With the beginning of a new year Los Angeles government needs to identify and address the issues for 2008। Crime is always the number one issue but there are many other problems to tackle.
Here are my issues:
1. The number of police is too low compared to Chicago and NYC. We need to change the ratio.
2. LAUSD needs to be broken apart.
3. Illegal immigrants are over running our city. Our society is being affected both socially and financially by their presence. If Congress won’t pass legislation to make them legal we need to start returning them to their native countries.
4. There is a lack of affordable housing.
5. The city must become business friendly. There is a lack of decent paying jobs. There are plenty of jobs available at $10 per hour or less. No one can live here on that pay except students still living with their parents.
6. The traffic makes getting to work a nightmare for many people. We need better roads and an improved public transportation system. The “subway to the sea” is a good start.
7. We need to spend more money on our infrastructure. Paving streets and sidewalks, cleaning streets, cutting trees, replacing dead trees, improving and repairing parks and other public facilities.
8. Neighborhood councils need to be given direct control over the monies spent in their communities. An advisory roll is insufficient. Leadership of the councils should be elected on regular ballots not by a select few.
9. Oversight committees should be given the ability to stop payment when bond monies are misappropriated.
10. Planning commission meetings must be required to meet in the community that is affected by their decisions.
Monday, December 24, 2007
Friday, December 7, 2007
Oh, This Hurts!
How many people are following the debates (really forums) put on by each political party? Many commentators have said the numbers are small. I have not found any data on the internet to support or contradict those statements.
Although most of the candidates tend to mimic each others opinion in each political party there are some differences. Watching the news and listening to the candidates has slowly helped to define my positions. I am disappointed that none of the candidates have a vision of the future.
Here are my views on some of the leading candidates.
-Mitt Romney has changed most of his positions from the time he was governor of Massachusetts to when he became a candidate for president. His views as governor were relatively liberal and mostly aligned with the Democrats in that state. Now as a past governor and a man trying to win support in his conservative party he has espoused views that support very conservative positions. Romney is a flip flopper. He bows to opinion and has not taken any stand on any issue even if it is unpopular. His speech on his Mormon religion was excellent but does not changes his flip फ्लोप्पिंग ways on issues that really matter. He has not said anything that makes him a standout in the crowd.
-Mike Huckabee has declared himself the Christian candidate. He does not believe in evolution. He has implied that there is something wrong with Mitt Romney’s Mormon religion. There is no religious qualification for this job. As to Huckabee’s position on issues he seems to have mimicked Mitt Romney when he was governor of Arkansas. To Huckabee’s credit he does defend his action when he was governor. Defining himself as the Christian candidate eliminates him as someone I would support.
-Hillary Clinton has defined herself as the candidate with the experience that will enable her to walk into the White House and capably go to work because she was there before. She voted for the war in Iraq and does not regret it. Recently Mrs. Clinton voted to declare a military group sponsored by the state of Iran a terrorist organization. In light of the NIE report that Iran stopped developing nuclear weapons in 2003 it appears her decision was wrong. Her contention that experience trumps new ideas is hard to swallow. Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney came to the current administration with significant experience and their assessment of Iraq was entirely wrong. Still she is smart, wise, and seems most likely to be the candidate most likely to succeed as president.
-Barak Obama calls himself the man with hope (his book “The Audacity of Hope”) and the man with new ideas. He points out that he would not have voted for the war in Iraq. He would directly personally negotiate with the leaders of other countries to avoid war. He does have some issues that he has not resolved or cannot resolve. He is young and in his first term as a Senator. His experience in government is small. Mr. Obama was not present to cast his ballot on the resolution to declare a military group sponsored by the state of Iran a terrorist organization (the one that Hilary Clinton voted yes). He then proceeded to criticize Mrs. Clinton’s decision to vote yes. In the Philadelphia debate in October Mr. Obama criticized Mrs. Clinton’s equivocation on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens but he too gave a long answer to the yes or no question (Should illegal aliens be issued driver’s licenses?
-John Edwards has a clear vision of where he stands on most issues. Like Barak Obama he has limited experience in government. He did vote for the Iraq war but has regretted that decision. His positions have been strongly in support of unions and working class people. He is wealthy and that has been held against him because he earned the money as a lawyer. I have not found any significant contradictions in his positions although he has become more strident with the passing of time.
Although most of the candidates tend to mimic each others opinion in each political party there are some differences. Watching the news and listening to the candidates has slowly helped to define my positions. I am disappointed that none of the candidates have a vision of the future.
Here are my views on some of the leading candidates.
-Mitt Romney has changed most of his positions from the time he was governor of Massachusetts to when he became a candidate for president. His views as governor were relatively liberal and mostly aligned with the Democrats in that state. Now as a past governor and a man trying to win support in his conservative party he has espoused views that support very conservative positions. Romney is a flip flopper. He bows to opinion and has not taken any stand on any issue even if it is unpopular. His speech on his Mormon religion was excellent but does not changes his flip फ्लोप्पिंग ways on issues that really matter. He has not said anything that makes him a standout in the crowd.
-Mike Huckabee has declared himself the Christian candidate. He does not believe in evolution. He has implied that there is something wrong with Mitt Romney’s Mormon religion. There is no religious qualification for this job. As to Huckabee’s position on issues he seems to have mimicked Mitt Romney when he was governor of Arkansas. To Huckabee’s credit he does defend his action when he was governor. Defining himself as the Christian candidate eliminates him as someone I would support.
-Hillary Clinton has defined herself as the candidate with the experience that will enable her to walk into the White House and capably go to work because she was there before. She voted for the war in Iraq and does not regret it. Recently Mrs. Clinton voted to declare a military group sponsored by the state of Iran a terrorist organization. In light of the NIE report that Iran stopped developing nuclear weapons in 2003 it appears her decision was wrong. Her contention that experience trumps new ideas is hard to swallow. Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney came to the current administration with significant experience and their assessment of Iraq was entirely wrong. Still she is smart, wise, and seems most likely to be the candidate most likely to succeed as president.
-Barak Obama calls himself the man with hope (his book “The Audacity of Hope”) and the man with new ideas. He points out that he would not have voted for the war in Iraq. He would directly personally negotiate with the leaders of other countries to avoid war. He does have some issues that he has not resolved or cannot resolve. He is young and in his first term as a Senator. His experience in government is small. Mr. Obama was not present to cast his ballot on the resolution to declare a military group sponsored by the state of Iran a terrorist organization (the one that Hilary Clinton voted yes). He then proceeded to criticize Mrs. Clinton’s decision to vote yes. In the Philadelphia debate in October Mr. Obama criticized Mrs. Clinton’s equivocation on driver’s licenses for illegal aliens but he too gave a long answer to the yes or no question (Should illegal aliens be issued driver’s licenses?
