Immigration Reform Sounds Great, But Get It Right

English: Benjamin Franklin National Memorial i...

Benjamin Franklin National Memorial in the Franklin Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

 

Immigration Reform is finally front and center in our national debate, no thanks to a feckless President unwilling to show his hand in this controversial debate. A group of republican and democratic Senators have come forward with a framework for a bill they hope to write, then pass on to the GOP controlled House by Spring. It’s a noble effort that will only become law if priorities are straight. And so far I’ve not seen evidence that their priorities are straight. So far, the only priority I’ve seen bantered about is the news medias claim the Republicans might come on board due to their desire for Hispanic votes. How’s that sit with you for integrity?

Estimates place the number of illegal aliens in this country at 11 million persons. 40% of these immigrants came to the country legally and over-stayed their visas. 80% of these illegals came from Mexico or some Latin nation. All of them place heavy burdens on our countries resources; jobs, welfare, schools, hospitals, justice system, etc. It’s a blight on the country and a serious threat to both economic recovery and deficit spending. And unless the problem is solved there is no hope of it getting better. It will only get worse. So some compromise, in the spirit of Benjamin Franklin, seems in order.

One of our countries greatest statesmen was the Philadelphia printer who almost singlehandedly brought the French into the Revolutionary War, and through an established aura pressed authors of our Federal Constitution to accord. The 81-year old Franklin urged his fellow delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention to be willing to sacrifice, not their principles, but their overwhelming urge to be right.

Franklin said that day that through his long life, he had often been forced

“by better information or fuller consideration to change opinions . . . which I once thought right, but found to be otherwise. It is therefore that the older I grow, the more apt I am to doubt my own judgment, and to pay more respect to the judgment of others.”

Details of the proposed immigration reform plan can be read in detail here, in the ABC News story: Details of the Immigration Plan.

What has always been the sticking point is what to do with the 11-million illegals already in this country. Hard liners insist they not get “amnesty”. But lets face it. Such a stance is both un-American and cruel. Americans grant amnesty all the time. It was written into the Constitution that Franklin worked so hard on. But Liberal Democrats have never wanted to face the reality of Republican priorities first: secure the border and remove the magnets. Granting illegals a path to citizenship is absolutely fine with me. But first things first. The border must be secured and allowing illegals to suck-up every welfare and entitlement program this country offers will not diminish the uncontrolled flow of illegal immigrants into this country. It will, in fact, accelerate it.

I’ve never understood why Democrats failed to understand that the jobs and benefits taken by illegals more drastically affect people who statistically tend to be Democratic voters. When you employ a Spanish-speaking person to cook your hamburgers, lay your carpet or install your new roof you aren’t taking a job from some college educated intellectual. You are taking a job from the least educated in our society, and far too often that person is black. When you provide a Section 8, or welfare home, to an illegal Mexican family you aren’t shutting out that home from a Stanford University grad and their kids. The American family who needs the warmth and security of that shelter is poor and ill-educated.

The current compromise proposal calls for more border agents and security monitoring using unmanned drones before any amnesty is granted. This sounds like a step in the right direction. It also proposes stream-lining the legal immigration process to make it easier to come into this country than the current nightmarish system. It also allows for more immigrants to legally come during times of economic growth and slow immigration during times of no or slow growth. Again, good ideas.

American Civil Liberties Union

The American Civil Liberties Union, or ACLU, has already come out against a registration plan allowing background checks for employers to see if potential new hires are legal residents in this country. They have an excellent point. A national ID card program, which this plan would certainly require, is an infringement on the implied Constititional right to privacy. But the problem can be easily solved by making the Federal Background check program and registration voluntary. If employers choose not to use it and are found to have hired illegals penalize them with such severe consequences that they would be unwise to not use it.

At the turn of the 20th Century and just before, this country was being overwhelmed by new immigrants. But at that time you were not allowed into this country without a sponsor and without a desirable skill. That too would seem to be a standard in our own national interests.

I don’t expect this bill to go anywhere. Because while I hope and expect Republicans to compromise on the “path to citizenship” issue; I expect Democrats to use the poor Hispanics/Latinos in this country as they continue to use the blacks in this country as political footballs with which to perpetually bash the GOP and subsequently remain in power. It’s not solutions they want. They’ll paint the Republicans reasonable positions regarding border security first as too tough and inhumane. And in doing so the complicit media will again drive more Latinos into the hands of their overseers, the Democratic party.

Conservatives look in the Mirror

English: Seal of the President of the United S...

 

Americans have re-elected a President presiding over 7.9% unemployment and GDP growth below 2%. These are by far the worst economic numbers overcome by a President winning re-election since Franklin Roosevelt in 1936.

 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933. Lietuvių: Fra...

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, 1933.

 

It’s not too difficult to figure how this happened.

 

There are currently 47-million Americans on food stamps. Just how many of them voted for Mitt Romney? Seriously…can you really expect a dog to bite the hand that feeds it? President Obama received a total of 58-million votes. And if 95% of food stamp recipients voted for him then all he would have needed was 12-million non-food stamp recipients to vote his way to overcome Romney’s total. Obama has created this dependency. It’s not likely they’ll vote against the person who keeps giving them their candy.

 

In spite of the Federal Government-gives-candy-advantage Obama held; Romney still could have won this election had Conservatives not self-destructed. The most obvious failing comes from the selfish, masturbatory Libertarian voters who sent nearly 1.2-million votes to Gary Johnson.

 

Gary Johnson

Gary Johnson 

 

Add in the 0.1-1.4% (depending on the state) of “voters” who wasted their vote on the Constitution Party candidate and you have just enough Conservative voters to match Obama in the popular vote. There’s no doubt in my mind that had this 1-2% of voters not bashed Romney as equally and vociferously as they did Obama over the course of the past year we’d be celebrating a Romney victory this morning. Florida is still too close to call and Virginia, Ohio and Colorado went to Obama by less than 2%. That’s the whole ball game.

 

What troubles me now and did so throughout the campaign is the foolish, bigoted, and hateful comments about Obama and his supporters that continuously poured from Conservative corners. The “birther” issue was and remains idiotic. And it was clearly racist. What I never understood was the point of it. Obama could have been born on Mars. Because his Mom was an American citizen so was he. The end result was the extreme side of Conservative politics continually gave Liberals all the ammunition they needed to once again paint those with our point of view as angry, mean, and bigoted.

 

Since the 1930s more Americans have identified themselves as Democrats than Republicans. And over the past 20 years more and more Americans are identifying themselves as independent. Overall, it’s roughly 1/3 Democrats, Republicans and independents. Polls show Romney won independents. But he didn’t win Democrats, not enough of them anyway. If scary, angry, bigoted Conservatives (what few of them there are) scare-off even a small percentage of independents and all Democrats,  Republicans don’t have a chance…not in 2012, and certainly not going forward as our country increasingly becomes less white and more brown.

 

Karl Rove correctly points out that there is no reason Republicans shouldn’t enjoy more support from this countries Hispanics. Generally speaking they are more religious and focused on family values than the overall populous. With such values they should vote for the GOP. But they don’t. Yesterday and in 2008 they vote close to 70% for Democrats. Why is that? Only one reason: too many Republicans allow  hateful xenophobic attitudes to exist within our own political discourse without justly shouting them down. And I for one am sick of it.

 

It makes me mad as hell to have Liberals who don’t know me constantly assume I’m a bigot. It happens all the time. And it diminishes me in the eyes of my kids, my black kids. It’s important that my values are passed on to my kids so that they may pass them on to their kids, etc etc. But like all young people my kids are influenced not only by me but by what they see and hear in society. And if I’m less trusted and less understood simply because I’m associated with people who espouse bigotry I’m naturally going to be hurt in my efforts to stand as a good example to my children. I worry about this constantly.

 

Republicans have to bring people to the party and not repel them. With a country that is increasingly made up of people of color we’re going to have to see to it that we not only attract them but repel and reject the angry bigots. They don’t make-up a large percentage of Conservatives or Republicans. But they don’t need to in order to chase away any chance the party has of winning in the future.

 

God Bless America.

 

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

 

The Dumbest People in America

English: President Barack Obama shakes hands w...

President Barack Obama shakes hands with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

Tell me, what’s wrong with this picture: The state of Nevada continues to have one of the worst unemployment rates in the country at 11.8%, 4-points above the national average and President Barack Obama maintains a slight edge in polling over Republican challenger Mitt Romney.

So this state that re-elected Dingy Harry Reid in 2010 to the U.S. Senate and then subsequently the Majority Leader position while battling unemployment over 14% at that time seems resistant to changing the leadership that has presided over their horrible conditions.

English: Night Panorama of the Las Vegas Strip...

Nevada also ranks sixth nationally in home foreclosures. At one time in the last four years they were number 1. And without looking this up to verify I can safely say the state of Nevada is first in the nation in gambling expenditures. And you can judge for yourself the morals and wisdom in Nevada being the only state in the country with legal prostitution.

And then there is the fact that Nevadans built their largest city in a desert, bereft of any sufficient water supply.

Las Vegas Strip in HDR

Las Vegas Strip

The polling numbers today got me wondering if the people in Nevada aren’t the dumbest people in the country. Why on earth would you continue to elect the leaders in charge of your horrible economic conditions.

So then I got to thinking about who the dumbest people in the country truly might be. I’d be interested in my readers nominations. But aside from Nevadans one group of people leaped into my head: television reporters and/or personalities. Calling tv reporters journalists is an insult to journalists.

This opinion isn’t based solely on partisan resentment for what is displayed daily on MSNBC. I was a journalist. I worked among newspaper, radio, tv, and magazine reporters for a number of years. I was at press conferences with the local, state or national politicians who had to face tough questions. I sat through more than my share of boring city and county and legislative council meetings. I stuck my microphone in the face of some of the country’s most prominent people; and usually did so side-by-side with other scribes and with the hot lights of television cameras shining over my shoulder.

And though its been 20 years since I worked professionally in reporting the news, all indications are that my personal experience with these walking, talking Barbie and Ken dolls remains a valid point of view. Let me state that like everything in life there are exceptions. But on whole I found tv reporters shallow primadonas without the intellectual capability of your average gas station attendant. I was awestruck on frequent occasions to hear questions of news worthy individuals that did little to expand on the story at hand, did little to enlighten the viewer. Usually, tv reporters benefited from the questioning of other more erudite journalists who usually came from the print or radio industry. Print reporters were generally quite arrogant and did little to hide their contempt for the average tv reporter…or news subject…for that matter. Radio journalist were the ones I respected the most. As a radio reporter you must ask your subjects questions that expand the story. Yes or No answers don’t work on radio. You need your subject to talk in order to get the sound bite that is long enough and interesting enough to include in your story. Being able to do this is not always easy and one reason I found more intelligence in the average radio journalist than in the average tv reporter.

TV news at the Empire State Building shooting

TV reporters were always more interested in how they looked on camera than in the facts of a given story. And in today’s world they seem utterly oblivious to fair and balanced reporting. It’s not so much that they boldly state ill-informed, uneducated opinions; it’s that they set a premise for their reporting and then work to shape the story to that premise rather than just gathering the facts with an unbiassed curiosity that allows for the truth to come out more frequently.

I also think its worth mentioning that among those who I learned to respect the most were the politicians. Politicians on the whole are genuinely smart people who care about the service they provide their constituency. I’m well aware of the average Americans contempt for politicians. And I understand that disrespect. But in my personal experience those who run for office have more education, wisdom, personality and compassion than other persons I’ve encountered in life. And I would say this of men and women from both parties. There are exceptions. But I am speaking generally.

So who would you nominate for the collectively dumbest people in America?

A friend posted on Facebook some time ago a quote I won’t soon forget because it’s true and its a little frightening. Half of all people are below average in intelligence. So now you have half the country, 1 out of every 2 people in which to choose.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

 

Understanding the Democrats

English: Number of self-identified Democrats v...

Number of self-identified Democrats vs. self-identified Republicans, per state, according to Gallup, January-June 2010

 

 

 

Every survey I’ve seen in the past decade or two indicates that most women consider themselves Democrats politically. Likewise, every survey I’ve seen in the past couple decades indicates that most men consider themselves Republicans, politically. Nobody should make the huge leap to argue that I am saying all women are Democrats and all men are Republican, or that Democratic men are somehow less manly. But I know some will. It’s inevitable.

 

Still, I do think some psychologic conclusions can be reached through these facts that will allow us to understand each other a little bit better where we disagree. And if you understand your political opponent more I’d like to think you are more likely to be able to find common ground.

 

Women crave security. Men crave independence. There. I’m done. These two statements sum up why Democrats and Republicans fight so much. If you don’t quite get it…allow me to explain.

 

In spite of Women’s Liberation, increasing freedom and less male dominance in the past 40-50 years woman still through nurture and nature have a strong desire for security. They don’t want to be fearful. They are averse to risk. Financial security is far more important to women than it is to men. The security of affection is stronger in women. A warm blanket to snuggle under on the couch while watching TV is cliche`. Knowing this, is it any wonder more women identify with the Democratic party? The Dems are the ones who want to provide you with everything you could possibly need, including…these days…cell phones.

 

Romney

Mitt Romney 

 

Also, with this in mind, it’s not surprising that President Barack Obama has been leading in polls over Mitt Romney among all women, (…at least until recently. More on this in a moment.) while Romney has been leading Obama among married women. Married women have far more security in their personal lives and have less of a need for security from the government. The converse can be said of single women.

 

English: Barack Obama delivers a speech at the...

Barack Obama 

 

If women crave security, what is it that most men desire? Men desire independence. Men don’t want to be told what to do. Men want to be men. I realize that I’m falling back on cliche` for some of this. But ultimately I only know what I know and no more. It’s instructive to realize that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Men and women are different, no matter how much Democrats want to insinuate that they aren’t. And men are more comfortable with risk than are women. Let’s face it, some men crave risk more than they crave independence  And at least since the time of Ronald Reagan and possibly as far back as Barry Goldwater the Republicans have rallied under the banner of less government and more freedom (also known as “risk” in many aspects of life) and independence. For men, it’s as if the GOP were some tall, leggy blonde in a tight sweater constantly winking at them. It’s too hard to resist the lure of freedom and independence…and risk.

 

So what’s wrong with women and Democrats seeking security while men and Republicans seek independence? Can’t we co-exist under such dissimilar desires? The answer is no because if you desire security then you desire someone giving you that security; because to provide that security yourself would require independence, and risk. And if you only get security from someone else, you give up some independence. When you’re single as a man or woman you have freedom. You can have drinks, dinner or sleep with whoever you want. When your married you can’t…or at least shouldn’t. Being single you have more independence. Being married you have more security. It’s the same in politics or government. So by desiring security through government Democrats are telling Republicans, and most men, to relinquish some independence. They’re telling single men to strap on the old ball and chain. Something men and Republicans are reluctant to do. It’s not in our DNA.

 

As it turns out President Obama is beginning to lose the argument for security. In polls released today by USA Today Romney has moved up into a tie with President Obama among women in the ten swing states that will determine our nation’s next President.

 

Romney and Obama tied amongst women 3 weeks before election.

 

It appears our nation’s women are beginning to understand that a better job, and better economy provide better security than can Obama’s government. Certainly, I agree.

 

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

 

Call us for effective, affordable marketing

 

 

Gubernatorial Debate | KCTS 9 – Public Television Serving Seattle, Central Washington and British Columbia

Please be informed. Please watch the entire Washington State Gubernatorial Debate from Yakima here on this link.

Washington State Attorney General Republican Rob McKenna shows great command and knowledge; while Democratic Congressman Jay Inslee is sometimes incomprehensible.

Gubernatorial Debate | KCTS 9 – Public Television Serving Seattle, Central Washington and British Columbia.

Seriously, after watching in all fairness you have to come to the same conclusion I have. The only thing that keeps Jay Inslee from being the dumbest person in Congress is that Washington Senator Patty Murray beat him to it.

Thanks for visiting. Comments are welcome.

  • Calendar

    • July 2020
      M T W T F S S
       12345
      6789101112
      13141516171819
      20212223242526
      2728293031  
  • Search