Friday, December 30, 2011

Change Will Be Required In 2012

Barack Obama burst onto the nation's radar promising "change," and anyone who believes he hasn't attempted to deliver it (Matt Damon's recent protestations notwithstanding) is either delusional or has been asleep for the past three years. Whatever one may think of his performance in the White House, it cannot be denied that he has taken significant steps to radically alter America. 

On the campaign trail in '08, he gave no details about what "change" he would like to see occur, and millions of Americans who were dog tired of wars overseas and a nearly incompetent Bush administration, really didn't request many.

For those who were curious, however, at the end of 2011, we have our answers: Barack Obama would like the U.S. to be much less white and he wants new arrivees and their children to be subsidized at levels previously unprecedented in the U.S.

How do we know this? By looking at his major political efforts during his time in office: Obamacare and the ongoing crusade against states that have sought to enforce immigration laws. Let's briefly review them.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("Obamacare") is pretty simple at its core. It takes billions of dollars in healthcare funds that would normally go to the elderly through Medicare, and redistributes them to millions of previously uninsured people ( The poor and uninsured in the U.S. are mostly new arrivees and blacks and Hispanics, and they are the folks who will disproportionately receive the medical handouts that the middle class will finance under the president's plan. Think of it like EBT cards and Los Angeles public schools, only hundreds of times bigger. The folks paying (mostly white and middle class) will be required to further subsidize people who have had families they can't afford. Only this time, they will be doing it on a level that encompasses over 15% of our country's economic output.

Insofar as the President's undeclared war on state immigration law enforcement efforts, Mr. Obama has used Eric Holder and the Department of Justice like a spiked club. Indeed, he has repeatedly taken broad swings at states whose officials have demonstrated the audacity to try to chase off the burgeoning illegal immigrant population that Washington won't. Utah, Georgia, Alabama and Arizona are only some of the states that find themselves embroiled in multi-million dollar litigation with a federal government that does nothing to stop the loss of billions of taxpayer dollars consumed by illegal aliens and their offspring. As Americans grapple with an unemployment rate much higher than the one that existed before Mr. Obama took up residence on Pennyslvania Avenue, the president's operatives have hounded Joe Arpaio with inane accusations of "racial profiling" (as if a person' skin color or ethnicity is relevant when a limited English speaker is utilizing stolen Social Security numbers or presents a Matricula Consular card to a highway patrol officer in lieu of a drivers license), and attacked all state efforts to have voters identify themselves with state issued (and usually free) identification cards.

Should this desired "change" come as a surprise? Not to people who have looked at Barack Obama, the company he has kept, and what he has written. He said on the campaign trail that he wanted to "spread the wealth." Well, if fully implemented, his healthcare "fix" will achieve that at a level previously unseen in American history. Further, he attended church services presided over by Jeremiah Wright for twenty years and had the pastor officiate at important Obama family ceremonies. There's a saying, folks: Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are. Keep that in mind when you stop to consider what the president thinks of the American white middle class.

If you believe another major legalization effort for millions of undereducated and fundamentally dishonest people from Mexico and El Salvador (only this time, a lot bigger) is good for America, the incumbent should definitely receive your vote. If you believe that struggling middle class families have an ongoing obligation to subsidize people who had children they could never have afforded to pay for on their own, a second term for President Obama is certainly what you should want. However, if you're of the opinion that immigration and employment laws should not be treated as "optional," and that the U.S. takes in more than its share of legal immigrants each year, then change is what will be required in 2012.

Sunday, November 6, 2011

National Remembrance Day For Victims Of Illegal Aliens (2011)

Thousands of Americans are crippled or killed each year by individuals who have no business being inside the United States. These appallingly high numbers are only possible because government officials largely treat immigration and employment laws as "optional." Take the thousands of politicians who can't be bothered to see federal statutes enforced, and add office-holding outright illegal alien cheerleaders such as Gil Cedillo, Antonio Villaraigosa, Linda Sanchez, John McCain, Rick Perry, Luis Gutierrez, George W. Bush (a former office holder), Thomas Menino and Deval Patrick, and you have millions of people unlawfully in the U.S. who would never have been given residency through legal channels.

The costs of illegal immigration are well known, however, the identities of some who pay a steeper price than others are often not.

As this is National Remembrance Day, we at will recall two of them.

In 2006, Tyler Lundin was 19 years old and driving his Toyota Tacoma through his hometown Antelope Valley, located in the high desert north of Los Angeles. Unfortunately for Tyler, another person sharing the roads with him that day was Wilfredo Brizuela, a driver lacking a license, sobriety and legal presence in the U.S. Brizuela blew through an intersection light and promptly plowed his Honda Civic into Lundin's vehicle. Tyler Lundin was transported to Providence Holy Cross Medical Center where he succumbed to "major head injuries." Brizuela, meanwhile, had to be detained by three passers by. One of the people who grabbed the drunk driver informed law enforcement who responded to the scene of Lundin's killing that "The guy didn't have any papers, so he tried to take off."

A little over three years ago, Jamiel Shaw had just spoken to his father by phone and advised him he was coming home. Shaw was returning from an orientation/presentation for promising athletes bound for college football programs. Although Shaw was less than a block away from his family's house, he didn't make it. An illegal alien with an extensive criminal record, Pedro Espinoza, had just been released from an L.A. area jail. Espinoza used his recently acquired freedom to grab a gun and shoot Jamiel Shaw.

Since Jamiel's death, his family members have unsuccessfully 1) run for local public office in an effort to reduce crime in L.A., 2) attempted to persuade local L.A. officials to stop providing sanctuary for violent illegal aliens, 3)  attempted to place a measure on the ballot allowing law enforcement to arrest known gang members for immigration violations, and 4) sued Los Angeles for negligently creating conditions that resulted in Jamiel's needless death.

Since Jamiel's death, Pedro Espinoza has 1) assaulted a deputy sheriff, 2) slashed the face of a handcuffed jail inmate with a razor, and 3) instigated a riot in lock-up.

If this passage hasn't been sad, enraging or depressing enough for you, we invite anyone reading the blog to google: killed by illegal alien.

