Editor’s note: Commentaries on the ease with which illegal immigrants evade their day in court and the role of guns in defending life and property drew some strong reaction, which leads this week’s roundup of your views. Be sure to write us at [email protected]—Ken McIntyre
Dear Daily Signal: It’s well past time to end the mockery of illegal immigration, is my reaction to Mark Metcalf’s commentary (“The Immigration Scandal No One Is Talking About”). Illegal immigrants caught entering our country need to be put immediately on a bus and returned to their own countries.
For those illegals seeking asylum, put them in a holding area with bars and guards until their cases can be heard by an immigration judge. No more releasing them into the country to appear at some future date for which they don’t show up. When asylum is denied, put them on a bus immediately and return them to their own countries.
Once strict enforcement is the norm, illegal immigrants will stop trying to come here because they will find that America’s door is no longer open.—Marion E. Daniels-Price
Why is there no mention of outstanding warrants? If one of us were to do this, there would be a bench warrant, or some such, sitting there waiting for us.
Any infraction, even if it was a ticket for a headlight being out, would trigger the warrant. Guess they just crumple and pitch those into File 13.—Karin Callaway, Florida
So where does that leave us? The MAGA president must be supported by a MAGA attorney general.
It doesn’t matter what happened to Jeff Sessions; it doesn’t matter how sleazy Rod Rosenstein’s abduction of the Justice Department was.
What matters is this fiasco is never going to deliver justice for the American people. Never. Mr. President, your move.—James Bryson
And no one in Congress had a clue, right? And never asked questions. All part of the under-the-table money flow to politicians. They are the true problem.—Bruce Atkinson
— Gary (@gds44) July 16, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Regarding Amy Swearer’s commentary, I own guns because it is the normal thing to do (“A Month of Data Provides Ample Evidence for Why Law-Abiding Citizens Own Firearms”). We as a country and individuals “do” the freedoms set forth in the Bill of Rights. We speak our minds. We keep and bear arms. We aren’t bound to slavery.
These rights, and all the rest of them, were specifically named so that a simple majority cannot take them away just because they don’t like it.
The Constitution also says these rights are endowed by God. I had to get fingerprinted twice and have background tests and prove my ability with a gun. Now, shouldn’t the same be required to vote, to speak out, to be free from slavery?—William Geyer
In World War II, the only reason that the Japanese and German armies did not attack the mainland United States was the Second Amendment. They feared that there would be a gun behind every blade of grass, with someone who knew how to use it. And they were right.—Jim Scofield
I am happy to see a report of compiled data such as this. One reason for the uncertainty of the actual number of incidents is that many states or cities do not count a crime thwarted by a firearm unless the gun is actually fired, and many crimes are prevented as soon as the criminal sees a gun in his way.
However, we do not need to supply a reason for gun ownership. It does not matter if others deride or dismiss our reasons. Gun ownership is a right provided by God and recognized officially in the country’s founding documents.
It would make as much sense to be asked to show a good reason to have freedom of speech or religion, or a good reason to have a fair trial or to not be a slave.—Mark Anglin
Wow: “In conjunction with the National Research Council,” Amy Swearer writes, “the CDC concluded that almost all national, comprehensive studies on the subject find that firearms are used for lawful defensive purposes between 500,000 and 3.5 million times every year in the United States.”—Robert L. Roach, The Woodlands, Texas
— Ken McIntyre (@KenMac55) July 23, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Absolutely make the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent, as Adam Michel and Parker Sheppard, and Kevin Dayaratna write in their commentary (“New Report Shows Every Congressional District Benefits From Tax Reform”). That is the only way that we will be partially assured that the tax cuts will not be repealed.
Look how hard it has been to convince Congress that it needs to get out of our pockets and lives. Give control of the states back to the states. The federal government is supposed to keep the country safe from all outside sources, and at this point, the entire left and some on the right haven’t gotten the memo.
Maybe we should get on board the Convention of States. That would really scare the heck out of our “representatives,” so they will read and absorb the Constitution. We also need to follow the various bills introduced because they can wipe us out in tiny increments.—Karin Callaway, Florida
The significant thing to note here is what this means to me and my family. In my home state of Texas, it says that we save $1,181 per year, on average. So in a standard pay year, that is the equivalent of me getting a 56 cent-an-hour raise. I’ll take it!—Ed Kubitskey
Tax cuts are always good. We as a nation were intended to have a very small federal government and no income tax. The U.S. saw explosive growth prior to the income tax being permanently legalized in 1913. Our monster of a federal government has grown over 1,000 percent just since the JFK years.—Anthony Alafero
— Israel News Links (@IsraelNewsLinks) July 25, 2018
Moving the 9th Circuit to the Right
Dear Daily Signal: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the subject of Fred Lucas’ news story, is not a court but a junta (“Trump Hits Roadblock in Remaking the Nation’s Most Liberal Court”). No one is conservative.
Someone mentioned that these federal appeals courts have an effect on everyone in the nation, not just their jurisdiction. Well, the same goes for Congress.
No matter what state they are from, any and every thing members of Congress pass by vote has an effect on every state, county/parish, city, town, farm, business, and American. (That is, unless you are a member of Congress; then you are exempt from following the rules and laws.)—Karin Callaway, Florida
Couldn’t Trump split the 9th Circuit and create a new Western Circuit? What’s involved?—Joel Wood
Can’t the Supreme Court do something to force the 9th Circuit to rule according to the Constitution? I guess the 9th believes that if it throws enough up against the wall, some of it will stick. —Cheryl Detar
I believe that confirmation of a presidential nominee to a federal court position should not be left to one or two senators, but to a simple majority vote by all senators.—Drew Page
First, any judge in this nation that has a higher rate than 50 percent of decisions overturned should be removed from the court for incompetence.
