An Amnesty Band-Aid

The general outcry of the Republican leadership and the party's intelligencia is that we must moderate our positions on social issues, particularly on illegal immigration.  “We lost the Hispanic vote because we are too hardline on amnesty!” they cry.  However, I would say that the Hispanic vote was lost to the Republicans before the election cycle even began.  This is nothing new; large segments of the Hispanic population have voted overwhelming for Democrats for decades.  Coming out in support of amnesty would be like putting a Band-Aid over a gaping wound in need of stitches.  In other words, we know that it is not the solution to the problem.  We have, in fact, historical evidence of this.  In the 1980s, Reagan granted amnesty to illegal aliens living in the United States.  This neither won the political loyalty of the Hispanic population nor stopped the flow of illegal aliens into this country.  So if amnesty isn’t the key to winning the Hispanic vote, what is?

I would say that the Republicans’ problem is larger than opposition to amnesty; it is about culture and assimilation.  Hispanic culture throughout the Western Hemisphere is as diverse as a cross-section of the cultures in Europe.  Each country (and each region within each country, for that matter) has its own traditions, way of life, and even its own dialect of Spanish.  What is it, then, that leads to Hispanics joining together as a voting bloc in the United States?   One thing that all Spanish-speaking nations have in common is that their populations overwhelming identify themselves as Catholic.  During the 1960s, the Catholic Church in Latin America (and more than a few parishes in North America) experienced the teachings of liberation theology.  This movement was largely a humanistic interpretation of the Scriptures, particularly the New Testament, and gave rise to the idea of “social justice," in the Marxist sense, not just as a political movement but a religious one.  Liberation theology advocates the redistribution of wealth and populist revolts to establish governments that would follow these teachings. 

With help from this movement, almost all Latin American countries were (and some are currently) controlled by regimes that fully embrace Marxism dressing in religious clothing.  To the leaders of these regimes, liberation theology was a means of preempting their own overthrow.  The people would not rise up in revolt because they were taught by their faith’s leaders that social justice is a religious obligation.  They did not hear opposing views or about different economic theories because the government controlled the education system (if there was any education to be had).  In the 1980s, the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith repudiated the Marxist elements of liberation theology because it ultimately led to a situation where “the Church of the people” conflicted with the “hierarchical Church”.  In spite of Vatican’s official disagreement with liberation theology, there are still to this day many priests and bishops (and a few cardinals) that embrace it.  When I lived in the Bay Area, I was hard-pressed to find a parish where priests were not pushing liberalism from the pulpit.  I even walked out of Mass during a homily in which the priest blamed the United States for the events of 9-11.  Little did I know back then (in 2005) that there was another religious leader named Jeremiah Wright who was singing from the same hymnal.

When Hispanics (or members of any other ethnic group) migrate to the United States, they do not leave their traditions and religions behind.  Nor should they; the beauty of our country as founded is that we are by default an inclusive society where all people are free to live as they choose.  Problems arise when no effort is made on the part of the immigrant to learn about the ways and culture of their new home.  In fact, in many states immigrants don’t even have to learn English for day to day interaction with the public. There is no expectation that any immigrant, Hispanic or not, legal or not, has to in any way adapt to the ways of their new homeland.  If we do expect it, liberals call us racists and xenophobes. 

That is what conservatism is up against. We have to undo 40 years of conditioning that has led generations of people to believe that it is a government’s job to make Christian charity compulsory.  Not only that, we also have to undo the conditioning of generations of Americans who were taught that “multiculturalism” means that we cannot and should not expect immigrants to truly adopt the United States as their home and assimilate into American culture.  If it sounds like a tall order, that’s because it is.  In states like California, it may even be impossible.  This is why we need to seek cultural solutions, not political ones, to our current problems.  We must emphasize the common ground that we have and educate everyone on what can be done to meet our common goals.  We all want better for our children.  We want to have the freedom to pursue our dreams and be our best.  We want equality of opportunity for everyone who seeks success.  These are the things that all good people want, regardless of their race, creed, or nationality.

