A dark Day for Minnesota Taxpayers

A dim day for Minnesotans…
This just came across my RSS:

“DFL senators propose highest-in-the-nation income tax bracket. The DFL-controlled Minnesota Senate is poised to approve a nearly $1 billion income tax increase that would tap about 60,000 filers to fund broad-based education spending and property tax relief.

Under the proposal, married couples would pay the 9.7 rate on adjusted gross income above $250,000. For singles, the new rate would kick in at $141,250, while for heads of households, it would start at $212,500.

The $992 million raised by the proposal would go to increases in funding for K-12 schools and early learning and for tuition relief and increased local aid to governments, which is used to hold down property taxes.”

The DFL in Minnesota is poised to punish the successful because they are “privileged”.

The question I want to ask is who will pay the taxes when the “privileged” all get up and leave Minnesota for any of the 49 other states that don’t punish them for their success in their jobs and life? When you punish the productive and successful people enough, they will eventually leave. They have 49 other states to choose from. 49 other states that won’t be the highest income tax bracket state in the nation.

It’s good to want to excel at things, but imposing the highest tax rate in the nation is not something the state of Minnesota should take pride in.

The logical one declares war on the illogical and bloated education system.

Sometimes I feel like I’m beating a dead horse here, but every time I turn around, I’m seeing the same mistakes surfacing again and again. Now, I realize that this is a taboo topic, but somebody needs to address it, so damnit, I will.

That’s right. We’re back on education again. It’s time to pull your heads out of the sand and take a long, hard look at what’s going on, and until you do, I will continue to pound you with the cold truth of the matter.

Of course, the overarching target of my contempt on this topic is the out of control education spending, which instead of getting better, just continues to get worse.

So what’s the big deal? Well, Monday saw the passing by the state senate of a $498 million increase to school spending, Then on Thursday, another bill went to the senate to increase school spending by another $1.1 billion over the next four years. This new bill also includes a roughly $900 million income tax increase over the next two years.

So what does Tarryl Clark (DFL), the senate assistant majority leader say about this tax increase?

“There is no such thing as a free lunch. To make these kinds of strategic investments, we need money.”

No shit. But what none of these people are considering is if this is a legitimate investment or not.

Now I’m not saying that schools don’t need funding… But I am saying that maybe, just maybe, there is some serious overspending going on. I mean, everybody is always so critical of government waste and overspending… But who’s holding the schools accountable for their money? Who’s going in and looking at the schools, and auditing their spending and cutting their waste? Nobody! And why not? Because it’s school, and it’s bad karma to mess with school. I mean, it’s the kids! Our future! How can you take anything away from the kids?

In short, I say that we take away the gluttonous bureaucracy that controls the system. Somebody is screwing something up here, and throwing more money into it will not help it, although the opportunity for more harm to be done is massive. Don’t believe me? I have the numbers right here.

In 2004-2005, the state spent 42.1% of the general fund budget on E-12 education. That’s $11.76 billion dollars out of $27.96 billion spent. That is the top state expenditure. In comparison, criminal justice received 5.2%, or $1.44 billion out of the total. 2006-2007 e-12 education will see $13.39 billion out of the general fund. Criminal justice will get $1.71 billion.

So what I would like to know is this… Where is all of this money going? By the number, between 1997 and 2007, Minnesota k-12 school enrollment rose only .27%, from 838,336 to 840,565 students. In the past 5 years, enrollment dropped .75%, from 846,891 to 840,565 students. But when we look at the money involved, the 2002-2003 budget gave k-12 $8.759 billion and the 1997-1998 budget was $5.733 billion. So if we put this all together, we get:

• Over the past 5 years, school enrollment dropped .75%, but the budget increased by 34.59%
• Over the past 10 years, school enrollment rose .27%, but the budget increased by 57.18%

And if you’re thinking that this number just reflects inflation, you’re wrong. 1997-2007 inflation rate was 27.23%. 2002-2007 was 14.29%.

