Sunday, June 18, 2006

A THOUGHT FOR FATHER'S DAY

After all the hoopla surrounding Mother’s Day, one of my favorite black intellectuals Chris Rock

puts the appreciation of fathers in the proper perspective…

Everybody takes Daddy for granted. Everything’s Mama. Dear Mama. Always loved my Mama. What’s the Daddy song? “Papa was a Rollin’ Stone.” Nobody appreciates Daddy.

Now, Mama’s got the roughest job. l ain’t gonna front. But at least people appreciate Mama. Every time Mama do something right, Mama gets a compliment… ’cause women need to hear compliments all the time.

Women need food, water, and compliments. That’s right. And an occasional pair of shoes. That’s right. Women got to hear it all the time, or they lose their minds.

And get Daddy to make sure you thank your Mama for everything. Tell your Mama how good the food is. Tell her how nice the house looks. Tell your Mama how nice her hair looks.

“Did you tell your Mama? You better go in there and tell your Mama!” That’s right. Tell your Mama! Tell your Mama! Tell your Mama!

Nobody ever tells Daddy sh*t.

I’m talking about the real daddies that handle their f**king business. Nobody ever says, “Hey, Daddy, thanks for knocking out this rent! Hey, Daddy, l sure love this hot water! Hey, Daddy, this is easy to read with all this light!”

Nobody gives a f**k about Daddy. I’m talking about a daddy that handles his business. Think about everything that the real daddy does: pay the bills, buy the food, put a f**king roof over your head. Everything you could ever ask for. Make your world a better, safer place.

And what does Daddy get for all his work?

The big piece of chicken. That’s all Daddy gets.”

Happy Father’s Day!

Bob Parks is a former Republican congressional candidate (California 24th District), Navy veteran, single father, member/writer for the National Advisory Council of Project 21, and is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc.

Saturday, June 17, 2006

SCHWARZENEGGER'S BRILLIANT POLITICAL MOVE: APPONITS SISTER OF L.A. MAYOR TO BENCH

On April 20th, Governor Schwarzenegger appointed Mary Lou Villar to the Los Angeles Superior Court (see press release). Villar is a Democrat. More importantly, she is the sister of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

The hope here is that the Mayor would not be as exited to support the Democrat nominee, if the Guv did something nice for his sister. Today, the Los Angeles Times, Michael Finnegan, did a story (see below) that shows that Antonio and Phil are not getting along. Maybe my good friend Michael does not know it, but the Arnold appointment of Antonio’s sister was not mentioned in his article. Could this be a reason Antonio is cool to Angelides?

This is a brilliant move on the part of the Governor. He appoints a woman, a Hispanic, a Democrat, and the sister of a major Democrat leader! A four-fer!!!

What do you think? Is this good for the bench, good for California, or just good politics that for two months few had noticed?

I remember Governor Wilson appointing some legislative Democrats to the bench. The goal then was to vacate a swing seat, so the GOP could pick up the seat. Almost all the Democrats Wilson appointed were moderate to conservative. Mary Lou Villar though, has the same politics as her brother.

Another factor, that was mentioned in the article, is that Antonio wants to run for Governor in 2010–so he would rather it be an “open seat” than run against a Democrat incumbent. (BTW, SF Mayor Gavin Newsom is also gearing up for that race-he is a strong supporter of Angelides—which means Newsom will get the “Progressive Democrat” support, not Antonio. In fact, if Antonio continues his soft support for Phil, the traditional Democrats will also get angry with him, making it even harder to run for Guv in 2010)

Looks like the Guv is good at dividing the Democrat Party. I will predict the turnout in November may be no more than 40%. Neither side will be energized for the election.

UPDATE:
Tension Builds Between L.A. Mayor, Angelides
The Los Angeles Times, by Michael Finnegan 6/17/2006

Tension between Antonio Villaraigosa and Democratic gubernatorial nominee Phil Angelides surfaced Friday as the Los Angeles mayor declined to say whether he backed his own party’s candidate to unseat Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The rift between two of California’s top Democrats became clear just after they appeared with Magic Johnson to celebrate the opening of a Starbucks on Crenshaw Boulevard.

Steve Frank is the publisher of California Political News and Views and a Senior Contributor to CaliforniaConservative.org. He is also a consultant currently working on gambling issues and advising other consultants on policy and coalition building.

