From the proposed mosque and Islamic cultural center at ground zero to the Koran-burning pastor in Florida, America is questioning rights versus what’s right.
The ground-zero mosque supporters say they have the right to build their mosque anywhere that’s legal. That is true. If it is legal for American citizens to build a mosque at that location, then they have the right to do just that. But, is it right? I know Islamic extremist make up a small percentage of Muslims and most do not condone what their more extreme counterparts are doing, but they should be sensitive to the pain America is still feeling.
To build this center so close to the site terrorists crashed jets full of passengers into the World Trade Center is a slap in the face to America. To me, it seems to say, “Hey, look, we brought down your two tallest buildings and now we’ve got a mosque there.” That is most likely not what is on the mind of those who want to build this mosque and cultural center, but it is certainly what it says to me and, I’m sure, millions of other Americans who watched as the planes hit the buildings. Do they have the right? Yes. Is it right? No.
On the other hand, we have a Christian extremist, pastor Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, who wants to burn the Koran on 9/11. That doesn’t sound much like world outreach to me. I don’t know enough about the Koran to either support or condemn it, but burning it does seem to me to be extreme. What’s the difference between Christian extremism and Islamic extremism? Remember the crusades?
The federal government has apparently gotten in on this action, but they can’t do anything about it as it is a First Amendment issue. The military are concerned about the fallout and increased risk to Americans who are still in the Middle East if this Koran-burning occurs, a valid concern to be sure. This church has the First Amendment right to burn the Koran, but should they do it? They have the right, but it is not right.
Americans enjoy certain rights (for now) and the most revered is the first one:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Maybe we need to not only enjoy our rights, but focus more on what is right.
Imagine a world where you have absolutely no privacy, similar to Orwell’s dystopian society where privacy is non-existent. A world where the government can spy on you without a warrant and track your every move. Well, welcome to 2010, just 26 years after 1984, where it seems as if that prophecy has come true.
According to this time.com article, The Government Can Use GPS to Track Your Moves, government agents can sneak onto your property and plant a GPS tracking device on the bottom of your car to track your movements and it doesn’t violate your 4th amendment rights because, apparently, you have no expectation of privacy in your own driveway.
The US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has declared the government can track you in this way almost any time it wants without a search warrant. The court also showed class bias by suggesting that any personal privacy should belong mainly to the very rich.
It is a dangerous decision — one that, as the dissenting judges warned, could turn America into the sort of totalitarian state imagined by George Orwell. It is particularly offensive because the judges added insult to injury with some shocking class bias: the little personal privacy that still exists, the court suggested, should belong mainly to the rich.
It seems as if Americans are giving up more and more of their rights to privacy in the name of security and crime-fighting. The government says we must take off our shoes and submit to sometimes invasive searches if we want to fly – in the name of security. The government says we must have a passport if we want to re-enter our own country – in the name of security.
It is true there is a fine balance between privacy and security, but we must find that fine balance. Americans need to draw a line at just how many rights we are willing to give up.
I wonder: how would the framers of the constitution view our current society?
Read this article to get the entire story of how this developed.
Click the picture to learn how to protect your children from online predators with PC Pandora
Many official forms and documents are not only printed in English, but also in Spanish and other languages. Several states have decided that it is too expensive to translate things to other languages and are looking to establish a language in which to conduct official business. Even though America is made up of all different cultures, English is the predominant language and has been the de facto official language in the US. Now, some states are trying to make English the official language in which to conduct business.
Oklahoma’s State Question 751, on the ballot for November 2, brings that decision to the people. Nothing in this says that people should only speak English, or that a translator can’t be used, but that for the purposes of conducting official business, English is the only language in which forms, documents and services must be provided. I fully support this measure and I urge you to also vote Yes on SQ 751.
STATE QUESTION NO. 751
LEGISLATIVE REFERENDUM NO. 351
This measure amends the State Constitution. It adds a new Article to the Constitution. That Article deals with the State’s official actions. It dictates the language to be used in taking official State action. It requires that official State actions be in English. Native American languages could also be used. When Federal law requires, other languages could also be used.
These language requirements apply to the State’s “official actions.” The term “official actions” is not defined. The legislature could pass laws determining the application of the language requirements. The Legislature would also pass laws implementing and enforcing the language requirements.
No lawsuit based on State law could be brought on the basis of a State agency’s failure to use a language other than English. Nor could such a lawsuit be brought against political subdivisions of the State.
