Louis R. Avallone

Category: Immigration

  • The Power of Taking a Stand

    The Power of Taking a Stand

    Are you a people-pleaser? If you’re not, I bet you know one.

    You know the person I am talking about, right?

    That person in almost everyone’s life who tries to make sure that everyone is happy – or that no one is disappointed. It’s the person in your life that intervenes whenever something is wrong, and tries to make peace wherever there is conflict.

    And we tend to vote for “people-pleasers,” too. Our government is filled with them. These are the candidates that promise everything to everyone.

    And while we may differ significantly on our opinion of President Trump (pick any subject), virtually every Presidential tracking poll confirms he is not a “people-pleaser,” at least when it comes to his job approval rating by most Americans. Nearly 54% of Americans “disapprove” of Trump’s job performance as President, and the polling shows it’s because he’s taken a stand on so many politically incorrect issues.

    For clarification, though, what does it really mean to take a stand? It means that one must take a firm position on an issue. For example, the demonstrators in Tiananmen Square who protested for greater freedom in China, or Martin Luther King, Jr. who sought to end racial discrimination and segregation in our country.

    Well, President Trump has definitely taken a stand on the issues, and it’s making a difference.

    He took a stand against illegal immigration, and within 60 days after he was inaugurated, the number of people apprehended while crossing from Mexico fell to its lowest level in 17 years (according to Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly).

    He took a stand for “America first” and that he would create good jobs for American workers, and the jobless rate is now the lowest since 2001. In fact, our country is almost at full employment today (the best in 16 years), according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

    He took a stand that he wanted lower tax rates for Americans in every tax bracket, and to simplify the tax code for businesses, and now the stock market has hit record highs. In fact, the market has hit new closing highs 23 times during during the Trump administration.

    He took a stand to defeat radical Islamic terrorism, and now ISIS has suffered severe losses recently, including the recapture of the Iraqi city of Mosul by Iraqi government forces, plus the U.S. led coalition forces have now regained close to a third of the territory previously controlled by ISIS in Syria.

    Trump also took a stand against wasteful government spending, explaining in his inaugural address that the days of “reap[ing] the rewards of government” were over. And today, regulatory costs imposed on Americans has been reduced by $70 billion.

    The bottom-line to all of this is that sometimes in life you just have to take a stand and say “no.” “No” to continued deficit spending by the federal government, “no” to government-run health care, “no” to higher and higher taxes, “no” to the redistribution of wealth by the government, etc.

    Taking a stand may be hard for people-pleasers. Or the optimists who see the glass as half-full and that every cloud has a silver lining. I get it.

    But I figure it like Martin Luther King, Jr. put it: “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter.” And whether that’s immigration policy, or an election, or deciding whether your town will build a multi-million dollar sports arena, it all matters. After all, as they say, if you don’t stand for something or you’ll fall for anything.

  • Let Freedom Ring

    Let Freedom Ring

    The 2016 campaign for president is over.

    And for millions of Americans this past election day, our country chose to let go of the past, and start anew.

    Today, it seems easier to recognize the abusive-like relationships that our country has gravitated towards, and clung to, over the past 50 years. Even though we knew better, we kept electing candidates for public office that were more interested in their welfare, than in ours. We supported one political party (or another) because they told us how much they cared, but never really helped us, at all.

    We kept accepting a watered down, blurred-line between what’s right and what’s not, just so that we might keep the peace for one more day, and be liked, rather than laughed at. It’s been more convenient to stuff our true feelings and be silent, or tolerate things that deep inside just didn’t feel right, so we might not be called names, or called into the court of public opinion.

    You see, many in abusive relationships simply don’t know what healthy relationships look like. And if you have grown up in an environment where you feel like you need permission from government to make even simple decisions, such as what doctor to use, or even how to spend your money, such as being forced to buy increasingly more expensive health insurance, then you may not recognize how unhealthy your relationship here is, in the first place.

    If you have only known relationships where you are blamed for others’ problems and unhappiness, by having your income taxed more and more, and still being accused of not doing enough, or putting enough skin in the game, then your relationship may seem normal to you. If you are belittled and trivialized for your feelings, such your concern about our border with Mexico, even though our government refuses to prosecute those here illegally, for the murderous crimes they commit – then yes, it may all seem normal to you.

    But it’s not. Not by a long shot. And if those blaming or belittling you happen to be popular, and likeable, it makes letting go of the relationship even harder, because who would take your side anyway, especially if you might be viewed as a bigot, a racist, or uncaring by speaking out?

