Monday, July 31, 2006

Summer's Deep Thoughts

1) The ongoing conflict in the Middle East is both the best and worse possible thing for the Democrats. The War gives Democrats a clear issue to use against Republicans, rightfully insisting that Republican leadership has only made matters worse for Israel and ourselves through direct involvement in their conflicts. Unfortunately for them, it creates a terrible conundrum for a political party that has had the foreign policy of the 'Peace and Freedom Party' since the end of the Vietnam War. Can the Democrats find a leader who would lead America to victory in this conflict, or will they again run a 'Surrender-Now!' candidate that will be rejected by every state not on the west coast or in New England?

2) Illegal Immigration is a winning issue for Republicans this year, but a big loser for citizens. Since the Democratic Party has adopted an Amnesty for All platforms for themselves, the Republicans can win the issue by merely requiring some form of payback or security is included in the final bill. The result will be a huge boon for plantation style businesses who employee illegal workers and ignore the federal and state regulations that were intended to protect the poor. Also winning here will be Republican AND Democratic Party bosses, who will each pick up votes from the disgruntled citizenry and the new voting block of Hispanics. The losers, no surprise, will be the illegal aliens made legal. Since, as I have previously documented, they largely want citizenship to gain access to federal benefits, their legalization or normalization will result in an increased cost to their employers, most of whom will lay them off and hire new illegal aliens or other normalized Hispanics who will forgoe those benefits. Also losing will be the working class of Americans, who will have even more competition at the none and low skilled positions, the youth of America, who will find it harder to find seasonal labor, and the retiree's, who will find their fixed incomes buy them less as inflation rises with the labor pool.

3) The Christian Right will again raise the banners against Gay Rights and Abortion this year, to probably little avail. The Democrats see the issue as costing them the last presidential election and the Conservatives are more concerned about the war than the liberal domestic agenda. Therefore, I see the issue being avoided by both parties at least until the next presidential election, at which time the Supreme Court nominating power will drive the fear-mongering by both sides of these issues. It is unfortunate that these issues have to be so passionately personal for people instead of being able to logically discuss them the way a Reagan would, "Government isn't the solution to problems, Government IS the problem."

4) Further evidence of the failure of Clinton Foreign Policy, which was really just Jimmy Carter foreign policy part duh, is the alignment of China against the United States of America. In spite of Most Favored Nation trade status, the Chinese continue to exercise hegemony over the Far East and threaten the peaceful nations of Japan and Taiwan. The Chinese have also been thwarting us in regards to reigning in Islamic Fundamentalists, who they view as useful in destabilizing the west and allowing their encroachment into the Pacific Rim and Indochina. The great danger for the Chinese is our removing their ability to steal what technology we have or a direct confrontation with the US over North Korea or Taiwan. They will use Iran and North Korea as proxies to weaken the United States while they further strengthen their position both domestically and abroad.

5) Victory through defeat continues to be the mantra of the Islamic Fundamentalists, who are now playing their game on the highest stage. How much longer the mainstream media will continue to play this up is unknown, but the images will have strength for some time in the Islamic world. Thus far they are foiling air power through the strategic placing of children near offensive weapons and other tactical/strategic targets, reducing their enemy’s ability to strike without fear of casualties. In essence, this defense forces the West to reduce their firepower in combat situations and thus increases their casualties in conflicts at virtually no cost to the terrorists themselves. Playing to the media and the world wide audience of modern media, the Islamic Fundamentalists enjoy acclaim even as they lob rockets into Israel. I wonder if Hitler could have pulled the same trick while launching rockets into London, I don't doubt that he tried.

6) At this point no strategy exists for countering the use of media compassion by Islamic Terrorists, but I have no doubt that contingencies are being drawn up. Whether the Israelis, or Americans for that matter, are interested in a return to the idea of Total War, that is war on both the Military and Civilian populations of an enemy country, or whether they will target members of the media and media installations themselves as being part of the enemy is doubtful. Nevertheless, it is currently the only logical direction either country can take towards victory. It remains to be seen if this would further alienate the world from the United States or Israel, or if the final results would be worth the horrendous loss of life.

7) I predict the Seattle Seahawks will go 12-4 this season (a similar prediction to last season I will remind you) with losses on the road in Chicago, St. Louis (I always pick them to lose there), Denver and Kansas City. Other tough games include the New York Giants at Home and the final game of the year at Tampa Bay, where both teams will most likely be playing for playoff positioning. As long as there are no serious injuries to Hasselbeck or Alexander, the team is largely intact and the Defense should improve, especially if Marshall remains as the Defensive Coordinator (or whatever they call the guy who calls the defensive plays during the game) with Ray Rhodes as his consultant. Their division remains weak, with Arizona having all the weapons but none of the core needed to win in the NFL and St Louis and San Francisco with work to do.

