According to the Washington Times, California already has a law on the books that looks rather similar to the law just enacted in Arizona.
(b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected of being present in the United States in violation of federal immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the following: (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding documentation to indicate his or her legal status.
I guess since California never enforces that, there’s no need to boycott CA along with AZ. I’m amazed that so many people are offering opinions and criticizing the law without even reading it. There’s enough to criticize there in the law already, why resort to making extra stuff up? It just makes you look horribly ignorant.
I read an interesting article on bilingual education, which focused on California. “The Bilingual Ban That Worked” gives a pretty good history of the evolution of California’s bilingual education and explores how to determine what has worked.
Hispanic test scores on a range of subjects have risen since Prop. 227 became law. But while the curtailment of California’s bilingual-education industry has removed a significant barrier to Hispanic assimilation, the persistence of a Hispanic academic underclass suggests the need for further reform.
The Hill reports that the House of Representatives will work eight days in January and nine days in February.
“The House vote schedule for 2010 allows ample time for us to build on our work from this year, so that we continue creating jobs and addressing our nation’s long-term fiscal problems,” Hoyer said.
Continue creating jobs? What planet is he on…
From an article about counting pay raises as saved jobs comes this quote:
At Southwest Georgia Community Action Council in Moultrie, Ga., director Myrtis Mulkey-Ndawula said she followed the guidelines the Obama administration provided. She said she multiplied the 508 employees by 1.84 — the percentage pay raise they received — and came up with 935 jobs saved.
Leaving aside the politics of counting pay raises as jobs, look closely at the math. It appears that she forgot that 1.84% equals 0.0184 when you multiple. In that case, she should have reported 9 jobs saved rather than 953.
Oops…another case of basic math illiteracy.
Rasmussen has a poll about people’s choices between socialism and capitalism. Now, the obvious caveat is that it totally depends on how people define both those terms, but for what it’s worth, the results are interesting…
Adults under 30 are essentially evenly divided: 37% prefer capitalism, 33% socialism, and 30% are undecided.
That really surprised me. But I have to say, I’m not even sure I know the true definition of socialism as anything other than something not capitalistic.
Republicans – by an 11-to-1 margin – favor capitalism. Democrats are much more closely divided: Just 39% say capitalism is better while 30% prefer socialism. As for those not affiliated with either major political party, 48% say capitalism is best, and 21% opt for socialism.
Based on the political winds lately, that doesn’t surprise me at all. Well, actually, I’m surprised that people admit preferring socialism. Somehow, current politicians want to be able say they support free-market capitalism at the same time as they vote to semi-nationalize banks, auto manufacturers, insurance companies, etc.
Andrea Tantaros points out that President Obama also believes marriage should be between a man and a woman. I think a lot of people who are criticizing Miss California are forgetting that.
I didn’t hear the outrage when Joe Biden said that he and Barack Obama are against gay marriage. No incendiary language, no insults, no four letter obscenities.
Maybe it’s because most people don’t believe President Obama? Or at least, they don’t expect him to act as though he believes that?
Perez Hilton seems to be something of an idiot. Everything I’ve read about him today seems to point towards his being one of the most intolerant pseudo-celebrities on the Internet. What a dufus. He doesn’t believe that Miss California should be allowed to disagree with him, and calls her names when she does.
Going by Miss California’s answer, she seemed to support states’ rights and then gives her own view. Isn’t that what Hilton was asking, with his leading question about Vermont?
An editorial from the Wall Street Journal makes an amusing point about the recent actions by North Korea and the UN’s response to them:
Yesterday’s U.N. statement lacks even the legally binding nature of a resolution. It is a promise by the 15 members of the Security Council to enforce sanctions they have already pledged to enforce but so far haven’t, in the name of getting the North to agree to abide by promises it has already made but hasn’t kept. This time, no doubt, everyone really, really means it.
Even President Obama’s press secretary can’t really put it any better. In the transcript of a press conference, Gibbs is quoted as being asked:
Q Won’t the North Koreans get the message that condemnations and requests for them to change actions are not exactly strong statements to make to a country that’s repeatedly defied, as you said, its obligations?
Mr. Gibbs’ answer certainly provides confidence:
MR. GIBBS: Well, I don’t — let me turn that question a little bit around, because I think there was some question about whether or not you could even get five members of a Security Council, or five of the permanent members of the Security Council to agree on a condemnation. Yesterday, 15 countries unanimously stood up and spoke out about the launch.
Like everyone else, I’m pretty proud of the US Navy snipers who took out the pirates who kidnapped the American captain. USA! USA! Heh…I see that the pirates are making all sorts of silly statements about getting revenge on the US. Two words, guys. Bring it…
According to the New York Times
The Defense Department twice sought Mr. Obama’s permission to use force to rescue Captain Phillips, most recently on Friday night, senior defense officials said. On Saturday morning, the president agreed, they said, if it appeared that the captain’s life was in imminent danger.
Well, ok, I take my first statement back. I’m sure the pirates are counting on receiving stern letters from the United Nations if they continue in their illegal activities.
From an old article by Charlie Reese, in the Orlando Sentinel,
Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?
One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices – 545 human beings out of the 235 million – are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.
There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.
Definitely hits a nerve there…