Hey guys... just because Reagan and Schwarzenegger did it doesn't mean you can pull it off.

Reading the Los Angeles Times can be so uplifting.  Today is no exception.

If the allegations are true, it is apparently too hard to keep child molesters from being teachers or administrators in our public schools.  This article involves a Santa Monica school district, and this one involves Los Angeles’.

Then there’s this.

Once again, a hospital is getting criticized for giving a homeless patient a ride.  This time it is extra bad because it was a ride into another county.  I suppose the other realistic alternative – pushing them to the edge of the hospital property and then leaving them to find their own ride – is preferable?

It simply isn't realistic to expect the hospitals, who are already caring for someone who cannot reimburse them, to house the person until a permanent home can be secured for them, especially if that will be against their will or will require extensive psychological counseling.

Is it hopeless for those of us who believe in limited, Constitutional government, personal liberty, property rights, and free markets?

Consider:

--Most voters apparently expect the government to do something for them, including protecting them from the negative consequences of their own actions, instead of simply protecting them from the denial of their rights by others.  Just consider how many people think health insurance and education, provided by others, is a right.  Just consider how many people think their personal happiness should be the responsibility of the President.

--Most people attend public schools, which, in the interest of self-preservation, are unlikely to teach students the benefits of limited government and self-reliance instead of government-reliance.  The people in control of these schools think it is their responsibility to make students feel good about themselves, no matter what they do wrong or fail to do right.

--Plenty of Americans are prone to blame America first, to seek the approval of other countries, and to wanting our leaders to enter into restricting agreements with other countries designed to transfer wealth from Americans to others by force.

--The Democrats are largely beholden to public employee unions, who have an interest in increasing the size of government.  Both parties are backed by business interests who have apparently given up on the idea of getting the government off their backs, and instead try to steer the government money (which is really our money, taken by force), their way.

--Articulating the actual ideals of the Founding Fathers would get a POTUS candidate labeled by most Americans as an extremist theocrat who wants to throw people into the streets without shelter or an education, to die of starvation or sickness or injuries from a hate crime, or maybe work them to death in a job with low pay and lousy conditions.

Maybe it is true that the GOP can’t retain the White House without credibly presenting a coherent plan for reform.

But just what kind of reform are voters going to buy?

Maybe there is hope, but reforms are going to have to move very slowly towards reigning in government.

Energy.  Everyone’s concerned about fuel prices, though there are some that like the increased prices because they hate progress because they think it is killing Gaia, or whatever her name is.  There is no way to stem rising fuel prices without some unpopular decisions.  We need to tap our own fossil fuels.  We need new refineries to process it.  We need to use nuclear power.  If we can show that these steps will stem rising fuel prices, enough people might buy into it.

War.  None of us want our men and women getting injured, maimed, killed, or traumatized in war, especially for them to return home to poor treatment.  We need to show voters that we will provide for our veterans and that we will reduce the need to prolonged war if we increase intelligence effectiveness and have saboteur/assassination/surgical strike squads.  That might not be popular with the international community, but prolonged wars aren’t popular with American voters, and if we can prevent prolonged wars, then we should.  As for Iraq, McCain should drill home the nation that we’ll protect our soldiers by helping Iraq to win the peace.

Immigration.  This hasn’t been a big issue lately in the campaign, probably because of the track records of the candidates.  I’ve frequently stated my ideals, but those ideals won’t appeal to enough people.  So, what McCain needs to do is publicize a clear “reform” plan that includes effective border protection first.  Once we can demonstrate effective border protection, other things will become more acceptable to a majority of voters, such as easing up on workplace raids and boosting legal immigration.  We’ll still need to pursue illegal aliens for deportation if they are committing serious crimes inside the country, including identity theft.  Announce that once the border is secured, we will consider allowing illegal aliens to register for the following reasons: 1) for identification to cut down in identification theft; 2) a temporary work permit; and 3) to “get in line” for legal immigration as of that moment as if they were applying from their country.  You can’t promise this ahead of the border being secured, or we’ll get a wave of people coming in.

