Note: "Jefe's Rules" are that if you are a military vet, and have some commentary to post, we shall endeavor to do some fact-checking; making sure that the statutes governing libel and slander are adhered to; and the Fair Use Content provisions are being maintained. Otherwise, some common sense goes a long ways, so send along your commentary if the urge cannot be overcome. And humor helps always.

In yesterday's post in which I suggested or advised Senator John McCain to consider Newt Gingrich for his Second Seat, and thusly, I have been proven correct. Sadly, the Republicans are refusing to rise to the easy challenge offered by the Democrats.

Of course, it doesn't take a rocket scientist or a wizard in economics to understand that addressing the Census Bureau, isn't going to solve the dilemma of our ongoing economy, but the Census Bureau will continue to tell us "who" we are. As to the ear marks, the discretionary spending can be found in the Pentagon budget, but if you're a child of the military industrial complex, changing the Pentagon budget is verboten and charges for being characterized as a wimp will be flying fast and furious across the political aisle. Of course, repealing the gas tax just means that our roads and bridges will fall into a serious state of disrepair. And lastly, an "official" English is more of a pander and directly targeted for the expanded and expressed ire of the ignorance and hate that abounds in America, and yet, it will tell us more of "what" we are.

So, it's now quite obvious that if Newt Gringrich cannot do better than his four tenets for his Conservative brand of audacity for hope, Senator McCain is deep in right field with no help on the horizon in order to watch his back.

Yesterday, Senator McCain was in Phoenix, Arizona, seeking Latino votes. This, after having attended the San Deigo, California, conference held by the NCLR this past weekend. At both the function and a later press conference, he expressed his sentiments that he will make inroads into receiving a sizeable number of Latino votes in November. In addition, Charles Black, McCain's chief strategist, has acknowledged that McCain's did receive 77% of the Latino vote in Arizona in his re-election quest of a couple of years ago, and bodes well for his anticipated success in November.

Of course, neither McCain nor Black will readily admit that Latino voters too, were flabbergasted, flummoxed, and even outraged, that a Democratic challenger to McCain, would wage a political campaign solely on the premise of, "anyone but Bush". Consequently, 77% of the Latino voters opted instead for another person. Additionally, Latinos, believing in "fair play" recognized that McCain still harbored presidential aspirations. And yet, everyone recognized that Bush and Rove, among others, "trashed" Senator McCain back in South Carolina in 2000. Thus, he deserved a second chance at his political "restoration" and therein was another reason and emphasis to re-elect McCain. To wit, Latinos have been proven correct.

As such, being "correct" is not necessarily "right" and that Right is that 16% of Latinos are registered Republicans. And should McCain receive more than this 16% in November, he too will be able to lay claim that he got "his fair share of the Latino vote."

But will it be more than enough to get him into the Oval Office? I think not. Sadly, we have learned from George W. Bush that the Nixonian "benign neglect" still bears fruit even though the tree is long dead. Of course, that won't stop McCain and Black from watering this long-dead tree in the fond hope that it can still bear fruit.

On of the leading lights of the left-of-center in a conservative newspaper penned a column in which he suggested that the America's pro-immigrant leadership has learned a valuable lesson from not having any pro-immigrant marches in these past few days. Moreso, especially since the prior immigrants marches were seen as 'successful' and yet, the new reality is that the leadership has learned to its dismay, that these marches have 'awakened the sleeping giant' of opposition. Not so fast there, buddy.

Of course, this pundit's left-of-center view flies in the face reality, but then, if one is desiring to express himself in order to engage in another form of "conflict", then, arguing that the majority of our fellow citizens are adamantly opposed to immigration as is being experienced in the Sonoran Desert, should be easily dismissed. And sadly, this sort of dismissal is just another form of "benign neglect", or for a "cavalier dismissal" of which we are unalterably opposed. Thus, this requisite challenge is offered.

It has been a long time given that 85% of the population is supportive of immigration. As is in most things, the devil is in the details. And for the more observant, the "norm" should be at about "90%" given that there is always the "10%" and commonly known as the "shit-disturbers". So, there has been a obvious drop-off of Five Percent. And that drop-off is not going to shatter the existing conventional wisdom. It just means that the voices in opposition have gotten louder and still not necessarily more effective.

And here in the Sonoran Desert, we have always known that the Legislature would wade into this political morass, and attempt to come out "smelling" their wishful thinking for roses, and not "smelling" the crappola emanting from the political gutter. Sadly, their olfactory sense went north when it comes to crafting "good" public policy. And I am sure that they are surprised at their successes to date.

"Instead of unifying people behind their cause, it shocked and frightened thousands of people who previously had only a passing interest in the immigration issue. Those people suddenly began to demand that politicians take action, by which they meant punitive action against anyone in the country, illegally."

