Food For the Sowell :Pricing

Liberals advocate many wonderful things. In fact, I suspect that most conservatives would prefer to live in the kind of world envisioned by liberals, rather than in the kind of world envisioned by conservatives.

Unfortunately, the only kind of world that any of us can live in is the world that actually exists. Trying to live in the kind of world that liberals envision has costs that will not go away just because these costs are often ignored by liberals.

Because, since they are morally and ethically superior in their own heads what they say and what they believe is so vastly superior…

One of those costs appeared in an announcement of a house for sale in Palo Alto, the community adjacent to Stanford University, an institution that is as politically correct as they come.

The house is for sale at $1,498,000. It is a 1,010 square foot bungalow with two bedrooms, one bath and a garage. Although the announcement does not mention it, this bungalow is located near a commuter railroad line, with trains passing regularly throughout the day.

Lest you think this house must be some kind of designer’s dream, loaded with high-tech stuff, it was built in 1942 and, even if it was larger, no one would mistake it for the Taj Mahal or San Simeon.

This house is not an aberration, and its price is not out of line with other housing prices in Palo Alto. One couple who had lived in their 1,200 square foot home in Palo Alto for 20 years decided to sell it, and posted an asking price just under $1.3 million.

Competition for that house forced the selling price up to $1.7 million.

Another Palo Alto house, this one with 1,292 square feet of space, is on the market for $2,285,000. It was built in 1895.

Even a vacant lot in Palo Alto costs more than a spacious middle-class home costs in most of the rest of the country.

How does this tie in with liberalism?

In this part of California, liberalism reigns supreme and “open space” is virtually a religion. What that lovely phrase means is that there are vast amounts of empty land where the law forbids anybody from building anything.

Anyone who has taken Economics 1 knows that preventing the supply from rising to meet the demand means that prices are going to rise. Housing is no exception.

Yet when my wife wrote in a local Palo Alto newspaper, many years ago, that preventing the building of housing would cause existing housing to become far too expensive for most people to afford it, she was deluged with more outraged letters than I get from readers of a nationally syndicated column.

What she said was treated as blasphemy against the religion of “open space” — and open space is just one of the wonderful things about the world envisioned by liberals that is ruinously expensive in the mundane world where the rest of us live.

But since it their intention that matters to them, and not the results. And you can’t violate the mantra because you are the superior life form and you must prove it everyday.

Of course, you’re not. But try telling that to a tye-died in the wool Liberal!

Much as many liberals like to put guilt trips on other people, they seldom seek out, much less acknowledge and take responsibility for, the bad consequences of their own actions.

Why should they, they are superior, so their beliefs are superior and if thy just work hard enough (and suppress everyone else more) then you’ll believe it to. Or else.

There are people who claim that astronomical housing prices in places like Palo Alto and San Francisco are due to a scarcity of land. But there is enough vacant land (“open space”) on the other side of the 280 Freeway that goes past Palo Alto to build another Palo Alto or two — except for laws and policies that make that impossible.

After all, Central California is suffering from a massive drought, but they won’t divert water to the farmers because of an inedible fish, the delta smelt. It’s “environmentally” more important than farmers and crops.

So they’ll  happily create a dust bowl in order to save their fish. Then turn around and blame global warming for it. Thus, they are not at fault for doing nothing about it.

https://indyfromaz.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/you-smelt-it-you-dealt-it/

As in San Francisco and other parts of the country where housing prices skyrocketed after building homes was prohibited or severely restricted, this began in Palo Alto in the 1970s.

Housing prices in Palo Alto nearly quadrupled during that decade. This was not due to expensive new houses being built, because not a single new house was built in Palo Alto in the 1970s. The same old houses simply shot up in price.

It was very much the same story in San Francisco, which was a bastion of liberalism then as now. There too, incredibly high prices are charged for small houses, often jammed close together. A local newspaper described a graduate student looking for a place to rent who was “visiting one exorbitantly priced hovel after another.”

