Posts

Is a One Party State good? Not if the party is Democrat.

California is experiencing horrific fires around Los Angeles, so let's use this opportunity to talk about how the Democrat controlled government has run what should be an idyllic paradise into the ground. Let's start by defining "Democrat controlled government." Governor - Democrat for 14 years State Senate - Democrat for 32 years State Assembly - Democrat for 30 of the last 32 years Los Angeles - there has been one Republican Mayor (8 years) since 1961 Los Angeles - Not one Republican on the City Council San Francisco - Democrat mayors since 1964 I could list more cities or city councils but I think that makes the point.   What has single party Government gotten the people of California? High taxes.   Nerdwallet report on taxes High inflation - Cumulative inflation since 2021 was over 20%.   Joint Economic Committee  and  National Business Capital High Homelessness -  Highest number of homeless people, in fact 1/3rd of all homeless people in...

H-1B Visas - theory versus reality

H-1B Visas are a good idea in theory.  People around the world want to come to the United States to work and live.  Why not invite the best and brightest.  Bring top talent to the US to help our businesses, industry and military remain the top in the world. Then there is that pesky thing called reality.  I've worked for small companies with less than 250 employees and companies with hundreds of thousands of employees, and companies in between.  I've seen the reality I'm describing. I'm sure there are some brilliant researchers and developers who have come to the US under this program.  But they are the exception.  The norm is that companies don't bring over the best and the brightest.  They bring over cheap labor.  Companies, seeking to get a leg up on opponents by offering customers lower prices, import labor who will work at a fraction of the cost of US residents doing the same jobs. If a person from Country X is doing the same job an Ameri...

The Biden Legacy

This week President Biden gave a speech reviewing his legacy in the White House.  Biden talked about the good he's done.  I have a different perspective, I see the deaths and damage that occurred in the last four years. Covid - more people died of Covid in 2021, when Biden was in office, than died in 2020, when Trump was in office.*  In 2020, the disease was new and testing was ramping up, treatment protocols were being developed, medical supplies like ventilators were in short supply, and multiple Democrat run States put in place nursing home rules that led to significant numbers of deaths.  In 2021, those nursing home rules were no longer in place, multiple vaccines were available, testing and supply issues had been overcome.  Despite those advantages, more people died of Covid in President Biden's first year in office. The Border - Laken Riley, Rebecca Morin, Jeremy Poou Caceres (a 2 year old boy), Rachel Morin, Melissa Powell and her son Riordan Powell, Ai...

Government knows best or people know best? You choose.

During 2024, we saw a great example of the different philosophies of our political parties. Kamala Harris proposed $25,000 loans to small businesses and assistance to black men wanting to get into the marijuana business.  While running for President, Kamala Harris proposed increasing taxes on business and "the rich."  After the election, Senator Elizabeth Warren suggested a way to reduce the deficit is for rich people to return the money given to them by the Government with the Trump tax cuts.  To address housing issues, Kamala Harris proposed building 3 million new homes.  The Mayor of Denver put an initiative on the ballot to raise taxes to help people with rent assistance.   Donald Trump on the other hand proposed reducing regulations, reducing the tax burden on businesses, and eliminating taxes on hard work with his no tax on tips and no tax on overtime proposals.  To address housing issues, Montana's legislature in the last session provided a prop...

This time we spoke out

I saw the movie "Bonhoeffer," a story about a German pastor who spoke up against the actions of Nazis in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s.  The movie had the actor playing Martin Niemoller, a Lutheran Pastor in Germany, speak the famous remarks of Pastor Niemoller: First, they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist.  Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.  Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.  Classic Nazi and fascist techniques have been adopted by Progressives in the current century.  Start with a "Big Lie" - take a kernel of truth and build up whatever you want around it.  Shout down anyone who tries to speak against you, they have the advantage of social media allowing the shouting down to include name calling, slurs, bullying, and hu...

A Unifying Answer On Mass Deportation

 On Sunday, November 19, the Denver Post ran an editorial on mass deportation that was divisive and included at least one lie, all with a clear goal of spreading fear and promoting opposition to the policies of President Trump.  I'm left wishing I was finally retired so I could send a letter to the Editor in response, but I'm not (yet) so I can't.  I can only respond here.  Here is what I would have written to them: ------------------------ To the Editor: Your Editorial of November 17, "Mass deportation will hurt Aurora," is divisive and misleading, including a clearly false statement about President Trump's first term.  Your paper is sending a signal that rather than being willing to offer compromises or suggestions to make things better, you intend to spread fear and promote opposition to the policies of President Trump, while insulting the majority of Americans who voted for Trump. According to your editorial police say there were only 12 members of the vio...

A different view on Separation of Church and State

The very beginning of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...." For decades this was interpreted as saying Government, public places, schools, etc. must be free of all religion.  No symbols, no books, no prayers, etc.  It was also interpreted by many as saying Government may not grant funds to religious institutions.  No funding of religious schools as part of school choice type programs, for example.  Some took it further to argue Government funds to help the poor can't go to religious organizations either. Those opinions are wrong. I recognize Congress cannot declare the United States is a Catholic country as Hungary had done in the distant past or recognize a national Church as the England did.  However, prohibiting religious artifacts or funding to religious institutions is not, in my opinion the correct interpretation of the First Amendment. Two reasons for my p...