Education.  Although I believe in separation of school and state, I don’t see enough people going for it.  So vouchers will have to do.  I know this will elicit howls of protest from teacher unions, but inner-city minority voters have expressed support for vouchers and making them part of a reform plan just may work.  Boost tax incentives that encourage education.  Encourage charter schools.  If enough people see how these moves will benefit them, then they will want them.

Environment.  Encouragement for sound conservation through private property stewardship.  The wackos will not be happy without total government control and oppression of productivity, but perhaps enough moderates can be persuaded that we’re not out to poison the planet.


Our long-term strategy, as those who believe in limited government, needs to be two-fold:

1. Convince enough Republican leaders that limited government is the way to go, or groom such people within the Republican party.
2. Get enough Republicans elected, and stay on them to stick to limited government principles.

This recent Dear Margo caught my attention.

UP AGAINST A BRICK WALL writes:

I am a 21-year-old female who's still living at home with my mother and stepdad. I am a lesbian and currently in a relationship. The only problem I have is that neither my mom nor her side of the family approves of my lifestyle.

Either live by their rules or move out.

I want to make her happy, but I also want to be happy.

Sometimes, that is not possible.  Many times, people pick partners of the opposite sex that their families don't like, too.  Your mother doesn't have to live your life.  You have to live your life.

How can I start a life with my girlfriend if my family looks down on me because they feel it's "wrong"?

People start lives all of the time even though their family isn’t supportive of their choices.  Sometimes that involves choices about schools, career, religion - you name it.  If that's what you really want, then do it.  But maybe you're conflicted  about your choices, hence the letter to an advice column?

Dear Margo, of course, doesn’t offer those nuggets.  Here’s what advised instead:

I would encourage you to live your life in a way that feels natural, not in an artificial way that you think would please your mother.

How about telling her to move out on her own?

I have to wonder if Margo would advise a man to do what “feels natural” if he naturally felt like sleeping around on his wife?  Or sleep around without being married?  Or was naturally attracted to kids?  Or naturally felt like urinating in public?  Or naturally wanted to overeat?  Sometimes, feelings needs to be dealt with in ways other than letting them dictate behavior.

As for your instinct being "wrong," tell your mom -- and her side of the family -- that in matters of sexuality, which is hard-wired, there is no wrong.

Gotcha.  So, polygamy, adultery, pedophilia, not caring about your spouse’s needs... none of those are wrong?  Maybe that's not what you mean, but that is what you're saying.

And because you say they are religious, tell them God does not make mistakes.

Funny, people never use that one when they go to get plastic surgery, or physical therapy, or a prescription, or complain about a natural disaster.  Maybe this has nothing to do with what God has done?  I’m convinced that God is ultimately creator, but creation has been marred by sin.

Then invite her to try to imagine her life as a homosexual, and you may have made your point.

Ah, the old “put yourself in my shoes” thing.  Did you ever stop to think that maybe her mother has thought of that, and doesn’t want her daughter to miss out on marriage and having children with a husband?  I wouldn't know for sure, but I suspect life isn't all that easy for people with homosexual feelings, if for no other reason than we live in a sex-obsessed society that is predominantly heterosexual.  But even though people we love face difficulties, we should not abandon our own convictions.

With it looking like Senator Clinton will lose the Dem nomination to B. Hussein Obama, McCain can take advantage of some of the disappointed women who were supporting Clinton largely do to her XX chromosome status.  While I think it is silly to vote for a ticket based on the sex or skin color of the candidates, the fact is that many people clearly do just that, and elections are about winning.

I don't believe that all of the Senator Clinton supporters who insisted they would not vote for Obama really won't vote for him come November.  If they are staunch Dems or Leftists, they will prefer Obama over McCain.  Perhaps some will sit out the election or vote for a write-in or third party candidate.

But maybe there are enough Clinton supporters who would vote for McCain if his running mate was female.

Just something to consider.