-John Edwards has a clear vision of where he stands on most issues. Like Barak Obama he has limited experience in government. He did vote for the Iraq war but has regretted that decision. His positions have been strongly in support of unions and working class people. He is wealthy and that has been held against him because he earned the money as a lawyer. I have not found any significant contradictions in his positions although he has become more strident with the passing of time.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Is Everything Really Local?
I live in the Northwest part of the San Fernando Valley in a community called Canoga Park. Most of the Valley is within the city limits of Los Angeles. It’s a one hour drive to downtown Los Angeles. That is the location of city hall and where the city council meets. This is not a convenient location for most residence in the San Fernando Valley.
As a result, city decisions about this community are made with little input from Canoga Park residents (most are at work during city council meetings). To give each community in the city a sense of participation the city charter requires the government to create local neighborhood councils. However the local councils have no authority to affect any services provided to the communities. The councils only have advisory authority. I posted a blog entry about neighborhood councils on August 27, 2007.
The consequence of this government arrangement is local participation in neighborhood councils is minimal. After all, who wants to be a part of a group that cannot accomplish anything? Despite this predicament, a home owner three blocks from me is trying to organize a local group that might be able to influence the downtown bureaucracy with respect to maintenance of the neighborhood (street paving, tree trimming, street cleaning, etc.).
I have visited many of my neighbors to encourage them to participate in this endeavor. Some have said they are interested. This will be an ongoing effort. I will post success or failures here.
As a result, city decisions about this community are made with little input from Canoga Park residents (most are at work during city council meetings). To give each community in the city a sense of participation the city charter requires the government to create local neighborhood councils. However the local councils have no authority to affect any services provided to the communities. The councils only have advisory authority. I posted a blog entry about neighborhood councils on August 27, 2007.
The consequence of this government arrangement is local participation in neighborhood councils is minimal. After all, who wants to be a part of a group that cannot accomplish anything? Despite this predicament, a home owner three blocks from me is trying to organize a local group that might be able to influence the downtown bureaucracy with respect to maintenance of the neighborhood (street paving, tree trimming, street cleaning, etc.).
I have visited many of my neighbors to encourage them to participate in this endeavor. Some have said they are interested. This will be an ongoing effort. I will post success or failures here.
Friday, November 23, 2007
Balancing Los Angeles City Budget
There are 39 separate categories (departments or commissions) listed in the Los Angeles city budget. However 28 of those categories have budgets in the current fiscal year that are higher than last year’s budget. Those budgets are anywhere from 8% higher to 100% higher. The city clerk department has a budget that is twice last year’s budget.
I obtained this information from the mayor’s city budget website, http://www.lacity.org/mayor/budget/. I downloaded the information into an Excel spreadsheet and proceeded to do a little analysis. I am not an accountant but the information was just easy to acquire, as it should be, and did a little reading and sorting of data.
Here is another bit of surprising information. This year’s actual spending is exceeding the budget in 14 of the 39 departments.
I questioned why many of the departments exist. The housing department caught my eye. The department costs over $38 million dollars in salaries and another $6 million in operating expenses this year. ”The Los Angeles Housing Department has four program areas, housing, rent, code enforcement and compliance” The department also manages the Displaced Tenant Relocation fund that is estimated to be $500,000 this year. The total budget for this department in 2005-06 year was $36 million. That is a 22% increase in just one year ($38 million dollars plus $6 million).
The city’s elected officials know that there is a budget issue but have done little to stem the unbudgeted spending. Many are taking their pay raises with claims that they will donate the money to charity but the money for those raises is not really available. Worse are recently negotiated pay raises for all city employees. The police department’s new headquarters has seen its cost double from approximately $200 million dollars to $400 million. Many millions of dollars is being allocated for a new children’s museum.
Now the mayor has declared an emergency that enables the city to ask city voters for a new phone tax that only requires a majority yes vote to pass। If it wasn’t an emergency passing the tax would require a vote of at least 66.6%.
The lack of responsibility among city council members and the mayor is the emergency.
I obtained this information from the mayor’s city budget website, http://www.lacity.org/mayor/budget/. I downloaded the information into an Excel spreadsheet and proceeded to do a little analysis. I am not an accountant but the information was just easy to acquire, as it should be, and did a little reading and sorting of data.
Here is another bit of surprising information. This year’s actual spending is exceeding the budget in 14 of the 39 departments.
I questioned why many of the departments exist. The housing department caught my eye. The department costs over $38 million dollars in salaries and another $6 million in operating expenses this year. ”The Los Angeles Housing Department has four program areas, housing, rent, code enforcement and compliance” The department also manages the Displaced Tenant Relocation fund that is estimated to be $500,000 this year. The total budget for this department in 2005-06 year was $36 million. That is a 22% increase in just one year ($38 million dollars plus $6 million).
The city’s elected officials know that there is a budget issue but have done little to stem the unbudgeted spending. Many are taking their pay raises with claims that they will donate the money to charity but the money for those raises is not really available. Worse are recently negotiated pay raises for all city employees. The police department’s new headquarters has seen its cost double from approximately $200 million dollars to $400 million. Many millions of dollars is being allocated for a new children’s museum.
Now the mayor has declared an emergency that enables the city to ask city voters for a new phone tax that only requires a majority yes vote to pass। If it wasn’t an emergency passing the tax would require a vote of at least 66.6%.
The lack of responsibility among city council members and the mayor is the emergency.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Presidential Debates Have Been Disappointing
How boring! Most of the candidates in each party’s debates (they are really forums) mimic each other. The contenders of each party try to catch their opponents in an error. The one exception is Ron Paul. He is a Republican who actually brings his own thought to those utterly uninspiring debates. He has raised enough money to actually become a contender.
The Democrats are particularly unanimous in their views. Each of them tries his/her very best to avoid taking a stand on any issue. Actually they try to avoid all issues. The best example is providing a commitment to issue driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. Hilary Clinton flipped on this issue for two weeks and then said no. At the November 15 debate Barak Obama used 192 words before finally saying “yes”.
The Republicans also take the same views with the exception of Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani. Unlike Ron Paul the other Republicans subscribe to the idea of not telling voters anything about their views. Rudy Giuliani’s social liberalism and Mitt Romney’s religion have become talk show fodder. I find it utterly dismaying that Mitt Romney’s religious belief have become an issue. That Romney’s Mormon religion is being discussed is an indicator that bigotry still exists in the United States or that it is at least important in the Republican party. No wonder I have become an Independent. I personally dis-associated myself from a friend who showed himself to be a bigot and I would not be part of any group that stood for any bigotry.
I like Rudy Giuliani. His social liberalism makes him an excellent candidate for president against any Democrat. He could win next November. He and Hillary will have to take firm stands on real issues to win.