So where is all of this money going? This is not the price of educating our children. This is something else entirely. This is the price of a bloated system that is not held accountable for its money expenditures. Why is it that when gas prices move, everybody jumps up and starts investigating price gouging and going after the oil companies, but when education spending grows, everybody nods in approval and accepts it as “the price of education”?

This is just silly, folks. And what’s worse is that with all of this data at hand, the state legislators, backed heavily by the education unions and lobying groups, is working to increase education spending even more at the continued expense of the taxpayers via increased income taxes.

I know it’s been said before, most notably by Ronald Reagan, but something that needs to be said now, more than ever, is that the problem right now isn’t a matter of taxes that are too low, the problem is that government spending is too high. With 42.1% of state spending being tossed down the hole of k-12 education, I think it’s time to put education under the microscope and under the gun to try to reign in their uncontrolled spending.

Bitching, whining liberals want their day… But you can’t have yours.

I have been stewing for the past couple of days, trying to find the best way to approach a topic that was covered by the local news media the other day. There were 3 different headlines for the same thing in my RSS feeds that morning:

• St. Paul / Proposed decree welcomes dissenters
• St. Paul vows to protect protesters’ rights
• Protestors Seek Visibility At ‘08 GOP Convention

So I read the articles, and pondered what they were saying, and the more I read, and the more I pondered, the more angry I got. On one hand, I agree with first amendment rights for everybody. On the other hand, I think that there needs to be a line drawn between first amendment rights and people causing trouble. I also think that, once again, the liberal babies out there are trying to prove that, once again, the first amendment only applies to them, and that laws should be bent in their favor.

These whining babies are demanding that they get their chance to protest. That’s fine, if people want to protest, they have that right. However, I suspect that these protests are meant to disrupt. Oh, wait, I don’t have to suspect that. Remember an article a couple weeks ago, where these protest groups claimed that they were planning disruptions? Yeah, that’s right. So now put 2 and 2 together, and the truth is out in the open. The babies are demanding their freedom to disrupt somebody else’s right to free speech and expression.

Either way, according to one article, “Already, activists are clamoring to make sure their voices are heard during the convention.” I guess that makes me wonder… Who wants to hear their voices? What are they there to say? Are they going to be there to tell the GOP that they shouldn’t be there? Are they going to be there to tell the GOP how evil and terrible they are? Are they going to be there to fill the air with noise pollution carrying their hateful messages?

Most likely, yes. I can tell you that I don’t want to hear that. I don’t know anybody who does want to hear that. I can tell you that the GOP conventioneers are going to ignore it or dismiss it as the rants of a bunch of immature, whining babies who should probably get real jobs and take care of the issues in their own lives before going after everybody else…

And the whining just continues… According to Jess Sundin of the anti-War committee:

“The city has gone to great lengths to grant endless amounts of public space to the Republican National Convention for their meetings those four days. There’s no reason they can’t accommodate residents of the Twin Cities, including St. Paul, to the same extent.”

Oh! Oh! Can I answer this one? Ok, first off, the site was selected for the GOP CONVENTION. Not for everybody else. So of course, since space is finite (not endless, like Jess seems to think), most of the space should be granted to the people or group who not only asked for it first, but who were told they could have the space. Yo can’t invite a group and then tell them their space will be limited because other groups want the space to disrupt them. Second, the GOP Convention is not a bunch of troublemakers and rabble rousers. Cities and governments are much more apt to work with reasonable and professional groups over dealing with bitching, whining babies! It’s no big secret that these protest groups will cause disruptions and problems, and that if there is to be police involvement due to rising problems, it will be because of the actions of protest groups, not the GOP Conventioneers.

