Illegal Immigration: Life Lesson in the Making

I’ve recently observed a proposal that in exchange for U.S. citizenship, illegal aliens be given the opportunity to earn citizenship through a short stint in the armed services. I have to admit, at first thought I am perplexed. I’m not of the mind that service in the Army should be utilized as a sentence (for troubled youth) or domestic admission for citizenship. On the other hand, if those who so disparately value a life in the U.S. that they brave the searing sun over 100 miles for a job, then I would be willing to give them this opportunity in order to earn what they demonstrate is valuable to them.

If given the opportunity, would they even share the thought that they hold that much value for life in the U.S. Or, would they continue to balk at any thought where citizenship would come at a cost.

Defenders voice that illegal aliens “pay taxes”. Well the truth is they do and they don’t. They pay taxes on the products that they buy. Great, that’s appreciated, but to be perfectly honest, there is no way around it. You can’t go to McDonalds and decline to pay the tax. But like the border, they pursue any means by which they can escape income tax, which every law abiding U.S. citizen must pay. When U.S. citizens do not pay the appropriate income tax, they then experience the force of the law upon them to encourage them to become compliant.

Nobody is asking that the illegal be forced to follow anything rules or processes that any other U.S. citizen doesn’t already do. But they are asking (even demanding) every freedom that U.S. citizens enjoy but continue to try to circumvent what those costs are.

In the end, I have the opinion that I am for such alternatives to U.S. citizenship for illegal aliens. However, I already fear for the headline which would read: “Army Generals Racist: Consistently send Hispanic Citizenship Enlistees to the front lines.” I think I read something similar in a history book somewhere. Might have had something to do with the Vietnam War and African American soldiers.
History repeats itself when we (earth inhabitants) fail to learn the appropriate Life Lesson, until we get it right.

Obama already is contradicting himself

It had to happen sooner or later.
The 2008 election has been upon us since the close of the 2004 election. I had been able to let disregard all previous rhetoric previous to now as pure pontification. Only today was something observed which I thought should be called out as a bit hypocritical.

I don’t yet want to summarize where I feel on any particular candidate as I’m still trying to keep myself firmly planted in the middle without prejudice. While this submission will single out Barack Obama, it isn’t with the intent to discredit his candidacy, but rather to keep him honest in what he says.

In his speech, Obama, D-Illinois, said things would look different in an Obama administration: “When I am president, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world’s most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.”
“If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets, and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
– CNN.com

Isn’t this what GWB initially set out to do? The intelligence the U.S. used (albeit inaccurate in hind-sight) was actionable and was baked up by data from multiple other countries, notably all those within the U.N. Security Council. For Obama to say that his tack greatly differs from that which GWB used, is misleading at best, hypocritical in truth and fear-provoking at worst. Obama has used his “innocence” as a Senator to discredit those who voted in support of the initial invasion of Iraq, but then uses the same justification which was used to justify that invasion for one of his own.

Obama will say. “He elevates al Qaeda in Iraq — which didn’t exist before our invasion — and overlooks the people who hit us on 9/11, who are training recruits in Pakistan.”
–CNN.com

For Obama to assume that al Qaeda didn’t exist in Iraq before the U.S. invaded seems a bit naive.

I’m pleased to see such a large panel of candidates on both sides. Although I don’t much care for the nicey-nice tactic which both sides seem to be enacting with this go ‘round. I’m sure it won’t last long the sooner we get to the primaries.

Good Luck to Obama as he finds a way to correct this. Yes; I’m assuming there will be a “clarification”. I think he makes a viable candidate that both sides will have to be mindful of in this election if not the next.