Cary Nelson, president of the American Association of University Professors says that teachers are allowed to express their own beliefs and that he should not have lost his job over it. Or course, if things were flipped the other way and the professor said that homosexual acts were perfectly fine, then he probably would’ve gotten praised for it. No way would he have gotten fired for being so tolerant towards homosexuals. We should be allowed to share our beliefs and not be punished for it, especially if they are more conservative in nature. Why should the liberals try and control what we talk about?

Don’t we live in America? Aren’t we supposed to show our patriotic spirit throughout the entire year? They told the kids that they could wear those shirts on any other school day, but not on Cinco de Mayo. Last time I checked, we lived in the United States, not Mexico…

What started as just a state debate in Arizona has now become a huge national dispute over current immigration laws. I’m not sure why this became an issue to debate over in the first place. Doesn’t the term illegal immigrants mean that they are going against the country’s laws? Aren’t there supposed to be consequences for that?

Plus, I’m not sure that everyone really understands this immigration law in Arizona. Many assume that police can pull over and question anyone who looks like they might be an illegal immigrant. Not true. Police are only going to ask for proper documentation after they have made a “lawful stop, detention or arrest”. There is no problem with this if the police are sure to ask everyone they pull over or arrest to show them the required documents. Why not kill two birds with one stone if the opportunity is there?

The premise of this debate is interesting. When an immigrant comes to our country without the proper documentation, they are illegal. This means that they have broken a law. Is this to be tolerated, or even accepted just because a group of people feel that it is too hard to be a law abiding citizen?

Well, if this is the way that we are going to run our country we have to be prepared for the repercussions of the resulting anarchy. When it just becomes too hard for a group of people to not steal, should we then legalize stealing?

Granted, they can have a perfectly justifiable argument. Maybe their children are starving, their spouse is sick or the thief himself is starving. Is that a frustrating, detrimental, potentially life threatening problem? Yes, yes it is. But, the law does not see these problems in these terms.

Instead, the law simply sees that stealing is illegal.

Yes, immigrating to this country can be hard. The process is long and arduous, and many cannot afford to gain legal citizenship. Nonetheless, if you are not a legal citizen and you are residing in our country you are breaking the law. Have some respect for our country, for my country.

America is a great place to live, and one of the integral reasons that this country has been formed into a great country is because of our laws. Abide by our laws, and you are more than welcome to join us in America.

Once you have joined us in America, you are an American. Yes, your heritage is important and it does make you who you are, but you are an American. This means that your loyalty and your pride should be an American pride. The fact that American school systems believe it is okay to send American children home for wearing shirts with the American flag proudly displayed is absolutely despicable.

Yes, it was cinco de mayo. Yes, there were many students proudly displaying their mexican flags. Yes, those children that are attending American schools and using American tax dollars have the right to proudly flaunt their flags. But, so do the Americans.

Be proud to be an American. Be proud to support the American laws. Be proud to be part of a country that has become so prosperous and great that people from around the world continually try so hard to become a part of what we have.

90 year old Stevens’ liberal voting record will be continued by this 50 year old woman. Her eventual appointment will make her the fourth female Supreme Court Justice ever and the third female justice in office right now.

The deepest concern we have with Kagan is that SHE HAS NEVER BEEN A JUDGE. No really. Ever. And Obama wants her as a justice for the highest court in our government– the branch of the government that further defines our Constitution.

And Judge Judy has more experience than Ms. Kagan does.

We won’t overlook her years at Harvard, Oxford, and Princeton. Nor will we pass over her time as the first woman Dean of Harvard Law. It’s impressive. But there certainly is something to be said for experience.

We hear she knows the law. If that’s true, it’s much appreciated. However knowing the law and interpreting the law are two very different balls of wax.

And we’re not too sure about her perception as it encompasses of the whole picture.

She attempted to prohibit military recruiters from soliciting students’ service on Harvard’s campus because she’s unhappy with the military’s recruiting practices.

What does this mean about our newest Justice? We’re not sure, but we hope she recognizes the extreme responsibility of the weight she’s about to be given.

We should be extremely careful about our choices in the Supreme Court. It’s decisions can significantly altar the everyday lives of Americans and the future of the country– and even the world. United States Presidents serve four-year terms (and up to eight years if they’re good); justices have tenure for life.

Since this 50 year old’s life will probably last a while, we pray that she does this job for the American people, not as a favor for the Democratic party.

“At this point, there is no doubt that they’ve been able to peel off one or two of my twelve,” said Stupak.  According to Stupak, that group of twelve pro-life House Democrats — the “Stupak dozen” — has privately agreed for months to vote ‘no’ on the Senate’s health-care bill if federal funding for abortion is included in the final legislative language.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), unions, and others are “twisting the arms” of the 12 who have committed to stay strong in their ‘no’ vote. Stupak says the arguments they have made to him in recent deliberations, “are a pretty sad commentary on the state of the Democratic party.”

What are Democratic members saying? “If you pass the Stupak amendment, more children will be born, and therefore it will cost us millions more. That’s one of the arguments I’ve been hearing,” Stupak says. “Money is their hang-up. Is this how we now value life in America? If money is the issue — come on, we can find room in the budget. This is life we’re talking about.”

To read the full article visit: National Review Online

On healthcare reforms and Obama’s plan of action, I think even he is a little confused. Healthcare for an entire nation is complicated. Especially because we’re not starting from scratch.

One of the biggest problems is that people are expecting to be handed their healthcare. What about the rest of us that work for it? There needs to be balance.

Insurance company executives blame pharmaceutical manufacturers, hospitals, medical device companies and other medical service providers for driving their costs upward. We are a a nation with a capitalist economy; it happens. With the natural cycle of the economy, prices will come back down in time.

For a faster solution though, I say leave it to the states to decide on the best healthcare plan for their poor and uninsured.

Former presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, asserts that President Obama’s policies have extended and deepened the recession and that Obama’s healthcare plan ‘makes no sense at all.’

While Massachusetts governor, Romney put in place healthcare reform that has provided all state residents with healthcare insurance. That plan has some similarities with President Obama’s healthcare plan, “but some very big differences,” he says.

He points out that Massachusetts did not raise taxes to pay for the plan, while Obama’s plan would. Obama would cut Medicare, while Massachusetts did not. Obama has sought the power to put price controls in place, but Massachusetts did not.

“Ours is a state-based plan,” he says.

“We took responsibility for dealing with an issue and we solved it our own way. States should be allowed to approach their care for the poor in the way they think best, rather than have President Obama and Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid apply a one-size-fits-all plan for the entire country.

“The way President Obama has gone about it makes no sense at all.”

Pres. Obama’s comments frustrated many Republicans who were hoping the president would shift his focus to jobs and who are confused at the comment after Pres. Obama said Republicans brought good ideas to the recent health care summit.

“It’s just challenging to say Republicans have good ideas on health care reform … and then say Republicans don’t do anything on health care,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell spokesman Don Stewart said. “We’ve been dealing with health care non-stop for a year now and to say no one’s interested in it is a hell of a stretch.”

Conservatives are becoming more and more angered over Pres. Obama’s handling of health care reform. At the president’s own invitation, Republicans have brought their own reform plan to the table, stating they had plans to reform health care without adding more government. However,  the president has not, as of yet, shown signs of interest in the plan. In fact, he told Republicans “to do a little soul searching” about health care.