Conservative Common Man

Cross-post from Texas Fred’s:

MCKINNEY - A North Texas couple is getting ready for their second deployment overseas.

They’re leaving to serve their country but instead they’ve been served with fees from their landlord.

“It’s a job, we have to do it,” said Chris Horvath.

But they’re leaving with added stress, since they’ve been in a fight with their apartment complex - McKinney’s El Lago development.

The couple, both of whom are sergeants in the Texas National Guard, are soon headed to Iraq.

Full Story Here:
Iraq-bound guards penalized for breaking apartment lease

These are the names and addresses I have so far, there are some inquiries being made by a contact I have that IS in the apartment business. I do know this much, the TAA, Texas Apartment Association has a specific clause in their contract concerning military personnel and their transfers and activations, and that clause is in favor OF the troops.

I called El Lago Apartments and spoke to a person named Stephanie, and according to her the El Lago Apartments doesn’t operate under TAA leasing agreements. They would discuss the matter no further.

EL LAGO PARTNERS LTD
434 S EUCLID ST
ANAHEIM, CA 92802-1247
(714) 520-9432

owners of

El Lago Apartments
3400 CRAIG DR
MC KINNEY, 75070
(972) 569-6700

I am trying to pin down something on this El Lago Partners LTD, I might not be able to get it all until Monday, I have *feelers* out.

I will also be contacting the National Guard Bureau Public Affairs On Call, PAO email (703)-627-7273 and the office of Public Affairs email (703)-607-2584 on Monday.

I hope some of you will post this on your blogs and get involved, this type of thing can’t be allowed to happen to our troops. No matter how you feel about Bush and the war in Iraq, this isn’t about him, it’s about our TROOPS, and they have no choice but to follow orders and go when and where they are ordered..

Please, get involved…

Leave it to The Washington Post to give us an immigration sob story that really hits home. Today’s edition of the official D.C. area Obama campaign newsletter has the heart-tugging headline, “AIDS Among Latinos on Rise.” It seems a quarter of gay Hispanic men have HIV:

So far, the toll of AIDS in the nation’s largest and fastest-growing minority population has mostly been overshadowed by the epidemic among African Americans and gay white men. Yet in major U.S. cities, as many as 1 in 4 gay Hispanic men has HIV, a rate on par with sub-Saharan Africa.

Of course the a rag such as WaPo cares about the affects of this terrible disease and seek awareness and help for those suffering from it. Naturally it would be rude to mention that the majority of HIV transmission is a result of behavior, which liberals do not want regulated, but of course they do want to transfer wealth from those that avoid those behaviors to those that engage in them. The bright side is that we have discovered something that the liberal morons don’t want to regulate, it is just too bad that American manufacturing and industry doesn’t involve anal sex and abortions because then the libs wouldn’t be so eager to regulate them into extinction.

The important point of this important piece of agenda driven drivel… I mean journalism, is that gay illegals can’t get get the free help they deserve because they are stuck in “The shadows:”

Blacks still have the highest HIV rates in the country, but language difficulties, cultural barriers and, in many cases, issues of legal status make the threat in the Hispanic community unique. For those who arrived illegally, in particular, fear of arrest and deportation presents a daunting obstacle to seeking diagnosis and treatment.

“Officials need to stop downplaying or ignoring what’s happening among Latinos,” said Oscar De La O, president of Bienestar, a Latino service organization. “We are at the center of the storm.”

Even with the United States embroiled in a fierce debate over immigration policy, the problem of AIDS in Latinos had received scant attention from political and public health officials. At the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where only two of 17 approved HIV programs target Hispanic Americans, officials have added Spanish-language hotlines, confidential testing sites and other initiatives aimed at filling the gap.

I know the solutions sought by WaPo would include amnesty for all illegals, free condoms for all gay illegals, and conversion of all public medical services to Spanish only, but I have some other suggestions to deal with this crisis.

• Don’t enter the United States illegally.
• Don’t insert your genitalia where another man evacuates his bowels. (The reciprocal should also be avoided.)
• Don’t expect to have taxpayers pay for the consequences of the “rights” you wish to freely exercise.
• If you are in this country legally, attempt to learn English. (If you’re not in this country legally, get out.)

I hope these tips prove useful since it would be a true tragedy to spend another dime of taxpayers’ money to coddle illegal aliens and pay for the results of bad behavior.

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email brianbonner90- at-gmail- dot-com and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

The Washington Post can always be counted on for at least two things, free advertising for Barack Obama (under the guise of articles and editorials) and immigration sob stories designed to portray illegal aliens and people that refuse to learn English as helpless of victims of the evil that is The United States of America.