Friday, June 16, 2006

AS A CALIFORNIA TAXPAYER I SAY "HELL NO"

CA Democrats Want More Money To Offer Free Healthcare For Illegal Immigrants

Free Healthcare for Illegals: No GraciasBecause everyone’s a voter. And some count twice.

Reuters reports: “California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said on Thursday he expects lawmakers to pass a budget by month’s end instead of meeting a June 15 deadline because of disagreements over whether the state should fund health care for illegal immigrant children.”

Disagreements? Who woud support illegals?

With over $7 billion more in state revenues than had been expected, many lawmakers initially had expected to break the two-decade-long streak of missed deadlines because this year they did not have to haggle over spending cuts.

But last-minute differences emerged after a committee of lawmakers from both chambers of the Democrat-led legislature last weekend passed a spending plan to rival the Republican governor’s $131.1 billion budget proposal for the 2006-07 fiscal year starting next month.

Republicans, whose votes are needed for a two-thirds majority to pass a budget, balked at Democrat-backed provisions in the legislature’s plan to boost spending on health-care for children, including children who are not legal immigrants.

Ladies and gentlemen, witness politics in action.

You see, some politicians talk about creating efficiencies and reducing the burden on taxpayers, but any time there’s a surplus (e.g. $7 billion “more in state revenues than had been expected”), you can count on Democrats wanting to spend it.

“It’s a very bad idea,” said Republican Assemblyman Rick Keene. “We would be giving legitimacy to folks who are here breaking the law.”

State Senate Republican Leader Dick Ackerman added: “We don’t believe we should be setting up incentive programs to have more illegals come to California.”

Exactly. Makes total sense.

So, why are Democrats pushing for it?

Democrats have political reasons for taking the opposing position as California is increasingly Hispanic because of legal and undocumented immigration, especially from Mexico.

“A lot of Latinos are in Democratic districts,” said Pitney, adding that many could become Democratic voters if the U.S. Congress approves an amnesty for undocumented immigrants.

Well, there’s the answer.

Democratic Assemblyman John Laird said the legal status of children should not be of concern in emergencies: “We shouldn’t have doctors whose first question of a three-year-old brought into a hospital for meningitis is, ‘Is he here illegally?”‘

Didn’t we hear enough violins yesterday?

That’s like saying, some stores shouldn’t have to ask whether or not a customer paid for an item before leaving the building. The comparative logic is: By not questioning or caring about the status of citizenship (illegal=criminal), the state is widening the opportunity for rampant abuse. Free health care, come one, come all! It promotes it and most definitely creates incentive. Obvious to anyone. Just like shopping at a store that doesn’t charge for goods or service. It’s going to be very popular, until it goes out of business. Sounds like California.

And why should we care? If Mexico doesn’t provide free health care to their own people, why should we? Especially when they enter our nation illegally.

At a press conference, Schwarzenegger outlined his position on the dispute, which is midway between what Democrat and Republican lawmakers want. He would fund programs already providing health care to children, including undocumented children, but not expand the programs because of the costs.

“We should not politicize the children and drag them into this … But I would not go in the direction of expanding the Healthy Family program because we cannot afford it,” he said.

This is fact. And their should be no further “disagreements.”

Democrats and Republicans also are odds over whether to use about $1 billion to pay down debt or to build a reserve.

Unfortunately, some are not working with facts. And because these Democrats are in power, there’s only one thing they’re that familiar with building in California – and that’s more debt.

Thursday, June 15, 2006

ONLY FOR PROFIT: "SELLING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS THE AMERICAN DREAM"

So reads the headline of the S.F. Chronicle’s exclusive report today on how illegal aliens are working the system to not only secure good jobs, but also taking advantage of lax policies, lack of law enforcement, and complicit banking institutions.

Cue the violins and commence the media whitewashing:

Ramiro and Marisol looked on proudly as their 3-year-old son, Alexis, took out his toolbox and pretended to fix a closet in their new San Jose home. He was imitating the flurry of work his parents had put into the one-bedroom condominium over the past two weekends, installing new linoleum and carpets from Home Depot, painting and repairing.

With a shy giggle, Marisol, 27, pointed out where she plans to put the sofa and the TV in the tiny living room while Ramiro, 32, talked about being able to grill carne asada on the tree-shaded balcony.

They joked about how rarely they see each other. Ramiro works six days a week in a sheet-metal factory and attends night school to get his high school diploma. Marisol goes to business classes in the mornings and works afternoons as an office assistant while Alexis attends preschool.

