This is a little off the beaten path for me, so pardon me while I delve into religion and theology for a moment…
Maybe it’s the lapsed (and thus guilt-ridden) Catholic in me, but I really resent Not a Ferry Fan and other’s attacks on Frank Ferry for his comment that God doesn’t distinguish between American and non-American in the February City Council meeting.
Here it is played again in NAFF’s latest and quite possibly blasphemous video in which he takes on the voice of God and schools Frank Ferry on how sinful the illegals are:
After Ferry said this in early February, some said he was putting his allegiance to Cardinal Roger Mahoney before his allegiance to the City of Santa Clarita.
I say so what? So what if Ferry’s position on illegal immigration is informed by his Catholicism? Guess what, mine is too! The question for local conservatives and Christians is why aren’t your views on immigration shaped by your faith first and foremost rather than conservative political orthodoxy?
I’ll let Catholic theologian Richard Benson take over:
Every human being is created in the image of God and is both unique and equal. Some letters to editors refer to undocumented immigrants as “illegals.” I find this appalling language. Apart from the fact that it is bad grammar, it is a type of objectification of others reminiscent of the worst kind of racial profiling. No human being is ever to be reduced to being totally or even primarily identified by the color of their skin, their country of origin, their legal status or any other external characteristic. Every human being is first and foremost a person. In the book of Genesis, Scripture reveals that every human being is created as “imago Dei,” i.e. the image of God. Every human person is the child of God and therefore every human is a part of the family of God. We are sisters and brothers.
Local conservatives and Christians ought to be outraged when know-nothings like Not a Ferry Fan and Pastor Yancey take a person’s legal status before a human-created government and equate it with their standing before everlasting God. As if God would fault a poor man for crossing an arbitrary line on a map in order to better care for his family!
“Oh Jeff, you just don’t understand. The illegals are breaking the law! They’re illegal!” they shout.
But there is a higher law! A law and a law-giver who commands us to treat fellow human beings with respect, dignity and love. Whether that is a Catholic law, a Christian law, the Golden Rule, karma or any other principle that decent religious people have believed in and fought for throughout the ages, it is a higher law than United States Code or ICE regulations.
Shame on you!
I hope Frank Ferry doesn’t back down at tonight’s Council meeting. I hope he stands for his principles and yes, his Catholic beliefs.
Now back to your regularly scheduled City Council election intrigue.
The Congressman Buck McKeon interview that appeared in Saturday’s Signal is interesting on a number of levels. First of all, it’s rare to see our Congressman interviewed in our local paper on national subjects. Usually our local media just asks him what he’s doing for us in Washington.
Perhaps that’s why Congressman McKeon seems caught off guard and even a tad irritated at Randles line of questioning. And maybe that’s why some of his responses don’t hold up under examination.
To wit:
Term Limits:
Check out McKeon’s deflection when Randles’ asked him directly about federal term limits:
THE SIGNAL: On March 3, you announced you will be running for re-election. You have served in Congress for more than 15 years. How important are term limits for elected officials?
McKEON: How important are they? In what way?
THE SIGNAL: Do you think it’s important to have some sort of term limits on elected officials? You’re the only Congressman that’s serve in the 25th Congressional District…
McKEON: We had a 25th Congressional District before i served in the 25th Congressional District, it was just a different congressional district.
We have term limits every year. Every two years we stand for election so the people have a chance to make a choice at that time and I think that’s a good system.
That’s quite a contrast with what he told the Daily News in 1995. From the May 23, 1995 edition*:
“I believe term limits are necessary to increase citizen participation and revive the concept of the citizen legislator who serves for a short time as a civic duty rather than as a career,” McKeon said. “Without term limits, we will continue to move more and more towards a system dominated by an entrenched class of politicians that erode accountability and responsiveness.”
…
McKeon, serving his House second term, has pledged to limit his congressional career to eight to 10 years. McKeon’s district covers the Los Angeles County portion of the Antelope Valley.