I can’t help but struggle to comprehend the mammoth contradiction that is the immigration sob story. Why on earth would the immigrants willingly immigrate to such an awful place? Why on earth would they leave the culture they adore for a land with such an apparent lack of opportunity? Who, in his right mind, leaves the land of milk and honey for the desolate wastelands of another nation? I am truly perplexed, this country is supposed to be such an awful place to live, yet all these people flock here from around the world and people like Alec Baldwin break their promises to leave.

Now we hear of the latest plague upon the victims of our society. This plague is even worse than Alec Baldwin not keeping his word. The Washington Post paints the grim portrait in, “Move to Digital TV Faces Language Barrier“:

Hispanic viewers make up about one-third of the U.S. households that rely on antennas to receive over-the-air broadcasts, according to a survey by Knowledge Networks/SRI Home Technology Monitor.

And according to a May report released by Nielsen, Hispanic households are among the least prepared for the transition. There are about 608,000 Hispanic residents in the Washington region, according to 2006 estimates by the Census Bureau.

Local Spanish-language broadcasters are trying to get the word out about the digital switch, but some are worried that their viewers will wait until the last minute to take the necessary steps to keep watching TV, putting the stations’ ratings and advertising dollars at risk.

So we have a victim class that can be defined by their ethnicity and language, let us ignore the notion of individual responsibility and redistribute some wealth here. As Barack’s favorite uncle, Karl (Marx) would say, “to each according to his need and from each according to his ability.” Instead of focusing on why these people refuse to learn English or even why they feel entitled to TV, entities such as WaPo do their part to maintain the socialist liberal voting block that is a victim class requiring handouts. Apparently the taxpayer subsidized handouts:

The FCC has been hosting town hall meetings around the country and distributing educational materials in multiple languages, with particular emphasis on Spanish. And the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, which is in charge of distributing government-subsidized $40 coupons to help consumers pay for converter boxes that typically cost $50 to $80, operates a Spanish-language hotline that fields about 40 percent of the total calls to the agency. IBM, which is under contract to run the NTIA’s call centers, is hiring more operators fluent in Spanish.

aren’t good enough:

Community groups worry that Spanish-speaking viewers still may be left behind. The Rev. Luis Cortés Jr., president of Esperanza USA, a faith-based organization in Philadelphia that has tried to get the word out about the transition, said he suspects that many people with limited incomes won’t bother to apply for a converter-box coupon until their TVs don’t work.

“Their eyes glaze over when you say digital because it means nothing to them — they don’t have computers, they don’t have iPods,” he said. “The only national media vehicle in Spanish is TV.”

Obviously the solution has four components. First, we subsidize the purchase of computers and iPods for every resident, legal or otherwise, that does not understand English. Second, we force English speaking citizens to pass a Spanish proficiency test within the next 12 months and fine those that are not fluent. Third, all broadcasting is switched to the Spanish language since the host nation should assimilate to the language of immigrants and obviously not the other way around (naturally we ignore all languages other than Spanish unless CAIR begins to complain about the mistreatment on non-Spanish speaking Muslims.) Fourth, and perhaps most urgent, we deploy a task force to force Alec Baldwin to keep his promise.

One must wonder if our founding fathers intended a system of vote buying such as the one that exists in modern times. Pander to and maintain a variety of victim classes to ensure that no one rise above the status of victim-hood. As long as these victims rely on the handouts you forcibly take from the productive to redistribute among the victims, you can rely on the votes and support of those victims.

The typical “woe is business” sob story drips with even more typical liberal hypocrisy. Business is the enemy and is always taking advantage of poor unsuspecting, ignorant people… that is except when we can use the plight of business to further our open border agenda! The fact that the NY Times has such a ridiculous whine fest on behalf of business in today’s spewing, is rendered even more idiotic by the fact that the next president is guaranteed to coddle illegal aliens. Their side of the issue has already won the presidency, but apparently that isn’t enough.

When a liberal rag has an agenda, no level is too low to sell it. In fact, the first example of the poor business given in the offending article “Employers Fight Tough Measures On Immigration,” details the plight of a business that didn’t have to hire illegal aliens… but the point is they might have to someday!

Mike Gilsdorf, the owner of a 37-year-old landscaping nursery in Littleton, Colo., saw the need for action by businesses last winter when he advertised with the Labor Department, as he does every year, for 40 seasonal workers at market-rate wages to plant, prune and carry his shrubs in the summer heat. Only one local worker responded to the notice, he said, and then did not show up for the job.

