FederalRepublic.net

From the Associated Press

BOULEVARD, Calif. — As immigrants and their supporters prepared for a massive boycott on Monday, opponents of illegal immigration went to work building a border fence meant to symbolize their support of a secure border.

About 200 volunteers organized by the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps of California began building a 6-foot barbed wire fence Saturday along a quarter-mile stretch of rugged terrain in Boulevard, about 50 miles east of San Diego.

Tim Donnelly, the group’s leader, said volunteers ate apple pie and hot dogs as they worked on the fence, which was connected to an existing 12-foot-high fence previously built by the federal government.

The volunteers wanted to send a message to Congress that the government should block entry to the United States and not grant amnesty to illegal immigrants, Donnelly said.

Thousands of immigrants and their supporters are expected to boycott work and schools Monday to raise awareness of their contributions to society.

“This was largely sent as a message to Congress so they’ll see on May 1, there are jobs that even illegal immigrants don’t want to do, but Americans are more than willing to do them,” Donnelly said, referring to the fence-building.

Link

Finally someone is stepping up to do something about the problem of illegal immigration in this country, and it’s certainly not the federal government. While Congress debates legislation meant to put illegal immigrants on the path to citizenship (an almost absolute amnesty for illegals), the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps has voluntarily begun to build a fence in support of securing our borders.

Congress must realize securing our borders must be a priority of the most serious importance. Millions of illegal immigrants sneak into our country every year, drying out social service tax dollars, while defying our laws to the point of chaos. If the Congress does not take action on this serious matter, the silent majority must stand with the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps and fight for the security of our nation.

From Newsmax.com

WASHINGTON — President Bush on Friday rejected calls in Congress for a tax on oil company profits, saying the industry should reinvest its recent windfalls in finding and producing more energy.

“The temptation in Washington is to tax everything,” Bush said in an exchange with reporters in the White House Rose Garden. Rather than for the government to reap the benefit from oil company profits driven by the recent surge in global oil prices, he said, “The answer is for there to be strong re-investment.”

“These oil prices are a wakeup call,” Bush said. “We’re dependent on oil. We need to get off oil.”

Link

President Bush is certainly right in that the Congress believes taxation is the only solution to national problems. The reality is that if Congress passes and President Bush signs legislation to raise taxes on oil company profits, oil companies most certainly will pass the costs onto consumers in the form of higher prices. There must be a change in mindset in Washington, from a “penalize oil companies” prospective to a recognition that government must promote an environment that reduces regulations and allows new refinaries to be built and new drilling in commence.

By Desmond Butler

NEW YORK (AP) - Tens of thousands of protesters marched Saturday through lower Manhattan to demand an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, just hours after this month’s death toll reached 70.

Cindy Sheehan, a vociferous critic of the war whose soldier son also died in Iraq, joined in the march, as did actress Susan Sarandon and the Rev. Jesse Jackson.

“End this war, bring the troops home,” read one sign lifted by marchers on the sunny afternoon, three years after the war in Iraq began. The mother of a Marine killed two years ago in Iraq held a picture of her son, born in 1984 and killed 20 years later.

-Snip-

The demonstrators stretched for about 10 blocks as they headed down Broadway. Organizers said 300,000 people marched, though a police spokesman declined to give an estimate. There were no reports of arrests.

“We are here today because the war is illegal, immoral and unethical,” said the Rev. Al Sharpton. “We must bring the troops home.”

Organizers said the march was also meant to oppose any military action against Iran, which is facing international criticism over its nuclear program. The event was organized by the group United for Peace and Justice.

“We’ve been lied to, and they’re going to lie to us again to bring us a war in Iran,” said Marjori Ramos, 43, of New York. “I’m here because I had a lot of anger, and I had to do something.”

Link

This protest should serve as a reminder to those conservatives staying home on election day 2006. If Democrats come to power in Congress, we can expect the obstructionist and defeatist tactics of the liberal left being fully implemented, including hearings on possible impeachment of President Bush:

Cindy Sheehan and the rest of the moonbat bunch:

By Fred Barbash and Bill Brubaker

The nation’s economy regained momentum in the first quarter of the year as it recovered from the hurricanes of 2005, the Commerce Department reported yesterday, growing at a rate of 4.8 percent, compared with 1.7 percent in the previous quarter.

It was the hottest annualized pace for the gross domestic product in 2 1/2 years, with robust spending by consumers, business and government all doing their part.
 