Some people want us to stop focusing on the illegal alien problem, because they want to keep illegal aliens here.  The Democrats want them to add them (legally) to their voting base, and employers want cheap labor without having to move operations out of the country.  Then there are the illegal aliens themselves, who understandably want to get as much as they can for as little as possible, and have gotten away with staying here for so long.

But we do still care about the illegal alien problem.  We do not want shamnesty because that only made things worse the last time.  We want enforcement.  We demand enforcement.

Do you want us to stop caring so much about this issue?

I would care a lot less about keeping out illegal aliens if:

1. We control the border to keep terrorists, WMD, and communicable diseases out of the country.

2. We stop collecting payroll taxes, and get government out of the relationship between the employer and the employee, except where actual crimes have been committed, such as contract fraud.  Two people voluntarily negotiating compensation and working conditions should not be a crime.

3. We no longer use any income tax or any other tax money that can’t be equally collected from illegal aliens for health care, all forms of financial assistance, schools, government buildings, public works, etc.  User fees, fines, sales taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, and utility taxes are acceptable.

4. We bill an illegal alien's country of citizenship for the cost of their prosecution/incarceration should they commit a crime, and for any civil judgments and fines the individual fails to pay.

5. We verify someone is a citizen before they can register to vote, and we verify their identity when they vote.

Get all that done, I will have little problem with illegal aliens going about their lives here,

We currently have a way of life designed for citizens, immigrants (legal), and visitors such as business professionals, tourists, and students.  It does not work when we are flooded with unskilled, poor, uneducated illegal aliens who need government assistance to do anything outside of the workplace and use stolen identities.

But since my five points are unlikely to be put into place, we need serious border enforcement, workplace verification, and deportation of illegal aliens who commit additional serious crimes.  If those are all done effectively, the illegal alien problem will correct itself.  Either people will self-deport, or they will grow old and die out, and their children will be citizens by birth.  We will not have a massive influx of additional illegal aliens if we hold the line on shamnesty, and there will be no need for it.  Those “living in the shadows”  right now (as they march in the streets, no less) came and stayed here illegally by their choice of their parents’ choice, and we have no obligation to accommodate them.

If employers truly can’t find enough citizens and immigrants to staff their operations, then we can grant more temporary work visas to bring in workers from across the border.

We got our stimulus check.

I'm sure there are people all excited to get theirs.  And for some people, they'll be getting someone else's money.  Must be nice to have the government take it from other people for you.  In our case, I can reasonably consider this a refund of some of our own money.

If we had debt, we'd use it to pay some of that off.  But we've deliberately avoided debt.  So, most likely, it will be used for spending or investment, which was the idea to begin with.

Why should we expect someone to change their convictions because of a protest demonstration or because they find out that a friend, family member, coworker, or someone they admire does something they find wrong?

I just don’t react to an illegal alien demonstration with “Golly, I guess I am wrong.  How can I be against illegal aliens getting amnesty now that I’ve seen them marching?”  My opposition does not come from thinking nobody wants it.  My opposition comes from my convictions.

What if a group of burglars and kleptomaniacs got together for a march and you saw a bunch of people you recognized there?  Would that make it okay to steal?  What if there were a lot of people there?  What if someone in your life came to you and said “I don’t want to live a lie anymore!  I want you to know that I steal things.”   Would you suddenly say, “Well, I don’t want to hurt his feelings, so I’ll change my mind and say stealing is okay”?

I can understand protest demonstrations as a tool to fire up the participants, but they don’t change my mind.

As I’ve written previously, Leftists often think that if you disagree with them, you simply have not heard them; and I already know that people I admire are sinners.

Oh - and it does not influence me to change my mind if a movie actor supports a certain cause.  Depending on the cause, I may choose not to support that actor anymore.

Isn't that Groundhog Day?  The day we celebrate a movie starring Bill Murray?

Actually, it is the day that we should celebrate the liberation of the southwest from Mexico.