Monday, April 24, 2006

70 Million More...

It has taken 20 years to turn a "once in a lifetime only" amnesty program for 3 million illegal aliens into a civil right for an estimated 12 million illegal aliens represented by their children, deemed citizens by a rogue Supreme Court, demanding amnesty now. Why did this happen? These 12 million illegal aliens are approaching the end of their working years. They houses, mortgages, cars, and college age children. Living the life of a law-breaker, without a federal safety net, has lost its luster.

These 12 million need only one thing now and that is Federal Benefits. Social Security and Medicare (Now with a prescription drug benefit). Having already received thousands in State taxes they contribute little to, illegal aliens now want some of that federal tax pie. Who can blame them when so many politicians are tripping over themselves to pander to them?

The facts:

1) Illegal alien families are larger than that of native citizens, resulting in more people utilizing the state-run K-12 schools. Illegal aliens in California also receive in-state tuition when attending the public universities, which makes their attendance further subsidized by the California taxpayer.

2) Illegal alien families also tend to be uninsured or underinsured for everything from life and auto to health, increasing the costs for all other Californians and draining state coffers. Their abuse of Hospital Emergency Rooms has resulted in a reduction of the number of Hospitals providing those services.

3) Illegal alien families send billions of dollars back to their relatives and friends in Mexico, where the money is invested in the Mexican economy. This results in a net transfer of investment capital and taxes from the United States to Mexico. This results in illegal aliens contributing less to the state and local government than citizens and legal immigrants.

4) Illegal aliens do contribute tax money to the Federal government and programs like social security and Medicare, but currently they receive less than citizens in those benefits. Thus, the illegal alien is one of the few workers that contribute more than they take and they can't even vote to determine who represents those tax dollars. However, this is what is most politicians currently overlook, since granting amnesty will eliminate this pool of workers without benefits and create greater need on already desperate federal programs.

5) Illegal aliens also tend to spend their money or invest with companies that hire illegal aliens because of their inability to speak or read English. Not even true Spanish speaking citizens gain much of this market because the illegal aliens tend to speak improper dialects of Spanish and feel more comfortable with other aliens who speak similarly. This creates a self-fulfilling prophecy for illegal aliens in that hiring them requires you to hire more of them. If you have an illegal alien crew you will soon find yourself with illegal alien receptionists, illegal alien managers and illegal alien customers.

Ok, so the Amnesty in 1986 was a bad idea, what do we do now? We can't deport 12 million people can we?

1) We have to prevent this from happening again. The easiest way to do this is to make it extremely difficult to cross our southern border. I recommend the wall idea proposed in Sensenbrenner's bill since it could be quickly erected, would provide technical data along the border, restrict not just illegal alien traffic, but also traffic in narcotics. It would be a huge force multiplier for our border patrol, allowing them time to respond to assaults on the fence and to concentrate on un-fenced areas for patrols. It also sends a message to other nations that we will not tolerate their interference in our society and that deporting your problems to the United States is no longer an option.
a) So you are opposed to the idea of a wall... OK. How about we Annex Mexico and Canada? This would greatly expand our national resources and reduce our border to just the smallest little are around Central America. This is essentially an amnesty for all argument, and since an estimated 70 million Mexicans already want to come to America, we will have solved that problem too. Of course there is a lot of clean-up we'd have to do on both sides, as well as getting rid of that ridiculously poor Canadian medical system. Still, looks like a win-win situation.
b) World conquest not your cup of tea either? How about instead of a wall we simply increase our patrols. It would take years to hire and train enough border patrol agents, and they lack the firepower to deal with drug cartels, so lets use the military! We could simply attach a couple of divisions to deal with the border areas, and allow them to war game and patrol the regions. They have more than enough firepower to deal with drug dealers, even the ones contracting through the Mexican military, and would be able to practice their 'peacekeeping' through patient and careful apprehension of illegal aliens. There is the possibility of innocent lives being lost, although it is against the law to cross our border so 'innocent' is a bit of a misnomer, and would greatly increase tensions between the Mexican, Canadian and United States governments.

2) Secondly, we don't need to deport the illegal aliens if there are no jobs or benefits to hold them here. Unlike the "War on Drugs", employers are addicted to illegal aliens because their is no risk in hiring them. They have been allowed to hide behind defenses that they are just trying to help out the minorities or that they aren't sophisticated enough to check identifications, or that it isn't their responsibility, all the while knowingly hiring and using illegal alien labor. These employers are, in effect, the actual suppliers of the problem, since their hiring of illegal aliens is the reason they come to this country in the first place. If anyone should be made a felon, it is any employer who knowingly or negligently hires illegal aliens. The government can help them by making it easier to identify those who are here illegally and denying them the benefits citizens enjoy AND PAY FOR! This would of course result in a bit of discrimination, although it should be applied to all workers no matter their race, and would probably need some governmental oversight. This is far less damaging to the economy and nation, however, than the current swarm of illegal aliens.

While my solutions may seem overly harsh, they follow a definite band-aid method of solving the problem, not a pathetic please everyone consensus style solution. Amnesty, as has been proven time and again, sounds like the humanitarian thing to do, but it will only damage our nation, our economy, and exacerbate the problem. I also note that by using my plan, we could set up voluntary deportation centers around the country as the jobs dry up for illegal aliens, avoiding costly the jailing of illegal aliens. Company executives are not likely to risk jail time for themselves, especially if they were risking felony convictions, and the costs associated with hiring native born citizens is not that much higher in actuality.

