Barb V. V. wrote on Jun 18, 2006 9:33 PM:In response to JANE GROSS ["Stop the North American Union"] I have wondered how the term "Homeland" to describe our nation was coined so quickly after the 9/11 attack. It sprang into use in just a few days, and became THE accepted word, replacing 'nation' almost completely . This weans us away from the pesky notion of a unique and sovereign nationality. Nationalism is now a bad word, replaced by globalism or regionalism. 93218

Barb V. V. wrote on Jun 18, 2006 9:44 PM:"I believe in the United States of America as a government of the people, by the people, for the people, whose just powers are derived from the consent of the governed; a democracy in a Republic; a sovereign nation of many sovereign states; a perfect Union one and inseparable; established upon those principles of freedom, equality, justice, and humanity for which American patriots sacrificed their lives and fortunes. I therefore believe it is my duty to my country to love it, to support its Constitution, to obey its laws, to respect its flag, and to defend it against all enemies." This is THE AMERICAN'S CREED [W.T.Page, 1918] In In 1949 my 5th grade teacher, Mrs. Staples [Encinitas, Central School] required us to memorize this and other poems. I taught my kids to recite it, and my grandchildren can also recite this creed. It is far more inspiring and descriptive of our nation's true foundations than our Pledge of Allegiance. 618944

Barb V. V. wrote on Jun 18, 2006 10:15 PM:In response to Pedro Rocha Jr.[Lake Elsinore, Terra Cotta Middle School] ["Time for Bush's reign to end"] As an 11 or 12 year-old Pedro is so sure of his grasp of national and probably international news that he can claim it is wrong for President Bush to put our troops on our sovereign nation's borders to stem a flood of humanity from violating our laws and crossing illegally into our nation Pedro is so well informed that he doesn't know that a paper signed between two sovereign nations is called a Treaty. He is so well informed that he doesn't know that President Bush is at the end of his term of office and can't run again for President. Pedro is so ill-informed, radicalized, and indoctrinated that he doesn't know that the borders will NOT be closed. There will be, as ther are now, proper ports of entry for legal entry of people and commerce. What will be prevented is the unlawful entry of anyone who does not respect our nation''s sovereign right and duty to define who shal and shall not enter our nation, and wh en and where they may enter. You know like the protest signs say "Ningún respeto, ninguna paz" ["No Respect, No Peace"] You notice the work that Pedro indicates Americans do not want to do ... construction, mechanic. That is a nutshell is the story of the colonization of our blue collar work. To top it off, Pedro says that "We are all a kind of brothers in our country and all of the world". He has been taught that borders are meaningless and have no authority. I'll bet he know more about the history of Aztlan than he does about the history of our nation. Todays' students are taught Cultural Relativism [all cultures are equal, none are better than any others] The foundation of this faulty view is the philosophical assumption that internationalism should replace nationalism. These flawed concepts would have teaching American exceptionalism - a unique history that has produced the most free, open and prosperous society the world has known, despite its many flaws - supplanted with an idealized concept of citizen of the world. Perhaps curriculum antagonistic to our unique place in the world, has not yet spread to all schools. But the number grows under the tender care of the ACLU with its Liberal and Progressives copilots. 6181015

Nick wrote on Jun 18, 2006 10:56 PM:A little hard on the kid there Barb. He's only 12, so cut him a little slack, would ya. The way you lay into him, you would think his uncle was the mayor of L.A. or something.You seem to be a well educated individual and I read your rants all the time, and usually agree with you on most stuff, but I'm curious ? What's your take on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America ? I have been telling people about this for months now, and nobody is listening. Your an opiniated women who likes preaching from her soapbox, so lets her it. Good for the country...bad for the country? Let me hear it. www.spp.gov if you need to read up on the matter.

Daren wrote on Jun 18, 2006 11:08 PM:We all know that Pedro Rocha is wrong on several points in his letter. However, I don't see anything to be gained by ripping him and stifling any civic pride he may have. Pedro has the right to voice any opinion he wishes, no matter how wrong it may be.