    Maybe they call you names like “deplorables”, or humiliate you, put you down, and make fun of you in front of other people, by saying you “cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people” who aren’t like you? Maybe they demean your faith, calling Catholicism “severely backward,” and “a middle ages dictatorship?”

    Maybe it’s their dishonesty or disloyalty to you that make the relationship abusive, such as Hillary Clinton using a private email server, exposing classified, national security information, and putting our families at risk, all while pretending she didn’t know what she was doing. Or how about so-called journalists who secretly championed one candidate, while smearing all the others, cheating during the debates, and still pretending to be impartial stewards of the truth?

    For others, an abusive relationship is being with someone who is consistently irresponsible and unwilling, or unable, to handle their responsibilities. Maybe that is like Secretary Clinton protecting our embassy that was burned-down, and those American killed in Benghazi? Or keeping American forces in Iraq to contain the spread of ISIS throughout the world, regardless of the popularity of doing such. Maybe it’s running up our national debt to nearly $20 trillion since 2009, even though economic growth has been the slowest in our nation’s history, and the number of people unemployed has never been higher.

    Yes, it was inevitable that this day would come. A point where we, the people, became aware that must let go of the abusive relationships of the past and realize that the pain of remaining in them, simply outweigh the desire to just keep “working it out”.

    That time for change is now.

    Today, the continued corruption from the Clintons seems less inevitable, and more intolerable. The media charade of objectivity is even less convincing now, but more contemptible than ever before.

    Career politicians seem more temporary, and the right to bear arms seems more certain. Our faith is less like something we must hide in the shadows, and more like something we can discuss in the town square.

    Our allies, like Israel, will trust again that we have their back, and Iran will never extort our nation again for $150 billion.

    It seems more likely today that genuinely affordable healthcare will be made available for more Americans than ever before, that our border will be secure, the jobs shipped overseas will return, and our laws, like our nation, will be restored to their rightful and respectful position in the world.

    And while I wrote this column several days before the November 8 election, I could be wrong about who is President-elect right now, but I don’t think I am, though.

    For whoever is being inaugurated in January, and for the reasons explained above, they will be President of a country whose voters have been changed forever by this election, for “a mind that is stretched by a new experience can never go back to its old dimensions.”

    So, let freedom ring, and may God bless America.

  • Last Best Hope

    Last Best Hope

    It was the highest voter turnout in Great Britain in almost 25 years. In fact, more than 30 million British voters went to the polls last month and voted on whether Great Britain should withdraw from the European Union (or “EU”).

    What is the EU? Well, I’m glad you asked, because it wasn’t exactly what I thought it was, either. For starters, the EU is an economic and political partnership involving 28 European countries. The idea began after World War II on the premise that countries that trade with one another are less like to war with one another. It then developed into a single market, and by 1999, 11 of the EU countries even adopted their own currency, the “Euro”.

    You see, even though Europe does not have a common language, culture, or value system, the “EU” nonetheless has its own, single parliament system of government, and sets rules for its member countries on everything from the environment, transport, and consumer rights.

    The trouble is, most Europeans don’t really know how it all works, or who’s in charge, and there’s no real sovereignty for these countries, as members of the EU. For example, under EU law, Great Britain cannot prevent anyone from any other EU member state from coming to live in their country. Their border is completely open, as result. And because the EU makes the laws – the voters in Great Britain don’t have much of a say so, at all.

    This is one of the many reasons that almost 72% of the British turned out to vote on the issue of withdrawing from the EU. Some see it as these voters wanting to “take back” their country, or restore their national identity. And if so, we would do well in the United States to do the same.

    After all, a nation is a group of people who share a destiny, and with that destiny, an identity. But this national identity needs pride, and a sense of affection that is expressed to the exclusion of any other allegiance. But because there is no common language, culture, or value system in Europe, is it really any surprise that the British saw the foundation of their nation eroding away – and wanted to do something about it?

    Did you know that only 54% of us here in the U.S. are very proud to be Americans? Compare that with only 33% of people in Germany, France, and Italy (all EU members) that say the same about their own country. These are countries who are clearly losing their national identities – and quickly. The result is utter failure.

    Just look at France or Spain or Greece: these nations are replete with worker protests, and are facing mounting financial difficulties, and unchecked immigration of unassimilated migrant workers, many who are openly hostile to their own host nation, demanding continued entitlement to unsustainable, state-funded social programs, and threatening the peace and stability of that nation.

    Margaret Thatcher once said that Europe is “a classic Utopian project, a monument to the vanity of intellectuals, a program whose inevitable destiny is failure: Only the scale of the final damage is in doubt.” Indeed, she was right.