 

A Greasy Paper Bag

A very wise friend of mine once said, “Life’s lessons don’t always come to you wrapped in a pretty package.  Sometimes they get handed to you in a greasy paper bag.”  She told me this when I was at a definite low point in my life. I had been having difficulty with my boss at work and was just laid off.  This happened just as my fiancé was having difficulties at his job.  To add insult to injury, I learned that same week that I had not passed all of the sections of the Professional Engineering exam and would have to wait until October (the weekend we had planned to get married) to re-take it.  However, my friend’s gentle reminder gave me the encouragement that I needed to look at the situation with a clear mind and learn the lessons that were needed to move forward.  Given the way that the election went last night it’s time to roll up our sleeves, dig through the greasy paper bag, and find out what’s in it.

What did we learn about ourselves as a nation?

Mitt Romney was not incorrect when he said that at least 47% of the population was lost to him.  Last night was saw what happens when an administration chooses to buy votes by adding to the welfare rolls and removing any sort of working or job training requirement in order to receive government aid.  Why work for a living?  Working is for suckers!  The people who came out to vote for Obama were voting to preserve their bottomless bag of goodies from “Big Daddy Gubbmit.”  We truly have become a nation of petulant children who expect mommy and daddy to foot the bill on everything from our cell phones to housing, from college tuition to healthcare.  Hence we have the Occupy movement. 

There is also an obvious lack of self-esteem in this country!  The exit polling indicates that while voters thought Romney was better equipped to handle the economy, people voted for Obama because he “cares” about people like them.  He “cares” about minorities.  He “cares” about women.  He “cares” about the GLBT community.  This is an effect of the chickafication of society; it’s more important have someone “care” than it is for you to actually care for and like yourself.  Other than pandering to these groups, what has Obama done for them?  The last time I checked, unemployment among minorities is higher than the national average.  Are there no women or gays who have lost their jobs in the last four years?  These groups see themselves as victims, and it’s easier to be a victim and do nothing for one’s self than it is to stand up for one’s self as an individual with dignity and self-worth.  Self-esteem comes from achievement, and I am not talking about the “everyone getting a trophy for participation” kind.

How do we show the way to these lost souls?  It’s simple.  The government cannot possibly sustain the level of current spending, let alone the projected growth in spending.  These entitlements will collapse under their own weight.  When they do, from whence will all the freebies come?  There will be no more freebies.  Sure the government can try to raise taxes and may even succeed in that regard (as with California’s Prop 30).  However, the golden goose is going to croak sometime.  When it does, these people realize that the only way to get and keep what they want is to earn it, we will be there to show them how.  Accomplishment breeds confidence which, in turn, leads to self-esteem.  When victims start to stand up for themselves, liberalism will lose its appeal.

What did we learn about the Republican Party?

We conservatives should never EVER allow the Wizards of Smart in our own party or in the media tell us that we should nominate someone because they are “electable”.  Every time in my lifetime that this has happened, the Republicans have lost the White House.  Every last one of them told us that our only choice was Romney.  I am not making disparaging remarks about Governor Romney.  He is a good, decent man and an all-around class act.  Compared to Obama’s lack of credentials, Romney had an excellent track record on the economy in both his private and political careers.  He was also quite milquetoast compared to the flashy, hip “Campaigner in Chief”.  The one glimmer of what could have been was Romney’s brilliant performance in the first Presidential debate.  I only wish that he had been that articulate and fired up for the whole of the campaign.  Being President is not just a job, it is a vocation.  If one does not have the fire within to be President, one should not run.

The GOP was scared to be seen as the “mean party”.  They didn’t want to look like the boys of Cobra Kai beating up Daniel-San.  They were so concerned with the optics that they forgot the message.  At no point in the campaign did I ever hear of Obama calling on his supporters to quit picking on Romney’s faith.  Neither did I hear him ask for moderation of the comments misrepresenting Bain Capital and the role of private equity investment in our economy.  In fact, he was the source of some of those remarks!

  The Republican Party needs to stop worrying about what liberals will say about them because no matter how many minorities we as a party embrace, no matter how nice we are, no matter how mild-mannered we are, Republicans will always be portrayed as the party of mean, racist, sexist, homophobes who have taken advantage of the poor to gain wealth.  Who are the people that matter?  The conservative base and the folks who do not follow politics but every four years, that’s who.  If a candidate cannot mobilize his base to campaign for him (rather than against the other guy), how can he hope to persuade the people in the middle?