Zoom forward to 2010 and McKeon tells the Signal that he will serve in Congress “as long as I’m healthy and able to continue on.”
Stimulus
But that wasn’t the only flip-flop. On the topic of the federal stimulus program, McKeon denied to The Signal that he ever said the the stimulus had failed to create jobs.
THE SIGNAL: You have said the $800 billion dollar federal stimulus has created no new jobs and…
McKEON: No, I didn’t say it hasn’t created no new jobs. When you throw out that kind of money it’s bound to create some jobs. What I have said is, since that bill was passed, we were promised it would create 3 million new jobs, but in fact what has happened is we have lost 4 million jobs. What I said was it’s been basically ineffective and for the amount of money that’s been spent, very few jobs have been created.
Actually Congressman, as recently as February you were saying the stimulus didn’t create jobs:
“The question is ‘Did the Stimulus Bill create new jobs?’ The answer is no. The Democrats’ claimed their stimulus plan was going ‘create new jobs’ and hold unemployment at or below 8.5%. The reality is new jobs have not been created. In fact, millions of jobs have been lost, despite the $800 billion boondoggle that was rushed through Congress.
And that was only the latest flip flop. Back in November, McKeon toured a local lock factory that hired 17 new employees with stimulus money. The Signal story about that tour said, “The congressman voted against the stimulus package but conceded that in the case of Pacific Lock, the program is working.”
Health Care
Few issues have lit up our Congressman’s press and outreach machine like Health Care reform. You should read his discussion with Jonathan Randles on the topic, but I wanted to zero in on McKeon’s abuse of the phrase “government takeover of healthcare,” which has appeared 16 times in outreach emails over the last year.
McKEON: Such as government basically taking over healthcare, and I have real concerns about that.
He goes on to claim that if Health Care reform passes, the 80% of Americans who like the insurance coverage they have “will lose it.”
For the last time, there is no proposal in the House, the Senate or in the President’s desk drawer that amounts to a “government takeover” of healthcare. Respected fact-check website Politifact.com tags Congressmen who say such things as “Liar Liar, Pants on Fire,” saying:
By any reasonable definition, there’s no way that the Democratic plan could be considered a government takeover. Indeed, its primary approach is to set up new systems to encourage private health insurance companies to provide more coverage and better services.
The cornerstone of the Democratic program is actually the status quo. The majority of Americans would continue to get health coverage the way they do now — from private insurance companies. That coverage would be paid for the same way it is now — by private employers and individual premiums. That’s not a government takeover.
Indeed, FactCheck.org said the whole “Government Takeover” mantra was one of 2009’s biggest “whoppers” alongside death panels.
It’s easy to figure out why Congressman McKeon continues to use this inaccurate phrase. Back in May 2009, pollster Frank Luntz said that was the only reasonable chance Republicans had of derailing health care reform.
I hope The Signal and other local media will do more interviews like this as the 2010 campaign season kicks off. Congressman McKeon works for us, after all.
* Jim Skeen Daily News Staff Writer. (1995, May 23). CONGRESSMEN BACK MEASURE ON TERM LIMITS MCKEON, THOMAS SUPPORT BID FOR CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT :[ANTELOPE VALLEY Edition]. Daily News,p. AV.1. Retrieved March 7, 2010, from California, South Newsstand. (Document ID: 19938913)
Before the week began, George Runner said WTF at the Minuteman rally as a crazy old preacher got up on the stand with his hate-filled message. That didn’t stop Dave Gauny and Bob Kellar fromspeaking in front of the out-of-town group, though.
A day later, Roger Gitlin was apologizing to George Runner and saying the protests were essentially pointless. Wish he would have saved us all the trouble in the first place.
On Sunday and Monday, there was palpable, fist-pounding outrage in the old SCVTalk mailbox and on the SCVTalkers forum regarding the Signal’s editorial that alleged a Council candidate would soon release a manipulative mailer touting a Signal “Crime is on the Rise” headline.