Saturday, November 5, 2011

Why Car Wash Unionizing Won't Catch On

Most baby boomers probably have at least a dim recollection of the campy "Car Wash" movie from the 1970's. The film's plot centered around a day in the life of the mostly African-American employees at a car wash in Southern California. The movie wouldn't be made today, of course, and not because of the passings of George Carlin and Richard Pryor, but because you don't see any brothers at car washes anymore in L.A.  As with construction, auto body shops and maintenance businesses, black workers are almost entirely extinct in Los Angeles.  Just like the fast food service industry, most such positions are occupied by Hispanic illegal aliens and their children.

Illegal aliens have replaced African-Americans in low skill jobs during the past quarter century because they rarely complain and can be paid less. Nowhere is this more evident than at local car washes.

Of course, when you have an illiterate, undocumented work force, all sorts of abuses by employers can take place. The illegal immigrant cheerleaders at Clean Car Wash L.A. have complained of incidents of bullying of employees, workers being paid only in tips, hazardous working conditions, and a lack of break time. For the record, we have no doubt that most or all of these accusations are true. If you allow people to violate the law, illegal alien workers or employers of illegal aliens, they will take advantage of it. That's human nature.

Consequently, the Cesar Chavez and Saul Alinsky inspired folks at the National Day Labor Organizing Network, the UCLA Labor Center, and other "economic justice" outfits have undertaken a major community organizing effort to start unionizing car washes. And in recent weeks, they have enjoyed their first major success ( The ownership of Bonus Car Wash, in ultra-liberal Santa Monica, has recognized the United Steel Workers as the certified collective bargaining representative of the illegals who scrub, wipe, and vacuum automobiles at their establishment.

Now we will mostly sidestep belaboring the obvious point that none of this unionizing would be necessary if the employees were legally in the country because legal actions and litigation would have put an end to the above-described employer misconduct years ago. Instead, it's better to briefly explain why efforts to unionize car washes en masse are doomed to fail, and it's really this simple:

Illegal aliens serve four basic purposes in America. One, they provide cheap, compliant and malleable labor. Two, they produce votes and influence for various special interest groups and politicians. Three, they buy things and provide consumption for American businesses and government entities. Four, they attend and contribute to churches.

Of course, by unionizing, the employers will now have to start treating the illegals like regular American workers, which means less employer control and higher costs. This situation will drive up prices because it directly interferes with Purpose Number One.

It's hardly rocket science. If you own a business, you want illegals because they cost less and don't cause problems. When they don't and they do, there's almost no point employing them anymore. The car wash industry in California is competitive, however, and most people who own such businesses like having their near slave labor workforce, so we at have a bold prediction (and we're really going out on a limb with this one!):  Illegals from Latin America will continue to work at car washes in L.A. and most of them won't be unionized.

Sunday, October 9, 2011

Welcome To California, The Lunatic State

California is the nation's most populous state and can boast of the following:

- An unemployment rate 3 percentage points higher than the national average.
- An illegal alien population over twice the size of any other state's illegal alien population.
- An annual state deficit over twice the size of any other state's annual deficit.
- A shortfall of funding that has closed 30% of California's state parks.
- A shortfall of funding that is resulting in the termination of thousands of court employees and closing of dozens of criminal and civil courtrooms.
- Insufficient funds for maintaining California's enormous prison population, resulting in the early release of thousands of felons.
- Over 30% of welfare recipients in the United States.

And what steps have elected officials in the state capitol in Sacramento taken this month, to address the Golden State's myriad problems?

Legislation making California the first state in the nation to make the use of tanning beds, by minors, illegal:

Legislation making Calfornia the first state in the nation to offer college financial aid to illegal aliens:

Would the last sane taxpaying citizen to exit the state please turn out the lights?

Monday, October 3, 2011

The Alienation Of America's Middle Class

We here at are big fans of the writings of Pat Buchanan. There is a relentless essence of common sense and practicality that weaves through all his ideas that make their way on to printed pages. For that reason, like the conservative nerds we are, we jumped at the chance to scan some of the pages made public from his new book, that will be released later this month.

Here are a couple excerpts from his most recent work, Suicide Of A Superpower:

From pages 160 and 161

Why the alienation in Middle America?

In their lifetimes, they have seen their Christian faith purged from schools their taxes paid for and mocked in movies and on TV. They have seen their factories shuttered and jobs outsourced. They have seen trillions of tax dollars go for Great Society programs, but have seen no Great Society, only crime, rising illegitimacy, and rising dropout rates. They watch on cable as illegal aliens walk into their country and are rewarded with free health care and education for their kids, take away jobs from U.S. workers, and carry Mexican flags while marching in American cities to demand U.S. citizenship.

They see Wall Street banks bailed out and read that the bankers used the billions not to lend but to trade, and that the bonuses are back. They see their government shoveling billions out to Fortune 500 companies and banks to rescue the country from a financial crisis created by that same government, and by those same companies and banks. They sense they are losing their country. And they are right.

From page 400

Our intellectual, cultural, and political elites are today engaged in one of the most audacious and ambitious experiments in history. They are trying to transform a Western Christian republic into an egalitarian democracy made up of all tribes, races, creeds, and cultures of planet Earth. They have dethroned our God, purged our cradle of faith from public life, and repudiated the Judeo-Christian moral code by which previous generations sought to live.

They have declared men and women to be basically the same, that all voluntary sexual relations are morally equal, that the traditional family is but one social option, that men can marry men and women can marry women, that race is a social construct invented by bigots bent on repressing others, that all are endowed with the intelligence and ability to succeed in the most competitive society on earth. All religions and all "lifestyles" are equal and all are to be equally respected. These elites will fight to ensure that a mosque is built at Ground Zero with the same ferocity as they will ensure that no Nativity scene ever appears on the National Mall. If there is an inequality of rewards in society, they believe, this is the residue of a reactionary America, the fruit of societal injustice, and it is the moral duty of our modern state to rectify that injustice and mandate equality. Those who reject these truths are benighted and bigoted.

Our secular elites believe in this revolution. The people never did. Middle America detests it. Thus it has had to be imposed from above, by judges, bureaucrats, professors, and those who control the content of our culture. One part of America believes we are headed for a wonderful new age. The silent majority thinks the country has lost its mind.

Pat Buchanan and St. Martin's Press are unaffiliated with Neither of these entities is responsible for excerpts of Mr. Buchanan's upcoming book having been placed on this page. For those interested in more ideas and opinions from Pat Buchanan, you may click on the following link: . Readers interested in additional materials released by St. Martin's Press can find them here:

Saturday, October 1, 2011

Alabama Has Exposed The Left's Immigration Lies

We can't possibly deport all those people! Do you know how much that would cost?

