'In the name of science' is not usually a good reason

The 40th anniversary of man walking on the moon has drawn extra attention to NASA's role for the next decade, and it sure does need some changes.

The 24-hour news networks have had experts speak and some old astronauts have thrown their opinion out there, but I think the soundest argument I've heard regarding future space exploration came from the Colbert Report.

There is no reason to send humans to other planets or moons. Some scientists claim researching the moon will answer questions about our planet or that Mars could be another source of resources in the future, which could all be true. If those claims can be backed up, send some robots to check things out because they can do it safer, cheaper and more efficiently.

The entire world is in such financial turmoil right now, it would be criminal to spend millions or billions of dollars so someone can take a nice ride into space. The worlds' nations are too cheap to help fight terrorism, feed the hungry or buy swine flu medication for the poorer nations, but we will fulfill some guys dream of seeing the stars?

I'm not saying we should dismantle NASA. But, it needs to be streamlined to become an efficient agency. The astronaut does not need to be extinct, either. There are reports of private entities considering space travel for commercial gains, which makes perfect sense.

Space exploration was considered to be the forefront of thinking outside of the box and looking toward the future. How can we do that with an agency that seems to be running the same as 40 years ago? Let's bring NASA into the 21st century as a viable resource rather than a memento of previous accomplishments.

County takes a sensible step in immigration front

The Monmouth County Sheriff's Office has recently received approval to have officers stationed as immigration agents at our jail, according to this morning's Asbury Park Press.

The purpose of these officers would be to turn over illegal immigrants who commit crimes to the feds, and deportation would follow if appropriate.

Sheriff Kim Guadagno says the $50,000 training program would be paid for by reimbursements from the federal government, which is really only a cherry on top.

It is bad enough that taxpayers are expected to pay for people who reside here illegally to use our schools and hospitals as they avoid paying taxes while taking much-needed jobs. And don't give me the "they do jobs we don't want to" spiel. That might have been true years ago, but there are plenty of unemployed people who would work for landscaping companies or clean buildings to pay their mortgages these days.

Why should we pay for defense attorneys and translators, and eventually jail time for some, if they break our laws and endanger the responsible members of our society? In addition to the fact that too many don't even have to serve their punishment due to plea deals or because they flee the state. (Side note: Kudos to the courts for allowing the increasing of bail for illegal immigrants in order to keep offenders here for prosecution.)

I understand the sympathy for people who left their country to come here for a better life -- that is how many of our ancestors came here. However, my grandparents registered and paid their taxes, which should be the goal of anyone who comes here.

But, to live off our dime and then commit crimes against us is a double slap in the face. I see no need to protect anyone who free loads off of our society and then breaks its rules.

The defense from immigration rights groups? That these officers could be used to protect us from offenders. That is a pretty weak argument. If we send these offenders home, there would be less policing of them needed.

Further, this could serve as a deterrent. Perhaps less crime from illegal immigrants would occur in our county if they knew they could be kicked out of the country for it.

I have respect for the many sects of our society, and I believe everyone should have a chance to make a better life for themselves. But, not if it is by endangering or swindling the rest of us here.

How did the Republicans get my phone number?

I thought the Republican Party would stop calling my house after I advised the last campaigner that butchering my last name in both mailings and over the phone will never win my vote. Spaggio -- really?

This time they sent a robot. The auto tron wanted to know who I would vote for in the Republican primary for New Jersey governor.

"For Chris Christie press one." The first thing that popped in my head was a Rob Tornoe cartoon. (See my favorite at the right.)

After they listed Steve Lonegan and some other forgettables, I pressed the key for "still undecided." That was the closest option to the truth since Stephen Colbert wasn't an option.

Ms. GOPtron then all but begged me to vote for Christie -- I wonder who paid for this telephone call -- but then it was over. I kind of wished it worked more like one of those online quizes where I can go back and pick a different answer to get a new response.

The Christie-lover poll and others like it tell a lot about the candidates.

Positions seekers are so focused on what interests them -- numbers -- that they give up the chance to find out what is important to me, which they would need to know to get my vote.

I'd like to say it's my vote they want, but I don't think that would be accurate. They just want to add a tally to a board, and sometimes the people who put it there are lost in the shuffle.

I fear that for the Republicans why I vote for a candidate is even less important. Because all they need to do is convince me not to vote for Gov. Jon Corzine, and they win. They have some material, but judging from that last phone call, they might not have the resources to hire people to do it right.

Which number do I punch for some new candidates?

Is that a little light?

As newspapers continue to close their doors and more reporters are sent packing, The Huffington Post is taking a different avenue that could just be a saving grace: Hiring investigative journalists.

According to an AP story I read Monday night, the HP plans to hire a slew of investigative journalists, which would save a few reporters from the unemployment line. Word is that the first assignments would be about the economy.

This is an especially important topic because, as some have already pointed out, some major companies in the U.S. are getting a pretty good deal from subsidies and such. Since those companies own the major media outlets, a lot of things are not really being reported.

Some people question journalism that is backed by corporations or the government, but keep in mind that most organizations are owned by a major corporation already, so it's not like we have a free standing system now. The system simply needs to evolve in order to survive.

So, keep an eye out for some of those different media sources, that's where I'll be looking.

I have the solution! (Thanks Mr. Ultra Conservative for your help)

After hearing "Poker Face" for the fifth time during my drive into work today, I decided to give 101.5 a try. It's been awhile since I gave the Jersey Guys a listen, and I thought it prudent to tune in to what they think we think is important.

The ultra conservative one was ranting and raving about how he doesn't care if sex offenders have any place to live, which was obviously his attempt at discussing the case before the Supreme Court regarding municipal restrictions on residences for sex offenders.

More than 100 municipalities have enforced some sort of residency restriction for sex offenders within their borders in NJ alone. But, as one of the town's attorneys admitted in court today, the ordinances directly contradict a state law. Megan's Law does require sex offenders to register, and different levels of offenders are treated differently. But the only reason the register system works is because housing is not supposed to be denied to these people once they are released from prison.

Now, I think a lot of people are taking the not-in-my-back-yard approach to this one. And that is understandable. But there is a bigger thing going on here, and I think it is important to get past the emotions to really see the debate.

On one hand, the legislators passed a state law, and municipalities are expected to abide by that law, just like any other. But, as ultra conservative pointed out, the people who made those laws are not living in the same neighborhoods as these offenders. Ex-cons tend to live in lower- to maybe middle-class neighborhoods -- not in mansions with bee farms or and horses.

This is supposed to be a country of the people, but there is one excellent example of the elite running our world for us. My solution: Put it on the ballot. Let voters come out and say what they want to happen here. Because, ultimately, we are the ones who have to live with the decision, not the bigwigs on the hill.

How the APP's coverage of Highlands ruined my breakfast

I was disappointed this morning when I ran outside to pick up my New York Times and there was no blue bag on my driveway. I must need to reorder my subscription -- no big deal.

I figured I would give the Asbury Park Press a glance. "It's good to keep up with the local news," I told myself.

As I leafed through one Associated Press article after another, and deemed it last night's AP wire on paper, I figured it was better than nothing. Until I hit the "local news" section. At the very bottom of B1 I see "Highlands vows to cut off funding for business partnership."

Anyone accustomed with Highlands politics would not have been surprised to read that. I haven't been there for months but knew cuts were coming to the HBP after the Dems took control during the last election.

However, the APP's article comically displayed the news by its lack of information. They were quick to quote Carla, the president, and a few HBP supporters, but where were the people who have opposed the HBP for more than a year?

"Business owners pleaded with council members for more than an hour to keep the HBP budget."

I did actually laugh out loud after reading that line before quickly turning to B3 for the conclusion of this fanciful tale. By business owners, did they mean Carla and whomever she dragged there to argue with the Dems, who she has long opposed, for an hour? Oh, and an hour is really not notable when talking about Highlands. I have seen people carry on for at least that long about a road sign, but I digress.

"The HBP sponsors about 10 public events."

Really? Because the only events I remember Carla requesting free advertising for were the ClamFest, the holiday tree lighting and I think there was something for July 4th.

OK, that's enough poking fun at the APP's view of happenings in town. I don't have anything against the HBP. I think some sort of business improvement organization is a great idea, but so is constant change. The HBP leadership has been buddy-buddy with the reining GOP in town for a long time, and things were obviously going change this year. Is it fair to cry about "pure politics" only when it is not in your favor?

As for me, I'm going to reorder my New York Times subscription.

Your tax dollars at work

Towns and counties are struggling with the increase of taxes on already burdened residents in order to keep essential services. The Garden State has claimed similar stresses and its leaders have even proposed some painful cuts and measures to "fix" Jersey's financial situation.

But, fortunately, they managed to find the funds to put together this nifty video, which I can only label as an artist's rendering.

I could not find a link to this inspirational video, which was passed on to me, on the state Department of Transportation Web site, however the link does share the URL. As you will see, its symbol is dramatically shown in the beginning.

Further, anyone who has sat in Highlands Borough hall will recognize the DOT artist's work a mile away. (I think my favorite part is the shot from the water over the bridge -- maybe that's a bird's point of view!)

I ask you residents, tourists and neighbors, have you ever felt so peaceful about a construction project that has rocked your coast for more than a year?