The recession has no doubt helped in highlighting the differences between these two systems and the results of this experiment are coming in loud and clear; Capitalism by a long shot.

Since the conclusion of World War II California’s growth has been extraordinary. In 1950 California’s population grew from 10.6 million to 36.8 million in 2008. During this period, the Golden State attracted commercial and industrial expansion of astronomical rates. The adoption of a Master Plan for Higher Education in 1960 allowed the development of a highly efficient system of public education in the Community Colleges which included the University of California and California State University.

By creating an educated workforce, California was able to attract investment, particularly in areas related to high technology. By 1980, California became recognized as the world’s eighth-largest economy. Millions of workers were needed to fuel the expansion.

The high population of the time caused tremendous problems with urban sprawl, traffic, pollution, and, to a lesser extent, crime. Accompanying this growth was a liberal, progressivism with labor unions dominating the public sector and an unquenchable thirst for big government spending. California’s budget has doubled from $59 billion to $120 billion in the decade 1995 to 2005 alone.

To feed this spending binge California has systematically increased taxes to 9.3% on individuals and to 8.84% on corporations. Despite its best efforts to expand its tax revenues, California is projecting a budget deficit as high as $25 billion.

There is even some talk of a $40 billion deficit, with a total public debt now approaching $500 billion. Its freeways are crumbling, public sector college tuition is up 30% and unemployment stands at 14.3%, 4.6% higher than the national average.

California’s economy is collapsing and citizens are voting with their feet. From 2000 to 2009 more than 1.5 million individuals have left the state and this trend is accelerating.

Contrast this to Texas. Texas’ economy is booming. Nearly 1 million have moved into the state from 2000 – 2009. Nearly 145,000 have moved into the state during 2008-2009 alone. It’s fiscal condition is sound. Public employee unions are weak or nonexistent.

It’s government is a fraction of the size of California’s. Despite its small government, Texas is delivering superior services. Its teachers are paid less than California’s, yet Texas’ test scores are higher than California. Texas has no income tax, a legislature that meets only ninety days every two years, is building new freeways and boasts an unemployment rate below that of the national average. Due to population growth, Texas is poised to add four more electoral votes in the 2010 apportionment, while California, for the first time in its history, will gain no electoral votes.

The differences between the two states is clear. California’s high-tax, expansive government verses Texas’s low-tax, low-services government. Or, better put; progressive socialism verses conservative, free market capitalism. The conclusion of the laboratory experiment between socialism and capitalism, between California’s and Texas’ two diverse economic systems is clear. With the debate raging in the U.S. over government expansion, increased entitlements, which may ultimately include socializing health care, and increased taxes to pay for all of this, we do not need to look beyond our own backyard.

Socialism has failed where capitalism has succeeded. Unfortunately for the citizens of the U.S. we cannot vote with out feet and leave for another state. We must stay and fight. We must wage the war against socialism and preserve the American Dream for our future generations.

It’s a battle worth fighting. Thanks to the genius of our founding fathers we have the means to wage revolution in this country, not with bullets or bloodshed, but with a more formidable weapon; the power to vote.

According to recently released reports from the College Board, most students and their families can expect to pay, on average, from $172 to $1,096 more than last year for this year’s tuition and fees, depending on the type of college. Private four-year college costs in 2009 averaged $26,273 (up 4.4 percent from last year).

Four-year public colleges raised tuition and fees by an average of 6.5 percent last year. Given the financial hardship of the country, it’s simply astonishing that colleges and universities would have these kind of increases.

What will it all mean? The Ivy league and other top tier schools will see very little, if any, impact to their enrollments. The colleges, however, that will be devastated will be the second tier and little known, private and public college programs who will see enrollments drop precipitously over the next five years.

Many will be unable to sustain themselves and will be forced to close their doors.

Lower enrollments translate into fewer college graduates. With our country’s spending seemingly out of control and a deficit which is expected to double to $24 trillion in just ten years, our nation’s future generation will be educationally ill equipped to meet the challenge. The effects of the 2008 economic meltdown, I’m afraid, will be with us for a very long time.

