Friday, March 31, 2006

How to create a big backlash

Someone needs to tell Piolo (Los Angeles radio DJ) and others that their big march has caused a huge backlash. It did not help the cause to have idiots waving Mexican flags and making anti-US statements.

Again, I support a work visa program. I think that we must have a way to accommodate the people who are already here. I think that most of them are decent and hard working people. Yet, the leaders need to have their heads examined.

For the next march, Piolo should have his followers make these placards:

1) Thank you for letting us live here and get free public services!

2) Thank you for the wonderful public schools! (It costs $10,000 in California to educate a public school pupil every year!)

3) Thank you for the opportunity that our own country denies us!

4) We love the US. We are actually glad that you stole California from Mexico. Otherwise, we would be living in third world California, a state of Mexico, rather than "gringo" California, the 4th largest economy in the world.

This is a start. Otherwise, the backlash against illegals will get worse. Frankly, most of us non-Mexican legal immigrants were deeply offended by the demonstrators.

For more, check out "Whose Backlash?" By
Victor Davis Hanson (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/03/whose_backlash.html)

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Who let the students out?


Someone needs to answer a simple question: Who let the students out? What bright school board member let thousands of high school kids out?(http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/news/local/14205503.htm)
Another question: what does the Mexican flag have to do with any of this? Beyond the flag, I was offended by placards or statements that the US had stolen Texas from Mexico.

Frankly, if you believe that the US stole Texas from Mexico then you should not live here. Go back to Mexico!

As an immigrant, I was offended by some of these demonstrators. They are not representative of legal immigrants, the people who followed the rules and are very proud to live in their adopted country.

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Some thoughts about Chavez

Ed Lanza has a wonderful blog. Check it out: http://hispanicon.blogspot.com/

Today, Ed links an article on the Venezuelan situation:

http://hispanicon.blogspot.com/2006/03/chavezs-day-are-numbered.html

Sec. Caspar Weinberger and Lyn Nofziger

Pres. Reagan surrounded himself with wonderful and competent people.

Within 24 hours, we have lost two of Reagan's greatest allies:

Lyn Nofziger, campaign adviser and friend (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060328/pl_nm/nofziger_dc), and

Sec. Caspar Weinberger, one of the finest public servants in recent memory. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,189335,00.html)

Nofziger goes back to California. Weinberger was the loyal and able Secretary of Defense during the tumultuous Reagan years.

Great men, great public servants!

Does Lopez-Obrador really want to be president of Mexico?


According to my Mexican friends, Lopez-Obrador will be the next president of Mexico. They tell me that he has great public support. Frankly, I don't know. I think that it is very hard to analyze Mexican public opinion.

Yet, my question is this: Does Lopez-Obrador want to be President of Mexico? Does he want to become the most unpopular person in Mexico?

Let me give you a preview of a Lopez-Obrador's presidency.

If elected in July, Mexico will have a summer of huge capital flight. It will remind every one of August '82 or November '94.

By the fall, the peso will be devalued as Mexicans panic and take their money out of the country.

L-O will respond by saying that he is not as bad as his populism indicates. He will assure investors that his "populist words" were just campaign rhetoric intended to get votes rather than a reflection of how he will govern.

Foreign investors won't buy it. Dollars will flow out of rather than into Mexico!

Mexicans won't buy it either. There will be more and more people trying to cross the US-Mexico border.

With a devalued peso and zero confidence from foreign investors, L-O won't have a lot of options to deal with Mexico's problems, such as PEMEX, the inefficient agricultural sector and high youth unemployment.

So my advice to L-O is this. Don't win.


Let PAN govern Mexico.

I'm not suggesting that PAN has all of the answers. No one does.


At least, PAN is a serious player who understands the challenges facing Mexico.


Monday, March 27, 2006

Another Cuban political prisoner!

Guillermo FariƱas Hernandez is a Cuban political prisoner. He needs your support.

Go to http://www.babalublog.com/archives/003123.html for more information.

Bring on the censure resolution


To date, no Democrat has called for the cancellation of NSA wiretapping.

To date, no Democrat has presented any evidence that Pres. Bush was actually wiretapping American citizens, such as Attorney General Robert Kennedy and Pres. Kennedy wiretapping Martin Luther King in 1963.

What's going on?

The Democrat Party has an angry left wing monster walking around its headquarters. The bad news is that the monster needs to be fed with 'anti-Bushisms". The good news is that the monster raises a lot of money from Hollywood and moveon.org.

Once in a while, the party needs to throw a big bone at the monster. That's what this censure is all about.