That is part of the unacknowledged cost of “open space,” and just part of the high cost of liberalism.

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 

Re-Volting

Nearly a year ago General Motors was losing almost $50,000 for each Chevrolet Volt it built. Now GM’s business model, driven by trendy environmentalism, calls for it to cut the price and lose even more money.

Well, that’s liberal economics…

The green lobby wants more hybrids and plug-in electric cars on the roads. Therefore the president wants 1 million electrics humming around by 2015 — and the carmakers have to ignore market reality under pressure to do what the environmentalist-political complex demands.

Even if it makes no sense.

Volt Sales — 2013: 9,855 so far. 2012: 8,817 2011: 7,671

The Toyota Corolla, the car I’ve driven since 1991 —July 2013 Sales: 24,463. And that was #10 on the most popular Cars for just THAT Month and it sold virtually as many in that month as the Volt has in 3 years!

But the sanctimonious environmentalist left doesn’t give a crap about market trends and consumer demands. It has “moral” superiority and high minded righteous arrogance on its side.

#1 by the way was the anti-environmentalist, but American, Ford F-150 Pickup truck with over 60,000 sold in July alone. 17 mpg city, 23 mpg highway.

And by the way, Ford took no bailout money.

So screw what the consumer wants we’re going to try and make them (force them later??) chose what we want them to choose.

They will continue do the same thing over and over and again and if they wish really, really hard then they can change reality and the utopia they see in their heads will be transmitted to everyone else. Or else they’ll just have to force it to happen.

Cram that square peg into that round hole.

If at first you don’t succeed. Fail, Fail, Again!

That’s so Liberal. Remind you of ObamaCare? 🙂

THE AGENDA IS THE AGENDA

Fiat and Chrysler’s global head of powertrains, put it in his own remarks at Traverse City (Meeting), “Many customers want to reduce CO2, but they aren’t willing to change their lifestyle or pay the cost — yet.”

So they left will have to ramp up the Global Warming Fear factor and crush the competitiveness of the more popular cars (everything except a Volt) because that’s what Liberals do when their “superior” fantasies don’t materialize.

Think I’m kidding…

The problem with bad ideas from Europe is that they eventually become bad ideas in America too.

And so it goes with the latest nitwit scheme from Britain’s Liberal Democrat Party, which is cousin to our own liberal Democrat Party, separated not ideologically or by a vast ocean, but only by accents.

The Lib Dems want to outlaw gas and diesel powered cars from the United Kingdom with a goal to create a “zero-carbon” UK by 2040.

No word yet whether they will allow people to “breathe,” which– incidentally to Lib Dems it seems– also pushes carbon into the atmosphere.

“Only electric vehicles and ultra-efficient hybrid cars would be allowed on UK roads under the Lib Dem plans,” writes the UK’s Telegraph. “However, petrol and diesel vehicles would still be allowed for freight purposes. The plans will be voted on by members at the upcoming Lib Dem conference in Glasgow and could become party policy if approved.”

Nice to see that Lib Dems also approve of group assisted-suicide. I wasn’t sure if it was legal in Glasgow.

Oh, but wait. It gets better.

Because the UK’s Labour Party, which often runs just a little left of Josef Stalin, may capture the government in 2015, and they love bad ideas like this almost as much as Nanny Pelosi loves to pass unread bills. (John Gibson)

NHS…ObamaCare

So why not…

In September of last year, we said “Obama’s Government Motors needs to shut down the Volt line indefinitely” — not just for the month it planned to halt production — then restart the assembly lines only when it could make a profit on the car.

In May, we noted: “The market for electric cars is so weak that consumer costs are approaching almost nothing.”

Here it is August, and the Volt, the car that USA Today calls the “supposed” star of General Motors’ portfolio, is back in the news.

This time it’s because the automaker is going to drop the price by $5,000. USA Today reports that with “a full $7,500 federal tax credit, the price is cut to $27,495,” a figure that doesn’t include some state tax credits.

