News | Obituaries | Forum | Sports | Lifestyle | Videos


- Muleshoe ISD
- Muleshoe Chamber of Commerce & Agriculture
- City of Muleshoe
- Bailey County
- Muleshoe Area Hospital District
- Muleshoe Heritage Foundation
 

 

home | email
News
Obituaries
Forum
Sports
Lifestyles
Videos
Classifieds
Weather
Subscription Info
Contact Info
Lifestyle Forms



Reader Approves Of Editorials
Wednesday, August 26, 2015
To the Editor:

Thank you for your timely editorials! I look forward to your words and thoughts each week.

The words on Clinton’s double standards is very worthwhile for we — American citizens —to pay heed, and the illegal matter that Trump is confronting — way to go!

Nelda Hunt, Muleshoe


Full Story
Immigration Question Raised
Thursday, August 20, 2015
As we understand it, when an individual is convicted of a crime the laws in most states prohibit that individual from profiting from that offense.

In other words, a burglar who enters your home steals your property, and is subsequently caught, prosecuted and convicted of the theft isn’t allowed to keep the funds he acquired from selling your property.

But apparently not all crimes and criminals are handled in the same manner.

Among the immigration-related issues that have surfaced in recent months concerns the birthright of children born to individuals who have unlawfully crossed our national borders, or who after entering legally overstay their visa.

It’s not even politically correct to identify such national trespassers as criminals. Instead of being illegal aliens, the politically correct term is “undocumented immigrants,” but calling burglar a “property removal specialist,” doesn’t change the fact that an offense is being committed.

Support for such actions are based on an interpretation of the first clause of the 14th Amendment which states: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

Herein is the problem. At the time the 14th Amendment was drafted and eventually ratified, the problem of unauthorized immigration didn’t exist. The nation was still new enough that all who came were for the most part heartily accepted.

Since that time, however, new legislation has been placed in effect which restricts such access to our shores and the lands which lay beyond.

While some contend it would take passage of a new amendment to address the issue of what some have called “birthright tourism,” and others have described as the theft of national benefits, others suggest the high court return to the amendment’s original intent?

Of course, such a strict constitutional interpretation — in light of recent decisions — seems beyond the capability of the present court.

According to a recent press release from the Democratic National Committee, such efforts “attacking and criminalizing children — let alone citizen children born to immigrant parents — is the lowest form of political buffoonery… even the GOP.”

Apparently, the DNC has forgotten that it was the Republican Party that pushed for the amendment’s passage with its original intent back in 1868.

The United States Supreme Court ruled long ago that the children of legal immigrants have the protections of the 14th Amendment, and are citizens by birth.

As previously, stated, we don’t have a problem with that ruling, even though the majority of governments throughout the world oppose the concept of citizenship by birth.

But that same court has yet to rule regarding the offspring of illegal immigrants.

Is it “buffoonery” that a large number of legal experts have the opinion that the 14th Amendment’s scope has been exceeded? Is it “buffoonery” to ask that an issue that so affects this nation should finally be considered by its highest court?

If fraud committed during the naturalization process can result in a declaration that an individual is not and was never a citizen, then why shouldn’t the fraudulent presence of foreign nationals within our borders have a similar result?

Full Story
Democratic Double Standard Noted
Thursday, August 20, 2015
One of the biggest “non-news” news events in computer history was the Y2K bug that was thought to have the potential for major disruptions in computer service around the world.

For those who remembered the event, as the clock’s minute hand approached and passed midnight it was a time of great relief when the anticipated disasters didn’t occur.

Most recently, the “non-news” computer news stemmed from a different source. In fact, it fell into the classification of “non-news” because long held suspicions were finally upheld when former Secretary of State — and Democratic presidential candidate — Hillary Rodham Clinton turned over a thumb drive containing emails from her private server that reportedly included some with “top secret” classifications.

But still, no server was produced. Of course that changed on Wednesday, Aug. 12, but the question remains: Why the double standard?

When the director of the Central Intelligence Agency David Petraeus’ involvement in an extramarital affair became public knowledge the FBI had already gathered information that he’d mishandled classified information.

He was subsequently charged with a felony for that violation, and reportedly the classified material was only marked “confidential.”

We also note that a decision to release the information regarding the former Pres. Obama-appointed director’s affair and his violation of classified information procedures was admittedly withheld from the public by members of the President’s administration until after the Nov. 6, 2012, presidential elections.

Surprise!

Pres. Barack Obama’s team was apparently willing at that time to do whatever was necessary to support his reelection, and it seems to be just as willing to support any Democrat running for the presidency today, and that includes protecting former Secretary Clinton as well.

Now that it has been verified that Ms. Clinton mishandled classified information also, why wasn’t the Federal Bureau of Investigation knocking at her door with a search warrant in hand to seize the server from which the emails were produced.

There was certainly enough time between when the flash drive with the top secret emails was produced and the “clean” server was turned over.

The Clinton clan had more than enough time to destroy any additional evidence on the server. Without a doubt there are current cases under investigation by the FBI in which the suspects would appreciate similar lag time.

You would think Attorney General Eric Holder would want to at least appear to be doing his job and instruct the FBI to do its job, but that wasn’t the case.

Instead, the head of the Justice Department apparently waited for a call from the Clinton’s IT guy telling him the server was “all clear,” and ready to be picked up.

Again we ask: Why the double standard?

Full Story
Happy 100th Birthday To An Amazing Mom!
Friday, February 27, 2015
On Aug. 15, 2015, Wilma Jean (Key) Shelburne, my mother, would have been 100 years old.
Now this gets dangerous. As an English major, I’m delving into what for me is higher math. But Mom passed away in 1992, more than 23 years ago. Amazing that it’s been that long! She was 77.

The grandson born on her birthday, my son, just turned 32 on their birthday.
Full Story


New Page 1

Subscribers:
Login to read the latest edition online:


Muleshoe Journal 201 W

Muleshoe Journal
201 W. Avenue C
PO Box 449
Muleshoe, Texas 79347
Phone:
(806) 272-4536
Fax:
(806) 272-3567

© Copyright 2012
Muleshoe Journal
All Rights Reserved

Send comments or suggestions to webmaster.