Mr. Gilsdorf was able to fill his labor force with legal immigrants from Mexico through a federal guest worker program. But that program has a tight annual cap, and Mr. Gilsdorf realized that he might not be so lucky next year. His business could fail, he said, and then even his American workers would lose their jobs.

“We’re not hiring illegals, we’re not paying under the table,” Mr. Gilsdorf said. “But if we don’t get in under the cap and nobody is answering our ads, we don’t have employees.” His group, Colorado Employers for Immigration Reform, is pressing Congress for a much larger and more flexible guest worker program.

I am too ignorant to see how the wages Mr. Gilsdorf pays are “market-rate” if he can’t find legal workers to employ at those wages. Oops, I keep forgetting the fact that he can find legal workers to employ! I would suggest that as soon as he can’t find legal workers to employ at his “market-rate” then it is no longer “market-rate.” Are we to assume that there is full employment in his part of Colorado? If not, how can “market-rate” wages not attract employees?

Mr. Gilsdorf is not alone in his agony. An electronics assembly company in California has 20 out of 90 assembly workers whose numbers don’t match the records of the Social Security Administration. Apparently anti-discrimination rules prevent the company from checking into the discrepancy. How exactly does that work? There is a system known as E-verify, perhaps this particular company might want to use it for the 20 employees mentioned. What would be the down-side of that?

Because of the antidiscrimination rules, the executive cannot check to be certain that the 20 workers, mainly Hispanic women, are illegal. Moreover, they have advanced through training, she said, and excel at their jobs, which require the repetitive assembly of tiny parts by hand, often under microscopes.

“I can’t replace those people,” the executive said. She said that despite offering competitive wages from $9 to $17 an hour, the company had failed over the years in repeated efforts to attract nonimmigrant workers because of the state’s tight technology labor market and because of the nature of the work, exacting and tedious. If the workers were fired or arrested, she said, she could fail to meet her contracts.

“If we have to terminate 20 people, that’s going to jeopardize 100 other jobs of people who are legal, Americans, people who are making a good living,” she said.

Angelo Paparelli, an immigration lawyer who represents the company, said: “This is not an employer who wants to turn a blind eye to lawbreaking. She is facing a tightening of the enforcement vise that does not take into account Congress’s failure to create a workable system.”

I see. The problem is that Congress failed to give these businesses that employ illegal aliens everything they wanted! McCain, Kennedy and the boys ought to at least get some credit for trying to cater to the American citizen undercutting employers. Heck, if the nasty… gasp… citizens hadn’t butted in the congress could have done their duty, which is apparently written in The Constitution as:

The primary function of the Senate and House of Representatives is to ensure the free flow of illegal labor to any company that does not want to pay “market-rate.” The rights of non-citizens will be protected before the rights of citizens will be considered and Congress shall pass no law that infringes on the employment opportunities to those that might cross our borders illegally.

Festering cesspools like the NY Times and Washington Post really do take issue with the government when it actually indicates some willingness to follow the will of the electorate. I suppose these liberal mouthpieces are in for happier days given the state of American politics. The next president is highly unlikely to follow the will of the electorate on this issue as both candidates seek to compete for the title of “an illegals best friend.” Too many Republican politicians seem to think the path to re-election is to act like Democrat politicians and too many citizens just don’t seem to be involved in the nation’s affairs. These factors spell gloom for our nation and her citizens, which of course is good news for the liberal rags.

**This was a production of The Coalition Against Illegal Immigration (CAII). If you would like to participate, please go to the above link to learn more. Afterwards, email brianbonner90- at-gmail- dot-com and let us know at what level you would like to participate.

A reasonable person would have a difficult time denying that parrot press outlets such as the Washington Post are little more than divisions of the Obama campaign staff. Today’s Post offers further proof of the advantage that Obama’s campaign holds over the McCain campaign. It is extremely ironic that McCain played such an instrumental role in magnifying his opponent’s advantage via his McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform legislation that muzzles the private citizen thus allowing parrot press hit pieces greater impact.

It seems that staff writer Robert Barnes lives in fear, dreading the horror of a potential Supreme Court that respects the Constitution and its duty. The message of “A Win By McCain Could Push a Split Court to Right” could be summarized as a five alarm alert for those that prefer judicial activism over the Constitution:

A victory by the presumptive Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, would probably mean preserving the uneasy but roughly balanced status quo, since the justices who are considered most likely to retire are liberal. A win for his Republican counterpart, John McCain, could mean a fundamental shift to a consistently conservative majority ready to take on past court rulings on abortion rights, affirmative action and other issues important to the right.