While Cinco de Mayo celebrations are a bid deal in places like southern California, and I'm not one to discourage a celebration of victory over the French military (cough, cough), around here, that is a day that a lot of people pretend the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo never happened.  I say would should celebrate February 2 almost like we celebrate July 4.  Let's have a yearly reminder that we are part of the U.S.A., not Mexico, and thank God for that!

Howard Hurlbut of Redlands wrote to the Los Angeles Times with the following questions for the POTUS candidates:

What would you do to end the widening chasm between rich and poor in America?

How would you restore U.S. credibility abroad?

Social Security has for years generated surpluses. What specific modifications would you propose to ensure its continued success?

I will answer them one by one.

What would you do to end the widening chasm between rich and poor in America?

I reject the premise of the question.  Hopefully, there is an increasing spectrum between the richest person and the poorest person, and hopefully, it is because the richest person continues to be as productive as he or she has been until now.  A rich person has more resources with which to acquire more resources, and we want them to put those resources to work, because that helps everyone else down the line, including the poor.  Because the rich person has more resources, that person can accumulate wealth at a faster rate than the poor person.

In our system, the rich need not get richer by making the poor poorer.  Ideally, the poor will also get richer.

That is because the pie is getting bigger.  It isn’t a matter of taking up more of the same size pie.

It is not the President's place to get involved.  I would do my best to ensure that the most people have the most opportunity go generate wealth.  I would do that by eliminating programs that encourage dependence on taxpayer money.  I would let more people keep more of their own earnings.  In turn, they will save, invest and spend, thereby providing opportunities to others.

Just as I would stop redistribution of wealth to individuals, I would also stop the government from redistributing wealth to businesses by subsidies.

Envy and jealousy can be very ugly things.  Instead of resenting your neighbor for doing well, why not strive to do well yourself?

How would you restore U.S. credibility abroad?

Credibility involves having people believe you mean what you say, and that you know what you are talking about.  Shall I assume you refer to intelligence showing WMDs in Iraq?  In that case, I would reiterate exactly why our intelligence operations reported such a thing, and show exactly what the Iraqi’s genocidal tyrant was and was not doing.

One way of maintaining credibility is to back up our demands.  We did just that when we went into Iraq.  If you make demands and then don't back them up, you lose credibility.  The tyrant was in violation of the cease-fire agreement.

I do not care if there are some people in other countries that resent our successes and power.  That is unavoidable.  The best and most powerful are always resented by someone.

Social Security has for years generated surpluses. What specific modifications would you propose to ensure its continued success?

Social Security is a ponzi scheme sham, and is only a “success” if you think it is a good thing to take money from hard working people and be a lot less productive with it than they could have been themselves.  We should fulfill our promises to the existing generations and let the generation about to enter the workforce know that we will be discontinuing this disastrous program and remind them that they should be saving and investing and insuring through their own actions and choices.

Hey Howard – if you are related to Bud, I give you props for that.  But I clearly disagree with your thinking.

Well, the criminals marched, the police arrested a handful of people, and certain newsrooms presented the illegal aliens as heroic freedom fighters.

Meanwhile, my drive home from the office was even better than my drive in.  I wish these people would protest every day.  It really points out how much better our freeways would be if they are back home.

I think the local Fox station here, KTTV Channel 11, must have a newsroom run by someone extremely sympathetic to illegal aliens.  Certainly me know Tony Valdez, one of their reporters they had covering this year's goof-off, has blatantly expressed his own reconquista sentiments in the past, on-air.

Protect the border.  End the hand-outs.  No amnesty for any illegal alien except military veterans.  Enough said for today.

I’m continuing my coverage of the March of the Criminals.

Teresa Watanabe and Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers, report in a very one-sided article.

The Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, joined by labor and political leaders at a news conference this morning, renewed its call for immigration reform that includes more worker visas and a path to legalization for [illegal aliens].

Aawwww, they want more cheap labor that we subsidize with our taxes.  Poor babies.  Why not hold a news conference asking for easy document verification, or a more libertarian system?  How about pledging not to accept corporate welfare?

