Mexico: All talk, still no walk

Yesterday, President Obama had a meeting with President Felipe Calderon of Mexico to discuss that country's growing drug cartel violence and the issues on the U.S. border. The problem is not going away anytime soon.

Since 2006, President Calderon has attempted to crack down on drug cartel violence throughout Mexico and it is apparent that he is loosing. Over the last four and a half years, some 30,000 people in Mexico have been killed in drug cartel related violence, and the Mexican Military and Police Force have been largely outnumbered.

Stories of drug cartel violence continues to escalate. In various cities across Mexico, the mutilated remains of people are showing up all over the streets.

Now, the violence is pouring onto U.S. soil, and the U.S., by the way, happens to be a primary financier and buyer of drugs, not to mention a supplier of weapons to Mexican drug cartel organizations. 

In Phoenix, the city happens to be the second "kidnapping" capitol of the world thanks to criminal illegal aliens.
Back in October, a married couple on Falcon Lake, Texas which also lies on Mexico's border, were ambushed by drug cartel members. The husband was killed and the wife was able to get away. A Mexican police commander investigating the case was decapitated and his head later turned up at a Mexican Army base.

That same month in Chandler, Arizona, an illegal alien was arrested for beheading a man who had an association with drug smuggling.

And, more recently, a U.S. ICE Agent was ambushed and killed on a Mexican highway.

It is arguably the worst that Mexico and the U.S. has ever seen.

Despite all of this, President Calderon and President Obama continue to just talk about the drug cartel violence in Mexico, the gang members and the illegal alien population in the United States. Yet both of them continue to offer no solution to stop and prevent Mexico's drug cartel problems from continuing, nor expressing any solution to our own country's border security.

Honestly, it does not take rocket science. Secure the border, work on a rational and humane solution on our illegal immigration problem and work jointly with Mexico to remove the drug cartels.

But unfortunately, our Congress and this Administration, just like every Administration in the last twenty years, still cannot figure it out.

How pathetic.

Jerry Brown should take a lesson from Scott Walker

California Governor Jerry Brown is continuing to push for more taxes, something that would most likely become nothing more than a burden for just about everyone in the State.

The Los Angeles Times reported on Friday that Governor Brown is insisting on pushing for a $25 billion cut in State services, if voters do not approve more taxes. Of course there is already more bickering up in Sacramento, as Democrats act like a bunch of rubber stamps anyway and a majority of Republicans signed a tax pledge last year vowing to vote against any tax hike period. However there are some Republican State Senators that Governor Brown says he can win over.

I guess some Republicans are able to show their true colors as a bunch of back stabbing worms.

But perhaps Governor Brown should take a lesson from Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. Last week, the Wisconsin Assembly approved a bill to take away union rights. You know, the same unions that receive largely inflated pension funds and huge pay checks? And the same unions that are part of the problem as to why States across the nation continue to suffer financially because the tax payers are on the hook to pay for all of their crap?

It was amazing to finally see politicians do something which usually only receives talk and no walk. 

Only if Governor Brown would take note of Wisconsin's unprecedented steps at real union reform, but the problem with Governor Brown is that he protects State unions, not to mention illegal aliens. The two huge factors that play a part in California's escalating financial crisis and yet he refuses to even acknowledge this. To him, it is all about raising taxes on Californians. No other alternative exists.

I wonder if Governor Brown has any conscious at all to the families in California? Thanks to the protests in the Middle East, gasoline prices have begun to skyrocket and if it continues, people will have to start spending less and California already suffers from 12% unemployment. I'd really like to know why Governor Brown thinks it is so necessary to add more fuel to the fire, instead of looking at alternative solutions to solve the problems that have cost this State an arm and a leg for decades now.

Take a lesson from Wisconsin, Governor Brown. At least they're actually doing something.

Arizona countersues Federal Government over immigration bill

The State of Arizona has decided to sue the United States Government for failing to secure the State's border with Mexico and failing to enforce the laws that are already Federal Statutes.

This day has been coming for quite some time, as the Obama Administration, much like the Bush Administration, continuously embarrassed themselves by filing a law-suit against Arizona after the State passed SB1070 which would allow for more protective measures to secure the border with Mexico, deport illegal aliens and allow police officers to profile those that are not suppose to be in the country without proper paperwork.

