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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.