Search
Archives

You are currently browsing the blog archives.

Categories

Tuesday night, Beaumont and San Diego became the latest cities to officially reject California’s SB 54 California Values Act, aka California’s Sanctuary State law. In Beaumont, the Beaumont City Council voted 3-2 tonight to approve a resolution asserting that California’s so-called ‘sanctuary state’ law is incompatible with federal law and, therefore, illegitimate. Beaumont is the first Inland Empire municipality to oppose Senate Bill 54, the ‘California Values Act,’ joining Orange County and a number of its cities in challenging the statute’s validity.”

Also on Tuesday night, the “San Diego County Board of Supervisors voted 3-1 Tuesday to support the Trump administration’s lawsuit against California over so-called sanctuary laws that the state passed last year to limit its role in immigration enforcement. The county will file an amicus brief at the first available opportunity, likely if and when the case moves to a higher court on appeal, said Supervisor Kristin Gaspar, chairwoman of the board.”

I’d like to thank Agnes Gibboney, one of the Angel Moms I’ve had the privilege of interviewing, for tipping me off about the Beaumont vote.

It’s unmistakable that the tide is turning against the Sanctuary advocates. A month ago, Gov. Jerry Brown and California State Attorney General Xavier Becerra were lipping off to President Trump. Now, they’re in full retreat. According to Agnes and others, Californians are speaking up against the Democrats’ anti-safety policies. One of the ‘others’ is Kristin Gaspar, the chairwoman of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors. Ms. Gaspar is also running to replace Rep. Darrell Issa in the US Congress. After Tuesday night’s vote, Fox News’ Ed Henry interviewed Ms. Gaspar about their vote. Here’s that interview:

I found this snippet disturbing:

SB 54 also mandates that schools, health facilities, libraries an courthouses serve as ‘safe zones,’ where undocumented immigrants can come and go without risk of detention.

I don’t see how that’s enforceable since the sidewalks and city streets are public property. It’s possible that SB 54 could suggest those areas as safe zones. I don’t see how California could mandate that those areas be safe zones.

In the end, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors listened to their constituents:

During the announcement of the vote, Gaspar showed printouts of emails she received from each side of the debate. The stack of emails criticizing her for considering support for the lawsuit was not much thicker than a legal pad. The stack of emails asking her to support the Trump administration’s legal challenge was more than a foot tall.

On a political note, Democrats had to think that they’d flip Darrell Issa’s seat after he narrowly defeated Doug Applegate, his Democratic opponent, by 1,600+ votes. With an increase in Republican voter intensity in San Diego, a pretty red district, coupled with Ms. Gaspar’s popularity, I’d say another Republican seat is a bigger challenge for the Democrats than it was a month ago.

Based on the reports I’m getting from southern California, I’m getting skeptical that Democrats will get enough seats from California to flip the House.

Margaret Baker, who lives near the border, told the board that backing the lawsuit will discourage immigrants from reporting crime. “We see this lawsuit as an attack on our safety and the well-being of our community,” she said.

The reports I’m getting from southern California is that significant numbers of illegal immigrants are injuring pedestrians in hit-and-run accidents, with many legal residents getting severely injured. It’s impossible to make the case that shielding these illegal immigrants from prosecution is making San Diego safe.

Facts on the ground are changing the debate more than Jerry Brown can spin things. That truth should frighten Democrats.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A week ago, Jerry Brown and Xavier Becerra, California’s governor and state attorney general respectively, were riding high while touting California’s sanctuary state law. Since then, Brown and Becerra have done nothing but backtrack on immigration. Don’t expect their losing streak to end anytime soon. Los Alamitos was the first openly defiant city to challenge SB 54. It wasn’t the last.

Last night, Los Alamitos voted for a second time to opt out of SB 54. By a vote of 4-1, “Los Alamitos Council members voted … to opt out of a state law that prohibited state and local police agencies from informing federal authorities in cases when illegal immigrants facing deportation are released from detention.”