Immigration laws can only be enforced by the federal government!

Really? Is that so?

Unlike folks in California, Texas and Nevada, the people residing in Alabama decided they didn't want to be victimized by illegal immigration. The prospect of deplorable public schools, unpaid emergency room hospital bills, and hordes of unlicensed drivers apparently did not sit well with American citizens in the "Heart of Dixie." Consequently, the state stood up, passed legislation designed to curb the influx of the undocumented, withstood the gratuitous and inane accusations of "racism," and promptly exposed common lies peddled by scores of politicians and illegal alien advocates. The ones depicted above are just a sampling of the misrepresentations repeatedly voiced by people who are dying to hand out another amnesty. Sometimes they call it "The DREAM Act," and on other occasions they'll refer to their legalization plans as "earned citizenship" or "comprehensive immigration reform." Whatever dressed-up term they utilize, among the lies they invariably mouth in support are that we could never deport millions of illegal aliens and that states cannot regulate immigration, only the federal government has that authority.

And to those who have been making these arguments for years, Alabama has proven you wrong.

Things we learned in September:

1) You don't have to deport illegal aliens to rid yourselves of many of them. Even a whiff of immigration enforcement causes large numbers of the undocumented to run back to Mexico or states that accommodate illegals. Further, when they leave, they take a lot of their anchor babies with them.

2) States are not without authority to do many things to ensure that illegal immigration does not flourish. Immigration enforcement is not exclusively the domain of the federal government.

What is the moral of the story that is currently playing out?

Being saturated with illegal aliens is a choice. It's not something Obama, Napolitano or Bush can force upon state residents. When you elect representatives who hand out in-state tuition to illegal aliens, institute "hands off" policies for police like the LAPD's Special Order 40, proclaim large areas to be "sanctuary cities," and insist that people unlawfully here are "immigrants," you wind up with South Gate, Panorama City, Maywood, Pico Rivera, Fresno, Lancaster, Oxnard, Fontana, Hesperia, Pomona, Huntington Park, Corona, Van Nuys, Canoga Park, Santa Ana, annual deficits of billions of dollars, and the current state of the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Alabama officials have chosen otherwise, and now the Americans who reside there can look forward to avoiding the fate of The Golden State.

Monday, September 19, 2011

Support! Support America!

The sad truth is that not all Americans can match the dedication to this country displayed by Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore. Indeed, not everyone we know or see in our daily lives has pledged his support to President Obama. These same individuals, many of whom were still desperately clinging to their guns and religion during the '08 campaign, now pass on lies and smears about our nation's leader.

The airwaves, social networks and the blogs on the internet have been filled with hate speech they ridiculously try to justify as political dissent.

Do you know who some of these people are? Will you tell us where they can be found? Or are you simply going to stand by while they attack what's best about America and try to hide behind an anachronistic Constitution?

Your President needs you. Progressive policies and forward-thinking ideas must be preserved. We urge you to help defend your country at this critical juncture in our nation's proud history. Please, report people who speak, post or write any of the following suggestions or lies, at .

Recent stimulus packages have made the economy worse

Government has become far too big and intrusive

Enforcing employment laws against those here unlawfully would create millions of jobs

Foreign leaders have little respect for our president

Government money given to Solyndra was a political payoff to major Obama campaign contributors

The border is not safer and more secure than ever

Actions by the U.S. military must be preceded by a declaration of war, by Congress

Obamacare will result in lower quality care at a much higher cost

Comprehensive immigration reform is really a dressed-up amnesty

President Obama was not unaware of Jeremiah Wright's beliefs and sermons

There are at least 20 million illegal aliens in the United States

Mayor McCheese has a better chance of creating desperately needed jobs

This message has not been brought to you in any way, shape or form by Obama For America.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

The Non-Answers Speak Volumes About The GOP And Immigration

During yesterday's Republican presidential candidate debate in Florida, a question was directly put to the assembled politicians:  "What would you do to remove the illegal immigrants from our country?"

In response, we were told lots of things that people who have been watching the GOP debates already know: Rick Santorum is proud to the be child of an Italian immigrant. Governor Perry thinks border fencing is appropriate in some areas, and not others. Governor Romney favors a more extensive border fence than than Governor Perry, and Newt Gingrich believes English should be the official language utilized by our government.

What we didn't learn, however, is what they would do to remove the illegal immigrants from our country.

This question came from a Tea Party member in Cincinnati, who probably wouldn't have had to ask it if it had been answered when it was offered up to the  candidates a week earlier, in California.  More specifically, on September 7, MSNBC trotted out a journalist from Telemundo who put this question to Michelle Bachmann: "Let's say that in 2012 or 2013 there's a fence, the border is secure, gasoline is $2.00 a gallon. What do you do then with eleven million people, as the Speaker says, many of whom have U.S. born children here, what do you do?"

In response, the congresswoman spoke about her discussions with Cubans, the crisis in Mexico, and many other things that were something other than an answer. To his credit, the reporter followed up her song and dance response with: "A quick thirty second rebuttal, on the specific question, the fence is built, the border's under control, what do you do with eleven and a half million people who are here without documents and with U.S. born children?"

Not only did Ms. Bachmann offer up more of the same evasiveness, none of the other candidates, many of whom are desperate for more face time in front of the cameras, gave the response that would have brought the conservative crowd to its feet: Illegal aliens will be removed from this country. Some by deportation proceedings, and others will leave voluntarily after my administration cracks down on employers of illegal aliens with laws already on the books, and when we implement nationwide use of the E-Verify system.

Why are we hearing, instead, endless refrains about not having "that conversation" until the border is secured? Why is no Republican debate participant capitalizing on this wonderful opportunity for additional media attention and way to endear himself to the conservative base? Simple, because none of them intends to do it, and no one wants to be accused of flip-flopping after he receives the GOP nomination.

Mainstream GOP presidential candidates are 1) owned by big business interests, and 2) intent upon winning a decent share of the Latino vote in the general election. Further, there are some, like Governor Huntsman, Congressman Paul, Speaker Gingrich and Governor Perry, who clearly believe that making today's illegal aliens permanent additions to our country is the right thing to do. Their records as elected officials, and/or writings, have already answered the questions, listed above, that they have made no effort to answer responsively in front of conservative audiences.