Isn’t funny how liberals see rights that don’t exist and refuse to see rights that do? Barnes article seems like a campaign ad mostly because it is either blatantly disingenuous or he is ignorant of the history of the Republican nominee. An honest appraisal would conclude with the likelihood that McCain would shy away from strict constructionist judges regardless of his promises to do the right thing. As I said in a discussion group the other day, it would seem this election is a choice between potential Ginsberg appointments and potential Souter appointments. Either way the American public and the Constitution loses.

Constitution respecting citizens can at least hope to influence a McCain appointment. There is the possibility that he could appoint judges that adhere to their mandate, so this might be what Barnes fears. Although he does provide a little honesty in parentheses proving that he has some knowledge of McCain’s history:

(McCain’s endorsement of Roberts and Alito as his models for judicial appointments is somewhat ironic, since each has authored an opinion dismantling part of the senator’s most notable legislative achievement.)

The addition of a conservative in the mold of Roberts or Alito to replace the court’s longest-serving justice, 88-year-old John Paul Stevens, would make Kennedy’s role less pivotal. For instance, it would not be hard to imagine the court’s jurisprudence on the death penalty changing dramatically without Stevens, who this year announced that his 30 years on the bench had convinced him that capital punishment cannot be fairly administered.

You see it is not only the fabricated right to have a child ripped from the mother’s womb that must be protected. Anti-justice Kennedy’s power to play king must be preserved so that states can’t execute child rapists. Barnes apparently dreams of a day when the only people that can legally be executed are unborn or maybe even recently born children. The objects of the “Hope” of an Obamunist are really sickening if you stop to think about them.

Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta have a piece in Sunday’s Washington Post with a headline that seems intended to show that white people are racist and if somehow Barry O doesn’t win the presidency it can be attributed to racism. I, of course, assumed it was written by Juliet Eilperin when I read the headline, “3 in 10 Americans Admit To Race Bias.” The headline and the beginning of the article are for the benefit of those that just take a glance and then walk away with the prescribed sense of righteous indignation regarding race relations in the United States. The casual headline reader might reasonably get the impression that the deck is stacked against the propagation of Obamunism, although the casual headline reader probably doesn’t stop to think that he is actually supporting Obama’s version of Communism (Obamunism,) when he supports Obama. Ominously bleak first sentence:

As Sen. Barack Obama opens his campaign as the first African American on a major party presidential ticket, nearly half of all Americans say race relations in the country are in bad shape and three in 10 acknowledge feelings of racial prejudice, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Of course the libiots at the Post don’t discuss factors such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton promoting racism for profit or programs designed to maintain racial divides. Scholarships for minorities only, hiring quotas, and race-oriented organizations all work together to ensure racial divides will never heal. These factors contribute to the attitudes that the Post laments (before launching into its gleeful “Hope” for racism):

More than six in 10 African Americans now rate race relations as “not so good” or “poor,” while 53 percent of whites hold more positive views. Opinions are also divided along racial lines, though less so, on whether blacks face discrimination. There is more similarity on feelings of personal racial prejudice: Thirty percent of whites and 34 percent of blacks admit such sentiments.

Oh no, the racism fostered by race-hustlers and special programs designed to foster racism had the intended affect! Whatever will we do? Not to worry dedicated Obamunists, the Post says you can “Hope” for racism to carry you to victory:

His campaign advisers hope race may prove a benefit, that heightened enthusiasm among African Americans will make Obama competitive in GOP-leaning states with large black populations. But to win in November, Obama most likely will have to close what is now a 12-point deficit among whites. (Whites made up 77 percent of all voters in 2004; blacks were 11 percent, according to network exit polls.)

The article goes back and forth between whites being racist and that being a potential threat to an Obamanation and the “Hope” for Change” that racism may bring due to a bump, courtesy of race-only voters. The bottom line of this article (or unpaid campaign ad for Barack Obama) is that the glory of Obamunism may be realized thanks to the racism they decry.

Is it good for the state of race relations to depend on racism to elect a president? Probably not, but just like Jackson and Sharpton, The Obama Campaign (I would include The Washington Post in an unofficial capacity of course) pretends to oppose racism in order to foster racism as a means to their selfish ends. Perhaps the most disturbing part of this entire situation is that there are millions of voters that either share the goals of the vile or are duped by the vile.