Governor Jan Brewer decided to move forward on filing a counter suit against the United States Government, because "the federal government failed to protect the citizens of Arizona." And she has a good point.

While the Obama Administration continued to waste the taxpayers time and money for allowing a ridiculous law-suit to be filed in the first place since everyone in Washington D.C. has been lazy on enforcing immigration policy for many years, Arizona has been riddled with skyrocketing costs for the incarceration of criminals from Mexico, crime and Phoenix becoming the second 'kidnapping capital of the world'.

Despite the fact that a U.S. District Judge barred a specific requirement concerning police officers asking illegal aliens their immigration status, Governor Brewer remains optimistic and is determined to see Arizona win at the end of the day.

Isn't it just hypocritical of the Obama Administration to make outrageous remarks that the Arizona Law is Unconstitutional because illegal aliens don't have the documentation they're required to have, yet the Health Care Law he passed last year, requires everyone to have documentation on their insurance status?


The contradictions of this Administration is breath taking, and perhaps President Obama should shut up and get with the program and finally do something meaningful, as well as humane when it comes to the issue of illegal immigration. For one, you can start by getting rid of every single dirt bag drug dealer and gang-banger in the country and deport them back to their home country. Secondly, those that are living in this country and are contributing to our economy, allow them a rational and effective path to citizenship. Third, leave Arizona alone and realize that U.S. Congress, as well as yourself and former President Bush have failed to enforce immigration laws that are already on the Federal Government's books; and finally, address the ever-growing drug violence in Mexico and begin a strategic alliance with President Calderon on how to defeat the drug trafficking throughout our Southern neighbors... before it ultimately spills over into our territory.


For reasons like this, is exactly why Arizona passed this law in the first place.

Governor Jerry Brown's election a good idea?

California Governor Jerry Brown continues with his wrath of bringing nothing new to California, and wants everyone in the State to vote in a special election to approve his budget deficit plan. Sounds like a coy. Governor Brown also is apparently semi-delusional on this issue since Governor Schwarzenegger asked for basically the same special election last year, which was overwhelming defeated by the people of California.

Yet when you consider that all of the politicians in Sacramento were elected to solve these problems, none of them will admit that they are all part of the problem as to why this State continues to suffer financially.

Since the politicians in Sacramento have no interest in solving real problems, lets give Governor Jerry Brown the benefit of the doubt on his budget deficit plan he wants Californians to vote on later this year.

In this special election, lets throw in the following as a rational solution to solve the $25 billion deficit:

- Vote for a part-time State Legislature that congresses every other year and reduces perks for all of them.

- Vote for an amendment to the California Constitution, which specifies that deficits will not be allowed.

- Eliminate the State Employment by 30%.

- No raises to State employee salaries and benefits, until the budget deficit is reduced to workable levels.

- Eliminate public employee unions.

- Eliminate worthless Governor appointed State boards and commissions that collect hundreds of thousands of dollars, for doing absolutely nothing.

- Eliminate programs that provide benefits to illegal aliens;

- And finally, lets sell or auction off all of that unused property which is owned by the State and is just accumulating depreciation.

What do you think Governor Brown? If this is all on the ballot, we may very well eliminate California's budget deficit entirely!

California’s Law supersedes Federal Immigration Statute, but Arizona cannot enforce Federal Immigration Law?

The California Supreme Court ruled on Monday that illegal aliens are allowed to pay cheaper in-state tuition rates at California universities including the UC systems. The UC systems in particular, charge about $12,000 per year for in-state fees, and $35,000 for out of state.

Some critics are arguing that California’s decision on this matter is a violation of the 1996 Federal Statute, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act, which prohibits education benefits to illegal aliens, versus those immigrants that are actually here legally. But the California Supreme Court says that the State Law is not conflicting with the Federal Law because in California, any immigrant can automatically apply for in-state tuition as long as that immigrant attended high school within the State for three years.

