Alan Greenspan was at a Senate hearing today, talking about amnesty for illegal aliens. Of course, they would choose an economist who agrees with them to make the presentation.
Greenspan is the master of macro-economics. His agenda was to promote borrowing and consumption, which requires growth. Of course, it is impossible to sustain such actions. By-and-by comes a train wreck, as we are now suffering.
But for him new borrowers and new consumers are good, and large numbers of illegal aliens fit the bill.
He glossed over the fact that our low-skilled citizens are taking it on the chin, being undercut at every turn by illegal aliens.
He then went on to extol the virtues of immigrants (and illegals) at the top end, those requiring professional visas. He quoted Bill Gates. He wants more visas for scientists and engineers.
Why? Because our educational system is broken. We can't get math and science right and must import talent to fill the gap. So goes the argument.
I wonder what would happen in our school district if we could spend our money on the gifted? Instead we teach English, hygiene, and foreign culture to anchor babies, immigrant children, and Plyler's kids. And there are federal grants for bilingual education, but few for math and science. What did Greenspan expect? And exactly how does amnesty fix that problem?
But his deliberate pronouncements were well-received by the committee. Just what they wanted to hear.
We wouldn't want one of those rogue economists telling Congress that America will adapt if we allow our own citizens to fill the jobs. Wages and benefits would adapt to the demand and the unemployed would fill those jobs.
We would see our own scientists rise to the occasion.
Greenspan didn't talk at all about our broken labor certification that doesn't look very hard to find a citizen to fill the professional jobs.
But Greenspan has never been wrong before, has he?
Thursday, April 30, 2009
About the Obama agenda
Thoughts on climate change, nationalization (even temporarily) of business, health care reform, swine flu...
The first is the advance, and increasing application of science. As a means to the ends I care for, this is neutral. We shall grow able to cure, and to produce, more diseases -- bacterial war, not bombs, might ring down the curtain -- to alleviate, and to inflict, more pains to husband, or to waste, the resources of the planet more extensively. We can become either more beneficent or more mischievous. My guess is we shall do both; mending one thing and marring another, removing old miseries and producing new ones, safeguarding ourselves here and endangering ourselves there.
Observe how the "humane" attitude to crime could operate. If crimes are diseases, why should diseases be treated differently from crimes? And who but the experts can define disease? One school of psychology regards my religion as a neurosis. If this neurosis ever become inconvenient to Government, what is to prevent my being subjected to a compulsory "cure"? It may be painful; treatments sometimes are. But it will be no use asking, "What have I done to deserve this?" The Straightener will reply: "But, my dear fellow, no one's blaming you. We no longer believe in retributive justice. We're healing you."
This would be no more than an extreme application of the political philosophy implicit in most modern communities. It has stolen on us unawares. Two wars necessitated vast curtailments of liberty, and we have grown, though grumblingly, accustomed to our chains. The increasing complexity and precariousness o our economic life have forced Government to take over many spheres of activity once left to choice or chance. Our intellectuals have surrendered first to the philosophy of Hegel, then to Marx, finally to the linguistic analysts.
As a result, classical political theory, with its Stoical, Christian and juristic key-conceptions (natural law, the value of the individual, the rights of man), has died. The modern State exists not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good -- anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence, the new name "leaders" for those who were once "rulers".
We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, "Mind your own business." Our whole lives ARE their business. I write "they" because it seems childish not to recognize that actual government is and always must be oligarchical. Our effective masters must be more than one and fewer than all. But the oligarchs begin to regard us in a new way.
Here, I think, lies our real dilemma. Probably we cannot, certainly we shall not, retrace our steps. We are tamed animals (some with kind, some with cruel masters) and should probably starve if we got out of our cage. That is one horn of the dilemma. But in an increasingly planned society, how much of what I value can survive? That is the other horn.
I believe a man is happier, and happy in a richer way, if he has the "freeborn mind". But I doubt whether he can have this without economic independence, which the new society is abolishing. For economic independence allows an education not controlled by Government; and in adult life it is the man who needs, and asks, nothing of Government who can criticise its acts and snap his fingers at its ideology.
Read Montaigne; that's the voice of a man withhis legs under his own table, eating the mutton and turnips raised on his own land. Who will talk like that when the State is everyone' schoolmaster and employer? Admittedly, when a man was untamed, such liberty belonged only to the few. I know. Hence the horriblesuspicion that our only choice is between societies with few freemen and societies with none.
Again, the new oligarchy must more and more base its claim to plan us on its claim to knowledge. If we are to be mothered, mother must know best. This means they must increasingly rely on the advice of scientists, till in the end the politicians proper become merely the scientists' puppets. Technocracy is the form to which a planned society must tend.
Now I dread specialists in power because they are specialists speaking outside their special subjects. Let scientists tell us about sciences. But government involves questions about the good for man, and justice, and what things are worth having at what price; and on these a scientific training gives a man's opinion no added value. Let the doctor tell me I shall die unless I do so-and-so; but whether life is worth having on those terms is no more a question for him that for any other man.
I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come in. In every age the men who want us under their thumb, if they have nay sense, will put forward the particular pretension which the hopes and fears of that age render most potent. They 'cash in". It has been magic, it has been Christianity. Now it will certainly be science. Perhaps the real scientists may not think much of the tyrants' "science" -- they didn't think much of Hitler's racial theories or Stalin's biology. But they can be muzzled.
We must give full weight to Sir Charles's reminder that millions in the East are still half starved. To these my fears would seem very unimportant. A hungry man thinks about food, not freedom. We must give full weight to the claim that nothing but science, and science globally applied, and therefore unprecedented Government controls, can produce full bellies and medical care for the whole human race: nothing, in short, but a world Welfare State. It is a full admission of these truths which impresses upon me the extreme peril of humanity at present.
We have on the one hand a desperate need; hunger, sickness and the dread of war. We have, on the other, the conception of something that might meet it; omni-competent global technocracy. Are not these the ideal opportunity for enslavement? This is how it has entered before; a desperate need (real or apparent) in the one party, a power (real or apparent) to relieve it, in the other. In the ancient world individuals have sold themselves as slaves in order to eat. So in society. Here is a witch-doctor who can save us from the sorcerers -- a war-lord who can save us from the barbarians -- a Church who can save us from Hell. Give them what they ask, give ourselves to them bound and blindfold, if only they will! Perhaps the terrible bargain will be made again. We cannot blame men for making it. We can hardly wish them not to. Yet we can hardly bear that they should.
The question about progress has become the question whether we can discover any way of submitting to the worldwide paternalism of a technocracy without losing all personal privacy and independence. Is there any possibility of getting the super Welfare State's honey and avoiding the sting?
Let us make no mistake about the sting. The Swedish sadness is only a foretaste. To live his life in his own way, to call his house his castle, to enjoy the fruits of his own labour, to educate his children as his conscience directs, to save for their prosperity after his death -- these are wishes deeply ingrained in civilised man. Their realization is almost as necessary to our virtues as to our happiness. From their total frustration disastrous results both moral and psychological might follow.
All this threatens us even if the form of society which our needs point to should prove and unparalleled success. But is that certain? What assurance have we that our masters will or can keep the promise which induced us to sell ourselves? Let us not be deceived by phrases about "Man taking charge of his own destiny". All that can really happen is that some men will take charge of the destiny of others. They will be simply men; none perfect; some greedy, cruel and dishonest. The more completely we are planned the powerful they will be. Have we discovered some new reason why, this time, power should not corrupt as it has done before?
All the above comments are from C S Lewis, July 1958
http://www.onthewing.org/user/Pol_Is%20Progress%20Possible%20-%20CS%20Lewis.pdf
A fascinating perspective as fresh as last night's Presidential address.
The first is the advance, and increasing application of science. As a means to the ends I care for, this is neutral. We shall grow able to cure, and to produce, more diseases -- bacterial war, not bombs, might ring down the curtain -- to alleviate, and to inflict, more pains to husband, or to waste, the resources of the planet more extensively. We can become either more beneficent or more mischievous. My guess is we shall do both; mending one thing and marring another, removing old miseries and producing new ones, safeguarding ourselves here and endangering ourselves there.
Observe how the "humane" attitude to crime could operate. If crimes are diseases, why should diseases be treated differently from crimes? And who but the experts can define disease? One school of psychology regards my religion as a neurosis. If this neurosis ever become inconvenient to Government, what is to prevent my being subjected to a compulsory "cure"? It may be painful; treatments sometimes are. But it will be no use asking, "What have I done to deserve this?" The Straightener will reply: "But, my dear fellow, no one's blaming you. We no longer believe in retributive justice. We're healing you."
This would be no more than an extreme application of the political philosophy implicit in most modern communities. It has stolen on us unawares. Two wars necessitated vast curtailments of liberty, and we have grown, though grumblingly, accustomed to our chains. The increasing complexity and precariousness o our economic life have forced Government to take over many spheres of activity once left to choice or chance. Our intellectuals have surrendered first to the philosophy of Hegel, then to Marx, finally to the linguistic analysts.