Democrats are used to blindly voting against their own best interests as evidenced by:

• Union members consistently voting for the party that wants to flood the labor pool with cheaper (and illegal) laborers.
• Union members consistently voting for the party that opposes the growth of business and imposes suffocating restrictions on business (then blaming the business when it closes or moves.)
• Black people voting for possibly the most pro-abortion presidential candidate in history regardless of the number of black children killed in carrying out the racist mission of Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood pioneer.
• Religious people voting for candidates that fight for the extermination of babies for convenience. (Do supposedly religious people that vote for pro-abortion candidates ask God for forgiveness every day for the rest of their lives?)
• Democrats that drive and don’t like paying $4 a gallon for gasoline continue to support candidates that will fight (not admittedly, of course) to raise the price further and create shortages by preventing the access to and refining of our own oil, while advocating energy independence, naturally.

So it isn’t surprising anymore, to see people voting against their own interests. It is far too common for the people that complain about a situation to vote for and support the very candidates that are most likely to make the situation worse. Are Americans simply sadomasochistic?

From Malignant Liberal Idiocy:

I was disheartened to click on Cristina Page’s bio and find out she has a child and another on the way. The fact that she has children is not disheartening, but the fact that she has children and still advocates so feverishly for abortion “rights” is. Sadness and disgust are accurate descriptions of my reaction to her latest Huffington Post display of maniacal libiocy, “Obama: The Real Pro-Life Candidate.”

If you are not familiar with the moral decay and aspirations toward Socialism usually espoused by most bloggers at HuffPo, you might think Mrs. Page’s entry is a work of satire based on the title. One could reasonably expect to see such an outrageously contradictory headline in MAD Magazine. The sad and disgusting truth is that Mrs. Page is serious. The demented chair of the Huffington Chapter of Barry Hussein’s Fan Club’s Abortion Promotion Committee writes:

Obama has a huge opportunity to win over an unlikely voting bloc: pro-life voters. The debate over reproductive rights has for decades existed in the abstract; it’s been a back and forth volley over “values” that’s heavy on emotion and light on fact. But the facts reveal surprising truths and they ought to be hammered home by Obama. The data show that the pro-choice approach is more effective at achieving what the American public views as “pro-life” goals i.e. reducing the number of abortions, preventing late term abortion, than the so-called “pro-life” approach.

She goes on to lay out how Obama is for access to birth control and conservatives are against access to birth control. Thus apparently Obama really does qualify as “the Pro-life candidate” in her opinion. Of course her focus on “access” to birth control is coupled with her disdain for the notion of teaching abstinence. The following is what Mrs. Page neglects to mention, intentionally I’m sure.

More

Cross-post from Malignant Liberal Idiocy:

Congress Could Prove Useful, Despite Pelosi

June 14th, 2008 by sepierce and tagged Energy, Gas Prices, Pelosi, Shimkus

There are two discharge petitions currently in the U.S. House of Representatives of which the leadership would prefer you not hear. These petitions would force Bela Pelosi to allow two important bills to come to the floor for a vote. Discharge petitions require 218 signatures, so please go to the links provided to find out if your congressman has signed these important petitions.

The first petition is for The Broadcaster Freedom Act, HR 2095, which would permanently stop any attempts to reinstate the ridiculously named “Fairness Doctrine.” Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) has successfully gotten a one year ban on the free speech silencing doctrine. Unfortunately that temporary ban is about to expire. Click on the picture below to see who are the spineless libiot hypocrites that agreed to the one-year ban but refuse to sign the discharge petition to bring the permanent bill to the floor. The picture links to a site aptly called hypocrisycaucus.com.

The second, but obviously no less important discharge petition is for HR 3089, “The No More Excuses Energy Act of 2007.” My congressman, John Shimkus (R-IL) has signed this petition, has yours? Didn’t Pelosi and her fellow libiots make fuel prices a part of their 2006 campaign? Well they have certainly impacted the cost of fuel. I suppose the folks that supported the Democrat takeover sought higher prices. So  if you think paying $4 a gallon is the right thing to do, you may want to disregard this petition. If you would like Congress to do its job instead of acting as an obstinate blockade to the achievement of the best interests of the citizens it supposedly represents, you may want to ask your congressman to do just that! You may want to call or e-mail his or her office and ask why he or she isn’t doing the right thing. You may want to inquire as to who he or she serves, you or Pelosi the libiot dominatrix.

“Power to the People” can be a reality. We can need to remember who pays the salaries and provides the perks for the elected representatives. Here’s a radical thought… how about we demand that our representatives represent us!