As for the others, whose positions are less clear based upon their actions as elected office holders, it doesn't matter what they believe. What is clearly most important to them is the ability to swing to the center after the Republican primary. Best interests of the country? Defending the rights of people who have played by the rules and applied to enter legally? Making jobs available with deportations? Reducing the burdens on public schools? Removing recipients of WIC benefits and Section 8 housing? Standing for principle and the Rule of Law?  Sorry folks, as we have seen, these are clearly not the priorities of any Republican appearing on these debate forum stages. If they were, the answers to the direct questions (listed above) would have been a lot different.  Unfortunately, what they're not saying is telling you everything you need to know.

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Another Illegal Alien Nestled In The Obama Family Tree

President Obama is either a psychic or God has a sense of humor about U.S. immigration concerns. Given the way his family has almost immediately benefitted from his recent effort to sidestep the will of Congress, there just doesn't seem to be another plausible explanation for the events of the past couple weeks.

Uncle Omar
Here's what happened: On August 18, Janet Napolitano proudly announced that the Department of Homeland Security will be practicing a revised policy. Essentially, through the use of "prosecutorial discretion," her agency will only pursue deportation of illegal aliens who have previously been deported or have a record of serious criminal activity.  In substance, President Obama just turned the rest of the country into Los Angeles. More specifically, an illegal alien will pretty much have to kill, rape or steal something significant before he gets even a sniff from immigration enforcement authorities. This was widely understood, by Republicans and Democrats alike, to be the President's attempt to win back Latino voters who have been peeved with him about his failure to deliver the amnesty he promised while campaigning back in 2008.

Aunt Zeituni 
Then, only days after Napolitano's announcement, in an apparent attempt to celebrate the de facto amnesty his nephew just handed out to millions of illegal aliens in the U.S., Onyango Obama allegedly got liquored up and raced around the streets of Framingham, Massachusetts, before being pulled over and cited for driving under the influence. In fairness to Uncle Omar (as he was referred to in "Dreams From My Father"), it should be noted that he has yet to be convicted of the charge, and asserted after blowing a .14 into a breathalyzer that there was nothing wrong with the way he was operating his Mitsubishi. Further, he believes the police officers, who claim they had to slam on their brakes to avoid being hit by his vehicle, are mistaken because he heard no squealing tires at the time the collision was avoided.

Reportedly, when Uncle Omar was being booked he was advised that he had a right to a phone call, and the arrestee indicated his desire to contact the White House.  Insofar as the rest of the booking process at the Framingham Police Station was concerned, it was quickly discovered that Onyango Obama is in violation of a deportation order that dates back almost twenty years.

If this is beginning to sound familiar, it's probably because Onyango's sister (the President's aunt), Zeituni Onyango, was also discovered to have violated a deportation order when she was residing in government funded housing and receiving government checks, during the time the President was making his initial run for the White House (Aunt Zeituni has since been granted asylum which magically occurred after Obama won the election in '08).

Since obtaining residency rights in the U.S., Aunt Zeituni's most significant contribution to the country has been to publicly complain how her taxpayer-funded life in the U.S. has been a nightmare, but that's a story for another time (A video of Aunt Zeituni voicing her grievances about her life in the United States:

Billy Carter
In retrospect, as events have unfolded, the President's actions are beginning to make sense. After all, he has good reason to want the rest of the U.S. to be more like Southern California. The reality is, he's very much like many Angelenos. Think about it. Barack Obama has multiple members of his family who are "sin papeles" (without papers) and receive all sorts of goodies from American taxpayers. Further, these folks can't seem to be bothered to abide by our laws regarding residency and driving. Lastly, the chances of any member of law enforcement doing anything about their illegal presence is close to zero. In short, the Obama Family would fit right in to Maywood, Pico Rivera, Huntington Park, Panorama City and many other Los Angeles neighborhoods that used to seem like parts of the United States.

If this complete disregard for the Rule of Law and common sense is troubling to you, we hope you will at least take some solace in the fact that former President Jimmy Carter is probably sitting on a porch in Georgia enjoying a great sense of relief. After all, prior to the shenanigans perpetrated by Obama's merry pair of undocumented relatives, Billy Carter was pretty much considered to be the most embarrassing presidential family member in modern history.

Friday, August 26, 2011

Throwing Tantrums And Throwing Babies

California Illegal Aliens Recently In The News

Pictured in this entry are Jorge Herrera and Sonia Hermosillo, people unlawfully in this country who have been making Southern California their home. The latter recently came to the public's attention when she allegedly tossed her infant from the fourth floor of a parking structure in Orange County. The former was desperately seeking the public's attention when he tossed a fit in front of a federal immigration building in L.A.

Jorge is demanding that we give him, and those similarly situated, legal residency, whereas Sonia would probably like nothing more at the moment than to be released from county jail.

What do these two have in common?

1. In addition to ignoring immigration regulations, neither one seems to care much for our nation's laws.

2.  Jorge and Sonia have no business being inside the United States.

3.  They're both costing California taxpayers a pretty penny.

In fairness to the former mother (her infant recently died from his injuries), there may be something wrong with her. In addition to her illegal presence in our country, that is. Based upon what has been reported, it is likely her legal team will assert some manner of diminished capacity defense as it has been asserted that she is suffering from depression. This is in contrast to Jorge, the Harbor College student who quite knowingly blocked an entrance to a federal immigration facility while being cheered on by members of the Brown Berets and National Day Laborer Organizing Network.

What isn't in question, however, is the tab these two are running up in government funded services. Assuming Jorge has attended public schools since arriving in California at the age of four, his grade school education has cost taxpayers well over $100,000.  This price tag, of course, doesn't include the subsidized reduced college tuition rates for illegal aliens (AB 540) he's been receiving at the community college he attends, nor the law enforcement response expenses when he periodically takes part in public demonstrations ( to insist that he is entitled to stay here and be given a green card and social security number.

As for Sonia, well, anyone who has ever seen a medical bill can take a guess at the size of the tab she will be foisting upon Californians after her psychiatric evaluations, medical treatment, incarceration and trial expenses, and infant's medical bills come due.  And, of course, we shouldn't figure in any maternity hospital costs for her pregnancy or WIC benefits she may have been receiving for her American-born infant, because it is common knowledge that illegal aliens all have medical insurance and don't take advantage of government food subsidy programs for children they couldn't afford in the first place.