Surprisingly, Pew reports that the number of Americans who believe Barack Obama is a Muslim has jumped from 12% in early 2009 to 18% in 2010.  Similarly, Pew reports a decline in the number of respondents who identify Obama as a Christian – 34% today compared to 48% in March 2009 and 51% during the Presidential campaign in October 2008. As usual, there is a less decisive group floating out there – adding up to a plurality of 43% – who respond that they do not know what is Obama’s religion.  These undecided respondents are up from 34% in 2009.

I’m certain that if Pew telephoned me, I would have been one of the folks who said Obama was a Muslim and who would not have been given the time to fully explain what I mean.

First, I know that Obama’s step-father, Lolo Soetoro, was a practicing Muslim.  According to freely available press accounts, Soetoro took little Obama with him to the mosque to pray and enrolled little Obama in school as a Muslim.

Second, I know that Obama grew up in a predominantly Muslim country, Indonesia.  Third, when I met the young Obama – while he was a sophomore at Occidental College – I can report that his closest friends were the Muslim Pakistani students on campus, in particular, an older Pakistani student named Mohammed Hasan Chandoo.

Hasan visited Obama while he was a student at Columbia and attended Obama’s wedding to Michelle in 1992, unlike the African-Americans at Occidental who now claim they were close friends with the young Obama,.

As for Obama’s more contemporary connections to Islam, I pay the most attention to his words in his book, Audacity of Hope, where Obama calls into question the divinity of Christ.  This is, in my view, a bright dividing line between being a Christian believer and being a Muslim adherent.

I also know that Rev. Wright is a former Muslim and maintains close ties to the Muslim community.  All of this information gives me confidence that Obama’s world view, his basic mental architecture, has more links to Islam than Christianity.

Nevertheless, I’m sure the media will spin the results of Pew’s poll as evidence of racism or religious intolerance or an effort to portray Obama as the “other.”  My perspective, however, gives me an advantage over mainstream journalists who are puzzled about how Obama could be so completely foolish as to endorse the Ground Zero Mosque.  In my view, he is simply defending his base, a base of Muslim adherents to whom Obama has shown considerable loyalty ever since he was a little child.

I think the simplest answer is that Obama was being loyal to his Muslim-American base…not to African-Americans…not to his Democrat party…and not to the American people. I have found some supporting evidence for this thesis in an article in Politico on August 15, 2010 in which Carol E. Lee writes that an undisclosed administration official says this was “purely” Obama’s decision.

See, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/41077.html In Audacity of Hope, Obama writes that he is intent to assure Muslims that he will stand with them during the ultimate crisis.  Apparently, Obama’s brain decided that moment has arrived.

What is missing from all the reporting on this issue is what an incredibly stupid thing this was for Obama to do in terms of electoral politics.  Obama has ignited a firestorm of controversy that can only do damage to his party’s chances in November 2010 and to his own chances in November 2012.  Already, Rasmussen shows Republicans opening up a 12-point lead in the generic polling results.  See, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot Obama’s job approval rating, according to Gallup, is at an all time low of 42%.  On a scale of one to ten for political stupidity, Obama’s endorsement of the GZM is a ten.  It is the equivalent of running toward a burning car wreck and then squeezing yourself into the trunk.

Since I knew President Obama while he was a radical, Marxist sophomore at Occidental College, I think I have an unusual insight to share regarding this politically inept decision.   Based on my face-to-face talks with the young Obama, I’m among those who do not see Obama as an intellectual genius.

I’ve never gone along with those who think they can find evidence of a high IQ in Obama’s election as the editor of the Harvard Law Review, or his role as an adjunct at the University of Chicago Law School, or his success in winning office.  Since I never bought into the inflated view of Obama’s intellectual skills, I was not surprised by his dependence on the teleprompter.  I do, however, think I know why he has not released his undergraduate transcripts from Occidental College or Columbia University: His charismatic reputation for genius would not survive the harsh reality of his ordinary grades.

Accordingly, I’m not convinced that Obama’s endorsement of the GZM was an example of a political genius playing chess while we are all playing checkers.  Instead, I see Obama’s recklessness as more similar to a funny, stupid criminal story where the bank robber submits his demand for cash on the back of his own business card.  I think the stress of his job is getting to him.  Under stress, Obama’s thinking has become cloudy, impulsive and irrational.  Reviewing this last week, even Obama may now understand that he cannot drive and should not have the keys.