The Democrats are particularly unanimous in their views. Each of them tries his/her very best to avoid taking a stand on any issue. Actually they try to avoid all issues. The best example is providing a commitment to issue driver’s licenses to illegal aliens. Hilary Clinton flipped on this issue for two weeks and then said no. At the November 15 debate Barak Obama used 192 words before finally saying “yes”.
The Republicans also take the same views with the exception of Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani. Unlike Ron Paul the other Republicans subscribe to the idea of not telling voters anything about their views. Rudy Giuliani’s social liberalism and Mitt Romney’s religion have become talk show fodder. I find it utterly dismaying that Mitt Romney’s religious belief have become an issue. That Romney’s Mormon religion is being discussed is an indicator that bigotry still exists in the United States or that it is at least important in the Republican party. No wonder I have become an Independent. I personally dis-associated myself from a friend who showed himself to be a bigot and I would not be part of any group that stood for any bigotry.
I like Rudy Giuliani. His social liberalism makes him an excellent candidate for president against any Democrat. He could win next November. He and Hillary will have to take firm stands on real issues to win.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Political Junky
I am a political junky. Some people love sports so much that they stay home to watch every game no matter what the sport. I would watch political show all the time if it wasn’t for my lovely wife. Even as I am watching This Week on ABC, I am recording Meet The Press on NBC. The DVR is a wonderful thing! I listen to talk radio all the time, even when I do not agree with the hosts. Know thine enemy would be my reasoning. I admit I have been watching all the Dancing with the Stars programs but that’s because of Julieanne Hough. This only proves that there are some things that will distract me (please don’t tell my wife, she never reads these blogs).
I do not have access to any of the politicians so everything I write is based upon all of those columnists that I admire. I put together the pieces by reading their commentaries and adding the news reports.
I read blog writers become recognized by writing almost daily. That is now my objective. Yes I am envious of the columnists in Newsweek, Business Week, the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and the Washington Post. I am not earning a dime but I am having fun doing these postings.
I do not have access to any of the politicians so everything I write is based upon all of those columnists that I admire. I put together the pieces by reading their commentaries and adding the news reports.
I read blog writers become recognized by writing almost daily. That is now my objective. Yes I am envious of the columnists in Newsweek, Business Week, the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and the Washington Post. I am not earning a dime but I am having fun doing these postings.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
Ann Coulter, Political Conservative Commentator and Author
Her words tell us more about her than anything I can say.
Some things she has said or written:
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president,” Coulter told The New York Observer। “It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”
In one of her books she lashed out at 9/11 widows, saying, “I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much।”
On advertising guru Donny Deutsch's CNBC show "The Big Idea."
In response to a question from Deutsch asking Coulter if "it would be better if we were all Christian," the controversial columnist responded: "Yes."
"We should all be Christian?" Deutsch repeated.
"Yes," Coulter responded, asking Deutsch, who is Jewish, if he would like to "come to church with me."
Deutsch, pressing Coulter further, asked, "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians?" She responded: "Yeah."
Coulter deflected Deutsch's assertion that her comments were anti-Semitic, matter-of-factly telling the show's obviously upset host, "That is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews."
Some things she has said or written:
“If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another Democrat president,” Coulter told The New York Observer। “It’s kind of a pipe dream, it’s a personal fantasy of mine, but I don’t think it’s going to happen. And it is a good way of making the point that women are voting so stupidly, at least single women.”
In one of her books she lashed out at 9/11 widows, saying, “I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much।”
On advertising guru Donny Deutsch's CNBC show "The Big Idea."
In response to a question from Deutsch asking Coulter if "it would be better if we were all Christian," the controversial columnist responded: "Yes."
"We should all be Christian?" Deutsch repeated.
"Yes," Coulter responded, asking Deutsch, who is Jewish, if he would like to "come to church with me."
Deutsch, pressing Coulter further, asked, "We should just throw Judaism away and we should all be Christians?" She responded: "Yeah."
Coulter deflected Deutsch's assertion that her comments were anti-Semitic, matter-of-factly telling the show's obviously upset host, "That is what Christians consider themselves: perfected Jews."
Thursday, September 27, 2007
The Iran Nuclear Issue – It’s All About the Oil
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to New York to do what? If he was trying to win friends and influence people he said everything he could to scuttle that objective.
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070926/D8RSTOS00.html.
We all support freedom of speech. Ahmadinejad’s purpose in speaking at the U.N. and Columbia University is to convince us that he really has no ulterior motives. http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070924/D8RS0GKG1.html. It is the same methodology used by Hitler before WWII.
Iran’s goal is to acquire a nuclear capability. The reason is to gain control of all the oil producing nations in the Middle East. In a localized sense Israel and Iran would be at a standoff if both had nuclear weapons (I assume Israel already has them). Iran’s statements about destroying Israel are an appeal to Arab nations to join Iran in opposing their common enemy. In joining together Iran would likely also become the leader of the Arab world against the West. That in turn would give Iran the overwhelming power to effect the West because of their combined oil resources.
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070926/D8RSTOS00.html.
We all support freedom of speech. Ahmadinejad’s purpose in speaking at the U.N. and Columbia University is to convince us that he really has no ulterior motives. http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070924/D8RS0GKG1.html. It is the same methodology used by Hitler before WWII.
Iran’s goal is to acquire a nuclear capability. The reason is to gain control of all the oil producing nations in the Middle East. In a localized sense Israel and Iran would be at a standoff if both had nuclear weapons (I assume Israel already has them). Iran’s statements about destroying Israel are an appeal to Arab nations to join Iran in opposing their common enemy. In joining together Iran would likely also become the leader of the Arab world against the West. That in turn would give Iran the overwhelming power to effect the West because of their combined oil resources.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
The free world needs a leader like this!!
Prime Minister John Howard - Australia
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks। A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown। Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament। 'If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you', he said on National Television 'I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia : one the Australian law and another Islamic law that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option', Costello said. Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should clear off. 'Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off', he said. Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.' 'However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia . However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom. We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language! Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture. We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us. If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like 'A Fair Go', then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others. This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'. If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU chose.'
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Why are most Mexicans in Mexico so poor?
The Los Angeles Daily News reporting on President Felipe Calderon of Mexico on Sunday, September 3, 2007 (http://www.dailynews.com/search/ci_6788647?IADID=Search-www.dailynews.com-www.dailynews.com) “Criticizing the United States for its treatment of illegal Mexican immigrants has become routine for most Mexican politicians, including Calderon. Because the immigrants send home about $20 billion a year and because the yearly emigration of more than 400,000 people from Mexico relieves that country of masses of the poor, the government in Mexico City has little incentive either to stem the emigration northward or to support stricter measures making it harder for Mexicans to cross the border.”