Guiseppi = wrote on Jun 19, 2006 12:08 AM:== Yes, Joanne Goodwin (letter Jun 19), this Congress has might peculiar priorities, indicating how cut off they are from real America. While we, the real people, worry about health insurance, sending kids to college and making house payments, Bill Frist worries about protecting the flag from flag burners. I am pushing seventy years, and I have never seen a flag burned in malice, but I can tell you this: I have seen much destruction of the Constitution and our liberties. The nation sinks into bankruptcy as it struggles to extricate itself from a quagmire in Iraq, half of New Orleans still sits in rotting debris, our healthcare system heads for fiscal meltdown, Bush usurps legislative and judicial powers and Antarctica melts. Voila’- Bill Frist and his NEO-CONvicts announce their top priority: a “Flag Protection Amendment”. Ironically, Bush drags our flag through the sewer of torture and war atrocities at the same time Frist charged “people in this country are saying it's okay to desecrate that flag…” Guess Frist was referring to Bush-Gonzales. I'd rather have someone who burns the flag and protects the Constitution, than someone who wraps themselves in the flag and shreds the Constitution. Presently, Cuba, China and Iran are the only countries to ban flag desecration. Chauvinists go berserk over a flag burning, but turn a cold heart to millions of families who can't afford medical treatment. Respect for our flag will flourish once again around the world when the nation regains its self-respect and honor, renounces the culture of corruption and returns to its first principles of a government of the people, by the people and for the people - not the corporation.

Guiseppi = wrote on Jun 19, 2006 12:37 AM:== Michael Campbell (letter July 19) defends the insanity of the Vietnam War. The only people who defend the Vietnam War today are diehards like those who attacked Senator Kerry for his war medals, and those who gush over Bushie for his Vietnam service. They worship Bush, ignoring that he went AWOL and then deserted his country during wartime. They believe we could have won in Vietnam with nuclear weapons, and by continuing the draft and invading Hanoi, which would have been like invading Tokyo in 1945. We lost 62,000 troops in Vietnam as it was, and killed over two million Vietnamese. At its peak we had 500,000 troops in Vietnam. Had we pursued the insane war plan of Campbell, we could have lost twice that many - and for WHAT? A few rice paddies? And what about stopping the dominoes from falling? There were no dominoes. It was a flawed fascist intellectual right wing theory. Today Vietnam is on friendly terms with the US. I thank god these crazies lost the moral battle to the sensible liberals who saved America. History proved the wisdom of peace.

We need a sheriff like wrote on Jun 19, 2006 6:24 AM:JOE ARPAIO in San Diego County! Too bad he can't be our sheriff too.

Mike the Marine wrote on Jun 19, 2006 7:04 AM:In answer to Mr. Owen's question, "What disaster would make mankind seek to live off the earth?" How about overpopultion, dwindling natural resources, etc., etc. If America had a space program that had an actual objective, we could see light at the end of the tunnel now.

Yes, Barb V Is: wrote on Jun 19, 2006 7:52 AM:Full of words, and music, and signifying...nothing

what a sweet man wrote on Jun 19, 2006 8:46 AM:That James Strong from Escondido sure has a sweet gentle disposition. Wouldn't he make a great Sunday school teacher? Or maybe a day-care worker for disadvantaged minorities?

Nobel prize committee wrote on Jun 19, 2006 8:54 AM: It is with interest that we note Paul Owens of Ramona and his critic of the ideas of the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University, Prof. Stephen Hawkings. Obviously, Mr. Owens' intelligence is too high for us to grasp. He should submit his thesis immediately and prepare for his award as the smartest man in Ramona.

Cabbages & kings wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:02 AM:It will always be claimed that government intrusions upon individual freedom are required to protect liberty.

to Mike Campbell wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:02 AM:You are wrong.

Rambo wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:12 AM:Go get 'em J. Strong. Just keep sending people to Gitmo without charges, torture them until they're desparate, then dispense the cyanide. What a plan. There might be a possible Nobel Peace Prize in this for you. Don't I know you from Auschwitz or somewhere?