As a result, classical political theory, with its Stoical, Christian and juristic key-conceptions (natural law, the value of the individual, the rights of man), has died. The modern State exists not to protect our rights but to do us good or make us good -- anyway, to do something to us or to make us something. Hence, the new name "leaders" for those who were once "rulers".
We are less their subjects than their wards, pupils or domestic animals. There is nothing left of which we can say to them, "Mind your own business." Our whole lives ARE their business. I write "they" because it seems childish not to recognize that actual government is and always must be oligarchical. Our effective masters must be more than one and fewer than all. But the oligarchs begin to regard us in a new way.
Here, I think, lies our real dilemma. Probably we cannot, certainly we shall not, retrace our steps. We are tamed animals (some with kind, some with cruel masters) and should probably starve if we got out of our cage. That is one horn of the dilemma. But in an increasingly planned society, how much of what I value can survive? That is the other horn.
I believe a man is happier, and happy in a richer way, if he has the "freeborn mind". But I doubt whether he can have this without economic independence, which the new society is abolishing. For economic independence allows an education not controlled by Government; and in adult life it is the man who needs, and asks, nothing of Government who can criticise its acts and snap his fingers at its ideology.
Read Montaigne; that's the voice of a man withhis legs under his own table, eating the mutton and turnips raised on his own land. Who will talk like that when the State is everyone' schoolmaster and employer? Admittedly, when a man was untamed, such liberty belonged only to the few. I know. Hence the horriblesuspicion that our only choice is between societies with few freemen and societies with none.
Again, the new oligarchy must more and more base its claim to plan us on its claim to knowledge. If we are to be mothered, mother must know best. This means they must increasingly rely on the advice of scientists, till in the end the politicians proper become merely the scientists' puppets. Technocracy is the form to which a planned society must tend.
Now I dread specialists in power because they are specialists speaking outside their special subjects. Let scientists tell us about sciences. But government involves questions about the good for man, and justice, and what things are worth having at what price; and on these a scientific training gives a man's opinion no added value. Let the doctor tell me I shall die unless I do so-and-so; but whether life is worth having on those terms is no more a question for him that for any other man.
I dread government in the name of science. That is how tyrannies come in. In every age the men who want us under their thumb, if they have nay sense, will put forward the particular pretension which the hopes and fears of that age render most potent. They 'cash in". It has been magic, it has been Christianity. Now it will certainly be science. Perhaps the real scientists may not think much of the tyrants' "science" -- they didn't think much of Hitler's racial theories or Stalin's biology. But they can be muzzled.
We must give full weight to Sir Charles's reminder that millions in the East are still half starved. To these my fears would seem very unimportant. A hungry man thinks about food, not freedom. We must give full weight to the claim that nothing but science, and science globally applied, and therefore unprecedented Government controls, can produce full bellies and medical care for the whole human race: nothing, in short, but a world Welfare State. It is a full admission of these truths which impresses upon me the extreme peril of humanity at present.
We have on the one hand a desperate need; hunger, sickness and the dread of war. We have, on the other, the conception of something that might meet it; omni-competent global technocracy. Are not these the ideal opportunity for enslavement? This is how it has entered before; a desperate need (real or apparent) in the one party, a power (real or apparent) to relieve it, in the other. In the ancient world individuals have sold themselves as slaves in order to eat. So in society. Here is a witch-doctor who can save us from the sorcerers -- a war-lord who can save us from the barbarians -- a Church who can save us from Hell. Give them what they ask, give ourselves to them bound and blindfold, if only they will! Perhaps the terrible bargain will be made again. We cannot blame men for making it. We can hardly wish them not to. Yet we can hardly bear that they should.
The question about progress has become the question whether we can discover any way of submitting to the worldwide paternalism of a technocracy without losing all personal privacy and independence. Is there any possibility of getting the super Welfare State's honey and avoiding the sting?
Let us make no mistake about the sting. The Swedish sadness is only a foretaste. To live his life in his own way, to call his house his castle, to enjoy the fruits of his own labour, to educate his children as his conscience directs, to save for their prosperity after his death -- these are wishes deeply ingrained in civilised man. Their realization is almost as necessary to our virtues as to our happiness. From their total frustration disastrous results both moral and psychological might follow.
All this threatens us even if the form of society which our needs point to should prove and unparalleled success. But is that certain? What assurance have we that our masters will or can keep the promise which induced us to sell ourselves? Let us not be deceived by phrases about "Man taking charge of his own destiny". All that can really happen is that some men will take charge of the destiny of others. They will be simply men; none perfect; some greedy, cruel and dishonest. The more completely we are planned the powerful they will be. Have we discovered some new reason why, this time, power should not corrupt as it has done before?
All the above comments are from C S Lewis, July 1958
http://www.onthewing.org/user/Pol_Is%20Progress%20Possible%20-%20CS%20Lewis.pdf
A fascinating perspective as fresh as last night's Presidential address.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Vectors, vectors, everywhere
Remember the tainted tomatoes? Remember how it took the FDA weeks to say the word "Mexico" and shut down imports?
The swine flu outbreak is more of the same and another one for your Bush III file. Napolitano did not act quickly enough to limit travel and has yet to close the border. Why? Because the political image of Mexico as our friend is more important than public safety.
Of course, we knew that just by looking at our immigration policy, but this just shows you how deep our loyalty goes.
As a result, new vectors for the virus continue to enter the United States. Watching people get off airplanes at O'Hare is NOT a reliable way to screen for the virus.
Had the outbreak been limited to a town in rural Mexico one could justify the limited approach, but people in Mexico City were already infected and health officials there were shutting the city down. Ergo, affluent Mexicans and visitors likely to travel were not kept out of the US.
As a result, the number of infected people and their distribution around the United States has grown. This is not the policy of containment as is commonly practiced in disease control.
Homeland Security fails us again.
The swine flu outbreak is more of the same and another one for your Bush III file. Napolitano did not act quickly enough to limit travel and has yet to close the border. Why? Because the political image of Mexico as our friend is more important than public safety.
Of course, we knew that just by looking at our immigration policy, but this just shows you how deep our loyalty goes.
As a result, new vectors for the virus continue to enter the United States. Watching people get off airplanes at O'Hare is NOT a reliable way to screen for the virus.
Had the outbreak been limited to a town in rural Mexico one could justify the limited approach, but people in Mexico City were already infected and health officials there were shutting the city down. Ergo, affluent Mexicans and visitors likely to travel were not kept out of the US.
As a result, the number of infected people and their distribution around the United States has grown. This is not the policy of containment as is commonly practiced in disease control.
Homeland Security fails us again.
Moron Air Force One
I mean, more on Air Force One.
There is quite a buzz about the little air show over New York City on Monday. There are all sorts of theories but they all come to the same conclusion: We aren't being told the truth.
One theory is that a renegade pilot stole the plane and took it for a very visible joyride in order to protest the new administration.
I'm skeptical about that one since the NYPD apparently knew about the exercise days in advance but didn't tell anyone.
On another note, it seems odd to me that early reports said it was a combination training exercise/photo op. It seems the "training exercise" part of the excuse has been dropped.
So, let's say it really was a photo shoot of Air Force One and the Statue of Liberty. What's wrong with this picture:
1) No one reported helicopters or other photographers covering the shoot. And F-16s aren't exactly built for taking pictures.
2) Such a photo shoot would have been done on a Sunday, like most movie scenes. And there would have been advance warning. (I don't mean telling the public that Air Force One would be in the sky over the Hudson at 9:00 am Sunday. Just say "airplanes for a movie" and people will know enough.)
3) Now is not the time to go around the country taking pictures of government airplanes, especially when the tab for an hour in the sky for Air Force One and a couple of F-16s is well over $100K. ABC says it was $328K. Like was said, just use PhotoShop and save the taxpayers.
Now there are some other ideas about what happened. The First Family wanted to take Bo up and show him the plane. That's as good as anything else I've heard.
What is hard to believe is the reaction of the President. He didn't know about it. It'll never happen again. How about the response of Napolitano about the Bellingham raid. She was going to get to the bottom of it.
Obama could have said he was going to investigate and give us a full report. (That would be transparency.) It took a letter from John McCain to get that ball rolling.
If he didn't know where his airplane was, that would put him in a very bad light. The plane, it's readiness, it's back up plane, are all part of national security.
I think from his answer he knows more than he's telling. And it is consistent with President Image to hide bad news from us, especially if it reflects badly on him as a leader.
It makes you wonder what else he's hiding from us.
There is quite a buzz about the little air show over New York City on Monday. There are all sorts of theories but they all come to the same conclusion: We aren't being told the truth.
One theory is that a renegade pilot stole the plane and took it for a very visible joyride in order to protest the new administration.
I'm skeptical about that one since the NYPD apparently knew about the exercise days in advance but didn't tell anyone.