The good news for Republicans is that the Democrats always overreach with their hatred of Bush. "Hate Bush" is the Democrats' poison pill!

As I wrote before, bring on the censure discussions.

Let' see how many Democrats are really ready to censure a President who ordered the wiretapping of conversations from suspected terrorists.

Sunday, March 26, 2006

I agree with Charlie Cook on the 2006 elections


Charlie Cook is a weekly columnist for National Journal magazine and the founder and publisher of the Cook Political Report. Today, he published an analysis of the upcoming election "The GOP's Many 'Micro' Advantages" (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/03/the_gops_many_micro_advantages.html )

Cook looked at the US Senate. At the moment, the US Senate is 55-44-1. In fact, it is 55-45 because the "1" is a liberal and he would vote for a Democrat majority leader. The bottom line is that the Democrats need a net gain of six to make it 51-49.

Can they do it? In theory, or generic polling, the answer is yes. In state by state polls, it is almost impossible. There are 5 vulnerable Republicans and the Democrats must keep Minnesota, Washington, Maryland and Vermont.

My guess is that socialist Bernie Sanders will win Vermont. However, the other three are not a given.

The bottom line is that the Democrats have to go 9-0 by defeating 5 Republicans and keeping the aforementioned 4 seats. In other words, there is no margin of error at all.

Over in the House, the Democrats need a net gain of 15. Unfortunately, there are not many competitive House elections. The 2000 census changed many districts. Gerrymandering has helped the Republicans in Texas and the Democrats in California.

Can the Republican levees hold? My guess is that they will. In fact, I predict no change in leadership this November.


P.S. Straight line projections usually do not hold in US politics. Bush looks vulnerable in March '06. He also did in March '04. By November, Bush may look great, specially if documents keep showing that Saddam and Osama had a working relationship.

More from the Saddam documents


There are three great articles about Saddam's documents.


The first one is historical and recalls the chemical attacks on the Kurds: "History speaks" by Mindy Belz (http://www.worldmag.com/articles/11671)

Saddam had chemical weapons. Who killed 12,000 Kurds? Why did they call his assistant Chemical Ali?


Stephen F. Hayes writes for The Weekly Standard. His latest article is "Camp Saddam" (
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/024eyieu.asp)

Who trained at Camp Saddam?":

"Beginning in 1994, the Fedayeen Saddam opened its own paramilitary training camps for volunteers, graduating more than 7,200 "good men racing full with courage and enthusiasm" in the first year. Beginning in 1998, these camps began hosting "Arab volunteers from Egypt, Palestine, Jordan, 'the Gulf,' and Syria."

It is not clear from available evidence where all of these non-Iraqi volunteers who were "sacrificing for the cause" went to ply their newfound skills.

Before the summer of 2002, most volunteers went home upon the completion of training. But these camps were humming with frenzied activity in the months immediately prior to the war.

As late as January 2003, the volunteers participated in a special training event called the "Heroes Attack." This training event was designed in part to prepare regional Fedayeen Saddam commands to "obstruct the enemy from achieving his goal and to support keeping peace and stability in the province."

I hope that Tim Russert will ask Rep. Murtha about this!

David Koppel points this out in his article:

"Slated for future release are 700 documents that are discussed in the next issue of Foreign Affairs. The documents state that Uday Hussein ordered "special operations, assassinations, and bombings" against London and other targets.

Moreover, the Iraqi regime, at the time of the March 2003 coalition invasion, had made advanced preparations for "Blessed July" terrorism attacks against the West."
(
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/opinion_columnists/article/0,2777,DRMN_23972_4569241,00.html)

It will take weeks to go over these documents. There are many more coming. Yet, it's getting a lot of harder to make the case that Saddam didn't have ties to terrorism.

Of course, most people suspected these ties all along. Pres. Clinton said so in '98. Have we forgotten Senator Kerry's words from January '03:

"If you don't believe...Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me."



Saturday, March 25, 2006

Go Longhorns!


March Madness is so special. Can anything be more exciting? Maybe game 7 of the World Series.

Thursday night, Texas beat West Virginia. It was a good game and a great finish. The Longhorns are now in the elite 8.

Texas has a wonderful opportunity. They won the baseball and football titles. Can they bring another title to Austin?

It will be tough but we can dream!

Friday, March 24, 2006

Who is living in denial now?


To my knowledge, no one ever said that Saddam was directly involved with the 9-11 attack. However, it is now becoming clear that Saddam and Osama shared more than a residence in the Middle East.

