Tea Party Express is Way Off Track

I understand the frustration of U.S. citizens with the state of our economy, unemployment, failing infrastructure, and Congress. I do not understand how many think it can all be fixed yesterday by keeping tax cuts for the rich, throwing out Hispanic immigrants, and most of all, by the Tea Party. The Tea Party is an all too predictable non-solution to a plethora of problems that have manifested themselves over several years, and are due to neglect and criminal behavior by our "leaders" and big corporations. So should we just replace the perpetrators of this malice with a bunch of misinformed, misled, impulsive altruists, who will be re-inventing the wheel with a bad plan?!
All you have to do is look at the ranting of Christine O'Donnell, or Sarah Palin's past half-baked comments to get a taste of the chaos that would ensue if they were to take power. A more recent example was last Friday night on the Bill Maher show when he paneled the editor of bigjournalism.com and co-founder of the St. Louis Tea Party, Dana Loesch. Her statements of the "facts" that the Democratic Party was the ruling majority for the last 4 years of the Bush administration (it was the last two), the corporate bailout cost more than the War in Iraq (the bailout, which has all but been paid back, totaled far less than the costly, ill-advised war), and that the new health-care plan will cost us 1 trillion dollars (a plan that pays for itself)is proof that they are just reciting the claims of the right and really have no voice of their own. When she said a "huge" amount of black conservatives are now stepping forward, it almost made the rest of the panel fall out of their seats with laughter. When asked "where are they" by John Legend and Al Sharpton she named them all in about 15 seconds. I commend Ms. Loesch for going on this Democratic friendly talk forum, but she made it clear why many "Tea Partiers" before her have wisely declined rather than display their inept policies and poor grasp on the issues and history.
I agree with their basic premise of cutting waste in government and ending cronyism, but the fact is they do not know what they are doing, saying, or how to get us where we want to be. They are just screaming for results without any answers. Please do not fall prey to this knee-jerk political power grab by a bunch of novice legislators. We voted for change and gave the Democrats the power to make it. Rome was not built in a day, and the catastrophic policies of the Bush Administration, and the Republican Congress that was in charge for 6 of those 8 years, will not be overcome in less than 2 years. Do not panic! Let them finish what they have started. We do not want to go back where we just were, or worse.

Note to Congress: Trickle Down Economics is not Working for U.S.

The "Trickle Down Economics" theory has been tried before and has always failed the economically lower 80% of the population. Now Congress is trying to convince the American people that it is a valid solution again. How has that solution been working for us since 2001? Fat cat congressmen and their wealthy friends tell us that by continuing the Bush tax cuts for the rich that the money they pocket will somehow trickle down to the middle-class and the poor. Proponents claim that if the top income earners invest more into the business infrastructure and equity markets, it will in turn lead to more goods at lower prices, and create more jobs for middle and lower class individuals. Also known as the "Horse and Sparrow" theory in the late 1800's using the analogy if you fed the horse more oats, the sparrow would find more food in the horse's dung! Some claim this led to "The Panic" of 1896. Reaganomics, Supply Side Economics, or Keynesian economics, they all have the same result; the rich get richer, and the middle class and poor get the dung. If you remember the TV show "All in the Family" and it's Republican-minded main character Archie Bunker, you may remember he mistakenly, but more appropriately, would call it Nixon's "Tinkle Down Theory", which was supported by his hero and Republican President, Richard Millhouse Nixon.

Let's face it, the rich are holding onto their money in these unstable economic times, and the middle-class and poor have a lot less. We are in an economic stale-mate, and the middle-class, which set or country apart from the rest and made America the great nation it was, is disappearing. We are becoming a nation more like China, Saudi Arabia, and the nations of Africa. The upper 3% controls 80% of the wealth in the U.S., and the comical part is 20% of the people think they are in the upper 3%. I do not think the lower 80% are so delusional. If you want to see the money start to flow again, put it in the hands of the ones that spend it on groceries, to keep a roof over their heads, and buy the goods that keep small businesses thriving. President Obama is only trying to get taxes on the rich back to the levels they were in the 1990's! Back before the Bush tax cuts for the rich in 2001. Remember the Clinton years? We need to get rid of the loopholes and implement a flat tax in the long run, but for now the rich need to pay their fair share. We need to quit balancing the nation's budgets on the backs of the working people of this country.

It would be funnier if it were not so true.