On another note, it seems odd to me that early reports said it was a combination training exercise/photo op. It seems the "training exercise" part of the excuse has been dropped.
So, let's say it really was a photo shoot of Air Force One and the Statue of Liberty. What's wrong with this picture:
1) No one reported helicopters or other photographers covering the shoot. And F-16s aren't exactly built for taking pictures.
2) Such a photo shoot would have been done on a Sunday, like most movie scenes. And there would have been advance warning. (I don't mean telling the public that Air Force One would be in the sky over the Hudson at 9:00 am Sunday. Just say "airplanes for a movie" and people will know enough.)
3) Now is not the time to go around the country taking pictures of government airplanes, especially when the tab for an hour in the sky for Air Force One and a couple of F-16s is well over $100K. ABC says it was $328K. Like was said, just use PhotoShop and save the taxpayers.
Now there are some other ideas about what happened. The First Family wanted to take Bo up and show him the plane. That's as good as anything else I've heard.
What is hard to believe is the reaction of the President. He didn't know about it. It'll never happen again. How about the response of Napolitano about the Bellingham raid. She was going to get to the bottom of it.
Obama could have said he was going to investigate and give us a full report. (That would be transparency.) It took a letter from John McCain to get that ball rolling.
If he didn't know where his airplane was, that would put him in a very bad light. The plane, it's readiness, it's back up plane, are all part of national security.
I think from his answer he knows more than he's telling. And it is consistent with President Image to hide bad news from us, especially if it reflects badly on him as a leader.
It makes you wonder what else he's hiding from us.
Monday, April 27, 2009
"I have a gift, Harry."
Such confident words from Obama, as recalled by Harry Reid.The "gift" is public speaking.
Obama had another TelePrompTer malfunction just today.
I hope someone kept the receipt for his gift.
Stupid pills discovered...
...at Homeland Security.
Well, here's another boneheaded move. They conducted a training exercise in New York City in the middle of the day today using Air Force One (sans O) and two F-16s.
Except no one at NYPD thought it would be a problem so they kept it a secret from the mayor and the media.
Buildings were evacuated and lots of New Yorkers shaken up by the sight of a 747 coming in over the Hudson, doing a few banks and turns among the skyscrapers, followed by F-16s.
Oh yeah, and it was a photo op for the government as well.
Speaking of stupid pills, Napolitano apologized to the veterans for calling them rightwing security threats. How about an apology for the rest of us? I guess she's not taking that one back.
Anyone with strong opinions about immigration, abortion, or gun rights in still on the Homeland Security watch list.
Well, here's another boneheaded move. They conducted a training exercise in New York City in the middle of the day today using Air Force One (sans O) and two F-16s.
Except no one at NYPD thought it would be a problem so they kept it a secret from the mayor and the media.
Buildings were evacuated and lots of New Yorkers shaken up by the sight of a 747 coming in over the Hudson, doing a few banks and turns among the skyscrapers, followed by F-16s.
Oh yeah, and it was a photo op for the government as well.
Speaking of stupid pills, Napolitano apologized to the veterans for calling them rightwing security threats. How about an apology for the rest of us? I guess she's not taking that one back.
Anyone with strong opinions about immigration, abortion, or gun rights in still on the Homeland Security watch list.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Fun and games in Cook County
Remember the blog a few months ago about the county official caught flipping the bird at a county meeting?
http://alienrants.blogspot.com/2009/01/different-kind-of-bird-strike.html
Donna Dunnings was her name. And she’s a cousin to county board chairman Todd Stroger. Well, for our entertainment value, both Todd and Donna are in the news this week.
And you will love it.
Tony Cole was a college basketball player for the University of Georgia back in 2002. He was charged with aggravated assault with intent to rape and they booted him off the team.
Then in 2003 he was in trouble with the law again for threatening an ex-girlfriend with an Uzi (submachine gun). For good measure, he entered a guilty plea that same year for writing bad checks.
Sometime around then, he told reporters that he got an “A” in a class he never attended and received some goodies from the university, statements that brought the wrath of the NCAA down upon the school.
Then there were a few run ins with the law in Baton Rouge.
Then just last June Tony was charged with domestic battery.
Fast forward to October. County Board Chairman Todd Stroger met Tony Cole at Ruth's Chris Steak House. Tony was a busboy at the time, having worked there for three months.
Stroger was so impressed with him that he hired the busboy. Tony Cole began working for Cook County on October 14, 2008 as an administrative assistant. His starting pay was $48,249, not a bad bump in these tough economic times.
But just a few weeks later in November of 2008 Tony was arrested for violating an order of protection. So he calls his boss, Donna Dunnings (the finger lady) to bail him out. She paid $1,000 to bail him out. And one of Stroger’s cronies was present when he was bailed out. Stroger knew of this event.
Well, Tony kept making nasty phone calls to the ex-girlfriend until the judge called him back in and raised the bail to $40,000. Dunnings paid the additional $3,000 bail that time as well.
So, what do you do with an employee like that?
In Cook County you PROMOTE him. And so Tony was given a raise to $61,189 and put in the HR office of the county highway department.
So, here it is April 12th and the probation officers are worried. Tony has been AWOL four times and is hostile to the follow-up. They go to his house, Tony refused to cooperate, and he is hauled back to jail. Bail is now at $200,000 and no one is bailing him out.
Stroger fires Donna “Finger” Dunnings over the scandal and immediately calls the newspapers to inform them the situation was all Donna’s fault.
Now all sorts of finger-pointing is going on. Stroger says the state police took months to deliver a background check on Tony Cole and that he had no idea about Cole’s violent past. (You could always Google his name, Todd. That would give you more than enough to keep you from offering a busboy a $48K job.)
But Todd is looking rather foolish now since the Illinois State Police and the FBI keep very good records and have proof they notified Stroger back in November.
Oh, and they finally did fire Tony Cole a couple of weeks ago.
Does this explain why Cook County has the highest sales tax in the nation?
http://alienrants.blogspot.com/2009/01/different-kind-of-bird-strike.html
Donna Dunnings was her name. And she’s a cousin to county board chairman Todd Stroger. Well, for our entertainment value, both Todd and Donna are in the news this week.
And you will love it.
Tony Cole was a college basketball player for the University of Georgia back in 2002. He was charged with aggravated assault with intent to rape and they booted him off the team.
Then in 2003 he was in trouble with the law again for threatening an ex-girlfriend with an Uzi (submachine gun). For good measure, he entered a guilty plea that same year for writing bad checks.
Sometime around then, he told reporters that he got an “A” in a class he never attended and received some goodies from the university, statements that brought the wrath of the NCAA down upon the school.
Then there were a few run ins with the law in Baton Rouge.
Then just last June Tony was charged with domestic battery.
Fast forward to October. County Board Chairman Todd Stroger met Tony Cole at Ruth's Chris Steak House. Tony was a busboy at the time, having worked there for three months.
Stroger was so impressed with him that he hired the busboy. Tony Cole began working for Cook County on October 14, 2008 as an administrative assistant. His starting pay was $48,249, not a bad bump in these tough economic times.
But just a few weeks later in November of 2008 Tony was arrested for violating an order of protection. So he calls his boss, Donna Dunnings (the finger lady) to bail him out. She paid $1,000 to bail him out. And one of Stroger’s cronies was present when he was bailed out. Stroger knew of this event.
Well, Tony kept making nasty phone calls to the ex-girlfriend until the judge called him back in and raised the bail to $40,000. Dunnings paid the additional $3,000 bail that time as well.
So, what do you do with an employee like that?
In Cook County you PROMOTE him. And so Tony was given a raise to $61,189 and put in the HR office of the county highway department.
So, here it is April 12th and the probation officers are worried. Tony has been AWOL four times and is hostile to the follow-up. They go to his house, Tony refused to cooperate, and he is hauled back to jail. Bail is now at $200,000 and no one is bailing him out.
Stroger fires Donna “Finger” Dunnings over the scandal and immediately calls the newspapers to inform them the situation was all Donna’s fault.
Now all sorts of finger-pointing is going on. Stroger says the state police took months to deliver a background check on Tony Cole and that he had no idea about Cole’s violent past. (You could always Google his name, Todd. That would give you more than enough to keep you from offering a busboy a $48K job.)
But Todd is looking rather foolish now since the Illinois State Police and the FBI keep very good records and have proof they notified Stroger back in November.
Oh, and they finally did fire Tony Cole a couple of weeks ago.
Does this explain why Cook County has the highest sales tax in the nation?
It's not cool to be anti-American
The White House has officially declared to the world that America bashing is no longer “cool”. David Axelrod, Obama’s close Chicago friend and political strategist, decreed it so with this statement: “I think what has happened is that anti-Americanism isn't cool anymore.”
I believe David was speaking directly to the likes of Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, and the Castro Brothers.