Rambo wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:16 AM:James Strong, meet Michael Campbell. You guys are a definite team.

Does it matter? wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:33 AM:I saw this in today's NY Times: "More than half of the estimated seven million immigrants toiling illegally in the United States get a regular paycheck every week or two, experts say. At the end of the year they receive a W-2 form. Come April 15, many file income tax returns using special ID numbers issued by the Internal Revenue Service so foreigners can pay taxes. Some even get a refund check in the mail." This surprised me. I didn't realize that so many had regular jobs, paid taxes, etc. Does this affect anyone's opinion about the issue? I know some will say, No, Illegal is Illegal. Anyone have any other opinions about this?

Ron wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:44 AM:I guess identity theft is no longer a crime, according the the U.S. Senate. In that case, anyone know where I can buy a few new ones? If you can't beat em, join em, right?

Jules wrote on Jun 19, 2006 9:45 AM:To NCT I guess the paper decides only to print letters from a few people now, I have written many times only to see BarbVV letters galore, it is not one sided though If you are Guiseppe or BarbVV you can write all day and they will print, how many others have seen this?

Difference, please wrote on Jun 19, 2006 10:01 AM:When OK City was bombed, it was viewed as a criminal act and responded to accordingly. There was no talk of a military strike against groups that thought like McVeigh, nor of invading states that harbored such groups. 9/11 was viewed completely differently. Can someone explain this to me. Why didn't we view those behind 9/11 as criminals and go after them as individuals rather than making a military, nation vs nation thing out of it?

Liability wrote on Jun 19, 2006 10:18 AM:I had a strange day-dream, inspired by the letter referring to "dirty little cowards" and "suffering...face to face confrontation". Imagine that the writer, or someone with the same beliefs, learns from some NCT employee the email addresses of whatever "liberals" are so hated, and tracks them down, and does what he threatens. Can you imagine the NCT's liability if this were traced (as would be likely to happen)? Be careful NCT, neither all letter-writers nor all employees should be assumed to be reasonable people.

Barb V. V. wrote on Jun 19, 2006 11:06 AM:In response to To Jules [6/19 945am] I can well understand your anger at having your posts to this blog not be posted, because it has happened to me more times than you might guess. I make a copy of every post, along with the date and time because I can't depend on my own memory. I don't write deliberately offensive or abusive materials, but nevertheless, quite a few are not posted. I hope that helps you. I too have wondered about the staff who tend this blog. Mostly because when I just posted my name as Barb, another "Barb" posted horrible racist stuff. So I went to 'Barb V' and lo and behold another 'Barb V' posted more racist stuff. So I went to Barb V. V. and the little sneak who was posting hate using my moniker hasn't posted again.

Guiseppi = wrote on Jun 19, 2006 11:15 AM:Thanks, Ramsey Tuell (letter July 19) for reminding us once again of the disastrous mismanagement of FEMA, in losing $1.4 billion to thieves. As you say, this is not 'petty cash'. Yet, compared to the losses in the Iraqi quagmire, FEMA does seem like petty cash. On a monthly basis, spending on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue to increase rapidly. Costs for military operations (including personnel costs as well as operation and maintenance costs) are slated to increase from $5.4 billion in FY 2005 to $6.4 billion in FY 2006-a 20 percent increase. In a little reported theft, we found out on May 2 that some 200,000 guns the US sent to Iraqi security forces may have been smuggled to terrorists. The 99-ton cache of AK47s was to have been secretly flown out from a US base in Bosnia. But the four planeloads of arms vanished. Two years ago we learned how the army botched planning and management of the multibillion-dollar contract to provide food and other services to troops in Iraq. GAO investigators criticized Halliburton's staffing and accounting in just one of their many profiteering schemes. Yet, the military went ahead and agreed to pay Halliburton more than $5 billion on the contract in questionable overcharges. Then there was the $9 billion in cash sent to Iraq that just vanished over two years ago. There still has been no accounting for this vast theft. Actually the scale of waste is far greater than all this, but it is hard to get our minds around so many overwhelming statistics. The immensity of such theft is so unfathomable, that we just shove it out of our minds, and worry how we are going to make our next house and medical insurance payment. We can't be bothered by Uncle Sam’s debt problems. We are just trying to stay afloat ourselves on the deck of the Ship of State, sinking in a vast ocean of red ink.

