|
Friday, April 08, 2005Hugh Hewitt got to chat with Governor Schwarzenegger and remains impressed with the governor's efforts. The latest is a push for state initiatives on redistricting and merit pay for teachers. The left, of course, is upset. But if the liberals in Sacramento are too pigheaded to bargain and the voters lack the sense to replace them, government by initiative is what we shall have. On the one hand, government by plebiscite is a bad idea. On the other hand, at least we're getting gov's initiatives without the watering down they'd need to get through the California legislator.As an educator working in retail, I'm having a hard time working up sympathy for the teachers in this, though. That's because by teachers' union standards (and, alas, the idiotic NCLB), I'm underqualified. I have a masters in French and did PhD coursework. That, of course, is far less qualification to teach French than a minor in French with an education degree. Makes me smile, though, every time I hear the ad on the radio about "When Schwarzenegger said he'd take on the special interests, we didn't think he meant teachers and nurses..." With the growth of public sector unions, are they really many interest groups that can hope to compare in raw power? I might just vote for the gov's initiatives when he gets them on the ballot. 
posted by gbarto at 9:55 PM Wednesday, April 06, 2005Real ID ActHere we are, again in the immigration battles. And here's where I stand: I've watched three college teachers get the boot because of paperwork confusions while Mohammed Atta managed to stay in flight school until he got around to killing 3,000 Americans. The Read ID Act is a) a pernicious nativist effort to lock out legitimate immigrants while anti-immigrant sentiment is a little higher and b) a legitimate effort to figure out just who is here. It's nice to say that this act is no big deal because people who are here legally need only comply with its terms and they'll be fine. But a few years back, a good friend of my sister's (who was here teaching French at a small Christian college) was deported for listing herself as a "teacher" instead of a "professor" on her visa application. This constituted making a false statement to the INS and she was booted. Note that she was not initially rejected. They deported her when she filed an amended statement to correct the mistake. Some INS bureaucrat that day went back to his office, checked some boxes on a form to prove his vigilance in defending our nation and made a confirmed America hater of someone who had at one time considered becoming a permanent resident. Way to go, INS! At the same time, Mohammed Atta received his paperwork allowing him to stay in the country months after he became the greatest mass murderer in our history. So, where do I stand on the Real ID thing and all these other immigration measures? Right in the middle. Ours is the land of opportunity and this great American experiment wouldn't even be here were it not for some politically motivated immigration a couple hundred years ago. To decide to close the doors now is to deny our origins and the meaning of our nation. But we should at least know who's here. I've mentioned knowing people deported over bureaucratic hassles. I've also met "visitors" who are almost literally slaves to their employers because the rent went up and they had to take an illegal job to finance staying in school here - they came here legally, pose no threat and have jobs I sure wouldn't want. But the nativist element wants to spend taxpayer dollars to raid ethnic restaurants lest they get an unwarranted $2/hr because it would send the wrong signal to let them take a crap job with the normal protections. And yet, there's that Atta thing. We don't know how many Attas were caught or who, because of our crappy immigration setup, never even tried. That one got through may indicated that crap happens, or it may show that the system was lousy. That he was approved to stay another year after killing 3,000 people indicates that it was probably the latter. So, what do we need? We need to loosen up the system enough that those making an earnest effort to comply won't get deported by INS officers having a bad day. Then we need to clamp down on those who aren't in the system. If you file your paperwork and it's wrong, in other words, we work with you. If you don't file your paperwork and we find you, you're gone. The ultimate goal would be to create greater transparency. This includes two assumptions: 1) Immigrants would have more options than they do today, provided they kept the INS posted. 2) We would have more right to know what they're doing with those expanded options. In 2001, we were spending big bucks to make sure Manuel wasn't moonlighting as a dishwasher in defiance of the no-work provisions of his visa. We were spending big bucks assuring that Pedro had his papers lest he take an American's job cleaning that toilet. We spent more dough to be sure that Tran didn't get a programmer's job that could go to Jake. And we twiddled our thumbs about a known Muslim radical who wanted to learn to fly but didn't need to know how to land. It was all about economics, with hardly any concern for security. Today, as Friedman makes clear in his new book, The World Is Flat, the economic stuff is useless. If you can't get your workers a visa for here, you hire an outsourcing firm in India. This is certainly what's happening in Silicon Valley. Three years ago, there were Japanese people everywhere. They took the good jobs, but at least they bought their gas and groceries here and paid taxes. Now they're gone and the jobs are in India and one hopes our the anti-immigration idiots will eventually catch on that hunting down Pedro 'cause you don't like 'spics really limits the resources available to find the really bad guys. The INS, now that it's part of the DHS, hopefully has its head screwed on straighter. But I doubt it. Yes, something like the Real ID act is needed. But something else is needed. We need to send Charles Rosetti (former IRS commissioner) or someone like him to straighten out the immigration system first. Or ten years from now we'll have deported a whole lot more decent immigrants trying to make it and will have destroyed the notion of the American dream for countless more networks of families and friends in countries that should look well upon us. And then we'll turn on our tv sets to witness another mass murder by Arab terrorists who had the money to get their papers filed properly while we deported dishwashers in the name of national security.