We at are well aware, of course, that many on the west coast hold sentiments that differ from ours regarding the presence of illegal immigrants. For those reading this passage who feel a degree of sympathy for Jorge and Sonia, please take comfort in the knowledge that under the new guidelines for "selective prosecution" of immigration law violators, as recently put forth by the DHS, the chances of either of these two being deported any time soon are miniscule to none. In fact, if Sonia is acquitted at trial, and Jose ever winds up getting collared at one of his public exhibitions of self expression, they're both excellent candidates to apply for and receive work permits under the new standards authored by the Obama administration.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Barack's Best Amnesty

Five groups were key in the election of our President, three years ago:

1.  Voters intent upon repudiating the eight years of the Bush Administration.
2.  Blacks
3.  Latinos
4.  College educated white females
5.  Independents

Fifteen months before Obama's second round with the national electorate, however, the landscape has changed significantly. Group One no longer exists. Group Two is enduring a 16% unemployment rate.  Group Three is composed of many people who are hopping mad that the President has failed to deliver the amnesty he promised, on the campaign trail, during his first year in office; and Groups Four and Five are being buffeted about by a plummeting stock market and a greatly devalued U.S. dollar.

Let's be realistic, if a presidential election were held next week, Barack Obama would be a Dead Incumbent Walking. The members of the groups, listed above, who propelled him to victories in many swing states, would cast their ballots for him in reduced numbers. Additionally, the President could expect to receive even fewer votes from the groups that supported him in low numbers the first time around.  Thanks to Obamacare, among Employed White Males and Voters 65 and Over, the former Illinois senator is viewed as even more of an extremist fringe character than he was in 2008.

In short, Mr. Obama must re-energize his base if he wants a chance to serve a second term. Given the amount of debt he has heaped upon the nation, however, there's little chance job growth will drastically improve. Further, the stock market is subject to financial fortunes overseas and a host of factors over which he has little or no control. Finally, he'd rather die than scrap his widely derided socialized medicine scheme, which he believes will be his great legacy ... so that leaves the amnesty.  There are just two problems: The economy stinks and there hasn't been anything close to a majority of voters who have voiced support for the concept of rewarding immigration and employment law violators with residency rights.

What's a President to do?  Pretend he's Congress, that's what!  More specifically, Barack Obama has authorized the Department of Homeland Security to essentially stop seeking deportations of illegal alien college students (along with many others currently in the country unlawfully). If you can't get the law changed, just stop enforcing the parts you find politically inconvenient!  In substance, the DHS will no longer be seeking the removal of illegal aliens brought here as children or those pursuing higher education. To get hauled into deportation proceedings, one is probably going to have to start killing, robbing or raping. And what of the 300,000 people currently in deportation proceedings? We've already been told that most of them can expect to receive work permits.

It's not quite the amnesty he or the illegals wanted, but hey, it's the best Mr. Obama can do under the circumstances. Truth be told, he probably never thought it would be this difficult. The DREAM Act was submitted to Congress twice during his presidency but those silly legislators just wouldn't pass it! Resultingly, rather than accept the will of the people as voiced by their elected representatives, he does an end around by forsaking his oath to uphold the Constitution and enforce federal laws.

Now, the only things that remains to be seen are how millions of Hispanic voters react, and just what other chicanery the President will conjure up in his desperate attempt to motivate his base of loyalist supporters to vote for him again next year.

For a peek at the level of support and excitement the President formerly received from many in the Latino community, click on the following link: 

Saturday, August 13, 2011

Rick Perry Aids And Abets Illegal Immigration

With much fanfare today, Texas Governor Rick Perry proclaimed his candidacy for the GOP presidential nomination (  Like all aspirants to the White House, the former Democrat intends to feature his successes and political accomplishments. As he will be attempting to appeal to a conservative audience, however, he probably won't highlight many of the things listed below. In fact, he's likely to try to minimize or outright deny them, while simultaneously attempting to feature some seemingly pro-law enforcement steps he's conveniently taken just prior to throwing his hat in the ring for the presidency. 

The reality about Rick Perry, however, is not in question and is simply a matter of record. A portion of that record is as follows:

- Texas is second only to California in the size of its illegal alien population. During the decade Rick Perry has acted as Governor, the Lone Star State's number of illegal aliens and anchor babies has consistently grown.

- Governor Perry has rejected Arizona's SB 1070 immigration law enforcement measure, describing it as inappropriate for Texas.

- Rick Perry acted as the chairman of Al Gore's Texas campaign to obtain the Democratic Party presidential nomination, in 1988.

- Governor Perry has repeatedly voiced his opposition to building a border fence. He has derided the notion of completing the barrier as "nonsense" and "idiocy."

- Governor Perry signed a bill granting taxpayer subsidized in-state college tuition rates to illegal aliens in Texas. Perry happily boasted of this accomplishment when making an official visit to Mexico.

- The Governor from Texas has opposed the use of E-Verify, a free system available to employers that allows them to check whether or not they are hiring someone who can legally work in the U.S.

- While speaking in Mexico in 2007, Perry called for a "... free flow of individuals between these two countries who want to work and want to be an asset to our country and to Mexico.”

Governor Perry has endured criticism from some as being similar to another Texas governor, George W. Bush. We at feel that's unfair, however. After all, George W. Bush never lied about his desires to accomodate, and ultimately grant legalization to, millions of illegal aliens. He was very up front about his intention to achieve "comprehensive immigration reform." Perhaps a more realistic comparison is made between Rick Perry and another faux conservative, John McCain.  Senator McCain engaged in much the same type of about-face, tough-talk-on-immigration and empty posturing, when he desperately attempted to salvage his senate seat last year, as Rick Perry has in the months leading up to his presidential run.

Readers who would like more insight into Governor Perry's immigration views and positions are invited to click on the following link:

Wednesday, August 10, 2011's "Drop The I-Word" Campaign

In polite and educated contemporary society, you can't say ni--er or sp--. Further, Jews can't be referred to as k--es, and it's really not acceptable to call an Italian a d--o. In the past few years, even fag--t has fallen into disfavor. These are considered taboo terms, and most Americans agree that they constitute a form of profanity.