“This rapid growth is another sign that our economy is on the fast track,” President Bush said.

But the Commerce Department report was no surprise to economists, who expected a bounce-back from the slowdown following the hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico region, including Hurricane Katrina. The rate announced yesterday was more in line with the pre-hurricane quarterly pace.

-Snip-

While Bush trumpeted the Commerce Department results, he also said: “This good news cannot be taken for granted. With gas prices on the minds of Americans, we need to keep our foot on the pedal of this strong economy.”

-Snip-

“The surest way to put the brakes on our economic growth would be to raise taxes or spend too much of the people’s money here in Washington,” Bush said. “That’s why I’m going to continue to work with Congress to make the tax relief that helped spur this economic growth permanent . . . [and] to make this country less dependent on foreign sources of oil.”

Link

As a result of the Bush tax cuts and federal spending to compensate for the damage from Hurricane Katrina and the wars in the Middle East, the economy is rolling along at a respectable 4.8%, which is definately far better than any country in the European Union. However good the economy is at this point in time, the Congress and the president would be wise to work toward long term economic growth.

Long term economic strategies include making many provisions of the Bush tax cuts that are set to expire permanent and cutting federal spending. Social Security must be reformed into a system of taxpayer ownership, allowing Americans to invest a portion of Social Security into the stock market. There must be more focus on cutting business regulation and red tape, allowing citizens to easily start businesses or invest back into their own. Finally, Congress must work with the president to reduce our dependence on foreign oil by providing legislation to build new refinaries and allow more oil exploration and drilling (especially in ANWR) and secure our borders to reduce illegal immigration.

By Jim Rutenberg

WASHINGTON, April 28 - President Bush has never been shy about speaking Spanish in public, and he is known to love all kinds of music: country, folk and even Tex-Mex style rock. But one thing you will not find on his iPod: “Nuestro Himno,” the new Spanish version of the national anthem that was released on Friday as part of the growing immigrants’ rights movement.

President Bush speaking to reporters today in the Rose Garden of the White House.
Asked at a news briefing in the Rose Garden on Friday whether he believed the anthem would have the same value in Spanish as it did in English, Mr. Bush said flatly, “No, I don’t.”

“And I think people who want to be a citizen of this country ought to learn English,” Mr. Bush said. “And they ought to learn to sing the national anthem in English.”

Mr. Bush has tried to occupy a middle ground in the raging debate over immigration, supporting legislation that would grant immigrant workers temporary legal status and perhaps a path to citizenship, while pushing for immigrants to learn English also pressing for more steps to stop the flow of newcomers over the border. But his statement about the anthem was taken by members of both parties as a clear signal to conservatives that he stood with them on what many of them see as a clash between national identity and multiculturalism.

Link

While many issues are at stake in the debate over illegal immigration and border security, it is absurd the national anthem of the United States has been toyed with and destoryed in hispanic circles. Written by Francis Scott Key while observing the British bombardment of Fort McHenry in 1814, the Star Spangled Banner has given hope and courage to millions of soldiers and U.S. citizens. However, the anthem has now been abused by those who don’t care about this country’s history or what the anthem stands for.

We’ve seen time and time again illegal immigrants and other minority groups take to the streets to protest the ongoing fight in Congress regarding border protection legislation. However, during protests, many immigrants have pledged their loyalty to Mexico, have flown the American flag upside-down, and called for the Mexican re-annexation of the American Southwest. Now, radical hispanics have destroyed the Star Spangled Banner. In my eyes, this is not only dishonorable, this is dispicable. Illegal immigrants wish for the American people to sympathize with their cause, yet they continue to destroy American symbols.

As an American citizen, I am angry, and I hope other Americans are angry as well. It is time for the silent minority to step out of its comfort zone and speak out for border protection and the rule of law. Though these radicals may destory our national symbols, they must not destroy our determination to close the borders and prevent amnesty for those who disrespect our laws and freedoms.

I just returned home from watching what in my opinion was a cinematic masterpiece, the new film “United 93.” To all who read my site and then some, I submit this review for what I believe to be the most important movie of the year.

Upon entering the movie theater, I could feel this film was going to be a special one. I had heard “93″ being promoted all over the airwaves of talk radio, but I wanted to find out how good it was for myself (understandable, considering many of the talk show hosts hadn’t even seen it, yet continued to promote the film). Aside from the general opening day movie talk, I wanted to see what really happened because I am not as knowledgeable as some about the events of that day.