So I wondered why are most Mexicans in Mexico so poor? I looked at Wikipedia ,ask.com and Google. The answers I found were very limited. Those that I found echoed my suspicions. The web sites are http://www.funqa.com/economics/4400-1-Economics.html and http://www.polyconomics.com/searchbase/11-24-98.html and http://www.mindfully.org/WTO/2003/Mexico-Poor-NAFTA22mar03.htm .
The message from all of these web sites is clear. The wealthy of Mexico have the power to keep most the country’s population very poor and they like it that way. It’s all about cheap labor. Their attitude is if the poor don’t like it they can sneak into the U.S.A. They have gotten away with this because to many American companies like the cheap labor force and the American government is complicit in this situation. It’s not a Democrat or Republican thing. It is a U.S. government thing.
The American public uproar is the best thing Mexicans have going for them to change the Mexican government. So President Calderon’s statements are just part of that government’s public stance to convince Mexicans that their government really is concerned about the well being of its population. As to the marches in the U.S. about illegal alien rights, those are the words and actions of do-gooders who have played into the hands of the wealthy Mexicans.
A very inadequate educational system and major government corruption are the two issues most commonly identified as destroying the Mexican economy. Many Mexicans can not read or write. Bribery is a way of life in almost every part of the government including the police. These two problems discourage foreign investment.
Notice that Carlos Slim, the wealthiest man in Mexico, is now listed as the third wealthiest man in the world according to Forbes magazine. He along with other wealthy Mexicans couldn’t be happier with this situation. Carlos Slim alone is reported to control 20% of the Mexican economy. Can you imagine what would happen to Mexico if the wealthiest in that nation were forced to surrender and share what they have with the average Mexican? I am not a communist but I believe that the wealthy families of Mexico are one significant cause of that country’s problems. The U.S. could force this situation to change. The U.S. won’t do that because the situation benefits American corporations.
So I wondered why are most Mexicans in Mexico so poor? I looked at Wikipedia ,ask.com and Google. The answers I found were very limited. Those that I found echoed my suspicions. The web sites are http://www.funqa.com/economics/4400-1-Economics.html and http://www.polyconomics.com/searchbase/11-24-98.html and http://www.mindfully.org/WTO/2003/Mexico-Poor-NAFTA22mar03.htm .
The message from all of these web sites is clear. The wealthy of Mexico have the power to keep most the country’s population very poor and they like it that way. It’s all about cheap labor. Their attitude is if the poor don’t like it they can sneak into the U.S.A. They have gotten away with this because to many American companies like the cheap labor force and the American government is complicit in this situation. It’s not a Democrat or Republican thing. It is a U.S. government thing.
The American public uproar is the best thing Mexicans have going for them to change the Mexican government. So President Calderon’s statements are just part of that government’s public stance to convince Mexicans that their government really is concerned about the well being of its population. As to the marches in the U.S. about illegal alien rights, those are the words and actions of do-gooders who have played into the hands of the wealthy Mexicans.
A very inadequate educational system and major government corruption are the two issues most commonly identified as destroying the Mexican economy. Many Mexicans can not read or write. Bribery is a way of life in almost every part of the government including the police. These two problems discourage foreign investment.
Notice that Carlos Slim, the wealthiest man in Mexico, is now listed as the third wealthiest man in the world according to Forbes magazine. He along with other wealthy Mexicans couldn’t be happier with this situation. Carlos Slim alone is reported to control 20% of the Mexican economy. Can you imagine what would happen to Mexico if the wealthiest in that nation were forced to surrender and share what they have with the average Mexican? I am not a communist but I believe that the wealthy families of Mexico are one significant cause of that country’s problems. The U.S. could force this situation to change. The U.S. won’t do that because the situation benefits American corporations.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
I Don’t Like Gay People
This commentary is all Idaho Sen. Larry Craig's fault. This is not a topic I am really interested in discussing. I don’t like gay people. I find their behavior disturbing on two counts.
I do recognize their right to perform revolting acts. If they want to do those things it’s their business. If they would just keep it private. That’s all I ask. Instead some do their thing in public places. (Associated Press item: A defiant Sen. Larry Craig denied any wrongdoing Tuesday despite his guilty plea this summer in a men's room police sting, emphatically adding, "I am not gay. I never have been gay.")
If that isn’t enough, many of these people parade and announce their behavior to the whole world. Gay parades seem to have become a fad in many big cities. Two that come to mind are the parades in West Hollywood and San Diego. Many also seem to take specific pride in announcing to others that they are gay. The announcements are of course more prominent within the entertainment community. I even had an individual call for an appointment for a job interview. He advised me that he lived “a different life style.” Do I care what his sexual proclivities are? Of course not but since he advised me, I concluded that he would be making that fact part of his behavior at work. I did not interview him.
I have actually known men who I suspected were gay. Since they kept their sexual preferences to themselves it did not bother me. Apparently they are the exception. Gay men want to make their sexual behavior known. I never told anyone about my sexual behavior. It’s all about women. How dull? Well not to me.
I do recognize their right to perform revolting acts. If they want to do those things it’s their business. If they would just keep it private. That’s all I ask. Instead some do their thing in public places. (Associated Press item: A defiant Sen. Larry Craig denied any wrongdoing Tuesday despite his guilty plea this summer in a men's room police sting, emphatically adding, "I am not gay. I never have been gay.")
If that isn’t enough, many of these people parade and announce their behavior to the whole world. Gay parades seem to have become a fad in many big cities. Two that come to mind are the parades in West Hollywood and San Diego. Many also seem to take specific pride in announcing to others that they are gay. The announcements are of course more prominent within the entertainment community. I even had an individual call for an appointment for a job interview. He advised me that he lived “a different life style.” Do I care what his sexual proclivities are? Of course not but since he advised me, I concluded that he would be making that fact part of his behavior at work. I did not interview him.
I have actually known men who I suspected were gay. Since they kept their sexual preferences to themselves it did not bother me. Apparently they are the exception. Gay men want to make their sexual behavior known. I never told anyone about my sexual behavior. It’s all about women. How dull? Well not to me.
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Securing America
Every few months I review my emergency supplies that I have put away for a catastrophic event that renders my home uninhabitable. I have two portable cases stored on the side of the house that hold non perishable foods, blankets and sleeping bags, a crank radio and flashlight, cooking and eating utensils along with a small propane stove, and a first aid kit. Additionally I have 15 gallons of water stored in a shed and an old propane barbeque.