“What the heck is up with the Signal painting ALL of the challengers with a broad brush with their editorial, and giving the incumbents a pass?,” one commenter said on SCVTalk.
Turns out that the hard-hitting and manipulative mailer doesn’t exist…yet. So why did the Signal write about it?
The Signal isn’t the only one that got savaged this week though. The California Attorney General’s Office pretty much told us that One Valley One Vision, as currently comprised, isn’t worth the paper it’s written on saying that the document totally ignores greenhouse emissions from all these new cars taking people to their new homes in Level “E” Traffic.
It also said that the document didn’t even work as an informational document.
That totally harshed my buzz for OVOV, even if it did come from Jerry Brown’s office.
Another SCVer’s whose pre-election buzz has been prematurely harshed is Frank Ferry. Sometime early in the week, Dave Bossert posted an email from Frank Ferry in which Ferry appears desperate to raise $45,000 in 30 days because, he says, the race is suddenly “competitive.” Gauny/Boydston partisans are excited by the news, especially in light of the fact that the conservative California Republican Assembly IHOPPed its way into Gauny’s corner alone and didn’t endorse any of the incumbents.
Myers speculated that incumbents were concerned; after all, they’ve been caught opening Facebook fan pages in lieu of polling in order to improve their self-esteem, high school-style, he said.
But within 24 hours the City Council insurgents get smacked down by the City’s release of a new Public Opinion Poll, which finds ”high levels of resident satisfaction on big picture issues handled by the City,” the City’s email to residents said. Boy, I wonder how the Signal will report it?
“A Slice Short of Heaven,” is the Signal’s headline the next day. You can just visualize the mailer now, can’t you?
Geez, the Boydston/Gauny partisans said, the establishment is really pushing for the incumbents to get re-elected. What’s next?
Well the week was only half over at that point.
Yesterday the 60s radical in me rejoiced as 10s of thousands of students took to the streets to protest education cuts across the country. The message of the Tea Party is that no one wants to pay taxes for anything; well now we can see the results as schools in the SCV close, teachers get laid off and students pay more in our colleges and universities.
Back to the City, which yesterday decided to exit the freeway into Right Wing Crankland when it added a number of controversial and downright screwy Glenn Beck-type bills to the City Council agenda. That’s right, on Tuesday we’ll get to see what Marsha McLean thinks about de-funding ACORN, what Laurie Ender has to say about English as the National Language, and what Frank Ferry’s reaction will be to stripping American citizenship from babies born in the US to illegal immigrant parents.
No study session as promised by the City, they’ve just decided to endorse the craziest bills out there in an effort to get the Minuteman off their backs and to give their incumbents something to show to the voters.
Sigh. All this from Bob Kellar’s Proud Racist moment…I wish I had never seen that video back in January.
Surely that’s enough to chew on for one week, but no! There was an interesting Council Candidate luncheon at the Chamber yesterday in which one candidate said the illegal immigrants were working for the SCV business establishment.
And then today…Myers tells us another Republican group in town could only find enough votes to endorse Laurene Weste. Meanwhile, we learn that Castaic doesn’t really want a high school after all (well at least that part of Castaic) and…holy cow…what’s this?
Johnny Pride the 26 year old boffo council candidate has been arrested on rape charges.
Yowza!
All kidding aside, the most momentous and impactful event of this week didn’t occur in the Santa Clarita Valley at all. It occurred on a dusty road in Kandahar, Afghanistan as one of the SCV’s and America’s finest gave his life while in service of our country. Specialist Ian Gelig, 25, a 2002 graduate of Hart High and an elite paratrooper in the storied 82nd Airborne Division, died Monday when an insurgent rammed his vehicle with a car bomb.
You are not forgotten Spc. Gelig and we pray for God’s comfort on your family and friends. Thank you for your service.