Spoiler Alert

The movie begins with the terrorists praying in their hotel room on the morning of September 11, 2001. As the plot progresses, we see these extremists board the plane and wait for the right time to hijack the plane and attempt to steer it to Washington, D.C.

While the audience follows the nothing-out-of-the-ordinary drama in the plane (mainly flight preparation of morning meals and standard take-off procedures), the viewing shifts to the business of the FAA and regional air traffic control centers. Mysteriously, two planes crash into the World Trade Center, getting notice from both military and civilian authorities and sending them into a frenzy.

Suddenly, the terrorists on United 93 take control of the plane, murdering the pilots with knives and exciting fear in the passengers in the form of a fake bomb strapped to one of the hijackers. Slowly, the passengers on the flight began to talk amongst themselves, eventually planning to overtake their captors. Their plan goes into action, throwing the terrorists themselves into panic. The rest of the story, as they say, is history.

I cannot tell you the emotional turmoil I experienced when I sat through the movie. It tugged at my heart strings in the most sincere way. Seeing the fear in the passengers’ eyes while they dialed their families, seeing the sweat on the faces of both passengers and terrorists, seeing the sense of panic and heroism in those who stormed the cockpit, literally brought me to tears. As the passengers of United 93 stormed the cockpit, the audience in the theater literally clapped and cheered as the passengers retook the plane. This was not any ordinary movie moment, it was a moment that made me proud to be an American.

I highly recommend this movie to anyone - liberal, conservative, or anyone in between. Contrary to some people’s beliefs, this movie is not one bit biased, but truly represents the pain and anguish our country felt on September 11, 2001. I encourage all of you to see this movie and attempt to realize we should be thankful for those who have given their lives for the freedom of others.

The Miami Herald has published an opinion piece explaining the irresponsible actions of Congress in trying to fund unneeded earmark appropriations:

It’s time for President Bush to brush the cobwebs off the veto stamp that has been gathering dust in his desk drawer ever since he became chief executive. The federal budget process is complicated, but the issue here is simple: An emergency supplemental appropriation — using federal money to pay for an emergency — should deal only with emergency issues. Until now, Republicans have insisted that there is no higher priority than funding to support our troops.

But with its approval levels approaching record lows and elections looming on the horizon, Congress is apparently trying to buy the public’s affection, even at the cost of imperiling the Iraq funding bill. The president requested $92 billion for war-fighting expenditures and some hurricane relief, but at last report the amount being voted on stood at $106.5 billion. Congress added provisions for still more hurricane relief on the Gulf Coast and a variety of so-called earmarks.

One of the ‘’earmarks'’ deserves special attention because it stands as a metaphor of Congress’ wild spending habits. It wasn’t too long ago that lawmakers approved a payment of $250 million to rebuild a railway line along the Mississippi coast after it was destroyed by Katrina. Now Congress wants taxpayers to spend another $700 million to relocate this same, privately owned rail line in order to build an east-west highway to spur economic development.

The president is right to threaten a veto of any bill that exceeds his request. The irrelevant add-ons may deserve consideration by Congress, but turning this bill into a Christmas tree is irresponsible.

Link

The more Congress is not responsible with the people’s money, the more anger it produces in the body politic. Out of control spending, unneeded regulation, and liberal political philosophy continue to make conservatives like me uneasy about where this country is going after the midterm elections.

Congress must return to fiscal sanity if it is ever to balance the budget or decrease the national debt in my lifetime. It seems politicians are more concerned about putting politics in front of true American priorities like entitlement reform, fiscal responsibility, and a strong defense. No wonder Congress has low approval ratings.

By Charles Krauthammer

WASHINGTON — If you thought the Dubai port deal marked a record high in Washington cynicism, think again. Nothing can match the spectacle of politicians scrambling for cover during a spike in gasoline prices. And this time, the panderfest has gone all the way to the Oval Office. President Bush has joined the braying congressional hordes by ordering the Energy and Justice Departments and the FTC to launch an investigation into possible gasoline price-fixing.

What a disgrace.

-Snip-

Today, every time an Iranian mullah opens his mouth about nukes, the risk premium for Persian Gulf supply interruptions jumps again. Crude oil prices alone account for about $1.70 of what you pay for a gallon at the pump. So 10 years later, I’ll wager again. Here’s what the Bush search for price gougers and profiteers will find:

(1) Demand is up.