Chamber officials will be armed with a new study by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., scheduled for release today, showing that tens of thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in revenue could be lost if continued raids forced businesses to flee the state.

If they need lower-wage workers, then perhaps they will have to relocate to Mexico.  That is preferable to inviting millions more poor, unskilled, uneducated people from other countries to come here and live off of our foolishly socialistic programs.  It isn’t like these people just work and that’s all.  They use our medical services, our welfare, our courts and prisons, our water, our electricity, our roads, our schools.  As long as these things are paid for through compulsory taxes, we are not going to accept this anymore.

Enforce the border.  If there is truly a labor shortage, we can issue temporary work passes.

"This is a landmark moment," said Samuel Garrison, the chamber's vice president of public policy. "Here you have labor, business, local elected officials, [illegal alien] rights activists and leading educators all coming together to say this has to stop.

Wow socialists and the elites who think they can manipulate a controlled marked to their favor agree.  What a shock.

And while you are doing that, we also have labor, business, local elected officials, immigrants, educators, and many, many voting citizens who say we have to stop the flow of illegal aliens into our country, not do things that will encourage much more of it.

Marchers include some of those injured in last year's MacArthur Park melee, who plan to wear red shirts and walk at the front of the crowd. Doris Ochoa, a 40-year-old janitor and [illegal alien] from Mexico, is one of them. She said she and her two sons, now 5 and 14, were hurt last year while running from police on motorcycles. Ochoa, who has filed a lawsuit against the city, said she still can't understand why police hurt innocent protesters.

Oh come on.  Of course she can understand.  She lived in Mexico, after all, where that kind of thing is common.  And now she will get a windfall of taxpayer money.

Acela Aguilar, 37, who has also sued the city, said she plans to attend the rally at MacArthur Park.

I’m sure this will take her away from some really vital public service.

She worries about her family being split if she is arrested and deported.

If that happens, the solution is very simple: all of your children join you in your own country.

Victor Narro, co-president of the Los Angeles chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, has been meeting with the plaintiffs all year and said last year's melee left many people injured psychologically as well as physically. He anticipated that dozens of them will return to the park for the rally.

Well then how injured can they be?

Walking out of school to participate in a march or rally will not result in an automatic suspension.

I’m sure that policy would be equally extended to say, a pro-marriage demonstration, right?

We should not reward lawbreakers.

Why wasn't anyone interviewed who could talk about how they lost their job or took a pay cut because illegal aliens are cheaper?  How about someone whose neighborhood has been ruined, or whose school has been ruined?  What about someone who has been the victim a crime or bad driving by an illegal alien, who runs back to Mexico to avoid prosecution?  What about interviewing someone who went through the trouble of coming here as a legal immigrant?  What about someone who has sat in an overcrowded emergency room?

Nativo V. Lopez, otherwise known as Larry, is the national president of the Mexican American [But Mostly Just Plain Mexican] Political Association and was a lead organizer of the illegal alien marches of 2006.  He has a column that ran today, entitled “Reason We March on May Day.”  We already know why, Larry.  It is because you are a commie.

The political muscle necessary to make substantive policy changes favorable to immigrant working families devolves from organization of the numbers exercised repeatedly toward very specific ends.

Immigrants are people who come here legally intending to become citizens.  You champion illegal aliens.  Nice use of the term “working families”, too.  I guess we lazy Americans aren’t workers, and single people don't matter.

We continue to wage costly battles over too many issues related to the social well-being of our families. The list is long, and much remains as a legacy of the nasty 1990s in California _ denial of driver licenses, higher education, financial aid, health-care access, business and professional licenses, employment authorization.

Yes, in Larry’s world, illegal aliens are entitled to all of those things – at YOUR expense.  They currently do have such access, in most of those cases.