Finally I conclude with the following theoretical question for you to ponder:

If hiring illegal aliens is so palpable, why do convicts, minority-citizens of the United States, being released from jail having served their time finding it so hard to find entry level work? Are they not the same person, from a sociological perspective, as an illegal alien?

Coming Soon...

Attention all freepers and bloggers, a major policy paper is coming soon...

Currently being considered by the desk of the Dreamer:
1) Illegal immigration: Certain to be the top issue for the remainder of the year, even if gas prices hit $10 a gallon.

2) Iran + Nukes = WWIII: We've been waiting for this for years, nuclear weapons and a nation crazy enough to use them. Not since Midwesterners were in the White House has this combination existed, even the Russians with all their blustering didn't have the balls to use them.

3) Israel vs. Oil: The Anti-Castro lobby is stronger today than the pro-Israel groups, with the Iraq war being smashed by the media daily and the surprisingly anti-Semitic left wing of the Democrats blaming the Neo-cons (as Rush would intone: 'jeeewwwssss...').

4) What's a Conservative to do? Advice for the terminally intelligent and patriotic.

Friday, February 10, 2006

Now I'm Angry

Not at the officials, that ended as soon as I went to bad following Super Bowl XL, as in, Extra Large Fix. Not at the players, that ended the next day, as I began mentally preparing for the off-season, also known as, "What are the Angels up to?"

I am angry with the sportswriters. The "Stop the Whining" authors. The, "No one will remember in 4 years who lost this Super Bowl" crowd. I am angry with Gene Wojciechowski of ESPN. Ask anyone from Buffalo who lost the Super Bowl in 1991-1994. I am sure they know.

How can you be so AMAZINGLY shortsighted? " The Seahawks had their chances... to overcome the Steelers and, if they insist, the refs, too." Oh really Gene (Wojciechowski of ESPN)? The same Seahawks that were four point dogs to the POWERFUL Steelers defense? The same Seahawks that had only gotten to the Super Bowl through a 'cake' schedule of the NFC Worst? Those Seahawks are now capable of beating not just the Steelers and a hostile crowd, but the Officials of the game too? Wow, how quickly a bottle of Jack Daniels and some Rose colored (courtesy NFL) glasses can change your perspective!

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2322300
(please don't sue the poor)

I wonder at what point of the game were the Seahawks to suddenly overcome the mistakes? After throwing a TD pass to Darrell Jackson, the Steelers’s defense shifting their coverage, and the Seahawks now in a 1st and 25, all they have to do is throw another pass in the end zone? Is that all you have to do? I guess that is why you write about football, because you clearly know nothing about the game. Going from a 1st and 10 resulting in a touchdown and now having to go 25 yards for a first down as well as having a now MORE aggressive defense that just got rewarded for bumping a receiver in the end zone; doesn't normally result in a TD.

"The striped shirts didn't cause the Seahawks defense to give up a Steelers first down on a third-and-28 situation (which later led to the Roethlisberger disputed TD)." Sure they did, by not calling a hold on any of the Steelers’s lineman on that play. You watch that play again and tell me there are no holds, as defined by the ref's themselves when they called Sean Locklear for it twice. Sorry Gene, but wrong again.

"The striped shirts didn't cause the Seahawks defense to give up the longest touchdown run in Super Bowl history." The fact the Steelers’s by the second half realized there would be no penalties against them helped them push the envelope on 'blocking' on this play. To say the ref's had no influence on a run of 75 yards against a defense that had held the Steelers to virtually 0 yards in the first half is ridiculous. Yeah Gene, wrong again.

"Or cause Seahawks quarterback Matt Hasselbeck to throw a killer interception with nearly 11 minutes left in the game and Seattle trailing by only four points." Actually they did, by calling the worst ever holding call in the history of the Super Bowl. And they even helped the reverse pass TD by calling a bogus penalty on Hasselbeck, the one where he low blocked someone he didn't touch, instant awesome field position. Wow Gene, suddenly your conversion rate in your article's "Red Zone" is worse than the Seahawk's.

Your 'lone Touchdown' Gene actually occurs earlier in the article. It is short and sweet and correct, "No one can deny there were questionable calls during the game." Why do you then defend the practice of making questionable calls? All the 'Latte Nation' wants is a little recognition that they deserved a better chance at a championship. Perhaps the reason for your defense of the officiating can be found in your earlier articles, like this one, "Bettis' homecoming should have happy ending"

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?columnist=wojciechowski_gene&id=2318982

Perhaps you should remind everyone that, "I found a seat on the Steelers bandwagon after the AFC wild-card victory at Cincinnati -- and I'm staying there." before you start instructing fans anywhere to stop whining about a game you clearly are biased about. Also, write an intelligent article for once and spare ESPN the embarassment of having your idiocy on its front page.