Let's get off the illegal immigration merry-go-round once and for all

Why do illegal immigrants come to the U.S. risking life and limb to be treated like sub-humans? Answer: The majority of them come because they can make ten times the amount of money here in half the time that it would take them in Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and as far away as South America. I think any American faced with the same alternatives would be doing the same thing. Higher paying jobs are the main attraction. Who provides these jobs? Answer: American businesses, small and large provide the incentive for them to make the treacherous, but lucrative journey. So how do we stop illegal immigration, or at least reduce the influx to next to nothing? Answer: Stop providing the illegal jobs which are the incentive for their migration north. Another alternative would be to help make Mexico a more vital nation that can provide jobs and salaries comparable to ours, but let's ignore that option as unobtainable for now, and focus on our current problem. After all we are not going to turn Mexico into Canada overnight. Have you ever noticed that we have no walls on our Northern border, which is over twice the length of the border to the South, and the border patrol is a fraction of the size?

So after years of living with the illegal immigrants from the South, they have become a vital part of our economy. If we could just throw all of them out of the country then our problems would be solved, right? Wrong, the problems we are having with our economy would be compounded to such a degree that we might get the full blown depression we barely escaped. The businesses that exist due to the hard work of these illegal laborers would go under, big and small. So we put up more walls, hire more border patrol agents, call out for the National Guard, and kick, scream, and cry for our politicians to do something. For the National Guard to even slow illegal immigration, soldiers would have to stand hand-in-hand along the border, and even that would not stop it.

We blame our federal government for not doing what it takes. Our state government says they are finally going to do something to quiet the angry mob, so they put a band-aid on the problem, like a tourniquet on a severed carotid artery, it will only exasperate the problem, and fix nothing. If SB1070 goes into effect, the lawsuits that will follow will tax our already weak economy along with the loss of revenue from tourism in our state. The only people that will want to come here will be skin-heads, white supremacists, and tea baggers without a clue. We already have enough of them, and their trailers camped out in the desert will hardly replace the millions we get from conventions. Then after numerous racial profiling lawsuits against the state of Arizona, the Supreme Court will strike it down for what it is, un-Constitutional. What a waste of time, energy, and money.

How would real immigration legislation work? I give way to the words and ideas of political analyst, and activist, Robert Creamer, who says, "It would do so through a combination of smart and effective border enforcement, a crackdown on illegal hiring and unfair labor practices, modernizing the legal immigration system, and requiring those here illegally to register with the government, pass background checks, study English, pay taxes, and get in line to work towards citizenship." We already have the border enforcement which will be more effective if we can slow the flood of people down to a trickle. I think most immigrants would stand in line to register and get legal work permits, pay their due taxes for services rendered, and a lot of them would get in line to work towards citizenship.

So where is the sticking point? What is stopping this plan from being implemented and working? There are two major components; the ignorant, racists, and an opportunistic lobby that call this path to citizenship, amnesty, to protect their clients. They are part of it, but the biggest problem lies in the employers of these immigrants. I know some will say we have the toughest employer sanctions in the country in place. What good are these laws when no one enforces them? Besides a well publicized raid by our narcissistic Sheriff Joe Arpaio once every couple of months on an easy target, the vast majority of these employers go unpunished, and the problem continues. Now can you see the merry-go-round we are on, and have been on for a long time?! Business men need this cheap labor to continue to make higher profits, and avoid the cost of documentation, benefits, and the distribution of taxes. They are willing to spend the money to control the legislatures, federal and state, with donations and lobbyists. Meaning it is more profitable. Then the legislatures appropriately extol the virtues, and sanctity of businesses, and how they are the life blood of our country and economy. Then the two get together and tell US we need higher walls, more troops, SB1070, and keep us going around in circles while they profit, and nothing really gets fixed because they really do not want things to change! Do you really think Senators Jon Kyl and John McCain are going to get anything done that fixes the problem? I think it would have happened already. Instead they will bluster and blow rhetoric, while telling the angry masses what they want to hear so they can hold on to their lucrative power, and get re-elected. Then they will go back to Washington and bluster and blow to Congress about how something needs to be done, and after all of that posturing NOTHING will be realized from this show, except the status quo. Jan Brewer is not trying to fix the problem. As a journeyman politician she is catering to the loud, angry mob so she can actually be elected to a post for which she is not worthy. This is desperation politics that does nothing to help us, gets nothing solved, and keeps us chasing our tails.