Why should the people be on the hook for the same issue coming to trial again and again and again, because the judges can’t get it right?—Allie Davis
— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) July 24, 2018
Mona Charen and What Women Want
Dear Daily Signal: This is in response to your interview with commentator Mona Charen on the podcast (“The Reasons Women Aren’t Happy Today”). The mantra from the radical left, which controls much of this nation, dictates that we are all the same, that the only reason why there are fewer women or minorities in certain fields is discrimination.
It is a ludicrous assertion. Men are superior to women in anything requiring power or speed. We are stronger and faster as a gender.
Males have consistently outperformed women in mathematics. That does not mean that there aren’t brilliant females in math, just fewer.
Asians are overrepresented in science and blacks dominate the NBA. So what? We as humans have strengths and weaknesses.
So do groups. The high school jocks are not normally the ones going on to found a dot-com company. So what?—Anthony Alafero
Since the ’70s? That’s when the National Organization for Women crowd and the women’s liberation movement began. I guess being politically correct just doesn’t work, since it drives a wedge between men and women.—Jeffy Pearson
I would say men and women complement each other. I am a complete person in Christ, but my man makes up for some of my shortcomings, and I his.—Sue Wright
— Veal Orloff (@PaulFeldman3350) July 23, 2018
Apologizing for Opinions
Dear Daily Signal: The extremists on both sides are tearing the country so far apart that it may never come together again, as Jeremiah Poff’s report suggests (“Actor Apologizes for Telling Liberals to Follow Ben Shapiro”).
What good will the fame/money/agenda these extremists seek do them when the country conceived in liberty, dedicated to the equality of all men, for whom so many have given the last full measure of devotion lies dead at their feet?
When government of the people, by the people, for the people has indeed perished from the earth? Will they be proud they “won”?
President Abraham Lincoln would be weeping that the country he fought so hard to hold together is again so viciously divided.—Randy Reeves
I give actor Mark Duplass credit for trying, but unfortunately his suggestion was doomed. With the left, it’s goose-step in unison at all times or face the consequences.—Matt Moran
Mark Duplass said the right thing. He should have stuck to his guns, insisted that polite discussion is essential for a viable society, and refused to apologize. Quit feeding the animals.—Robert L. Roach
Just remember you cannot please everyone. So just stay true to yourself. Sorry, we live in a world where the choir preaches tolerance and kindness but no longer practices it. Haters gotta hate.—Stella Longacre
Why does anyone feel that they have to apologize for their opinions? It’s your opinion, and no one should have to apologize. This ticks me off.—Vickie Insley Owen
This and That
Dear Daily Signal: While I agree with Patrick Tyrrell’s perception in his commentary of increased costs for construction of new homes, we do have to rein in our deficit with all nations by expecting balanced exchange for our goods versus theirs (“Pointless Lumber Tariffs Are Hurting Americans“).
If past elected officials had been responsible individuals, this issue would not be relevant. But they were neither responsible or concerned about the impact of government-subsidized lumber or any other products coming to America from nations that were dumping cheap goods on our free market and forcing companies to shut down.
Canada is our largest provider of subsidized lumber, so now they have to negotiate a more equitable solution. When other nations find out we expect balance in trade agreements, then I believe we’ll see pricing level out. This effort to get a level playing field won’t be without financial pain, but hopefully it will be temporary.
Any future exchanges between our nation and others will have to be monitored by Congress to assure compliance. We as citizens are primarily responsible for this quagmire because we never became concerned when business was leaving and our neighbors were unemployed because of unions making unrealistic demands on corporations’ bottom line, which continues to this day.
Also, like all things poorly executed by Congress, the taxpayers suffer the consequences of poor judgment and oversight by elitist that won’t feel or share in the consequences.—Brannen Edwards, Savannah, Ga.
Fred Lucas reports in his story on unions and Medicaid (“Trump Administration Takes on Unions Over ‘Skimming’ Medicaid Funds”): “Caregivers may pay up to $1,000 per year in union dues, according to the State Policy Network, which says state governments are ‘dues-skimming’ an estimated $200 million per year from home health providers and $50 million from child day care providers to give to unions.”
“The only time I hear from the union is when they inundate me with a political agenda,” Seattle resident Sally Coomer tells Lucas.
So $250 million in funding for leftists/socialists/Democrats, and their lobbyists and candidates. It should be against the law, Congress.—Millie Tyler
How Are We Doing?
Dear Daily Signal: Strong on current news, recent event analysis. Moderate on historical perspectives vis-a-vis current events.
Weak on national economics, especially failure to highlight specifics on massive government size, scope, overreach, and cost, and the impact on national debt and security.
Economics 101: Debt is a terrible master that can lead to the poor house, loss of freedom, and utter destruction. Much more emphasis should be placed on this fundamental reality. Specific details should be laid out over time citing laws, rules, regulations, and the resulting negative impact on our country. As it stands, we are on a hard and direct path to self-destruction.
We need to wake up and work overtime on this. Jefferson spoke to the disaster of our current path. It’s not complicated. We need immediate action.—David Harned
Fred Lucas’ reports are so biased it makes me wonder if he can stand straight.—Brenda Wilson
Keep up the good work.—Michael Keller, East Berlin, Pa.
I’m glad you try to tell us the truth. However, the government will always lie to the people and do only what is good for them.—Raymond Buchholz
Enjoy getting The Daily Signal in my email every day.—Peter Van Houten
Sarah Sleem and Jeremiah Poff helped to compile this column.