This is a rather frustrating matter especially if you look at this somewhat in comparison to Arizona’s decision earlier this year to enforce its border security and deport persons that were in the State illegally, after the Federal Government stood firm on doing nothing, as it has done for many years. No surprise there.

But one might argue that Arizona enforcing the Federal Immigration Law is not the same situation as granting educational benefits to illegal aliens in California. Well, in fact there are some similarities when it comes to Federal Law. Under Aliens and Nationality 8 USC Section 1304, Provision E (and yes the Federal Law does address immigrants as aliens, not undocumented persons, but I digress) clearly spells out that any alien 18 years of age or older must possess a certificate of alien registration receipt card. Failure to do so, results in a misdemeanor, fined $100 and/or a 30 day imprisonment.

What happens if this illegal alien does not hold this paperwork after he or she is accepted to attend college in California? Does the Federal Immigration Law become enforceable, or are they just allowed to continue to attend college?

So California is allowed to grant educational benefits to illegal aliens if they’ve attended high school for at least three years, even after the California Supreme Court says State Law is not conflicting with the 1996 Federal Statute prohibiting such educational benefits, but Arizona, enforcing Federal Immigration Law within its State boundaries, has an injunction filed by the Arizona Supreme Court, blocking the enforcement? There seems to be a huge conflict between State Law and the Federal Law and what a State can and cannot do when it comes to illegal aliens.

I have to say that California seems to be holding a higher degree of amnesty for those illegal aliens attending high school for three years, versus others coming to California seeking an education from out of state. Why does that not sound somewhat discriminatory in a way? If you’re a permanent United States citizen, a student from Arizona or Colorado and you move to California, do you still have to end up paying more for education than the illegal alien now?

At the height when California public universities, both the UC and CSU systems are raising the tuition fees, this seems more like a pandering of making education “less expensive” for illegal aliens.

I will go ahead and note that the United States is the most welcoming country in the world, and encourage my generation from all over the world to come to this country, get an education and apply for a visa or citizenship. I even have friends from college that are from countries like Brazil, Germany, Sweden and Canada who all have to pay the certain out of state fees, some are seeking U.S. citizenship. Yet, they all have to wait, while other illegal aliens cut to the front of the line, and do not speak a word of English, and are able to apply for this low cost tuition for their education.  

It is truly remarkable that when it comes to our Federal Immigration Laws, Arizona mirrored that law, yet the similar Federal Immigration Statutes when it comes to certain education benefits of illegal aliens is not enforced upon California’s State Law.

When are we going to draw the line, and resolve the conflict?

Texas aims to create immigration law like Arizona

Texas, like the rest of the country, is getting tired of illegal immigration and they are considering adopting the same kind of law that made Arizona so controversial earlier this year.

Debbie Riddle, a Texas State Representative from Houston actually camped out all night on the State Capitol in Austin and went ahead in filing the immigration bill because she claims, "the people of Texas are no longer asking, but demanding it. We have to make some significant steps toward illegal immigration and in addition to that, border security."

I give full credit to Ms. Riddle for moving in the right direction on establishing a new immigration law in Texas, and it is a dire shame that the rest of the Border States are not taking any notice. Now Ms. Riddle does acknowledge that her proposed law does have some differences such as if someone is arrested on a warrantless arrest, a law enforcement officer can inquire to one's legal status and if this person is here illegally and verified through Immigration and Customs Enforcement, they can actually be detained for illegal trespassing, which would result in a misdemeanor.

It would probably be very beneficial for Texas to go ahead and vote on this bill, and for Governor Rick Perry to sign it into law. In Houston, the gang-related violence connected with Mexican drug cartels has risen more than 250% since 2004, and it has become a real threat to the safety and security of the citizens living in Houston and throughout the rest of the State, particularly the areas near the border. This was exactly the reason why Arizona signed their law into effect in the first place..., to enforce its own laws in accordance of the federal law, and to protect its people. Something that the people in Washington D.C., simply don't care anything about.

Texas has always been a state that has sort of a "maverick" viewpoint on issues, and they're usually not the kind of state to put up with nonsense. Governor Perry earlier this year was slightly critical of Arizona's right to enforce immigration law and protect its people, saying it was a federal responsibility. Hopefully he will now recognize that is a serious issue, the violence on the borders has escalated this year, and the backstabbing members of Congress in Washington are not going to do anything to enforce the federal immigration law and help the States protect themselves from the in-pouring of hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens, and members of the criminal drug cartels.

For liberal America, its all theory to them, the Hispanic/Latin America Human Rights Groups and the ACLU, for example, believe that the federal immigration law needs to simply be ignored, and we're all suppose to keep our borders wide open, let all of the these people just come in here who don't speak a word of English, overpopulate our States, take advantage of our broken welfare system, destroy our cities with garbage and make way for drug cartels as a central place to carry out their business.

It is almost as though liberal America, who always voice their opinion on wanting 'freedom for all', wants to simply disband all of our existing laws, and turn us into a complete anarchy country. Speaking from someone from California, I guess I can relate on that level since California is on the verge of collapse and the cost of illegal immigration is almost about half of California's financial problems. I'm sure you're going to hear all sorts of criticism from these types of left-wing radical groups that it’s going to lead to racial profiling, or it’s a violation of human rights.

Well, who cares! The fact of the matter is, quite frankly, people are sick and tired of putting up with this problem.

We don't need anymore illegal aliens in this country; we don't need anymore members of drug cartels trafficking through our States posing as a threat to people; we as taxpayers, don't need to have to continue to pay tens of billions of dollars a year for the costs of illegal aliens, our States and our Country simply cannot afford it any longer.

Once the Texas legislature votes on the bill, hopefully Governor Perry will reconsider his thoughts and sign the bill into law. Do it Governor Perry!

Chris Pareja, a real Independent who challenged a real problem

Not many people in California's 13th Congressional District seem to be familiar with Chris Pareja, the Independent candidate who challenged long time incumbent Democratic Congressman Pete Stark.

In addition to my previous blog post about California's ignorance, the situation in Congressman Stark's district and his treatment to the people who have elected him to office since 1973, should be added to that list.

Congressman Stark demonstrates that he is beyond ignorant, sleazy and has no real honor whatsoever in representing his constituents. I am going to assume two possible scenarios as to why he keeps his Congressional seat and that is: people who elect him every year are your typical voters who vote for the incumbent every election, or they are just radical left wing Democrats with no real purpose accept to keep a failure in Congress.

Congressman Stark has also developed a notorious reputation for becoming perhaps one of the more controversial members of the U.S. House of Representatives, choosing to use sarcasm and hateful dialogue when speaking to his people, instead of, you know, actually listening to his people and doing the job he is elected to do. It's quite sickening indeed.

On June 26th, 2010, Congressman Stark held a town hall meeting in his district in which many of his constituents addressed the issue of border security and illegal immigration. The Congressman chose to do nothing. He did not give any insight into solving the problem of illegal immigration, instead attacked one constituent as a member of the 'Minute Men' project and pondered the question "who are you going to kill today?"  The constituent, indicating that it is not the Minute Mens' responsibility to enforce immigration law, it is the duty of the Federal Government.

Congressman Stark, in a shocking display of immaturity, responded "I'm not the Government". After several minutes of the Congressman mocking this particular constituent, and other members in the audience, one member simply asked "this is a very serious matter, why are you making fun of it?" The Congressman's disgraceful remark "I don't need to make fun of it sir, you do a fine job at doing that yourself".

The video of the Congressman's town hall meeting that day is here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHny1U4kdxk&feature=related

The man in the red shirt and black dress coat is of course, Chris Pareja who was at the meeting to perhaps get a feeling of the lack of representation on the part of Congressman Stark. I'm sure the outcome of this meeting was just more reason for Mr. Pareja to run as an Independent Candidate, and I'm sure he must have been shocked to see the horrible display of carnival acts by the Congressman.

Towards the end of this meeting, Mr. Pareja asks "you've been in office for 38 years, all 38 years that I've been on the planet...what are your plans of retirement?" Congressman Stark's response "I have no plans for retirement."

Unfortunately the Congressman stood by his decision not to retire, having been re-elected this last Tuesday.

But I have to give Mr. Pareja a great deal of credit for standing up for the people, especially at this meeting back in June, when Congressman Stark refused to do anything to address the situation of illegal immigration. I think it is a shame that individuals choosing to run as Independents have to garner a certain number of signatures within a certain period of time if they want to appear on the ballot. In Mr. Pareja's case, he had to secure a required 9,260 nomination signatures to appear on the ballot to try and unseat Congressman Stark. But at least Mr. Pareja challenged this Congressman, and helped show that he is a real problem with what Americans are angry about today: The failure to be properly represented by our Congressmen.

While Mr. Pareja was not elected, he can become a new influence in California's 13th Congressional District and help expose the truth as to the inability of this Congressman to do anything and how he has mistreated the people that he is supposed to be working for.

I'm personally hoping that Mr. Pareja will choose to re-run as an Independent in the 2012 election, and by that time, maybe enough voters will see Congressman Stark for what he really is: one of the most despicable members of the United States House of Representatives.

It is going to get real ugly here in California

As a lifelong resident of California and despite that I am only 24 years old, I've seen California go through tough times. Maybe this sounds too premature to say someone my age and in my generation see California crumble year after year after year.

But the evidence speaks for itself:

We've had some of the worst Governors in both parties. Pete Wilson, a Republican, deregulated electricity. Then, after he left office, we get Democratic Governor Gray Davis, who threw California into a deficit crisis and we had rolling blackouts. The voters of California revolted in 2003, and threw Davis out as Governor. So then, we get this has-been famous actor, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger who vowed to stop State spending and cut taxes.

What in the hell happened?

Schwarzenegger did absolutely nothing. He campaigned as the new 'Reform' Governor, and all of his reforms have proven to be total failures. He did not cut taxes, he raised them. In February, 2009, he joined Democrat Karen Bass, the Speaker of the State Assembly, Republican State Senator Dave Cogdill, Republican State Assemblyman Mike Villines and Democratic State Senator /President Pro-Tem Darrell Steinberg all came together in what they called a "bi-partisan compromise" to help close a portion of California's $42 billion shortfall.

How did they do this? Well amid the fact that entire State, being the seventh largest in the world's economy was pretty much (and continues) to tedder on the verge of bankruptcy, they all elected to raise everyone's taxes, after they pledged in 2006, that they would NEVER do such a thing to the people of California.

Instead of Governor Schwarzenegger asking the Democratic controlled Assembly to reform pension funds to the unions, and maybe do something about the illegal immigration crisis in California which in 2005 alone, the State spent nearly $12.5 billion in the costs of illegal immigration; they all decided to raise everyone's taxes. As a result, those four State representatives, two Democrats and two Republicans were awarded the John F. Kennedy Profile and Courage Award by Caroline Kennedy earlier this year. It's disgraceful.

Some of the other elected State representatives we've had in recent years have demonstrated that they are also a complete, utter embarassment. In addition to the traitors mentioned above, why don't we all have a flashback for a moment for some of the other corrupt politicans in California:

- Fabian Nunez (former Democratic State Assemblyman, former Speaker of the State Assembly): In October, 2007, the Los Angeles Times reported that Nunez spent tens of thousands of dollars of our tax payer money for his own personal use including vacations, luxurious meals and entertainment. Despite an investigation, he was not convicted. Well, what a surprise.

- Anthony Adams (former Republican State Assemblyman): He also took a tax pledge, vowing to never increase anyone's taxes in his district, but did it anyway. The people in his district started the recall paperwork, but failed.

- Michael Duvall (former Republican State Assemblyman): He was caught on tape in July, 2009 to admitting he had affairs with two women and even went into details about the sex with both of them. He resigned in disgrace.

- Roy Ashburn (Republican State Senator): He represents my district in Kern County, and I actually know Roy Ashburn very well and was a political friend of my family. Well, despite the fact that he was married and has two daughters, people always accused Senator Ashburn of being gay. After campaigning against the Same-Sex marraige proposition in 2008, Ashburn was arrested in March of 2010 for driving drunk after he left a gay-night club in Sacramento. After making bail, he admitted that he was indeed, gay. He should resign.

- Pat Wiggins (Democratic State Senator): She is apparently not fitted to continue to serve as State Senator in California any longer, and did not seek re-election this year. At least on two different occasions in the couple of years, Wiggins has had behavioral outbursts on the Senate floor, at one point scolding an aide and yelling obscenities at people testifying before the State Senate. They kept her on just to have a majority vote, despite the fact that she apparently has been diagnoised with dementia.

Those are just a few of the corrupt politicans that have been elected to serve our State in recent years, and this is what they do up there.

Since neither party is committed to helping California, the deficits continued to rise in California, it continues to suffer from a $20 billion budget gap and the unemployment rate is about 12.5%, and businesses and corporations are leaving every other week because of the unfriendly business environment and high fees. It is virtually unsustainable. One would think by now that the people in California would finally revolt and ask for something to be done, but that was simply not the case in last night's election in California.

California has already had Jerry Brown as a Governor back in 1975, and turning his tenure then, California's $6 billion surplus, was turned into a $1 billion deficit. Of course, in retrospect, that is nothing compared to what Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger have done.

Brown, who also served as State Attorney General in recent years, had been quoted as saying "we need to live within our means". What a load. The fact is very clear that now Governor-elect Brown, will favor special interest groups, the unions and all of their pension plans and most likely, do nothing about the illegal immigration crisis. The fact that Democrats won largely last night here in California, should send disturbing messages to everyone, but perhaps I'm speaking too soon. After all, a majority of Californians voted these people into office because they're all liberals, but maybe in the next year or so, they will see the writing on the wall, and see that they made a significant mistake.

Please do not get me wrong, I did not think too highly of Meg Whitman in the last month of her campaign. While I agreed with her notion of creating jobs, cutting spending and fixing education and all of the works, she did come from a business background, but unfortunately, she knows nothing about the political system in California and what the people really wanted. Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, changed her campaign several times, and embarassingly contradicted herself when it came to the issue of illegal immigration, for example, at one point saying she was "tough as nails on illegal immigration... to end sanctuary cities like San Francisco...", then deciding to set up bill board ads in Spanish saying she supported immigration reform in an attempt to garner more Hispanic voters... and that took votes away from her.

Additionally, Barbara Boxer retained her U.S. Senate seat, even though it would have only taken a few more votes to get her the hell out of office; and we have this sanctuary city supporter/mayor of San Francisco Gavin Newsom to become Lieutenant Governor. Is he going to favor shutting out sanctuary policies in cities like the one he ran which violates federal law...? Probably not. So instead of California voters, wanting to initiate change like pension reform for State workers, solving illegal immigration, fixing education and cutting spending... instead we all decided to vote for this freak show.

Maybe I can understand slightly why Jerry Brown won the Governor's race. People were tired of Schwarzenegger. So instead, they vote for the liberal candidate. I decided to vote for neither in the end... I voted for the Libertarian candidate Dale Ogden.

Now that the election in California is over, I can honestly say that nothing is going to be done. There will be absolutely no improvement in California's political system because the people that vote in this State are obviously arrogant, favor left-leaning ideaology that has proven to be a failure, they don't get the facts correct on the issues and continue to support huge salaries and pension funds for unions and State workers.

If Jerry Brown actually has any guts, he will address those matters laid out above. Stop the immigration crisis and reform pension funds and salaries, instead of focusing on a decision to possibly repeal Proposition 13 and raise everyone's property taxes. Those two issues are critical with relation to spending as to why California has suffered for so many years. Solve those problems, and we will be on the road to financial recovery.

But I honestly cannot see it coming into fruition, because nobody wants to hear it.

Now get ready for more problems in California. Proposition 23, which challenged the Global Warming Final Solutions Act signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger, failed last night. This means more than likely, more jobs will decline, and taxes for gasoline prices will rise. Also Proposition 19 failed to legalize marijurana. Not entirely surprised, except the fact it would have put criminal drug cartels out of business and the State maybe would have generated tax revenue, although I understood the notion of wanting to keep it away from children... of course.

Nevertheless, this State is in some really hard times and it can only get worse. This State is going to get ugly real fast. They better do something soon to solve our financial problems, otherwise, California may as well just go bankrupt and maybe decide turn itself back over to Mexico.