I endorse Robert Creamer's solution, it is viable, and the key piece to making it all work would be bio-metric identification. This is a card the size of your driver's license that would carry every important piece of information about you from medical records, to citizenship on a micro-chip that is easily read by a scanner. A policeman can see if you are here illegally in a moment. Medical personnel would know your history in an emergency whether you could speak for yourself, or not. Stealing your identity would be next to impossible, protecting your vital financial information, and protecting your assets. Why don't we have these already since the technology has been around for a while? Because there are people afraid of the Big Brother bogey man who claim our rights will be trampled by this invasion into our privacy. A lot are the same people that want immigration "fixed", and are loud enough, and angry enough of a mob, to unknowingly support the people that are really against this technology. The technology that can makes the immigration problem solvable, and the solution possible, is not really acceptable to the people in control.

Americans should be the masters to which the Supreme Court serves

Is our Supreme Court partisan?! I thought they ruled by interpretation of the law, not along political lines. They recently dismantled the McCain-Feingold bill, and upended 100 years of political campaign contribution regulations. They voted 5-4; with the 5 votes awarding corporations and unions to openly contribute to political campaigns with no restrictions on the dollar amounts, coming from the "conservative" justices, Kennedy, Thomas, Roberts, Alito and Scalia. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote, "If the First Amendment has any force" while defending his broad interpretation of the right to free speech, in justifying his vote. The loudest dissenter of the 4 justices voting against the ruling was Justice John Paul Stevens, the most conservative of the 4, "liberal" justices which included, Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayor; he called it "profoundly misguided." Justice Kennedy also said that there was, "No basis for allowing government to limit corporate independent expenditures." Stevens countered with, "In the context of election to public office the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it."

How does this happen when for the last 100 years, the last 20 years in particular, the law has focused on regulation of corporate campaign contributions? The approving justices argue that the people control the actions of their respective corporate employers and unions with their voices, therefore their word will be heard louder and clearer. I can see this being slightly true when it comes to unions, but thinking the employee of large corporations has any voice heard by the decision makers of the company is naive at best. In the case of unions, yes the member has a vote, but if the union has its own agenda, the member has little choice but to go along, or quit. There are few people these days that can get out of the union without losing their jobs, or can afford to just quit their job because the union did not listen to them. Teddy Roosevelt was the first President to recognize the negative influence corporations could have on our Democratic process, and started the regulation process, he said:

"Limitless corporate spending...is one of the principle sources of political corruption...not one (special interest, corporate) voice is entitled to a vote in Congress, on the bench, or any representation in any public office."

Now after over 100 years of attempting to put a cap on the powerful, and biased influence of corporations, special interest, and unions, 5 of the people appointed to protect our rights, and uphold the law, as interpreted by our Constitution, have chosen to go against decisions made over a long period of time by very intelligent people on both sides of the aisle, and the experts that guide their decisions. President Obama called it, “a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”

What could these 5 have been thinking? Obviously they had an agenda, and obligation to fill that went against all common sense, and popular thought that served the people and benefited Americans, but was very profitable for the real power they serve, big business. To accomplish this they interpreted the First Amendment to equate financial contributions with free speech. A very Capitalistic interpretation of Democratic law in which to hand the main influence on our future over to the very people that lied, stole, and misrepresented themselves to US all, for direct profit and gain for themselves, and to the detriment of the American people and our Republic. The money these entities contribute to campaigns influences our elected officials, and prove to be a much louder voice, canceling the vote of the American citizen. These funds give special interest a voice in Congress that they are not entitled to by any interpretation of our Constitution. There will be huge, unregulated caches of money used to spread the propaganda of for-profit operations against the fiscally handicapped non-profit operations that work for US and protect our rights against the perpetual assault on America's best interests by these opportunistic, selfish, and greedy enterprises. Large corporations only employ 20% of the work force. Why should they have the lion's share of the influence on the laws meant to protect all of us? This will result in the further devaluation of each Americans vote, and the apathy that follows, resulting in lower voter turnout.

It is a logical and proven fact that the lower the voter turnout during election time, the less the will of the people is served. It also results in a higher number of Republicans taking office over their Democratic opponents. Now you know the masters our Supreme Court really serves.