Sorry guys, I hate to be the bearer of the ugly truth, but if you weren’t a bunch of loud mouthed, trouble making babies, you might have better luck and get a better response out of city hall. It’s very unfortunate that one of your very own protesters, none other than loud mouth St. Paul city council member Dave Thune, is fighting to make sure you get your way. Of course, it seems a bit biased when somebody who proclaims that he will be protesting the convention will also be drafting and pushing resolutions in favor of the protesters. Where’s the neutrality in this action?

But let me tell you this: The only people that care about the things you have to say are your own followers. The rest of us have lives to get on with, jobs to go to, and a country to run. Get a life and just try shutting your mouth for a while and putting your energy towards something useful for a change. You might be amazed what might happen.

Don’t hate me because I smoke. Hate me because I demand the freedom to do so.

I’m not a real smoker. I don’t smoke cigarettes. In fact, I really don’t like eating at a restaurant where I am sucking in smoke with my burger or steak. But I do smoke cigars, which is one of my little enjoyments in life. And there used to be no greater joy in my life than going to a jazz lounge and ordering a brandy or scotch and picking a cigar out of their humidor, lighting up and listening to the lounge act.

But now I can’t do that. All of the places I used to enjoy going and smoking a cigar have been forced, by law, to go smoke free.

I don’t stand up for smokers because I enjoy second hand smoke. I stand up for smokers because they are individuals and they have the same rights as non-smokers. And to that end, I ask the lawmakers and the people who endorse and support anti-smoking laws if they know anything about this Country and what it means to be a free Nation?

The first line of the preamble of our Declaration of Independence states:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

As far as I can tell, that proclamation does not give anybody the right to take away the rights of one to favor another. In a free country, where free will and choice is upheld for all citizens, there should be no need to infringe on the rights of anybody. Yet here we are.

Minnesota is seeking to follow in the footsteps of several other states in imposing a state-wide indoor smoking ban (thank Rep. Phyllis Kahn for authoring this one). I find this unacceptable and to an extent, unlawful. They are imposing rule on private property, and are trying to take free will out of the hands of citizens. The law will make it illegal to smoke in almost any enclosed public place, including private clubs, and workplaces.

This is a horrible attack on the basis on which this country was founded. This is government telling the citizens that they no longer have the right to choose, and that they will make the decisions for you. This action takes away Liberty, and in a sense, violates the pursuit of happiness. What this does is strip away private property owner’s rights to choose whether or not that will allow smoking on their own premesis and takes away the individual’s right to choose whether or not they will patronize or work at a place that allows smoking or not.

In essence, the government is shielding those people who don’t want to have to choose by simply imposing overarching totalitarian laws. They are telling YOU that you cannot enjoy Liberty becuase somebody else thinks it imposes on their Liberty.

Sorry, it doesn’t work like that. One of the guarantees we have in this Country is the concept of equality, and the fact that all people have equal rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. When you take away the rights of one in lieu of another, there is no longer equality. When you take away the rights of private property owners in lieu of people who have the choice to be there or not, there is no longer equality.

I don’t know why we’re suddenly so willing to throw out those things that our country was founded on. The more we restrict, the less free we are. The more decisions we take from our own hands and give to others, the less free we are. The more we favor one group at the expense of another, the less free we are.

And on a personal note, this ban includes VFW and American Legion Posts, which is a massive insult to us Veterans. We fought for our Country, served in the Armed Forces, volunteered our lives for a cause… And now we’re being stripped of our right to choose; being denied the very Liberty that we swore to uphold. What gives you the right to take my freedom away? How dare you?

Minnesota Dems go after the “privileged” again. And again. And again…

Tax the “wealthy” because they don’t pay their fair share. Tax the “wealthy” so that others can get a bigger refund check. Tax the “wealthy” because they should take care of everybody else. Tax tax tax.

Do I need to revisit Communism 101 again? Everybody in the state gives according to their ability and is given according to their need? Something about a classless society? Something about the evils of capitalism??

I always thought that we were a capitalist society, but we’re quickly marching towards something different. When you punish the people who make money for their success; when you take from them simply because they make a decent income and give that money to those who don’t make as much as they do, you’re erring awfully close to the Communist theory of capital redistribution and allocation. Remember that on the left-right political scale, communism is far left, so the further the Democrats lean to the left, the closer they get to crossing that line.

So what’re the leftists doing in Minnesota now? Taxing the “wealthy” to help out everybody else, of course… And what’s their rationale for doing this? The “wealthy” aren’t paying their fair share. I shouldn’t have to re-hash table 2-2 of the 2007-2009 tax incidence study here, but just to reiterate what we’re talking about here, the “wealthy” already carry 72% of the income tax burden in Minnesota.

So what’s on the block today? I’m glad you ask. The Minnesota house is proposing a $543 Million plan to buy down property taxes and increase property tax refunds by creating a new tax bracket for the “wealthy” and increasing their burden. The amusing part about this is that they aren’t even hiding their feelings on the topic. They truly believe in their cause, and believe in punishing the upper tiers of income earners. According to the Democrat Tax Committee Chairwoman, Ann Lenczewski, the trade off is between helping most people and burdening a small number of the privileged. No kidding. In fact, her exact quote was”

“It’s significant relief to most of Minnesota for a small new burden on folks who aren’t paying as much as everyone else,”

What? WHAT?! Earth to Ann Lenczewski, what color is the sky in your world? Let’s get real here. Who’s not paying as much as everyone else? The “wealthy?” The “privleged??” Shall we review the numbers here? The top 1% of income earners in Minnesota pay 25% of all the total income taxes in Minnesota. That’s 25% of the burden put on 1% of the population. The top 5% pay 43% of the total… Almost half of all of Minnesota’s income tax revenue comes from just 5% of the population. So who’s not paying as much as everyone else?

And here’s a real head scratcher… What is this “significant relief to most of Minnesota” that you’re speaking of? The poverty stricken Minnesotans don’t pay property taxes because, well, most don’t own property. So what is the relief we’re looking at here? Here’s a bit of a summary of the expected “significant relief”:

Income	Home Value	Tax	Proposed cut
$20,000	$109,500	$569	$21 (3.6%)
$40,000	$189,000	$1,417	$172 (1.2%)
$80,000	$218,000	$2,200	$295 (1.3%)
$100,000	$283,500	$3,068	$405 (1.3%)

Oh! No, wait, I still don’t see it. I do see that the cut works on a sliding scale, so once again, the more wealth or the more “privileged” you are, the more you continue to get punished. Not to mention the fact that I still fail to see the “significant relief” here. Is taking $21 off of somebody’s property tax “significant relief?” No, of course not.

All this is is a ruse by the leftist Democrats to try to appeal to the citizens of Minnesota and win endorsement for their attempts to create a more level economic field. If you can convince people that they are getting “significant relief” at the expense of the “privileged”, of course people are going to be willing to jump on the bandwagon. But there is more here than just the Democrats misleading the public. Much more important is the Leftist’s blatant call for greater punishment of the so-called “privileged” and their belief that the “privileged” aren’t paying enough taxes. These people are not going to be happy until the “privileged” are paying all of the taxes while the “underprivileged” are paying nothing and collecting income from these taxes. It’s called Communism, folks. It’s called Communism, Ann. And if you truly believe that this is right, you need to take the DFL away from your name, and put a red star in its place.

Give Ann a visit…

Is this so difficult to understand? A look at Immigration Law and illegal immigration

If there is one thing that is starting to bug me, it’s the concept of immigration and immigration reform. I am quickly tiring of people who feel it’s acceptable to shun the law and then demand that it is changed to fit their illegal behavior. With that in mind, I decided to do a little research on my own to find out just what the law is, and try to figure out what sort of reform could be had…

First off, I found it interesting that immigration laws have been in place in our country since 1790. The first laws designed to specifically restrict immigration came about with the Naturalization Act of 1790, and have been changed, added to and repealed many times since then. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was the first effort to consolidate all of the rules and statutes into a single code. The Immigration and Nationality Services act of 1965 fixed many of the controversial aspects (such as the national-origin quota system) of the INA. But whatever, the origins aren’t quite as interesting as the content…

Here are some bits that I find interesting, and that I think pose the most conflict with many of the illegals right now:

Sec. 211. [8 U.S.C. 1181]

(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) and subsection (c) no immigrant shall be admitted into the United States unless at the time of application for admission he (1) has a valid unexpired immigrant visa or was born subsequent to the issuance of such visa of the accompanying parent, and (2) presents a valid unexpired passport or other suitable travel document, or document of identity and nationality, if such document is required under the regulations issued by the Attorney General. With respect to immigrants to be admitted under quotas of quota areas prior to June 30, 1968, no immigrant visa shall be deemed valid unless the immigrant is properly chargeable to the quota area under the quota of which the visa is issued.

So I think that’s pretty straight forward. Here you have defined legal immigrants versus illegal immigrants. There’s not much that can be misinterpreted there. It is part of the United States Code, and it is law. Coming here, undocumented, and establishing residence is illegal. Coming here and getting a visa, setting up residence, and letting your visa expire while you continue to live here is illegal. It’s pretty plain cut. I don’t know how you could reform this without completely opening up the borders and allowing people to come and go as they wish, which would then force us to ask what it actually means to be a sovereign nation.

So now let’s say that you’re living here and you want to become a naturalized citizen of the Uniter States (a fancy way of saying you want to be a US Citizen instead of just a visitor). According to the law, you must meet some requirements set forth in the INA, including:

• A period of continuous residence and physical presence in the United States;
• Residence in a particular USCIS District prior to filing;
• An ability to read, write, and speak English;
• a knowledge and understanding of U.S. history and government;
• Good moral character;
• Attachment to the principles of the U.S. Constitution; and,
• Favorable disposition toward the United States.
• All naturalization applicants must demonstrate good moral character, attachment, and favorable disposition. The other naturalization requirements may be modified or waived for certain applicants, such as spouses of U.S. citizens.

So, other requirements aside, let’s look at the big requirement here: All applicants must demonstrate good moral character, attachment to the Constitution and a favorable disposition towards the United States. Personally, I don’t see how being an illegal immigrant fits any of those core citizenship requirements. You’re not demonstrating good moral character by breaking the law, you’re not showing attachment to the Constitution since you’re breaking the laws that this country is founded on, and you’re not showing a favorable disposition towards the United States since you’re disregarding the laws of this Nation and then arguing that you shouldn’t have to. So I have to ask the inevitable question… How do you reform this without really sacrificing the core of this Nation?

So even if we do away with things like having to read, write and speak English and the knowledge of US history, can you really get rid of the core requirements? Do we want more people here who are lacking in moral character? Do we want people here who don’t have loyalty and attachment to this Nation and its Constitution? No, of course not! So why are we allowing it?

As a US citizen, I will say that I have no problem with sharing my Country with people who want to put forth the effort to be good Americans. I do not, however, want to share my Country with people who disregard the laws and foundations of my Country and then demand that they not only be taken care of, but demand that the laws be changed to fit their choices. That would be like me robbing a bank and then demanding that the law be changed to either make my actions legal or grant me amnesty from my criminal behavior because I think my actions are acceptable.

Law is law! If we cannot uphold our own laws, and demand that people seeking American citizenship follow procedure and meet our minimum requirements, then what do we have? Toss out the extraneous requirements and just focus on the core requirements for becoming a naturalized US Citizenship:
Good moral character
Attachment to the United States Constitution
A favorable disposition towards the United States
If we cannot uphold these simple requirements for citizenship, what good are we as a Nation?

Just when you thought it was safe to pull your head out of the sand…

YOU elected these people, YOU get to deal with the consequences. You can’t say that you weren’t warned. But YOU let your damned guilty conscious rule your hand when it came time to vote, and in return Minnesota is seeing the biggest batch of tax and spend legislatures it’s ever seen. Well, I hope you’re happy, because once again, I bring to you the latest tax increases to hit the state senate this week. Remember these numbers when it comes time to vote in the next elections.

If these taxes get passed, it could mean an additional $1000 a year in taxes for the average Minnesota family; all to fund roads and transit (more transit than roads) by an additional $1.7 billion a year. In this new bill to hit the senate floor, we see:

• An initial 10 cent per gallon gas tax increase that is tied to inflation, which means an anticipated 40 cents per gallon or more gas tax increase over the next 10 years. This would make Minnesota Minnesota the number one highest gas taxing state
• Higher registration fees for new vehicles
• A half-cent rise in the general sales tax in the seven-county Twin Cities area, imposed without a voter referendum, plus a $20 excise tax on new vehicle sales in the metro and a local-option authority for half-cent sales-tax increases in the rest of Minnesota, subject to voter approval.
• Authority for all 87 counties in the state to impose a $20-per-vehicle annual wheelage tax
• Increased fees for leased vehicle registrations, license plates, titles and drivers’ licenses, plus a $20 reinstatement fee for a license suspended for theft of gasoline

So there you have it, folks. Your proposed tax increases for the week ending March 25, 2007. Governor Tim Pawlenty has sworn to veto this bill, but if it passes the senate with the right number of votes, the Governor’s hands will be tied. You best be keeping your fingers crossed on this one… Unless of course you find novelty in being one of the highest taxed states in the nation.

Minnesota income tax burden unveiled. Only Karl Marx would be proud.

Let me first start by saying this:

Stealing from anybody for any reason is illegal and immoral. You cannot claim to protect the rights of some at the expense of others. We don’t protect the rights of the poor because they are poor. We don’t protect the rights of the wealthy because they are wealthy. We protect the rights of these people because they are individuals and because they are citizens of the United States of America.

With that said, I am pointing my finger right at the legislators and the media who supports and drives their cause when I say that they are not protecting the rights of their citizens. These people are punishing the wealthy for their success, and are trying to further punish them by raising their taxes again. This country should not be built on the Robin Hood ideal. It may make you feel good to take from the rich and redistribute to the poor, but it’s not right. There is nothing right or moral about what you’re doing. And to the media… Deliberately lying about the situation to rally people behind this cause is not your right. Freedom of the press does not give you the freedom to lie for your own political agenda. Report the unbiased truth or recatagorize yourself as a tabloid, since your current style of reporting isn’t any better.

So what is the truth? According to the democrats and the media, the wealthy are getting off easy and aren’t paying their fair share of the tax burden while everybody else is getting screwed. Is that true? Are the wealthy really sitting back and laughing while the lower classes shoulder the burden of state taxes?

No.

I have the facts right here in front of me. Not the media’s twisted facts, not the politician’s spin on the facts… These are the facts right from the latest Minnesota Department of Revenue Tax Incidence Study, table 2-2… Are you ready for this?

• The top 1% of income earners in Minnesota pay 25% of the total Minnesota income tax
• The top 5% pay 43% of the total income tax
• The top 10% pay 56% of the total income tax
• The top 20% pay 72% of the total income tax

So the top 20% of Minnesota income earners shoulder 72% of all of the income tax burden. That means that the remaining 28% of the tax burden falls on the other 80% of you income earners! Does that sound like the wealthy are getting off easy? Oh, and don’t forget that this income is combined income and the top 20% of combined income earners starts at people or couples who make more than $76,438 a year. So that means if you and your spouse each make $39,000 a year, you are considered the top 20% and fall into this tax trap. But what about the bottom end?

• The middle 20% ($35,554-$58,509) pay 9% of the total income taxes
• The bottom 20% pays -.42% of the total income taxes, which means they pay nothing but still receive a tax refund
• The bottom 10% pays -.25% of the total income taxes

So looking at t hose numbers, does it really look like the wealthy are getting off easy while the middle and lower classes are getting hit with the brunt of the income tax burden? Of course not, so why are the lawmakers and media demanding that t he wealthy get hit with more tax increases? By the numbers, the wealthy are already getting brutally punished for their success, yet we have the liberals claiming that that they should pay more, while all the while the bottom rungs are not only not paying anything, but are receiving refund checks from the pool that is being paid into by everybody else.

People, this is pure Marxism at its finest! There is nothing right about this. This is protecting the have-nots at the expense of the rights of the wealthy. As Americans, we are supposed to protect all individuals, yet we’re punishing those people who worked hard to achieve success in their lives so things can be more fair and equal between the economic classes. That’s not America, that’s Soviet Russia!

Wake up and get a clue, people. Feeling good and playing Robin Hood does nothing good for this country or its citizens.

When feel-good guidelines interfere with justice

When do feel-good politics and policies go to far? I’ve already talked ad-nauseum about the flaws in the Minnesota justice system, including our rank as 49 out of 50 in incarceration rates, and 47 out of 50 in probation/parole. This also follows a recent rant regarding the horrible sentencing for the uptown murderer, where he got 30 years in prison, eligible for parole at 20, by plea bargaining down to 2nd degree murder for shooting an innocent man in the head.

So once again, the flawed system shines through, and yesterday we saw the terrible sentencing of Mauricio Sanchez, the man who struck and dragged an 11-year old girl this past January.

To provide some background on the crime: Mauricio Sanchez, who was driving on a suspended license, struck 11-year old Gladys Reyes while her and a friend were walking. Upon striking her, he started to drag her, and despite Gladys’ pounding and shouting, and her friend running alongside this van pounding on the window and shouting, Mauricio decided to try to flee, continuing to drag Gladys down the street for over a quarter mile. She suffered tremendous injury, including the loss of her arm, and it was only through the kindness of a bystander who saw what was happening and forced Mauricio to stop by pulling in front of him and forcing him into a parking lot that Gladys survived. Upon stopping, Mauricio fled on foot, where he was later caught by police using dogs. Gladys was found sprawled face down 12 feet behind where the van had stopped. She remains in the hospital today.

Now, I’m no bleeding heart, but this is a horrible crime. Mauricio may not be a hardened criminal, but he certainly made a very bad decision, and very nearly killed an 11-year old girl in doing so. Had he not tried to flee, the situation may be differen, but it’s not. Despite knowing what was going on, and despite Gladys getting caught up in his wheel, he tried to flee. For this, he was sentenced to 23 months on prison, and could be out by 16 months. This exceeded the state guideline of jail time and a stayed prison sentence. He may also face deportation back to El Salvador.

The prosecution asked for four years prison time, but failed because the sentence already exceeded state guidelines. Needless to say, the Reyes family is not happy with this, and quite frankly, neither am I. I have seen worse sentences passed down for drug related offenses or theft! I mean, ok, his initial action wasn’t intentional, but once he struck the girl and decided not to stop, his actions became conscious and criminal in nature. And let’s not forget, he was already driving on a suspended license. For this action, Mauicio deserves to be adequately punished, and yet the punishment is limited by the state. In all likelihood, he will be back on the streets long before Gladys is out of rehabilitation. Is that justice?

So who’s to blame? The judge who passed down the sentence? The state for imposing guidelines that are too lenient? The lawmakers who are too focused on criminalizing smoking on private property to fix the real crimes? Who’s to blame for the lack of justice in this state? Getting tough on crime may sound like an outdated slogan, but in a state like this, it should be something that is reexamined very carefully, since after 16 months, Sanchez could be back on the streets while Gladys is still learning how to function without her arm.

Taking on the flawed lawmakers. All I ask for is loyalty to Americans.

Well well. I feel like I’m starting to beat a dead horse here… But then again, it seems that every day I see my favorite senator’s name pop up on issues that I find silly and unacceptable.