Muskogee Public Schools staff and band got together one day and put this wonderful video all together to get ready for the 2010-2011 school year! Good Job, Roughers! Vote YES on State Question 744 to require Oklahoma to boost education spending! Watch the video below!
State Question 744 will basically require that Oklahoma spend at least the same average amount for K-12 schools as surrounding states:
STATE QUESTION NO. 744
LEGISLATIVE REFERENDUM NO. 391
The measure repeals a section of the State Constitution. The repealed section required the Legislature annually to spend $42.00 for each common school student. Common schools offer pre-kindergarten through twelfth grade.
The measure also adds a new Article to the Constitution. It sets a minimum average amount the State must annually spend on common schools. It requires the State to spend annually, no less than the average amount spent on each student by the surrounding states. Those surrounding states are Missouri, Texas, Kansas, Arkansas, Colorado and New Mexico. When the average amount spent by surrounding states declines, Oklahoma must spend the amount it spent the year before.
The measure deals with money spent on day-to-day operations of the schools and school districts. This includes spending on instructions, support services and non-instruction services. The measure does not deal with money spent to pay debt, on buildings or on other capital needs.
The measure requires that increased spending begin in the first fiscal year after its passage. It requires that the surrounding state average be met in the third fiscal year after passage.
The measure does not raise taxes, nor does it provide new funding for the new spending requirements.
This can easily be funded if the state will stop raiding the education fund and replacing it with lottery funds as it was supposed to. Right now, the state is replacing funds with lottery funds instead of supplementing them. See: Oklahoma Education Lottery – the big lie.
Well, in the primary election yesterday, Oklahoma voters chose two women to run against each other, Jeri Askins (D) and Mary Fallin (R) will compete for the top state job in November. So, now the question is, which one will be the best for the top spot?
Well, I’m not going to go into it (yet) because I really don’t have enough information and really don’t know which one I will vote for. But, it begs the question – Will a woman do a better job leading the state than men have done?
The last presidential election saw Hillary Clinton running for president until she was pushed out in the primary. But, it did get some people to thinking about how a woman would lead this country versus a man. I can’t count the number of times I heard “Well, she can’t screw it up any more than a man.” I don’t know, man can screw it up really bad (cue Obama). Would Hillary have done a better job? Don’t know.
I personally don’t have a problem with a woman as president or governor. I think women are just as capable as men are to lead the state (or country), so don’t get on to me for being sexist.
Back to Oklahoma. Quite a few people would say our government is screwed up. There’s quite a few things I could (and do) gripe about. Up until this next election, Oklahoma has been governed by men and it is pretty screwed up.
I guess now we may finally get the answer to the question: Can a woman screw it up any worse than a man?
The new Arizona state immigration law has been likened to a standoff by local writer David Gerard in his recent column on MuskogeeNow.com. I read this column with great interest because what is happening in Arizona is very important to the rest of us. The decisions made by a federal judge will have a lasting message as to the importance of state rights versus federal responsibility.
I agree with David that the protection of our national borders is the federal government’s responsibility as I understand the Constitution. I also agree with David that the feds aren’t doing this job well, if at all.
Arizona officials and their supporters say the law is needed so that Arizona can maintain order within its borders from foreign sneaks, a job delegated by the Constitution to the federal government, but one the feds aren’t doing well or at all.
These get-tough-on-immigration officials would normally stand for a strict reading of the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law, but when it comes to illegal immigration, their attitude is hang the Constitution and illegal immigrants.
It is also true that, during this recent economic crisis, it is very easy to blame the lack of jobs on illegal immigrants. Yes, some jobs are being taken by illegal immigrants who employers (illegally) pay under the table; and, yes, most of these jobs are undesirable to Americans. (We DO have standards, you know.) Even though our economic crisis is NOT because of illegal immigration, they don’t help the situation, either.
Illegal immigrants do take away from citizens in the way of jobs, social services, unpaid taxes, housing and more. Most illegals drive without licenses or insurance. Since Arizona didn’t see the feds doing their job, they decided to do it for them. I don’t agree with all the aspects of the law, especially with the part that says if an officer has a reasonable suspicion someone might be here illegally, they have the right to stop and check. But, as part of other enforcement action, i.e. a traffic stop, response to a call, etc., the officer should have the right to verify a person’s identification, as well as immigration or citizenship status.
While the border between Mexico and the US has always been ‘porous’, as David Gerard puts it, is no reason to leave it that way. If the feds don’t want Arizona doing their job for them, then they need to step up and do it. Illegal means against the law. If I do something illegal, I will face the consequences. Illegal immigrants are here against the law, they should face the consequences. I am not against legal immigration, I am against illegal immigration.