And since people who use them are commonly frowned upon, you can bet your last dollar that many who passionately desire another immigration amnesty, would love to add the terms illegal aliens and illegal immigrants to this list.

In fact, the folks at feel so strongly about this topic, they have sponsored a Drop The I-Word Campaign, that is endorsed with a spiffy website ( and nicely produced video (

Now, in fairness to self-styled progressives, the people at, who describe their website as one that provides award-winning reporting, analysis, and solutions to today's racial justice issues, are hardly the first illegal alien cheerleaders to promote this notion.

A few years prior to his recent felony conviction in L.A. Superior Court, Nativo Lopez, of the Mexican-American Political Association, burst into anger on national cable television when he was asked a question about "a boycott of all illegal aliens in this country." He bellowed that illegal aliens is a derisive term. He added that "You don't say kike, patty, WOP, OK, you don't say nigger!" Lopez went on to scold the show's host that "You're using language that's offensive to me and offensive to my people!"

Fast forward to 2010 when Janet Murguia was part of a well-organized (and successful) campaign to have the Lou Dobbs Show taken off CNN. Dobbs, someone who was well known for his opposition to illegal immigration, was described by Murguia, who heads the National Council for La Raza, as someone "handing hate a microphone."

Now some listening to the comments of Mr. Lopez and Ms. Murguia might be a bit befuddled. Why are they arguing about the language?  If illegal aliens are so great, why don't they tell us how important they are to the nation, and necessary for our continued prosperity?  And the answer to that question is: They already did that and it didn't work.

That's why they're now hurling accusations and complaining of "hate speech."

The reality is that people who want a broad scale amnesty for millions of illegal aliens have been completely unable to persuade a majority of American voters. In fact, they really haven't even gotten close, although it certainly hasn't been due to a lack of effort.  Specifically, U.S. citizens have been told that illegal aliens:

A) ...only take the jobs that Americans won't do.
B) ... are just another addition to a nation built by immigrants.
C) ... only came here for a better life.
D) ... are doing what American citizens would do, if they had been born into poverty in another country.
E) ... will be a net gain of over a trillion dollars if they're put on "a pathway to citizenship."
F) ... are crucial to the health of the American economy.
G) ... only come here to work.
H) ... are a fundamental component of a multicultural society of which we can be proud.
I) ... who are legalized by "comprehensive immigration reform," won't really be receiving the benefits of an amnesty. Rather, they'll be acquiring "earned citizenship."

And all of these assertions (and others) have failed in the marketplace of ideas. Sure, some people buy into them, but most don't. Republicans and Democrats alike have tried to sell this package, and people simply haven't been lining up to buy it. National polls repeatedly show that a majority of Americans want current immigration and employment laws enforced.

Well, that didn't work, so what's next?  After all, community organizers and SEIU thugs can't be everywhere to intimidate Tea Partiers and conservatives, so how are we going to manage the national debate? Simple, and right from the George Orwell playbook -- You don't have a right to speak about it freely, and say derisive things about those here unlawfully, because your language and ideas are unacceptable.

More simply, intimidation and speech regulation are the far left's substitutes for a convincing argument.  These things are intended to silence those who disagree.

In support of this censorship effort, people who visit are presented with a trio of substantively bankrupt assertions. The term "illegal" is 1) racist,  2) dehumanizing, and 3) a legally inaccurate term that confuses the debate and is never used by judges and attorneys

Almost needless to say, these positions are transparent nonsense. Firstly, "illegal alien" describes a foreign national who is unlawfully in the United States. Illegal aliens come in every skin tone and members of the public are more than aware of this. Proponents of the "racism" argument will assert that although illegal aliens come in different colors, most of the undocumented here are Latinos, and therefore it is associated with people wrapped in brown skin.  That's true. Most illegal aliens are Latin Americans ... and the large majority of serial killers are white, and a disproportionately high number of people engaging in security fraud offenses are Jews.  Does that mean "serial killer" and "stock swindler" are now bigoted hate references for caucasians and Hebrews?

Secondly, "illegal alien" is hardly a "dehumanizing" term. Everyone knows what an illegal alien is. When a listener hears the phrase, a picture pops into his head, and it isn't of an insect, bear, reptile or little green man hopping out of a flying saucer. When people think of illegal aliens, they think of large families, children in need of schooling, and people bearing a host of consumer wants and desires - all very homo sapiens specific traits.  Indeed, there are pejorative words used to refer to those who come here unlawfully. Cockroaches, locusts, and parasites are all derisive references to the undocumented that suggest sub-human characterstics. "Illegal aliens," however, falls well outside the boundaries of the territory occupied by such ill-concieved language.

Thirdly, there is nothing "confusing" or "inaccurate" about "illegal aliens."  The general public is not unclear or "mixed-up" about what the term means.  Further, the assertion that legal practitioners don't use the terms "illegal aliens" or "illegal immigrants" is outright fiction, period (

In short, free expression seems to be a priority of illegal alien advocates when they cheer on the undocumented who parade through our streets, waving foreign flags, and demanding legalization. Any pronouncements by these marchers that opponents are "Hitler," "the Klan" or "Nazis" are just part of a robust debate protected by our nation's First Amendment. Start talking about "illegal immigrants," however, and clearly, the person voicing his opinion is conveying "hate" that needs to be restricted.

It is our hope that this blog's readers will see the Murguias, Lopezes and folks for what they are. Would-be bullies who would love to pressure you into just keeping quiet on a topic about which they don't have a chance of winning a real argument.

Sunday, August 7, 2011

What's Wrong With This Picture (Part II)?

If you're feeling a sense of disbelief about the recent downgrade of our country's credit worthiness, you're probably not a Californian. Here on the west coast, we've been leading the country in budget shortfall for some time. Consequently, all this debt deluge is sorta' old hat to folks in the Golden State. California has an annual budget deficit over twice the size of any other state's, and its residents have endured cutbacks and closures as a result. The bills for irresponsible government are coming due in California, and we have been witnessing the types of austerity and roll backs in government services that the rest of the nation will be experiencing, as a matter of necessity, very shortly.

That's not to say, however. that our state has become the model of fiscal responsibility. The same left-wing nitwits who plunged us into this fiscal abyss are still running the state, and continue to conduct themselves in a fashion that would leave any rational person wondering exactly who these politicians believe they represent.