Aside from those whose egos demand that they use their cars to scream out their moral superiority as environmentalists, and maybe a few enthusiasts who dabble in the technology, does anyone really want these electric cars? Their dismal sales numbers simply do not justify their existence.

Sales of the Volt, the most popular electric vehicle, were only a little more than half of the 45,000 that GM expected last year. Ford built 1,627 Focus Electrics in 2012 and sold only 685 of them.

Foreign makers fared no better. Mitsubishi could sell only 600 of its i-MiEVs while Nissan sold fewer than 800 of its Leafs last year. Sales in 2013 remained stagnant until Nissan cut the price by $6,400 early in the year.

Yes, Tesla seems to be doing well. But remember: It makes a luxury car that appeals to the wealthy who buy them as toys. It’s an outlier. (BASE PRICE: $58,570–$106,570).

Meanwhile, Chrysler has wisely decided to stay out of the EV market until “consumers are willing to step up and pay for the technology,” Automotive News reported this week. That’s the way it should be.

Government involvement invariably introduces inefficiency, improper incentives and, in the end, failure.

The very definition of Liberalism is to exactly the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. 🙂
Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

 Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Political Cartoons by Glenn McCoy

What About Ideas & Solutions?

Political Cartoons by Lisa Benson
First off, a bit of news and information:
Food stamp usage indicates that in December those receiving an average of $134 per month has just hit 44.1 million people.
In other words, America is now the land of the free, home of the brave, of whom 14.3% can’t afford to eat, even with all the new jobs created.
47% of people don’t pay taxes at all.
7% are Public Sector Union Members (All Unions are 12% total workforce) but they are being magnified by the Liberal media to be everyone.
And there are forecasts for another 15-25% drop in the housing market.
But yet, they are entitled. And making any cuts will turn today’s kids into tomorrow’s criminals, according to the Left’s latest fear-that-is-not-fearmongering.
Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-FL) on MSDNC:
“I was at a childcare center in my district, Monday and literally stood with moms who who when they lose their childcare, they’re going to have to stop working. They’re not going to be able to send their kids to school and they won’t get an early childhood education. And we know that cuts like that will directly lead to kids becoming criminals later on. We know there’s that direct proportional relationship. So we’ve got to make sure the cuts are the right cuts as well.”
Cogent <Research>  found that only 20% of plans can meet their financial obligations to plan participants. The deficit is due mainly to union and public pension plans: Only 10% and 12%, respectively, reported a current funding status of 95% or greater. A majority (54%) of public pensions said their current funding status is below 80%, and 16% had a current funding status below 60%.

As for the Media:

Only 1 out of 24 network evening stories about the Wisconsin “feud” since Feb. 16, reported a critical number relating to union pensions: $1 trillion. That’s the huge deficit facing public workers’ pensions in America and the reason Walker and other state governors are facing tough choices including demanding public workers contribute more.

ABC’s Barbara Pinto reported on the “looming crisis” on “World News” Feb. 21, the sixth night of coverage. Pinto said: “[P]ension plans for America’s public workers that are underfunded by at least a trillion dollars. Finance professor Joshua Rauh thinks the debt could be at least three times as much.”

She then quoted Rauh who said, “The only people who can pay for this are current taxpayers, future taxpayers, public employees, if their benefits are cut.” (MRC)

So the media doesn’t want to talk about reality. They want to talk about saving their agenda. Remember, Public Sector Unions make up 7% of the workforce and the media makes it sound like Armageddon is coming.
Armageddon is coming, but the media is ignoring it!!!
But don’t worry, be whiny…
***********************************************************************
Just how serious is the administration?

Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. walked out of Thursday’s high-stakes negotiations to stop a government shutdown and said the conversations will continue — but he won’t actually be part of them since he leaves this weekend for major negotiations with European leaders.

President Obama on Wednesday tapped Mr. Biden, his “sheriff” on the stimulus, to lead negotiations with Congress, though Mr. Biden already had a prearranged trip scheduled to visit Finland, Russia and Moldova next week.

