

Jo Ann Fonzone, who has a law degree from Western State University in Fullerton, California, has filed nearly two dozen lawsuits against people like MTV’s Judy McGrath and Hollywood executive Cary Woods, both of whom she has accused of identity theft. Fonzone has also filed multiple lawsuits over the last four years in her effort to divorce rock singer David Lee Roth, in spite of the fact that there is no proof that they were ever married, or have even met. 

Of course, some judges are just as bad as lawyers. In fact, most of them used to be lawyers! So is it poetic justice that a drunk driver recently crashed into the car of a retired Maryland judge who released him on charges of DUI back in 1998, even after he had been arrested on drunk driving charges twice in just three months and pled guilty?

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

Nick Russell on June 28th, 2010

Sixteen year old sailor Abby Sunderland should arrive home in California today, her plan to be the youngest person to sail around the world solo scuttled by another young adventurer who beat her to the title, and her small boat wrecked a violent storm in the Indian Ocean that resulted in a massive rescue effort that involved a chartered jet and at least three ships, at a cost reported to be somewhere between $100,000 and $300,000.

While we were all relieved at the news that Ms. Sunderland was safe, I have to ask the same question that goes through my mind every time some foolish adventurer gets into trouble that requires a massive rescue effort. Who pays the bill?

The news reports say that the countries involved in the rescue effort have no plans to seek payment for their services, because rescues at sea are covered under international agreements regarding maritime search and rescue operations.

Okay, but somebody has to pay the bills, whether it be American taxpayers, or in this case, citizens of France and Australia, the countries who participated in the girl’s rescue.

I can understand an all out effort to save the crew of a commercial vessel who get into danger at sea, or even people on a private boat who run into unforeseen difficulties. But we’re talking about a teenager who really had no business being out on the ocean by herself. And I say that whether it had been a boy or a girl, or even an adult for that matter. Is it really fair to expect taxpayers of any country to pay for the foolhardiness of somebody who pushes their luck and gets into trouble?

Every year in America huge sums of money and uncounted man-hours are spent to rescue hikers who get lost, mountain bikers who run off cliffs, boaters who push their luck too far, mountain climbers who fall, and hunters who do something stupid. These are not innocent victims, they are people who chose to put themselves in danger, relying on the fact that if they get into trouble, somebody will come to their rescue. Who pays for that? Usually the taxpayers do. But not always.

In some states, Arizona for one, they expect you to pay the cost if you do something foolish that puts you in a situation that requires rescuing. Every year during, Arizona’s annual monsoon season, brain dead drivers ignore warning signs and enter flooded washes. If they are lucky, they might lose their vehicle. If they are not so lucky, they lose their lives. If they survive, it is usually because brave rescue personnel put their lives on the line to save them. Rescuing these numbskulls sometimes involves helicopters, and always entails great personal risk to those who come to get them back to dry land.

I have no objection to the state fining anyone so dumb as to drive into a flooded wash, and I think that they should be expected to pay the costs for their rescue. Maybe you can’t fix stupid, but it shouldn’t be a ticket to a free ride either. What do you think?

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

Nick Russell on June 26th, 2010

A few days ago, at the post office in Williams, Arizona, we ran into a couple from California wearing T-shirts that said “We Are Buy-Cotting Arizona!” I commented on their shirts,and they told me that they made them themselves and were in Arizona on vacation, spending every penny they could to support the state’s tough stand on illegal aliens.

We have talked to a lot of people from California who want the world to know that, no matter what the idiots who get face time in front of TV cameras have to say, most Californians actually support Arizona’s new law, which enforces federal laws on illegals. In fact, according to a recent Los Angeles Times poll, the majority of California residents responding said that they support Arizona’s new law.

But Arizona is not the only place where local and state governments are taking action to halt the illegal invasion of our country. Nationwide, people are fed up with Washington’s inaction, and with seeing their jobs disappear and their taxes go up to support an influx of trespassers that nobody in power seems to have the balls to stop.

Last Monday, the citizens of Freemont, Nebraska voted in a new law that requires anybody who wants to rent a house or apartment in the city to first get a license. Before issuing the license, authorities will run a check to be sure the applicant is in this country legally. The new law also requires businesses to use the federal e-Verify database to ensure job applicants are not illegal aliens. Fremont took this action after it saw its Hispanic population rise from 165 in 1990 to 2,060 last year. Fremont residents say the law is not racist, but rather designed to insure that legal residents get the few jobs that are available locally.

