Have you ever picked up a puppy or a kitten for free from a neighbor or friend whose pet had a litter?  Well, the Nanny Staters in the People’s Republic of Mexifornia are looking to shut down such natural generosity (or free enterprise, if goods, services, or money is exchanged) by ensuring only charge-you-an-arm-and-a-leg breeders are allowed to make more puppies and kittens.  AB 1634 would make it a requirement that all of us peasants have our kittens and puppies surgically altered so that they can’t make more kittens or puppies when they grow up.  The Nanny Staters claim this will prevent stray animals from roaming the streets and costing animal control officials time and money as they track them down and then subsequently “put them to sleep”.  I’m sure it has nothing to do with what will make professional breeders more money.

This is the same group of dimwits encouraging illegal aliens to continue flooding into our state, bringing the third world to us.

Let's look at this practically.

Stray dogs and cats don’t crowd our schools, emergency rooms, or jails.  They usually don’t bog down freeway traffic.  They don’t form gangs that terrorize our neighborhood.  Frankly, I’d rather deal with their feces and urine in my neighborhood than illegal alien graffiti and litter.  Dogs and cats have never made illegal alterations to a building I was living in that could put my life in danger.  Dogs and cats don’t require me to pay extra to have everything translated.  They don’t tie up our streets and police with audacious demonstrations and then sue our governments in an effort to live high off of the taxpayers.

This intrusive proposal is the result of an erosion of property rights and holding individual accountable.  We're being asked to give up yet another freedom.

More and more, I'm considering fleeing my home state like many of my friends have done.

What a great neighbor the Mexican government is - they encourage their poor, uneducated, unskilled, and criminal elements to come to the U.S. illegally and milk our system.


Isn’t that lovely?


Except the “free” stuff is paid for by idiots like us, who allow the government to take the money by force from us and redistribute it.  I love the use of the term “undocumented”.  Drug dealers are simply “unlicensed” pharmacists.  Rapist are simply “unapproved” sexual partners.  Forgers are simply “unauthenticated” representatives.


Thank you, Mexico.  Why don’t you kick in to pay for some of the bills, you freeloading pile of corruption?


At least they included some sanity in this article.


Ka-ching!  Free money to Mexico’s people!


You know, the thieves that stole my car drove it a lot less than I did, over the course of a year.  The burglar who broke into my home only took one piece of electronic equipment instead of all of them.  I guess that makes it okay.


Sweet.  You know, if I simply hand the keys over to those gang-bangers who want to take my car for a joyride, then they don’t have to break the window or hotwire the car to get in and take a ride.


It’s not free.  It costs me a lot of money.


See that?  You have a right for someone else to provide you with medical expertise, labor, equipment, facilities, and drugs.  You not only have a right to force other people to provide these to you, have a right to do it in a foreign country you are in illegally.  We are successfully imparting our foolish socialism attitude on the illegal aliens who are invading our country and turning it into the slums of Tijuana.  Open your wallet wide, and remember to learn Spanish!

Kevin Sack of the Los Angeles Times brings us another example of how some "solutions" to infertility cause more problems then they solve.


Why couldn’t they adopt?


WRONG, WRONG, WRONG – She can’t release him from his obligations to his children.  The courts enforce those obligations “on behalf of the child”.  The children could find lawyers to take there cases, especially if something happened to Augusta.  If Augusta were to fall on hard times, her mind might change.  If she ever applies for assistance, he’s on the hook.  This is also why a man should never, ever donate his sperm - either to a sperm bank or to a friend.  It doesn't matter what someone says, what contract you sign, what the sperm bank promises - a man can still be put on the hook financially.


So, he wants his children killed.


See how complicated we make things when we get selfish and egocentric?


This is madness.  TRY ADOPTION.  Why produce children just to kill them or abandon them???


Uh, they’ve already procreated.  If you cook up a dish, and then freeze it for safekeeping, you have already made the dish.  Of course, thanks to abortion laws and rulings, we can’t admit that.

Of course, what the Times is really worried about is the potential of these cases to impact abortion.  It will be really interesting if the courts decide a fetus isn’t a child if the mother doesn’t want it to be, but an embryo is a child if one of the parents believes it is.


ADOPTION, people.

There are a lot of things that President George W. Bush has done that I wholeheartedly support.

His lack of action on border security and immigration enforcement is not one of them.

He has neglected one of his fundamental Constitutional duties - protecting this nation - by failing to protect our borders.  There have been other problems, too.  But who is really surprised?  We knew back in 2000 that he was not a true, consistent conservative.  Yet we thought he was more electable than the other candidates, and clearly he was - he's won two terms.