What did conservatives learn about themselves?

Even when we are not entirely enthusiastic about a candidate, look at all the work we can do!  I live in Santa Barbara County, which went blue this election.  Yet everywhere I went, there were signs for Republican congressional and state assembly candidates, as well as Romney-Ryan signs.  Even if there was a lack of enthusiasm, there was a lot of visibility. Imagine if our candidates had been able to fire up the base and get conservatives excited!  I have trouble believing that Lois Capps would even have had a snowball’s chance in hell of re-election if there had been a conservative on the ticket.

We are the ones with the real power in the Republican Party.  The House of Representatives is still in GOP hands because of Tea Party candidates who have held their ground on principles.  It is up to us to take the reins of leadership from the GOP establishment.  Since 2006 they have squandered the blood, sweat, and tears of every single one of us who has worked on the phone banks, sent mailers, posted signs, and faced off debates with acquaintances (sometimes even losing friendships over our beliefs).  The establishment will not give up power easily.  In fact, they may even try to tack farther left to stay in power in Washington, D.C.  We cannot let them!  Hold them accountable because we sent them to D.C. and we can send them home.

What do we do now?

We keep on doing what we have always done: we work hard to support ourselves and our families.  We give to charity to help those less fortunate than ourselves.  We persevere.  Even as the government makes it more difficult to do so, we will find a way.  We need to be vocal about our principles and demonstrate them in our daily lives and lead by example.  I know this sounds like what we were doing in the campaign, but this cannot be an “every four years” sort of thing.  We have to do it every single day.  Regardless of who may or may not be watching, we have to put our best selves forward and be the living examples of how conservatism works.

We must also work for change.  We have midterm elections in two years.  If you have the passion and the drive to do so, run for office.  We need fresh faces and new voices articulating our ideas.  Encourage your friends and family members to run if you don’t have the heart or stomach for it.  Our Founding Fathers envisioned the citizen-statesman, someone who is called from private life to serve his country as an elected representative and then return to private life when his work was done.  It’s time for us to quit looking to the establishment to change their ways and time for us step up.

Vote Early, Often, and Illegally

The Obama administration continues it's Democrat Voter Drive (after the colossal flop of the War on Women) by announcing today that it will grant immunity and work permits to young adults who were brought to the United States as children.  According to the story posted this morning on The Hill's website, those eligible for this "deferred action" (as Homeland Security Sec. Janet Napolitano calls it) are illegal aliens under the age of 30 who were brought here before the age of 16 and claim to have been in the United States continuously for the past 15 years.  They also cannot have a criminal record and must apply for a two-year work permit.  This work permit does not have a limit on the number of times that it can be renewed.


At first blush, this strategy serves two purposes.  This first is to assuage Latino lobbyists who have previously raised concerns that the Administration is not doing enough for them.  In the not to distant past, President Obama chided the pro-amensty crowd for blaming him for the failure to pass the DREAM Act.  As of last year, the President said "The fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce.  And I think there's been a great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetuating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things.  It's just not true."  So, other than the fact that Obama is busying trying to get re-elected with a shrinking economy and high unemployment, what's changed?


The other, perhaps less obvious, purpose is to ensure that these newly legal residents will vote like good little Democrats.  The illegals that can apply for and be issued work permits are practically guaranteed to have been properly indoctrinated in the ways of liberalism.  The youngest in this group will have just graduated from high school.  The oldest in the group will either be in grad school or less than five years out of college.  Couple that with the high probability that these young adults were raised to not assimilate into American culture (but rather maintain a culture separate from and untrusting of American culture), and you have a recipe for the perfect class warfare voter.


Of course, some people will still look at this and say that this doesn't affect voter rolls because legal residents are not necessarily citizens.  Because only citizens legally have the right to vote, these young adults would not be eligible.  One would have to be naive to not account for the recent Department of Justice assaults on state governments seeking to purge their voter rolls of fraudulent registrations or enact voter ID laws.  Just like the seemingly off-the-wall question that Mitt Romney was asked about the states' ability to take away birth control, Attorney General Eric Holder's aggressive opposition to fix the issues of voter fraud and voter identification was a prelude to this latest outrage.