Case in point, here are three recent local news stories or notices, all related to California's response to financial problems:

1.  Services to California's disabled, mentally unsound, and elderly are slashed as part of Governor Brown's new budget.

2.  40% of California's state parks will be closed by September, due to cuts accepted by Governor Brown to address his state's budget problems.

3.  Governor Brown signs the California Dream Act; legislation from lawmakers in Sacramento that will provide financial aid to California's illegal alien college students.

Take your time. Read these three pieces, and then do as the staff members of this website did, for the second time in as many months. Ask yourself, "What's wrong with this picture?"

Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Public Notice: / San Diego Tea Party is a privately run website that is unaffiliated with the San Diego Tea Party. No staff member of is a current or former member of the San Diego Tea Party or Chula Vista Tea Party. Further, the first above-listed entity has never partnered, associated or otherwise collaborated on any projects, writings or other endeavors, with either of these latter two entities.

On Sunday, July 24, 2011, a representative of was present in the City of Los Angeles for the purpose of filming a political rally.  Later that evening, the footage shot on that occasion was edited, organized and produced into three separate clips/videos, by the same individual who shot the film.  Shortly after the video was uploaded on to the Youtube channel, GeauxNOSaints, under the title Critics of the So. Central Los Angeles Tea Party, said video was non-permissively copied, re-edited, and made available to the public.  As we learned, one or more members of the San Diego Tea Party engaged in the above-described copying, re-editing, and ultimately posted it on the San Diego Tea Party's Youtube channel.

The San Diego Tea Party version of the video is violative of multiple provisions of federal copyright law. Further, it is a somewhat inaccurate depiction of the events that were recorded this past Sunday. More specifically, one or more of the persons appearing in the pirated version voices remarks that are presented out of context, and the events depicted in said version are chronologically inaccurate.

Once this matter came to the attention of the staff of, remedial/corrective measures were instigated immediately.  Despite our best efforts, however, the copyright violative version of the video appeared (prior to removal) on the following sites:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; TheHayRide;;;;;;;

Most likely, this is not an exhaustive list, but it is what we were able to find, so far, and remediate. From what we have been able to gather, the San Diego Tea Party video appeared at these sites under approximately a half dozen varying titles.

Again, no license to copy, augment, modify, edit, distribute, or represent as San Diego Tea Party material, was either requested of, or granted by, staff had no control over what was taken and re-edited by one or more members of that organization.

The following video is the original work produced by the staff of Any filmed version of what this video depicts, that varies in any way from what is contained here, was not released or authored by the original filmmaker:

Any further questions about this work, or unlawful derivatives created therefrom, may be sent to's general e-mail address -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

On an informal note, when this matter came to management's attention, we promptly located and contacted a representative of the San Diego Tea Party.

To our knowledge, that is the only contact we've ever had with the San Diego Tea Party.  When this incident began to unfold, we took an informal head count around the office and no one is aware of knowing any member of the San Diego Tea Party.  In fact, we'd never heard of the San Diego Tea Party, until yesterday.

After checking around a bit, the few names we could procure that are associated with the San Diego Tea Party are not any activists with whom we are familiar.

Further, while I was present in front of the Convention Center shooting film, I don't recall seeing any signs or paraphernalia from the San Diego Tea Party. There were members from several Southern California area Tea Party groups in attendance, as well as Minutemen, members of CCIR, Save Our State, and America's Black Shield, however, no one, to our knowledge, from the SDTP.

In short, we simply don't know these characters and this whole thing really hit us out of the blue. We're still scrambling around in an attempt to clean this up, but are committed to making this right. video is straightforward, honest, and always accurately depicts what took place. We do not doctor film, audio, or otherwise edit materials to suggest or infer things that are inaccurate. We deeply appreciate the internet users who utilize this website as a source of information, and will always provide written and audio-visual materials upon which our valuable audience can rely upon as truthful.

Friday, July 22, 2011

The Murder Of Robert Rosas And Border Security

Tomorrow will be the second anniversary of the murder of Border Patrol Agent, Robert Rosas. On July 23, 2009, Rosas was lured to a spot near the border, and attacked, by three Mexican nationals who intended to rob him. It was established at trial that he was shot eight times in the head, neck and torso as he lay on the ground.

Since that time, two very different federal government employees have made divergent remarks:

Janet Napolitano, Director of the Department of Homeland Security:

Public warning near Organ Pipe Nat'l Monument in Ariz.
"We need to be up front and clear about what’s really happening along our borders. Our border communities are safe."

"There is a perception that the border is worse now than it has ever been.  That is wrong.  The border is better now than it has ever been."

Shawn Moran, Vice President of the National Border Patrol Council (statement made at the sentencing of one of Agent Rosas's attackers) :

Funeral for Agent Rosas
"The border, no matter what the agency or the Department of Homeland Security tells you, is not secure. This is a perfect example of what happens.  And people running this agency who say the border is secure ... it is not.  Robert Rosas would be alive if this border was secure."

Robert Rosas and some of the family he left behind

In fairness to Secretary Napolitano, it should be noted that she issued neither of the above statements at the funeral of Agent Rosas, nor at the sentencing of one of the illegal alien criminals by whom he was murdered.  

Of course, that probably had something to do with the fact that she was noticeably absent from both events.

Sunday, July 17, 2011

AB 540 - What's Wrong With This Picture?

If you have children or pay taxes in California, there are two things you should definitely know:

- The cost of tuition for Californians at University of California campuses has more than tripled in the last ten years (

- The cost of tuition for illegal alien Californians at University of California campuses, within the past ten years, dropped over 70% (

As this blog entry is being written, each of the following is also true:

- A U.S. citizen from Phoenix, Reno or Denver, who took 12 units at San Jose State this past semester, paid $7254.00 in tuition and fees.

- An illegal alien who lives in Los Angeles, Watsonville or Santa Clara, who took 12 units at San Jose State this past semester, paid $2790.00 in tuition and fees.

- California community colleges, California State universities, and branches of the University of California, have substantially reduced the number of courses available and laid off staff members due to budget cuts.  The budget cuts have been in excess of 1.2 billion dollars.

- California taxpayers will be subsidizing, at a total cost approaching one million dollars, the reduced tuition rates available to California illegal aliens who take courses this coming year at Santa Ana College, Los Angeles City College, the College of San Mateo, and Harbor College.