Councilman Mark Chirco was the lone dissenting vote. Afterwards, Chirco said “the council has no legal authority to approve the ordinance and criticized the council members for what he called being irresponsible, stating that the measure will open the city to lawsuits.”

That started the Democrats’ criticism:

Shortly after the vote, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) tweeted that the ordinance is “a blatant violation of the city’s obligation to follow a state law that puts our local resources to use for the safety of our communities rather than toward federal immigration agencies.” The civil rights group previously threatened the city with a lawsuit if it passes the ordinance.

It isn’t surprising that the ACLU has it bassackwards. California doesn’t have the authority to ignore federal immigration policies. Let’s be blunt. That’s what California is doing by not notifying ICE of when illegal immigrants are getting out of jail.

The Democrats’ arguments are worthless as trash:

Omar Siddiqui, a U.S. Congressional candidate in California running to unseat Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, also spoke at the meeting, urging the council to oppose the motion as “our communities are safer when we work with each other and trust each other, not when we operate under a police state.”

Tell that to the Steinle family. This is an outright lie that’s told by Democrats. There’s no proof that verifies that as anything more than spin or theory.

Don’t be surprised if people reject Siddiqui. There’s an anti-sanctuary state backlash building in California. More people are getting tired of California’s failed liberal policies, especially with regards to illegal immigration. They’re tired of hearing how safe their communities are when they aren’t.

It doesn’t require a rocket scientist to figure out that this controversy is increasing voter intensity on the right. People are rejecting the Democrats’ anything goes immigration policies.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , ,

Almost reflexively, Democrats insist that Central Americans flee their country of origin to avoid the gang violence. This article is a good example of that reaction. This recent survey hints that NBC is buying someone’s spin.

First, the NBC article states “At its largest, the caravan included more than 1,500 members. Although many have chosen to stay in Mexico to pursue asylum, just over 600 of them will continue traveling to the United States. Its members are fleeing violence and political conflict in Honduras and other Central American nations. One Salvadoran caravan member said she fears for her life in El Salvador and feels she must continue to the United States in order to be safe from gang violence.”

That won’t be an easy sell. According to the survey, “Hondurans emigrate primarily for economic reasons, not violence, according to a new survey by a Jesuit-run research and social action center in that country. The report by the Reflection, Research, and Communication Team (ERIC-SJ as it is known in Spanish) is based on a survey of public perceptions of Honduras’ social, political, and economic situation in 2017. ERIC-SJ conducted the survey February 12-22, 2018, with a national sample of 1,584 valid questionnaires, which is representative of all persons over 18 who live in the country.”

These are some of the questions survey respondents were asked:

  1. Under the current situation in the country, have you thought or wished to emigrate?
  2. Has a member of the family emigrated in the last 4 years?
  3. Could you tell me the reasons why your family member emigrated from the country? (Answered by those who answered the previous question in the affirmative)
  4. Do you know if an acquaintance, relative, or neighbor has emigrated due to violence?

According to the article, respondents said:

The report confirmed the economic crisis in Honduras as the main cause for migration. Of the respondents that had a family member who had emigrated in the last four years, 82.9 percent did so due to lack of employment and opportunities to generate an income. Meanwhile, 11.3 percent migrated due to violence and insecurity. In comparison, the 2015 ERIC-SJ survey showed that 77.6 percent migrated for economic reasons and 16.9 percent migrated due to violence.

This video follows the script:

I won’t say that Honduras is a tropical paradise. I’m simply skeptical of the frequent articles that portray Honduras ‘migrants’ as fleeing violence.

Technorati: , , , ,

Anyone that thinks liberalism is intellectually significant is kidding themselves. Think of this: liberals think that 18-year-olds are old enough to serve in the military but too stupid to make an informed decision about smoking and buying firearms. Further, Democrats think that that 16-year-olds can cast well-informed votes. If those facts don’t give you intellectual whiplash, then you’re a liberal.