According to released documents, Saddam & Osama had contacts and exchanged a few notes.

Check out "Saddam, Al Qaeda Did Collaborate, Documents Show" by Eli Lake (
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746):

"In an interview yesterday, the current president of the New School University, Bob Kerrey, was careful to say that new documents translated last night by ABC News did not prove Saddam Hussein played a role in any way in plotting the attacks of September 11, 2001. Nonetheless, the former senator from Nebraska said that the new document shows that "Saddam was a significant enemy of the United States." Mr. Kerrey said he believed America's understanding of the deposed tyrant's relationship with Al Qaeda would become much deeper as more captured Iraqi documents and audiotapes are disclosed."

For years, most people understood that Saddam had used chemical weapons twice (Iran and the Kurds within Iraq) and had threatened to use them against Israel. During the Gulf War, Iraq fired Scud missiles at Israel.

How can you lie about someone who has used WMDs twice? Did Saddam have WMDs? Ask any Israeli.

Between 1991-2003. Saddam had played "cat and mouse" with UN weapons inspectors. First, he denied them information. Then he lied to them (and said so on the audiotapes recently released). Then he threw them out in '98, in a total and complete defiance of the UN Security Council. Of course, we learned later that the some members of the UN Security Council were carrying Saddam's water for oil contracts.

Unfortunately, some anti-Bushies are so invested in the "Saddam had no WMDs or relationship with Al Qaeda" story that they will avoid this whole issue or split hairs over the audiotapes and documents.

Yet, the truth is slowly coming out about WMDs and the Osama-Saddam relationship.

The question is "Who is lying now"? Perhaps, a better question is "Who is living in denial now"?

Sen. Clinton wants to be criticized by the anti-war left


Sen. Clinton was interrupted by antiwar protesters in New York. (
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/newyork/ny-bc-ny--senclinton-protes0323mar23,0,4648642.story?coll=ny-region-apnewyork)

At the same time, Justin Raimondom the editorial director of Antiwar.com, wrote a critical article about Sen. Clinton's Iraq war position. It is "Hillary the Hawk: The Democrats’ Athena only differs from Bush on the details". (
http://www.amconmag.com/2006/2006_03_27/cover.html)

Check out this comment from Mr. Raimondom:

"Hillary would have occupied Iraq a decade earlier, riding into Baghdad at the head of her troops like Pallas Athena descending on the Trojans, striding boldly into what Gen. William E. Odom has described as “the greatest strategic disaster in our history.” Hillary hails the 1998 bombing of Iraq, ordered by her husband, which killed thousands of Iraqi civilians, and recounts the official mythology promulgated by the Bush administration:


“[T]he so-called presidential palaces … in reality were huge compounds well suited to hold weapons labs, stocks, and records which Saddam Hussein was required by UN resolution to turn over. When Saddam blocked the inspection process, the inspectors left.”

My guess is that Hillary Clinton is delighted to read this.

Sen. Clinton wants to distance herself from the antiwar left. She wants them to show up at her speeches and make a lot of noise.

Hillary Clinton was active in the McGovern campaign. She knows that the US will not elect an antiwar candidate. She knows that the Democrats have lost 7 of the last 10 presidential elections because of the national security deficit.

Hillary wants to win in 2008. This is why she supports the Iraq War. In the meantime, she will happily take lots of criticism from the antiwar left!


Thursday, March 23, 2006

Gore is not running (he can't win)


According to press reports, Al Gore is not running for president in 2008. (
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/03/20/politics/p174309S87.DTL)

Frankly, Al Gore has looked at reality and decided to punt. Gore cannot win.

Gore and Nixon are compared often. They lost two of the most controversial elections in US history. In 1960, Kennedy beat Nixon. In 2000, Bush beat Gore.

Most of us remember the controversy about chads in Florida.

Few of us remember 1960. John Fund's "A Minority President--George W. Bush lost the popular vote. So did JFK." was written a few days before the 40th anniversary of JFK's assassination (
http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=110004320). It is a good place to start regarding the 1960 election problems.

Nixon reacted differently than Gore and that is why he was elected in '68.


He accepted the 1960 results and moved on. Nixon did not put the country through partisan recounts in Texas and Illinois. Yet, Nixon had credible evidence that the Democrats had played fast and loose with ballots in Cook County and South Texas.

To his credit, he did not spend the next three years delegitimizing the Kennedy presidency by accusing the new president of everything under the sun. Nixon understood that the nation needed a legitimate president. He put the nation over his ego. No one was more appreciative of that than Pres. Kennedy himself!