I'm glad Algore and John F. Kerry (who, by the way, served in Vietnam) were not elected.  But that doesn't mean that I buy anything Bush is saying right now about "immigration reform".

Our current laws are not being enforced, it is obvious that this bill will not bring about enforcement of existing or new restrictions - only a conference of legal status to 12-20+ million lawbreakers, including terrorist sleeper cells and gang bangers.  Brilliant.

This is why we must elect true conservatives.  This appeal to the Leftists is futile and self-destructive.

The GOP had better wise up, because people like me are not going to give a cent to the party if we are sold down the river.

Man up, W, and come clean.

I don’t generally hate people who are homosexual, but I do not like whiny crybabies who do things like this.


Is that really the same thing as illegal discrimination based on sexual orientation?  Strictly speaking, couldn’t a homosexual person sign up with the service?


Evidently, they are unaware of the 2,641,230 other online matchmaking site options, or that using eHarmony.com is a voluntary way to do a voluntary thing - find someone.

This is so stupid.  All this will do is make lawyers rich and nobody else happy.  Here’s the real problem, the real reason they are going after the service:


Gotta hit them because they were founded by …oooh… religious folks.  Guess what?  So was marriage!


Gotta hit them because they are $uccessful.


Was she really denied access?  Does the site really ask if you are a homosexual or not?  If I recall correctly, the site denies matchmaking services to people who are still married, have been divorced “too many” times, or are socially/emotionally unhealthy for a long-term relationship.  Maybe that was why she was denied?  Now, maybe discrimination on the basis of marital status is okay, but we know California law doesn’t allow for discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  Which illustrates the problems with laws like that being applied to private businesses.


Wow, you must really think highly of the services EHarmony.com provides for you so be so distraught.  I guess in a way that is a compliment to them.


Men and women are different.  That’s why laws pretending that same-sex relationships are identical to both-sex relationships are absurd.


You have that right, sure - you can do that any number of ways.  You can still do it right now.  But why have we gotten to a point in our society where you have a RIGHT to FORCE someone else to perform a nonessential service for you?


I would hope most people would have better things to do with their time.

Warren has stated his goal with the service was to reduce the divorce rate by matching people for marriage who are compatible in ways that would bode well for their long-term happiness together.  In California, it still takes a member of each sex to have a marriage.

The cynical side of me says the eHarmony.com should go ahead and offer same-sex matching, which would come without the secret formula Warren developed for the both-sex dynamic, but would only use the restrictions the users specify (i.e. height, age, location, smoker/nonsmoker, etc.) in matching them.  That way, eHarmony  would still get their money, and the controversy would go away, and how would the same-sex community be any the wiser?  How would they know that their relationships weren't lasting as long as the both-sex relationships that started through the service?  The downside for eHarmony.com, of course, would be an overall decline in their "success" rate.

Some other points...

What damages has anyone really suffered, given that there are many other services available?

Can a restaurant be sued or religious discrimination for refusing to serve kosher or vegan meals?  If JDate really is only for Jews, can I sue?

I think this is a good example of why businesses should be allowed to refuse service to anyone.  EHarmony.com provides services to people in a voluntary exchange - the customer supplies information and money, and EHarmony provides the service.  I realize that our laws require nondiscrimination for certain categories, but I think those laws may do more harm than good.  I can see the need for them when it comes to government services.  I do not see the need when they are applied to businesses, especially businesses that do not perform an "essential" service, like say a paramedic service.

If this lawsuit is successful, I think heterosexual people should flood traditionally/explicitly homosexual venues/services and sue if they are not served or are harassed or assaulted.  For goodness sakes, eHarmony.com is based on understanding of the dynamics between the sexes.  Men and women are different, after all, and if they weren’t you wouldn’t know you were “gay”!  Get a life.

So Mrs. Bill Clinton now has the endorsement of L.A. Mayor “Tony Villar”.  Interesting.  There are a few things this could mean.  First, TV is hoping for a place in Hillary’s administration as a springboard to eventually running for President himself.  Secondly, he does NOT want Bill Richardson being the first “Latino” President.  Third, if he doesn’t get a place in Hillary’s administration, he’s going to be counting on her to help him get elected Governor of California when Arnold Schwarzenegger is termed out.