    But none of this is new. Back in 2011, former French President Nicolas Sarkozy admitted, “We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.”

    Former British Prime Minister James Cameron said essentially the same in 2011, “(W)e have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream. We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values.”

    Does this sound familiar? And while America’s shores once assimilated different cultures and religions into “one nation under God,” today the “great melting pot” in the U.S. means that traditionalists get thrown into the boiling kettle of liberal diversity. Before long, our own nation’s identity will begin to erode precipitously, just as those European countries are witnessing now for themselves.

    And similar to errors of those European countries, such as France and Great Britain, President Obama continues to express indifference, regarding our open border with Mexico, which continues to be plagued by cartel violence, drugs, and other forms of illegal smuggling, as well as illegal immigration and terrorism. In fact, the authority of state and local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law has been diminished under the Obama administration, as the federal government now largely abandons the prosecution of non-criminal illegal immigrants and allows them to remain in the U.S.

    Even dyed-in-the-wool liberals must see the parallels here with the European nations and the consequences of unchecked, unassimilated immigrants to one’s nation. The proverbial handwriting is on the wall.

    Unlike the British, we cannot withdraw from any EU-like organization to save our country. We are everything that our country has protect its national identity – and we must act before it is too late. There is simply no place for us to go because, in the words of Ronald Reagan, “We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth”.

  • Wanting It

    Wanting It

    Many admire that he says things other people are afraid to say. The conventional wisdom was that his popularity would fizzle, but instead, it has sizzled. He’s just a showman, they say. He’s been called an entertainer, and criticized as not being a politician. He’s not spent any time volunteering for political campaigns, walking neighborhoods, door-to-door, or spent much time at all in Washington, D.C. or pandering to the political class, or establishment politics.

    In fact, they say he is taking full advantage of the lack of leadership in the GOP, and having a little fun at his fellow Republicans’ expense. He’s been viewed as a growing problem for the Republican Party and a serious liability that continues to damage the GOP brand. He’s even been called “incendiary” and “ugly” by the chairman of the Republican National Committee.

    Many dyed-in-the-wool conservatives feel he has become a clown and a laughingstock to the general public. They say he’s not concerned about being correct, as much as he is about being loud, and that therefore, he’s just not credible.

    As one writer put it, “I think the problem is the Republican leaders…and the other candidates, don’t have the courage to say what they say in quiet, which (is) they think he is a buffoon…(t) hey think he is like a clown coming out of a small car at a circus.  It’s great he is entertaining and all that.  But nobody takes him seriously.”

    Many cringe when he says what he says about the issues, and conservative supporters become almost apologetic to their “more enlightened” family and friends, to excuse his comments. They almost always follow-up nervously, and dramatically, with the reminder that, “He just cares so much about this country, and wants to see it great again.”

    But for others, his success – and his millions of dollars – simply has not translated into any kind of respect, deference, or validation for his positions on the issues facing our country.

    And while many of you may think you know exactly who we’re talking about here, the rest of you think we’re talking about Donald Trump – but we’re not.

    In fact, every comment, which has been recited above, has been said, or written about, Rush Limbaugh. Yes, Rush Limbaugh. And yet it is also being said, almost verbatim, about Trump, as well.

    Even with such criticism of Rush, and after almost 25 years of folks demonizing him, 20 million Americans still tune in every day to listen to Rush, and his message.

    Many say it’s because he lifts the spirit of the average conservative American, who feels that our country’s best days are slipping behind us, and that the American dream no longer exists. Like Trump, and with pep-talk enthusiasm, many say that Rush makes his listeners believe that America is still an exceptional nation, that it’s best days are still ahead, and that Americans are capable of doing the extraordinary, when it comes to their own personal achievement.

    And like Trump, Rush may not be an expert on foreign diplomacy, agricultural subsidies, or military strategy, but his activism produces public action because his message inspires. His listeners also pay attention to what’s going on – even as voter turnout numbers continue to plummet across the country.

    His message is not unlike the one from Ted Cruz, who explained how his father fled from Cuba and arrived in the United States penniless with $100 sewn into his underwear, and that he was grateful to God that some well-meaning liberal didn’t come put his arm around his father and say, “Let me take care of you.”

    Rush’s message is along the same lines of the famous Zig Ziglar who once said, “Building a better you is the first step to building a better America.”

    You see, the message of Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, Zig Ziglar, or Rush Limbaugh is much larger than these men, their fame, or fortune: it’s about we, the people, and realizing our greatest and best potential comes from within us, granted by God – not from what some government bureaucrat decides is best for us. This message is why Rush Limbaugh now has 20 million listeners a day, and why Trump continues to lead in the polls.