- Full-time student tuition for an illegal alien in California, at UC Santa Cruz, will be $11,220.00 this coming year.  This is a substantially reduced rate that is $22,878.00 below the full price. For each illegal alien who attends UCSC and receives this discounted rate, California taxpayers will be paying the extra $22,878.00.

- Approximately 40% of all illegal alien college students in the U.S., live in California.  Every one of them that spent three or more years in one of our state's grade schools, and graduated, is legally entitled to taxpayer subsidized in-state tuition at public colleges and universities.

Perhaps you're wondering how this came about.

In October of 2001, our state legislators in Sacramento passed AB 540. Assembly Bill 540 provides subsidized/reduced tuition for California's illegal alien college students (  It was first implemented in 2002 and if you've been paying taxes in California, you've been picking up the tab for this since that time.

Currently, tuition and costs are skyrocketing at UC's and CSU's.  Lots of middle-class California families are having a hard time affording these increased expenses, or are seeing their children graduate with considerable college loan debt.

California Assemblyman Gil Cedillo
And how are our elected leaders responding to this crisis? California legislators in Sacramento are working to pass AB 130 and AB 131, which will provide scholarships, grants and loans to illegal alien college students ( Governor Brown, when he hasn't been too busy advocating on behalf of tax increases to solve California's budget problems, has indicated that he intends to sign these bills into law when they reach his desk.

Check out the links provided in this blog entry. Read up on AB 540 and the "California DREAM Act," take a moment to look at the recent L.A. Times article about state college tuition increases (, and then ask yourself:  What's wrong with this picture?

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Enforcement Works

The lessons of Georgia and Arizona have been planted squarely in front of any Californian who is willing to look - Enforcement of immigration laws works.

In fact, even the threat or appearance of upcoming enforcement causes many families with illegal aliens to head elsewhere.

"Immigrants" in Georgia, preparing to flee before new enforcement laws take effect

The photograph that appears with this entry is from a recent issue of the Tifton Gazette.  It is a snapshot of  fifty plus Mexican nationals awaiting a bus that is destined for Mexico.  They are standing around in a parking lot of a local supermarket preparing to be driven home.  Keep in mind this is all taking place with a federal court having disallowed/suspended two provisions of Georgia's new immigration enforcement legislation.

Remember, Californians, that we don't have to live as we do. It is a choice we have made.  Our elected officials have set up numerous sanctuary cities, and treated employment  and residency regulations as if they are optional.  The Golden State has the largest population of illegal immigrants in the nation, and it has achieved such for more reasons than geographical location.

The evidence of recent events in Georgia and Arizona reveals that the warnings about having to spend billions on deportation proceedings are absurd.  People who worry about jail and unemployment commonly leave of their own free will.

Thousands of families with illegal aliens fled Arizona, and now they are fleeing Georgia.  Enforcement of laws in California would result in the same reaction, only on a much larger scale.

Article in the Tifton Gazette:

Saturday, June 18, 2011

Something WIC This Way Comes

If you're reading this blog, chances are you are at least somewhat familiar with U.S. immigration issues. You're also probably aware that demographic changes are impacting our nation. More specifically, we have a booming Latino population. What you may not know, however, is for how much of it you're paying.

If you reside in San Jose, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Gwinnett, Houston, Phoenix or Chicago, and are familiar with local public schools, you're probably aware of the dismal graduation rates of illegal aliens and their children, and what de facto babysitting services (with free lunches!) many campuses have become.  However, don't think for a second that you stop subsidizing the upbringing of other people's children when they step off campus.

Case in point, WIC (Women, Infants and Children) is a government program that provides free fruits, vegetables, eggs, milk, cereals, and other healthy foods for children who were brought into this world by parents who can't afford them ( Well, who commonly has children in America these days that they can't afford? Single mothers and Hispanics.

Recently, we learned that Latinos are now 16% of the national population. However, the National Council of La Raza reports that Latinos are 42% of all WIC recipients ( In fact, about 90% of very young Hispanic kids in America have parents who receive WIC vouchers and benefits.

WIC officials assume two things: 1) Lots of people in the United States have had children they can't raise without repeated government handouts, and 2) most of these people are nearly clueless as to how to properly feed a kid. Hey, given the overrepresentation of obesity among Hispanics in the U.S., below age 18, they're probably right.

Now why is this happening? Is there something wrong with people from Latin America? Hardly. People hailing from Mexico and Central America are as capable as anybody else of properly feeding and caring for kids. But, and this is key, the U.S. isn't absorbing "Latin Americans" and their American born children. Our nation is getting the bottom rung of the educational and socio-economic ladder that comes in from El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, etc. Illegal aliens are not commonly bankers, accountants, college grads, stock traders or people who had much success in their homelands. The middle-class and wealthy are not the ones skittering across Arizona deserts, hopping fences and paying coyotes to lead them past the Border Patrol. And they sure aren't the ones who are usually signing up for taxpayer-funded food programs.

Now, you may think that this is all very unfortunate, but you can't be asked, as an American taxpayer, to pay for all this. You have your own expenses and financial problems, right? Please, don't kid yourself. The NCLR has recently blasted e-mails (below) out to that organization's members and supporters. Make no mistake, having Americans continue to pay for WIC is exactly what they expect:

Save Our Babies! Stop Extreme Cuts to the WIC Programs!

The Latino community’s access to WIC, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children, is under immediate threat. The House of Representatives’ Appropriations Committee has voted to cut WIC funding by nearly $650 million, which will result in up to 350,000 mothers, infants, and children falling off the program. Given that Latinos make up two-fifths (42%) of all program participants, the Hispanic community is expected to be among the hardest hit.

WIC has been an essential nutrition assistance program for Latinos and has long been proven to prevent many of the costly conditions that result from hunger and malnutrition. In fact, nearly nine out of ten Latino infants born in the United States participated in WIC in 2008. This program has been especially important for Hispanic expectant mothers, who are less likely to have access to prenatal care and medical information.

Hispanic families became the hungriest families in 2008, and Latino children now make up nearly 40% of all children living with hunger in the U.S. The last thing we need is to take food out of the mouths of vulnerable mothers, babies, and young children.The full House will have a chance to reject these cuts. Tell your member of Congress to save our babies and reject harmful cuts to the WIC program. (

For a news report about the fraud and abuse common in WIC programs, please click on the following link: