The Danger of Playing Economic War When you are DOWNSTREAM

Interesting, considering the situation that exists between both Southern California and Arizona. They both are states that border Mexico. Their electorate are mutually groaning under tremendous budgetary shortfalls that are pushing our public programs to their very limit. 

However, Arizona in recent years has become a virtual highway into the United States for migrants from Mexico. Specifically, Arizona is now dealing with rampant human trafficking, kidnapping, drug-related murder and other crimes, and vehicle theft.  Phoenix is the kidnapping capital of the United States.  Five of the last eight Arizona law enforcement officers that we have lost in the line of duty were killed by illegal immigrants.  Two prominent ranchers have been killed and the evidence strongly indicates illegal drug activity associated with Mexicans in our state illegally. 

For these reasons and others the state of Arizona, a state somewhat more 'red' than our neighbor to the west, has decided that if the federal government of the United States will not enforce existing laws with regards to immigration, then Arizona will.  This was a bold step by Governor Jan Brewer and Arizona state senator Russel Pearce.  Both of them have publicly lamented the need to do this.  But citizens who have earned the right to live here because they have declared allegiance to this great country have an expectation to be protected by their government, and "Uncle Sugar" ain't making the grade.

Enter SB1070, or the (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).  Nearly everybody that has proclaimed (loudly) that this is racist legislation that will open the doors to the dreaded phrase "Papers, please!" has also now admitted that they have themselves not even read it yet.  I have done an analysis of the law (which you can find on this blog), which clearly shows that police may only act on this law in the course of an already existing "contact" between themselves and a potential perpetrator. Since I did that analysis, the law has been even further modified to put further restrictions on what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion'. 

Nonetheless, the liberal main-stream media, in cahoots with their progressive brethren and constituents in the Latino community, La Raza, the Reconquistas, and their fraternal friends in the civil rights movement have whipped up a completely false picture of how this law will be implemented.  President Obama, US Attorney-General Holder, Dept. of Homeland Defense Napolitano have all rebuked Arizona over the law even though all of them now admit they haven't even read it.

Now several cities in Washington, Illinois and California have decided to boycott Arizona originated goods and services.  With regards to California the Los Angeles City Council, strongly led by Mayor Villaraigosa, has decided to jump on the bandwagon. 

However, there can be, from time time, found even in offices of politicians and bureaucrats individuals who have the strength of character to respond forcefully and yet without emotion or irrationality.  Arizona Corporate Commissioner Gary Pierce has decided enough is enough and wrote a little missive to Mayor Villaraigosa, reminding him the Southern California buys a lot of our power.  I think that the Commissioner's stand on their own:


May 18, 2010


VIA FACSIMILE & US MAIL


Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa
Office of the Mayor
200 North Spring St., Room 303
Los Angeles, CA 90012


Re: Los Angeles boycott of Arizona


Dear Mayor Villaraigosa:


I was dismayed to learn that the Los Angeles City Council voted to boycott Arizona and Arizona-based companies--a vote you strongly supported--to show opposition to SB 1070 (Support our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act).


You explained your support for the boycott as follows: "While we recognize that as neighbors, we share resources and ties with the State of Arizona that may be difficult to sever, our goal is not to hurt the local economy of Los Angeles, but to impact the economy of Arizona. Our intent is to use our dollars--or the witholding of our dollars--to send a message." (emphasis added)


I received your message; please receive mine. As a state-wide elected member of the Arizona Corporation Commission overseeing Arizona's electric and water utilities, I too am keenly aware of the "resources and ties" we share with the City of Los Angeles. In fact, approximately twenty-five percent of the electricity consumed in Los Angeles is generated by power plants in Arizona.


If an economic boycott is truly what you desire, I will be happy to encourage Arizona utilities to renegotiate your power agreements so Los Angeles no longer receives any power from Arizona-based generation. I am confident that Arizona utilities would be happy to take those electrons off of your hands. If, however, you find that the City Council lacks the strength of its convictions to turn off the lights in Los Angeles and boycott Arizona power, please reconsider the wisdom of attempting to harm Arizona's economy.


People of goodwill can disagree over the merits of SB 1070. A state-wide economic boycott of Arizona is not a message sent in goodwill.


Sincerely,

Commission Gary Pierce


The City of Los Angeles may regret that they didn't build more nuclear power plants in the 1970's, 80's and 90's.

If you want to see the actual facsimile copy of the letter, you can go here to the Arizona Corporate Commissioner's website.

Adulation of the MAN vs. the INSTITUTION (Follow up to previous posting)

The American system of government is greater than any one man or even group of men. This why adulation for the MAN instead of the INSTITUTION is so scary to me and many who share my point of view.

Barack Obama's accomplishment of becoming the first American President "of color", especially considering our checkered history with the institution of slavery, specifically the slavery of Africans is momentous. But the accomplishment of Barack Obama pales when viewed in light of the greater context that our system permits any person regardless of creed, race, sex to achieve the highest levels of success and authority.

But are these children being taught to praise that system? I doubt it. I suspect that Dr. Denise King, the principal of the school where this song was recorded, would probably say that the American system is full of inequalities and injustices and that minorities are repressed. She is probably teaching children that capitalism is "evil" and "uncaring". She probably dwells on the mistakes of our nation's past, such as the nearly successful genocide of the Native American or the institution of African slavery.

I suspect she does NOT teach much about the indentured servitude (economic slavery) of Irish, Scots, Germans, Poles and Italians in the 1800's or the Chinese and other Asians in the late 1800's and early 1900's. I also bet she doesn't talk much about the current genocide taking place in both eastern and southern Africa, where Africans are enslaving or destroying whole other tribes of Africans solely on basis of clan affiliation. Or how about the sexual enslavement or mutilation of African women by African men? Hmmm? Or how about the current repression by China of Tibet and it's eastern Muslim population, or the destruction of millions of lives in Myanmar (formerly Burma)?

Then there's India with it's caste system. Does she spend much time talking about the purely social discrimination of the Bhangis ("untouchables") by the Brahmins, even though those people are genetically the same family? Or the "honor killings" practiced in much of the Islamic world? Or the outright racist attitudes of most Asians? To this day, Japanese print media depicts Africans with big lips and low foreheads and the book "Little Black Sambo" is a popular children's picture book. In fact, there is no redress for "hate crimes" in Japan because there is NO JAPANESE LAW protecting civil rights.

The American system of government and the society it has created is far from perfect. And by definition, a capitalistic economic system means that people will fail although that does not mean that those people are failures. People become failures only when they prove unable to overcome adversity. But in our society, which is now dominated by an arguably corrupt and non-representing representative system, the charged are still presumed innocent until proven guilty and people like Bernard Madoff or the CEOs of corrupt companies like TYCO, Enron or MCI Worldcom go to jail for destroying the financial future of others. While perfection eludes us what other nation on Earth presents as much opportunity as the United States? Even in decline with possibly our best days now behind us are still one of the freest, safest places on Earth to live.

So when I see children pouring out their adulation for only a MAN instead of the INSTITUTION, in my opinion I am justifiably concerned. If this is an innocent act then it's wrong. If it's purposeful then it can only be called one thing: INDOCTRINATION.

Showing Respect to the Office of President is Worshipping His Name.

There is a video on You Tube titled “(No background music} School kids taught to praise Obama.” The tape shows a class of students, about thirty or so, singing this little catchy ditty. According to the notes with the video, it was filed at the B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, NJ and uploaded on June 19, 2009.

Here are the lyrics to that song:
Mm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that all must lend a hand
To make this country strong again
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said we must be fair today
Equal work means equal pay
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said that we must take a stand
To make sure everyone gets a chance
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

He said red, yellow, black or white
All are equal in his sight
Mmm, mmm, mm!
Barack Hussein Obama

Yes!
Mmm, mmm, mm
Barack Hussein Obama

I have stated before on my blog and elsewhere that any person that is elected to the Presidency of the United States is worthy of respect, even if you are opposed to many of the policies or political views of that person. In my own case, I won’t ever represent President Obama as a monkey or a witch-doctor, as some of the 9/12 protesters did. I do not use inflammatory names when referring to Mr. Obama. But I have no problem with disagreeing with him on any policy he presents that grows government or limits personal freedom. Further, I have no problemexpressing those views on my blog and in personal conversations.

Prior to the 1970s, it was not uncommon at all for photographic portraits of the current U.S. President to hang in classrooms all across America. But during my public school education journey from 1966 to 1979 I do not ever remember singing a song about the man that held that office. We had our ditties about George Washington and Abe Lincoln back when those President’s birthdays were actually celebrated on the anniversary of their births. But a living currently serving President? Nope.

I find the lyrics in this song to be bordering on cult of personality worship:
“He said red, yellow, black or white All are equal in his sight.” This is almost demigod worship in its tone, much like the song “Jesus loves the little children”. This is a message to children that President Obama loves you no matter who or what you are. It is nearly cultlike. It is not the job of the President of the United States to love us. It is his job to protect us from all enemies foreign and domestic and to ever support and defend the Constitution of the United States.

“He said that we must take a stand To make sure everyone gets a chance.”
Who can argue with this sentiment? The problem here is that our children are being taught that there is blatant inequality in our culture, which I concede there is still some. However, the reality is that not everybody makes the most of the opportunities that life and our culture provides them. If opportunity for "minorities" was truly as bad as the progressives would have you believe, then why do Haitians fleeing abject poverty in their own country bypass Cuba, the Turks and Caicos, Jamaica and the Bahaamas, which are all far closer in order to emigrate to the United States? Why do hundreds of thousands of Mexicans flee to the U.S. in the face of the chance of capture, punishment or deportment? Opportunity! That's why!

But instead, for the sake of creating "nurturing" environments where our children are not subject to the "threat" of failure we are instead creating a whole generation of kids who do not know how to learn from their mistakes and overcome adversity using innovation, dedication and persistence. This school environment is emulated nowhere in the real world of employment. If you fail and give up, or repeatedly make the same mistakes you will be written up, demoted or terminated. But I digress...

I have no problem in teachers encouraging an attitude of respect for our President, but I am vehemently opposed to teaching our kids politics unless you will teach them by presenting both viewpoints equally or worse, adulation for a man who has yet to prove if he deserves the respect of the office that the People of the United States have already entrusted to him.

Comparing Joe Wilson's "You Lie" to the "New Face of the KKK". You've Gotta Be Kidding Me!

Representative Hank Johnson (D-GA) has now taken the political debate to yet a new low, showing that the Black Congressional Caucus and the Democratic Party is completely prepared to throw the "race card" down on the table at any time that it looks like it might create political advantage.

Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC) blurted out "You lie!" during President Barack Obama's September 9th speech promoting his health care reform plan to Congress. Wilson personally apologized to the President the following day, and that apology was accepted.

However, since Congress is a tank of sharks that just love the smell of blood, and partisan rhetoric is just as rancid and raucous as ever, the Democrats wasted no time in debating and then voting on a censure of Wilson today (September 15th). Of course CNN was there to cover this debate (where were they on Van Jones, ACORN, All the President's Czars, etc?). CNN caught Johnson on camera and he had this to say:

"He did not help the cause of diversity and tolerance with his remarks. If I were a betting man, I would say it instigated more racist sentiment and feeling. 'It's OK. You don't have to bury it now. You can bring it out and talk about it fully.' And so I guess we'll probably have folks putting on uh, white hoods and white uniforms again, riding through the countryside intimidating people. And uh, you know, that's the logical conclusion if this kind of attitude, uh, is not rebuked. If Congressman Wilson represents, uh, he's the face of it."

I've never cussed on this blog before. But I'm going to now. You've got to be shitting me. Joe Wilson is now the face of racial intolerance and hatred in the United States of America because he disagrees with the President's assertion that SR3200 will not prevent illegal immigrants from receiving health care benefits? You got all that from two words?. In my opinion that's one helluva stretch. This just demonstrates and proves what Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin and all the other conservative talkers have been saying since Obama started campaigning for election, which is that you cannot disagree with the President on any topic and then avoid being charged with opposing the President because you are a racist and he is an African-American.

I'm sure that were I to have an opportunity to speak directly to Representative Johnson, and he were willing to actually waste his time defending himself to me, that he could come up with some convoluted explanation about how he can rationalize the connection between Rep. Wilson to the KKK by the evidence of the two words "You lie!" In my opinion, this can only be rationally explained by Saul Alinsky rule #12: "Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it and polarize it." By portraying Wilson as a personalized face of racism, Johnson successfully demonizes Wilson and weakens him and what he stands for. The simplest explanation is the most likely, and this certainly fits the data.

Political discourse in this country is dying. And the rules are skewed. Nobody will defend Wilson against this ridiculous, baseless and from my point of view, irresponsible charge because no white guy is going to get fair representation.

New Administration Transparency.

I was reading some comments made by Howard Kurtz, a commentator/columnist who has made it quite clear that he is not a big fan of the conservative cause.

In a media chatroom hosted by the Washington Post, Mr. Kurtz was asked about how he felt about the current administration essentially playing the media "like a violin" concerning the dustup around Van Jones and the press announcement at 12 AM on a saturday morning announcing his resignation.

His response: I don't buy your reasoning. We can't cover a resignation until it happens. Leaving aside online and TV coverage, the Jones resignation got plenty of attention in the Monday papers. And if Sunday hosts ask the likes of David Axelrod and Robert Gibbs about the resignation, and get tepid or incomplete answers, I think it's clear to the audience what's going on. The Obama administration may have succeeded in muting the coverage on a holiday weekend, but that Friday-night and holiday releases of bad news were also a favored tactic in previous administrations.

Mr. Kurtz is right when he says that Friday-night and holiday releases have been used by previous administrations... But I'm going to throw one back at him: Didn't President Obama disavow the usage of such tactics? He did not specifically say "We will never make a significant press release after 10:00 PM Eastern on a Friday." But what he did say was that his administration would become much more "transparent" than the previous one.

Yet Van Jones was not properly vetted. It took "rodeo clown" Glenn Beck to discover Jones' very radical past, which I will not dredge up here using a staff of 7 and "Google" web searches. The information found couldn't be refuted and was easy to locate. It painted a picture of a man who clearly supports redistribution of wealth, nationalization of private industry, and a day of "comeuppance" of the long suffering black and minority communities against the dominant white race.

I truly believe that in this case, the Administration simply believed that even if this easily to be found information was dredged up, that nobody would care. Well, that's not the transparency that many Americans voted for.

I believe that Mr. Obama has more personal advisors that have past histories that are also quite radical. It would behoove Mr. Obama to submit those advisors to Congressional scrutiny because it is quite clear that Glenn Beck and others (Hannity, Van Susteren, Limbaugh) aren't going to let up anytime soon. Mr. Obama needs to let the American people know up front what kind of people he's selecting as his closest advisors as opposed to just hoping that their past are simply not scrutinized.

9/12 Rally Attended by "Tens of Thousands"

www.dailymail.co.uk reports that as many as "a million" may have attended the 9/12 protest march. I'm pretty sure I'm skeptical of that number.
Michelle Malkin seems to think that it could be as high as two million. I'm even more skeptical.
Let's assume that the liberals are right and only tens of thousands showed up (30 to 60 thousand people). That's still nearly unheard of when you consider that the conservative elements of our society almost never turn out for "protest" marches. I'm sure that even at the low number of 30,000, that many of the left wing organizations are thinking "Holy Cow! We've got problems if the "silent" majority is starting to become activitsts."

What is far more illuminating, and far more hypocritical, is the attempt of the left wing to portray this "9/12" movement, or "tea party" movement as "astro-turf" and highly organized and further that the people in these tea party rallies are "crazy" or "lunatic".

How come when several hundred-thousand people march on Washington to grant amnesty to illegal resident aliens in this country, those people are NOT lunatics, or that the movement was genuine grass-roots with no organization at all. Are you really trying to sell me on the idea that ACORN or La Raza or any other leftist organizations had NO ROLE whatsoever in drumming up support for that rally? Really? Are you telling me that Code Pink never encouraged their membership to attend rallies? How about SEIU? How about Nation of Islam?

Come on, let's all grow up here. Sure, FreedomWorks, MoveAmericaForward, Glenn Beck's 9/12 project and many others encouraged their subscribers to show up. But to tell me that the LEFT NEVER ORGANIZES is just another bald faced lie that they try to propound.

Instead, what is happening is that the "conservative" element of our national culture is scared witless at the massive and sweeping changes that have already occurred or are being seriously debated in Congress right now. 83% of Americans are happy with their healthcare plans and are very scared that the proposals currently being debated will either limit their choices or will cost more money for the same choices now.

Let's just stop the name calling. If leftist organizations want to organize and march on Washington, let them. It's their right. If rightist organizations want to organize, let them. It's their right.