Palin losing her luster in GOP?

Republicans might be wising up in at least one regard. It appears some people in the GOP have had enough of Sarah Palin. How the party of no has said yes to Palin for so long is baffling, but hopefully those days are coming to an end.

There is some evidence that Republicans are now thinking what many Americans have known since presidential candidate John McCain tragically went into the wilds of Alaska to dig up Palin as his running mate in 2008 -- Palin is simply an attention-seeking airhead with no genuine desire to promote anything but herself.

U.S. Congressman Jack Kingston recently said that Palin should mind her own business and stay out of Georgia's politics. The comments came after Palin decided to campaign for gubernatorial candidate Karen Handel, who lost to Nathan Deal in the state's GOP primary on Tuesday.

Palin, the former governor of Alaska, quit on her state when the going got tough. It appears that she saw a more lucrative future in touring the country, making speeches and promoting her book. She wasn't getting enough attention staying at home. Now we are seeing how too much exposure might be backfiring on Palin and the GOP.

"I don't know why she feels compelled to get into primaries all over the country, but fortunately Georgia voters are doing their own thinking on things like this," said Kingston. Read more.

No mosque near Ground Zero

There are certain issues in life where using intellect alone isn't enough to make a proper determination. I believe the debate over the building of a mosque at Ground Zero in New York is one of those issues.

My gut more than my mind or politics tells me that this is not the time to build a towering mosque just a couple hundred yards away from where the World Trade Center went down in a radical Islamic attack on America.

Sure, our country allows many freedoms. But it also has many commonsense restrictions. You can't build a strip joint or a casino in a residential neighborhood. Zoning laws prohibit it. You can't dig up historic cemeteries to build a 7-Eleven or place a YMCA in the middle of a Civil War battlefield. There are certain things that just aren't appropriate to people who would be prone to feel the most pain.

And so it is with a mosque in lower Manhattan.

Religious freedom doesn't mean rubbing salt into wounds (whether the salt is perceived or real) -- wounds that aren't healed, as a hole in the ground still has not been filled 10 years after the 9/11 attacks. New York is a big place. This mosque can be built elsewhere. It shouldn't be constructed before new towers and memorials are built at Ground Zero. It's just one of those things that doesn't feel right, despite logical arguments made by the mayor and others in support of the mosque. Read more.

This isn't just any old mosque. It's a proposed Islamic center -- an enormous, glowing facility that doesn't blend into the area but instead dominates it.

No matter how you cut it or how politically correct one wants to sound, a bastardized version of Islam is at the core of our fight against terrorism. I say that hesitantly, not wanting to sound like a commentator for Fox News. This is a hot-button reality in a post-9/11 world. We're at war in two mostly Islamic nations, looking for terrorists with jihad on their minds. I don't agree with the wars because I believe there is a better, more cost-efficient way to fight terrorism than militarily occupying countries. Regardless, the fact remains that we're still at war with Islamic extremists.

Eliminating terrorism doesn't mean we're against Muslims or that they don't have the right to worship here. It simply indicates that there is, at the very least, a strong emotional connection between the hateful fringes of that religion and some of the problems we are facing as a country. Some of those extreme fundamentalists will undoubtedly worship at the Ground Zero mosque. Government officials charged with determining the fate of the facility need to keep that in mind. If they don't, things could get uglier. It's not a good idea to congregate and/or provoke the more unstable people on either side of this issue (Muslims and non-Muslims) -- not when there are reasonable alternatives. The city has a responsibility to safeguard its citizens, whether they are Muslim, Jewish, Christian or of no faith. Building this mosque near Ground Zero is taking an unnecessary risk and jeopardizing everyone from worshipers to passersby.

A lot of people died in the attacks of 2001. Most of the deaths came at Ground Zero. We're still paying an economic price for those acts of terrorism. Many rescue workers are suffering from illnesses that were caused by breathing the dust of the burning towers. The point is, 9/11 still remains in the hearts and minds of many people, particularly New Yorkers.

There is a large, elaborate mosque a few miles from where I live. It is set off from the road and obscured by trees. It's accessible and right off a main road near Reston, Va., but not easy to see as you drive by. It appears to have been designed with privacy in mind. It is not a welcoming place to outsiders, as security cameras and locked iron gates surround it. There are also many store-front mosques in the area that are quite visible. Needless to say, Northern Virginia has a large Muslim population. However, I am unaware of any new towering mosques in the shadow of the Pentagon. Commonsense seems to have prevailed here.