I call this an outrage because it is being done via an executive order and without legislation from Congress.  Congress already tried this once before with the DREAM Act.  The attempt was shot down in flames when people flooded the phone lines and inboxes of their Senators and Representatives to protest it.  Liberals can only get their way by either judicial activism or by fiat.  While illegal immigration is a large and as of yet unresolved issue, there is a much more threatening precedent being set here: can the President use an executive order indiscriminately?


At this nation's founding, the idea of an all-powerful executive was repugnant.  To the mainstream, it still is.  From a constitutional standpoint, the President has the following authority: "The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America...To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof."  The Internet is already abuzz with liberals pointing to Reagan's granting amnesty to illegal aliens as an example of this already being done in the past.  There's one little problem, though.  Reagan granted amnesty because Congress had first passed a law that granted him the authority to do so.  


Because the power to make Federal laws is exclusively reserved for Congress, what law is Obama executing by the issuance of this executive order?  Undoubtedly, the constitutionally of this will be challenged.  In fact, observers on the left and the right already acknowledge that this is unconstitutional.  The question is, will it be too late or will it even matter to this President?  The fact that it is backdoor amnesty is outrageous.  The manner in which it is being done is Orwellian.

Back with a Vengence!

So, we meet again! After much tumult in my personal life (getting laid off, working multiple jobs to pay the bills, getting a roommate, interviewing for a new job, getting a new job, losing the roommate, and on and on and...you get the idea) I have returned to the blogosphere. First of all, let me say that I have a lot of ground to cover since I really don't have an outlet other than the unfortunates known as my family and friends. I'm sure that they get sick of discussing politics with me, especially my "to the left of FDR" friends. To them I say: Relax, go read some HuffPo, and hug a tree while I blog.


The last time that I posted, voters in California had just rejected four of five ballot initiatives brought to you buy our opportunistic State Senator-turned-Lieutenant Governor Abel Maldonado and a bunch of backroom dealing political hacks. They tried to convince us that we greedy working people needed to cough up more money to pay for Sacramento's precious social programs and feed the bloated tick that is our state's bureacracy. We were told that if we didn't tax ourselves into poverty, then the state would slide off into the ocean . Well, we didn't and...didn't. My apologies to the states of Arizona and Nevada; I'm sure that you were looking forward to some oceanfront property.


Our state is facing record deficits (again) and IOU's being issued to employees and contractors (again). According to the Employment Development Department, California's unemployment rate is 12.4%. On a national level, the unemployment rate was just reported at 9.8%. In the face of all of this what has California's legislators done? They have voted even more government spending, raised "fees" on industries and businesses still in the state, and passed a cap-and-trade bill that has our state's private sector economy shrinking. Whole companies have either gone belly up or have left California. In spite of all of this, what did the voters of California do? They voted to keep the status quo. Why? There are a few factors to consider.

Factor #1: California now has more people living off the government, both in the form of handouts and government employment. A state that is drowning in red ink is also the state's biggest employer. More than half of those employed in California are government employees. These employees all pay dues to their respective unions. As a former state employee (I quit because I actually like to finish projects), I had to pay $40 a month to the union despite the fact that I wasn't a member! How did they get away with this? State agencies are union-shops in California. Because I supposedly reaped the benefits of collective bargaining, I had to pay dues. What a racket! Even if you aren't a member, you are still funding the union's PAC and their candidates.

Factor #2: Almost all of the sane people have left the state, leaving the rest of us in the minority. I graduated from high school in a class of 150 students. Of those 150, about one-third of them have left California. There are roughly 37 million people in California. Of those people, 33% of them are under the age of 18 and a little over 11% are 65 and older. So, right off the top, you have 44% of the population that isn't working for a living. Of course, one would assume that the under 18 crowd is being provided for by their parents in some way or another. However, 2008 marked the first year that more people were actually leaving California than were coming here. If the people that I see in my day-to-day life are any indication, the only ones still here are senior citizens, kids, and illegal aliens that have fled Arizona.

