Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Fear, facts and transparency

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:00 am

According to the news, the government has opted to release some 1,000 illegal aliens into the general population. They claim it is necessary due to the "sequestration" issue.

This appears to be an obvious move in order to discredit those who have attempted to rein in the undisciplined spending spree of the Obama administration. From credible sources, we hear that the 2.5 percent required reduction could easily be obtained from other sectors — ones that do not entail the negative impact on the safety of the public.

How could anyone get a better "bang for the bucks" than having felons roaming our streets? This because their opponents would not aid them in their lack of fiscal responsibility.

What next — reduce air traffic controllers or Border Patrol agents? "Scare tactics" are being used to propagate ideology.

Anyone who has ever worked with budgets is aware there are some features common to all:

1. Allocation of monies.

2. Some built-in "wiggle room."

3. The need to spend the entire amount each year because the following year it will be considered in your new budget.

Isn't it time we separated "fear" from "facts" and receive the transparency we were promised?

Richard Viall

Woodbridge

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

3 comments:

  • Thomas Heuer posted at 5:38 pm on Thu, Mar 7, 2013.

    nth degree wise Posts: 1519

    How is anyone supposed to take you seriously when he article you offer from the American Spectator begins with "The LAWLESS Obama administration..."? How is anyone with a working brain expected to read on unless they are void of intellectual capacity and simply believe the president is less than the upstanding citizen he is. He has a wonderful family, never been arrested, attends church and is well liked by those who know him. Only the strictest of partisan motivated yahoos or simply dumb racists will find fault with the president.

     
  • stan taves posted at 12:06 pm on Wed, Mar 6, 2013.

    Stan Taves Posts: 313

    If there is one argument to be made against bigger govt; it is that govt allows for the inefficient deployment of capital. Inefficiency (waste, fraud, and abuse) reduces productivity thus making everyone poorer -- everyone except for the bureaucrats, that is. Conversely, the efficient deployment of capital that occurs in the private sector is what allows for productivity or growth. The important thing, that seems to be lost on big govt liberals, is that productivity makes everyone richer -- including govt. The problem is that govt inherently rejects the idea that it must function in service to the private sector; It is the nature of the beast, but the beast will kill itself before it ever destroys our God given will for self-determination.

     
  • John Kindseth posted at 10:09 am on Wed, Mar 6, 2013.

    John Kindseth Posts: 243

    This is one of many helpful articles:

    http://spectator.org/archives/2013/03/04/the-sequester-amnesty

     

Recent Comments

Posted 9 hours ago by Eric Barrow.

article: Letter: Vote for a better future for all

We really only have one race that will affect us on the federal level and that race will do little to change the make-up of the House. Ther…

More...

Posted 10 hours ago by Steve Schmidt.

article: Steve Hansen: Climate change is real, b…

Chuckle.... so you are saying that only 99.3% of the relevant experts disagree with you? Angie, I think you have succeeded in proving my p…

More...

Posted 11 hours ago by Joe Baxter.

article: Letter: Vote for a better future for all

Mr. Viall, are you saying that blatant disregard for American citizen rights and the Constitution are not the stellar qualifications of a c…

More...

Posted 11 hours ago by Joe Baxter.

article: Letter: Tim Katzakian responds to Jerry…

Those that CAN, do, those that CAN'T, complain. No CHANEY for City Council signs anywhere in Lodi.

More...

Posted 11 hours ago by Robert Molle.

article: LAPD deploys fewer patrol officers than…

Race card being pulled in 3...2...1....

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Featured Events

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists