A+ A A-

President Obama wants extra $3.7 billion, but not to close border

To The Daily Sun,

Our nation's illegal alien problem exemplifies Washington's war on the American people. Washington politicians — Republicans and Democrats — have lied repeatedly about immigration and pursued policies that benefits the politicians but hurts most Americans.

Senator Ted Kennedy, who changed our immigration philosophy, told us regarding his 1965 immigration law: "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs." But it has.

Regarding the 1986 amnesty law he promised: "We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never bring forth another amnesty bill like this." The border wasn't secured. In 2007, Senator Kennedy worked to give amnesty to about 12 million more illegals.

Politicians told us the 2006 Secure Fence Act would stop illegal border crossings. On May 10, 2011, President Obama told us that the border fence is "now basically complete." During his 2012 campaign President Obama repeatedly led us to believe the border was secure. On Feb. 4, 2013, Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano told us that the border is secure.

But the border isn't secure, Illegal aliens flood into our country. According to the N.Y. Times, almost 300,000 illegal aliens have come here just since April. About 60,000 illegal alien children have come here over the last six months creating a humanitarian nightmare and threatening the health and safety of the American people.

President Obama wants $3.7 billion to deal with the problem (but not to close the border) created by his failure to enforce our laws and by his 2012 announcement of (essentially) amnesty for most illegal alien children. (Yes, he set conditions, but illegals believe he will let them all stay here, and they are probably right.)

Americans have repeatedly told politicians to close the border. But illegal immigration benefits the politicians and they refuse to stop it. American citizens will increasingly suffer until the current politicians are replaced with people who care about American laws and American citizens.

Don Ewing

Meredith

Last Updated on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 10:49

Hits: 60

Criminal invasion of Iraq cost U.S. taxpayers about $3 trillion

To The Daily Sun,

It grieves my heart to hear the latest evaluation of the Iraq war, now 10 years old. Many in public office say, "It was a mistake!" How do we, as fellow humans, cope with the cold, calculating facts that we sent 2,300 soldiers — men and women to their death, now determined to be a worthless, wrong cause? Is human life that cheap?
A criminal invasion of the small, sovereign nation of Iraq based on charges Congress knew were totally false, but failed to speak out against, was only the beginning of deception and lies by the Bush Administration in its rush to war! In spite of its lack of validity we bombed civilians, hospitals and clinics in a total blitz! Before it was over we had killed 600,000 civilian and military alike leaving the country in shambles. It least 100,000 of this number were children.
In spite of this massive assault depicted over and over again on nightly news broadcasts: The blood spilled out on the streets: broken bodies shewn on the sidewalks unattended; women screaming for their missing children: The public and the clergy (for the most part) gave their silent consent letting the killing go on without a word of dissent. What kind of people are we? And now we arrogantly claim, it was wrong from the beginning.
Keep in mind this irrefutable fact about warfare: It is the most profitable business for industry and manufacturing — guaranteeing a steady stream of money for guns, bombs, and all the materials for so-called (war.) Military requests are hardly ever questions! The criminal invasion of Iraq costs taxpayers about 3 trillion dollars! Did you yourself, ever raise your voice against this monstrous brutality and murder? Shame on you!
I grieve the loss and my souls shrinks that we, as a nation of Christian/Judaic faith should ever have let this terrible loss happen!
There is no fault upon the soldiers that survived. They carried out their orders with bravery and honor.

Leon R Albushies
Gilford

Last Updated on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 10:44

Hits: 77

Zoning Board decisions against me were unfair & made no sense

To The Daily Sun,

In August of 2012 I went to the Laconia Planning Department to ask about a change of use for my property located at 355/357 Weirs Blvd., which is in the commercial/resort zone. This property has always been used as commercial, better known as the Boulevard Drive-In in the 1950s and then known as Ganong Real Estate and Crabby Dave's fast food during the late 1990s, and then just Ganong Real Estate.

After serious health problems, we had to close the real estate office and deal with more important things such as staying alive. Thankfully, we succeeded.

With 357 side of the building empty and unable to rent because of economic times as they are, my family decided to take a different venture called Hawaiian Shaved Ice. After two years, and for whatever reason, it was just not prosperous. The family talked and agreed we had to do something, so we contacted the city and applied for a change of use to sell used automobiles. Yes, a used car lot consisting of no more than eight automobiles at any one time. A "special exception" was required because auto sales is only permitted in commercial/resort zone by special exception.

At the first Zoning Board of Adjustment hearing on Sept. 17, 2012, I explained what I wanted to do: there would be no work on cars, no welding, no air wrenches!; there would be no mechanics work completed onsite; no compressors running all the time; no detailing of cars. . . just simply eight used cars for sale.

I explained that half the building was my residence — that is, 355 Weirs Blvd. — because of the past health issues, and I certainly would not deface the neighborhood because it is mine, too.

Yes, I was denied a special exception by the Zoning Board — three "no" votes and two "yes" votes, even though there was a used car dealership approved on January 17, 2012 on the same road — U.S. Route 3 — and in the same commercial/resort zone, by the same board. They said my request was denied because it was on the shoreline of Lake Winnipesaukee and because of the view from the road. My property is not on the shoreline, it is on Rte. 3, a major road through the state. Yes, it has a view and I pay for it in my property taxes. Is that a detriment to the property?