Sure I always put the guy who’s going on off for a week in charge of a 2 week do-or-die strategy meeting!!

Oh, and the Democrats are measuring their “cuts” against the 2010 Budget they refused to pass last year!!

God Help us all!

*********************************************************************

So Let’s Talk Ideas for a moment:

Today, the federal government spends almost $10 billion per day. That’s money we simply do not have. Reckless spending and reduced revenues from the economic recession have produced the largest deficits in U.S. history — $1.4 trillion in 2009 and $1.5 trillion in 2010. That means almost $3 trillion has been added to the nation’s total debt in just two years.

Based on current spending levels, the public debt will total $20 trillion by 2020. That’s $20,000,000,000,000.

The federal government pays over $600 million in interest payments every working day. By 2020, when the public debt is $20 trillion, the annual interest payment will be almost $1 trillion — the largest single item in the entire federal budget.

That means that more will be spent on paying the interest on the debt than on our children’s education or our nation’s defense.

What is the One Cent Solution?

The One Cent Solution is simple: If the government cuts one cent out of every dollar of its total spending each year for five years, we can:

  • Balance the budget by 2018.
  • Reduce the debt by $2.6 trillion. That’s $2,600,000,000,000.
  • Restore America’s financial future.
One Cent Solution founder Bruce Cook offers a solution to the national debt crisis

The One Cent Solution envisions that while all areas of federal spending should be considered, some programs may be too critical to cut deeply. In that case, other programs must be reduced more so that the total amount cut is equal to one cent for every dollar each year for five years.

For a simple example, let’s say the federal budget only had three programs funded, each with an annual budget of just $1.00.

  1. Program A is simply cut by one cent every year for five years. That means the annual budget for Program A is $0.99 in 2012, and then $0.98, $0.97, $0.96, and finally $0.95.
  2. However, no cuts may be recommended for Program B. It is already lean.
  3. But then, Program C would have to be cut by two cents each year for five years so that the total federal budget is cut by one cent for every total dollar, for a balanced budget by 2018.

The One Cent Solution contains three key distinctive elements.

The Three Keys

1. A Plan that Works

The One Cent Solution gradually reduces total government spending by making cuts equal to one cent of every dollar each year for five years. This simple solution balances the budget by 2018, reduces the debt by $2.6 trillion and restores America’s financial future.

2. Legislative Strategy

To achieve the necessary spending reductions, the One Cent Solution calls for legislation that would impose strict caps on total government spending. Congress would be required to enact reforms to all spending programs, either by creating a special Commission or by the “regular order” of business, working through the appropriate committee structures. Although some programs may be cut more than 1% and some less, total government spending must be cut by 1% each year for five years. If Congress fails to enact the needed reforms, then the legislation would require mandatory, “across the board” 1% spending cuts to bring spending reductions into line with the One Cent Solution requirements.

Last year, President Obama created a debt commission to recommend spending cuts and tax increases. Little agreement was reached, and no action has been taken. The One Cent Solution is different. Here’s how:

Commission Comparison

3. Public Support

As citizens, we must own the problem. It’s just not right for us to pass on this debt to our children and grandchildren. Tough decisions are ahead. The key to balancing the budget and reducing the national debt is you.

If we sign on 1 million citizens with representation from every congressional district, we can get Congress to focus on this solution and give them the political will to act. The One Cent Solution is a true American grassroots movement, started by citizens who believe good ideas can originate outside of Washington.

Through the One Cent Solution campaign, we are not only insisting upon action, we are providing a nonpartisan, simple, equitable way to get the job done.

Become the solution.

Why not try simple and fair 🙂

It’s got to be better than over-complicated and political. No favoritism.

Just hard choices.