The City Council agenda for next week has been released and under the “New Business” heading is this startling action item:
The item goes on to list six House bills and one resolution that the Santa Clarita City staff says the City Council ought to support and “transmit statements of position” to the Congressman McKeon and the US House of Representatives.
The bills include HR. 1868, the so-called Birthright Citizenship Act that would strip citizenship of babies born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents, a right guaranteed by the 14th Amendment. Another bill the City Council may support is the “Defund ACORN Act,” and the “Fairness to American Students Act,” which would prohibit illegal immigrant students from paying in-state tuition for colleges and universities, even if they have lived in California for much of their lives.
I’m not generally prone to conspiracy theories (indeed, I think I’ve been more than pro-city in the 4 years I’ve run this blog) but this is pretty blatant electioneering in favor of the incumbents. Consider:
It was just two City Council meetings ago where we heard Laurene Weste and other incumbents say the City’s hands were tied as far as illegal immigration
The City was supposed to schedule a “study session” in which this matter was discussed. The results would have then been brought to the City Council’s attention and a public meeting was to be scheduled
Instead, what we have is no scheduled study session, no public meeting, a surprise agenda item with several controversial bills, and a City Council with three members who are apparently worried about the coming election.
Is this just what Tim Myers was talking about when he mentioned the incumbent’s strange behavior? Is the City Council, or even the city staff, worried about the election to the extent that they want to out-Gauny David Gauny?
What better way to disarm all those angry, Bob Kellar-supporting citizens than by showing “support” for the most controversial and regressive immigration bills in the US House (Defund ACORN…WTF?)
Now Weste, Ferry and McLean can go to the voters and say, “Look, here is what we are doing to fight illegal immigration!” Essentially they are removing illegal immigration as a wedge issue, are they not?
And what is David Gauny going to say about that? For the last six weeks he’s hammered Frank Ferry and the incumbents for their limp-wristed response to illegal immigration. What does he say now that they are doing something he ostensibly would support as a Councilman?
Watch next Tuesday as all the people who showed up to support Bob Kellar either A) show up to support this agenda item or B) get confused because they can’t hammer the City Council for being weak on immigration anymore.
Here’s a simple word cloud comparison of Congressman McKeon’s outreach emails to constituents before and after the January and February Save Our State rallies in Santa Clarita. The size of the word indicates how often McKeon used the word in his emails and public statements:
Before the Rallies:
Created from 15,323 words in 77 outreach emails from 2/9/2009 to January. Emails are in my inbox
As you can see, before January, McKeon hardly ever mentioned illegal immigration. Nor would we expect him to mention it much because his primary post in Congress is as Ranking Member of the Armed Services Committee.
But now that he’s in campaign mode, it looks like illegal immigration is going to be a major theme.
After the Rallies:
Here’s a word cloud of his 500+ word statement yesterday announcing his reelection:
Created from his email yesterday announcing his reelection effort. "Immigrants" and "Immigration" are two of the largest words
I suppose you could say McKeon is pandering to the base for pivoting so dramatically from defense and national security issues to illegal immigration. But then again, I think the blow-up in Santa Clarita over illegal immigration in January and February was real and reflected uncertainties and fears about the economy in general.
Indeed, it seems McKeon is going to exploit those fears and uncertainties. Since the rallies, he’s also signed on to a number of controversial bills that would strip citizenship from babies born in the US to illegal immigrant parents and deny in-state tuition fees to illegal immigrant students who have lived here for much of their lives.
No matter that those bills have zero chance of passing (or in the case of one, Amending the Constitution), they will be used by McKeon during the campaign to show that he is doing something about illegal immigration.
McKeon is obviously listening and probably got a lot of push-back from constituents after he called for Bob Kellar to apologize.
Who knew the City of Santa Clarita had commissioned a public opinion survey of life in the Santa Clarita Valley?
I sure didn’t, but they just released the results of it and it’s a goldmine of data!