In answer to the question about the expectation Obama has for Chavez, Axelrod said: “Well, for one thing, to stop this sort of rampant and tasteless anti-Americanism that we've seen over the last eight years, and try and work cooperatively with us. And the hope is, is that that's what will come from this.
“But understand what's happening, Harry, and not just with Venezuela but with countries around the world. I think this president has engaged the people of the world, the constituencies of these leaders, and the leaders are now responding. Easy anti-Americanism is no longer a great political tactic in their countries, and I think that's one of the early accomplishments of this presidency.”
And how did Obama achieve this feat of elevating the reputation of the United States on the world stage?
Self-deprecation. That’s it. (And maybe Michelle’s wardrobe.)
Obama has been reaching out to Muslims since the first week in office. He held his first interview with al-Arabiya, reaching out to the Arab world rather than Fox News viewers. He sent holiday greetings to Iran. He told audiences all over Europe that we’re sorry. He made it clear that Muslims get preferential treatment over Christians in the United States (that theological affirmative action I wrote about earlier).
And he showed great respect at G20 and the Summit of the Americas, going out of his way to extend special greetings to the enemies Bush created. (Well, Obama blames the trouble on Bush.)
And he blames us wherever possible. Like the border violence. That’s caused by OUR guns in the hands of Mexican drug lords. That’s the result of the demand for drugs by rich white kids in the USA.
Illegals perishing in the desert? That’s a result of our failed immigration policy.
Deportation? Not the fault of the illegal aliens. We’re to blame for separating otherwise law-abiding families.
Oh, and the employers who hire illegals. (He never quite gets to the E-Verify fiasco, the main tool for employers.)
And those rightwing nuts who threaten our national security.
Maybe John Foster Dulles was wrong: “The United States of America does not have friends. It has interests.” (Secretary of State, 1953-1959)
Only time will tell if the community organizer knows more than the diplomat.
I believe David was speaking directly to the likes of Daniel Ortega, Hugo Chavez, and the Castro Brothers.
In answer to the question about the expectation Obama has for Chavez, Axelrod said: “Well, for one thing, to stop this sort of rampant and tasteless anti-Americanism that we've seen over the last eight years, and try and work cooperatively with us. And the hope is, is that that's what will come from this.
“But understand what's happening, Harry, and not just with Venezuela but with countries around the world. I think this president has engaged the people of the world, the constituencies of these leaders, and the leaders are now responding. Easy anti-Americanism is no longer a great political tactic in their countries, and I think that's one of the early accomplishments of this presidency.”
And how did Obama achieve this feat of elevating the reputation of the United States on the world stage?
Self-deprecation. That’s it. (And maybe Michelle’s wardrobe.)
Obama has been reaching out to Muslims since the first week in office. He held his first interview with al-Arabiya, reaching out to the Arab world rather than Fox News viewers. He sent holiday greetings to Iran. He told audiences all over Europe that we’re sorry. He made it clear that Muslims get preferential treatment over Christians in the United States (that theological affirmative action I wrote about earlier).
And he showed great respect at G20 and the Summit of the Americas, going out of his way to extend special greetings to the enemies Bush created. (Well, Obama blames the trouble on Bush.)
And he blames us wherever possible. Like the border violence. That’s caused by OUR guns in the hands of Mexican drug lords. That’s the result of the demand for drugs by rich white kids in the USA.
Illegals perishing in the desert? That’s a result of our failed immigration policy.
Deportation? Not the fault of the illegal aliens. We’re to blame for separating otherwise law-abiding families.
Oh, and the employers who hire illegals. (He never quite gets to the E-Verify fiasco, the main tool for employers.)
And those rightwing nuts who threaten our national security.
Maybe John Foster Dulles was wrong: “The United States of America does not have friends. It has interests.” (Secretary of State, 1953-1959)
Only time will tell if the community organizer knows more than the diplomat.
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Another animal cruelty story
The libs are rabid again. This time because a loose cat was chased around at a Cubs game and hoisted into the stands by its tail.How dare they treat one of God's creatures like that? (I guess we can't really say "God" can we? Sorry.)
They took the cat to the vet and he's OK.
In other news, the age for getting the morning after pill has been lowered to 17. No prescription needed. The unborn lose again.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Hate speech or great speech?
First of all, the Miss USA pageant is NOT real. It is entertainment. Donald Trump and NBC own the pageant. Does that tell you anything? Still not convinced? The host was from the gossip show “Access Hollywood.” And it was held in Las Vegas. It was hatched from reality TV but it isn’t real.
And Perez Hilton has all the depth of a paper doll. He was a pudgy actor wannabe with Cuban parents whose fame revolves around losing weight, being gay, having a famous-sounding stage name, and an obnoxious rant.
And Carrie Prejean may go to a Christian college but she’s also a model. I’m not sure her portfolio would contain much material for a lesson on modesty.
I’m not taking anything away from her and her answer; I’m just trying to put things in perspective. Right from the start, this was a shallow event with shallow players.
The question was a set-up from the beginning. Of course, the luck of the draw was when she chose the card that read, “Perez Hilton.” She had passed the point of no return at that moment.
The judge knew of her Christian up-bringing and he knew she would be challenged by his question. Besides, asking the question is one more chance to get the gay message on TV.
Hilton’s anger came when Prejean refused to cower to the power of the gay agenda, his #1 cause. Instead she gave an honest answer. She was booed, Hilton said. Well, she was also applauded by just as many.
This was a recount of the Prop 8 ballot question and the same outcome was displayed at the pageant in Las Vegas. (FYI, in 2002 the Nevada voters nixed same-sex marriage there as well.)
But a shallow event was followed by the shallow media, portraying her answer as a gaffe.
The headlines read, “Miss California puts her foot in it,” “A Beauty Queen Blows It,” and “Miss California stumbles over her answer.”
The stories used words like “awkward” and “fumbled” as they described the answer.
The pageant director was “personally saddened and hurt” by her reply.
All I can say is that the most genuine thing to come of it all was an honest answer that stood Hollywood on its ear. She said: “You know what, in my country, in my family, I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you.”
I worry that the girl might be put on Homeland Security’s rightwing watch list for having such a definite opinion.
Of course, I think the world can see she has nothing to hide.
I fully expect charges of hate speech to come out any day.
And Perez Hilton has all the depth of a paper doll. He was a pudgy actor wannabe with Cuban parents whose fame revolves around losing weight, being gay, having a famous-sounding stage name, and an obnoxious rant.
And Carrie Prejean may go to a Christian college but she’s also a model. I’m not sure her portfolio would contain much material for a lesson on modesty.
I’m not taking anything away from her and her answer; I’m just trying to put things in perspective. Right from the start, this was a shallow event with shallow players.
The question was a set-up from the beginning. Of course, the luck of the draw was when she chose the card that read, “Perez Hilton.” She had passed the point of no return at that moment.
The judge knew of her Christian up-bringing and he knew she would be challenged by his question. Besides, asking the question is one more chance to get the gay message on TV.
Hilton’s anger came when Prejean refused to cower to the power of the gay agenda, his #1 cause. Instead she gave an honest answer. She was booed, Hilton said. Well, she was also applauded by just as many.
This was a recount of the Prop 8 ballot question and the same outcome was displayed at the pageant in Las Vegas. (FYI, in 2002 the Nevada voters nixed same-sex marriage there as well.)
But a shallow event was followed by the shallow media, portraying her answer as a gaffe.
The headlines read, “Miss California puts her foot in it,” “A Beauty Queen Blows It,” and “Miss California stumbles over her answer.”
The stories used words like “awkward” and “fumbled” as they described the answer.
The pageant director was “personally saddened and hurt” by her reply.
All I can say is that the most genuine thing to come of it all was an honest answer that stood Hollywood on its ear. She said: “You know what, in my country, in my family, I do believe that marriage should be between a man and a woman, no offense to anybody out there. But that’s how I was raised and I believe that it should be between a man and a woman. Thank you.”
I worry that the girl might be put on Homeland Security’s rightwing watch list for having such a definite opinion.
Of course, I think the world can see she has nothing to hide.
I fully expect charges of hate speech to come out any day.
Friday, April 17, 2009
Catholics 4, Obama 1
It seems the president is once again showing hyper-obeisance to Muslims while throwing Christians under the bus. It's the theological version of affirmative action.
The White House instructed Georgetown University (Catholic) to cover up the symbolic Jesus before Obama spoke there earlier this week. One would hate to have THAT THING in the camera shots right after Obama told the world we aren't a Christian nation.
Here is a little photo history of Gaston Hall:
Gaston Hall in 1895. Note the Stars-and-Stripes bunting peacefully coexisting with the cross and the "IHS" icon.
Here's Ron Paul speaking there. Is it just me or is the American flag awfully close to that cross?
Here's Obama earlier this week. That cross and "IHS" were covered up at the explicit request of the White House.
I added the banner from a previous presidential event. Obama has succeeded in offending Catholics and their leaders. I wonder what they'll have to do at Notre Dame to accommodate the administration.