Yes, that’s right, I’m talking about Amy Klobuchar again. This time she’s once again proving that the democrat’s sense of reality and right versus wrong is terribly flawed. What’s worse is that dear Amy got her start in the field of right versus wrong as the Hennepin County prosecutor, and we all know how well that went. I mean, Hennepin County wasn’t necessarily a beacon of law and order under her reign.

So now she’s somehow gotten herself elected to the senate, and has taken that same flawed view of law and justice to a much more grand scale where she’s backed by a whole group of lawmakers who feel the same way she does.

So what’s at stake this time? As I see it, our justice system is falling apart under the guise of civil liberties and partisan politics, and it’s being spearheaded by the so called law and order liberals like Amy Klobuchar. Although the problem is not new, it seems that lately it is reaching an absurd level, and it’s only getting worse.

The US lawmakers have somehow gotten consumed with this flawed ideal of protecting the people they think are “victims” while also pouring their energy and resources into politically charged witch hunts that have no real bearing on the state of the Country. For example, they fight for the rights of enemy combatants and detainees, while all the while they’re viciously pursuing Scooter Libby and now the Attorney General.

Should all legal issues be investigated? Yes, of course, but our lawmakers need to get their priorities straight. People like Ms. Klobuchar need to learn that, while going after white collar crime and actions that may not be guided by the best intentions is all fine and dandy, it shouldn’t trump the real issues. Slamming Scooter Libby for purgery in a case that wasn’t really a case or pursuing the AG and the Bush administration for exercising their legal rights and firing US attorneys makes no sense when you don’t put any effort into punishing enemy combatants and terrorists being held. And why is this? Oh yeah… The detainees complain a lot and claim they are victims, so they deserve to be protected and saved from the horrors of America. But the proud conservatives, who don’t bitch and whine about their mistreatment, are severely disliked by the liberal lawmakers, hence becoming the targets of their contempt.

Where is the ACLU in all of this? Could it be true that they’re more interested in the same victims as the liberals? I would be willing to bet on that. There’s something very wrong with lawmakers and advocacy groups who are in place to uphold the constitution and yet don’t believe that the laws and rules that govern our rights in this country apply to everybody.

So while there are real issues that need to be addressed in this country; things like crime, national security, enemy combatant detainees, illegal immigration… What are our lawmakers doing? They’re working very hard to protect victims, keep us from offending anybody, and punish any political agenda that doesn’t agree with the liberal agenda and any industry that makes more money than they feel is acceptable.

So as always, I have to ask where the lawmaker’s loyalties really lie? Their actions are not benefiting America or American citizens. They’re not working to protect national security or to keep our streets safe. They’re not working to overhaul the flawed justice system that all too often favors the criminal element due to process flaws. However, they are working to benefit criminals, illegal immigrants (who are NOT American citizens) and terrorists… They’re telling us what we can or can’t do or say because we shouldn’t offend any sensitive groups or elements. They’re working to protect us from the horrors of white collar crime and big businesses making too much money. They’re putting a whole lot of effort into protecting us from conservative politicians who choose to exercise their legal rights as politicians… And one of my biggest pet peeves, they’re trying to control the way the military operates in an attempt to keep from offending or victimizing anybody.

Where are the loyalties here? As an American, I would like to demand that my lawmakers focus their priorities on my fellow citizens and me. I would like to put these political and industry witch hunts on a back burner somewhere while the real issues are addressed. I would like to see illegal immigration addressed and taken care of. I would like to see civil rights applied to Americans instead of enemy prisoners of war… Get my drift?

If we don’t start demanding it, we’re going to lose it completely. The law and justice agenda needs to return to America and the common citizen, and it won’t happen until people like Amy Klobuchar realize that the more energy they put into chasing these silly idealistic pursuits, the more the common American citizens will fall victim to the real issues that are being ignored or glossed over.