justforlaffs wrote on Jun 19, 2006 11:17 AM:Wow, Guiseppi an Barb VV are a match made in heaven! Between the two of them, they release more hot air than the the balloons at the last Temecula festival...how about limiting your comments and giving other people room, instead of using this site as your personal blog?

Barb V.V. wrote on Jun 19, 2006 11:20 AM:In response to Nick, asking about my views on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Anything that dillutes the sovereignty of the United States is not a good thing for us. That massive highway from Texas to Canada with fewer exit/entrances than on a normal freeway and with a customs office in the center of the natio seems not only destructive to the environment, but puts the government/business combination even more in control than they are today. As a matter of fact, it seems apparent that the unrestrained illegal immigration is a part of this agreement. The free flow of populations between Canada, US, Mexico is what is planned. I can't imagine the Canadians going for that, but there was similar resistance to the Union of Europe, too. This goes a long way toward explaining the amazing lack of enforcement of our immigration laws, 'till the illegal population had grown to a point where the 'leaders' can claim it is impossible to deport and so we must, yet again, regularize the illegal population. I'm pushing 70, have lived in SoCAlif all of my life, have always attempted to be up on current events, and believe in civic activism. I'm about ready to shut the media off and tend my roses and make quilts for my family. That's when I'm discouraged. Usually I say I will go down with all flags flying.

Jules wrote on Jun 19, 2006 11:31 AM:To BarbVV, I had no idea, I did indeed think you were the hateful person my apologies to you. Again I will ask if anyone has read Bush's comments when the Iraq goverment brought up an Amnesty plan for those who have killed U.S. Soldiers?? saying they are just defending thier Country. It was in the Washington Post last week. Bush did not have much to say on this point, you know he does favor amnesty. Now to all of you who say the president supports our troops what do you have to say about this tid bit?

Kerry wrote on Jun 19, 2006 11:37 AM:Poor Pedro. He is a great example of how pathetic our public school education is. Especially in poor areas. He is a good example of why we should bankrupt the public schools by home-schooling and vouchers. We must break the back of the Teacher's Unions and special interest groups that use education to spew their anti-American propaganda and social agendas.

Both ways? wrote on Jun 19, 2006 12:26 PM:Jules seems to support the war in Iraq, favoring the noble aim of bringing democracy and sovereignty to that country. But then when the leader of Iraq makes a decision about his supposedly sovereign nation's policies, Jules is outraged that Bush allows it. I don't get it.

Gottawonder wrote on Jun 19, 2006 12:44 PM:DIFFERENCE, PLEASE : Your question is excellent. I suspect the reasoning was based entirely on legal advantages . . . i.e. the administration’s ability to circumvent our civil liberties and rights that it would not have been able to do in criminal prosecution. Psychologically speaking, declaring 9/11 an “act of war” seemed to also serve to lend a very dangerous respectability to a group of mass murderers. I am not a lawyer or a psychologist however, and I, too, would welcome some enlightenment on the point you raise.

Jules wrote on Jun 19, 2006 12:46 PM:To both ways- I was asking a question, which I did not get an answer to. I am totally against this war I know that while we claim to spread democracy our rights are being decimated. I also know this Amnesty plan sure the hell is not going to fly with any military families. I know how I feel about most Bush policies, I was curious what the pro-war far right christians think?