Obama scores with Rome on his views on illegal aliens, but he loses points on abortion, stem-cell research, the commencement at Notre Dame and his desire to redecorate chapels.
He really shouldn't have worried about the icon. Cultural literacy is so abysmal few would have made the connection anyway.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
A cloth coat and a Cocker Spaniel
Since the days of Richard Nixon we have been treated to some fine spin, courtesy of television.
And the run up to the tax day protest is no exception. There’s a parade forming; get out in front of it.
Ripped fresh from the fax machine, a cute blonde reporter from Fox News Chicago stood there on camera on the April 14th 9 o’clock news with the scoop that Cook County Board President Todd Stroger was proposing a reduction of sales tax by 25%! She had no clue what she was saying and the brains behind her had no time to make sense of it by writing a script.
Actually, Todd was proposing at 0.25% drop in the sales tax, making it only a penny larger than what they charge in LA County. Oh no, Todd is the taxpayer's friend. We don’t want any signs at the tea party with his name on them.
But Obama took the “I feel your pain” approach with his 1 o’clock press conference. Yessir, the White House would have something to say about taxes to diffuse the protests.
His message? No one likes April 15th and the tax forms are too complicated. And he’s going to cut taxes (to help pay for all the money he’s handing out, I suppose).
Here is the official White House photo of the meeting, tagged by the administration as “hero_taxday.” (At least they were openly declaring their intent.):
And here we have the press conference with real Americans behind the President, standing shoulder-to-shoulder behind the man and his message:
And the run up to the tax day protest is no exception. There’s a parade forming; get out in front of it.
Ripped fresh from the fax machine, a cute blonde reporter from Fox News Chicago stood there on camera on the April 14th 9 o’clock news with the scoop that Cook County Board President Todd Stroger was proposing a reduction of sales tax by 25%! She had no clue what she was saying and the brains behind her had no time to make sense of it by writing a script.
Actually, Todd was proposing at 0.25% drop in the sales tax, making it only a penny larger than what they charge in LA County. Oh no, Todd is the taxpayer's friend. We don’t want any signs at the tea party with his name on them.
But Obama took the “I feel your pain” approach with his 1 o’clock press conference. Yessir, the White House would have something to say about taxes to diffuse the protests.
His message? No one likes April 15th and the tax forms are too complicated. And he’s going to cut taxes (to help pay for all the money he’s handing out, I suppose).
Here is the official White House photo of the meeting, tagged by the administration as “hero_taxday.” (At least they were openly declaring their intent.):
And here we have the press conference with real Americans behind the President, standing shoulder-to-shoulder behind the man and his message:
It sort of reminds me of this photo of Blagojevich during his January 9, 2009 press conference. See all these commoners he's helped while helping himself to the power of corruption?
Where do they learn this stunt? Is it something they teach in the Chicago School of Political Games?
Reading the comments on the news articles it appears that Obama has snookered many into believing that government is good for us so we can have roads and schools.
And taxes aren't so bad. In fact, they are going down. Why, you wouldn't believe how many people are getting refunds this year.
Media coverage
Just a couple of thoughts on media coverage of the Chicago Tea Party. I was there.
One TV station showed the rally site at about 10:30 am, an hour and a half before it was to begin. They never mentioned the size of the crowd. Someone watching that station would have the impression that there were about 100 people at the rally, not 2,500.
It would be like sending a photographer to the Easter Service to take pictures a half hour before it began, leading people to believe no one goes to church on Easter any more.
The Young Republicans rented a tall ship and sailed from Navy Pier. It was a great visual, but the TV reporters were obsessed with the EPA. They kept explaining that the crates didn’t really have any tea in them and would be retrieved from the harbor.
They showed over and over again the crates tethered with ropes as they were tossed over the side of the ship.
The coverage was on the logistics, not so much the protest itself.
One TV station showed the rally site at about 10:30 am, an hour and a half before it was to begin. They never mentioned the size of the crowd. Someone watching that station would have the impression that there were about 100 people at the rally, not 2,500.
It would be like sending a photographer to the Easter Service to take pictures a half hour before it began, leading people to believe no one goes to church on Easter any more.
The Young Republicans rented a tall ship and sailed from Navy Pier. It was a great visual, but the TV reporters were obsessed with the EPA. They kept explaining that the crates didn’t really have any tea in them and would be retrieved from the harbor.
They showed over and over again the crates tethered with ropes as they were tossed over the side of the ship.
The coverage was on the logistics, not so much the protest itself.
A movement or just BS
The progressives among us see the tea party as a manipulation by the rich to protect themselves against the Obama agenda. The theory goes that this grassroots movement is Astroturf, that corporate America has mobilized the minions in an effort to keep the left from taxing the rich.
Well, from where I sit the left is jealous and a bit frightened by what happened yesterday. Why, even celebrities were stepping up to the microphone to complain about government. And there was some media attention about it.
In contrast, let’s look at the May Day parades on immigration staged by the left. People are gathered from throughout Cook County at Catholic Churches mostly and bused in to Chicago. The bus is free. The food is free. There might even be a stipend of some sort.
When they arrive they are handed a preprinted sign, courtesy of the union. Clearly there is no permit problem or any effort to cancel the event due to security reasons. Why? Because Mayor Daley and Congressman Gutierrez and Cardinal George and Senators Obama and Durbin will be addressing the crowd.
But the tea party met with resistance from Chicago. Get your permits. Stay off the sidewalk. Let people pass. Move the van from the sound equipment company. Not quite as welcoming, was it?
And, by the way, you pay your own way. The bus was $16, bring a sack lunch, make your own sign. That was the order of the day at the tea party. (Gee, you would think something sponsored by corporate America would have had more perks.)
As for the idea that the tea party was a manipulation, I think not. For one thing, the crowd wasn’t exactly in agreement on what we were protesting. There were some Ron Paul folks there, some Libertarians, Repubicans, Democrats, some advocates of simplifying the tax code, some dismantle the Federal Reserve people, some anti-illegal alien groups, flat taxers, anti-stimulus protesters, gold standard advocates, transparency seekers…somehow this didn’t have the look of centralized organization.
The central message is that government is too big, too expensive, and too beholden to special interests.
Remember back in 2007 when they were trying to pass the immigration reform package? Remember the politicians who were complaining about talk radio. Here’s a refresher course: To The Washington Post, Lott had said, "I'm sure senators on both sides of the aisle are being pounded by these talk-radio people who don't even know what's in the bill." To the New York Times, he had offered: "Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem."
-Washigton Post June 20, 2007
In the same article Senator Trent Lott was complaining about all the phone calls he was getting, some of them from other states. Maybe that’s why I was out there.
Well, from where I sit the left is jealous and a bit frightened by what happened yesterday. Why, even celebrities were stepping up to the microphone to complain about government. And there was some media attention about it.
In contrast, let’s look at the May Day parades on immigration staged by the left. People are gathered from throughout Cook County at Catholic Churches mostly and bused in to Chicago. The bus is free. The food is free. There might even be a stipend of some sort.
When they arrive they are handed a preprinted sign, courtesy of the union. Clearly there is no permit problem or any effort to cancel the event due to security reasons. Why? Because Mayor Daley and Congressman Gutierrez and Cardinal George and Senators Obama and Durbin will be addressing the crowd.
But the tea party met with resistance from Chicago. Get your permits. Stay off the sidewalk. Let people pass. Move the van from the sound equipment company. Not quite as welcoming, was it?
And, by the way, you pay your own way. The bus was $16, bring a sack lunch, make your own sign. That was the order of the day at the tea party. (Gee, you would think something sponsored by corporate America would have had more perks.)
As for the idea that the tea party was a manipulation, I think not. For one thing, the crowd wasn’t exactly in agreement on what we were protesting. There were some Ron Paul folks there, some Libertarians, Repubicans, Democrats, some advocates of simplifying the tax code, some dismantle the Federal Reserve people, some anti-illegal alien groups, flat taxers, anti-stimulus protesters, gold standard advocates, transparency seekers…somehow this didn’t have the look of centralized organization.
The central message is that government is too big, too expensive, and too beholden to special interests.
Remember back in 2007 when they were trying to pass the immigration reform package? Remember the politicians who were complaining about talk radio. Here’s a refresher course: To The Washington Post, Lott had said, "I'm sure senators on both sides of the aisle are being pounded by these talk-radio people who don't even know what's in the bill." To the New York Times, he had offered: "Talk radio is running America. We have to deal with that problem."
-Washigton Post June 20, 2007
In the same article Senator Trent Lott was complaining about all the phone calls he was getting, some of them from other states. Maybe that’s why I was out there.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Cue the violins
The victim articles are coming on fast and strong. They must be priming the pump for another run at amnesty.
There was an article on-line at the Daily Herald about the poor people who have been deported even though they were here legally. The poster child is Pedro Guzman, born in the United States but deported to Mexico.