I’ve never said that cutting federal spending won’t be difficult, but making difficult decisions is what we elected our members of Congress to do, and we need them to act now to avoid disaster later. The One Cent Solution provides some flexibility in arriving at our target of cutting one cent out of every federal dollar spent, each year for five years, but as cuts are considered, everything must be on the table. I say that because, as Politico has pointed out below, many people think that we can achieve adequate savings by cutting waste, fraud and abuse…or going after defense spending.

I agree with those objectives, but spending will have to be widespread to be effective. Read on to see how popular belief and reality can part ways.

Misconception: 63 percent believe the federal government spends more on defense and foreign aid than it does on Medicare and Social Security. (Source: Tarrance Group, February 22-24, 2011)

Reality: “In fiscal 2010, spending for those two social programs totaled more than $1.1 trillion, while the Pentagon’s budget was about $660 billion and the State Department’s total spending was just under $52 billion.” (Source: Politico)

Misconception: 60 percent believe problems with the federal budget can be fixed by just eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. (Source: Tarrance Group, February 22-24, 2011)

Reality: “The Government Accountability Office on Tuesday released a report detailing several billion dollars’ worth of “duplication” in government spending that could be cut. But even if the totals reach the tens of billions of dollars, they would still be a drop in the bucket of President Obama’s proposed $3.73 trillion in spending for fiscal 2012.” (Source: Politico)

The General Accounting Office released a report yesterday that identifies an estimated $100 million to $200 million in duplicative spending. Imagine: we have 82 federal programs to improve teacher quality! Considering we just found hundreds of millions of dollars under the U.S. couch cushions, I am more convinced than ever that Congress can reduce each federal dollar spent by one penny each year for the next five years — cuts that lead to a balanced budget and $2.6 trillion of debt relief without raising taxes.

School districts had total expenditures of approximately $562.3 billion in 2006–07, including about $476.8 billion in current expenditures for public elementary and secondary education. Of the remaining expenditures, $62.9 billion was spent on capital outlay, $14.7 billion on interest payments on debt, and $7.8 billion on other programs (programs such as community services and adult education, which are not a part of public elementary and secondary education). SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2010).

But yet we have illiterate and uninformed students graduating and we have Unions with unfunded mandates that stretch into the Trillions of dollars.

Do you think there’s a problem here?

Zogby Poll: Do you believe the country is heading in the right direction or are things off on the wrong track? (FYI: “right direction” has been in free fall since Sept ’09- the height of the Obamacare debate)

Right Direction  Wrong Track    Not Sure

02-28-11     27                             60                            13

There is also the “roadmap” created by Sen. Paul Ryan (R-WI) at http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/

But I’m afraid all you’ll hear on the Liberal News Media is the Hysterical Left screaming like they a 1st degree sunburn and all you want to do is heal them but all they want to do is scream that you’re hurting and killing them!

Charlie Sheen Economics

Political Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

Familiarity Breeds

“It’s a great moment. I’m proud to have been here,” said a teary-eyed Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee led the effort in the Senate. “No one will know until this is actually in place how it works. But we believe we’ve done something that has been needed for a long time. It took a crisis to bring us to the point where we could actually get this job done.”

Financial Reform is done.

Sound familiar?

“You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other. But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket. Prevention, prevention, prevention—it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting.

But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.– House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, speaking at the 2010 Legislative Conference for National Association of Counties, 3/9/10

A brother of the Same Mother(f*kers!)

And having one of the architect of this the mess ‘fix’ it feels me with confidence, especially when he is not running for re-election.

********

Now for comedy you can’t make up:

Community activist Elena Herrada speaking on a panel discussion at the US Social Forum in Detroit, MI yesterday – compares the border patrol to the KKK. Herrada encouraged her audience to not sit next to border patrol officers in restaurants, asking, “Would you sit next to the Ku Klux Klan if they were sitting in a restaurant with a hood on over their head?” She continued, “There is no place for border patrol in our community, they have no good intentions. So when you see them refuse to sit with them, refuse to eat with them, pretend like they are the menace that they are.

Mind you, there is a foreign country just across the not-that-wide Detroit River, it’s Called CANADA!! so the only real Border Patrol she’s likely to see is at the Bridge going over to Windsor! 🙂

******

More Comedy:

From 620-WTMJ

MILWAUKEE – The Milwaukee County Board spent part of the day debating a measure that would call for the county to boycott doing business with companies in Arizona.

Communities around the nation have passed similar measures in response to a law in Arizona that makes it a state crime to be in the country illegally.
There was an odd moment during the debate when Supervisor Peggy West stood up and seemed to be confused about her geography.  “If this was Texas, which is a state that is directly on the border with Mexico, and they were calling for a measure like this saying that they had a major issue with undocumented people flooding their borders, I would have to look twice at this.  But this is a state that is a ways removed from the border,” West said during debate.


Her colleague, Joe Rice, quickly corrected her, “I just want to assure my colleague that Arizona does in fact share a border with the country of Mexico.”

WELCOME TO LIBERAL EDUCATION.

And, you have a foreign border just north of you too, it’s called CANADA!!

“I did get a passing grade in Geography in high school and in college and I do obviously know that Arizona is on the border,” West said in an interview after today’s meeting.

Oh Really? Are you sure about that?

Maybe they just “deemed” it.

The board tabled the measure, taking no action on it today.

The Video:

http://www.kfyi.com/pages/broomhead.html

*******

NOW IT’S THE STATE’S TURN:

Dozens of California lawmakers are pushing to make their state the first in the nation to impose an across-the-board boycott on Arizona over its immigration law — though the state’s largest city just voted to selectively scale back its boycott after local lawmakers realized it could backfire.

The Democratic state lawmakers on Wednesday unveiled a resolution that would impose several restrictions against Arizona. The measure calls for California to issue a travel advisory on visits to its eastern neighbor, halt state investment there and urge Major League Baseball to reconsider letting the state host the 2011 All-Star Game.

Though dozens of cities and organizations have voiced their opposition to Arizona’s law by instituting bans on employee travel, canceling conventions in the state and threatening to pull contracts, California would be the first state to do so.

Sen. Gil Cedillo, a Democrat from Los Angeles who introduced the proposal, said the Arizona law “undermines fundamental civil rights and civil liberties.”

He said it poses a “special threat to people of color” who live and travel through Arizona.

Though Arizona officials argue that the boycotts do little to change policy and only hurt businesses and workers in the state, proponents of the policies say they passed them out of concern over racial profiling.

However, the Los Angeles City Council — one of the cities leading the charge against Arizona — just backed off part of its boycott because it didn’t want to cut ties with an Arizona-based company that operates enforcement cameras at Los Angeles intersections and generated $6 million for the city last year.

The metropolis had previously banned most city travel to Arizona, as well as future contracts with Arizona companies. That kind of policy has since been replicated by other city governments.

But council members decided to make an exception on Wednesday, voting to extend a lucrative contract with red-light camera operator American Traffic Solutions, based in Scottsdale.

“The boycott never intended to impede public safety,” Los Angeles Councilman Richard Alarcon said during a meeting Wednesday.

Just mature, rational, logical thinking! 🙂

*******

NOW IT’S THE FEDS TURN

Two federal agencies have denied U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ charge they are boycotting Arizona because of SB 1070. The congresswoman earlier this week chastised the Border Patrol and the Department of Education for canceling scheduled events.

Border Patrol officials say they did not cancel any Arizona events, according to a statement issued by the agency’s public-affairs office in Washington, D.C.

The Border Patrol’s parent agency “has not canceled any conferences in Arizona. We conducted a thorough review across our organization to ensure this is, in fact, the case,” the statement says.

The Education Department says it moved a joint event with Mexican and Canadian attendees at the request of the Mexicans, The Associated Press reported. However, the Education Department said it still plans to hold other upcoming conferences in Arizona.