This article almost gave me intellectual whiplash. Fortunately, I could tell from the title of the article that this was typical Democrat propaganda.

The article opens by saying “Akron City Council is expected to vote tonight on whether to prohibit the sale of tobacco products to those under 21. Proponents hope the rest of the Summit County will follow Akron’s lead.”

That sounds eerily similar to the arguments made by proponents of a similar measure put before the St. Cloud City Council. In that instance, the Council passed the proposed ordinance 4-3. After the motion was made and seconded in St. Cloud, Mark Fritz, the owner of E-Cig Emporium in St. Cloud, testified, saying “Your ordinance will not stop them. You need to recognize all you’re doing is hurting your local businesses.”

What Fritz referred to is the fact that St. Cloud’s neighboring cities haven’t adopted this ill-fated measure. It’s ill-fated because the 26th Amendment states:

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.
Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

The minute these laws get challenged, they’ll be flushed into the dustbin of history by the Supreme Court. One of the organizations pushing the 21 age limit for smoking in Minnesota is Clearway Minnesota / Minnesotans For A Smoke Free Generation. They present as fact this opinion:

Raising the purchase age to 21 will prevent youth tobacco use and save lives.

It’s impossible to verify this. Something else worth considering is whether the laws will be enforced. This video hints that they aren’t enforced:

That’s before talking about how high a priority preventing ‘under-age’ smoking is to police departments. I can’t picture a PD for a city the size of Akron will put a high priority on stopping underage smoking when there’s an opioid epidemic underway. There’s only so many hours in a day. Police departments don’t have unlimited resources.

That’s why passing these laws is a waste of time. If you want to decrease teenage smoking, education programs are much more efficient than banning products.

Technorati: , , , , , , , ,

Are Student Ratings Important?
by Silence Dogood

I can’t say that I recommend the RATE MY PROFESSORS website. A lot of the time, I think it is just an outlet for frustrated students to vent their frustration. Truthfully, until last Wednesday, I had never looked at the website. But I was curious and just for fun decided to take a look to see what I might find. I looked first at St. Cloud State University.

Not really understanding what a 3.4 might mean, for comparison I looked at Minnesota State University—Mankato rankings, the university most similar to SCSU in the Minnesota State System.

Based on these overall rankings, which are not scientifically valid, SCSU comes out ahead of only Metropolitan State University in the overall quality rating!

For each and every measure, SCSU trails MSU—Mankato. Most significantly, in the safety ranking 3.0 vs. 3.8. But for the reputation measure, I was a bit miffed at SCSU’s reputation ranking of 3.1 vs. MSU—Mankato’s 3.4.

Next, I decided to look at the rest of the universities in the Minnesota State System.

However, what is clearly unsettling is that SCSU trails ALL of the universities in the Minnesota State System in the ranking for reputation:

These rankings may be anecdotal and have some validity issues. However, students use them. And they use them a lot!

For many years, administrators have said that SCSU hasn’t done a good job ‘telling its story.’ And in the past that may have been true. However, many of these same administrators and their replacements have been saying this for so long that it is hard to believe that they haven’t been held accountable for not doing a better job of telling SCSU’s story. Unless of course you believe that just saying that ‘they’ haven’t done a good job telling the story is explanation enough. It almost seems this explanation is good enough for the titanic enrollment drop since FY10. With no end in sight for the enrollment drop, it might be reasonable to ask is anyone ever held accountable at SCSU?

I wish I could say I was surprised by David Fitzsimmons’ campaign finance reporting tactics. Unfortunately, I’m anything but surprised. While some might criticize John Kern’s LTE highlighting the Emmer campaign’s tactics, I won’t follow suit. This isn’t that dissimilar to how big corporations use a plethora of regulations against small business competitors to reduce competition as much as possible.

John Kern opened the LTE, writing “In July 2016, Congressman Tom Emmer’s chief of staff David Fitzsimmons and GOP delegate Matt Stevens filed multiple Federal Election Commission complaints against me, the AJ Kern for Congress campaign and a private citizen. These frivolous complaints accused me of filing quarterly reports late and apparently attempting to gain undue influence with my wife by exceeding personal campaign contribution limits from our shared assets. Eighteen months later, presidentially appointed FEC commissioners voted 5-0 to dismiss.”

That’s the predictable outcome of these FEC complaints. Rep. Emmer knew he was underperforming at the time. According to Minnesota’s Secretary of State’s website, Emmer, the incumbent, won the primary with a pathetic 68% of the vote. That’s pathetic considering the fact that Emmer “out-fundraised AJ Kern’s 2016 campaign” by a 61-1 margin.

Emmer won’t win by overwhelming margins because he’s ignored his constituents on key issues. Specifically, he’s agreed with the Obama administration lock, stock and barrel on the Refugee Resettlement Program. When questioned by constituents if he’d push for a moratorium of the program, Emmer replied “That isn’t happening.” (I know because I attended that townhall at the Ace Bar on July 1, 2015. That’s also the night Kate Steinle was murdered.) After that meeting, AJ Kern told attendees that she was thinking about challenging Emmer. Here’s the explanation for why Emmer didn’t support his constituents:

President Trump has frequently criticized “the Swamp.” Regulations implemented by the Swamp have a chilling effect on both speech and competition. The truth is that Emmer is part of DC’s Swamp. Bradley Smith, the former Commissioner of the FEC, is one of the fiercest champions of free speech. Here’s what he’s stated on the record:

Charges and litigation are used to harass opposing candidates and make political hay with the press… used most effectively by ‘incumbents’. Many, if not most, of these cases end up being dismissed, but not without distracting the campaigns and using up their resources. …The problem in campaign finance is that unethical politicians are threatening private actors, rather than that unethical special interests are threatening government.

When John McCain and Russ Feingold wrote the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, aka McCain-Feingold, grassroots activists criticized it by nicknaming it the ‘Incumbents’ Protection Act’. That’s exactly right. BCRA didn’t eliminate corruption. It codified corruption by burying challengers under mountains of paperwork. That’s what its intent was.

While career politicians might want to fight the hordes of uppity peasants insisting on being heard, those career politicians won’t silence the activists’ voices.

Emmer can take that to the bank.

The DFL’s CD-8 food fight, aka CD-8 DFL Primary, is starting to take shape. The latest news is that “State Rep. Jason Metsa is not done yet in his bid to replace Rep. Rick Nolan in Congress. On Sunday, Metsa said he will continue his campaign, targeting the 8th Congressional District DFL primary election in August.” Sunday morning, Metsa said “With no result from the DFL endorsement process, I have chosen to continue my campaign to be the DFL nominee for Congress in #MN08. The best way to identify the strongest candidate to win in November is through a primary campaign,” Metsa said in his statement. “I look forward to running a robust grassroots campaign focused on our shared values of fairness and responsibility.”

According to the Duluth Tribune, “Metsa joins Phifer, Radinovich and Michelle Lee as candidates vying for the primary.”

Thus far, each of the candidates is staking out their territory:

“We need to make sure that equal access to healthcare, education, the right to put food on your table and a roof over your head is something that all Americans can achieve, not just those who can afford it,” Phifer said.
Radinovich emphasized the importance of education.

“I got myself elected to state legislature where I got myself on the Education Finance Committee and I passed legislation to make sure that there was no gaps between the richest and poorest schools in our state,” Radinovich said.

Phifer said she would fight for sensible gun control, climate change, DACA, protecting treaty rights as the supreme law of the land, and raising minimum wage. “The DFL is the party that fights for our safety and wellbeing. We are the party that believes in economic justice. In congress I will lead the fight for $15 an hour minimum wage,” Phifer said.

Metsa hadn’t jumped into the race at the time of the WDIO article, which was written on Saturday.

Thus far, this is the field for the CD-8 DFL Primary:

Let the food fight begin.

One doesn’t have to read much of this article to figure out why Heartland voters treat Democrats like aliens from another planet. The Democrat writing this article disparages Christians in a totally disrespectful way.

For instance, the article contains a paragraph that says “New York has taken to Chick-fil-A. One of the Manhattan locations estimates that it sells a sandwich every six seconds, and the company has announced plans to open as many as a dozen more storefronts in the city. And yet the brand’s arrival here feels like an infiltration, in no small part because of its pervasive Christian traditionalism. Its headquarters, in Atlanta, are adorned with Bible verses and a statue of Jesus washing a disciple’s feet. Its stores close on Sundays. Its C.E.O., Dan Cathy, has been accused of bigotry for using the company’s charitable wing to fund anti-gay causes, including groups that oppose same-sex marriage. ‘We’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation,’ he once said, ‘when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage.’ The company has since reaffirmed its intention to ‘treat every person with honor, dignity and respect,’ but it has quietly continued to donate to anti-L.G.B.T. groups.”

It’s one thing to disagree with Chick-fil-A’s religious beliefs. That’s fair enough. It’s another to treat Chick-fil-A like they’re weird. For years, Democrats knew how to relate to devout Catholics and Jews. Those days are definitely in the Democrats’ past.

This emphasis on community, especially in the misguided nod to 9/11, suggests an ulterior motive. The restaurant’s corporate purpose still begins with the words “to glorify God,” and that proselytism thrums below the surface of the Fulton Street restaurant, which has the ersatz homespun ambiance of a megachurch. David Farmer, Chick-fil-A’s vice-president of restaurant experience, told BuzzFeed that he strives for a “pit crew efficiency, but where you feel like you just got hugged in the process.” That contradiction, industrial but claustral, is at the heart of the new restaurant—and of Chick-fil-A’s entire brand. Nowhere is this clearer than in the Cows.

This writer might want to pay a little more attention to what he wrote. Specifically, he should pay attention to this:

One of the Manhattan locations estimates that it sells a sandwich every six seconds, and the company has announced plans to open as many as a dozen more storefronts in the city.

Mayor de Blasio called for a boycott of Chick-Fil-A. Here’s how New Yorkers responded:

I definitely won’t put those people in the undecided or opposition categories.

Its arrival in the city augurs worse than a load of manure on the F train. According to a report by the Center for an Urban Future, the number of chain restaurants in New York has doubled since 2008, crowding out diners and greasy spoons for whom the rent is too dear. Chick-fil-A, meanwhile, is set to become the third-largest fast-food chain in the nation, behind only McDonald’s and Starbucks. No matter how well such restaurants integrate into the “community,” they still venerate a deadening uniformity.

If I had a saying for this writer to live by, it’d be ‘Lighten up, Dude.

The indisputable fact is that Chick-fil-A identified a market, which has helped them make tons of profits while developing a loyal customer base. If that isn’t the definition of success, I don’t know what is. Perhaps it’s time for Democrats to figure it out that they’re losing voters, congressional districts and states because they’re too hard-hearted.

Per tradition, the DFL issued this statement after delegates endorsed Angie Craig to run against Republican incumbent Jason Lewis. The statement was the usual milquetoast boilerplate, saying “Angie Craig embodies the American Dream. She went from a mobile home park to a leader at Minnesota manufacturer St. Jude Medical. She will fight to ensure every Minnesotan has the opportunities she did by fighting for good-paying jobs, affordable healthcare for all, and real middle-class tax reform.”

All the statements in the world, though, won’t take away the major mistake that Ms. Craig made last week. Last week, Ms. Craig bragged that she wants to team up with Keith Ellison on health care. It’s worth noting that Rep. Ellison “took the reins of single-payer healthcare legislation in the House” last month. After making a major mistake on health care the last time she ran, Ms. Craig apparently didn’t learn.

I’m not the expert on CD-2 that others are but it’s difficult to believe that there are many John Kline voters that’d support a candidate that wants to implement a single-payer health care system. This snippet will hurt Ms. Craig this fall:

While I won’t predict a lop-sided victory for Jason Lewis, I can’t picture him winning by less than 6-8 points. The DFL recently has talked about health care being a major issue this fall. To the extent that it’s an issue, it won’t hurt Republicans as much as it’ll hurt the DFL.

Prior to Saturday’s DFL Convention, I thought that the DFL’s best chance to hold a battleground congressional district was the Eighth District. Based on Saturday’s CD-8 DFL convention outcome, I won’t predict that anymore. Based on reports like this article, it sounds like the convention ended in discord.

Sam Brodey reports that “it’ll take an August primary to determine which of these Democrats earns the chance to compete in the general election, and that primary has the potential to showcase the party’s rifts on issues like mining and immigration, which were on full display at Saturday’s convention.”

One of the early casualties was Rep. Jason Metsa. Rep. Metsa got into the race late. Still, he might run in the DFL primary. Others sure to run in the DFL primary are Joe Radinovich, Leah Phifer and Michelle Lee. Each of those candidates have flaws.

For instance, Phifer is an environmentalist who worked for the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement. That put her at odds with “members of the Latino DFL Caucus.” Rep. Radinovich was a one-term wonder from Aitkin before losing to Dale Lueck. After that defeat, Radinovich was Nolan’s campaign manager before becoming Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey’s chief of staff. When Nolan endorsed Radinovich after the 6th ballot, Frey held up a sign announcing Nolan’s endorsement.

Frey, who traveled to Duluth to work the floor for Radinovich, got on top of a chair with a hand-written sign broadcasting Nolan’s endorsement to the delegates. But ultimately, Nolan’s support was not enough for Radinovich to eclipse Phifer.

Adding to the confusion is the fact that DFL State Party Chair Ken Martin addressed the convention:

Addressing delegates earlier in the afternoon, Minnesota DFL Chairman Ken Martin urged delegates to unite behind a candidate. “If we come out of here divided, we’re not going to win,” he said.

It’s still to be decided whether the primary will split or unite the DFL but it can’t be denied that the DFL isn’t off to a good start of uniting the party. It can’t make Martin feel good that the candidates essentially ignored his exhortation to unite.

Looming large over the convention was a candidate who wasn’t even in the room: Republican Pete Stauber, who is a lock to earn the CD8 Republican Party endorsement. Democrats are concerned that a bitter and drawn-out primary will give Stauber time to raise money and consolidate support, boosting his campaign to win this seat in November.

National Republicans like Stauber, a St. Louis County commissioner who formerly served with the Duluth Police Department, and they view CD8 as one of their best pick-up opportunities in the entire country. President Donald Trump won here by 15 points in 2016, and Republican candidates are making inroads in places like the Iron Range, which has been a DFL stronghold for the better part of the century. Nolan’s retirement, in the eyes of the GOP, only increased their chances of flipping CD8.

The biggest advantages of not getting primaried is that the opposition doesn’t get additional ammunition against the candidate, in this case, Mr. Stauber. The other advantage is the opportunity to open some deep philosophical differences. Mining is something that the DFL, especially Chairman Martin and Congressman Nolan, have worked hard at avoiding.

That’ll be difficult in the primary since Radinovich is from the ‘other’ Range, aka the Cuyuna Range. Meanwhile, Phifer is a diehard environmental activist. Those wings of the DFL mix together like the DLC wing and the MoveOn.org wing of the DNC.

At minimum, the DFL will spend this summer fighting and burning through cash while possibly dividing the party for both the congressional candidate and the gubernatorial candidate. If the DFL isn’t united this time, it will be a tough year for them up-and-down the ballot.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,