It was a typical new-homeowner scene with one exception: Ramiro and Marisol, who asked that their last name not be used, are undocumented immigrants from Mexico. They’ve been in the country for four years. Marisol entered on a tourist visa. Ramiro hid in a car.

In other words, and according to U.S. law, they are criminals.

And their son, well, he’s an “anchor baby.”

Soon, if not already, little Alejandro will claim another seat in our public schools, taking advantage of a “free” education at taxpayers’ expense. (Oh, pardonme, they pay taxes, too. Of course.)

Their immigration status did not prevent them from buying a home. It is legal for undocumented people to purchase property in the United States.

That won’t fly in Mexico. In fact, only natural-born citizens can hold permanent title to any land. That way they don’t sell their country away to foreigners. Interesting concept.

The problem has been borrowing the money to pay for it. Ramiro and Marisol have stable jobs, but many undocumented people have spotty or nonexistent credit histories. Often, they’ve worked off the books.

No kidding. But still we’re supposed to believe they pay taxes? Right. Just like the employers are paying avoiding payroll taxes. That’s why it’s “off the books.”

Another issue used to be an absolute deal breaker when undocumented people applied for home loans: Until recently, people had to have a Social Security number to qualify for a mortgage.

Now, a handful of banks, including some major institutions, have begun offering home-mortgage loans to people who don’t have Social Security accounts. Instead, borrowers can use individual taxpayer identification numbers, or ITINs, which are used to file income tax returns. These lending programs also allow borrowers to use unconventional ways to demonstrate their creditworthiness.

The Internal Revenue Service issues taxpayer IDs to both resident and nonresident aliens so they can pay taxes. A significant number of the 8.6 million holders of individual taxpayer IDs are illegal immigrants, according to the Government Accounting Office.

So, that implies that of the estimated 12+ million illegal aliens hiding “in the shadows” of America, there’s millions that don’t pay taxes. Confirmed.

“For those families who have the American dream, but don’t have access to documentation, the (the taxpayer ID mortgage) is a way for them to be able to buy a home, lay down roots and build wealth for their family for the future,” said Janis Bowdler, housing policy analyst at the National Council of La Raza, a Hispanic civil-rights organization in Washington, D.C.

SPIN ALERT: “Dont have access to documentation?” Pobresito, try this. Leave the country and come in the front door legally, and we’ll give you all the documentation you need. Then, and only then, have you qualified to pursue the American dream.

Opponents of illegal immigration deplore mortgages for undocumented people. Some say the banks making taxpayer ID loans are guilty of aiding and abetting criminals.

Yes, that’s because, um, they are! And this article confirms it. It’s obvious to any reasonable person concerned about enforcing our immigration laws. Evidently, banks seeking profitablity in “untapped markets,” regardless of our laws, don’t see it the same way. Profit motive prevails.

U.S. Rep. John Doolittle, a Republican from Roseville (Placer County), has introduced a bill that would ban issuing residential mortgages to illegal immigrants.

“The government should not be in the business of creating incentives to encourage illegal behavior. Nor should companies be permitted to reward those individuals in clear violation of our laws,” Doolittle said in a statement when he introduced the bill in October.

The bill, which also would require expedited deportation of people caught entering the United States illegally, is pending in the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims.

We trust our legislators, those elected to preside over the public interest, will vote accordingly. (Note to file)

“People traditionally talk about the undocumented Latino population as furtive people in the shadows who are very marginalized,” said the study’s author, Rob Paral, a research fellow with the American Immigration Law Foundation in Washington, D.C. “What’s really changed is that a lot of people who are undocumented have fairly decent incomes. They have spending patterns and social behaviors which include an interest in buying a home and an ability to do it.”

Someone talks about illegal aliens as “people in the shadows?” Really? Who? But they’re not? And they’re making good income? (Doing the work that legal Americans won’t?)

Great news. Thanks for the clarification.

Using Census data on income and age, he estimated that 216,000 currently undocumented households could buy homes — admittedly ones at modest prices. About a quarter of those potential home buyers are in California. “This is a large, untapped population from a financial point of view,” Paral said. “If it were not restrained, it could be pouring a lot more money into society.”

Interesting logic. Think we heard someone say the same thing about marijuana crops and legalizing drugs.

Banks have gotten that message loud and clear. U.S. banks now routinely accept both taxpayer ID numbers and a Mexican ID called matricula consular to open new accounts. Many reach out to the Latino community with Spanish marketing materials and bilingual bank tellers.

The latest twist is the taxpayer ID mortgage. Pioneered by small community banks, mainly in the Midwest, the loans slowly have begun to spread. As of September 2004, one credit union and 18 banks were offering such mortgages, according to a report by independent researcher Mari Gallagher. In California, Wells Fargo and Citibank both offer taxpayer ID mortgage loans, albeit in small programs.
. . .

Marisol and Ramiro got their mortgage through the Citibank/ACORN Housing program, which offers interest rates a full percentage point below the published rate and $3,000 toward closing costs or down payment. In addition, their Realtor, Rebecca Gallardo-Serrano of Protelo Group Realty in San Jose, gave them a rebate of $2,500 to help pay their closing costs. At less than $260,000, their small condo was the lowest-cost listing in Santa Clara County.

Sounds like a great service. Guess that’s what corporations mean about multiculturalism and understanding the needs of their “community.” Some might simply call it racism: doing business by catering to specific ethnicities.

“In the Latino community, we don’t like to have debt,” said Frances Martinez Myers, chairwoman of the National Association of Hispanic Real Estate Professionals. “We transact in cash, so there’s no credit history.”

Finally, a true word is spoken.

Marisol and Ramirez, for example, “used very nonconventional credit,” Gallardo-Serrano said. ACORN Housing verified that the couple had paid their bills on time for the past two years to PG&E, San Jose Water, their landlord and a health club. In addition, they showed two years of tax returns and employment history.

Looks like they’re well out of the shadows and even spending time working out at the gym. Good for them. Arnold approves of that. Now if only we could get all the homeless in America the level of customer service, we might end poverty afterall.

Lez Trujillo, field director with ACORN Housing Corp. in Chicago, said the program with Citibank, which is available in about seven states, has made 804 mortgages worth $153 million since early 2005. Of those, 387 were in California, primarily Northern California. An additional 1,300 borrowers are now in the pipeline, either in contract or shopping for a house.

Affirmative-action in action.

Wells Fargo has offered taxpayer ID mortgages since December in a pilot program in Los Angeles and Orange counties. The bank declined to discuss the program, instead sending a short statement saying it will continue to evaluate it.

The biggest barrier to such loans is that they cannot easily be sold on the secondary mortgage market. Most banks sell the mortgages they originate to bring in more money to make more loans. Instead, banks must keep taxpayer-ID mortgages in their portfolios, tying up capital.

Sounds like a credit risk. If nothing else, tying up a bank’s capital can’t be a good practice. But do shareholders really care? Has anyone asked them?

[Independent researcher Mari] Gallagher, who specializes in research on undocumented Mexicans and the mortgage market, said that despite the shifting political winds, she thinks taxpayer ID mortgages will grow because the market pressure of so many immigrants who want to buy homes will be so strong.

“This is the match that could light the next fire in the mortgage industry,” she said.

That kind of talk ignites wrath among anti-immigration partisans.

“It’s simply wrong for foreign lawbreakers to be enabled to plant roots in this country by way of obtaining a mortgage,” Roy Beck, executive director of NumbersUSA, a group that wants to curtail immigration growth, wrote in support of the Doolittle bill that would bar mortgages for undocumented aliens.

It’s hard to believe we are having these kind of conversations without widespread ridicule. Guess that’s what happens when money is involved.

We’re talking about criminal activity. Illegal aliens, entering the country by breaking our immigration laws and ignoring our national sovereignty. If we start referring to criminals as customers, why stop at the border? There’s many more illegal markets to pursue. Does anyone see the folly?

Ramiro and Marisol don’t see themselves as lawbreakers. They hope to become citizens. And they hope that their condo will appreciate in value so they can trade up.

“After I finish school, I want to have another baby, a girl,” Marisol said. “Then in three years or maybe two, we can buy a house.”

Until our national leaders — finally — listen to the majority will and get really serious about immigration reform and law enforcement, there will be millions more who want to be livin’ la vida loca like Ramiro and Marisol.

In the meantime, some banks and other greedy corporations will continue selling-out the American dream to anyone who can pay their fees.

