Immigration ‘gang’ is aptly named
I see that the Gang of Eight is trying to shove an immigration-reform bill down the throats of the American people. The term “gang” is most appropriate, as one of the definitions is a group of people working to unlawful or anti-social ends. A similar “gang” passed an immigration-reform bill in the 1980s with all the usual promises (lies) that Washington, D.C., politicians make.
Today we have millions of people who come to this country illegally with the blessing of Washington politicians. These same politicians make no effort to stop the invasion. In fact, when a state tries to enforce the constitutional rules regarding immigration, those all-knowing Washington politicians won’t allow it.
Of course, this “gang” promises that it is going to enforce all the rules and regulations of the new reform bill. How can the American people believe anything that the “gang” members say, when they don’t even make an attempt at enforcing the laws already on the books?
So politics dominated the congressional hearings on Benghazi (May 9 Eagle)? That is hardly surprising, though it should be.
Back in October 1983, 241 American servicemen lost their lives just outside of Beirut, Lebanon, when an explosive-laden truck rammed into their barracks. The Marines were part of a peacekeeping force sent by President Reagan during Lebanon’s civil war.
The Marine Corps commandant had told his superiors repeatedly that they were “sitting ducks.” His warnings about needing beefed-up security went unheeded. Because of that, a horrific act of terrorism was committed against this country. Sound familiar?
However, Congress was controlled by the Democrats back then. There was no lasting congressional inquiry, and certainly no politicizing of this tragedy, even though it was an election year. Reagan, the Teflon president, came out smelling like roses and was re-elected.
Now, Congress is controlled by radicals so far to the right that they are willing to do and say anything to discredit President Obama and his administration, even if it includes lying and grandstanding about the deaths of four Americans in Libya.
I vehemently disagree with the obstructionist stance that Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Wichita, has taken on Obamacare. His “free-market” solution is the same failed policy that has enriched the insurance companies at the expense of patients for decades. Obamacare, on the other hand, addresses most of the problems with our outdated health care system.
What is it about Obamacare that Pompeo doesn’t like? That it closes the doughnut hole in prescription drugs for seniors? That it removes the lifetime cap from insurance company payouts? That it provides health care for most people? That it requires insurance companies to cover people with pre-existing conditions? That it ties medical payments to performance?
Pompeo should stop fighting against the best interests of Kansans and Americans, and try to do the right thing by working across the aisle and supporting Obamacare. He should stop this nonsense of trying to repeal Obamacare, which he knows is nothing but harmful partisan politics and cannot pass. Pompeo needs to realize that people like it, support it and want it.
God gave us the Ten Commandments. The fifth of these is “Thou shall not kill.”
If a person kills another, it is called murder. He is caught, tried in a court of law and punished.
An abortionist can end the life of a beautiful, innocent, defenseless unborn baby, collect his fee, and go home to dinner and a night’s sleep. He is free to do this over and over.
It is easy to mourn a classroom full of children killed by a deranged person, because it is all over TV and the newspaper. My heart and prayers go out to these families. But who mourns God’s innocent aborted babies?
More back alleys
The actions and conditions at Kermit Gosnell’s abortion clinic were horrid and criminal. Yet these women felt his services were the only ones available to them, due to circumstances of economics and increasing restrictions.
There was a time when the only type of services at hand for abortion were back-alley locations and unsterile utensils. With Roe v. Wade, that (all but) ended. But as more “well-intentioned” restrictive legislation is passed, these situations and circumstances again will become commonplace.
Clean, regulated clinics with licensed professionals or back alleys with quacks – those are the alternatives.
Rove v. Wade is still the law.
KEVIN D. PLESS
Not a disease
I was shocked to read about the age limit being reduced for the “morning-after” pill (May 1 Eagle). According to this article, 15-year-olds are now allowed to purchase Plan B “emergency” contraceptives without a prescription or adult consent.
The article also described the pill as “designed to reduce the risk of pregnancy.” Is pregnancy a disease? A disease is something harmful to the population that one must prevent or get rid of; pregnancy is the reason the population exists.
While pregnancy is inconvenient for unmarried teenage girls, abstinence is the real solution. Is that not a better choice than artificial, dangerous pills in women’s bodies?