Barb V.V. wrote on Jun 19, 2006 2:09 PM:Second response to Nick, asking about my views on the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America. Human Events online. You and others may want to check out an article in HUMAN EVENTS ["North American Union Would Trump U.S. Supreme Court" by Jerome R. Corsi] Just Google the title and you can read it online. And let's open the discussion to everyone in this blog. If you haven't heard of this move to unify the nations of Canada, US, & Mexico into one political unit seems to be off-radar for most in the media and even those in government. It's one thing to have trade agreements that favor neighboring nations, and it is quite another to form a quasi-governmental entity on the way to a formal government comprised of the 3 nations. The fact that this is not being hotly debated by the general population and most particularly by candidates for federal office, is not a healthy sign.

Kerry wrote on Jun 19, 2006 2:35 PM:Finally, you can look up companies in the San Diego area that are using the employee verification system. If you are concerned who is really trying to hire only Americans, look up the list on NumbersUSA.com.

To Maria wrote on Jun 19, 2006 2:37 PM:You are wrong, attendance is an extremely important part of school and you should be failed for poor attendance. School is about more than what you learn from a book. School is about learning something about life. You have a responsibility to be in your classes everyday, you are responsible for being on time, you are responsible for participating in the class discussions, asking questions, turning in assignments on time and anything else your instructor requests you do. While you may in fact pass a test, if you are not in class you don't get the whole picture, the benifits of all the discussions and interactions that occur in the classroom. I once fired a cook for attendance, he said to me "How can you fire me, I am your best cook", my response, "You are worthless if you are not here". That is the way it works in the real world. Learn to be responsible now. You need to be in school everyday, on time, you DO NOT have something more important to do. If your parents would teach you this now, we employers wouldn't have to teach it to you later!

to Jules wrote on Jun 19, 2006 2:43 PM:This is "Both Ways". Sorry I misunderstood you. I completely share your curiosity about the pro-war reaction to this. I expect them to be furious as well, perhaps mostly at the Iraqis who will join their long list of ingrates who benefitted from American military action and didn't genuflect to us.

Jules wrote on Jun 19, 2006 4:01 PM:Yes it alsways amazes me how the pro-war folks love to say you cant be against war and support the troops. This administration has shown an appaling "support" of our service members in so many ways, insufficiant body armor, reduced benifits, stolen identification, continuous rotations, families left to endure. and now possible amnesty for the killing of our soldiers in Iraq, So we sent them to a war under false pretenses not thier fault they believe they are doing the job the "Commander in Chief" sent them to do and now we can tell these families that if thier loved ones were killed in action the perpetrators will go free because they were defending thier country. now that is "shock and awe" folks. "Flowers" they said, "mission accomlished" they said... some never believed it and were called traitors and unpatriotic. It is just a sad situation with no clear end in sight, as an American I wish to thank all of the troops who are doing thier job even if I disagree with the administration who sent them there.

to Gottawonder wrote on Jun 19, 2006 4:33 PM:It is a peculiar bit of history, isn't it? After all, McVeigh, though obviously a true extremist, was part of organizations that are hostile to the US government, are armed, and feed fanaticism, at least sometimes. But it took Bush almost no time to extend the battle against the 9/11 people to states that harbor such, declaring that they were no different from the terrorists as far as we were concerned. I think part of the answer might be that at that moment, he could. The US and the world was in shock after 9/11, enraged, and in the mood to support any action that our leader proposed. But you have to wonder at the sheer speed and enormity of the decision. It was like jumping at the chance to make it a war-frame instead of a crime-frame. I hate thinking that Rove knows that somehow, the US is always ready for a war, always ready to go somewhere and overkill with our awesome military. I wonder what citizens would have done if all the groups associated with McVeigh-types had been really targeted for full-blown attack by our military/police. What do you think?

Ron wrote on Jun 19, 2006 5:14 PM:Or try: HireaPatriot.com

Guiseppi = wrote on Jun 19, 2006 6:01 PM:==Do not be discouraged, JULES. Keep submitting your opinions and be persistent. Barb V.V. gave an accurate account: NCT blog posting is often erratic and suspicious. Follow her practice, which is also my procedure. I do wonder if they have two different philosophical camps making the postings. Or maybe it is not philosophical editing, but the editing of incompetence. Many time I wait 4-8 hours before resubmitting, and find the second attempt it gets through. Sometimes they have been posted within two minutes of submission. Happened yesterday. Other times I have had to submit three times, and still nothing is posted. This is the 2nd time I have posted this particular message. And sometimes a submission is posted twice, several hours apart. Doubtless it is a personnel problem and expense for the Times, as well.