China has come from nowhere to pass Japan as the number No. 2 oil consumer in the world. China and India — between them home to eight times the U.S. population — are industrializing and gobbling huge amounts of energy.

-Snip-

2) Supply is down.

Start with supply disruptions in Nigeria, decreased production in Iraq and the continuing loss of 5 percent of our national refining capacity because of Katrina and Rita damage. Add to that the mischief of idiotic new regulations. Last year’s energy bill mandates arbitrary increases in blended ethanol use that so exceed current ethanol production that it is causing gasoline shortages and therefore huge price spikes.

Why don’t we import the missing ethanol? Brazil makes a ton of it and very cheaply. Answer: The Iowa caucuses. Iowa grows corn and chooses presidents. So we have a ridiculously high 54-cent ethanol tariff and ethanol shortages.

Other regulation requires specific (”boutique”) gasoline blends for different cities depending on their air quality. Nice idea. But it introduces debilitating rigidities into the gasoline supply system. If Los Angeles runs short, you cannot just move supply in from Denver. You get shortages and more price spikes.

Link

This article explains precisely why government should remove itself from the oil business. Needless regulation, fears in the Middle East, and high gas taxes add to the ever increasing problem of rising prices of gasoline.

The issue with high gasoline prices is not about price gouging or the greed of oil companies. High gasoline prices have been given to us first, by supply and demand, with demand rising all around the world (especially in India and China) and on concern of political happenings in the Middle East. Second, government has given us high gas prices by restricting the oil industry with needless regulation, Clinton-era taxes, and obstruction in giving oil companies more places to drill for oil. This regulatory mindset must change in Washington if consumers are ever to see cheap gasoline prices again.

Mark Davis has made some very logical comments regarding the role of government and high oil prices in his latest article. I’ve highlighted what I believe to be the most valid points:

-Snip-

Instability in oil-producing nations boosts world oil prices; stability brings them down. The best thing we can do to bring about that stability is to win the war. I’d hate to get in the way of scornful ex-generals tripping over each other in airports during their book tours, but if we could direct our energies toward supporting the war we’re in, we might have a better chance of prevailing and seeing that stability unfold.

That will take years, but so will every other substantive thing that will bring prices down. If Congress had allowed the Alaskan drilling President Bush started asking for five years ago, oil from that sliver of land might be hitting the pipelines right now.

Imagine that. More American oil. We have whined for decades about relying too much on foreign oil, yet we have never seen a major public outcry for environmental extremists to get out of the way so that we can drill and refine more of our own oil and import less from countries that want to kill us.

No new refineries in America in more than three decades. That track record of obstruction, thanks mostly but not totally to Democrats, has done more to keep our oil prices high than any Republican coziness with big oil

-Snip-

Through our behavior in the marketplace, we will let it be known how much we will pay for gas and how much of it we wish to use. Let’s stop these useless cries for Congress to “do something.” Government doesn’t need to do more; it needs to do less.

Elected officials need to drop the obstacles to domestic production, lose their fetish for forcing additives like MTBE and ethanol, and stop wasting our time grandstanding about investigating and punishing oil companies just to get underinformed heads to nod.

By Dana Bash

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Most American taxpayers would get $100 rebate checks to offset the pain of higher pump prices for gasoline, under an amendment Senate Republicans hope to bring to a vote soon.

However, the GOP energy package may face tough sledding because it also includes a controversial proposal to open part of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil exploration, which most Democrats and some moderate Republicans oppose.

-Snip-

“Our plan would give taxpayers a hundred dollar gas tax holiday rebate check to help ease the pain that they’re feeling at the pump,” Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist announced Thursday.

“It also includes strong federal anti-price gouging protection to protect consumers against anti-competitive behavior by oil companies or other suppliers of gasoline. Our free market system works, but it works best when there’s full accountability and full transparency.”

Link

It is said democratic nations don’t last because at some point, the people will discover they can vote themselves money out of the public treasury. Though this country is not a democracy, it seems politicians are attempting to win our hearts by bribing us with one time rebate checks.

Not only is this plan absurd, it also does not make sense. Instead of doing the logical thing like cut regulation, pass legislation to drill in ANWR and build new refineries, or ease gas taxes, our government seems to think the American people will be pleased with a $100 for gas - a one time deal.

Real reform must be sought and fought for in Congress by bringing back market incentives to the oil industry, instead of tying it down with needless regulation. Though a large portion of the blame for high gas prices go to supply and demand, government can and should promote a free market when it comes to our oil supply.