The United Nations now is working on an international gun control law (Arms Trade Treaty) that would make it illegal for any law abiding citizen; including in the United States to possess a firearm.  Oh yes, you are reading correctly.   Instead of addressing this issue as an international gun control it is being packaged in many different ways by the many different  research organizations/civil society organizations: “Practical disarmament” , “grave threat to human rights”, “disarmament of combatants”, “promoting public security”(http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/files/portal/spotlight/disarmament/disarm.html), “stop the proliferation and misuse of small arms and light weapons-SALW”, “represents the voices of civil society…”, “protect human security”, “promoting the voices of survivors…” (http://www.iansa.org/about.htm),  “nefarious illicit arms trade”, “armed violence killed more than 2,000 people every day” (http://www.un.org/News/Press/doc/2010/dc3248.doc.htm), and “…strengthening peace and security through disarmament”, “…the excessive accumulation of small arms has been instrumental in shaping the onset, severity and duration of armed violence, and its negative consequences”,  “high incidence of gender base violence”, “Up to 60% of violent deaths worldwide can be attributed to firearms…”, “More that 540,000 men, women, and children die from violence each year..”, “productivity losses due to premature death, can be as much as $160 billion a year”, “humanitarian situation”(http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/SALW/Html/SALW-POA-intro.shtml).

What a bunch of garbage!  The United Nations and the rest of the anti-gun nut jobs across the world do not give a crap about those suffering from dictators, radical nuts, ethic cleansing or drug czars-the only thing they really care about is POWER!  That is right!  If you look at places like Iran, Cuba, China, North Korea, Columbia, Mexico, Darfur, and Venezuela; what do they have in common?

They all have disarmed their citizens so they can oppress, abuse, torture, destroy if anybody gets in the governments’ way-not including drug czars can force anybody to do anything they want because nobody can defend themselves or their family.  This is happening right on our southern border with Mexico!  The Mexican government has taken the God given right to defend oneself, family, and land and the drug cartels are having a field day by kidnapping, torturing, sending parts of a loved one back to the family one by one, shooting those who get in there way, and decapitation-is this what we want for future generations of Americans?

What about Iran?  Nobody there can possess a firearm unless they are part of the military-gee how did that go in 2009 after the joke of elections?  Iranians went to the streets to protest and some were killed while others were tortured-is this what we want for future generations of Americans?  How about Cuba?  Total dictatorship!  Nobody can own a firearm because the fear that the people will up rise against oppression, torture, and poverty-is this what we want for the future generations of Americans?   How about Venezuela?  Chavez has made sure none of the citizens there can possess a firearm; heck he has even shut down most of the media there due to an outcry of his policies-gee how is that working for the people? Chavez is afraid of what the people might do to him if they had firearms-probably kill his insane butt!  What about Darfur?  There has been nothing but a blood bath, because many citizens have been denied the simple right to defend themselves-how has that been working out?  How about North Korea?  There is a joke!  The people there live in poverty and have no rights whatsoever!

Communism is total control by the government of all things, including the God given right to defend family, home, and yourself-I can see that has been working real well for the citizens of North Korea!  China, well same attitude as North Korea…Communism is total government control of all things-you have no rights at all!  Here is some more to think about: What about the Holocaust and Rwanda?  The extermination of the Jews was quite easy because the Nazi’s made sure they took their firearms away before throwing millions on a one way trip to the gas chambers!  Rwanda was a blood bath! Thousands of Tutsis and Hutus were brutally killed-so many that rivers ran red with blood!  Many did not have anything to defend themselves with other than maybe a machete-gee that really worked.

The only way to keep the government in check, invaders at bay, drug czars dead, terrorism under control, dictators never in power, communism never allowed, and protect your home, family and yourself is to have the “right to keep and bear arms”-Why do you think America has been free for 234 years?

Obama and the rest of the White House, including our Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are on board with the United Nations(plus anti-gun nut jobs) and their plan to take every Americans right to “keep and bear arms”.   I thought our president, the administration, and Congress was supposed to “uphold” the U.S. Constitution?  Now the White House and Hillary Clinton will tell you that the Arms Trade Treaty will not take away the rights of Americans to “keep and bear arms” but will only regulate the trade of firearms to different countries and help keep them out of the hands of terrorists-NOT!