So who will be the first do-gooder to boycott Fremont? Not me! In fact, when we start traveling toward the Midwest in a few weeks, I am going to try very hard to stop in Fremont and at least buy dinner and a tank full of fuel to show my support.

Arizona may be the leader in this fight, but a news report Friday says that at least eighteen other states are watching the issue closely, and lining up to follow suit. Laws modeled after Arizona’s have been introduced in Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and South Carolina. Lawmakers in Florida, Idaho, Oklahoma, Nevada, and several other states have suggested similar action for their 2011 legislative sessions.

So, will San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom, the “entertainers” in Hollywood, and the rest of the clowns from the land of quakes and flakes who are talking boycott end up boycotting Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and the whole darned country before this is all over? Does anybody really care if they just stay in LaLa Land forever? I don’t.

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

Nick Russell on June 21st, 2010

I think folksinger Woody Guthrie would be rolling over in his grave if he saw what was happening in the American Southwest these days. Guthrie won fame with his song This Land Is Your Land, but today we are losing our land to the drug smugglers and illegal aliens streaming across the Mexican border.

If you doubt me, take a look at this sign, one of several that the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has erected along a section of Interstate 8 in Arizona, warning people to stay away from the area, due to the possibility of encountering armed smugglers. This is the same area in which a Pinal County sheriff’s deputy was involved in a shootout with smugglers a few weeks ago.

BLM warning sign

Just what in the hell is it going to take to make the United States government realize that it needs to take action to stop this invasion? And that is the correct word for it. Armed criminals from another country are invading the United States, and the federal government’s response is to post signs telling U.S. citizens to stay away!

If a bunch of armed Americans entered Mexico they’d probably be shot down. At the very least, they’d likely spend decades in some Mexican prison. But here, we just tell our folks to stay out of their way.

While the brain dead of the world, who live in some dreamland, are condemning states like Arizona for wanting to enforce existing federal laws about illegal immigrants, people in Arizona are living in a war zone, where even armed police officers are subject to ambush. Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the nation, and second only to Mexico City in the world, and police statistics show it is almost all related to drug and smuggling activity.

But instead of addressing the problem, the Obama administration is now talking about challenging Arizona’s new law in court. What’s to challenge?

I don’t believe in vigilante justice, but I’m convinced that if Washington doesn’t take serious action to stop this invasion, armed citizens are going to get fed up and take matters into their own hands. And when that happens, nobody wins.

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

Nick Russell on June 18th, 2010

Texas Republican Representative Joe Barton enraged a lot of people yesterday when he apologized to BP for the $20 billion relief fund President Obama demanded the company establish to compensate victims of the Gulf oil spill, calling it a “shakedown.”

“I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong is subject to some sort of political pressure that is — again, in my words, amounts to a shakedown, so I apologize,” Barton told BP’s CEO during hearings before Congress about the oil spill.

What an idiot! It should come as no surprise that Barton has received more campaign money from big oil corporations than any member of the House of Representatives  for the last ten years. Barton has received at least $1.4 million from the oil industry since he took office. He may not know much about oil on beaches, but this self-serving SOB definitely knows which side his bread is buttered on!

Of course, in typical political tradition, when even his own party turned against him after his comments, and threatened to take away his prized post as chairman-in-waiting of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Barton issued an immediate retraction, saying “I want the record to be absolutely clear that I think BP is responsible for this accident. If anything I said this morning has been misconstrued, in opposite effect, I want to apologize for that misconstruction.” Then he issued a written statement that added, “I apologize for using the term ’shakedown’ with regard to yesterday’s actions at the White House this morning, and I retract my apology to BP.”

And people actually have reelected this snake to office since 1985? No wonder our country is so screwed up, with people like this making the decisions that affect us all! Can anyone actually believe people like this have anything but their own interests at heart?

As upset as so many people are with Barton for his comments, I’d think the oil industry is really pissed off about his retraction. After all, they paid good money for him, and deserve a return on their investment!