    Yes, maybe the message can be said better, or more nicely. After all, the Bible says, “Speak the truth, but do it in love.” But the popularity of Trump’s message is not primarily because of Trump. It never has been, and it never will be.

    Like Rush’s nearly 30 years on the radio, Trump’s message will continue to resonate this year with millions of Americans – not because of his showmanship or his knowing the art of the deal, but because it’s a message that we already know to be true: We can do more for ourselves than we think is possible, and that there is greatness within all of us.

    While many may get distracted by the pundits who offer their critical commentary about Trump’s presidential campaign, his credibility, consistency, integrity, his qualifications, intellect, or even as they ridicule his supporters, and what damage this is all doing to the Republican Party, just remember this has all been done before – including to a man named Ronald Reagan.

    Trump may not be the best politician, or the best choice for a nominee, but as conservatives, we just want it to be morning again in America. And we want a leader, whatever his name, to want it as badly as we do.

  • Recently…

    Recently…

    Would you rather “feel” better, or “do” better? Your answer will tell a great deal about you, and may even help predict who will be elected our next President in November.

    You see, our brain circuitry is such that emotion overrides reason, and much more easily than the other way around. And while many voters think they are casting their vote based on their logical analysis of the issues, many really aren’t – at least not today, in our non-stop streaming, round-the-clock, always on, television, radio, and Internet news cycles.

    Because of the amount of available information to us on the issues, and the speed at which it is dispatched to us, there simply isn’t enough time in the day to analyze every new development or alert. Suddenly, then, our country is moving away from a cautioned, logical analysis of the issues, to a quicker, knee-jerk, emotion-based decision making process, instead.

    And if you said you would rather “feel” better, than “do” better, perhaps that is an indication that you’ve thrown in the towel, so to speak. Maybe now you’ve decided you won’t try keeping up with the constant barrage of breaking news and will move towards rely more on how a candidate, or an issue, “feels” to you, instead.

    It’s just a basic human principle, really. We like things that make us feel good. We avoid stuff that feels bad. Here are some examples of how emotion-based decisions are dominating our nation’s most pressing issues:

    You want to improve national security, but don’t want to engage in profiling all Muslims, or to turn away refugees coming into our country from Syria.

    You support the Bill of Rights, including the 2nd Amendment, but you feel that increased gun control legislation must be passed in order to “do something” about the rising gun violence in our communities.

    You believe that universal healthcare, controlled by the government, actually reduces access and increases medical costs for millions of Americans, but you don’t want to deny medical care to anyone, or for anyone not to be able to get the medicines they need to feel better.

    You know that the unemployment rate always increases whenever the minimum wage is increased, especially among the poorest Americans, but you feel like everyone is entitled to a living wage, and the dignity of supporting your family.

    You believe in the freedom of religion, but you don’t feel it’s right for any business owner to refuse service to a customer because of their sexual orientation.

    You know the poverty rate has remained unchanged over the past 50 years in our country, even after spending $22 trillion, but you don’t feel right about any legislation aimed to cut entitlement spending because the poorest among us deserve a “hand up.”

    We could go on and on here. All of these examples represent impossible choices for many voters, and the difference is between doing what we know is better, or doing what makes us “feel” better.

    It makes us “feel” better not to profile and to welcome refugees who are suffering, but according to the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), we could “do” better if we did profile. In fact, a former DHS employee testified that the San Bernardino terrorist attack could have been prevented if the Obama administration had not shut down his surveillance investigation on the grounds that he was profiling Islamic groups.

    You may “feel” better to support new gun control legislation because “something” must be done, but study after study has shown that nations with the strongest gun control laws have substantially higher murder rates than those that do not. Chicago has the toughest gun control laws in the country, for example, and they have the highest violent crime rates, as well.

    You may “feel” better to support universal healthcare coverage, but since Obamacare was enacted, there are 31 million Americans who still can’t afford medical care (and won’t for the foreseeable future).

    You might “feel” better advocating for a “living wage,” but the recent increased minimum wage law in Seattle resulted in the loss of 1,000 restaurant jobs within a month following that wage increase.

    Again, we could go on and on here, comparing how we may “feel” with the actual facts. The question is, “How much damage to our country, or lost opportunities to “do” better, is this shift to “feeling” better costing us?”