I appealed the zoning board decision and asked that my case by heard again. Before I went to that second meeting on November 19, 2012, I did some research on uses that are permitted without special exception in the commercial/resort zone and discovered some were by far more abrasive than a couple of tasteful used cars parked around my lot. Instead of selling cars, some of the permitted uses are a car wash or a taxi cab company — imagine eight taxi cabs hanging around my parking lot waiting for a call. . . their engines running continuously during the cold winter months. Or is a dealership a better use for my property?

If I wanted to, I could also build storage units, a night club or a porn shop. . . yes a PORN SHOP right there on Rte. 3/Weirs Blvd. Or I could sell boats. What's the difference between boats and cars? I just don't get it.

The zoning board agreed (4-0) to re-hear my case.

On January 22, 2013 — here we go again — I was off to ZBA for a second hearing. I brought legal counsel with me so that maybe he could present my case better that I had  tried to do before. He made his presentation and did a great job. He presented signed documents from a number of abutters who were in favor of what I was trying to do, taking into consideration what was permitted. Because of the way I maintain my property, we all get along.

To make a long story short, I was again denied by the majority.

I think this is very unfortunate and unfair. I truly do not understand it.

John Ganong

Laconia

 

 

Last Updated on Wednesday, 16 July 2014 10:41

Hits: 161

Sen. Shaheen knows where to go to get the N.H. opinion

To The Daily Sun,

One hundred New Hampshire military veterans gathered to show support of Sen. Shaheen, urging her re-election. Included were Gail Prince of Bedford, an Air Force veteran and former commander of the Sweeney Post in Manchester.

Prince said, "What impresses me most about Senator Shaheen is that because of her history here in New Hampshire, she knows who to reach out to in the state to get the New Hampshire position, the people's position. So when she goes back to Washington she properly represents us because she knows us."

Ken Clark of Stratham, a retired Air Force major general, and former Adjutant General of the New Hampshire National Guard said, "This is my very first time standing up at a political event and saying I'm going to be behind somebody. I spent a career making sure no one could paint me with a brush, but it is time to come out and take a stance because what is going on here is too important. We need Senator Shaheen."

Personal testimony shared at election time makes people take notice. Good. Maybe we will next witness 100 New Hampshire farmers for Shaheen and 100 beekeepers beside them. This would show she's hearing their issues and taking what action she can. If I were a New Hampshire farmer or beekeeper I'd want to know that she's working to curb Monsanto for its GMO seed products and poisons and anti-food labeling moves (Monsanto is taking neighboring Vermont to court on this). Then I'd be a farmer or beekeeper testifying for her and watching to see her cut Monsanto's legs out from under them. Sorry for the bloody graphic here. Politics can be about needed change.

Lynn Rudmin Chong

Sanbornton

Last Updated on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 09:48

Hits: 92

I, for one, am sick of doing without & paying more & more in taxes

To The Daily Sun,

President Obama signed an executive order in 2012 that he would grant a two-year deferral to those under the age of 30 if they came to the U.S. under the age of 16. He would allow them to get work permits. He changed our immigration policy.

As a result, I can bet that is the reason why so many underage illegals are flooding the borders. Their parents are following. A plane with the illegals landed in Boston. I wonder if they will come over the border to New Hampshire. Will that add to the budget problem of New Hampshire?

Because he changed the law without going to Congress, we have a greater number of younger illegal immigrants entering our southern border. A border, that he said was secure.

Mr. President, maybe you should stay at the White House or Camp David and save the U.S. taxpayers some money to pay for the influx of younger illegal immigrants, as it is a result of you not following the laws. It won't cover all the cost, but it is a start.

Not to get off subject but Sgt. Tahmooressi is still in Mexican jail. Is the president doing anything about that? Our veterans are still waiting to see doctors at the VA. Is the president even talking about the veterans? He wants money to take care of the illegal children. But what about our veterans.

I think it will be cheaper to get judges to the holding zones for the children, hold court, and as they are illegal deport them by putting them on military transport planes and send them home. How about stopping funding. Maybe the money he wants to take care of the children could actually take care of our veterans.

The illegal unaccompanied children are suing the U.S. government for taxpayer funded representation and the treatment they are getting.

Let's change the law now. They do not need representation. The need to go home. We, as a country, cannot afford this. The ACLU is really taking court cases that are costing the American taxpayer billions for silly lawsuits.

What are our elected federal representatives going to do now to stop this? I do not want someone to say they are going to vote for or against something. I want them to write a bill that will expedite their deportation hearings and their deportation. We cannot afford this.

I for one am getting sick of doing without and paying more in taxes and not getting anything from my representatives. I get promises but nothing. No more excuses.

In our state, Gov. Hassan put a freeze on spending, part of which is travel, yet she traveled to Turkey for business for New Hampshire. (Governor Lynch put a freeze on spending inn 2008 which Hassan stopped when she was elected). Why did the present governor stop the freeze? Governors in southern states are traveling to New York to try to get businesses that are leaving New York to go to their states. Hassan could have saved some money going to New York instead of Turkey, but then she would have had to cut taxes for businesses so that they would want to come to New Hampshire.

Apparently the governor was given a budget, but she told the fiscal committee that it is very unlikely that the state will come close to meeting the budget target.

Why can't our elected officials spend just what the budget dictates? I have a budget. I do not spend more than my budget. I cannot afford to spend more. The interest would be impossible for me to pay back. I bet most New Hampshire citizens spend within their budget. Why can't our government officials?

Linda Riley

Meredith

Last Updated on Tuesday, 15 July 2014 09:44

Hits: 38

 
The Laconia Daily Sun - All Rights Reserved
Privacy Policy
Powered by BENN a division of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Login or Register

LOG IN