Giffords’ office stands by its news release, said C.J. Karamargin, Giffords’ spokesman. “Meetings were scheduled, meetings were canceled and the reason was SB 1070,” he said.

Giffords is an Arizona Democrat opposed to SB-1070!! 🙂

Ever since U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton confirmed – apparently prematurely – that the Justice Department would be bringing suit against the state of Arizona over its controversial new immigration law, we’ve all been watching anxiously for the DOJ’s official filing.

That was almost a week ago, and Justice is still saying they are “reviewing” the possibility.

Well, this may be the reason for the delay:

Arizona Democrats, with tough re-election battles looming, have urged the Obama administration not to sue the state over its controversial immigration job.

The Hill reported yesterday that Democratic congressman Harry Mitchell has sent President Obama a “sharply worded letter” urging him to call off plans for Justice to sue his state. Two other House Dems, Gabrielle Giffords and Ann Kirkpatrick, are also calling for Obama to back off of SB 1070.

The problem, it seems, is that widespread support for the law among Arizonians has caused trouble for AZ Dems in tough reelection battles. Republican opponents have been turning up the heat, painting the Democrats as unsupportive of the law and soft on illegal immigration. In an effort to respond to this tactic, Dems have tried to avoid mentioning SB 1070 while talking up the need for immigration reform and increased border security. If Justice brings suit, the election rhetoric will necessarily be once again focused on the law itself.

Mitchell’s letter seems to strike a distinctly Republican tone:

“I believe your administration’s time, efforts and resources would be much better spent securing the border and fixing our broken immigration system,” the two-term congressman wrote in the letter. “Arizonans are tired of the grandstanding, and tired of waiting for help from Washington. … [A] lawsuit won’t solve the problem. It won’t secure the border, and it won’t fix our broken immigration system.” (Blue Wave news)

Strange bedfellows indeed!

***********

Notice in this next one, Border Security is  not only not mentioned it’s not even referenced:

WASHINGTON – House Democrats on Thursday marked what they called a “milestone” of 100 co-sponsors for a comprehensive immigration overhaul bill that includes a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

Flanked by a group of immigrants from across the country, Democratic lawmakers said at a news conference that achieving 100 co-sponsors shows the immigration bill has the momentum necessary to become law.

The bill faces an uphill battle in Congress. House members are wary of facing voters in November who are split on what to do about immigration. Arizona’s controversial immigration law is adding considerable fuel to the fire.

The Arizona law requires law-enforcement officers, while stopping someone for another reason, to check immigration status when there is “reasonable suspicion” that the person is in the U.S. illegally. It also makes being an illegal immigrant a state crime.

At a news conference on Capitol Hill, Rep. Solomon Ortiz, D-Texas – who along with Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., introduced the federal immigration bill last December – said the legislation is not an “amnesty bill” for the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. and that it would not grant citizenship without punishment.

Rather, he said the bill would create a system that “is tough on enforcement, fair to taxpayers, and enforceable.”

The House bill would increase the number of green cards available and would create a program for illegal immigrants and their families giving them semi-legal status for six years if they learned English and U.S. civics.

The program also would require applicants to pay a fine of $500 and undergo a background check. The bill also would increase border security.

“Never have I seen the division that I see today and the hate that I see today,” Ortiz said in reference to the Arizona law, which barring any legal action will go into effect next month. “But people are beginning to understand the necessity of passing this important comprehensive immigration reform bill.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has said in the past, however, that she would not bring a comprehensive immigration bill to the floor until the Senate has passed its own version.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, called the climate surrounding the immigration issue “hostile” and added that not passing a comprehensive immigration measure would be the “BP oil spill of not doing the right thing.”

The Democrats’ immigration proposal, Jackson Lee said, “is going to save this nation.” (AZ Daily Star)

Still believe any time a Democrat is talking about “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” that it’s not AMNESTY and has nothing at all to do with Border Security?

And still don’t believe Jon Kyl when he said that Obama was going to hold Border Security hostage to the Agenda?

I would hope not.