Arizona took drastic steps several months ago to try to stem the tide of illegal immigration. I may not agree with every aspect of this law, but I do agree something has to be done. Illegal immigration adds to the financial burden of legal US citizens. Instead of condemning Arizona, the feds may do better to work with them to not only make sure Arizona’s laws are correct, but to shore up federal law and assist other states with legislation.
No, I’m not racist, anti-immigration, or anything else. I am an American. I know we are the melting pot and this country was built on immigration. I think this is the greatest nation in the world and I understand why people want to move here and live here and raise their families here. I don’t have a problem in the world with those who want to live and work here LEGALLY! It is those who don’t want to go through the legal processes that I have a problem with.
Apparently, so does Arizona, hence their laws. So, instead of doing their jobs and protecting our borders, the DOJ is filing suit challenging the constitutionality of Arizona’s laws. Our president apparently doesn’t think illegal immigration as he calls the state law misguided.
‘My favorite part of the article is this: “The lawsuit will argue that Arizona’s new measure requiring state and local police to question and possibly arrest illegal immigrants during the enforcement of other laws, like traffic stops, usurps federal authority.”‘
Legal immigration – no problem. Illegal immigration needs to stop.
Congress has passed national health care legislation, which means, that if you buy or sell more than $600 in coins or bullion, you must fill out a tax form. Wait, what? Yes, that’s correct. This is part of the national health care and kicks in with it in 2012.
According to NumisMaster.com, this is part of section 9006 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148).
“Section 9006 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Public Law 111-148, signed into law by President Obama this spring) turns 1099 forms into reporting forms not only for independent contractor’s income – what they have long been used for – but also to show sales, gains and losses on purchases and sales of goods as part of a trade or business.”
“There’s a bill introduced by Rep. Dan Lungren (H.R. 5141), which has gathered over 80 members of Congress as co-sponsors to repeal this section. Evidently, however, the drafters of the provision think there is a $17 billion loophole that this plugs.”
So, that coin collection you have been hanging on to that is probably worth more than $600 may be best to be sold before January of 2012 to keep you from having to file a barrage of 1099 forms. If you are into coin collecting, buying or selling bullion, then you definitely need to check into this law.
Some potential problems have arisen for Mayor Hammons’ nominee for vacated council seat of Bob Luttrull.
According to MuskogeeNOW.com, Mayor Hammons has nominated his mother’s boss, Craig Koele of Solara Hospital, to replace Bob Luttrull on the city council. Perhaps this is a conflict of interest.
According to MuskogeePolitico.com, there are also allegations of sexual harassment at Solara Hospital that have allegedly gone unanswered. Be sure to read the
Vote YES on School Bond, Your choice for mayor, council
For mayor, our choices are incumbent John Tyler Hammons, John Coburn, Theresa Garris, and Chris James.
Council Ward III choices are incumbent David Ragsdale, Jr. and Randall Howard.
Council Ward IV choices are incumbent Jim Ritchey, Cedric Johnson, and Ken Payne
The school bond issue is very important. This is a $2.1 million school bond issue that provides $700,000 per year for three years. This bond is for maintenance, equipment and renovations. The cost to the taxpayer is $1.66/month on a $100,000 home. That’s less than $20/year. This will help ease the budget woes placed on the schools by the state and keep teachers employed.
The state lied to the citizens when they said the lottery proceeds would be an addition to the state formula for education (see Oklahoma Education Lottery – the big lie). They instead made it PART of the formula resulting in schools not receiving very much extra money, if any from the lottery. Because of this lie, schools are not receiving the help they need to make budgets in lean times. The schools need our help to provide quality education to our children.
President Obama plans to open off-shore drilling on the Atlantic, East Gulf Coast, and Alaska shorelines. The environmentalists, of course, are all upset saying that this will cause all sorts of ecological disasters. However, I’m happy that finally president Obama has done something I agree with.
Technology has come a long way since the drilling ban was put into place. There are better ways to mitigate any spill, however rare they should be.
Just as it appears we are looking at a better economy, despite the Democrats mortgaging our future for generations to come, they took the final action that will even more completely bankrupt America. They passed Obamacare at a huge cost, $940 Billion. Yes, that’s BILLION … with a B, which also stands for BAILOUT!