There are already rules and regulations in place so terrorists cannot get a firearm (placed on a watch list)-do not talk about the Fort Hood shooter because he fell through the system because the federal government chose to ignore the emails that proved he was communicating with a Muslim extremist.  On top of this, “all military articles of U.S. origin are subject to extremely rigorous procedures under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations.  All U.S. exports of defense articles and services, including small arms and light weapons, must be approved by the Department of the State.”  (http://www.thefreelibrary.com/United+Nations+Conference+on+the+Illicit+Trade+in+Small+Arms)  This does not include the fact the United States has offered technological and financial assistance along with working with countries to develop national legislation to regulate exports and imports of arms.

If this does not bother you enough, read the following: “The State (the country’s government) has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force and armed violence in order to protect and safeguard its people and institutions, consistent with international legal obligations, humanitarian and human rights principles.  The State (country’s government) is also responsible for determining the circumstances in which individuals can lawfully use force and armed violence and for ensuring full respect for and observance of the international and domestic legal standards on the use of force and armed violence”.  (http://www.un.org/disarmament/convarms/SALW/Html/SALW-POA-ISS-intro.shtml).  Excuse me, really?

That was not how this country came to be and that is not how we have kept our freedom for so long.  The federal government cannot run the post office, railroad, healthcare, social security and they certainly cannot keep our borders safe-this is another “power grab” by the White House so the government will have total control of all things in this great country.  I do not want this kind of future for my children or for that matter my grandchildren- it must be stopped NOW!

What’s all the fuss about? Tesla Motors, the latest darling of Hollywood, political leftists, and amateur Wall Street enthusiasts. Anybody who’s anybody wants to be in this game. Tesla is the electric roadster car made in Great Britain designed to sell for a mere $109,000.00. Names like George Clooney and Brad Pitt top a list of 998 people with orders in for them. It is the stuff that anti oil, life is good when living off the government, environmentalists dream of. For them it is answered prayer to gas guzzlers. For mainstream America however, it is an unrealistic and unworkable alternative.

Similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which never seems to make money but enjoys government subsidies, Tesla, a British company, is politically popular. Enough to have garnered 465 million dollars from the US government in loan guarantees. Also similar to Freddie and Fannie the government insists that the names of campaign donors that coincidentally matches the names of the Tesla principals wasn’t a factor in their decision. This of course is the same denial about the 529 million in government loan guarantees issued to Fisker Automotive, a Finnish car which coincidentally boasts Al Gore’s group as investors. The rest of us are scratching our heads trying to figure out how high priced electric prototypes outside America benefits America.

While admittedly lacking a degree in automotive engineering or economics, I none the less hold the view, counter to our government and the political left, that a car designed to sell for over 100 thousand dollars is probably not going to be the breakthrough to resolving oil dependency. What it is going to do, in my opinion, is make a few insiders a car trunk full of money…, and then go broke.

With all the insider elements in play, the initial public offering is getting incredible interest in the financial district. Apparently everybody thinks those early in are going to make a pile of money buying Tesla stock and they may be correct. Stock is strictly a demand driven product. When a lot of people want the stock, even if the company has no prospect of making a profit, share prices rise. Similarly in a financially healthy company that is making a profit, such as BP, when a lot of people don’t want the stock, the share price goes down. Still, in the long term however, when a company has no chance of making money or surviving, the stock collapses. That stated, I for one would not be buying Tesla with a long term view.

One big problem with Tesla is that it is mired in debt on the front end. All they’ve done with the massive start up loans is manage to lose money. Hundreds of millions. Moreover the car can’t become popular because it is priced beyond reach for the average American. Even among those who can afford one, does anyone seriously think they are going to be trading in their Roadster ever year for a new one?

The founder and CEO Elon Musk is admittedly broke, in the process of a messy divorce, and desperate for cash. Tesla has already lost 246 million dollars in the first three years. None of this suggests optimism.

Recent history suggests the politically connected insiders will pocket millions and walk away rich when the company fails. Those with arms linked to Washington power will move on to new government deals and contracts. That’s how the game is played. It’s important to remember that at a casino, the dealer always works for the house while the players go broke.

My prediction for this latest hundred grand fad is that like all fads, it will run it’s course and fade away, along with the money of many small investors. Before you get too caught up in Tesla-mania, my advice is to think, “DeLorean.