Pedro is mentally ill, spoke only Spanish and is illiterate. He signed the waiver for deportation and wound up in Mexico. It took the family three months to find him. That was news back in 2007 when it happened. It is still news today.
Latino activists say there have been 55 cases of wrongly deported in the past eight years. ICE admits to ten cases. (It's funny they didn't mention the 600,000 fugitives who were ordered deported and failed to leave. Or the 12 MILLION who are here illegally and know it.)
The take home message is that we should stop all deportations.
Article number two (also in the Herald) was a rehash of the fake data that 90% of weapons used by Mexican drug lords comes from the United States. (As earlier reported, the real number is about 17%.)
The take home message is that we (The United States) are to blame for the trouble in Mexico so we should spend a billion on the problem and go easy on the illegals who came here to escape the violence.
And the Gutierrez roadshow, designed to elicit tears as we hear tales of separated families in the aftermath of deportation. I do hope they have finished their 16 city tour.
And perhaps the best of all is the theory that we need the illegal aliens to fuel our economic recovery. That one is a stretch. Obviously their advocates aren't economists, unless they came from the Bush White House. What part of "income transfer" don't they understand?
All I'm saying is be prepared for the onslaught of pity pieces as a run up to the May Day rallies around the country. And they are only a dress rehearsal for the Obama administration as they pretend to hear a mandate for amnesty.
There was an article on-line at the Daily Herald about the poor people who have been deported even though they were here legally. The poster child is Pedro Guzman, born in the United States but deported to Mexico.
Pedro is mentally ill, spoke only Spanish and is illiterate. He signed the waiver for deportation and wound up in Mexico. It took the family three months to find him. That was news back in 2007 when it happened. It is still news today.
Latino activists say there have been 55 cases of wrongly deported in the past eight years. ICE admits to ten cases. (It's funny they didn't mention the 600,000 fugitives who were ordered deported and failed to leave. Or the 12 MILLION who are here illegally and know it.)
The take home message is that we should stop all deportations.
Article number two (also in the Herald) was a rehash of the fake data that 90% of weapons used by Mexican drug lords comes from the United States. (As earlier reported, the real number is about 17%.)
The take home message is that we (The United States) are to blame for the trouble in Mexico so we should spend a billion on the problem and go easy on the illegals who came here to escape the violence.
And the Gutierrez roadshow, designed to elicit tears as we hear tales of separated families in the aftermath of deportation. I do hope they have finished their 16 city tour.
And perhaps the best of all is the theory that we need the illegal aliens to fuel our economic recovery. That one is a stretch. Obviously their advocates aren't economists, unless they came from the Bush White House. What part of "income transfer" don't they understand?
All I'm saying is be prepared for the onslaught of pity pieces as a run up to the May Day rallies around the country. And they are only a dress rehearsal for the Obama administration as they pretend to hear a mandate for amnesty.
Sunday, April 12, 2009
House-broken promises
This may be the unrecoverable error of the Obama administration. Americans can forgive him for his decision to expand abortion, free terrorists, appoint tax dodgers, send greetings to Iran, take over private industry, approve embryonic stem cell research, apologize all over Europe, publicly embrace Islam at the expense of Christianity...
...but you don't mess with dog lovers. Perhaps you heard that the Obama's have a dog, a Ted Kennedy dog. His name is Bo. And he wasn't rescued from a shelter. There's the rub. He promised to get a mutt. Instead he's sending a check to the SPCA and getting a purebred.
The self-proclaimed Mutt got an ivy league dog.
The name was chosen by the children and is fraught with racial overtones. Why if Cal Thomas had suggested such a name he would have been banished from journalism. And what a field day they would have had with Rush Limbaugh.
But it's OK.
I was listening on the scanner yesterday. During the shift change the Secret Service chimed in, "Be careful where you walk in the residence wing. Don't step in the Bo-diddly."
...but you don't mess with dog lovers. Perhaps you heard that the Obama's have a dog, a Ted Kennedy dog. His name is Bo. And he wasn't rescued from a shelter. There's the rub. He promised to get a mutt. Instead he's sending a check to the SPCA and getting a purebred.
The self-proclaimed Mutt got an ivy league dog.
The name was chosen by the children and is fraught with racial overtones. Why if Cal Thomas had suggested such a name he would have been banished from journalism. And what a field day they would have had with Rush Limbaugh.
But it's OK.
I was listening on the scanner yesterday. During the shift change the Secret Service chimed in, "Be careful where you walk in the residence wing. Don't step in the Bo-diddly."
Friday, April 10, 2009
Reality TV
The reality show "The Biggest Liar" has come to Washington.
In the first season, Karl Rove and Joe Biden are the contestants.
It may be anti-climactic, but I think this one will end in a tie.
In the first season, Karl Rove and Joe Biden are the contestants.
It may be anti-climactic, but I think this one will end in a tie.
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Another Bush Remake
In the run-up to a fresh campaign for “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” in a couple of months, the Obama administration, through Border Patrol statistics and latino activist, has gone back to the first 100 days of the Bush administration.
That was then…
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 25, 2001
Statement by the Press Secretary
The President called Mexican President Vicente Fox this morning to express deep sadness and condolences to President Fox, and the Mexican people, over the horrible deaths of 14 Mexicans in the Arizona desert earlier this week.
The Presidents reaffirmed the importance of our ongoing efforts on border safety and migration, to ensure that tragic events such as this do not happen again. They noted we are making steady progress, and pledged both sides would work hard to carry this process forward.
This is now…
Border deaths up despite apparent dip in crossings
By ARTHUR H. ROTSTEIN, The Associated Press
11:44 a.m. April 8, 2009 San Diego Union Tribune
TUCSON, Ariz. — Illegal immigrant deaths are continuing to rise along the U.S.-Mexico border despite a nearly 25 percent drop in Border Patrol arrests that suggests far fewer people are entering the country unlawfully.
The number of migrant deaths along the roughly 2,000-mile border increased by nearly 7 percent between Oct. 1 and March 31, the first six months of the 2009 federal fiscal year. The biggest increase occurred in the patrol's Tucson sector, the nation's busiest corridor for illegal immigrants coming through Mexico.
In all, the remains of 128 people were found, compared to 120 in the same six-month period the year before, according to just-released Border Patrol statistics.
And this segues into a call to do something. This is Cardinal material. We must grant amnesty and increase the number of guest worker visas into the USA so these good people won’t die trying to come here illegally.
Remember the “90% of weapons are from the US” hoax I blogged about last week? Well, there is another reliability issue here as well. Further down in the AP article it says: Dr. Bruce Parks, the medical examiner in southern Arizona's Pima County, said more than half the bodies his office examined were skeletal remains, meaning they had not died recently. But that is down from first half of fiscal 2008, when 75 percent of the cases involved skeletal remains.
"Many of them are people that died sometime earlier, and it could be more than a year or two in some cases," Parks said.
But in our Postmodern world, truth is irrelevant.
In fact, come summer if the discovery of bodies increases, the libs may be able to parlay this into a twofer. Problem #1- Lack of immigration reform. Problem #2- Global warming. Imagine all the conferences and grant writing that news would afford us.
That was then…
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 25, 2001
Statement by the Press Secretary
The President called Mexican President Vicente Fox this morning to express deep sadness and condolences to President Fox, and the Mexican people, over the horrible deaths of 14 Mexicans in the Arizona desert earlier this week.
The Presidents reaffirmed the importance of our ongoing efforts on border safety and migration, to ensure that tragic events such as this do not happen again. They noted we are making steady progress, and pledged both sides would work hard to carry this process forward.
This is now…
Border deaths up despite apparent dip in crossings
By ARTHUR H. ROTSTEIN, The Associated Press
11:44 a.m. April 8, 2009 San Diego Union Tribune
TUCSON, Ariz. — Illegal immigrant deaths are continuing to rise along the U.S.-Mexico border despite a nearly 25 percent drop in Border Patrol arrests that suggests far fewer people are entering the country unlawfully.
The number of migrant deaths along the roughly 2,000-mile border increased by nearly 7 percent between Oct. 1 and March 31, the first six months of the 2009 federal fiscal year. The biggest increase occurred in the patrol's Tucson sector, the nation's busiest corridor for illegal immigrants coming through Mexico.
In all, the remains of 128 people were found, compared to 120 in the same six-month period the year before, according to just-released Border Patrol statistics.
And this segues into a call to do something. This is Cardinal material. We must grant amnesty and increase the number of guest worker visas into the USA so these good people won’t die trying to come here illegally.
Remember the “90% of weapons are from the US” hoax I blogged about last week? Well, there is another reliability issue here as well. Further down in the AP article it says: Dr. Bruce Parks, the medical examiner in southern Arizona's Pima County, said more than half the bodies his office examined were skeletal remains, meaning they had not died recently. But that is down from first half of fiscal 2008, when 75 percent of the cases involved skeletal remains.