    How many more laws will the “feel” better crowd propose, that overrule our personal freedoms, from the freedom to worship to our right to bear arms? How much more of our national security will be compromised, because of political posturing? How long will we continue to remain silent, as hard work continues to be replaced with greater and greater entitlements by those who want to “feel” better? How much longer will we allow the government to run our lives based on what they “feel” is best for us, instead of us running them?

    No, good decisions don’t always “feel” good – not at first, at least – but that sure doesn’t stop them from being the best ones, either. Happy New Year to you all, and may God bless America.

  • National Identity

    When the folks in Washington begin talking about increasing the number of Syrian refugees in our country by over 250% from last year, or raising that number next year to as many as 100,000, many Americans wonder how we will be able to afford spending as much as $1.6 billion on these refugees annually, when we have not yet addressed the record number of American families already living below the poverty level in own country, and the historic unemployment levels that continue to weaken our communities.

    Yes, I know. I shouldn’t be concerned with that because of what it says in the Bible: “For I was hungry and you never gave me food, I was a stranger and you never made me welcome…” However, it also says, “Anyone who does not look after his own relations, especially if they are living with him, has rejected the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” In other words, are we taking good care of our neighbors who already call this country their home?

    And before you start saddling up to ride that high horse you are about to ride off into the sunset on, please remember that the U.S. contributed nearly $500 million for humanitarian aid to the Syrian refugees, just this past September alone, and that is on top of the $1 billion contributed last year – more than any other country in the world.

    Even five of the wealthiest Muslim countries have taken NO Syrian refugees in at all, saying that doing so would open them up to an increasing risk of terrorism in THEIR country. Isn’t that what our own FBI and Department of Homeland Security is warning us, as well?

    But in light of the recent terrorism in France, the most stark danger for most Americans is that the profile of the great majority of Syrian refugees to this country do not (will not) meet the profile of the typical refugee family, as was revealed during testimony before a Congressional hearing last month. Instead of family members, more of these refugees are “young, single, males”. 

    And to add to that: The FBI director and the Homeland Security Secretary have admitted that there is not a system in place right now to properly screen and conduct background checks on these refugees, and soon we will have a whole new set of problems to deal with in our country, as a result.

    There have always been refugees, and the U.S. has always given them sanctuary. Times are different today, and at the root of this Syrian refugee matter is the erosion of national identities around the world, especially in Europe, where assimilation has been difficult.

    In fact, as early as 2011, French President Nicolas Sarkozy admitted, “We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him.” British Prime Minister James Cameron said essentially the same, “(W)e have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and apart from the mainstream. We’ve even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run completely counter to our values.”

    And while America’s shores once assimilated different cultures and religions into “one nation under God,” today the “great melting pot” in the U.S. often means only more political correctness. Before long, our own nation’s identity will begin to erode precipitously, as well, just as those European countries are experiencing now for themselves.

    And similar to the errors of those European countries, such as France and Great Britain, Obama continues to express indifference, regarding our open border with Mexico, which continues to be plagued by cartel violence, drugs, and other forms of illegal smuggling, illegal immigration, and now, he wants to increase the number of refugees in this country by 250%.

    Even dyed-in-the-wool liberals must see the parallels here with the European nations and the consequences of unchecked, unassimilated immigrants to one’s nation. The proverbial handwriting is on the wall.

    You see, a nation is a group of people who share a destiny, and with that destiny, an identity. The truth is that this national identity needs pride, and a sense of affection that is expressed to the exclusion of any other allegiance. This is the foundation of nation building. As it erodes, so will the nation. This is why it is abhorrent that Obama is not interested in American pride, or in “America winning,” as he recently said.

    Mr. President, we believe that America is exceptional, but not because of what it does or what you have to say about our country.

    It’s exceptional because of what it believes. And that is why, in the words of Ronald Reagan, “We are indeed, and we are today, the last best hope of man on earth”.

  • The Shepherd Tends His Flock

    The Shepherd Tends His Flock

    Pope Francis is only the fourth Pope to visit the United States. As he visits Washington, D.C., New York City, and Philadelphia, the crowds who come to see him stretch for as long as the eye can see. Many say that millions will crowd out one another to merely catch a glimpse of the Pope because our country, as well as across the world, are starving for spirituality. In fact, Mother Theresa once said that the poverty in the West is a different kind of poverty – one of spirituality, adding that “there’s a hunger for love, as there is a hunger for God.”[br]

    After all, Jesus had said the same, saying, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty….” And it is perhaps this point that explains why so many millions, even those who are not of the Catholic faith, will get up at 4:00 a.m. in the morning, or travel thousands of miles, if only to be in the presence of the Pope.[br]