This is how many schools across America are handling “harassment”-seriously.  A student can file a complaint for harassment against somebody for simply giving a “dirty look”, or somebody sticking their tongue out at a student.  If a person looks at a student “wrong”, talks about the student during lunch, makes a mooing sound as the student walks by-file a harassment complaint.

Since a few kids out of millions have committed suicide due to harassment by schoolmates, many schools have taken their harassment procedures to a whole new level.  By the way, many of the harassment procedures have nothing to do with an investigation or witnesses; it has to do with how many times a “victim” of harassment files a complaint and the accused receives suspension (after a verbal warning).

These levels of harassment procedures are turning our schools into places of personal vendettas, “tit for tat” complaints, and a total waste of education time and money.  Instead, of teaching and developing the minds of the future leaders of America, many principals and teachers are filling out harassment complaints.  This does not include some teachers going as far as to “take sides” in the “harassment” situation, without even knowing what the heck is going on between the students to begin with.  How old are we?

Growing up in the 70’s and 80’s, students knew better than to complain to a teacher or principle that somebody gave them a dirty look or said a mean thing to them-you stood up for yourself and worked it out one way or another with the other student or students that were “harassing” you.

I grew up being “harassed” because of how tiny I was and my Spock ears (pointy), plus other things I will not mention here.  It was hard and I cried many days after school, but my parents taught me that words go through one ear and out the other-words only have the power to hurt me if I let them.  Dealing with this throughout elementary through high school helped prepare me for the big bad world, that does not care if your feelings are hurt or not.

How can students build social skills needed in the big bad world, if somebody is always there to wipe their butt and their tears?  Are students going on to college going to whine and sniffle to their college professors or their boss at their place of employment because somebody gave them a “dirty look” or called them a bad name?

How is that going to work in keeping America growing and prosperous?  This kind of approach to harassment does not work; it creates an environment of chaos and in turn students lose out on a good education, while teachers and principals are busy filling out complaints.

I am not saying I do not have compassion for those students who have legitimate harassment complaints-that would include taking a naked picture and texting it to all students or setting up a student on a “date to go bad”.

What I am saying is that it is not harassment when somebody gives you a “dirty look”, calls you a bad name, or moo’s at you, talks about you during lunch-let it go, words cannot hurt you and it is time to learn that now!  The future leaders of America need to grow some “thick skin” in their younger years in order to be well adjusted adults-life is not suppose to be easy and a “bed of roses”-it is suppose to be challenging.

Having failed to bully their views into acceptance, leftists are reverting to their standby, the national press corps, to rewrite history and distort reality. We are now seeing stories everyday about illegal immigrants leaving Arizona for greener pastures. Most of them repeat the mantra about how unfair the law is, as though the new law does not mirror the federal law that‘s been in existence for over a decade.

As always, the reality that “illegal” is in fact illegal is absent from reporter logic. They never seem to ask some rather obvious questions, so I’ve included a few recent examples and suggested a few questions they could have asked.

In a June 9 USA Today story (“Hispanics Moving Out Of AZ” by Alan Gomez) the thrust of the article focused upon the impact the law is having on the illegal community as they pull up stakes. We learned that one elementary school lost 70 children in their enrollment. To quote Superintendent Jeffrey Smith, “They’re leaving to go to another state where they can feel more welcome.” Here’s an unasked question. Why aren’t the illegals returning to Mexico? Do they not feel welcome there?

Then a Mr. David Castillo, co-founder of Latin Association of Arizona, said businesses serving Hispanics is down. “It’s devastating.” Here’s a question for Mr. Castillo: What kind of business exactly depends upon illegal immigrants for it’s profitable existence? Surely all 466,000 illegals haven’t fled yet, have they?

Juan Carlos Cruz, an illegal worker in plant nurseries, was quoted, “I have to find a place where we can live with more freedom.” My question for Mr. Cruz: Don’t you really mean, “I have to find a place where they ignore immigration laws” (The freedoms are very evenly and constitutionally guaranteed over all fifty states, provided one is here “legally”)?

Finally a Jorge Vargas said he plans to move his air conditioning business to New York because his business relies mostly on Hispanics and is completely dead. I have the same question as for Mr. Castillo. Can you not sell to legal immigrants or even, heaven forbid, even native Arizonians? Is the fact that the law might actually be applied to you the real motivator here?