The poll was conducted via telephone and 408 residents of the City of Santa Clarita were interviewed. The poll was conducted from January 12th through January 24th with a 4.9% margin of error. It was conducted by a company called Meyer Marketing Intelligence, a Newhall based company, and the questions concerned a whole range of issues.
34% of the respodnents lived in Canyon Country, 26% in Valencia, 24% in Saugus and 15% in Newhall. The surveys ays this “closely mirrored the actual distribution of the population.”
I’m still reading through the 114 page report released today, but here’s some snippets I’ve pulled out:
Commuting & Employment:
52% of respondents work outside of Santa Clarita
And over half (53%) of those who work outside the City travel commute up to 30 miles to get to work. 27% travel 31-40 miles.
47% work in the “services industry” and 37% are in healthcare. The remainder are in education and entertainment
Only 25% are satisfied or extremely satisfied with the availability of local jobs. Those who were dissatisfied with local job prospects said they could not find jobs locally (34%)
As far as “Green Living” programs, residents said bike lanes were the second most important amenity to have behind recycling programs
Business and Shopping:
54% of respondents don’t shop outside the City of Santa Clarita. The 46% who do cite a variety of reasons for not ThinkingSCV, including “wider selection of stores, product selection, close to work, and convenience.”
The most frequently requested new stores/restaurants among the respondents were Cheesecake Factory (18%), Norstrom’s (13%) and Morton’s steakhouse
Respondents have modified their buying habits due to the economy. 69% shop less at stores and 66% eat out less
53% said their most recent vehicle purchase was in the SCV
Media:
47% get their local news through TV. Only 25% get news from The Signal. 26% from the Daily News and 15% from the Los Angeles times
40% get their local news on the Internet
People:
Santa Clarita is getting older. 52% of the respondents were between the ages of 35 & 54 years of age. In 2006, the last time a survey was run, 20% of respondents were ages 18-34. This time, only 7.8% of respondents were aged 18-34
A poll like this was last conducted in 2006.
The City’s email announcing the results of the poll says it reflects “high levels of resident satisfaction on big picture issues handled by the City. These issues included crime and public safety, graffiti removal, local air quality, cultural arts programs and events, open space addition, and traffic on major local roadways.”
The email points out that the top issues facing the city according to the respondents include “crime prevention and response, water quality/supply, air quality, traffic congestion and drug use by young people.”
City Council candidates (well the non-incumbents at least) and critics of City hall are sure to point out that this big survey (with the accompanying headlines about “high levels of resident satisfaction”) is being released just five weeks before the City Council election on April 13, 2010.
I’ve posted the entire survey below. Read through it and post your observations. I’ve barely scratched the surface (the last several pages have direct quotes from respondents).
A fully built-out SCV according to the OVOV Draft documents
If anything, today’s good Signal report on the reaction of the California Attorney General’s office to the joint City/County One Valley One Vision plan understated just how badly the AG’s office views the draft environmental impact review for OVOV.
Indeed, the letter from the AG savages the OVOV DEIR, saying it fails even as an informational document for “decision makers” and the public:
Our review to date indicates that the DEIR fails as an informational document, in that it
fails to apprise the decision makers and the public of the full range and intensity of the adverse
effects on the environment that may reasonably be expected if the Plan is adopted and carried
out.
As The Signal mentioned, the letter also alleges that the OVOV DEIR glosses over the impact of increased traffic, pollution and greenhouse gases. Here’s a relevant section from the OVOV Draft Circulation Element on the County’s website (note this isn’t from the actual EIR document):
Pursuant to AB 32, standards and regulations for measuring and mitigating greenhouse gas emissions were still being developed during the time this General Plan was prepared. However, because of the importance of this issue and in response to the State’s mandate that local agencies consider the effects of greenhouse gas emissions in local planning decisions, the City and County have incorporated policies in the General Plan to reduce vehicle trips and thereby reduce carbon emissions through a variety of planning strategies. These strategies include establishing an urban limit line on the land use map, encouraging infill development through increased densities allowed in the urban core, encouraging mixed use in specified land use designations, promoting transit oriented development around Metrolink stations and the bus transfer station, expanding bikeways and walkways, and using transportation demand management measures.