Factor #3: At the state-level, the Republican Party still doesn't get it. Look at who we had for political candidates this last go-round. We were asked to hold our noses, once more, and vote for the lesser of two evils. Meg Whitman ran like John McCain. In other words, she ran a horrible campaign. It should have been easy to beat Governor Moonbeam; look at all the material you have. Jerry Brown hasn't had a private sector job since 1970. To give you a little perspective, my mom was ten years old the last time that Jerry Brown earned a paycheck that didn't come from a municipal or state treasury. Whitman didn't have to run a negative campaign to beat Jerry Brown. All she had to do was list his accomplishments while serving has Governor, Mayor of Oakland, and Attorney General.

Is California beyond hope? It's difficult to stay optimistic in the face of this past November. If California is going to recover and become prosperous again, we need to quit doing more of the same. By and large, all the State Legislature's incumbents were re-elected. Even though the governorship switch parties, it didn't change the agenda. Schwarzenegger abandoned conservative principles years ago so he could "get along" with everyone entrenched in Sacramento and still get invitations to Hollywood cocktail parties after he leaves the state's capital. I also suspect there was an element of domestic harmony to be maintained, as well. If you thought Ah-nuld was a schmuck, wait until Moonbeam gets sworn in for the third time.

At least we still have the recall referendum.

Shame, Shame, Shame!

The New York Times has excoreated Californians for voting against more tax-and-spend (and tax some more) policies. Ah, yes. Shame on those of us who work for a living, for wanting to keep more of our hard-earned money so we can continue living in the most expensive state in the Union without being on the government dole. We should all hang our heads because we are so very selfish for not wanting to continue to send our money to Sacramento. What a bunch of ingrates we are! How dare we prevent more funding for the n'er-do-wells in government who are already too busy spending our tax money to actually get a real job? What an outrage that we may actually have to trim the fat off the budgets of the state's various bureaucracies, not the least of which are education system, environmental regulating agencies, and *gasp* welfare benefits! Mea culpa.

Of special note, all of the emphasis is being placed on cuts in the state's education system. First off, look at how liberals love to use children as a human shield for their policies. Strictly looking at the amount of money spent per child in California and then looking at the results, I'd say that California's education system has been a poor investment. Students graduating from high school should have enough education to either go to college or get an entry-level job. I hate to break it to you, but there are teenagers graduating who can barely read and write at the sixth grade level. Don't even get me started on the lack of work ethic or professionalism of these alleged young adults. And why should they have to work for achievement in academics? After all, in the state of California teachers seem to have made it a regular practice to pass the failing students (we don't want to damage their budding self-esteem). When they graduate with their Cracker Jack diploma, they can continue to live off their parents or apply for welfare benefits. Meanwhile, the California Teacher's Assocation is allowed to engage in the type of behavior that helped the United Auto Workers bring down the auto industry in this country. Think fat pensions, tenure based on seniority (not performance), and a political action committee that might as well be a branch office for the DNC.

The governor, in an effort to scaremonger us into voting for higher taxes and more borrowing, threatened to cut funding for law enforcement and firefighters...during a wildfire that destroyed 80 homes and almost 8000 acres in the Santa Barbara area. That's low (even for a politician). Why not reduce welfare benefits and use that money to maintain the funding for law enforcement and emergency services? Reducing welfare would serve multiple purposes. It would take away the incentive for laziness, incentivize hard work, and possibly discourage some would-be illegal aliens from coming here. I also bet you would see a precipitous drop in the number of pregnant, unwed mothers in California.

We should be ashamed of ourselves. Not for the outcome of yesterday's vote, but for the fact that it even had to take place. The last time the people of California were this focused on the state's budget issues was back when we recalled Gray Davis and elected "Ah-nuld". California's budget mess should have been straightened out then, rather than enacting some feel-good brand of bipartisanship that only kicked the can down the road. Only now that individuals and businesses are relocating to less hostile environments (and taking their tax dollars with them) are the politicians being faced with having to enact real budget reform. Let's hope that Californians have finally learned a lesson that they won't soon forget.

"Why Make Trillions When We Could Make...Billions?"