Barton has also received almost $2.2 million from the healthcare industry, most of that coming from political action committees, so I guess we shouldn’t be surprised that he voted against the Affordable Healthcare Act either.

Now, don’t go thinking that Barton is all selfish. After all, he paid his wife Terri $57,759 in salary and bonuses, from his campaign funds during the 2006 election, according to campaign funds , for her assistance in  planning fundraising and special events. Barton does believe in spreading the wealth. He paid his daughter Kristin $12,622 in salary and bonuses, and his mother $7,000.

The Clinton years convinced me that I don’t have the sex drive for the job, but I hope that  if I ever do get so sleazy that I decide to run for public office, my loved ones would support me just because they believe I am the best man for the job. Then again, who knows Representative Barton better than his own family?

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

Nick Russell on June 10th, 2010

If you think that illegal aliens are only a problem for border states like Arizona and Texas, think again. If you pay taxes, you are paying for the costs of dealing with these illegal trespassers in our country too!

While states and the federal government are cutting back on basic services, laying off schoolteachers, closing state parks, and even roadside rest areas, and the federal deficit grows dally, here is how the illegal alien problem is sucking our tax dollars down the drain. You will also note that several of those arrested are not simple working people looking for a better life, but rather criminals with violent pasts. This report from the Tucson Sector of the Border Patrol covers activities from just last weekend.

Border Patrol agents arrested an illegal alien Friday who admitted to being a member of the Sureno 13 gang. When his fingerprints were entered into a database, agents discovered he had arrests alleging aggravated assault with a weapon, possession of a firearm, and harassment.

Agents arrested an illegal alien Saturday who admitted that he was a member of the Latin Kings gang.

Agents assigned to the Casa Grande station arrested an illegal alien Saturday who claimed he was a member of the Sureno 13 gang. Records generated through fingerprint testing showed that the man had prior arrests alleging theft, burglary, and narcotics violations.

Agents assigned to the Nogales station arrested an illegal alien Sunday who admitted to being an active member in the Sureno 13 gang. Fingerprint testing revealed that the man had several charges for narcotics violations and for carrying a concealed gun.  

Border Patrol agents assigned to the Tucson Station rescued an illegal alien Sunday who had consumed contaminated water. The man was transported to a local hospital for further treatment.

Agents assigned to the Border Patrol Search, Trauma, and Rescue Unit (BORSTAR) rescued two illegal aliens Sunday who were suffering from dehydration.

Agents assigned to BORSTAR rescued an illegal alien Sunday who could no longer walk and was experiencing dehydration. The woman was taken to a local hospital for treatment.

Border Patrol agents assigned to the Tucson station apprehended two illegal aliens Sunday, who said they had left behind a man that had collapsed and possibly died. Agents located the man, already deceased, and turned the scene over to the Pima County Sheriff’s Department.

Agents assigned to BORSTAR located an illegal alien requesting assistance to help recover his deceased travel companion. The illegal immigrant identified the deceased as his brother-in-law.

This is just a report from one weekend and one Border Patrol sector! How many gang members and other criminals slipped through? Whose tax dollars do you think pays for those Border Patrol agents, and pays for their rescue efforts, and pays to process and detain those arrested. Whose tax dollars pays the hospital bills for those who had to be treated after being rescued? And again, how many more slipped through?

Now, if that doesn’t get your blood boiling, think about this. A Houston Chronicle news story released this week reports that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials are making changes at privately owned immigration detention centers that include “softening the look of the facility” with hanging plants, reducing and eliminating pat-down searches, free movement of low-risk detainees, expanded visiting hours, providing unmonitored phone lines, and eliminating lockdowns and lights-out for low-risk detainees.

But wait, there’s more! Dining hall menus will have more variety, and have self-serve beverage and fresh vegetable bars. Officials plan to offer movie nights, bingo, arts and crafts, dance and cooking classes, tutoring, and computer training. Detainees also will be allowed four hours or more of recreation “in a natural setting, allowing for robust aerobic exercise.” And of course, all of this is on the taxpayer’s’ dime. Can you afford movie nights, dancing classes, bingo, and computer training?

Hell, I’m going to park my motorhome and pretend to be an illegal alien for my next vacation! I can’t afford a resort with those kinds of amenities!

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