And here’s the damning response from the AG’s office:
The failure to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Plan as measured against existing conditions, not hypothetical future conditions, results in the DEIR finding the proposed Plan would have no significant impact on climate change (despite adding almost four million metric tonnes of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere), on air quality (despite doubling existing pollutant emissions into an air basin that already is the most polluted in the nation), on transportation (despite increasing average daily trips by about 120%), and other areas. We believe that these findings are not supported by substantial evidence, and that they render the DEIR legally inadequate.
The letter also says that attempts to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions in the plan “tend to be voluntary and unenforceable, merely requiring that the mitigation be ‘encouraged’ or ‘promoted’ and not required.”
That’s probably right and it gets to the heart of the matter. You can’t require that homeowners and commuters use other, greener forms of transportation. To a large extent, a planner’s hands are tied, especially if he’s building low density developments that aren’t transit friendly.
The letter also argues that the premise behind OVOV may be flawed simply because it doesn’t recognize the impacts growth in the Antelope Valley will have on Santa Clarita and the North County region:
Further, the cumulative impacts of the proposed OVOV Plan, taken together with the impacts that will result from development and growth in the remainder of the North County subregion, particularly the Antelope Valley, are barely explored at all.
The letter says this “contravenes CEQA’s requirements and is at odds with one of the central rationales for cumulative impact analysis.”
Local critics of the OVOV plan often say that it encourages too much high density development and doesn’t adequately plan for traffic (TimBen Boydston explains in this video). They probably like the AG’s letter (enemy of my enemy is a friend etc) but would disagree with what would limit greenhouse gas emissions: higher density development that discourages private automobile use.
And as well know, high density is a non-starter in Santa Clarita.
One final note: a footnote on the letter says that these comments are submitted “pursuant to his independent power and duty to protect the environment and natural resources of the State from pollution, impairment, or destruction and in furtherance of the public interest.” It adds that the letter should not be “construed as an exhaustive discussion” of OVOV’s compliance with CEQA.
That to me makes it sound more like a political document rather than a document judging the legal merits of the DEIR. For what it’s worth, Jerry Brown is running for governor.
Pack your bags because Tim Myers is sending us on a guilt trip with regard to Los Angeles County:
Talking negatively about the county seems proto-atypical of the Santa Clarita Valley. Many will remember a former Sunday Signal columnist who spent nearly every column deconstructing the corruption and evilness of county government, embodied in its enumerated anti-Christ, Supervisor Michael Antonovich, apparent representative of all evil in the world.
I’ve been guilty of that here on SCVTalk. It’s far too easy to bash the County apparatus for problems in the SCV (excepting of course the Sheriff’s Department and LACFD). They’re the big bad guys 35 miles away, out of sight and out of touch with the SCV, yet they make decisions that affect us everyday.
But that’s not fair. Our Supervisor is in touch with his District and with this community. His staff always answers my questions, points out errors in coverage and provides good information. They are accessible, and that’s a big thing in a County with 8 million + people.
And Supervisor Antonovich- well, he is a career politician, but he knows what he’s doing and he has brought a lot of good things to the SCV (there are so many more parks in unincorporated SCV than when I first moved here, for example).
Near and dear to my heart are bicycles and libraries. As Myers pointed out, the public libraries in the SCV are popular and heavily used. And the County is developing a bicycle master plan and has held (and may hold more) meetings in the SCV for cyclists.
Good on Tim Myers for pointing out that we all engage in a little unwarranted County bashing.
Roger Gitlin "preaches to the choir" (plus Jeff Wilson, Nathan Imhoff, GangFang and yours truly)
A video update on the “Little Bighorn” post from a couple weeks back.
Included in this montage are the most heated moments of the “Save Our State” rally.
