Tag: news

Show Me Your Papers

publius911Leave a comment

12/27/25

I’m loving the hypocrisy of the lefties who seem to hold our attention with outlandish claims. With an estimated 20,000,000 people let into our country during the Biden years, and with all the profoundly negative impacts of that, many are upset with any effort to apply the laws governing being in the USA. The latest slur is how draconian it is to have to show proof of citizenship.

If asked, I don’t carry any documentation that I’m an US citizen. I could carry my passport or get and carry a copy of my birth certificate. If I thought I was going to be subject to such an inquiry, I likely would resort to such actions. That is, if I looked like the one of the millions that crossed the border illegally and am living in an area dominated by immigrants, I would think it prudent to be prepared. “How unAmerican”, you say?

Before you go off on me, did you scoff at the idea of having to show your covid vaccination proof? I bet you don’t protest when you try to enter an airport’s secured area.  How about buying liquor at a grocery store, despite looking well beyond the legal age for purchasing alcohol. Just some of the areas where you must “show your papers”.

Now that we’re looking for legal permission of to be in the USA, the long arm of the law is at hand. The drastic illegal actions of the last administration demands that we take corrective actions. Due process relies on confirmation of legal status. Prove to me you were born here, have a green card or H1b, have papers showing your future asylum hearing or else, we’re going to hold you until you can prove it or send you packing when you can’t.

The bald face effort by Democrats to change the electorate in their favor requires that every legal action be taken to assure we have free and fair elections. Obstinance to requiring proof of citizenship is a telltale sign of the underlying intentions of the left. Subvert the electoral process to achieve full and lasting control of government and the people. Starting with asking status of citizenship on the census and flowing all the way through to identification at the time of voting, Democrats resist the simplest actions to assure only citizens are voting and receiving a myriad of other taxpayer provided benefits.

Blue states hide behind “states’ rights” on elections. The invasion of our country that took place demands that issues affecting federal elections be addressed federally. California will fight any effort to establish how many actual citizens live there because their congressional power rests with the number of people, not citizens. Automatic voter registration while applying for a drivers’ license (aka “Motor Voter” laws now in 24 states and DC) now demand that even asking for some kind of identification at the time of voting is inadequate. As unlikely as it is to happen, in states where that occurs, it is imperative that proof eligibility to vote be required.

Litigation to see if the federal government can hold sway over efforts to assure only those eligible to vote is now pending. The positive outcome of efforts to assure free and fair elections may rest on the government being able to ask us to “show our papers”. This is what the Democrats have wrought on us.

Occupation: Political Grifter

publius9112 Comments

12/10/25

The latest to seek permanent employment as a “candidate” is Jocelyn Crockett. She joins Stacy Adams, Beto O’Rourke and Curtis Sliwa among others, who have found a way to milk the campaign finance laws to make a very comfortable living. The advent of “influencing” as an occupation only adds to the number of people who have turned some level of exposure into full time “get me in front of a camera/microphone” folks.

Crockett has to know she has no chance of winning a statewide election. Indeed, her kickoff had little to do with addressing what she would do as a Texas Senator. Rather she saw her bread get buttered by bashing Trump. The constant stream of anger sells her brand and she will ride that horse as long as the trough is full of money from those only to glad to have another loud voice in the wilderness of anger politics.

She won’t be the last and they exist on both sides of the aisle. Look for Marjorie Taylor-Green to join the ranks of people who turn a short stint of perceived gravitas into something well beyond their talents. Kamala Harris is doing her best to keep the money flowing. Obama can’t shut up and he needs to pay for the “library”.

The revolving door of political employment to traditional lobbying has found competition from government “advising”/ambassadorship, media, academia and now podcasting/influencing. It only entices more to seek office in hopes of not only enriching themselves while in office but the trappings that await them post “public service”. This further degrades the quality of those who are supposed to put country over their own desires.

Beware when candidates are short on what they will do for you and long on what they will do for themselves.

When is Your Boss not Your Boss

publius911Leave a comment

9/25/25

There is much angst over President Trump’s ability to manage the executive branch. With every thrust of placing people aligned with his policies in position, there is a parry by the entrenched bureaucrats holding on. Democrats are aligned in their outrage over removal of their cronies that have held to their leftist views and policies, many times in opposition of new laws contravening those policies. Attempts to remove these bureaucrats rest on unclear laws written by legislators who continue to hide behind vague wording that allows them to use both sides of the argument to suit their current power. She can stay but he must go depends on the blowing winds of power.

From slow walking senate approvals of hundreds of positions, supporting litigation for those who are being sent packing, and insisting on continued funding of “make work” roles, Democrats insist on keeping their stranglehold on the federal bureaucracy. Their power resides in their ability to impose their rule despite any new regime and its policies. In addition, the massive federal bureaucracy is a voting and funding pool they can count on. So what good is hiring a new “CEO” when he can’t run the company?

No manager can keep an employee who disregards their instructions. Indeed, no company can survive if its employees are saboteurs. What makes Americans think that our federal government is any different? If we elect people for what they purport to accomplish and then find they are unable to act on their promises, who is in control? Certainly not the voter or the people for whom they voted.

While we don’t want to “clean house” willy-nilly, determining who will follow the politicians lead should be paramount to their continued employment. We do want some institutional knowledge to pass on but only in terms of process and not policy. Ethical leaders who have issues with incoming regime policies should resign. Those who remain have an obligation to the voters to carry out the prerogatives of the new administration.

There is a new boss and he’s going in a different direction. Get on board or get out.

Worse than Watergate

publius9111 Comment

8/27/25

Senator Grassley recently said that the machinations of the years since Trump came down the escalator are “worse than Watergate”. This is the understatement of the century (so far). Recall that Watergate was a cover-up of an attempt to find dirt on a political opponent. Men went to jail and a President was removed from office as a result.

What we have today pales in comparison. It starts with a conspiracy of government officials using fictitious information to subvert a candidate first and a duly elected President second. Reflecting this back to Watergate is laughable yet here we are, wondering if we will ever see anyone, let alone those who are now found to have lied to Congress, will see the inside of a jail cell.

Having jailed hundreds of Trump’s supporters for “crimes” like entering the Capital without permission or having a phone call with a foreign representative, there is a collective “so what” when the cabal’s obfuscation and outright lies are mentioned. The clear intention of subverting an election mirrors their fictitious allegations of foreign collusion that nearly brought down a presidency. Millions of dollars and two plus years of investigations were brought to bear, causing not only domestic upheaval but international chaos.

To those that continue to say, there is nothing here, understand the enormity of what took place. Government officials. At the highest level, used their power to keep a person from being elected by using false information. Once elected, they continued to use that false information to subvert the will of the people with terrible consequences still reverberating here and around the world. (This says nothing about the “deep state” activities that undercut the first Trump administration at every turn.) Given their skulduggery, is it out of the question that the 2020 election was tainted?

The actions of those involved in this conspiracy may weasel out of any physical accountability but make no mistake, history will show them as the criminals they are. Shame on them for the damage they did to our country.

Rigging the Game

publius9111 Comment

8/6/25

The headlines are all about how congressional districts are drawn. Gerrymandering is named after a Massachusetts politician who was the first to use district drawing to favor his political party. Gerry (hard “G” by the way), was combined with “salamander” for the shape of a district that was drawn. Cue the current Illinois Congressional district map.

The battle for supremacy in US politics is in the state houses. This is where the power to affect outcomes is most pronounced. That is, without Congressional districts that can be won and controlled, there can be no federal power. The partisan drawn districts determine who controls Congress.

It’s been over a century since Gerry’s first 1812 “gerrymandering” and it has only led to more of it. The result is the current morass separating Americans. The political divide is most evident in the way we assemble Congress. With districts that do not reflect a mix of political views, each party has “locked” in safe seats throughout the country. Representatives no longer have to run campaigns building large war chests  that further their insulation from competition. They can ignore constituents who do not hold their party’s orthodoxy and worse, they reflect the loudest of those within their district even if not that of the majority.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 poured gas on the issue of Congressional districts. It requires there to be carved out “minority” districts. As is/was the case with affirmative action, combating discrimination with more discrimination doesn’t work. It is high time for any and all references to anyone other than an individual to be purged as has been done with college entrants. It is long overdue for congressional districts to be drawn not on the color of the residents but on those attributes that are germane to governance. The criteria should be, the number of citizens, those who are eligible to vote, and smallest physical size and geometrically sound shape. There is sufficient data and mapping software available to achieve a much more logical outcome.

The registered party of the citizen is immaterial in this scheme. Removing party labels is critically important to begin the process of knitting back the fabric of our society. Representatives should no longer be able to hide out in the shadow of one or the other party. They will more likely have to move to positions that have appeal to the majority of their constituents who now reflect a more diverse mindset. That is, the center with minority extremes no longer holding sway over the majority. My suggestion.

Step 1 – Repeal the Voting Rights Act of requiring minority districts

Step 2 – Collect data on the number of citizens and where they reside (Census upgrade)

Step 3 – Create and apply universal mapping software that utilizes citizens data with geo mapping to create compact physical areas for representation.

Unforced Error Number 2?

publius9112 Comments

11/25/24

With the pick of Lori Chavez-DeRemer for Labor Secretary, Trump has made another tactical mistake. Her voting record  speaks volumes to her position as a labor advocate/activist. Most glaring is her support for the “Protecting the Right to Organize Act” in 2023, one of only 3 republicans that did so. This legislation would have outlawed right-to-work legislation in the states, and  provided unions with untoward tools that favor them and handcuff management in organizing efforts. It would have furthered the strength of public unions which counters the stated efforts to curtail the behemoth federal government. Is it going to be resurrected?

How this selection squares with DOGE is lost on me. Both Musk and Ramaswamy anticipate struggles with unions on reductions in force. Their intentions are put against the backdrop of greater numbers of federal employees who increasingly join unions.

 “According to new numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), more federal workers joined unions last year.  Federal density in 2023 was 25.1%, up from 24.4% in 2022.” (https://www.afge.org/article/union-membership-in-federal-sector-went-up-in-2023/)

So why put in place a person who will likely, based on past performance, be a hinderance to Trump’s state objective of “draining the swamp”? Why the nod to Union Leader Sean O’Brien simply for speaking at the RNC convention? History has shown that every time we acquiesce to the left, they simply push for more. Right-to-work laws are at the heart of personal freedom. That they can be taken away by this incoming administration is an affront to those who support a vastly reduced influence of large labor groups on our federal, state and local governments and overall economy.

I suspect that hoards of federal employees will seek to join unions looking to preserve their jobs. They are hoping to hide behind antiquated rules put in place to by those who drink at the union trough. With a swamp subservient Washington DC court now packed with a majority of left wing Democrats, the resistance needs no more help. Certainly, not from someone who has the bully pulpit and power to make significant positive change.

Chavez-DeRemer should follow the route Matt Gaetz took. Take a walk through the Senate offices and gauge the sentiments for her appointment and once done, bow out gracefully saving Trump from yet another embarrassing failed appointment.