"Many of them are people that died sometime earlier, and it could be more than a year or two in some cases," Parks said.
But in our Postmodern world, truth is irrelevant.
In fact, come summer if the discovery of bodies increases, the libs may be able to parlay this into a twofer. Problem #1- Lack of immigration reform. Problem #2- Global warming. Imagine all the conferences and grant writing that news would afford us.
Kalpen Suresh Modi
The stars come out in DC. Rock stars recruit movie stars to work for them.
Kal Penn is an example of name recognition (and the time-honored tradition of rewarding your political hacks) over qualifications.
Modi (er, Penn) is a first generation American born to Indian parents.
His moral dilemma over a role in the TV series 24 is instructive. He was supposed to play the role of a terrorist but almost turned it down. When I read it, I thought I might actually like this guy. I thought, “Good for him. He doesn’t want to be portrayed as a whack job who wants to blow up innocent people.”
But my hopes were dashed. His ethics alarm went off all right, but not because the character was a terrorist. He was worried about the racial profiling aspect of the role. Check this out from Wiki:
In January 2007, Penn appeared in the first four episodes of the sixth season of 24 as Ahmed Amar, a teenage terrorist. Penn says he nearly turned down the role due to personal ethics, stating, "I have a huge political problem with the role. It was essentially accepting a form of racial profiling. I think it’s repulsive. But it was the first time I had a chance to blow stuff up and take a family hostage. As an actor, why shouldn’t I have that opportunity? Because I'm brown and I should be scared about the connection between media images and people's thought processes?"
Well, he does have a strong sense of morals. While filming for his White Castle movie he refused to eat meat so they prepared soy burgers for the restaurant scenes.
As for his credentials for the post, he did go to UCLA and majored in film and sociology. And he has been a guest lecturer in Pennsylvania. He is regarded as a poster child for Asian stereotypes.
What can a 32-year-old with a BA in movies do at the White House? Well, Kal will be working for Valerie Jarrett, the Secretary of Community Organizers. As an actor, he’ll be getting the message out.
Another example of this administration’s fixation over image.
Here's the Kal Penn photo album, in all its decorum and sophistication:
Primed for a role at Homeland Security?
Experience as Surgeon General?
His White House portrait, perhaps? (Hey Valerie, did you check his tax returns?)
Kal Penn is an example of name recognition (and the time-honored tradition of rewarding your political hacks) over qualifications.
Modi (er, Penn) is a first generation American born to Indian parents.
His moral dilemma over a role in the TV series 24 is instructive. He was supposed to play the role of a terrorist but almost turned it down. When I read it, I thought I might actually like this guy. I thought, “Good for him. He doesn’t want to be portrayed as a whack job who wants to blow up innocent people.”
But my hopes were dashed. His ethics alarm went off all right, but not because the character was a terrorist. He was worried about the racial profiling aspect of the role. Check this out from Wiki:
In January 2007, Penn appeared in the first four episodes of the sixth season of 24 as Ahmed Amar, a teenage terrorist. Penn says he nearly turned down the role due to personal ethics, stating, "I have a huge political problem with the role. It was essentially accepting a form of racial profiling. I think it’s repulsive. But it was the first time I had a chance to blow stuff up and take a family hostage. As an actor, why shouldn’t I have that opportunity? Because I'm brown and I should be scared about the connection between media images and people's thought processes?"
Well, he does have a strong sense of morals. While filming for his White Castle movie he refused to eat meat so they prepared soy burgers for the restaurant scenes.
As for his credentials for the post, he did go to UCLA and majored in film and sociology. And he has been a guest lecturer in Pennsylvania. He is regarded as a poster child for Asian stereotypes.
What can a 32-year-old with a BA in movies do at the White House? Well, Kal will be working for Valerie Jarrett, the Secretary of Community Organizers. As an actor, he’ll be getting the message out.
Another example of this administration’s fixation over image.
Here's the Kal Penn photo album, in all its decorum and sophistication:
Primed for a role at Homeland Security?Experience as Surgeon General?
His White House portrait, perhaps? (Hey Valerie, did you check his tax returns?)I've come to discover the fun the libs had with Ronald Reagan and his old film roles, especially Bonzo. They were on to something.
Monday, April 6, 2009
We've been punked...
...by Washington.
Imagine that. Something we've been told by the government turns out to be hype.
You know that "fact" from the administration that 90% of the weapons used by drug lords in Mexico come from the United States?
Well, it turns out that they were off a bit. That figure is more like 17%. Off by quite a bit, don't you think?
You see, the Mexican government sends us weapons to have the US government determine their origin. But Mexico doesn't send us any weapons that are obviously NOT from the US, and that's the bulk of the weaponry.
When you take into account those guns that are unidentifiable, the number is actually about 17%.
So, why is Napolitano spending $400 MILLION right now in an effort to screen vehicles headed into Mexico?
Beats me. Maybe Obama wants us to be a good neighbor. Maybe he wants to support Calderon in his drug war. Maybe it's just Washington as usual.
Here's the news report. (Note that Fox is the only network to cover the real data. The rest of the world continues to believe th 90% number.):
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/
Imagine that. Something we've been told by the government turns out to be hype.
You know that "fact" from the administration that 90% of the weapons used by drug lords in Mexico come from the United States?
Well, it turns out that they were off a bit. That figure is more like 17%. Off by quite a bit, don't you think?
You see, the Mexican government sends us weapons to have the US government determine their origin. But Mexico doesn't send us any weapons that are obviously NOT from the US, and that's the bulk of the weaponry.
When you take into account those guns that are unidentifiable, the number is actually about 17%.
So, why is Napolitano spending $400 MILLION right now in an effort to screen vehicles headed into Mexico?
Beats me. Maybe Obama wants us to be a good neighbor. Maybe he wants to support Calderon in his drug war. Maybe it's just Washington as usual.
Here's the news report. (Note that Fox is the only network to cover the real data. The rest of the world continues to believe th 90% number.):
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/02/myth-percent-guns-mexico-fraction-number-claimed/
Shame on you, Congressman Gutierrez!
Here’s what Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez said, after hearing the congressional testimony of a father who lost his daughter to an illegal alien driving drunk:“Mr. Tranchant, can I share with you as the father of two daughters, I thank you for bringing your testimony here, but I suggest to you that if we refer to people as banditos, as you referred to them in your testimony, it does not help to solve the problem.”
May I suggest to Rep. Gutierrez that he listen to Mr. Tranchant and the thousands of other family members who have lost loved ones to illegal aliens. The man who killed Tessa Tranchant, Alfredo Ramos had a BAC THREE TIMES THE LEGAL LIMIT. Furthermore, he had been arrested twice before for causing accidents while driving drunk.
Yet Gutierrez had the nerve to say, “I think we’re missing the point of the testimony here this morning and just so we have it very clear, no one ever has debated, promoted law that does not deport drunks.” Well, that statement isn’t true, Mr. Gutierrez. There have been bills before Congress that mandated deportation for illegals driving drunk, BUT YOU VOTED AGAINST THEM. Like HR 4437 in 2005. Title VI, section 606 would have covered it. BUT YOU VOTED AGAINST IT, Mr. GUTIERREZ.
And you have helped keep funding away from interior enforcement efforts that would have saved Tessa and Ali.
And, you were the sponsor of the rally in the Chicago church where Cardinal George solemnly proclaimed, “To separate families, wives from husbands, children from parents, is to diminish what God has joined.”
Well, Luis, there’s no greater separation of families on earth than a funeral of your own child. Deportation doesn’t even come close to death.
As for the term “banditos,” my dictionary defines a bandit as “anyone who cheats, steals, etc.” I’d say that describes illegal aliens rather well. It surely applies to Alfredo Ramos.
And that’s the key here; Gutierrez fails to see the illegality of his “undocumented” friends, choosing instead to whitewash their status and pretend they are refugees. But the American public sees them for what they are: lawbreakers.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Bush blueprint found
It appears that the Obama administration has found some of the old George W Bush files on comprehensive immigration reform. And they are using them!
This from the AP today:
Mexico, U.S. form immigration working group
Associated Press
Published: 4/4/2009 12:01 AM Daily Herald
MEXICO CITY -- Mexico and the United States have formed a high-level, joint working group to make immigration safer and more orderly, Mexican officials announced Friday.
The working group will focus on making documented migration easier, protecting migrants' rights and improving procedures for repatriating migrants, the Mexican Foreign Relations Department said in a statement.
It also will focus on steps to inform the public about the dangers of trying to cross the border without documents.
The group was formed following meetings between U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Patricia Espinosa.
The two officials also want to create a long-term study group on border issues such as the environment, water and health.
While the outflow of Mexican migrants has fallen dramatically, immigration remains an important bilateral issue.
The net outflow of Mexicans -- both legal and illegal -- declined by more than 50 percent in the 12 months ending in August 2008, compared to the same period a year earlier, according to the Mexican National Statistics, Geography and Information Institute.