Wednesday, June 14, 2006

There Are Lies, There Are Damn Lies And Then There Are The Democrats

That's A Crock A Shit! That’s the only thing I can call Harry Reid’s statement after President Bush’s news conference. Let’s start with his most insulting accusation:

Bush Sets Up Straw Man: Unnamed Democrats Want to Raise Taxes While Bush Has Been Fiscally Responsible. “Our job is to work with Congress to have wise fiscal policy. And wise fiscal policy means not only keeping revenues low, (sic) but it also means being wise about how we spend the people’s money…(Democrats) will couch it in all kinds of language. But really what they’re saying is, ‘We’re going to raise your taxes.’” (Press Conference, 6/14/06)
FACT: President Bush Turned Record Budget Surpluses into Record Deficits. President Bush inherited a unified budget surplus of $236 billion from President Clinton, the largest surplus in American history. Budget surpluses were expected to continue for another ten years when President Bush took office in January 2001. By 2002, however, the unified federal budget had returned to a deficit of $158 billion and has since reached historic highs. This year, the budget deficit is expected to reach $336 billion. (Office of Management and Budget; Congressional Budget Office, 03/06)

When Reid represents as fact that “President Bush Turned Record Budget Surpluses into Record Deficits”, he’s conveniently forgetting about this thing called 9/11. In the aftermath of 9/11 a couple trillion dollars were pulled from the American economy. Factor in the cost of waging a war we had to fight to the lost tax revenue and it would’ve taken an act of God to not run huge deficits.

Of course, Reid doesn’t want people to think that the deficit is shrinking because that would doom Democrats’ chances this November. Too bad. We’ll continue trumpeting the latest deficit reduction figures that the CBO is reporting. What’s more is that the deficit is dropping like a rock as a percentage of GDP.

Notice, too, that Reid doesn’t knock down the President’s “straw man” that Democrats would raise taxes. He’s hoping you won’t notice. Sorry, Harry, but that won’t work with the Right Blogosphere translating your misstatements.

Here’s another bunch of BS:

Last year, the Congress called on the President to make 2006 a year of significant transition in Iraq and yet halfway through this year, the President is simply maintaining the same tired mantra, ‘as Iraqis stand up, we will stand down.’ Yet at the same time more Iraqi security forces are in the field, U.S. force levels have actually increased in recent weeks. This is not a real plan and is not acceptable. The President must take responsibility for laying out a strategy for stabilizing Iraq and bringing our troops home.”

TRANSLATION: Last year, most Democrats and a few faint-hearted RINO’s said that they didn’t like President Bush’s strategy, that it wasn’t fast enough. They told him that they didn’t have the steadfastness and fortitude to stay the course.

Democrats are the only ones now who think that we don’t have a plan for victory. That’s because they haven’t expressed a consistent desire for victory. Instead, all they’ve offered is an endless litany of complaints. Chief among those complaints was that we hadn’t killed or captured Zarqawi. The minute the report broke that he’d been killed in an airstrike, they switched to saying that this was a nice accomplishment for the military but that it was mostly a symbolic event. RIGHT!!! They first said that killing Zarqawi should be our first, second and third priority, then they say the military’s killing him was only symbolic. And these idiots can’t figure out why they aren’t taken seriously on national security issues? Scary.

KILLING AMNESTY SOFTLY

With his words...

Hopes for a quick compromise on immigration were dealt a blow Tuesday after House Speaker Dennis Hastert said he wanted to take a "long look" at a Senate bill offering possible citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants.

Hastert said hearings on the Senate bill should be held before appointing anyone to a House-Senate committee to negotiate a compromise immigration bill. Later, he said he was unsure what the House's next move would be.

"We're going to take a long look at it," Hastert said late Tuesday.

House Majority Leader John Boehner agreed. "I think we should know clearly what's in the Senate bill," Boehner said. But he added there are lots of ways to understand its contents.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, also scheduled a hearing for Monday to review provisions in the bill requiring employers to verify that their workers are legal.

Cornyn said he opposes a provision allowing workers to use up to 20 documents to verify they are legal workers. Also, the Department of Homeland Security has raised concerns about how quickly it must have in place an electronic system that employers will use to verify their workers legal status, Cornyn's spokesman Don Stewart said.

"This will give us a chance to look at it in more detail," Cornyn said.

Sending a bill that has already passed the Senate to hearings would be a highly unusual move and make completing a final bill before Congress goes on its summer recess in August far less likely. Disagreement on procedural issue has kept negotiations from starting, but there were hopes that could be resolved this week.

"It's an obvious retreat from where we are," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

And that is progress.