I recently watched that terrible classic movie "The Day After” starring Jason Robards. “The Day After, a dramatization of the effects of a hypothetical nuclear attack on the United States…” That movie is nothing short of frightening. It was shown on ABC and could easily be called a movie prepared by today’s liberals. It was extreme because the story told of total devastation of the entire country. Still there was a real part to this story. After all who could have foretold 9-11? If that could happen couldn’t the events of “The Day After” happen too?
Our President projects his desire to protect America. He has not yet closed our borders to an invasion. Only next year, seven years after 9-11, are we asking for a list of all passengers on an airplane before it departs from another nation. Our ports only inspect less than 5% of all imported goods. We are so unprepared that we cannot even care for the people devastated by Katrina.
Those candidates for president never even discuss this issue. They prefer to discuss issues that impact a minority of our citizens. How many are faced with the issue of abortion or health care?
Will any candidates or the current president ever confront this issue? Sorry to say it but it’s doubtful.
I recently watched that terrible classic movie "The Day After” starring Jason Robards. “The Day After, a dramatization of the effects of a hypothetical nuclear attack on the United States…” That movie is nothing short of frightening. It was shown on ABC and could easily be called a movie prepared by today’s liberals. It was extreme because the story told of total devastation of the entire country. Still there was a real part to this story. After all who could have foretold 9-11? If that could happen couldn’t the events of “The Day After” happen too?
Our President projects his desire to protect America. He has not yet closed our borders to an invasion. Only next year, seven years after 9-11, are we asking for a list of all passengers on an airplane before it departs from another nation. Our ports only inspect less than 5% of all imported goods. We are so unprepared that we cannot even care for the people devastated by Katrina.
Those candidates for president never even discuss this issue. They prefer to discuss issues that impact a minority of our citizens. How many are faced with the issue of abortion or health care?
Will any candidates or the current president ever confront this issue? Sorry to say it but it’s doubtful.
Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils
Los Angeles Neighborhood Councils get a D grade. They are not quit a failure. There is still the possibility that they can be made a success.
Despite all of these apparent efforts on the part of the city council I believe that the neighborhood councils were created for the purpose of quelling calls for neighborhood autonomy. Their purpose is to give neighborhood activists an outlet for their frustrations.
The city charter change in 2002 provided for advisory neighborhood councils. The city council decided to provide $50,000 per year to each council for secretarial expenses and community projects that had not been budgeted in the conventional budget allocations. There are 86 councils in the city and so the city has allocated $4.3 million to the councils each year.
The evidence to support my contentions are 1) the controls the city council has imposed on how the annual $50,000 is to be spent and 2) the rule that the neighborhood councils views are advisory and have no regulatory authority.
What goes for an accomplishment (on the neighborhood councils web site) by a neighborhood council is a meeting held by the Tarzana council that explained the rights of renters being evicted from their homes due to a condo conversion. The council was unable to stop the conversion so other than telling renters their “rights”, nothing was accomplished.
The recent pressure brought to bear by the Tujunga Sunland council denying Home Depot a permit to turn a K-Mart into one of their hardware stores shows that the neighborhood councils can impact the community. It was the same fervor that denied Walmart from taking over a store in Northridge. Clearly zoning matters can be influenced by neighborhood councils. Only by banding together and packing city council meetings can these councils be a success.
As to other accomplishments to date, there is a dearth of such information. Of the fourteen neighborhood council web sites I checked only one listed their accomplishments. That is West Los Angeles Neighborhood Council. My own neighborhood council did buy a new sound system for the senior center. Could that have cost more than $10,000? What happened to the rest of the money they received?
Has there been a major outreach to obtain greater community involvement in neighborhood councils? Well certainly not my neighborhood. The same group of people who control the chamber of commerce run the neighborhood council.
This is not representative government.
Despite all of these apparent efforts on the part of the city council I believe that the neighborhood councils were created for the purpose of quelling calls for neighborhood autonomy. Their purpose is to give neighborhood activists an outlet for their frustrations.
The city charter change in 2002 provided for advisory neighborhood councils. The city council decided to provide $50,000 per year to each council for secretarial expenses and community projects that had not been budgeted in the conventional budget allocations. There are 86 councils in the city and so the city has allocated $4.3 million to the councils each year.
The evidence to support my contentions are 1) the controls the city council has imposed on how the annual $50,000 is to be spent and 2) the rule that the neighborhood councils views are advisory and have no regulatory authority.
What goes for an accomplishment (on the neighborhood councils web site) by a neighborhood council is a meeting held by the Tarzana council that explained the rights of renters being evicted from their homes due to a condo conversion. The council was unable to stop the conversion so other than telling renters their “rights”, nothing was accomplished.
The recent pressure brought to bear by the Tujunga Sunland council denying Home Depot a permit to turn a K-Mart into one of their hardware stores shows that the neighborhood councils can impact the community. It was the same fervor that denied Walmart from taking over a store in Northridge. Clearly zoning matters can be influenced by neighborhood councils. Only by banding together and packing city council meetings can these councils be a success.
As to other accomplishments to date, there is a dearth of such information. Of the fourteen neighborhood council web sites I checked only one listed their accomplishments. That is West Los Angeles Neighborhood Council. My own neighborhood council did buy a new sound system for the senior center. Could that have cost more than $10,000? What happened to the rest of the money they received?
Has there been a major outreach to obtain greater community involvement in neighborhood councils? Well certainly not my neighborhood. The same group of people who control the chamber of commerce run the neighborhood council.
This is not representative government.
Sunday, August 19, 2007
Democrats Goldilocks Candidate
Karl Rove has spent this past week issuing multiple attacks on Hilary Clinton. (http://apnews.excite.com/article/20070819/D8R46NK00.html). The questions about his attacks are:
1. Do the Republicans really fear her candidacy and believe that early attacks are the best thing they can do to start their campaign?
2. Is Karl Rove pointing out Hilary’s vulnerability to Democrats, in the hope they will vote for another candidate, because they know she is the strongest candidate?
3. Perhaps Karl Rove is making these attacks now as a favor to his friend George W. Bush because he has said he won’t be involved in the upcoming campaign and these are his parting shots.
Most Democrats know that a controversial candidate could enable the win for the Republican. So do Dems need Karl Rove’s help in selecting their candidate for president? The answer is No! I believe Karl is involving himself in the Democratic primary to influence the outcome.
Hilary is a controversial candidate. She is also one of the smartest candidates. She engenders passion. She is not a Goldilocks candidate. That passion will translate into a hard charging group of men and women who will provide the power needed to win the presidency.
If Democrats really want a Goldilocks candidate they need look no farther than Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson. However, history tells us that Dems do pick controversial candidates to run for president. Unless they do something really stupid, one of the three leading candidates will be the Democratic nominee. I would bet on Hilary.
1. Do the Republicans really fear her candidacy and believe that early attacks are the best thing they can do to start their campaign?
2. Is Karl Rove pointing out Hilary’s vulnerability to Democrats, in the hope they will vote for another candidate, because they know she is the strongest candidate?
3. Perhaps Karl Rove is making these attacks now as a favor to his friend George W. Bush because he has said he won’t be involved in the upcoming campaign and these are his parting shots.
Most Democrats know that a controversial candidate could enable the win for the Republican. So do Dems need Karl Rove’s help in selecting their candidate for president? The answer is No! I believe Karl is involving himself in the Democratic primary to influence the outcome.
Hilary is a controversial candidate. She is also one of the smartest candidates. She engenders passion. She is not a Goldilocks candidate. That passion will translate into a hard charging group of men and women who will provide the power needed to win the presidency.
If Democrats really want a Goldilocks candidate they need look no farther than Chris Dodd and Bill Richardson. However, history tells us that Dems do pick controversial candidates to run for president. Unless they do something really stupid, one of the three leading candidates will be the Democratic nominee. I would bet on Hilary.
Wednesday, August 8, 2007
American Auto Manufacturing Is Coming To An End!
Naming Robert Nardelli the new CEO of Chrysler is just one more step in the torturous decline of the American auto industry. Professor Peter Morici of Robert H. Smith School of Business, University of Maryland (http://forums.industryweek.com/showthread.php?t=1270) clearly points out the error of new Chrysler owner Cerberus Capital Management LP. Could Robert Nardelli be a partner in this private equity investment firm? That might explain the investment.
I use Consumers Reports® as a guide to buying cars. One fast look and you quickly realize that most Japanese cars and some European cars are the leaders in quality. Is it no wonder that sales of the big three (GM, Ford, Chrysler) are in the dumps. The closing of those companies will impact our economy in ways that will be nightmarish to our economy.
I use Consumers Reports® as a guide to buying cars. One fast look and you quickly realize that most Japanese cars and some European cars are the leaders in quality. Is it no wonder that sales of the big three (GM, Ford, Chrysler) are in the dumps. The closing of those companies will impact our economy in ways that will be nightmarish to our economy.
Tuesday, August 7, 2007
Whose Fault is This Anyway?
Just two years ago the housing market was booming. Homes stayed on the market in Los Angeles just a few weeks before being sold. Even those homes in poor condition were sold within two months. People were buying homes with little or no down payment and low monthly payments. Now all of that has changed and we have at least two Democratic candidates calling for some kind of relief for those foolish buyers. The web site http://patrick.net/housing/contrib/nobailout.html defines the problem better than I. That web site also suggests what many of us feel about the low down payment/low monthly payment buyers. I too agree that it is unfair for the government to bail out these foolish buyers. After all, to be fair, we would then have to bail out those people who have lost money in the stock market or opened a business that failed. There would be no end to government bail outs to people who have made financial mistakes.
I find it astonishing that candidates for president would suggest such a plan. The candidates are looking for a way to gain support in the upcoming primaries. If they suggest tougher restrictions on lenders that would be appropriate. Democratic candidates need to define other reasons to vote for them that will have a positive impact on our nation. More of these kinds of ideas will cause many American to vote for a Republican in the next election even if they perceive problems with the Republican candidate.
I find it astonishing that candidates for president would suggest such a plan. The candidates are looking for a way to gain support in the upcoming primaries. If they suggest tougher restrictions on lenders that would be appropriate. Democratic candidates need to define other reasons to vote for them that will have a positive impact on our nation. More of these kinds of ideas will cause many American to vote for a Republican in the next election even if they perceive problems with the Republican candidate.
Friday, August 3, 2007
An Unpleasant Reality
I was born to Jewish parents and had a Bar Mitzvah at age 13. As an adult I am neither a Zionist nor a religious Jew. My view of being Jewish is being part of the social Jewish order. Perhaps that is a tribe but I like to think of Jews as being part of a nationality that was changed in name to Israeli in the 20th century. The group also has its own religion and as a result it is unique. After all, what other nation has its own religion? So I care about the survival of Judaism as much as Italians in America or Koreans in America care about their ancestors in their native lands.
Jews, as a group, have adopted American values as much as any group could. There are exceptions but they are a very small group. Jews have adopted the attitude of Western Europe and America in regards to birth rate. We simply have a low birth rate. That unpleasant reality dooms a Jewish state. Israel as a Jewish state will come to an end between 2020 and 2050 unless there is a dramatic increase in the birth rate of Israeli Jews.
The Arab Muslin population of Israel is growing at the rate of 5% a year. The Jewish population of Israel is growing at the rate of 3% a year at best. I have researched this on the web a dozen times and have read many articles on this subject. Every one has stated the same or similar conclusions. An example is the jewishvirtuallibrary.org . Their 2003 article states that the birth rate among Arabs is twice that of Jews. Newsmax.com has a 2004 article titled “Will Israel Become an Arab State?” You do your own investigation by entering the search words “Israeli birth rate” and you will realize that all the Arabs have to do is be patient and Israel will be theirs.
Jews, as a group, have adopted American values as much as any group could. There are exceptions but they are a very small group. Jews have adopted the attitude of Western Europe and America in regards to birth rate. We simply have a low birth rate. That unpleasant reality dooms a Jewish state. Israel as a Jewish state will come to an end between 2020 and 2050 unless there is a dramatic increase in the birth rate of Israeli Jews.
The Arab Muslin population of Israel is growing at the rate of 5% a year. The Jewish population of Israel is growing at the rate of 3% a year at best. I have researched this on the web a dozen times and have read many articles on this subject. Every one has stated the same or similar conclusions. An example is the jewishvirtuallibrary.org . Their 2003 article states that the birth rate among Arabs is twice that of Jews. Newsmax.com has a 2004 article titled “Will Israel Become an Arab State?” You do your own investigation by entering the search words “Israeli birth rate” and you will realize that all the Arabs have to do is be patient and Israel will be theirs.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
A Real National Health Care System
This is a very personal thing for me. I went onto Medicare when I turned 65. That is more than three years ago. I left my employer just before turning 65 and they provided coverage until my 65th birthday. My wife was always covered by dependent health insurance. Now that I have no health insurance she must be covered by a private plan. The cost of that plan has now reached $360.00 per month and the co-pay for each visit is $50.00. Yes, I am paying for this insurance because I do have the money but it hurts every month.
It is easy to understand why 47 million Americans have no health insurance. If an employer does not provide a health plan or does provide one that requires a high cost to the individual or family, the employee might find he/she cannot afford the cost. This is a situation that does impact lower level employees in many businesses.
The Republican candidates have been slow to present their ideas on health care. Rudy Giuliani just issued his plan today. He offered a “consumer-oriented” solution that relies on giving individuals tax credits to purchase private insurance. This is a wonderful idea if the individual has the money to pay for the plan. In my case there is too little income to claim a tax credit. Giuliani argues against universal health care by calling it socialized medicine. That is an argument that goes back to the late 1940s when the American Medical Association called universal health care a step towards communism. There does not appear to be any logical reason to argue against universal health care.
The evidence for a change in our health care system is coming from all sides. Emergency rooms are being used as primary care facilities. The cost to hospitals is causing them to sometimes close their doors. Both large and small companies are struggling with their medical insurance costs. Examples are the American auto manufacturers, southern California food chains, and public transportation companies. Why are employers responsible to provide health care?
Universal health care seems to be a Democratic Party issue. All three major candidates have supported a version of universal health care. Why are Republican candidates opposed to this idea? I would like to believe they really care about the best possible care but all evidence seems to point to protecting the current system. Do those Republican candidates see health care companies as major campaign contributors? My guess is the answer is yes.
It is easy to understand why 47 million Americans have no health insurance. If an employer does not provide a health plan or does provide one that requires a high cost to the individual or family, the employee might find he/she cannot afford the cost. This is a situation that does impact lower level employees in many businesses.
The Republican candidates have been slow to present their ideas on health care. Rudy Giuliani just issued his plan today. He offered a “consumer-oriented” solution that relies on giving individuals tax credits to purchase private insurance. This is a wonderful idea if the individual has the money to pay for the plan. In my case there is too little income to claim a tax credit. Giuliani argues against universal health care by calling it socialized medicine. That is an argument that goes back to the late 1940s when the American Medical Association called universal health care a step towards communism. There does not appear to be any logical reason to argue against universal health care.
The evidence for a change in our health care system is coming from all sides. Emergency rooms are being used as primary care facilities. The cost to hospitals is causing them to sometimes close their doors. Both large and small companies are struggling with their medical insurance costs. Examples are the American auto manufacturers, southern California food chains, and public transportation companies. Why are employers responsible to provide health care?
Universal health care seems to be a Democratic Party issue. All three major candidates have supported a version of universal health care. Why are Republican candidates opposed to this idea? I would like to believe they really care about the best possible care but all evidence seems to point to protecting the current system. Do those Republican candidates see health care companies as major campaign contributors? My guess is the answer is yes.
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Wild Oats: Sale Won't Lead to Price Rise - What?
The Federal Trade Commission filed an antitrust lawsuit to block the $565 million sale of Wild Oats Markets to Whole Foods Markets. The commission contends that the consolidation of the two largest natural food chains would result in raised prices and stifled competition.
Wild Oats lawyers said competition is expanding because other supermarkets are selling more organic and natural products. They contend that prices will actually drop. Huh? Lawyers will say anything for their clients.
Let’s see, we now have six major oil companies in the entire world (BP, Chevron-Texaco, Exxon-Mobile, Shell, ConocoPhillips, and Total) More than one half of all revenue in the oil industry is obtained by these companies out of a total list in the Global 500 of 34.. What do you suppose would happen if these companies were split into 12 companies?
Do you suppose if Kroger or Safeway was the only major chain of super markets that prices would decline? Are we better off now that Wells Fargo Bank has bought Crocker and First Interstate? There are now only two major banks in California. Bank of America and Wells Fargo Bank.
This is not a new phenomenon. Even during the Clinton administration the consolidation (merger and acquisition) continued unabated.
Wild Oats lawyers said competition is expanding because other supermarkets are selling more organic and natural products. They contend that prices will actually drop. Huh? Lawyers will say anything for their clients.
Let’s see, we now have six major oil companies in the entire world (BP, Chevron-Texaco, Exxon-Mobile, Shell, ConocoPhillips, and Total) More than one half of all revenue in the oil industry is obtained by these companies out of a total list in the Global 500 of 34.. What do you suppose would happen if these companies were split into 12 companies?
Do you suppose if Kroger or Safeway was the only major chain of super markets that prices would decline? Are we better off now that Wells Fargo Bank has bought Crocker and First Interstate? There are now only two major banks in California. Bank of America and Wells Fargo Bank.
This is not a new phenomenon. Even during the Clinton administration the consolidation (merger and acquisition) continued unabated.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
George W. Bush’s War
If you read Robert Scheer’s commentary, Bush in Free Fall, http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070724_bush_in_free_fall/
and then read HEROES AND HISTORY by David Brooks http://www.isranet.org/picks_of_the_week.htm#heroes
you may wonder if these two writers are on the same planet. If the David Brooks report is accurate than Robert Scheer’s commentary is pointless. George W. Bush believes he is on the correct course. He considers himself to be beyond, or is it above, the arguments about the Iraq War. He sees himself as the leader of a free world that must convert the rest of the world to his view.
To answer Robert Scheer’s questions there is no disaster and therefore the message of poll ratings does not mean anything. His view is he is the commander in chief and does not have to listen to anything Congress or the people say about this war. Unless two thirds of the congress supports our withdrawal he will not even entertain this idea. At that point I still doubt he would listen to the public. It is not likely he will be impeached. Such discussion is pointless.
We can only hope that the president does not steer us into any additional wars.
and then read HEROES AND HISTORY by David Brooks http://www.isranet.org/picks_of_the_week.htm#heroes
you may wonder if these two writers are on the same planet. If the David Brooks report is accurate than Robert Scheer’s commentary is pointless. George W. Bush believes he is on the correct course. He considers himself to be beyond, or is it above, the arguments about the Iraq War. He sees himself as the leader of a free world that must convert the rest of the world to his view.
To answer Robert Scheer’s questions there is no disaster and therefore the message of poll ratings does not mean anything. His view is he is the commander in chief and does not have to listen to anything Congress or the people say about this war. Unless two thirds of the congress supports our withdrawal he will not even entertain this idea. At that point I still doubt he would listen to the public. It is not likely he will be impeached. Such discussion is pointless.
We can only hope that the president does not steer us into any additional wars.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
The Rule of Law
My previous BLOG entry was about the illegal entry of other nationalities into this country. Most recently in my life I completed a 13 months study course in law. This is not a promotion of my business. This is a discussion of American law. I was struck by the overwhelming amount of legal decisions handed down by our courts. For those of you not familiar with this field, I want to tell you that our nation has a very complex but very thorough legal system. Literally volumes of ruling exist for every state. There are businesses that earn their income by collecting and documenting all the rulings in this country. We are a nation of laws and ruling on the meanings of those laws.
People entering our country illegally are breaking our laws. They are here in the US illegally. They have no legal right to be here. When they demonstrate about their rights, they are complaining that they have no legal rights.
Illegal aliens do have one right. They have the right to be heard in a court of law. It’s the same right of a burglar. He has the right to defend himself in court. We go even farther than many countries because we say that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
It’s all in the laws that are appealable to the highest court in our country. Everyone, by law, is subject to the same laws including the president of the United States and all of the people working in our government.
The citizens of Iraq and Mexico do not understand our system of government and I doubt they ever will.
People entering our country illegally are breaking our laws. They are here in the US illegally. They have no legal right to be here. When they demonstrate about their rights, they are complaining that they have no legal rights.
Illegal aliens do have one right. They have the right to be heard in a court of law. It’s the same right of a burglar. He has the right to defend himself in court. We go even farther than many countries because we say that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
It’s all in the laws that are appealable to the highest court in our country. Everyone, by law, is subject to the same laws including the president of the United States and all of the people working in our government.
The citizens of Iraq and Mexico do not understand our system of government and I doubt they ever will.
Sunday, July 22, 2007
The Los Angles Times Opinion is Open Borders to Everyone
On Saturday, July 21, 2007 the Los Angeles Times editorial, horrifyingly titled “All-American deathtrap”, contends that building and maintaining an irrigation canal within our country is unfair to illegal immigrant because they have to swim across it when they are sneaking into our country.
I do not want to have anyone die but those people are here illegally. I would extend that 23 mile waterway from the Rio Grande to the Pacific Ocean if it will deter the entry of illegal aliens. Our safety and our culture are at stake. The primary issue is uneducated and most likely illiterate/unskilled Mexicans are entering this country.
They are not people who have entered the USA with the intent of becoming part of our culture. That was the intent of all those who came here through Ellis Island. Many communities here in California have populations that are more Hispanic than White (non-Hispanic). Unfortunately they choose to speak Spanish and behave as if they are still in Mexico. There are communities in Los Angeles with second and third generation Mexicans who still do not speak English. The men wait at street corners and in the front of building supply businesses hoping for any kind of laboring job. The women take any kind of work they can obtain. This may be better than Mexico for them but it does not make our nation healthier.
A second reason for stopping the flow of illegal aliens is the possibility of terrorists entering our country. Just this past week Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, issued statements that he is concerned about the possibility of a terrorist attack in this country during this summer season.
Would the Los Angeles Times have a different opinion if someone here illegally attacked a Los Angeles landmark? To read the Times editorial click this. http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-ed-canal21jul21,1,6586085.story?track=rss&ctrack=1&cset=true
I do not want to have anyone die but those people are here illegally. I would extend that 23 mile waterway from the Rio Grande to the Pacific Ocean if it will deter the entry of illegal aliens. Our safety and our culture are at stake. The primary issue is uneducated and most likely illiterate/unskilled Mexicans are entering this country.
They are not people who have entered the USA with the intent of becoming part of our culture. That was the intent of all those who came here through Ellis Island. Many communities here in California have populations that are more Hispanic than White (non-Hispanic). Unfortunately they choose to speak Spanish and behave as if they are still in Mexico. There are communities in Los Angeles with second and third generation Mexicans who still do not speak English. The men wait at street corners and in the front of building supply businesses hoping for any kind of laboring job. The women take any kind of work they can obtain. This may be better than Mexico for them but it does not make our nation healthier.
A second reason for stopping the flow of illegal aliens is the possibility of terrorists entering our country. Just this past week Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security, issued statements that he is concerned about the possibility of a terrorist attack in this country during this summer season.
Would the Los Angeles Times have a different opinion if someone here illegally attacked a Los Angeles landmark? To read the Times editorial click this. http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-ed-canal21jul21,1,6586085.story?track=rss&ctrack=1&cset=true
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Time for New Leadership in Los Angeles
Los Angeles is the second largest city in the nation with a population of almost 13 million people in the metropolitan area. We have some very rich people here and we have some very poor. What we do not have is a governing body to manage the issues that implicate this significant population.
Everyone thought that Antonio Villaragosa, as mayor of Los Angeles, would bring a new vitality and direction to the city. This has not happened. Instead we have experienced a non stop series of photo ops featuring the mayor. When it comes to substance there has been a dearth of successes.
Here is my list of the mayor’s lack of performance.
- He has supported a subway to the sea but there is no money to build it.
- Light rail projects have been delayed for an indefinite period of time. The Expo line was not given a color code because of some perceived significance in a minority area. The San Fernando Valley east west line became a busway that barely operates faster than traffic on nearby streets.
- He wanted to take control of the school system but lacked the legal authority to complete that task.
- There was the increase in fees to city property owners to pay for new police officers but the enlistments have not filled the police department objectives.
- The airport has not been updated in at least 20 years but bickering among members of the airport commission and the arguments with adjoining cities has resulted in no significant new construction.
- The harbor area has the reputation for significant pollution but no action has been taken to curtail polluting activities.
- Automobile travel times have stretched by 50% and as a result many one hour commutes have become 1 ½ hour commutes. The idea to turn Pico Boulevard and Olympic Boulevard into one way streets has not materialized. To make matters worse the street maintenance has been poor at best. Many streets, including Wilshire Boulevard have not seen resurfacing in many decades.
- Housing costs are now so high in Los Angeles that there has been a major migration to suburbs. Gang activity has contributed to that migration.
Gang activity has brought to attention but no tangible results in reducing the impact.
- The city is a sanctuary for illegal aliens. The impact is streets and fronts of hardware stores have lines of people loitering while waiting for work. Many hospital emergency rooms have been closed due to the number of illegal aliens using those rooms as their only source of medical care. Illegal aliens are a member resource for street gangs.
Being mayor of Los Angeles is a tough job. We need a tough mayor and city council to bring order out of this chaos. I do not believe we have the right people in office now.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Where are all the liberals?
They call us the “left coast” and we are “liberals”, communists, and just plain fools. It’s just not true. What we are is thinking people.
According to the California Secretary of State more than 18% of the registered voters are identified as “Decline to State” on their voter registration forms. “Decline to State” is the official designation for those registering to vote without stating a party preference. It was those “Decline to State” independents and thinking Democrats that recalled Gray Davis and put Arnold Schwarzenegger into office.
The other west coast states have even larger numbers of unaffiliated voters. In Oregon more than 29% and in Washington State more than half of the registered voters have no party affiliation.
My source for this data is the secretary of state web sites.
Are we ready for a robust third political party?
According to the California Secretary of State more than 18% of the registered voters are identified as “Decline to State” on their voter registration forms. “Decline to State” is the official designation for those registering to vote without stating a party preference. It was those “Decline to State” independents and thinking Democrats that recalled Gray Davis and put Arnold Schwarzenegger into office.
The other west coast states have even larger numbers of unaffiliated voters. In Oregon more than 29% and in Washington State more than half of the registered voters have no party affiliation.
My source for this data is the secretary of state web sites.
Are we ready for a robust third political party?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