UPDATE: Here is the video of the AnswerLA folks when they first marched on the scene. My favorite part is at 1:50 when SCVTalk’s own Petz half-heartedly broadens his sign.
Photo Courtesy of Nate Imhoff. Check his blog at www.blazingmonk.com for more great shots
Today I stood in the cold rain for two hours observing 75 Minutemen and Minutewomen. I learned some things. I un-learned some other things. Here’s my observations.
It seemed as if the Minutemen who stormed the SCV in January were on a roll. Bob Kellar never backed down, even when Meg Whitman disowned him and Buck McKeon said he should apologize. They had enlisted several new speakers, including high profile ones like State Senator George Runner, to aid in their cause. They were optimistic that 250+ people would show up at their rally, and they were ready to double down on just about everything they said at the last meeting.
But it didn’t turn out that way.
First of all, our local and out-of-town Minutemen weren’t alone today. They were bested in both turnout and volume by the ANSWER LA immigration activists, who showed off their protesting chops by shouting for their cause in unison and by being mobile.
They shouted the standard ANSWER agitprop “The people, united, can never be defeated!” through their bull-horn. One Angry Minuteman tried to counter that with the awkward and rhythmically-challenged, “We can cross the border illegally!” in an attempt, I guess, to ironically shame them.
Needless to say, the shout didn’t catch on among the largely 50+ year old Minuteman crowd.
The rally itself started quite late, but it didn’t take long for things to warm up. Pastor Audie Yancey, the “illegals are evil” star of the January rally, kicked things off again this time around with a milder invocation.
At least I thought it was milder.
State Senator George Runner (of all people!) didn’t think so, and you can see his animated and heated exchange with Minuteman organizer Frank Jorge in the video below.
As Pastor Yancy went on another tear against illegals and told the protesters to shut up, Runner headed for the exits with his aide in tow. I asked some local Republicans why Runner had left, and the consensus seemed to be that he 1) didn’t like the Pastor telling the protesters to shut up (thereby acknowledging their presence) or 2) the rhetoric was a bit too heated even for his taste.
Runner’s desertion of the Minuteman left Frank Jorge hopping mad:
With Runner out of the picture, I thoguht for sure that Bob Kellar and David Gauny might be having second thoughts about speaking at this rally. I watched them as Jorge made his speech, but they showed no reaction. They were ready to press on even when the high-profile Senator abandoned ship.
Things started to move briskly. Ray Herrera, a veteran, took to the stage and outlined a grand conspiracy for everyone in the crowd. I can’t say I even caught the broad outlines of this theory, but it had something to do with the enduring power of the “Anglo Protestant People,” the Puritans and Pilgrims, World War II and Saipan, tyranny, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck. After invoking all that, he pointed toward the ANSWER activists and said this:
They don’t have the core values, they don’t have a progressive state. They don’t have the courage to stand up in Mexico and fight for what they want.
They want to take it from you. I’m going to say it like it is. They want to take it from the white man.
Of course, Herrera immediately recovered from “saying it like it is,” and said that what the ANSWER activists really didn’t understand was that there was no white man in America because all Americans are equal before the law and when push comes to shove, Americans of all races would fight the Japanese in the foxhole together on the beach at Saipan.
Or something.
In any case, he provided some context that made his remarks seem less like a call to arms in defense of the white man’s things, and especially, his women folk (because who wouldn’t want them some fine white women?)
Moving on, it was David Gauny’s turn to speak. Undeterred by Runner’s exit and Herrera’s grand American theory of everything, he started by poking some fun at Kellar. He then said that many had advised him that showing up at the rally would guarantee he wouldn’t be elected and then launched into campaign mode.
His speech was largely unremarkable, though he did channel Steve Lunetta and mention how bad things are in Newhall with regards to day laborers. Funny that he didn’t mention that those men stand out their because we Santa Claritans are hiring them every day.
