Robert Robb's article, Immigration figures to bug your eyes out, address only half the story, and not the more important half of the debate over illegal immigration.

Living in California, I see first hand the effects of immigration, economically, socially, even politically. The economic impact of immigrants from Mexico is enormous. They do perform a large volume of work, much of it labor intensive, and much of it work that would go unperformed by most native citizens.

I grew up around immigrant families, went to school and played little league baseball with their children. In high school and college I worked in fast food restaurants alongside many immigrants. I have always had the highest respect and admiration for anyone who wants to work, to make their lives better, and help their families.

Without their labor and efforts, California's economy, without a doubt, would suffer. All of the niceities that come with jobs such as OSHA, unemployment and disability insurance, are not provided in the wages of the immigrant. They certainly are not paid the highest of wages, nor is there much future in such employment. There is no career track for day laborers.

The costs in terms of dollars are also enormous. While reaping the financial benefits, we also absorb a tremendous cost. These costs range from health care, much of which is provided at emergency rooms, to our schools which must deal with a large number of migrant children for whose families public schools often serve as expedient day care.

The real cost however is not in dollars and cents, but in our culture. Contrary to the deepest desires of the multiculturalists, there is a unique American culture. And it is a noble one indeed.

In Frank Talk about "Mexifornia", a speech given to Hiilsdale College in 2003, Victor Hanson explains clearly what some of us have known for a long time. I of course saw this ever so clearly as I pursued my teaching credential in the mid-1990's, suffering in silence through the indoctrination of multiculturalism, "diversity", and relativism. Winston Smith had nothing on me.

At the time, the two hottest certifications to have with the credential were the CLAD and B-CLAD. CLAD, if you are curious, stands for Crosscultural Language and Academic Development. The B of course stands for bilingual. (Yes, they're as pernicious as they sound.)

Today, almost without exception, every credential by default comes with the CLAD components to the core education classes already included. Thus there is no "escaping" if you will the CLAD. Don't let the state's CLAD web page fool you. What is on paper versus what is in practice are entirely different.

What has happened, not just with the full consent of but active participation by the public schools is the dilution of our culture. We are much like 3rd and 4th century Rome, with large numbers of non-Romans inhabiting larger and larger swaths of land, people who brought their culture with them and continued it in their new homes. They had neither the Roman ideals nor Roman legacy to guide them. Now, it is almost as if we had our own Adrianople, sans the battle.

Once, as the saying went, "when in Rome, do as the Romans." Travelers could ride Roman roads from Spain to Jerusalem and never forget that they were in Roman lands. The Roman empire ceased being Roman long before Alaric and Oadacer ran wild.

I live twenty miles or so north of the San Fernando Valley, which is the northern part of Los Angeles County, and part of the city of Los Angeles. Once it was home to the likes of Lockheed and General Motors. It cranked ot planes and automobiles and supported a large and vibrant post-WW2 middle class. Still visible are the vast rows of tract homes and suburban sprawl, now decaying, that were the progeny of the post-war, post-depression boom. The Catholic churches' coffers were filled as parishoners with growing incomes and few needs were all too ready to give. In fact, I spent time as a youth living the Valley, my parents only moving as the Valley began to change.

And what of the change? No better place to look at the change than the public schools. Los Angeles Unified's demographic data tells the story. In school year 2002-2003, here is the breakdown: (I put the data into a spreadsheet and crunched the numbers.)

Hispanic: 72%
Black: 12%
White: 9%

Now, it'd be one thing if this were a small, rural district in a small Arizona or California border town. But this is the nation's second largest school district.

Jill Stewart, who is what a journalist should be, has been on the case for several years. Even now, bilingualist teachers refuse to follow the law. Apparently, Los Angeles Unified at least has shorn itself of the ultra-left and now is controlled by the moderately left, which has chosen immersion, whereas other districts remain mired in "they won't be able to talk to grandma" bilingualism.

What this means is that our schools are forced to teach the most basic of skills far beyond the grade levels at which the skills should be acquired. But the problem lies much deeper still.

Though they are taught more English, what are the chances that the kids are also being taught the cultural values and traditions of America?

Consider for a moment some of Los Angeles' policies regrading immigrants. Los Angeles has enacted Special Order 40, which prohibits police from inquiring about the immigration status of suspects they arrest. It also is a "sanctuary city" for illegals. It recognizes the Matricula Consular card, issued by foreign governments, as valid identification. As for the LAUSD, here's the results of a quick test. Their website search tool returns 448 results for "multicultural" yet only returns 45 for "patriotism".

Even though the schools are aiding and abetting the dilution of our culture, it would happen nonetheless. Large parts of the Valley are becoming more and more populated by non-English speaking, non-Western culture adopting peoples. There is entirely not a racial component to this, as race and culture are distinctly separate.

As Hanson put it:

statistics suggest that after 20 years, even legal Mexican immigrants have double the welfare rates of American citizens. And in one study, students surveyed at 13 years of age and then again at 17 were 50 percent more likely at 17 to identify themselves as “Mexicans” as opposed to “Mexican-Americans”—this despite, or perhaps even because of, having spent four years in American high schools.

What this means for the populations of California, Arizona, and other states, is that there is larger and larger share of the population, people who do not consider themselves to be American, nor will they ever want to be. They will have no appreciation of, nor a desire to embrace, the Western way of life: i.e. individualism, hard work, moral restraint, love of freedom, criticism of government, patriotism, and other traditional ideals that built this great land.

The very foundation of our society, the ideas that we hold dear, will be of no importance to them. And more and more, they shape public policy. For example, at Cal State University Northridge, where I earned my Master's in Education, Caesar Chavez Day is a holiday while President's day is not.

And if you think this is limited to California and Arizona, you're sadly mistaken. It has affected even the president's amnesty immigration plan.

The real cost to America of unfettered illegal immigration is dimunition and destruction of America. The mantra of "we're a nation of immigrants" just won't cut it anymore. For our entire history, immigrants came here for a better life, to make a new start, to seek freedom, but most importantly, to be American. They might have brought some of the old world with them so they'd never forget from where they came. But they never forgot why they came here nor more importantly, what they were to become: American citizens.

When the bullets flew in Normandy, or Sicily, or Iwo Jima, or a million places in between, Schmidts and Bauers fought and died alongside Steins and Cohens, who fought and died alongside Mancinis and De Lucas, who fought and died alongside Micklczewskis and Kowalskis. And they all bled and died, not as Germans, Italians, Jews, Poles, or Irish. They all bled and died as Americans.

I wrote back in december, The liberal case against oen borders that from social issues like aboriton and gay marriage to economic issues like falling wages and standards of living, there is a very strong case against open borders from a liberal perspective. Most of the immigrants coming into America today, the ones coming illegally and establishing residencies in the sprawling immigrant communities of places like Los Angeles, are not bringing with them political liberalism.

The economic price is expensive yet one that's recoverable. In fact, one could make the case either way, that immigrants produce more than they take. On that, I'll leave it to the professional researchers who can analyze the data. It would be hard to speculate on. However, on one point the evidence and analysis is clear. Illegal immigration has taken a toll on American culture. Public institutions, from city governments to the entire educational system have acted with complicity and in some cases outright defiance of laws.

We do not even truly know the exact number of persons living here illegally. It could be 10 million, it could be three times that. Nonetheless, there is a large and ever growing permanent class of people from whom we are everything and anything but home.

America is the grandest experiment in history. We are a nation not of a single race, religion, ethnicity, or heritage, but rather we are a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. And that's it. We are held together by an idea, a belief, and nothing more. We are all Americans by choice, whether born here or not. We are free to leave, yet save for a few wealthy liberals, none do. For all the purported evils of our society, millions still risk life and limb to get here.

Fine. Roll out the welcome mat, just so long as they embrace our culture, and equally, we teach it to them. Because unless they do their part, and we do ours, the costs to our culture, and thus our country, will be unbearable.

Hindrocket nails it better than anyone and without trying to, indcits the MSM horribly for deriliction.

Also earlier today, Iraqi electrical workers marched through Baghdad to protest against terrorism, especially attacks on electricity stations and oil pipelines. The demonstrators chanted "No, no to terror." Here is a photo of the demonstration:



I think it's interesting that the signs are all in Arabic. All around the world, antiwar and anti-American demonstrators brandish signs in English. Why? Because the intended audience isn't their countrymen, it's us. Here, the demonstrators wanted to get through to the terrorists and to their fellow Iraqis.

Nothing is more accurate, or damning, than the last paragraph.

I finally was able to condense into one sentence the perniciousness of killing Terri Schiavo. Cut through all the legalese, all the moralistic pining, and all the "cult of death" rhetoric. The reason is simple:

The real issue is not what Terri is capable of doing, the real issue is what we, society and humanity, are capable of doing.

After the elections in the US, then Iraq, then the elevation of Dean to party chair, it looked like the democrats were a party doomed. Everyone jumped on the bandwagon.

Now, it's the right that's on the ropes. Andrew Sullivan Bush’s triumph conceals the great conservative crack-up on March 20th and Glenn Reynolds' A conservative Crackup today are just two examples.

They are correct in their assessment that it is only the war that binds us together, that a big fissure lies underneath. But the sad truth is that the Republicans are just doing the peoples' bidding. In my state of California, we are in a horrific mess, as we have the most liberal state legislature in country, where no spending bill is ever rejected. Los Angeles is a sanctuary city for illegals, and the public schools defy the will of the voters and still continue bilingual programs. The recent choice for LA mayor was between ultra-left and ultra-left.

We get the government we deserve. We also get the government we want. And the truth is the voters really like the government goodies. The Republicans know this all too well. They swept into power in 1994, only to see their control erode the more they cut and reduced the government. So they had two choices, give the people what they want, or lose. Easy choice to make, for a poltician that is.

Many conservatives such as myself, are furious. The president might be conducting an effective war on terror, and has taken the fight to the enemy. The democratic party of FDR, Truman, Kennedy, and Lieberman has been hijacked by the Deaniacs and the international-euro-peaceniks, and they can't be trusted to defend this country. But domestically he is anything but a conservative.

His immigration policy is amnesty. His trade policies are killing American firms, whether it's the tariffs or the trade with China. His medicare bill is a trillion dollar boondoggle. He has nationalized education. He has spent money like there's no tomorrow, made "compassionate conservatism" a euphimism for big government, and worst of all, ran up enormous deficits.

Just as Californians only have themselves to blame, so too do we only have ourselves to blame. Those of us who want smaller government are in the minority. And where are we really going to go?

Take social security for example. The federal government takes 7 1/2 percent of your money, takes 7 1/2 percent from the employer (well, they take it from you, it just "appears" to come from the employer) and does so based upon a "promise" that the money will be there later, and nobody complains. The greatest pozi scheme ever invented, and people don't want to scrap it, but save it.

They might be angering the conservatives, but they're just doing what the people want.

Some people do not know the difference between life and death. Some will go to extremes in their hatred and attacks, likening a president to one of the greatest mass murderers of all time, oblivious to the sheer stupidity and intellectual vacuity they display. In order to kill a million and a half unborn children they must ignore the ashes falling from the sky over their town. They have to forget to ask what that awful smell is, why so many thousand disembark month after month and never are seen again.

Why does the fate of one woman capture the attention of a nation? Because some of us actually do understand the difference between life and death, recognize what a slippery slope we stand on, and are aware of the descent we are beginning and to where it leads. We have been there before.

Many spending programs and government schemes from the left are sold as being "for the children." Excpet of course if that child has the unfortunate circmstance of being unborn. Republicans are accused of wanting to kill old people and the sick. Yet when they actually want to stop the killing of a disabled person, they are blocked. We're told that it's necessary to kill a million unborn children because "nobody's going to pay for them." Well, someone wants to care for Terri, and still they want to kill her.

Perhaps some of us who see Terri see a glimpse into the future, and it's a frightening one indeed. Maybe we just don't understand why some are so determined to see Terri die, so much so that they will kill her. What goal are they trying to achieve, what purpose are they fighting for? Is the power of life and death that intoxicating that this has become a battle over far more than the life of a single Florida woman? Have we become so inured to death, so expecting of a life satiated, that a woman who leads a life none would choose, would cause us to kill her and save her.

I think that some of use are quite fearful where we go from here. We fear that once we are comfortable aborting the deformed unborn, we will ex post facto abort the deformed child. I think we fear not so much the killing of Terri, but what will be next. And the farther down that road we travel, the farther we will be from knowing the difference between life and death. And that is a history book often written.

More and more the feminists are painted into a corner from which there is no escape. They have to take the fifth when Clinton does what would otherwise get a Republican burnt at the stake. Then, they have to lobby for preventing women from receiving information about their "fetuses" and against pre-abortive ultra-sounds.Just listen to the words of NARAL spokes post-fetus:

"They don't want women to go to Planned Parenthood, where they'll get their full range of options," said Alison Herwitt. "They just want them to go to crisis pregnancy centers, where women will be exposed to this weapon at taxpayers' expense."

Yes, that pesky thing called information Now, they find themselves further backed against a wall with Terri Schiavo. To promote abortion, than no humanization of the unborn child fetus is permissable, all abortions must be protected, no matter where in the term, thus nthe apoplexy over late-term abortion legislation. As I posted yesterday, on this point, we all agree. Banning late-term aboritons is just the beginning.

To kill Terri, we must deny her her humanity. Fine. But to kill her, we are also giving her husband complete control over her life. Is this really what the feminists want?

The entire case to kill her comes from the testimony of her husband, his claim that she wouldn't want to live this way. He has total say as to whether she lives or dies. In fact, he makes the "choice" for her. Yet, the foundation of "reproductive rights" is that the woman makes the choice alone, sans spousal or partner input.

This would be comical on so many levels if it wasn't so disgusting. The power to kill Terri comes from the same person who would have absolutely no power to prevent Terri from killing her unborn child. And so the feminists must remain silent as a husband kills his wife, fearing their obvious duplicity being exposed. In other words, it is okay to kill a woman should she be unable to speak. And doesn't this imply a patriarchal relationship between the husband and wife?

Hardly a fish and a bicyle. It's quite a quandry.

Two articles highlight a growing group of people that one could only call the ruling elite. Michael Barone's The Trustfunder Left, and Victor Hanson's America's New Discontents describe the groups of people who are predominantly of wealth, and live in a world far removed from most people who actually work for their income.

They are disproportionately leftist, not liberal. They are highly suspicious of "patriotism" and those who believe in America. Their "compassion" is contempt poorly masked. They lead lives of folly and worthlessness, and seek to find meaning in the governance of others.

I have written that the left has contempt for democracy, and that they will do anything to win an election. You see it in Washington, and you see in in Ohio, where although the results are in, they are never finished. Surel, there was suppression and intimidation, and even if it is pure fantasy, keep the message alive, deligitamize the election, and with it the entire electoral process.

It is why we can't be trusted to invest in personal savings accounts.

It is why we can't own guns.

It is why we must pay high taxes.

It is why we must turn over as much of our autonomy to others.

It is why they seek to make more and more people dependent upon government, for food, clothing, housing, medicine.

It is why we must remain ever vigilant.

Terri Schiavo is simply the latest episode in our culture of death. We kill over a million unborn children each year simply because they are unwanted. We now kill an innocent woman whose only crime is inconvenience.

It is visible every where in our society, from video games to movies and television. Killing makes a killing, and the consequences be damned. We have to have legislation against cloning because some are too self-consumed with their god-like powers that they can't, or won't, see right from wrong. And now we're having a debate about whether Terri Schiavo's life is actually life. Yet, try to build a new school to ease overcrowding, and heaven forbid you should be intruding on the habitat of a frog.

It's interesteing to hear how the democrats are "for the little guy", yet the littlest and least able of them all, they want to kill. When people ask what is the result of the secularazation of soceity, here it is. We no longer are guided by the principle that we are all equal under the eyes of God. We are guided by the principle that we are all powerful in the eyes of the law.

Now we are become death, the shatterer of worlds.

It's been one year since I returned to blogging in earnest. I had originally started the blog in 2002, but quickly became distracted and found it hard at times to keep it going. Plus, in 2002, the blogosphere hadn't quite hit it's stride. I imagine had I been a little more diligent, I'd probably be on a lot more blog rolls. Oh well, such is history.

Along the way, I made some predictions that turned out to be fairly close, such as calling the election 53-46, and that was back in March 2004. Okay, so it was 51-48, but I did also predict that Kerry can't beat Bush, and that one proved true. Bush almost beat himself, but in the end, the American people pulled through.

I have discussed a variety of topics, from politics, war and peace, to education and history. I think I taken as a whole, I have been right more often than not, more accurate than not, and more insightful than repetitive.

On many issues or events I chose not to comment when there were thousands of others doing so, or when I had nothing more to add to the conversation. Sometimes events really speak for themselves. I have looked for areas where I could write longer and more detailed pieces, rather than the shorter style found on most blogs. I preferred the one big play to the long drive, to use a football analogy.

Competition is indeed human nature, and likewise, I sought to compare myself to other blogs and other writers. More than anything else I've learned is that compared to many others, I write an analyze well. I am not alone in feeling that the professional commentariat world is filled far more with hacks and cronies than with talent. When true talent is the only measure, you get the NFL. Instead, we have the NY Times.

In addition to writing, I have read extensively, from books on contemporary issues, to books on history and philosophy, to even the classics.

Blogging has been a most wonderful experience. It has forced me to become a much better writer as well as much better reader. Being able to put thoughts down on paper has been a tradition since the ancient times, and I know why. Writing is one of the most rewarding, stumulating, and exciting activities the mind can engage in. The most gratifying part is that the words and thoughts are mine, and I have the power to write what I want, when I want.

I've had a few thousand visitors to my site and not have had the forutne of being instalaunched. I'm sure that will happen someday. Even still, it's been an exciting year. Since I've had my site counter running, I've increased my hits every month, and this month looks likely to follow the same pattern. But whether one or one thousand people visit per day, I will continue.

To all who've visited, thanks. To all those still to visit. Thanks. Hope you like my city, stay a while, and drop a few dollars to help the local economy.