On the other hand. Gore has spent the last five years as a bitter man. He has moved to the left and made some outrageous remarks, such as the most recent speech in the Middle East.

Gore lost in 2000 because he could not win his home state of Tennessee. Bush could have "stolen" all of Florida's 7 million votes and still lost the 2000 election. The election was decided in Tennessee not Florida.

Today, Gore can't even win the party's nomination. No one sees him as a serious candidate or one who can compete nationwide. He is closer to the moveon.org idiots than the mainstream of his own party.

So it's over for Gore. He will never be elected President and that's good for the US!

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Why isn't Pres. Bush doing more press conferences?

To be fair, I don't blame Pres. Bush or VP Cheney for keeping the White House press corps at bay. The press hates Bush and Cheney. They hate them because they are conservatives who do not support abortion.

Yet, the President needs to do this more press conferences.

I thought that Helen Thomas made a fool of herself yesterday. It is absolutely insane to suggest that Pres. Bush was determined to invade Iraq from day 1.


Well done Pres. Bush.

The terrorists do not like The Bush Doctrine


Pres. Bush reasserted his doctrine of preemption. In simple terms, Bush is saying that we will attack first if we believe that is necessary to protect our homeland. In simpler terms, we will kill them before they blow up one of our cities.

I love this comment from IBD:

"It's ironic that the National Security Strategy update was released just nine days after the 70th anniversary of Adolf Hitler's sending the Wehrmacht to reoccupy the Rhineland in violation of the Treaty of Versailles. Then, as now, the world was confronted with a megalomaniac on a messianic mission, determined to build his arsenal and impose his apocalyptic vision on the world. Then it was Hitler, and now it is Iran's Ahmedinejad seeking the final destruction of the Jews." (
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1&issue=20060320)

Like Winston Churchill in the 1930s, Pres. Bush understands the threat that we face. It is real. Therefore, I congratulate Pres. Bush for making it clear that we won't sit by and get hit again.


The good news is that Bush gets it. The bad news is that so many of our allies don't.

Monday, March 20, 2006

Great job market for college graduates

The US economy continues to prove all of the "doom and gloomers" wrong. Reuters just published this story:

"U.S. college graduates are facing the best job market since 2001, with business, computer, engineering, education and health care grads in highest demand, a report by an employment consulting firm showed on Monday.

"We are approaching full employment and some employers are already dreaming up perks to attract the best talent," said John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas." (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-03-20T163503Z_01_N20258421_RTRUKOC_0_US-ECONOMY-JOBS.xml&rpc=22)

Sunday, March 19, 2006

Craig Biggio of the Houston Astros


The MLB season is around the corner. Opening Sunday night is literally two weeks away as the Chisox open up against Cleveland. Most teams open the next day.

Looking ahead, everyone is talking about Bonds passing Ruth or reaching Aaron. He needs 6 and 47, respectively. He should pass Ruth by Mother's Day in mid-May! I'm not sure that he can hit 47 and tie Aaron.


Of course, I am not sure that Bonds is even going to play in 2006! Frankly, I hope that he does not play and spare us all the controversy of breaking the most cherished of all sports' records.

Beyond Bonds, and the steroids controversy, there are some interesting goals ahead for Craig Biggio of the Houston Astros. (http://houston.astros.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/player.jsp?player_id=110987)

Craig Biggio needs 205 hits to reach 3,000. He won't do it but should set himself up for passing the mark in early '07.

Biggio is a first class act. He deserves everything that comes his way. Hopefully, the 3,000 hits will put him in the Hall of Fame.

Biggio also needs 103 runs scored to reach 1800 and move into the top 15 between Ted Williams and Carl Yaztremski. I think that he has a good chance of scoring 103 runs if he can get 500 at bats.

Biggio needs 36 doubles to tie Honus Wager at 640. This is also possible if he stays healthy.

Last year, Biggio and Bagwell, long time teammates, got a chance to play in their first World Series. It did not work out well for Houston but I was happy to see them in the Series.

Bagwell is at 449 home runs and 1,529 RBIs. Unfortunately, Bagwell has too many injuries and may not get enough bats to increase his numbers. I hope that I'm wrong.

Let's cheer for Biggio & Bagwell, two great guys on and off the field!



Nobody came to the anti-war parade

They called for an anti-war demonstration and few showed up:

"There's just about more policemen here than people," said the Democratic candidate for the Utah House of Representatives in District 40, nodding to the squadron of eight motorcycle officers parked alongside 400 South.


"I guess the longer the war goes on, the more people accept it." (http://www.sltrib.com/ci_3618103)

My guess is that everyone stayed home to watch the Road to the Final Four!

Thursday, March 16, 2006

March madness is great

If you love sports, specially young guys playing for their schools, then March Madness is for you.

I am a conservative so I will pick Duke to win it all. However, Texas A&M (a family favorite) and Gonzaga (Catholic school) will be the upset artists.

No matter what, this is a fun time of the year.

Monday, March 13, 2006

The real homeland security problem


The Dubai ports issue was a phony national security conversation. Yet, we have a growing crisis at the US-Mexico border. The Democrat Arizona governor has just announced that she is putting troops on the border. Her decision proves that this is not a partisan issue. Bill Richardson, the Democrat New Mexico governor, has been screaming that the Mexican government is not serious about the border.

Every day, we hear about killings and chaos at the border. Beyond the human tragedy, the crisis in an economic disaster for border states.

The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) has released a new study (
www.bordercounties.org). It shows how the disorder at the border is causing an economic burden for both sides.

Among the UTEP findings:

"San Diego County alone spends $50 million a year to arrest, jail, prosecute and defend illegal immigrants, with the feds contributing a meager $2 million.
The UTEP study notes that 1.14 million arrests were made in 2004 along the border that stretches from San Diego to Brownsville, Texas, up 26% from the year before. The UTEP study also details the costs of illegal immigration in terms of health care and environmental degradation. At border-county hospitals, for example, treating illegals accounts for nearly one quarter of uncompensated costs."


Sooner, rather than later, the US and Mexican governments need to sit down and work out a solution. Otherwise, the US public will build a fence and make matters worse.

IBD has a great editorial on the UTEP report: (
http://www.investors.com/editorial/IBDArticles.asp?artsec=20&artnum=1&issue=20060310)

Another good report is from Dan Stein:

"Local officials from the 24 counties along the Southwest border say they want lawmakers in Congress to recognize they face problems much more complex than border walls and guest worker programs. They say they need federal help fighting grinding poverty, disease and crime. The issues are highlighted in a study they released Wednesday in Washington just as senators are grappling with proposals for overhauling the nation's immigration system," the AP writes. "Researchers found that if the region were a 51st state, it would rank first in federal crimes, second in tuberculosis and near the bottom in education, per capita income and access to health care." (http://www.steinreport.com/archives/009016.html)

Dubai was a lot of posturing and a free shot for Democrats. The US-Mexico border is a real problem and it requires some leadership.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

Al Qaeda wants a civil war!


Tod Lindberg writes in The Washington Times:

"Civil war" may have a social-science definition that encompasses the current situation in Iraq. But under current circumstances, the term can take on a specifically polemical purpose as well. That purpose is to evoke conditions of total political failure: the collapse of a central government that has lost its legitimacy in the eyes of violent extremists on all sides, anarchy in the streets, mass killings, ethnic warfare, humanitarian catastrophe, massive refugee flows, etc. Those are not the conditions that obtain in Iraq today." (http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060306-092601-1772r.htm)

Al Qaeda wants a civil war because they are doing everything to drive the US out of Iraq. They understand the US media. They figured out that the US media will do anything to hurt Bush. So they are hoping that Iraq turns into another Vietnam, where cut-and-run Democrats pull US troops out.

In Vietnam, the cut-and-run Democrats left millions behind. Specifically, 3 million Southeast Asians were killed by the communists after we left. It was one of the worst bloodbaths of the 20th century.

We left and the communists killed millions. Let's not make the same mistake in Iraq.


Monday, March 06, 2006

Iran killing US soldiers!


ABC News is running a story about the Iranian connection in Iraq. According to Brian Ross:

"U.S. military and intelligence officials tell ABC News that they have caught shipments of deadly new bombs at the Iran-Iraq border. They are a very nasty piece of business, capable of penetrating U.S. troops' strongest armor.


What the United States says links them to Iran are tell-tale manufacturing signatures -- certain types of machine-shop welds and material indicating they are built by the same bomb factory."
(
http://abcnews.go.com/International/print?id=1692347)

Iran is actively trying to kill US soldiers. Sooner or later, we are going to have to take out this regime. The Bush administration needs to make it clear to Iran that we will not tolerate their continuing interference in Iraq.

PLEASE SUPPORT OUR BLOG AND RADIO SHOW

FOLLOW MY BLOG

LISTEN TO OUR RECENT SHOWS

Check Out Politics Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Silvio Canto Jr on BlogTalkRadio

Follow by Email

MY TWITTER

FACEBOOK

Search This Blog