The net outflow of Mexicans -- those leaving the country minus those returning from abroad -- dropped to 204,000 people between August 2007 and August 2008. That was down from 455,000 for the year ending in August 2007.
And now this from the SAME DATE in 2001.
Press Statement
Richard Boucher, Spokesman – Secretary of State
Washington, DC April 4, 2001
Joint Statement of the US-Mexico High Level Working Group on Migration
The US-Mexico High Level Working Group on Migration signed a joint statement on April 4 in Washington, D.C. Following is the text of that statement.
The governments of Mexico and the United States today began talks intended to achieve a framework for orderly, legal, safe and humane migration and for the protection of worker rights. As Presidents Vicente Fox and George W. Bush directed during their recent meeting in Guanajuato, the talks are chaired by the Secretaries of Government and Foreign Relations of Mexico and the Secretary of State and the Attorney General of the United States.
Other signs that "change" looks like same-old, same-old:
*Like Bush before 2006, Obama is scaling back interior enforcement efforts simply by changing operational directives.
*Like Bush, Obama is working closely with the Mexican President with visits focused on immigration.
*Like Bush, Obama is listening to special interests rather than the will of the people.
But Obama has a tougher task here. The Internet not only has a long memory but also is an effective tool for contacting people directly.
People know what to watch for. They know more about immigration.
Homeland Security didn't exist in the early days of the Bush Administration. The whole issue of terrorism is now on the front burner.
The border wars are a new twist.
More immigrants and amnesty are a hard sell in a country with 8%+ unemployment and social services stretched to the limit.
Obama is fast losing an immigration reform ally in the Catholic Church. Cardinal George doesn't seem to notice the hypocrisy, but the parishioners do!
Happy 8th anniversary to immigration rhetoric from Washington.
This from the AP today:
Mexico, U.S. form immigration working group
Associated Press
Published: 4/4/2009 12:01 AM Daily Herald
MEXICO CITY -- Mexico and the United States have formed a high-level, joint working group to make immigration safer and more orderly, Mexican officials announced Friday.
The working group will focus on making documented migration easier, protecting migrants' rights and improving procedures for repatriating migrants, the Mexican Foreign Relations Department said in a statement.
It also will focus on steps to inform the public about the dangers of trying to cross the border without documents.
The group was formed following meetings between U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and Mexican Foreign Relations Secretary Patricia Espinosa.
The two officials also want to create a long-term study group on border issues such as the environment, water and health.
While the outflow of Mexican migrants has fallen dramatically, immigration remains an important bilateral issue.
The net outflow of Mexicans -- both legal and illegal -- declined by more than 50 percent in the 12 months ending in August 2008, compared to the same period a year earlier, according to the Mexican National Statistics, Geography and Information Institute.
The net outflow of Mexicans -- those leaving the country minus those returning from abroad -- dropped to 204,000 people between August 2007 and August 2008. That was down from 455,000 for the year ending in August 2007.
And now this from the SAME DATE in 2001.
Press Statement
Richard Boucher, Spokesman – Secretary of State
Washington, DC April 4, 2001
Joint Statement of the US-Mexico High Level Working Group on Migration
The US-Mexico High Level Working Group on Migration signed a joint statement on April 4 in Washington, D.C. Following is the text of that statement.
The governments of Mexico and the United States today began talks intended to achieve a framework for orderly, legal, safe and humane migration and for the protection of worker rights. As Presidents Vicente Fox and George W. Bush directed during their recent meeting in Guanajuato, the talks are chaired by the Secretaries of Government and Foreign Relations of Mexico and the Secretary of State and the Attorney General of the United States.
Other signs that "change" looks like same-old, same-old:
*Like Bush before 2006, Obama is scaling back interior enforcement efforts simply by changing operational directives.
*Like Bush, Obama is working closely with the Mexican President with visits focused on immigration.
*Like Bush, Obama is listening to special interests rather than the will of the people.
But Obama has a tougher task here. The Internet not only has a long memory but also is an effective tool for contacting people directly.
People know what to watch for. They know more about immigration.
Homeland Security didn't exist in the early days of the Bush Administration. The whole issue of terrorism is now on the front burner.
The border wars are a new twist.
More immigrants and amnesty are a hard sell in a country with 8%+ unemployment and social services stretched to the limit.
Obama is fast losing an immigration reform ally in the Catholic Church. Cardinal George doesn't seem to notice the hypocrisy, but the parishioners do!
Happy 8th anniversary to immigration rhetoric from Washington.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Call Washington
Not that it'll help, but you can call both Homeland Security and the White House and tell them you are upset about Napolitano's amnesty for the 27 illegals from Bellingham, Washington.
It might make you feel better.
At least they'll know someone noticed.
White House Comment line: 202-456-1111 (9-5 EST)
Homeland Security Comment line: 202-282-8495 (the voice mail was full yesterday)
And send a message to your Congressmen as well. They are probably oblivious.
Note that Congress didn't have to vote for this to happen. Obama didn't write an Executive Order. It was all done through the operational authority of Secretary Napolitano.
You can be sure that potential illegal aliens around the world are taking notice.
It might make you feel better.
At least they'll know someone noticed.
White House Comment line: 202-456-1111 (9-5 EST)
Homeland Security Comment line: 202-282-8495 (the voice mail was full yesterday)
And send a message to your Congressmen as well. They are probably oblivious.
Note that Congress didn't have to vote for this to happen. Obama didn't write an Executive Order. It was all done through the operational authority of Secretary Napolitano.
You can be sure that potential illegal aliens around the world are taking notice.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Napolitano again
In a further move to establish the rule of law (snicker) Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano announced yesterday that the 27 illegal aliens arrested in an engine rebuilding plant in Bellingham, Washinton will be given work visas and allowed to work in the US.
That's right. I thought it was just a bad April Fools Day joke but it turns out to be true.
I suppose if Obama can fire the president of GM, Napolitano has enough authority to grant a pardon and issue work papers. I wonder what law she used to do that?
It is believed that she is giving out these work papers based on witness cooperation as they build a case against the employer. BUT, and this is very important, the employer was already enrolled in a verification program AND was in full cooperation with ICE agents as they planned the raid. They had been working with ICE since last fall. That visa rule clearly does not apply in this case.
But the Obama administration will make it fit.
That's right. I thought it was just a bad April Fools Day joke but it turns out to be true.
I suppose if Obama can fire the president of GM, Napolitano has enough authority to grant a pardon and issue work papers. I wonder what law she used to do that?
It is believed that she is giving out these work papers based on witness cooperation as they build a case against the employer. BUT, and this is very important, the employer was already enrolled in a verification program AND was in full cooperation with ICE agents as they planned the raid. They had been working with ICE since last fall. That visa rule clearly does not apply in this case.
But the Obama administration will make it fit.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
The Weatherman speaks for himself
Bill Ayers, a political activist who once hosted a campaign party for Obama himself was disinvited to speak at a Naperville high school. I think it was the wrong thing to do, but I found Ayers’ reaction rather humorous.
The University of Illinois-Chicago education professor sent this e-mail after being informed of the cancellation: "This cancellation provides terrible lessons for these young people about the limits of freedom and the importance of obedience, and it must be painful for many of them to watch people they admire collapse under pressure. It has all the hallmarks of suppression of speech: incitement of fear, intimidation of well-meaning folks, mob rule."
Remember his phrases:
“limits of freedom”
“importance of obedience”
“incitement of fear”
“intimidation of well-meaning folks”
“mob rule”
What’s that character flaw where you get most agitated when you see your own weaknesses in the actions of others?
Well, here’s Ayers’ rap sheet. It includes bombs and a dead policeman. I wonder if he detects the irony in his own words?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ayers
But that was then. Where’s his mind in 2009? His office door is decorated with pictures of (cop killer) Mumia Abu-Jamal, Che Guevara and Malcolm X.
Like I say, I think it was wrong to cancel his visit. The problem was the goof who invited him to speak in the first place.
The University of Illinois-Chicago education professor sent this e-mail after being informed of the cancellation: "This cancellation provides terrible lessons for these young people about the limits of freedom and the importance of obedience, and it must be painful for many of them to watch people they admire collapse under pressure. It has all the hallmarks of suppression of speech: incitement of fear, intimidation of well-meaning folks, mob rule."
Remember his phrases:
“limits of freedom”
“importance of obedience”
“incitement of fear”
“intimidation of well-meaning folks”
“mob rule”
What’s that character flaw where you get most agitated when you see your own weaknesses in the actions of others?
Well, here’s Ayers’ rap sheet. It includes bombs and a dead policeman. I wonder if he detects the irony in his own words?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ayers
But that was then. Where’s his mind in 2009? His office door is decorated with pictures of (cop killer) Mumia Abu-Jamal, Che Guevara and Malcolm X.
Like I say, I think it was wrong to cancel his visit. The problem was the goof who invited him to speak in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)