    And as Catholics, we believe that whenever the Pope teaches a doctrine on faith or morals, and asserts his official authority as leader of the Church, he is to be held infallible, or otherwise incapable of error. But when the Pope makes statements about what many feel are political matters, and not of faith or morality, many say that the Pope is still infallible, and should not be questioned, especially by Catholics.[br]

    Recently, the Pope advocated for the U.S. to open its borders to refugees from around the world, saying, “When the stranger in our midst appeals to us, we must not repeat the sins and the errors of the past.” Is this a truth? Or is that his opinion?[br]

    Surely he knows that 80% of our population growth is already from immigrants that are in our country, and we spend $113 billion on the effects from illegal immigration, and that we’ve even set-up sanctuary cities for illegal immigrants by immunizing them from the laws of our very own country.[br]

    And surely he knows that our country is nearly $20 trillion in debt, and that unchecked illegal immigration has continued to overcrowd our schools and made learning more difficult for our children, since we know that smaller schools tend to have higher attendance and graduation rates, less violence, higher grades, and test scores.[br]

    I’m sure he knows that continuing to allow illegal immigration to grow chaotically, without a plan, means that our nation’s ability to care for the sick, regardless of their citizenship, will continue to decline, as hundreds of hospitals are now closing or reducing treatment services because the uninsured number of illegal immigrants continues to grow. The average wait time in a California emergency room, for example, is now 4 hours (and growing).[br]

    When he blames the Syrian refugee crisis on the “the god of money” or on a “bad, unjust” socio-economic system, but doesn’t comment on the Islamic State that has now taken over half of Syria, a third of Iraq and is expanding out into Gaza, Libya and Afghanistan – is this a truth, or is that his opinion?[br]

    He has criticized global leaders for their failure to combat climate change. But is it his opinion that the earth is warming, or it is a truth? Surely he knows that in 2014 there was record ice in Antarctica, record snowfall, record cold, and that the oceans are rising much less than predicted (95% less). Surely he know that nature produces much more CO2 than man, and that 99% of scientists don’t believe in man-made global warming.[br]

    Despite this all, how can we question the Pope if he is infallible? This illustrates the common confusion between infallibility and imperfection. After all, there are many Popes that even disagree with one another. Infallibility does not make a Pope’s private, theological opinions become “truth”. He learns the “truth” as we all do – through careful study. His infallibility, according to the Catholic Church, applies to “solemn, official teachings on faith and morals.”[br]

    Whether you believe or not that the Pope is infallible on matters such as immigration or global warming, we simply cannot have it all. Life is a series of trade-offs. You can’t have all of the joys of having children, and then have lots of time for yourself, or your career. You can’t eat poorly, and then have good health. You can’t speak up and remain silent.[br]

    So when the Pope offers his comments, surely he also expects us to consider there are trade-offs to achieve the great works we are called by God to accomplish, such as extending mercy to those who are suffering and coming to our country, while making sure we have a sustainable system in place to transition them from pain to prosperity.[br]

    After all, we are not called to merely accept our circumstances, but to change the things we can change. As Pastor Joel Osteen wrote, “You were not created to just get by with an average, unrewarding, or unfulfilling life. God created you to leave your mark on this generation.”[br]

    And we can do that. The path we take to do so may be different than Pope Francis imagines today in his speeches, but I’m sure he won’t mind how we do it – not because it may reveal his infallibility – but because it reveals the teachings of Christ truly are.

  • Knowing Better

    Knowing Better

    Being informed today about current events is both easier, and more difficult, than perhaps at any time in our nation’s history. While our access to information from various sources is growing more expansive, we have increasingly less time available to give thoughtful consideration to any of it – not to mention discern fact from fiction.

    Many of us are working longer hours to make ends meet and reading the news is less of a priority when children have their homework to finish, baths to take, and the checkbook still has to be balanced.

    So last Sunday, when I read Prentiss Smith’s column on this editorial page, where he attempted to simplify the thought process for black voters this fall by reminding them that voting for Republicans is analogous to voting for racists, I got angry.

    I got angry because it’s a lie, and because history is filled with examples of lies that have oppressed the human spirit, in an attempt to seize those rights that were granted unto us only by God – and not by government. But as Hitler’s propaganda minister understood, “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.” And this is the case when it comes to Democrats.

    Prentiss knows better that Republicans enacted the civil rights laws in the 1950’s and 1960’s, over the objection of Democrats. He knows that even though Democrats are considered more caring and sympathetic to the plight of the poor, it has been the Democrat-led welfare programs over the past 50 years, which have virtually destroyed the black family, and the black community.