I’ve read MSM news reports that Hillary expects endorsements from TV and Fabian Nunez to give her the California  “Latino vote.”  What kind of world do we live in when people are expected to vote for someone simply because someone else in their broad ethnic category endorses them?  If they do, it is groupthink at its worst.  That the MSM and/or Hillary expects them to is a form of racist thinking, is it not? And racism on the part of the group if they do it?  I don't vote for someone because he or she has European roots, as I have.

First, I’m going to give a disclaimer that shouldn’t be necessary.  I am not uncomfortable around brown skin, people with Latino surnames, or Spanish-speakers.  I have no ill-will for Latinos, Chicanos, or Hispanics.  I work with people in these categories, I am friends with people in these categories, blah, blah, blah.  Okay, now that I’ve got that out of the way…

Unless we enforce our borders and use immigration to the benefit of Americans, the culture of the U.S. will change in a negative way.  It will change a lot faster if the “immigration reform” bill is signed into law as-is or with any of the provisions that will legalize the 12-20 million illegal aliens currently in the U.S. and thereby encourage millions more to come here.

Authentic Mexican food is not a problem.  It’s great and I enjoy getting fat on it.  Lavish parties for your fifteen-year-old daughter is not a problem.  More brown skin and Latino surnames in the U.S. would not be a problem.  Immigrants coming here to be truly self-sufficient is not a problem.

What IS a problem is that we’re being inundated with the poor, the uneducated, the unskilled, the dependent, and the lawless from Mexico, and to a smaller extent from other Latin American countries.  This can’t be stopped without securing our borders and/or moving our society away from tax-funded social programs, education, infrastructure, and medical care.  Border security is more likely, and more necessary since it would also help reduce the threat of foreign terrorism on our soil.

What is happening in the greater Los Angeles area and similar near-the-border areas will not stay here.  Unless you live in such an area, you are probably not getting the full story.  So let me fill you in.  Lawless illegal aliens are keeping our law enforcement system occupied and our jails overcrowded.  Many have no respect for authority or a fear of the authorities, thanks to their experience in their corrupt home countries.  Others feel comfortable enough to protest in the streets and make outrageous demands, including demands for absurd monetary settlements if the police react to their assaults.  They accept corruption in the government and other places of power.  They are perpetuating a violent culture of gangs and graffiti.  Violent criminals in their families wanted by the police often take refuge in Mexico, free to return to Los Angeles when the heat isn’t so hot.

Most of them take much more from the system than they put in, and their children add to that burden.  Meanwhile, they send money home to such an extent that it is now Mexico’s second largest source of foreign revenue.  Education is not valued, and so many of the children drop out of school or do not make the best use of their time at school, perpetuating an permanence to the underclass.  The utilities and infrastructure in the Los Angeles area are overburdened.  A culture of code violations, littering/illegal dumping, and cockfighting is growing.

Hospital emergencies rooms are overburdened with illegal aliens, most of whom either can’t or won’t pay the bill.  Classrooms are full of children who do not know English and do not live in a home that promotes English learning.  All things being equal and free market, I wouldn’t care, but day laborers and unlicensed vendors provide unfair competition to businesses adhering to all required regulations and laws.  Foreign pests that threaten California (and American) agriculture hitch rides in smuggled produce brought back from visits home.

We’re not talking little neighborhoods.  We’re talking entire cities.

The common American language of English isn’t being adopted as the Spanish language is either the sole, prevalent, or at least equally emphasized language in what has to be a majority of workplaces, stores, and restaurants.  There are something like two dozen Spanish-language radio stations in the Los Angeles market, some are the highest rated radio stations in the area.  There are at least three Spanish-language broadcast television stations, Spanish-language newspapers, etc.  The Mayor of Los Angeles speaks Spanish at every news conference, sometimes before he speaks English.  Further contributing to this balkanization from the general American culture are those more extreme elements who advocate a “Latino” groupthink,  “reconquista”, “brown pride” in conjunction with discrimination against and exclusion of “anglos”, “blacks”, and Asians, and they fly the Mexican flag alongside or instead of the U.S flag.

If you think this is going to stay around here, you are nuts.  This will expand to other parts of the country, especially with the legalization of 12-20 million illegal aliens and the certain influx of millions more.

Now, I’m not ignorant of the history of Los Angeles.  I know it was once Mexican territory.  However, for more time than that, it was Spanish territory, and for much longer than that, it was tribal area.  Regardless, California has been an American state much longer than it was ever Mexican territory, and this matter was settled in the 1840s and California became a state in 1850.  At the time, in addition to Spaniards and Mexicans, there were English, French, Basques, Germans, and Chinese people here in addition to Americans from the eastern United States.  Not long after California became a state, the Los Angeles area welcomed an influx of people from all parts of Europe, Asia, and Central and South America as well as more from the rest of the U.S.  The idea that we should align with Mexico, refrain from enforcing codes and regulations, or even accommodate the Spanish language is ridiculous.