posted by gbarto at 9:37 AM Floating around the net for tax-time: Internal Revenue Service Department of the Treasury Washington, DC 20001 Enclosed is my 2004 Form 1040, together with payment. Please take note of the attached article from "USA Today" archives. In the article, you will note that the Pentagon paid $171.50 each for hammers and NASA paid $600.00 each for toilet seats. Please find enclosed in this package four toilet seats (value $2,400.00) and six hammers (value $1,029.00). This is in payment for my total tax due of $3,429.00. Out of a sense of patriotic duty, and to assist in the political purification of our government, I am also enclosing a 1.5 inch Phillips head screw, for which HUD duly recorded and approved a purchase value of $2200, as my contribution to fulfill the Election Fund option on Form 1040. It has been a pleasure to pay my taxes this year, and I look forward to paying them again next year in accordance with officially established government values. Sincerely, Another satisfied taxpayer
posted by gbarto at 9:32 AM From this morning's Corner: NEW OLD STUFF ABOUT DELAY [K. J. Lopez]Unfortunately, on the case just means on the defensive. Not to be cynical, but as a longtime recipient of Republican fundraising letters, I have yet to see Delay or anyone else include "and make sure my wife and other family members are well-compensated for the things politician's families get dragged into doing" alongside keeping guns legal, keeping taxes down, keeping the Democrats on the run and the other explanations for why I should send my hard-earned "$250() $100() $50()." Frum and Pfeiffer are correct that Delay isn't necessarily the worst, and that the Post and Times pieces are hatchet jobs. But why in these circumstances does Delay insist on making himself such an easy target. We don't read this stuff about Hastert and Frist of even the anti-Christ of campaign finance reform, Mitch McConnel. If they haven't been able to make a three ring circus out of the doings of CFR's most ardent opponent, why do they have such an easy time finding problems with Texas' most famous exterminator? If this picks up traction, Republicans are going to have to figure out where we stand on this and lay down clear lines. We can't just react to the appearance of impropriety or the Times will run lousy stories until Olympia Snowe and John McCain are the only Republicans left on Capitol Hill. But we can't just denounce everything as a media hatchet job or people will get the impression (rightly) that the Republicans will permit all corruptions before considering risking one iota of power. Right now, the GOP is in a position of relative strength, what with controlling the House, the Senate and the White House. But we'll lose that strength if we spend our political capital covering Delay's you know what instead of pushing our agenda. One hopes that Mr. Delay will have some serious talks with the rest of the leadership about what else is going to bog down their efforts to get things done and will step aside if it's too much. One recalls the "Save Social Security first" mantra from awhile back, and worries that the GOP's mantra will become "Save Delay first" Speaking of Social Security, it's pretty transparent that the purpose of the Times and Post is to sabotage an agenda including revamping Social Security by replacing substantive talk with more innuendo. The question for the GOP is whether for all our principles, the GOP leadership is more interested in our agenda or its own power.
posted by gbarto at 9:00 AM Tuesday, April 05, 2005More great journalism...According to the San Jose Mercury News' "People" gossip column, a fight broke out at a record store appearance by Kanye West when ...some patron started a ruckus with some security-guard guy. West's autograph-signing was thus irrevocably affected after a mere 40 minutes. Cops say they had to spend a half-hour clearing away the thousand fans who had shown up for the event. But, alas, some of those fans were crushed by the meaningless rumpus.It just goes to show what they always say. The mainstream press beats the bloggers every time because they have editors. (This is from the paper version; I can't seem to find the "People" section online.)
posted by gbarto at 10:16 PM Monday, April 04, 2005Instantman links Cap'n Ed, who's publishing the goods on corruption in Canada. One question that's been raised several places today, though, is what would happen if the American government tried this maneuver. We know, of course, that the Post and Times would be filing FOIA claims on any Republican administration while the WSJ op-ed folks, at least, would be after any Democrat. But what of the citizenry?It is a testament not just to our countrymen, but to the country and its founding fathers who set it in motion, that most efforts to rein in the media provoke more controversy, not less, while efforts to regulate us "amateurs" are less opportunities to quash speech than to get an in-box full of e-mail from people who just don't seem prepared to sit down and shut up. We're very lucky in one regard, then: because of our manner of parting company with the British Empire, we have both the habits of liberty and the customs of liberty, the two reinforcing each other to create a breed that knows its rights and knows the value of protecting them.
posted by gbarto at 10:51 PM Sunday, April 03, 2005To: Supervisor Maxwell Board of Supervisors San Francisco, CA cc: Readers of the TurkeyBlog Supervisor Maxwell, Though I do not now live in San Francisco, I have considered moving there. I was therefore distressed to read about legislation before the board affecting a hobby near and dear to my heart: blogging. I appreciate the board's desire to insure a level playing field for political competition. However, blogs are not the same as a two minute break between segments of the Simpsons. People come to blogs for one of two purposes. Some log on for the latest news from commentators whose judgment they trust. These are opinion journalists. To regulate them would be tantamount to requesting that the editorial staff of the Chronicle register if they intended to publish an endorsement. The other visitors to a political blog are usually either fellow bloggers or people who leave comments. These people view blogs both as news sources (free-lance journalism) and as places for public dialog. In this sense, the web of blogs form a sort of internet-wide café where people of similar (or sometimes widely differing) views can get together to hash out what's going on in the world. To regulate blogs involved in such conversations would be tantamount to handing out paperwork to those who discuss the newspaper with tablemates in a bar or at a sidewalk café. The blog, in short, is not the same thing as a candidate's press release. It is a place where people go to see what other people think is interesting or important and, where possible, to kick in their two cents worth. To regulate blogs is to make San Francisco's campaign finance jurisdiction superior to both freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. One hopes that the wearing away of some pretty big First Amendment freedoms was not your intent, but it is the logical consequence of your proposed ordinance. You might want to rethink this one. Geoffrey Barto
posted by gbarto at 10:33 PM |
Archives
|
Day By Day© by Chris Muir.Old TurkeyBlog here.