    He’s aware that before these welfare programs began in 1965, only 22% of black children were born into single parent families, but that after these Democrat-led programs began, the illegitimacy rate in the black community tripled to almost 70%. He knows too this sent millions of black families into poverty, since the poverty rate for single-mother families is nearly five times more than the rate for married-couple families, not to mention that boys born to these single-mothers (especially who didn’t finish high school) are twice as likely to end up in prison, as well.

    He knows the statistics back then show that the unemployment rate among young black men was not only lower than it is today, before these welfare programs were enacted, but that it was nearly the same as the unemployment rate for whites.

    And he knows that today the race hustlers in the Democrat Party are still manipulating the black community, even as the unemployment rate for blacks continues to balloon under this administration – an unemployment rate that is twice as high as whites, and almost as much as the unemployment rate of Asians and Hispanics combined.

    And he knows that Washington is marginalizing the black community more each day by allowing more illegal immigrants to flood the market, reducing wages and employment opportunities in the black community (not to mention taking their votes for granted) because there are simply not enough low-skilled jobs to go around for both blacks and illegal immigrants.

    Despite these facts, the lie persists that Republicans are racist and therefore (according to Prentiss) need to find a way to broaden their appeal to blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc.

    I disagree. This pandering has gone on for too long now, and our nation has to only political correctness and trillions of dollars of debt to show for it. It has divided us as a country, and is one of the reasons that Americans are frustrated with our political party system in the first place, and are registering to vote as “no party” instead. Republicans sounding like Democrats will have the same destructive effect on the black community that Democrats have had all these years.

    So, no, the Republican Party does not need to talk to minorities as minorities – we ought to be talking to one another as Americans, demanding results, instead of more rhetoric, and planning for the long-run, instead of merely how to win elections.

  • Are You Fiddling Me?

    Are You Fiddling Me?

    In 1964, Lyndon Johnson was the first U.S. President to provide the commencement address to the cadets of the United States Coast Guard Academy. He rallied the cadets and explained, in the words of Winston Churchill, that “civilization will not last, freedom will not survive, peace will not be kept, unless mankind unites together to defend them.” And President Johnson’s administration understood those words all too well, being as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof – confronting one foreign crisis after another.

    From assisting the South Vietnamese to defeat Communist aggression, to signing a treaty with the Soviet Union to ban nuclear weapons in outer space, to signing a treaty to prohibit the transfer of nuclear weapons to other nations, and to backing down the Cubans in Guantanamo Bay, these were serious times for our nation. And the world knew it.

    Today, we too face serious times.

    Right now, we have terrorists taking control of cities in Iraq and controlling 50% of Syria. Iran is moving ever closer to nuclear capability, and North Korea is building a nuclear arsenal, while testing long-range missiles that could strike the U.S. mainland. Russia has flexed its military muscle, and invaded the Republic of Georgia and Ukraine. China is modernizing its weapons with fighter jets, developing prototypes for hypersonic missiles, and building ballistic missile submarines. Our own nation’s borders are so porous that even the U.S. Border Patrol admits that they don’t know who is coming across the border, or whether they wish us well or ill.

    Even so, and faced with these threats to peace and freedom around the world, do you know what President Obama identified as the “core” of their military service, when he addressed the cadets earlier this month? Climate change.

    Yep. Climate change.

    The world is on fire and President Obama is calling upon these cadets to “to start reducing” its carbon emissions now, although he never explained exactly how they could make a difference. On the other hand, China (which is the largest holder of U.S. debt) is now building one or two new coal-fired power stations per week, until at least 2030. It was in 2007 that China overtook the U.S. as the world’s largest carbon emitter and now produces twice as much as the U.S., and 50% of all coal combusted globally.

    He also told cadets that climate change is a key pillar of American global leadership. Really? Soon, China alone will be responsible for 40% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions, and that’s even based on the agreement we just made with them to reduce carbon emissions.

    He also explained to the cadets that when he meets with leaders around the world, “it (climate change) is often at the top of our agenda – a core element of our diplomacy.” Really? How about the murdering of Christians in Muslim war zones, or the trafficking of children by the millions in China, the manipulation of gas prices by Russia, or the ever increasing national debt of the United States, which should we default, would threaten currencies worldwide? Does any of this ever come up, in passing or over coffee?

    Speeches like President Obama’s to the cadets makes some Americans wonder where if we have our priorities in order, and despite the imperfection of the past, it makes us wish for a time when America better knew what was most important, and, more critically, understood the order in which it must all be done.