Yes, almost $1 Trillion was allocated earlier to bailout big banks and corporations, now almost $1 Trillion more for Obamacare. Well, this is just the beginning, kids. Employers who will be forced to provide health insurance to every employee, including part time, will feel the cost. One report I heard is that Caterpillar will spend $100 million dollars in the first year alone.
And what happens when companies have to spend more to make a product? That’s right, they pass the cost on to the consumer. That’s you and me. If you think eating at McDonald’s was a cheap treat, think again. If Mickie D’s has to insure every employee, they will pass the cost on to us. Walmart commercials talk about low prices – not if they have to insure every employee who works a few hours a week. If you think the unemployment rate is high now, wait until employers start laying off employees because they cannot afford to insure them.
What makes the government think they can do this any better than they’ve done any other program in the past? What makes them think they can do health care better when every country in the world with socialized health care says, “Don’t do it!!!”?
And, the beauty of it all is that most provisions don’t take effect until 2012 or 2014 when Obama will be out of office! Yes, Mr. President, this is what change looks like – a change for the worst. YES, WE CAN… bankrupt America!
This article is my own personal opinion. If you share this opinion, or don’t, please leave a comment. Thank you.
Bob Anthony must think the people of Oklahoma are stupid. He has apparently been watching too many movies out of Hollywood that portray Oklahomans as a bunch of slow-talking, slow-thinking hicks. His plan is to enact toll-free calling statewide in Oklahoma. You could call from Hugo to Boise City without any long distance at all. Okay, that is well and good, but it has to be funded. The logical place to fund this would be to put a surcharge on landline phones because this is what it would affect.
But, noooo, his idea is to add a surcharge (I heard $3.19/line) on CELL PHONES. Yep, you heard it right… cell phones. I don’t know about you, but I can already pick up my cell phone and call anywhere in the US as part of my calling plan. I’m quite sure that this is now pretty standard with most plans out there. I still have a landline for the DSL. Any long distance calls are placed using my cell phone.
The whole reason for this push is to further subsidize small telephone companies in the state who already charge below-cost rates to their customers. So, he wants to further subsidize these little locals with money from wireless customers. I don’t think so! Especially at $3.19/line where most families may have 2, 3, 4 or more phones. And further especially because cell phone users won’t benefit at all with this. Not one bit.
I urge you to contact your representative and let them know how asinine this plan is and to tell Bob Anthony to crawl back under his rock and stop trying to gouge user with fees for services we don’t need.
Back in November, a law was passed in Oklahoma to ban drivers from driving in the left lane on highways and clogging things up. It is now being enforced by the Oklahoma Highway Patrol. If a person drives in the left lane, unless he or she is passing or turning left from the highway, can be ticketed.
Even though there are already laws on the books that tell slower drivers to stay right and allow for ticketing drivers who impede traffic, State Rep. Glen Bud Smithson, D-Sallisaw, one of the authors of the new bill, seems to think we need yet another law for drivers to be wary of.
Also, while there are signs to tell out-of-state drivers that slower vehicles should move to the right, there won’t be any signs that tell drivers it’s illegal to drive the left lane even if there is no traffic.
There are also questions about enforcement on state and federal highways inside city limits. For example, here in Muskogee, Shawnee, Main Street, part of Okmulgee Ave, Peak Blvd, and 32nd St. are all state or federal highways. It doesn’t make much sense to enforce this law on these roads. Doing so will impede traffic in and of itself.
Did we need a new law or just stricter enforcement of the impeding laws?
Every so often, federal and state laws change and that usually means that local laws and ordinances must change with them. Same goes for the governing document of the City of Muskogee – the city charter. Even in the absence of federal or state law changes, it is a good idea to partially review sections of the charter from time-to-time and make sure we are keeping up with the times.
The mayor proposed a complete charter review and a change in city government from the current city manager to a strong mayor government. This was very bold and seemed to some that it was a power grab attempt. The mayor also wanted a committee made up of citizens for this charter review. I’m not against citizens being involved, in fact, I think citizens should be very involved in their government – local, state and federal. However, the first step of being involved means to be informed.
The council voted down the mayor’s proposal and proposed the council as the charter review committee. The portions of the charter under review will be posted on the city’s website and citizens who want to be informed may read the proposed changes, attend the meetings and give input. This is, in my opinion, the best way to handle charter review and change.
Every so often, federal and state laws change and that usually means that local laws and ordinances must change with them. Same goes for the governing document of the City of Muskogee – the city charter. Even in the absence of federal or state law changes, it is a good idea to partially review sections of the charter from time-to-time and make sure we are keeping up with the times.
Loading ...
Twitter
RSS