In an effort to show that he is working on maintaining a balanced federal budget, the Lord Messiah, Barack Obama the Most Merciful (LMBOMM, for short) had told his Cabinet that they must cut $100 million in spending from the proposed $3.5 trillion budget (see the story here). For visual reference,

that is this many: $100,000,000

from this many: $3,500,000,000,000

Do you notice something strange about this? The amount to be cut is only 0.0029% of the budget! Apparently, our "articulate, bright and clean" president (per our vice president's description) either really sucks at math, or is a graduate of the Dr. Evil School of Economics, which is located on the same campus as the Joe Biden Institute of ABCs and 123s (and the Derek Zoolander School for Kids Who Don't Read Good, and Want to Learn How to Do Other Stuff Good Too). Maybe I'm being too hard on Obama. After all he may have meant to to say $100 billion, but the teleprompter technician miskeyed it.

All joking aside, though, even $100 billion would be a pittance compared to the size of this budget (it would only be a 2.9% reduction). Just think about it. Three. And One-Half. Trillion. Dollars. There is slightly over 300 million people in the U.S. That means that if they decided to divy this up to every man, woman, and child we would each get $11,666.67. Of course, that wouldn't happen because the people that make over $250,000 a year are included in that 300 million people. This budget is 60 times Bill Gates' estimated net worth. If you hear a peculiar sucking sound, that's the sound of your hard-earned money leaving your wallet. Don't worry, though. Obama is going to "spread the wealth around" and make things better for you...with your own money.

Real Change is My Cup of T.E.A.

A few things caught my attention about yesterday's TEA (Taxed Enough Already) parties. First off, how very normal the attendees looked. If one were to believe Janet Napolitano, we should have been looking at a bunch of fatigues-wearing, gun-toting Aryan Nation and Ruby Ridge types. We should have also expected to see effigies of Obama being burned or hanging from a noose. Another thing that struck me was how the media coverage largely focused on reaction from elected officials (i.e. the targets of these tea parties), not what was being said at the rallies. Any attention that was drawn to the attendees contained the following: 1) these were all orchestrated by conservative think-tanks and talk radio, 2) attendees are nothing more than anti-government malcontents, and 3) the attendees fit the Department of Homeland Security's description of the "right-wing extremist". The drive-bys also had a penchant for referring to participants as "teabaggers". Use urbandictionary.com to look it up, because I'm not going to explain it here (this isn't a public high school sex ed class).

Now, I attended one of the the tea parties here on the central coast of California. There were anywhere from 1500 to 2000 people. This was just one of the seven tea parties held between Ventura and Monterey (that I know of). The crowd had people of all ages, ethnicities, and walks of life. Attendees were unfailingly polite, even when the event was over and everyone was trying to vacate the parking lot. There were no riots, no burning cars, and no one attacking the police detail. In short, we were better behaved than most California protesters (unlike the protests that followed the passage of Prop 8).

In addition to protesting higher federal taxation, we were also protesting higher state taxes and onerous environmental regulations based on incomplete or fake research. California has the seventh largest economy in the world. Why is it then that California is in tank with an ever-increasing budget gap, while we have the highest income tax rate in the nation (and the sixth highest per capita total taxation)? Our current legislators think that the solution is to increase our income taxes, our sales tax, the fuel tax, the alcohol tax, the tobacco tax, and our vehicle registration fees. On top of these increases are new taxes on services such as auto repair and veterinary care.

Why do we have regulations in our state that stifle economic growth in the name of "environmental preservation" when there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that these measures actually work? The last thing California needs is the tax base leaving for places like Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and Colorado. Or, in the case of some of my wiser friends, Texas. On a side note, can I adopt Rick Perry as my governor? Between that, and having Rudy Giuliani run for mayor of Los Angeles we could really clean up California. All I'm saying is think about it.

Who's going to pay taxes to support welfare benefits and state employee retirement plans? Illegal aliens and welfare recipients don't pay income taxes and theoretically don't pay very many other taxes, either. Even supposedly recession-proof industries like engineering and health care are suffering here, thanks to an orgy of lawsuits and state-funded programs ruining any prospect of private sector survival. California, and other welfare states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and New York are prime examples of what the rest of the nation will become if people don't wake up and take action. The tea parties were a great first step...now we need the follow-through to bring about change that we can really believe in (without the aid of a teleprompter).