An educated and respectful discussion about the elephant in the room

Our country is severely divided, and just like our Civil War, one side cannot seem to talk to the other side about it. This led to the bloodiest war in our country's history, and it was Americans against Americans. Today we are just as divided over BIG issues, but our weapons do not need to be lethal. We just need to start discussing the issues with each other again. Not just with the people that share our views, where it is safe and comfortable, but out there on the front lines. Sure, things get heated, but words are better than guns and bombs, and as long as we can remember that we are all Americans, and all care about our nation a lot, maybe we can refrain from physical conflict and start listening to each other a little more, and not to the equally divided media and political pundits. Because they, like lawyers on each side of a divorce case, pit us against each other for their own personal gain.

Maybe if we start talking to everyone about the problems this country faces, the lies will start to be exposed, and the truth will prevail. Now I know bringing up politics at the wrong venue can raise blood pressure and ruin a good family reunion, or light social gathering. So there is a time and place to hear each others arguments. I was reluctant to talk about politics once myself. I did not see the value in discussion as much as I saw the work it took to have it and not wanting to ruffle any feathers. That all changed when George W. Bush was re-elected to office in 2004. That was the year I knew I needed to get involved and be more pro-active. As far as I am concerned, if I hear someone discussing the points of a hotbed issue, or political subject, anywhere, game on!

Social networks are perfect for dispute if you refrain from threats, name calling and swear words, and stick to the discussion of the facts, what you have read, or heard, or just believe is true. A person will quickly realize the fallacies in a debate if they educate themselves on the subject, and can remain open minded and respectful about everyone's opinion. Being able to admit you are not always right is a valuable virtue also.

SB1070: Do you carry proof of citizenship with you at all times?

I recently read the new immigration law in Arizona, SB1070. This is what I found:

It allows racial profiling by police, which in itself, is against federal law.

It allows a street cop to detain a man/woman of color for making a "nod or gesture" to a passerby, and possibly arrest them. They may be looking for employment, or just saying hello.

A person picking up a man/woman of color who cannot show proof of citizenship, can be arrested, their car impounded, fined, and lose their license. They may be looking for cheap "illegal" labor, or just giving someone a ride.

An employer can be entrapped by law enforcement who "provide the employer with an opportunity to commit the violation" of hiring an immigrant, or maybe is just cutting another human being a break, and giving them a job.

And, the officers are not responsible for the legal costs that are incurred. They are "indemnified" by this law. Which means we, the taxpayer, pick up the bill when they screw up (and they will), and there are no legal, or financial consequences to them.

An officer can "arrest" a person of color for probable cause. The presumption of a crime!

Notice I used "person of color" and not Hispanics, or Latinos. Because anyone that even looks Hispanic can be detained, asked for proof of citizenship, and be arrested. I am a white man of German/Irish descent, and have been told I look Italian, Greek, and even Hispanic when I have a little tan, and my beard is grown in full. Hopefully my last name would save me from arrest. Imagine what excuse a police officer can make for pulling over a light skinned black woman, Arab, Italian, or Greek who has married a Hispanic man, and has the last name of Reyes, or Ruiz! He can legally arrest that woman for not carrying proof of citizenship.

This law now presumes to re-prioritize the very busy jobs of federal ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents, by telling them they must now deal with, and rule, on each individual case brought in by local law enforcement. Add to this the fact that these local law enforcement agents can be sued by an Arizona resident for limiting or restricting "the enforcement of federal immigration laws to less than the full extent permitted by federal law", and you have a recipe for legal discrimination being dealt out by common citizens against innocent Americans.

How many lawsuits can you see stemming from this piece of legislation put together in desperation, by a bunch of hacks, in a knee jerk reaction to an angry mob?

Not to mention that any person of color will not bother going to police after witnessing a crime, or being the victim of a crime themselves, out of fear of being arrested.

The good news is that most legal experts are sure it will be thrown out before it becomes law in 90 days. They say the feds control immigration laws, not the states, but some also say the law may have to be enacted, and lawsuits filed, before people really understand its absurdity, and it can be outlawed.

I know immigration is a problem, and it needs to be addressed, but this is a short-sighted quick fix that is full of holes. Jan Brewer and the legislature are not doing what is best for Arizona. They are only bowing to the loud, angry, anxious mob, in hopes of keeping their office. The citizens of this state will be the losers, whether some realize it or not, and the winners will be the lawyers and their clients.