Los Angeles, like the rest of America, has absorbed other cultures before.  But this requires immigration controls and selective immigration, and a commitment on the part of immigrants to pledge their allegiance to America, adopt our common language, seek integration, live by and support our laws, regulations, and codes, fight corruption, be self-sufficient, and seek upward mobility.

Browning America is fine.  Growing blighted and gang-infested neighborhoods and a dependent underclass is not.  Balkanization is not.  We must enforce our border and existing laws, or our culture will change for the worse.

You have to believe that having diversity of skin color and sexual proclivities is vitally important to every organization, but diversity of political thought isn’t.

You have to believe that a televangelist noting that homosexual behavior is a sin, according to Scripture, puts homosexual people in physical danger, but that lack of morals being glorified in films, televisions shows, advertisements, songs, and music videos will have no effect on youth.

You have to believe that there is no difference between men and women, and yet it is impossible for someone attracted to the same sex to ever live a heterosexual life.

You have to believe that smoking one leafy plant (marijuana) is good for you and has medicinal properties, but smoking another leafy plant (tobacco) will kill you and everyone else in the same building or anywhere near you.

You have to believe that being a full-time mother and a devoted wife is degrading and dangerous to women, but women sleeping around with men they don’t know are liberated and empowered.

You have to believe we can't know what happened 2,000 years ago, even with archeological and manuscript evidence, but we can know with certainty exactly what happened 1,000,000 years ago and that God could not have involved, thanks to some bone fragments.

You have to believe that it doesn’t really matter what anyone believes about God, as long as they don’t claim to have good reasons to believe that God exists and has communicated with humanity in an objective way.

You have to believe that there really is no such thing as evil, but that Dick Cheney is evil.

You have to believe that a nativity scene on public land will harmfully influence the public and is not protected free speech, but that demonstrations calling attention to the participants’ same-sex attraction or burning the U.S. flag on public land are okay.

You have to believe that marriage is "just a piece of paper" and outdated, and yet it is vitally important that same-sex couples be issued that piece of paper simply because some have asked for it.

You have to believe that using fossil fuels will destroy the world, but vehemently oppose any attempts to build more nuclear power plants, which don’t give off greenhouse gases.

You have to believe that America is a horrible, oppressive place run by a dictator, but want everyone who wants to come here “for a better life” to be allowed.

Bush is clearly ramping us up to military action in Darfur on trumped-up evidence.  Keep our troops out of Sudan!

1. There are no WMDs, and we know from what the Democrats say about Iraq that we have no business going anywhere if there are no WMDs.

2. The Sudan hasn't attacked us, ad we know from what the Democrats say about Iraq that we have no business going anywhere if that country hasn't attacked us.

3. The situation in Darfur is a sectarian civil war, and we know from what the Democrats say about Iraq that we have no business being involved in a sectarian civil war.

Bush just cooked this whole thing up in Texas so that he can transfer money to his buddies in various corporations.

(Of course, I'm being sarcastic, but I'd like to at least see some consistency from the Left.)

How do you get a Leftist into the fetal position?

Tell them how pot smoking contributes to global warming.

Most Americans are enjoying a long Memorial holiday weekend.

We should never forget are fallen men and women who gave their lives in the cause of liberty and freedom.

Our simplistic view of history often forgets that there was domestic opposition to American war involvement for every war, including World War II and the American Revolution.

We can debate the necessity of military action for any given situation, but we should never forget the soldiers who ahve served us and protected us.

We are an incredbily blessed nation, but we would not have our liberty and our Constitution without it being defended by so many, including those who gave their lives.

I thank those of you who served alongside these people, allowing me the freedom to write my mind here.

My God bless you!

The illegal alien amnesty crowd keeps putting forth a false dichotomy.  I agree with Ann Coulter.  The alternative to their “immigration reform” bill isn’t actively rounding up 12 million people and deporting them.

It’s really not as complicated as they want you to think.