David, you’ve lost my vote. I hope your appearance before 75 or so anti-illegal immigration activists, most of whom don’t live here, was worth it. I have my doubts.
Bob Kellar was up next and made sure to emphasize that he was speaking on his own behalf. He was proud to say that those of us who wanted him to apologize were going to have to wait a long time. The rest of his remarks were prepared and it’s safe to say he left Cranky Bob Kellar at home in Sand Canyon today. I only wish he had done the same in January. I genuinely liked this man.
Finally, it was Roger Gitlin’s turn to speak.. I’ve gone back and forth on Roger Gitlin on this blog. Sometimes he seems reasonable, even hinting that he supports humane immigration reform. At other times, he tosses his lot in with the crazies like Frank Jorge. Happily, the former showed up today, and he was engaging and lucid and reminded the Minuteman to protest the issue of illegal immigration, not the illegal immigrants themselves. Of course he then went on about illegal alien criminals, but compared to the rest of the speakers, Gitlin was almost someone I could have a conversation with. Almost.
As the rally wore on, I became less interested in recording each speaker. They largely said the same thing. I will say that the black man from South Central who got up and defended Bob Kellar and shouted the word “nigger” several times made me wince (that’s a hell of a thing to hear in downtown Valencia, Nate Imhoff told me), but other than that, I was bored. So I decided to confront Pastor Yancey because his January comments bugged me the most:
Yancey comes off less the racism-justifying preacher of yesteryear and more the confused old man who’s past his prime.
By the way, props to Tony Miano, the SCV street preacher, retired Sheriff’s Deputy and blogger who denounced Yancey and said he was at the rally because “people are here” and not because he agreed with the sentiments. You should check out his blog, where he reflects on Pastor Yancey.
Concluding Thoughts
In the end, I didn’t leave feeling triumphant or beaten down. I left feeling pity for these protesters. One of them mentioned “globalization” and touched on the way the world has changed in the last several decades. In his mind, America should be like it was in the good old days, that mythical time of economic security, harmony and good jobs. That time when a man knew his place in the world, rather than finding himself confused and lost in modern American capitalism’s relentless race to the bottom (and that was before the bailouts!) What difference does it make to the American worker, he seemed to mourn, whether the cheap labor we depend on is in China or on the streets of Newhall? Both are bad for American workers.
This, I remain convinced, is what the anti-illegal immigration movement is really about: Economic insecurity.
I did share one thing with the Minuteman. I am angry. I am very angry that Deputy David March was murdered. I am angry there are illegal immigrants driving without licenses or insurance. I’m angry that the taxpayers foot the bill for an undocumented immigrant’s kidney dialysis at my mom’s unit while an elderly American gentleman struggles getting his insurance company to pay for his. I’m angry that Adrian Avilla, an illegal immigrant, raped several women in Canyon Country a few years ago.
I’m also angry that American companies get fat off the backs of these people and no one stops them.
I’m angry about these things but the difference between me and the Minutemen is that I think the solution is to get illegal immigration under control and provide a path to citizenship for the vast majority of illegal immigrants who come here, work hard, and just want to improve their lives. In that sense, I’m on the side of President Bush who tried to fix this problem in 2006. But his effort died at the hands of the Minutemen.
And unfortunately, they’re not giving up and they’re never going to change their tune.
This place was suggested to me by a friend. Great service. Accepted my walk in mid day. Friendly staff. Pricing was more than fair, and they used quality film. As equally great as the tint job was,… […]
I and my family love Thai food a lot i love this place, this small restaurant but great taste especially the lunch special is very very YUMMY and good choice. Orange chicken is my most favorite dish. […]
The first time I went here I was very dissatisfied. I was sorely disappointed with the service and my order. I was only handed an order form and not a menu so I didn't order how I should have. I ended… […]
The staff is always very friendly..even when they have black eyes. It's a lovely starbucks. I really enjoy the patio area...it's just always nice and mellow. This is my go-to relax place. […]