We also struggle against overt forms of state terror, including wanton workplace and neighborhood raids by the Immigration and Ice Enforcement,

That’s not terror, Larry.  And it isn’t happening enough.

the arbitrary impounding of vehicles (which constitutes the outright seizure of personal assets),

No, that’s hardly arbitrary.  When a driver is pulled over for a violation and that driver does not have a license, then their car is impounded.  Sometimes.  Don’t like it?  Privatize the roads.

a growing number of police checkpoints in multiple jurisdictions,

Oh, so now getting drunk and then driving should be okay?  As long as it is Mexican beer, I’m sure.

and the increased cooperation between ICE and local police authorities throughout the country.

Oh no!  Law enforcement working together!  Oh, the horror of it all!  How DARE we deport people who broke the law to come/stay here, and are subsequently committing other crimes?  We should welcome criminals from other countries, right?

Notwithstanding a decade of political gains and increased electoral representation for Latinos at all levels of government,

Woah there – there is a difference between the terms “Latino”, “immigrant”, and “illegal alien.”

we have not secured sufficient political strength to curb the aforementioned practices.

Well, yeah – people prefer the rule of law, Larry.  Crazy, I know.

The prospects of these issues being resolved in favor of immigrants and their children within another presidential term is highly probable, provided the numbers coalesce politically at the ballot box and in the street.

It helps to commit voter fraud.

Take the elected leadership of the city of Los Angeles, for example. It is the embodiment of diversity and liberalism _ the greatest number of Latinos, blacks, Democrats, gays and liberal Jews probably ever in its storied history.

So the color of someone’s skin is important?  I’m so confused!  And yes, I’m sure it is important to have both heterosexuals and homosexuals approving budgets.  I know I get more savvy financially every time another guy hits on me.  And I guess "conservative Jews" don't count.

The City of L.A. is a horrible example.  The place is a mess.  You like it, Larry, because your illegal alien friends can run around waving the Mexican flag and not be beaten and robbed by the police, like they would if they were demonstrating in Mexico.

However, the city is not as friendly to immigrants as one might think. Immigrant raids continue to abound, vehicles are regularly impounded, sweat shops are more the norm than the exception, and the poverty index remains high.

Yes, because only immigrants are poor.

The city is no longer considered a sanctuary as once touted by Mayor Tom Bradley in the 1980s.

Good!  Can you explain that to your buddies south of the border?  I want the word to spread.

More than 94 percent of the private work force is neither represented by a union nor enjoys a collective bargaining agreement,

And this has to do with illegal aliens or immigrants or Latinos…how?  Are you saying that none of those groups are capable of setting their own terms of employment?  Are they somehow deficient to other groups?

the schools are a laboratory of failure for immigrant youths,

Yeah, the public schools are pretty bad.  Your kind of thinking is one reason why.

and the prevalence of gangs is greater today than a generation ago _ disproportionately concentrated in immigrant neighborhoods. This is why we continue to march.

I see… I don’t recall any signs complaining about the gangs.  Mostly they seem to support the gangs.

Something tells me Larry wouldn’t be so supportive if, oh, Europeans, Africans or Asians were flooding into the area on the level of Mexicans and they were rallying in the streets.  Just a hunch.

I've actually dealt with this guy in person.  He wishes he was the Mexican-American Al Sharpton.  He's not, though.

Traffic conditions into to the office this morning were great.  I just want to thank all of the illegal aliens, their sycophants, and the commies who made it that way by boycotting work here in greater Los Angeles.

Hey Greater Los Angeles!  Remember that tomorrow is the March of the Criminals and Communists – you know, the people who support the invasion of our country by gang members and forced American-taxpayer support of Mexico’s poor.

The good news in this is two-fold.

1) As long as you don’t work where they are marching, traffic should be wonderful!  It is so nice to see how great our commutes could be if the illegal aliens weren’t clogging our roads.

2) If the reaction from the general public matches the past events of this sort, there will be reinforced resolve to secure the border and encourage illegal aliens to self-deport.  These protests actually take the activists further away from their goals.

Of course, there will be people there assaulting police officers and doing their best to goad the LAPD into actually defending themselves, thereby resulting in huge taxpayer payouts.  Hopefully, they’ll just end up fighting with each other instead.

I think these people have the right idea about tomorrow.