Missing in the stories are questions about the incarceration costs that Arizona has been burdened with. Or the crime impact. Or the drug related problems. Or questions about the costs of housing. The impact on legal wages and revenues sent back to Mexico.

Also missing for the stories are the perspectives of law and due process. Why should a sovereign nation not have the basic right to control its borders? Why should any group be permitted to bully their way around the laws while other applicants stand in line for years?

No one is imposing anything new or unreasonable. The federal laws have been established for years and ignored for political reasons that include cowardice and greed for power. Finally a state has taken the action to reverse the impact of the blatant corruption that’s been thrust upon them. And that’s made leftists see red.

There’s good news in all of this. The power of the corrupt political system is fading fast. Fading almost as fast is the power of the press who think like-mindedly to influence the citizenry with lopsided reporting. Newspapers are shrinking and incumbents are nail biting.

So here is my last question for consideration: how many violations of immigration law does it take to declare we simply won’t follow the law? 12 million? How about 12 million drunk drivers? Do we stop enforcing the laws then for them also? How about not processing larceny when it reaches 12 million thieves?

It’s not a good idea to ignore “illegal”.

A perfect example of this is with Al Gore. As he settles into his new $9 million mansion in California (saving the world apparently pays well), he can do so knowing that he’s doing his part to save the atmosphere again. He is part of an investment group backing a car firm named Fisker Automotive that received a $529 million government loan to produce a hybrid sports car in Finland designed to sell for $83,000. By the time a few friends of the rich and famous parade their new Fisker cars to show how passionate they are about saving the world, the car company will probably have gone bust and Al Gore will probably have moved into a twenty million dollar mansion.

This follows a similar US government loan of $465 million to a car company named Tesla Motors who intends to produce an electric Roadster to sell for $109,000. For the record, though both companies are laden with Hollywood names of big campaign donors to major Democratic candidates, they insist that has nothing to do with the loan approvals. Whatever the case, it appears the government and the super rich are intent on solving the gasoline problem…for the super rich. Presumably one would expect them next to design newer fuel efficient private jets, with taxpayer funding.

Meanwhile, back in mainstream America, support wanes for low speed vehicles that actually are affordable and consume less fuel. In a Wall Street Journal (May 21 -“Group Wants Low Speed Vehicles Controlled”) the IIHS or Insurance Institute for Highway Safety called cheaply priced vehicles nothing more than “souped up golf carts.” A spokesperson explained, “The vehicles are fuel efficient and cheap to own, but they aren’t built to protect people in crashes.” True, but on the other hand they don’t guzzle gas or cost $100,000. I also suspect a golf cart accident at 25 mph is probably less destructive than two electric whiz cars doing 75 on the interstate.

It seems if an idea surfaces that might be practical, affordable, and do-able, the government unleashes an agency like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to regulate the idea beyond possibility, rendering so many safety precautions that a bicycle must sell for ten thousand dollars. That’s how government protects us little people from ourselves. The solutions they find ultimately will produce something no one can buy, but their friends will get rich from making them.

For those of us who think the point of transportation is to get from point A to point B, perhaps “souped up golf carts” might be a reasonable answer, at least for small towns and rural areas with speed limits of 30 mph and below. Perhaps we could design or designate certain streets that interconnect and reserve them for anything that one can sit in and doesn‘t go above 30 mph. It would be nice if folks who are on fixed incomes, folks who are poor, folks who are too fragile to be on superhighways, could use some real alternative transport options to re-engage in life. They could shop, go to church, get to work, to school, and so on.

While we’re at it, perhaps we might open up some more industry options and employment markets creating alternative transportation options right here in America instead of Finland. It really seems so obvious that one can pretty much expect Congress will never think of it.

I don’t mind the beautiful people having their beautiful people options, which really consists of spreading government dollars into their domain. But it would be nice if the cards weren’t so stacked against the 99 percent of Americans who otherwise might have alternatives that could apply to their lives.

Forget about a trial; that could take a while before someone decides to get around to it. Russia? Umm, border guards popped some Ukrainian tourist for ramming through their checkpoint (which is only logical) he didn’t fare well. Maybe bowing down to other countries apologizing for our prosperity and accomplishments had something to do with it.

How about permitting a visiting head of state (well, a figure head) to speak before the US Congress declaring our laws are racist and unfair? Go ahead and try the same stunt elsewhere and see how long before local thug cops come to get you!