Jan Brewer and John McCain must go

Your next Senator Kyl, but as Kurt Warner says, first things first:

Can anyone see the pattern here of knee jerk reaction by some politicians to the loud, and the demonstrative, angry crowd? This is desperation politics at its worst. No thought, no study into what is right. Just react to the biggest, loudest crowd to court their vote and get re-elected. Always preaching to the choir and bowing to their demands so they can hang on to their power for another term, and then serve their cronies, special interests, and the lobbyists until the next election nears. They do this because that is where their power really lays. That is where they get their money to fill their coffers, to influence their "friends", and to bamboozle the electorate when re-election time comes along with expensive campaigns and commercials.

John McCain has been doing this for 28 years now. He started in 1982 moving to Arizona as a war hero, born and raised in North Carolina. Did he come here because he loved Arizona, and wanted to help and fight for its citizens? No, he saw an easily won seat in the U.S. House of Representatives in a conservative state that would feel honored that this national figure would want to represent their state. He was right, and his journey to become President of the United States had begun. Next step U.S. Senator, and it was accomplished in 1986. 14 years later he would make his first bid for President. Arizona has been a nice stepping stone for him, and I do not doubt that he has acquired affection for our state over the years, but Washington has always been his goal, and that is where he wants to stay. He sometimes does the right thing for this state, even a blind squirrel finds an acorn sometimes, but his goal has always been to get re-elected, and someday be President. He almost made it, but a less qualified, yet more powerfully financed ladder climber named George W. Bush was crowned President, stealing Senator McCain's dream. Now he desperately holds his position by standing at the border with crony-in-chief Jon Kyl (another blog) surrounded by an angry mob and screaming, "This state is going broke, we need 3000 National Guard troops at our border". What does one have to do with the other? He has lost his focus, his only goal is to get re-elected, and it is an election year. So he stands amongst the angry, loud, demonstrative crowd, surrounded by TV cameras, and tells them what they want to hear.

Jan Brewer was not born in Arizona, but moved here with her husband from California, started and raised her family here, as many do, and was elected to the state house of representatives in 1983. She became a state senator in 1987, served as majority whip from 1993 to 1996, before defeating Ed King to become Maricopa County Supervisor from 1996-2002. Her last elected post was Secretary of State in 2002. A position she obviously seemed qualified for due to her understanding of the inner workings of the state, but like Sarah Palin, it was a position too close to the top for a journeyman legislator. Now she stands as the primary decision maker in our state, and she has clearly risen above her level of competency. Do we need guns in bars? To what end? Concealed weapons without training? To what purpose does this serve? A birther bill that is more racist than functional. Wasting our state money with a lawsuit against the federal government, that has already been filed by other states. And she is now signing a bill that supports racial profiling, and will result in the filing of hundreds, if not thousands , of lawsuits against our state. She clearly should not have the steering wheel to this state in her hand, but there she stands, bowing to the loud, demonstrative, angry crowd. Doing what she ignorantly thinks is right, so she can get elected and hold onto power that she was never elected to have in the first place.

Their stories are different, but their tactics to hold onto power are the same. One is much smarter than the other, but they both bow to the lowest common denominator. The change we voted for from our federal government needs to take place in Arizona.

p.s. This is not an endorsement for that dufus JD Hayworth (Hoss Cartwright). Electing him would drive us back into the Stone Age.

Now that the ISP's have taken control of our Internet

I have been writing about Net Neutrality and warning people about the need to keep the Internet open for a long time, only to be met with apathy on one side, and indignation on the other. Now we are going to get what we get from ISP's. What will that be? The same thing you get from your cable and dish companies. Chopped up services, and packages that cost you more and do not allow you to go, and do, whatever you want on the Internet. We just handed our free Internet over to corporate America to do with what they want. President Obama, and the FCC, have been warning us about this for the last year and a half, but everyone has been too worried about Kate Gosselyn, and Tiger Woods, or wringing their hands anticipating the windfall! Now the Republicans, lobbyists, and special interests have created another cash cow so they can line their pockets with our money. Billions of dollars of our money!

What do we do now. Write the FCC, write your congressmen, and tell everyone. Maybe it is not too late if everyone would finally get behind this President, who cares about us, and drown out the squeaky wheels. They do not need any more grease, because they just bank it, keep on squeaking, and ask for more!