The proposal for a mosque at Ground Zero has instigated a controversy that didn't need to be stirred. Frankly, if I was a sincere follower of that religion, I wouldn't want the attention that this debate has brought. Build the mosque elsewhere and let the people of lower Manhattan remember those who died on 9/11 in the manner and environment in which they choose.

Joblessness in N. Virginia could be more in line with rest of the country

"Virginia is more vulnerable to this kind of policy shift than any other state," said Stephen Fuller, director of the Center of Regional Analysis at George Mason University. "Defense spending was our strength during the downturn. It kept unemployment lower here than in most other states. It kept the economy from crashing as far as other states'. It's also our Achilles' heel."

- The Washington Post, August 9, 2010

The good times in Northern Virginia might take a significant hit if the business of defending the country goes the way of many other businesses in the last couple of years. The unemployment rate here is about half the national average. This is an area that employs hundreds of thousands of government workers and has numerous private-sector companies that do work for the Defense Department and related agencies. Many northern Virginians have simply been oblivious about the horrible job market outside of the area.

Of course, Northern Virginia hasn't been totally immune to the economic downturn. Even before the recession started, AOL (once the charm of the high-tech world) had several rounds of massive layoffs and relocated most of its remaining operations to New York. Gannett, a major newspaper and media company based in McLean, Va., laid off thousands (including me) throughout the entire company. Some restaurants have closed. Some offices remain vacant. But we have always had the government jobs. Those are good jobs that keep housing prices from crashing and continue to bring new and highly educated job-seekers to the area.

Defense and national security, in one way or another, drive most everything here -- from local coffee shops that cater to government employees to the technology corridor that does contract work for Uncle Sam. People who work for the government or related firms have been a fearless, confident group throughout the recession. But that is now in jeopardy here and down in the Norfolk region. The loss of a few thousand jobs might not send the state's economy crashing much further, but it won't help failing municipal budgets or the confidence of people already looking for jobs. Read more.

Have an oyster, everything is fine

American society suffers from attention deficit disorder. We get bored easily. We want to move on to the next big thing before the old big thing is resolved. We like to interpret facts in a way that suits our beliefs and we generally don't dig too deeply when forming opinions about anything. If a Google search can't provide the answer, well, it's probably not worth pursuing.

Furthermore, if you believe that life on this planet is trending in a positive direction, then you're likely to believe that things like giant oil spills are nothing more than small speed bumps on the way to a better existence for all of mankind. Conversely, if you think that human beings will eventually do themselves in, there is plenty of evidence to back that opinion, too. Either opinion can be supported by data. Numbers, scientific polls, statistical trends can be interpreted however one sees fit.

It seems news consumers really don't want to dwell too long on any one major societal or environmental problem. It's like we have a collective overflow valve that shuts off and allows us to stick our heads in the sand whenever reality gets a tad too real or is contrary to our overall beliefs, causing us to kind of short circuit. Not dwelling on negative things could be a survival mechanism in human beings. It could also lead to our extinction. After all, we need to pay attention at times, even when it's not fun or doesn't suit our world view. Yes, worrying alone won't solve anything but nor will ignorance.

Yup, we either blow events out of proportion that have virtually no impact on society or the planet (see any Lindsay Lohan story) or embrace denial and/or unrealistic optimism when it comes to known, widespread problems like famine, genocide and unjust wars. A lot of innocent people and species perish because, well, we just didn't want to acknowledge our roles in their fate. Didn't want to accept any responsibility. Couldn't bother to watch 15 minutes of news a couple times a week in order to stay somewhat informed or vote once a year. It's easier to be entertained by things that don't really touch our lives, like Lohan's escapades. These distractions pull our collective attention away from the things that should matter more. They require no emotional or intellectual investment. Concern for oil-stained pelicans takes more humanity, the good kind, than obsessing about American Idol. It requires that we pay attention for more than 30 minutes and read something other than People.

So it is with the Gulf of Mexico and the BP oil spill disaster. As soon as the oil stopped flowing, it was like the spill never occurred in the eyes of many Americans, mostly those from outside the Gulf region, of course. Even while the oil was gushing, many people showed very little interest or concern. We are a society where if it doesn't happen in our backyard or impact our checking account, we're just not that interested. And if it drags on for too long we are certainly going to get bored and turn away. We are becoming a culture where sticking with something, seeing it through, just isn't fashionable.

Let's think positive thoughts about where all the missing oil went. Maybe an oil fairy flew down from the heavens and cleaned the sea. Heck, the president is telling people it's safe to eat seafood from the Gulf, even before the scientists have confirmed that. Do you think Mr. Obama will take responsibility for anyone who gets sick as a result of eating tainted fish now or five years from today? Why the rush to declare Gulf seafood as safe? Why rush, period? Everything except the things that are most important to our survival and evolution seem to take priority in our new, superficial culture. Stopping oil from gushing in the Gulf? No rush there. It took over three months to resolve. Getting people back to work? Nope. No urgency or sense of focus over that as bickering about nonsense now occupies most politicians' time. Yet, we keep electing childish leaders because voters aren't paying attention. We have a wealthy mayor in New York City who seemingly has forgotten about 9/11. That's another post for another day.

But there is good news. We can get a quick fix for our iPhone4's. We have EZ-Passes to get us through road tolls quickly. The prices on laptops are way down. There are energy drinks and blue pills that create all sorts of illusions to distract us from some core issues that deserve more attention. Unfortunately, none of those things will restore the Gulf of Mexico. That will take some awareness and a lengthy attention span that we no longer possess.

Meanwhile, impatient Chambers of Commerce are telling would-be tourists to come on down, the waters are fine, even as experts grapple with what impact the chemicals used to control the oil might have on the environment. Many objective scientists and scholars are saying it will be decades before it can be determined how the biggest oil spill in history has altered the Gulf. Yes, I said the biggest oil spill in history. You would think that alone would mean that folks would want to pay more a attention for a little bit longer. But no. It's on to the next big thing. The next special, self-serving interest.

Hey, the well is plugged. All is grand. While we're at it, why not call off the Congressional investigation and allow BP to get out of its agreement to pay $20 billion in claims to Gulf residents and businesses? Let's not fix anything or hold anyone accountable. Do you think the American public is really going to pay attention to a lengthy investigation of BP? Let's just get back to eating shrimp. Turn off CNN. Put down the newspaper. Those faraway wars will end, and even if they don't, who cares? Ninety percent of Americans are employed. Most people don't know a single soldier. That global warming thing is probably a silly hoax, too. So some ice melts and a few polar bears drown. Why all the worry? We'll probably have bigger waves to surf in the future. There's a positive to come out of global warming. No need to be grumpy. The economy will magically get better because...well, just because. Go on, have another Louisiana oyster.

Read another interesting opinion about where America is heading.

'Acceptable' number of casualties

No matter how you interpret the data, or whether you're a glass half-full or half-empty type of person, you have to admit one thing, today's job numbers aren't causing anyone to jump for joy.

At this rate, the economy will never fully recover -- well, at least not in most of our lifetimes, and that's all that really matters for people already on the edge. There probably is going to be a new economic norm that is somewhere below where it was in previous decades. Sure, some folks will land on their feet. Some businesses will flourish, maybe even exceed pre-recession revenues. But for millions of Americans, this slow trickle of so-called good news -- this one step forward, a half step back approach to economic recovery -- means their pain is going to get worse. A lot worse. We need about 10 steps forward to even begin to get back to where we were in normal times. And that doesn't appear likely.

As I ponder the whole situation it seems to me that like in war there is some acceptable number of casualties that society is willing to live with. Whenever we as a country emerge from this war, however that is defined, a lot of people will be left behind. Whether that number will be in the hundreds of thousands or millions remains to be seen. But it does seem obvious at this point that many folks who were previously in the middle class will not be returning to that status. As long as that number doesn't exceed a certain percentage, most Americans will go about their lives just fine, happy to see a trickle of good employment/economic news each month. Happy that they weren't the ones who got shut out from the recovery.

Rodriguez earning his pinstripes

Alex Rodriguez hit his 600th home run yesterday, an accomplishment only a handful of players have achieved. He did it in New York, on his home field at Yankee Stadium. Yet, the hoopla around the homer was fairly restrained, particularly considering this is the age of the media hyping everything, whether events warrant it or not.

I suspect that even though Rodriguez finally won a World Series last year and came through for the Yanks in the clutch in the playoffs, he probably still isn't considered a "real Yankee" by some fans. Add in the controversy surrounding his steroid use before joining the Yankees, and this milestone home run was bound to lose a bit of its luster, even in the Big Apple where sports stars are front-page news.

I enjoy watching A-Rod play. For a fairly big guy, he's graceful both at the plate and in the field. He's not a cartoon character like sluggers Barry Bonds or Sammy Sosa were. In addition to hitting the ball over the fence, Rodriguez hits for average, catches the ball and has a good arm. He can even steal a base. This all makes him a candidate to be considered one of the all-time greats, more in line with Hank Aaron, Willie Mays and Mickey Mantle than the less-complete Bonds or Sosa.

However, A-Rod may never be an absolute fan favorite in the Bronx. First, he is not a home-grown Yankee like Derek Jeter, Mariano Rivera or Jorge Posada. He hit most of his home runs while playing for Texas and Seattle. I won't deduct too many popularity points for that because Reggie Jackson, Greg Nettles, Catfish Hunter, Babe Ruth and other beloved stars also played elsewhere before coming to New York. But let's face it, players who came up through the farm system do have an edge in Yankee lore.

Rodriguez never got the personality thing right. He doesn't seem genuine. He seems more suited for Los Angeles. New Yorkers tend to like authenticity. His new strategy of only talking minimally to the media hasn't endeared him to the public but at least he hasn't shot himself in the foot lately. Look, Mantle was a creep. I met him and I wasn't impressed. Everyone knows the stories of Mantle's drinking problems. Thurman Munson was gruff and crude, according to my father who had encounters with him off the field. But those guys were also gritty, and New Yorkers appreciate guys who will get dirty, brawl on the field and shout at the opposing bench. No one did those things better than Lou Piniella and Billy Martin -- two of my favorite Yankees.

Alex stays clean and pretty. Other than a throw-down against the Red Sox a few years ago, A-Rod just plays ball. And that's fine, too. As long as he keeps hitting home runs and turning double plays, he'll move up in Yankee status. It's just going to take some more time.

I suspect Rodriquez will end up with a monument at Yankee Stadium. His number 13 may be retired. A generation who never saw Martin manage, Mantle with knee braces blasting towering homers or Ron Guidry blowing away batters might think more of A-Rod than fans my age do. That's OK. Every generation tends to think their stars shine the brightest. I will add, however, that being a true Yankee fan also means knowing at least something about the many fantastic players who roamed the outfield and ran the bases long before ESPN, free agency and color television. Being a true Yankee fan means passing down that knowledge of guys like Yogi Berra and Whitey Ford to the next generation. Take note of Jeter, Rodriguez and Rivera because one day you'll be telling your kids and grandchildren about them.

A pause for a blog update

This is month 12 of Calvacca Blog. When I started the blog, it was something to do -- a way to pass time in between playing guitar, searching for work and taking walks to clear my mind. A way to stay connected to the news and maintain whatever writing skills that I might possess. I have learned some technical skills like how to embed video into posts and adjust the HTML coding to make them fit, created links and utilized counters that track the number of visitors to the website. I know the identity of most of my core readers. They are family and friends. Some, however, remain anonymous but are fairly loyal followers. Others just take a peek now and then or are one-time visitors who did a Google search on some particular topic that I happened to have written about. I don't know how many people from foreign countries have come to this blog, but I am guessing it's at least three dozen. My numbers are small compared with the big-time blogs, but drawing a huge audience has never been my intent.

I have hammered away on topics that are important to me. The unemployment situation hits particularly close to home, not just because of my own situation, but because of others in my life who are either out of work or afraid they are going to lose their jobs. I realize joblessness doesn't always make for compelling reading. In fact, I am almost certain people avoid this blog like the plague because they don't want to be reminded of certain realities in my life or in the economy as a whole that might eventually impact their lives. I don't curse. I don't write about celebrity nonsense or show sensational photos. Therefore, the odds of this blog ever going viral are pretty much zilch.

There are very few warm and fuzzy tales or literary moments of note on this blog. While some bloggers focus on one subject, I've tried to remain open to writing about various issues that come up in the news or in my own life. I have tried to write these commentaries in a straight-forward, narrative style.

Besides it being somewhat educational and helping to pass the time on some lonely days, blogging hasn't been all that I expected it to be. With that said, I am not certain what expectations I had 12 months ago. With millions of bloggers across the world, one isn't likely to be discovered here without a lot of marketing. Advertising and sales aren't my thing. One blogger isn't going to change the world, although collectively there is some evidence that blogging matters in shifting opinions and policy. So in that way, I do feel that I am minimally contributing to society. Of course, that doesn't pay the bills.

For the most part, though, bloggers are voices in the night. Some are nut jobs. Others provide a lot of food for thought not seen in the mainstream media. Most struggle to build a following. A lot of bloggers are former journalists, like me, who lost their jobs in the recession and can't find their way back into a newsroom for whatever reason.

I am not sure where this blog is going as the one-year anniversary approaches. Lately, I feel that I have said everything I can say about the economy, the state of politics, the world in general and the condition of my old profession. Until things change, what else can I rant about or applaud?

The blog could use a lot more reader participation, but I have had to tighten filters on the comments because of the typical Internet stream of lunatics that want to leave inappropriate remarks. I don't use foul language or make threats on this site, but apparently those who comment don't have those same values. Seeing how ugly and limited people can be has been one of the negatives of blogging. Doesn't inspire much confidence in my fellow human beings. But that aside, blogging has been a mostly positive experience in a rather negative year. I have no regrets.

A more patriotic approach needed to fix what ails America's economy

Everyone from Rush Limbaugh to some of my friends like to point out that it is not the role of businesses to provide jobs. In normal times, I would agree.

These are not normal times.

Look, during past wars, businesses refitted their production lines to serve the military. They stopped making goods for civilians in order to supply our soldiers with ammo and other items needed to successfully defend our country. Their missions changed from making profits via the private sector to helping to uphold our way of life. From housewives to Hollywood, everyone was behind the war efforts because losing was not an outcome that served any American's interest.

What I am about to say is the most important point I have made in over 300 posts. The economic crisis we're in might not feel entirely like a national emergency but it is. We should not wait until the enemy is deeply entrenched in every neighborhood across this land before fighting back with everything we have.

Businesses, particularly profitable ones, have a new responsibility and it includes creating jobs just as it involved making tanks instead of cars in World War II. It is no longer acceptable for anyone to say it's not the role of any entity to create jobs. It also isn't constructive to continue to lie about why so many workers were laid off in the first place. Too many corporations over reacted to the recession and exploited millions of their most vulnerable workers, making the recession far worse than it needed to be. That is a fact. It is time for corporations that went too far to make up for their part in bringing down the entire economy, not to mention the personal lives of many good people.

It's the responsibility of government, small and big businesses to work together to restore the American economy. Schools, vocational training centers and banks willing to make loans can also play a positive role. Everything and everyone should take responsibility in some manner, including bloggers and the media.

A true recovery can't happen until unemployment is reduced. We need to throw out the old playbook and figure out a way to get people back to work. That can't be done by businesses pointing the finger at government and government pointing back. It can't be done with the level of partisan politics we're experiencing or the continuing decline in education.

America needs some out-of-the-box thinking that doesn't rely on stereotypes about the role of businesses in a capitalistic society. We would be speaking German if that sort of thinking existed in the past. To say that employers are too afraid to hire because of the uncertainty about the economy is probably true but it's also a trap. It's a vortex that no one can escape. A circular argument that pushes us closer and closer to the edge. Businesses were not exempt in contributing to past war efforts. Why are they now washing their hands of any responsibility during one of the most profound emergencies we have ever faced?

Risk is involved in the operation of any business during up and down times. Those without the stomach for risk probably shouldn't start a company. The excuse that hiring is too risky now is just that -- an excuse. While it might be a justifiable excuse, it is nonetheless an unproductive claim. Profitable companies can't lean on that crutch until the good times return. There will be no good times without companies showing some confidence in America. Government can help lessen those risks, but can't eliminate them. It's going to take brave corporate leaders to chart a new course -- a course that navigates us to safer waters. The profits will return and the stockholders will get paid, but for now, we need a fresh, less selfish approach to doing business.

The fact remains that the private sector provides most jobs in most democracies. With that privilege comes the occasional responsibility to chip in, to do right by society, to give back. Companies hold fund-raising drives for the United Way and other charities, now they need to do a little more for the benefit of the entire country.

We have a domestic war going on. The further collapse of the economy will mean the eventual collapse of a nation. History has proven time and time again that countries without viable economies will implode. Ask anyone on the front lines of this war about the seriousness of our economic woes. They will describe scenarios that might seem unimaginable to most people at this stage of the war.

While I empathize with anyone trying to keep their business afloat with all of the current obstacles in their way, I must say that the time has come for the bigger, more profitable employers to show some faith and start becoming part of the solution rather than part of the problem. Others will follow. I believe in momentum. Businesses that become leaders in this cause will motivate others and stimulate the economy in ways the government can't.

Being frozen with fear while sitting on profits is no longer an option. This is an emergency. A war. All hands are needed on deck. A sense of patriotism that trumps greed needs to emerge, just as it did in past wars. We have to get away from this stuffing-cash-in-the-mattress mentality. Continuing to debate roles and responsibilities just prolongs the conflict and jeopardizes the very thing that most companies and individual citizens treasure -- freedom.

Read what others say about why corporations got rid of so many workers during the recession (far too many in the estimation of some) and why companies are refusing to hire despite bulging profits: "A Sin and a Shame"

Where will we hide the homeless?

There is a proposal in Hawaii to ship the state's growing homeless population to the mainland.

As the economy continues suffer and jobs remain scarce, homeless people are showing up in places usually reserved for tourists. Some state officials believe it would be more prudent to spend $300 on a one-way plane ticket for each homeless person than to pay $35,000 a year to shelter and feed them. Furthermore, the state has concerns that the sight of homeless people roaming plush beaches will hurt tourism, which overwhelmingly supports Hawaii's economy.

Welcome to the future of America, where homeless people are no longer confined to inner-city soup kitchens and out-of-sight trash dumpsters. The homeless will be everywhere and will include educated people who were living in 3-bedroom suburban homes for most of their lives. The new homeless will look different. They'll be your grandparents and former colleagues. They will be well spoken and mentally coherent. Many will be young adults who couldn't navigate their way into a failing job market despite possessing multiple college degrees. They won't be content to freeze in a back alley in a decaying Detroit neighborhood. They will migrate to places where they can survive in the elements.

Where will we ship these people?

As distasteful as it might be for some folks to picture the new homeless camped out in the parking lot of Whole Foods in suburbia, it's going to happen because of our inability to extricate ourselves from the economic mess we're in. Some people won't even acknowledge how severe the unemployment problem has become. The Rush Limbaughs of the world think there are plenty of good jobs for anyone willing to work.

While those who are still sailing along, bathing in a kind of blissful ignorance, tend to not think about these things, I am here to tell you that current and former middle class people can't continue to drain their savings forever without ending up on the streets. They need jobs. They need to restore their nest eggs.

Tourist areas, tidy suburbs and other places that are usually shielded from society's ills will be inundated by a new wave of homelessness in the next decade if the employment situation doesn't improve dramatically in the next year or two.

Read more about Hawaii's proposal.

Fences rarely provide solutions

Before there was an Arizona law on illegal immigration, there was a Manassas and Prince William County, Va., law that I have written about in a earlier post. In my opinion, and the opinion of a federal judge in Phoenix yesterday, there are aspects to these local laws that are unconstitutional. I might add, on a humanitarian level, there are also unfair elements to these types of laws born out of desperation to solve an undeniable problem that impacts many communities across the country.

However, I've been in Manassas several times in recent weeks and there is no denying that an illegal-alien problem still exists there, maybe more so than most areas around the state. Some estimates claim that illegal immigration costs Virginia more than $1 billion a year. I imagine the state of Arizona is facing an even bigger bill. Small towns in particular, like Manassas, simply can't afford these kinds of expenses.

Something does have to be done to guard our borders. That's just commonsense. We are living in the worst economic times of our lives. Just from an economic standpoint, moderating the flow of people into this country, regardless of where they come from, seems fairly prudent. We must fight this recession on several fronts and reduce expenses where we can. War and illegal immigration are just two areas where we could save billions.

It is important to look at immigration (legal and illegal) as a economic issue and not a race or emotional debate. In better times, there were some economic benefits to having some illegal immigrants here, working for minimum wage and spending money in various communities. Those times have probably passed with the loss of jobs. Many of those immigrants are still here and are unemployed and not circulating money back into the economy.

The federal government is charged with protecting our borders, issuing work visas and should not be undermined by the states or municipalities. But the feds should also understand that we can't continue to give jobs away to whomever wants to come over here, whether they come legally or illegally, whether they work for minimum wage or hold white-collar jobs. There aren't enough jobs for everyone. We have to shut off the faucet and allow jobs to catch up with the population.

Leaders in Washington should act soon so that states that are already running huge deficits don't have to add to the red ink by providing services to folks who aren't here legally. Police need a clear set of rules to work under in addressing illegal aliens -- rules that don't endanger them or inflame the situation. Employers must also play by the rules when hiring workers. And we all need to bite the bullet and accept that our veggies and fruit might cost a bit more if we really want to solve the problem of illegal workers.

No fence along the Southwest border is going to solve all our problems. Immigration regulations in general need a major overhaul. We need laws that allow people in under a fair system while protecting the economic and security interests of America. Times change and smart legislation needs to reflect that. To do nothing is to ask for more trouble, more court battles, more bad laws and more expenses we can no longer absorb.