Someone I used to admire a lot was Linda Chavez. Now her speech at this year’s CPAC left me a bit shocked; I mean I know a RINO when I see one but her attitude on this issue was really beyond the pale. The announcer called Ms. Chavez’s family as one of the oldest dating back several centuries in America so basically, her lineage gave her a more relevant knowledge of the immigration issue.

Like that’s supposed to make her contention that those 12 plus million illegal aliens might as well stay in the US because their work and living ethics are par to that of mainstream America (I’m not making this up okay?) justification for not enforcing immigration law! Chavez’s opinion is that these people from Latin American origins are really up to par with mainstream Americans.

They marry and stay together longer, take care of their kids, have close familial relations and are hard workers. I’m sorry, does this sound like any of us? What exactly is she saying that mainstream America doesn’t have some core values? This was a ridiculous speech; one that told me in February as we struggled to fight the advent of health care legislation (with strings attached) that something was coming down the pipeline. What she’s saying is that they’re not going anywhere so we might as well embrace their illegal status and let them stay.

What is even more disturbing is the attitude from this administration against Arizona’s immigration enforcement. It’s almost as though these events are unfolding according to some plan. But don’t pay attention to paranoid ranting and judge for yourselves. Let’s go back to March 2010 when suddenly (at least to those not involved) the much maligned Minuteman movement called it quits claiming that hey, this border issue is going to spark something, and they don’t want to be held liable in any way. What a terrible shame but you know I can’t blame them! Look at where we are, shall we?

After that announcement the pro-illegal immigration forces began to mobilize and were planning marches then Arizona’s law further pushed them into engaging in angry insurrection. I say only angry because it’s a matter of time before these oppressed former owners of the lands of the United States of America like Mecha (the wick) or La Raza (idiots without a purpose) become flat out violent. The health care reform legislation forced on the US had this little hidden gift of more immigration violations. In English, HCR brought the new civil war to our borders and to our cities.

These people want what’s not theirs because many in our government brainwashed them into believing it is theirs to take. In the end what this administration wants is to buy votes to keep itself in power and maintain a Democrat majority. This is by no means to say that Republicans have not gone along with this mass suicide. There is truly something going on here and it is not just a random set of circumstances.

We’re being displaced folks. I’ll never read anything by Chavez again I know that.
Look at the immigration rallies following the health care bill; instead of Americans (the folks who are legally here) marching to protest flimsy border security and lax immigration enforcement, those who have invaded us over decades and their offspring set out to challenge the law of the land. Even known criminals with illegal immigration status marched wearing their fashionable like they could do this in their own dirtbag countries.

ICE is being forced to play a dog and pony show now, allowing for these people – some who have been charged criminally – to roam the country free. But don’t forget we’re all racists. These people would never get away with mocking immigration laws but the powers that be in the US makes it so easy to do and with no consequences. No wonder the Minutemen said the hell with it, there’s going to be war anyway. I agree as this is a blatant invasion.

Sometimes these events come in a sliding scale and usually it slides down hill quickly. The left has gone out of its way to spread the word that the right, tea parties rallies and white people are a danger.

Not only that; forget any people of other races, the women and registered Democrats who make up the majority of these rally-goers. This is not to really scare us on the right but to motivate those sitting on the fence dangling their feet unaware they’re part of one giant Tom Sawyer fence painting project to take up arms against us.

It was interesting to see how Rahm Emanuel told Katie Couric in March that the GOP is being controlled by a ‘fringe’ group (that’s the grannies holding signs), but would not expand on that statement and said he would do so sometime this summer. This is riveting testimony to the headmaster of crises. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Fringe groups don’t organize with a particular purpose; they are either segmented due to ideological differences and power struggles, which means that the new movement is nothing like the original and probably all about the people who founded it. Sabotage should be factored into this equation. What is it about summer that brings on from skirmishes to invasions to general political upheaval?

This is June and with the Arizona situation heating up and Sheriff Arpaio showing the rest of America how this is done, totally embarrassing and trumping the Obama train wreck. I guess Governor Brewer’s testicular fortitude in the face of extinction is too much for the ultra-liberal establishment to tolerate. When someone dislikes another all it takes is for one to engage them in character assassination, sit back and watch the hatred flow in. Brace yourselves it’s going to be a bumpy summer.