LTE: Real Courage

Real courage

Houston attorney Patrick F. McCann paints a bleak picture of life in Mexico and various Central American countries to rationalize the flood of immigrants entering the country illegally and overwhelming America's southern border. According to McCann, these nations are so dysfunctional that children and elderly mothers are left to suffer poverty, savage civil war and brutal gang violence.

He then goes on to ask what he assumes is a clever rhetorical question: If Americans found themselves in similar circumstances, wouldn't they flee their country for a place more peaceful and prosperous?

I believe Americans have proven that the answer to that question is a resounding "No." Throughout the Revolutionary War, America's Civil War, two world wars, one Cold War and the Great Depression, it has never been our habit as Americans to run away to some place safer, and under no circumstances would it be considered honorable to abandon our children to the tender mercies of human smugglers.

I'm more interested in questions that McCann does not ask: 1) What is so wrong with countries like Mexico and Honduras that so many of their citizens just up and leave? 2) Why don't these immigrants stay and fight to make their homelands better places to live?

The fact that McCann and other so-called "open borders" advocates focus instead on mass immigration means that misery, poverty, war and gang violence will be the lot of the tens of millions who remain behind.

We need to address the causes of the problem, not the symptoms. In the meantime, taking in an endless stream of refugees only delays the reforms that could make these countries decent places to live.

Pete Smith, Houston 
-----------------------------------------------
In "The courage to cross", Houston attorney Patrick F. McCann paints a bleak picture of life in Mexico and various Central American countries to rationalize the flood of illegal immigrants overwhelming America's southern border.  According to McCann, these nations are so dysfunctional that children and elderly mothers are left to suffer poverty, savage civil war and brutal gang violence.

 

He then goes on to ask what he assumes is a clever rhetorical question: If Americans found themselves in similar circumstances, wouldn't they flee their country for a place more peaceful and prosperous?

 

I believe Americans have proven that the answer to that question is a resounding "No".  Throughout the Revolutionary War, America's civil war, two world wars, one Cold War and the Great Depression, it has never been our habit as Americans to run away to some place safer, and under no circumstances would it be considered honorable to abandon our children to the tender mercies of human smugglers.

 

I'm more interested in questions that McCann does not ask: 1) What is so wrong with countries like Mexico and Honduras that so many of their citizens just up and leave? 2) Why don't these immigrants stay and fight to make their homelands better places to live? 

 

Anybody with an ounce of humanity would wonder why our northern neighbor Canada is a peaceful, functioning and prosperous democracy, and they would focus like a laser beam on helping our neighbors to the South duplicate the Canadian experience.  The fact that McCann and other so-called "open borders" advocates focus instead on mass immigration means that misery, poverty, war and gang violence will be the lot of the tens of millions who remain behind.  

 

We need to address the causes of the problem, not the symptoms.  In the meantime, taking in an endless stream of refugees only delays the reforms that could make these countries decent places to live.

 

Pete Smith

Houston, TX

LTE: Reactions to apostasy

Two stories that ran in the Tuesday Chronicle provide a stark contrast in the way the Muslim faith is different from virtually all others. 

 

"Mormon Church excommunicates founder of women’s rights group" tells the story of Kate Kelly, a Mormon activist who promoted gender equality with the ultimate goal of allowing women in the lay clergy.  For challenging the patriarch, the Mormon church accused her of apostasy, and excommunicated her.  "Sudan frees woman sent to death row for apostasy" tells the story of Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman sentenced to death for practicing the Christian faith of her mother instead of the Muslim faith mandated by the nation of Sudan.  She was recently released on a technicality, only because of intense international pressure.

 

So there you have it: the most radical expression of disapproval amongst Christian faiths is to tell the offender "you can't be one of us any more."  In contrast, a death sentence for the same offense is all too common throughout much of the Muslim world. 

 

And it's not just the death sentence that Islamists impose with such regularity for anything found to be offensive to Islamists, it is that they find offense in the most innocent of things.  Practicing the faith of one's choosing shouldn't be offensive to anybody.  It is instructive that for a disturbingly large percentage of the world's Muslims, it is.

 

Pete Smith

Houston, TX

Two stories that ran in the Tuesday Chronicle provide a stark contrast in the way the Muslim faith is different from virtually all others.

The story "Mormon Church excommunicates founder of women's rights group" (Page A2) tells the story of Kate Kelly, a Mormon activist who promoted gender equality with the ultimate goal of allowing women in the lay clergy. For challenging the patriarch, the Mormon church accused her of apostasy and excommunicated her.

The other story "Sudan frees woman sent to death row for apostasy" (Page A2) tells the story of Meriam Ibrahim, a Sudanese woman convicted of apostasy and sentenced to death for marrying a Christian. She was raised by her mother who practices the Christian faith instead of her father who practices the Muslim faith. She was recently released on a technicality, only because of intense international pressure.

So there you have it: The most radical expression of disapproval amongst Christian faiths is to tell the offender, "You can't be one of us any more." In contrast, a death sentence for the same offense is all too common throughout much of the Muslim world.

And it's not just the death sentence that Islamists impose with such regularity for anything found to be offensive to Islamists, it is that they find offense in the most innocent of things. Practicing the faith of one's choosing shouldn't be offensive to anybody.
Pete Smith, Houston

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/homeless-sing-communist-song-free-lunch-article-1.1843700
 

All I Can Say Is: "My feelings exactly"

Google Glass is arguably the worst idea ever.  Conceived as a bold experiment in capturing the real world virtually, it ends up being nothing more than a 24x7 means to invade other people's privacy. 

 

It will die a not-so-quiet death, and soon, but not before Google tries mightily to cram it down our throats, and unfortunately, not before several dozen of its wearers get beat up or otherwise harassed.

 

As a company devoted almost exclusively to exploiting the personal information of its Users, Google has been long due a come-uppance.  Here's hoping they take it up the shorts on this venture.

 

And on a purely personal note, I'm rooting for the failure of the stupid-ass "Google Driverless Car" too.  These Dorks know as much about car manufacture as Elon Musk, and are destined to suffer his fate.

Give me more money, or suffer the consequences

Regarding "Mayor: Repeal revenue cap to aid HPD" (Saturday Front Page), Mayor Annise Parker speaks bluntly and even a little harshly about the sorry state of law enforcement in Houston when she says that "the only way we can have more police officers is to have more tax revenue to pay for them.”  It seems she's displeased with the cap on tax rates imposed by voters ten years ago, and has presented us a fait accompli: take the limits off her credit card, or take your chances on the newly mean streets of Houston.

 

What is interesting is what Mayor Parker does not tell us about this matter: First, that income tax revenues have skyrocketed in the past decade thanks to Houston's booming economy, which should have made increasing the rate of taxation unnecessary.  Second, during that period, more than any other Houston politician Parker has presided over the shower of pension perks, health care perks, pay raises and "alternate" forms of pay across the entire spectrum of public employment that brought Houston to its current sorry state.  Ironically, her fiscal irresponsibility was never more boldly on display than last week, when she conceded to giving a mid-contract pay raise to firefighters just to get them to agree to show up for work.

 

Sad to say, Mayor Parker has never been the person to bring berserk government spending under control.  Sadder to say, there is nobody likely to replace her that will either, at least not until such time as voters again show the backbone they did ten years ago when they took away the blank check.

 

Pete Smith

Houston, TX

Houston, we have Lift-off

Regarding "Carter’s HR in 10th produces big finish for series" (Friday Sports page), first off, I'm glad the Chronicle is putting the Astros' games on the front page again.  Seems like earlier in the season they were the red headed step child, priority wise speaking.

 

No more.  The Astros are now officially the most interesting team in baseball.  They have three prolific home run hitters, two world class Starters, several potential All Stars, and - wonder of wonders - a Bull Pen that has gone from worst to first in no time flat.  They have a better record than Boston, and are only 3 wins behind the Yankees, despite a payroll that is only a fraction of theirs.  They have put themselves in contention in just 30 days with a group of untested rookies and journeymen. 

 

The Astros were harshly criticized in the past year for selling off all of their so-called "legit" players and starting over.  Now, is there anybody left that doesn't wish they had done this five years ago?

 

Anyway, I look forward to reading about the Amazing Astros on the front page for the rest of the season.  They are the best story in town.

 

Pete Smith

Houston, TX

LTE: Case for paying for rail

Case for paying for rail

Regarding "Don't give up on light rail; it's our future" (Page B12, Sunday), Cindy Clifford insists that the light rail system has "broad" public support, citing a 2003 referendum where voters supposedly demanded that Metro begin construction on four new lines.

While this claim is a little hyperbolic, it is not unfair to say that the electorate supported some form of rail-based mass transit. In fact, public support for rail has been expressed at the polls going back to 1998.

What is notable is the reason why it is popular: federal funding. The three existing lines that have been built were funded overwhelmingly with the earnings of people who not only don't live in Houston, but don't live in Texas, which brings us to the eternal question: If projects like light rail are so popular, why don't Houstonians - citizens of one of the richest cities in America - pony up the bucks to pay for it?

Unwittingly, Clifford blows up her own argument with her quote from the movie "Field of Dreams", when the main character, Ray Kinsella, is told: "If you build it, they will come." What Clifford doesn't bother mentioning is that Kinsella spent his own money to build that infamous baseball field in the middle of nowhere.

Kinsella literally bet the farm to fund his boondoggle, and it paid off. By comparison, Houstonians risk only a modest tax increase to fund theirs.

Bottom line, if Houstonians want more light rail, they should pay for it themselves.

Pete Smith, Houston
http://www.chron.com/opinion/letters/article/Wednesday-letters-NCAA-Houston-rail-India-5542951.php
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding "Don’t give up on light rail; it’s our future" (Sunday Outlook), Cindy Clifford insists that the light rail system has "broad" public support, citing a 2003 referendum where voters supposedly demanded that Metro "begin construction on four new lines".  While this claim is a little hyperbolic, it is not unfair to say that the electorate supported some form of rail-based mass transit.  In fact, public support for rail has been expressed at the polls going back to 1998.

 

What is notable is the reason why it is popular: federal funding.  The three existing lines that have been built were funded overwhelmingly with the earnings of people who not only don't live in Houston, but don't live in Texas, which brings us to the eternal question: If projects like light rail are so popular, why don't Houstonians - citizens of one of the richest cities in America - pony up the bucks to pay for it?

 

Unwittingly, Cindy Clifford blows up her own argument with her quote from the movie "Field of Dreams", when the main character Ray Kinsella is told: "If you build it, they will come".  What Clifford doesn't bother mentioning is that Kinsella spent his own money to build that infamous baseball field in the middle of nowhere.

 

Kinsella literally "bet the farm" to fund his boondoggle, and it paid off.  By comparison, Houstonians risk only a modest tax increase to fund theirs.

 

Bottom line, if Houstonians want more light rail, they should pay for it themselves.

 

Pete Smith

Houston, TX

Bergdahl Is No Hero

Regarding "Swap frees U.S. POW" (Sunday Front Page), the New York Times article tells the straight-up story of an American soldier kidnapped by the Taliban in Afghanistan who endured almost five years of captivity, finally to be released by a prisoner swap engineered by the Obama Administration.  Unreported is the fact that in 2009, Sgt Bowe Bergdahl deserted his post, but not before very publicly renouncing the American military and his country, calling America "the most conceited country in the world", and accusing fellow soldiers of "running.......children down in the dirt streets with our armored trucks".

 

These facts make it all the more strange that the military promoted Bergdahl twice during his captivity, and that he returns to a hero's welcome.  To me, the real story is that the Obama Administration has sent a very clear message to the Taliban: an American deserter is worth five terrorists.  Only time will tell what the future ransom for kidnapped American soldiers will be, but thanks to the actions of Bergdahl and the federal government, I believe we are soon to find out.

 

Pete Smith

Houston, TX