Let me state, from the very start, I disagree with the concept of politically-motivated boycotts, whether from the left or right. For example, I disagree with the Cuban embargo/economic sanctions, and any faithful reader of this blog knows I've been silent on the topic of Iranian economic sanctions. I also didn't back the long-term sanctions against South Africa, even though I personally regarded apartheid morally reprehensible. Nobody can say I am backing any rogue governments. There are some basic relevant points: (1) I don't think they're effective; (2) they are arbitrary; and (3) they are politically counterproductive.
I have made it clear in numerous posts on this blog I disagree with the Arizona immigration law, based on a number of factors, including constitutional grounds and questionable effectiveness. However, the deliberate misstatement of the law, which explicitly rules out ethnic profiling, including the absolutely unconscionable admission by Attorney General Eric Holder that despite making a number of critical statements about the law in fact had not even read the reasonably brief legislation, is particularly damning.
Let us remember that nothing Arizona is doing redefines immigration laws. Undocumented workers or residents are in violation of American laws; Latinos are not "more equal" than European, Asian, African, or other prospective immigrants. Arizona is not overwriting civil rights legislation; nobody is suggesting that legal immigrants or Latino-Americans are to be treated differently than any other American citizen. Furthermore, there is no evidence of which I'm aware of any material due protection issues regarding Latinos of Arizona law enforcement personnel.
The histrionic, progressive groupthink response is morally unacceptable, in particular, the boycotts. Now if other states and organizations decide to declare a form of economic extortion, a trade war against Arizona-based business for the government to address a public safety issue, is mutually assured economic destruction.. What particularly disturbs me is failed government leaders, such as Barack Obama and the Los Angeles city council, whom have run their governments into the ground, up to the point of bankruptcy, shamelessly pandering to Latino voters with disingenuous propaganda against the Arizona law. It's even gotten to the point that national sports are using Arizona as a whipping boy with attempts to rehost or boycott an upcoming baseball All-Star game in the state and the NBA Phoenix Suns temporarily renaming themselves "Los Suns" in a brown-nosing tribute to political correctness.
The decision of District 113 assistant superintendent Suzan Hebson to cancel a planned trip to an Arizona-based basketball tournament by the Chicago-area Highland Parks High girls' championship basketball team (which had been holding bake sales to finance the trip later this year) essentially because of the administrator's politically-correct opinions regarding "beliefs and values" and sham rationalizations of "safety" concerns is fundamentally unjust; don't insult our intelligence. I do not like athletes being used as political footballs; President Carter's decision to prevent dozens of American Olympic athletes from earning medals at the 1980 Moscow games had zero effect on the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Athletes should provide a unifying force, e.g., "ping pong" diplomacy under President Nixon, not a divisive one.
But given the small-minded hostility of California to Arizona, might I suggest Arizona counter-attack, in particular, inviting overtaxed California businesses to relocate to a more business-friendly Arizona?
Does Obama Really Believe His Hype?
Obama had this to say today in Buffalo:
Obama said Republicans have "done their best to gum up the works" and said they generated much of the country's fiscal deficit that they now complain about.
"Their basic attitude has been, if Democrats lose, we win. After they drove the car in the ditch, made it as difficult as possible for us to pull it back, now they want the keys back. No. They can't drive. We don't want to have to go back in the ditch," he said.
The fact is, the Bush administration faced the aftermath of the stock market bubble correction, the 9/11 tragedy, and major corporate scandals (Enron, Tyco, etc.), without the deterioration we've seen since the 2008 economic tsunami. The Obama Administration will add $3T to the deficit in 2 years--roughly 30% of the entire federal deficit. The Democrats also controlled the Congress during the economic tsunami. As much as they gripe about the hand they were dealt, they did not inherit the famous Jimmy Carter "misery index".
I am not a Republican apologist--any faithful reader to this blog knows I have been sharply critical of GOP domestic spending during the Bush Administration. But Obama's rhetoric is deliberately disingenuous; not only have Democrats wanted more spending during the Bush years, they opposed pro-growth economic policies, which contributed to some of the highest federal revenue collections in American history.
But it's worse than that. Obama wants you to think it's the problem of the banks and that Bush is responsible for the banks. In fact, some of the criticisms that have been made (e.g., on derivatives) apply equally to the Clinton administration. The problem is that banks made loans at the peak of the housing market. If they have to foreclose on bad loans, it wipes out their equity. Why were housing prices so high? Because of easy money and high-risk mortgage loans. Bush did not control monetary policy; he wanted reform of the GSE's.
Running the economy into the ditch? Hardly. The problem is that Obama's economic policy has been on a slippery slope, he's been spinning his wheels in partisan mud, and his gold-plated economic programs are gaining no traction.
Political Cartoon
Ken Catalino points out that the progressive Democratic red ink gusher, which has exploded under progressive political malpractice, may take decades to clean up, as the national debt currently stands a shade under $13T.
Quote of the Day
Grow old along with me! The best is yet to be, the last of life, for which the first was to be; our times are in his hand who saith, A whole I planned, youth shows but half; trust God: See all, nor be afraid!
Robert Browning
Musical Interlude: "America" Songs
Neil Diamond, "America"
West Side Story, "America"
Simon & Garfunkel, "America"
Ray Charles, "America the Beautiful"
