Write your Senator now!

The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes
309 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC , 20510

Dear Senator Sarbanes,
As a native Marylander and excellent customer of the
Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your
assistance. I have contacted the Immigration and
Naturalization Service in an effort to determine the process
for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.

My reasons for wishing to change my status from
U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stem from the bill which was
recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted.
If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate,
as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for
five years, what I need to do to become a citizen is to pay
a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five
years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am
anxious to get the process started before everyone figures
it out.

Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have
had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect
of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine.

Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively?
This would yield an excellent result for me and my family
because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that
my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative
to her law school applications.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process
to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of
the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative.
Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent,
Pete McGlaughlin
---------------------------------

(emailed to me by a friend; checked out on Snopes)

What if...

Any 8th grader can tell you that by controlling crude oil production, oil companies are artificially keeping gas prices high. Because Americans’ demand for oil is relatively constant with the U.S. economy and consumers dependent on oil, big oil companies can raise prices and we “hostages” will continue to buy at whatever price they set. (I mean, REALLY, what other choice to we have?)

This got me to thinking: What if Bu$hCo invaded Iraq not to acquire oil, but to stop it from getting here in the first place? We know the war is definitely about oil, but what if the original plan was not to actually bring the oil to the U.S., but instead to stop the flow of oil to decrease supplies and keep prices high? Who profits the most?

Anyway, in the long run, if oil prices remain at their current levels, a financial disaster is inevitable. Interest rates will rise (as they already are) and Americans will have to choose between paying their rent or putting gas in their cars.

If America were Iraq...

"If America were Iraq, what would it be like." This may have been originally written in Sept 2004 but it's sure still relevant today. Goes to show, some things never change.

"This is America, please order in English."

Joey Vento of Geno's Steaks in South Philadelphia had the audacity to put a sign in his establishment's window that simply said "This is America, please order in English." Since when did it become a hostile act to express that you prefer to conduct routine business in English? Why is it that simply suggesting it would be better for all concerned if we spoke the same language such a major controversy?

Could it be because many of today's immigrants are coddled into believing they don't need to adapt to their new country's ways, customs and language? After all, they are taught in bilingual schools. They listen to radio stations in their own language. They watch television programs in their native tongue. The crux of the problem is that there is no urgency for assimilation, even though it has been proven over and over again that without assimilation only limited success is achievable in any culture.

In another time, no one would have thought twice about such a sign. Then again, in another time, the sign would not be needed. Only in America.

Flag Burning

If forced to choose between protecting the flag and protecting the Constitution, I’d choose the latter. I'm not a flag burner. I don't plan to burn the flag. I view flag desecration as a harmless, if obnoxious, form of protest. I even agree with people who say that flag burning is ineffective, misdirected, or "improper."

The problem is that we can't pass and enforce laws against flag burning unless we modify the US Constitution and remove an important part of the First Amendment. Supreme Court rulings have upheld that flag desecration is a form of political speech that should be protected by our Constitution. I agree. We do not need to amend the Bill of Rights to show our respect for the flag. Simply put, flag burning may destroy the flag, but an amendment to protect it would forever damage what it stands for.