1. We need a secure border for many reasons, the most important of which has nothing to do with illegal aliens who want to come here and work on farms.  It has to do with our security.  Well thought-out walls, fences, other barriers, and border monitoring/patrols can be very successful in securing our borders.  This will not stop people from coming here via legal, temporary stays and then overstaying their legal welcome, but it can virtually eliminate illegal border crossings.  It doesn’t matter what incentives or disincentives there are as far as hand-out and amnesty programs if they can’t get across that border in the first place.

Okay, then we have 12-20 million illegal aliens here to deal with.  So what to do with them?

Why is there a need to “bring them out of the shadows”?  Marching down the street waving Mexican flags and shouting “Viva La Raza!” and “Si Se Puede!” isn’t exactly hiding in shadows.  But why the need?  Is it for tax purposes?  Is it for law enforcement purposes?  I really don’t see the need.  Compassion for their situation of having to “live in the shadows” is misplaced when there are people waiting in line to legally immigrate to our country.  The illegal aliens chose to come/stay here illegally.  They chose this lifestyle.  It is an improvement for them, otherwise they would go home.

Here’s what we do after securing the border.

2. We start enforcing employment laws, cracking down hard.  When illegal aliens can’t find work with respectable employers anymore, they will either leave on their own, or will turn to some sort of “underground” or “under the table” occupation.  If they start committing more crimes, we will hopefully catch them and prosecute them.

3. Deport any criminal who is an illegal alien.  Deport illegal aliens caught in workplace raids.

When it becomes clear that, unlike 1986, they aren’t going to get an official pardon/citizenship, that it is hard to find work, and that if they are caught by the police committing more crimes they will be deported, things will gradually get better, because many will leave on their own, or will not make trouble if they do stay here.

Yes, some illegal aliens would continue to live here quietly “in the shadows”.  So what, as long as they don’t commit any other crimes?  Yes, they will still cost us in our foolishly socialist programs like education and health care, but they are already doing that.  They will grow old, die out, and their children born here will be citizens.  Eventually, the number of illegal aliens will dwindle to almost nothing.  The ration of illegal aliens to citizens and legal immigrants will shift dramatically, and the problems associated with having large numbers of illegal aliens will go away.

Not extending any form of legal status or amnesty will allow us to crack down as hard as possible on the illegal aliens who are career criminals, gang members, or terrorists.

Enforce EXISTING laws.  Protect our borders.  Don’t reward lawbreakers.  None of that is unrealistic.  All of that is possible.  It’s very simple.  We don’t need to further complicate matters with a new convoluted system of additional regulations and government programs.

The ONLY illegal aliens who should be given legal status, amnesty, and citizenship are any who serve honorably in our armed forces.  I would be all for that.

No need for any more madness.

Some animal advocate groups are saying that securing our border, which is essential to our survival as a nation and possibly individuals, would be a bad thing because it would hurt animals that "need" to move back and forth across the border.

There are ways of dealing with this without giving up our self-preservation.

Strategic areas could  have openings in the wall/fence and be monitored closely by strict border guards in ways that will allow animals freedom of movement without allowing invaders, smugglers, and illegal aliens from freely crossing our border.  Animals would be let through.  Human beings would be stopped.  Most sane people can tell the difference between wild animals and human beings.

There.  That was easy.

Ted Kennedy angrily and forcefully opposed the amendment to the "immigration reform" bill that would have eliminated the guest worker program, declaring that without a guest worker program, illegal aliens would continue to flow into this country only to be exploited with low wages.

Gee, Ted, how would that be possible with these border control triggers that you and your fellow Democrats are promising will secure the border?

You unwittingly admitted that the border control aspects of this bill are a sham and/or won't be effectively executed.

Current immgration and border laws are not enforced.  Why should any of us believe that these massively complicated new regulations will be enforced?

So Ted... is this one really, truly, going to be the last immigration reform bill, just like the last two you claimed would fix the problems?

I continue to see global warming warners appearing in/creating media and traveling.  Now they are going to put on these huge concerts.

Don’t these people know that all of those behaviors are contributing to global warming?  They’re going to kill us all, but more importantly, all of the dolphins, spotted owls, apple trees, and bacteria!

These people should be living in naturally formed caves with no electricity, natural gas, or other energy source, clothing, furniture, or vehicle that gives off heat, pollution, or carbon dioxide in manufacture/generation or usage.

Running for office must contribute big-time to global warming, so they shouldn’t be doing that, either.

The fact that they continue to party, continue to perform, continue to make movies and television shows, continue to write articles and books, continue to travel around, and continue to live in those unnatural buildings tells me they either don’t really believe the situation is important, or that it is only important to give them enough control over our lives to make sure we don’t end up living like them.