Right on, Jules wrote on Jun 19, 2006 6:22 PM:You said it well. I read recently that the divorce rate among military families who have someone in Iraq is up to nearly 30%, and the rate among similar officers is over 75%. While Bush and his followers moan over what a few homosexuals might do to the institution of marriage. This group cares absolutely nothing about the troops or their families, only about their political agenda. And yet, amazingly, many people are so in love with the idea of a war fought for supposedly good reasons, whatever those reasons are that they are fed, that it's all worth it, the sacrifices are noble, and anyone who says otherwise is a traitor. Rove and his minions, including the Pres, know that anytime you can get people in an "us" and "them" frame of mind, you can get them to give you anything...anything. How they must laugh at us.

Guiseppi = wrote on Jun 19, 2006 7:24 PM:==Jules inquired about the possible use of amnesty to settle the morality quagmire between the United States and Iraq. It seems probably, Jules, that both side will have to go far beyond just amnesty to reach a peaceful solution. Amnesty is defined QUOTE ‘A general pardon for offenses against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction; an act of forgiveness for past offenses, esp. to a class of persons as a whole. END QUOTE. When genocide, mass murders, torture and war crimes have been committed, it takes more than mere amnesty. Amnesty could be applied in the case of massive unlawful immigration, for example, but not for ending Apartheid in South Africa, the crimes of the Nazis or the war criminal war against Iraq. South Africa had to go far beyond to create a new solution to bring peace. They developed the TRUTH & RECONCILIATION Commission (TRC). This commission was a court-like body assembled to reach beyond a mere truce to a healing process after the end of Apartheid. Anybody who felt they had been a victim of violence could come forward and be heard at the TRC. Perpetrators of violence could also give testimony and request amnesty from prosecution. The work of the TRC was accomplished through three committees: (1) Human rights violations - (2) Reparation and Rehabilitation, to seek restoration of victims’ dignity and help with rehabilation, and (3) Amnesty Committee (AC) considered applications for amnesty that were requested in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The working miracle of this system was that the commission was empowered to grant amnesty to anyone charged with atrocities as long as two conditions were met: The crimes were politically motivated and the entire and whole truth was told by the person seeking amnesty. No one was exempt from being charged. As well as ordinary citizens, members of the police could be charged and, most notably, members of the government at the ruling. Basically, no one was exempt, and all could be included. == For such a solution to work in Iraq, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Condaleezza Rice and all major figures responsible on the American side, and also those in Iraq, would have to confess to their crimes, to fulfill the TRUTH part of the equation. Reconciliation would require settlement for grievances on both sides. I cannot see this ever happening, considering the total recalcitrance and arrogance of our leaders. More likely we will recognize we cannot win, declare that we won, leave the country, and have no reconciliation. The hatred toward the United States will boil and simmer for generations.

Nick wrote on Jun 19, 2006 7:33 PM:Barb V.V.: Thanks for your insight, but don't give up the ship yet. It's hard for me to be a good Republican with our Idiot-in-Chief fumbling the ball every time he gets his hands on it, but my Love of Country and Love of Family keep me from throwing in the towel. As usual, you seem to have a pretty good grasp on things. What I don't undertand is how Bush kept the Security for Peace and Prosperity deal off the radar ? There were no big news headlines on this thing. I called the NC Times and spoke with a lady and asked why they never ran a story on it and if they would do a story on it. Of course, she said she would look into it, but i'm not holding onto my breath. This agreement is worse than the 10 million people here in country illegally. It is also the reason he is for giving them amnesty and not deporting them like they should be. Thanks again for the input, and don't give up the good fight. I would hate to think that my ancestors died in vain for this glorious nation we call home.