    Obama could have reminded the cadets, and their families, of the legacy of the Coast Guard, and how they have served our nation honorably. In World War II, they were among the first casualties of war on the day after Pearl Harbor. He could have inspired them by explaining how Coast Guardsmen were piloting the landing craft on D-day, when our soldiers hit the beaches at Normandy. Or how the Coast Guard rescued over 1,500 soldiers that day when their boats had been sunk by enemy fire.

    He could have inspired them with any number of stories of selflessness and love of country. But he didn’t.

    And so I am reminded of the expression, “Nero fiddled while Rome burned”. It comes to mind because of the obliviousness of the President’s remarks to the most pressing threats facing our country, and because not only did Nero “fiddle” while his people suffered, he was a poor leader in a time of crisis, as well.

    Although it’s only an expression (especially since the fiddle did not exist in ancient Rome), the danger of ignoring what’s most important is still as destructive as it was in 11 A.D. when Rome burned. The question for us all, especially to those whom we elect to public office, is simply this: What are you fiddling with, while our “Rome” is burning?

    Image credit: Jon McNaughton

  • Stupid is as Stupid Does

    Stupid is as Stupid Does

    By Louis R. Avallone

    –

    Sometimes we get so caught up in using labels that we miss the forest for the trees. Of course, labels help us organize our world, which is increasingly loud, confusing, and misleading. Folks often bite their tongue, or hold their comments back, afraid that they will be called a racist, or an elitist, a liberal, or a conservative, a sexist, or an anti-environmentalist – for simply what they believe.

    But no matter the label, I think it all boils down to the plain wisdom of Forest Gump’s momma when she said, “Stupid is as stupid does”.

    And the world is certainly full of lots of examples of stupid. It’s hard to comment on any of it, or engage someone in a meaningful discussion about it, without offending them – or some group – or risk being branded as a heartless so-and-so, or an insensitive you-know-what. Thus, lots of folks just keep their opinions to themselves.

    And a recent Pew Research poll indicated this as well: Most people who regularly use social media sites are less likely to share their opinions, even offline, unless they know their audience agrees. Our fear of isolation from others, it seems, keeps too many of us from sharing our opinions, and this encourages a sense of apathy, or a “to each his own” mentality.

    The problem with that, in the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., is that “(o)ur lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”

    For example, does it matter that welfare spending has increased 16-fold since the federal government began the “War on Poverty” in the 1960s, and that welfare spending has risen 32% since Obama took office? Yet the number of people on food stamps in the U.S. today exceeds the total population of Argentina (43,024,374)?

    Doesn’t it matter that Obama said earlier this month that he was “proud of saving the economy,” during the same week that 25,000 Americans filed for unemployment, and that the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported 93 million Americans being unemployed now, or not even looking for work?

    Does it bother you that our federal government is borrowing 14¢ out of every dollar it spends now, just to keep the “lights on”, and yet Obama’s Executive Order on immigration enables those here illegally to get a check from the federal government through the Earned Income Tax Credit, even retroactively, going back 3 years? And did you know that last year the IRS sent $4.2 billion in checks to illegal immigrants in our country?

    This is exactly the kind of “stupid is that stupid does” thinking that will do us in. It’s contagious and it’s reaching epidemic levels – especially with the nonsense thinking in our society that places more value on how something looks or feels, rather than what it is actually.

    Does it bother you that our president is more concerned with “showing” the world that Americans are united together to fight ISIS terrorists, instead of him simply freeing up our military commanders to go break things and kill the bad guys (instead of just “showing” the bad guys how united we are in spirit)?

    And does it bother you that NBC anchor Brian Williams wanted to look more heroic when said his helicopter was hit by a rocket-propelled grenade as he was covering the Iraq war in 2003 (when it really didn’t), or when Hilary Clinton said that she landed in Bosnia in 1996 under sniper fire (when there wasn’t any)? Or when Connecticut Senator Richard Blumenthal wanted to appear as a war hero and said he served in Vietnam (when he hadn’t).

    If any of these examples bother you, speak out, be heard. There’s more people who think like you do than you might realize. And like fleas, roaches, rats, rust, and termites, if you say nothing, or ignore the problem, it will only become worse.

    Our society too often confuses doing something with actually accomplishing something. We give more praise and attention to those who care more, than those who actually help more.

    And it’s got to stop.

    So don’t be silent about things that matter, and call it like it is, no matter what side of the aisle you are on. And if anyone happens to get offended by you defending what you believe, especially the intellectuals who “know better” than the rest of us, just tell them to go see Forest’s momma. It’s not any more complicated than that.

    Image credit to grabgewalt.deviantart.com