What E.J. Montini doesn't tell the public is that America's War For Obtaining Natural Resources, has embued public policy, from the top down. Thus, immigration policy has suffered the consequences. And all this commenced with Bush's War of Choice in which Congress refused to comply with the Constitution, as in a Declaration of War. And regardless of one's sentiment for support or opposition, our public policy should have been premised on the requisite Declaration. Consequently, the "marketing" for Bush's War of Choice included the intellectually laziness for pandering to ignorance, hate, and fear. Thus, the historical "context" is missing, and egregiously so.

And from my perspective, the leadership cadre for these pro-immigrant marches in 2006, understood that the use of a hammer twice, is far more effective than having to use the hammer on three differing occasions. Equally important, twice, the point was made and received by the general public. Yet, the general populace recognized that immigration was an issue to be addressed and solved, and if the general populace decided to reject their status quo for lethargy and begin to participate in its inherent Philosophy for Thought and Action, then Democracy was being reinforced and served to all, including to all who were willing to participate. Moreover, Democracy was visible and available to all and delivered in all of its manifested glory. And not too shabby of a political undertaking to my way of thinking.

Consequently, the immigration marches of 2006 and 2007 were indeed a learning experience but not for the pro-immigration crowd, but only for the anti-immigration crowd. They, the anti-immigration crowd, got their learning experience and which was delivered by the Undocumented Immigrant in pursuit of economic sustenance. Now, that's what I call Irony, in that "blaming the foreigner" brought Democracy home for everyone to participate in.

Of course, I could also argue that these "new" Aztecs are returning home to the Sonoran Desert and to the loving embrace of their ancestral family. But I will leave that for another time, and I know that such Argumentation would not register on the time piece worn wrongly by E. J. Montini, the journalist-pundit.

It's been a given that Senator John McCain seems to be somewhat shallow in his thinking when it comes to the storyline for political economics, and who on the Right side of the aisle, has the "street cred" to uplift or elevate McCain's presidential campaign?

Of course, that burden in America would or should fall to the former House Speaker, Newt Gringrich from the South. In keeping with American Tradition, this responsiblity and duty should fall to the "historian" for the GOP. And that makes Gringrich the perfect match.

Being that political economists make far too much money to engage in running for public office, historians are the next bet "fit" for such a job. Why? Gingrich can speak eloquently to the arena of economics without ever getting himself in trouble. Of course, it's easy to do, this speaking to the economics sphere. And here's how it's done, and you too can do it.

Globalization, regardless of where you sit on the minutiae or the micro, the macro, is almost as easy as falling off the truck. Two wits or the "last two inches", is how its done. From your eyeball to your brain. It's been Convential Wisdom for years, but how you say it with a tad of stylistics is what will keep you seen as a modern equivalent and at the front of the line by your willing acolytes. And that's what it take to be a "good" Vice President. And if you don't believe me, think of Dick Cheney. The willing acolytes for the conservatives would never disagree with me regarding Cheney.

Consequently, Senator McCain needs to look no further than to Newt Gringrich, since Gingrich would be a "safe bet". Moreso, since Gringrich needs a new gig and would never take or intrude into McCain's ambient limelight. Besides, Gingrich is probably the best former politician currently in the Republican Party that does "toss the bull" and doing it all easily and without ever having to stretch his imagination.

Lately, the Republicans have been offering considerable "advice" to the Democrats in all arenas of politics, so I thought that I would have some fun today, and return their favor and done in my usual manner. In contrast, a Democratic Candidate was asked in a public forum, if "mexican veterans" were listened to, and the candidate did not respond and therefore, moved on to the next questioner. Such is life in our Great America when it comes to practicing Humility.

A journalist and Good Bud, and who has spent six months in both Afghanistan and Iraq reporting on the War, has of late, written quite elegantly that Americans don't want to hear the Truth and much prefer that our politicians lie to us, since it keeps us happy and tolerant of the human foibles of our daily lives.

"Senator Obama and Senator Clinton want to set a date for withdraw. That's what they want to do is get everybody out. I believe that would lead to catastrophe and chaos and that we would have the whole region including the whole region and the country in such turmoil that we would be required to come back to the region. And I just want to promise you this. My friends, I will have an energy policy that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East that will - that will then prevent us - that will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East."

Of course, Senator McCain has since recanted this statement from above, on the basis that he was speaking of the First Gulf War, of over 15 years ago. Seemingly, he forgot that both Clinton and Obama were not in the Senate those many years ago and were not attempting to achieve their respective presidential aspirations. Perhaps, age has intruded unexpectedly?

So, if McCain is talking about energy independence, then, he must take into consideration, today's obvious reality as well. Anyone who has an inkling of what it will be required to take America off its addiction to oil and natural gas, America can not do it alone on its presumptive "natural resources". Take, for example, add all the oil and gas "reserves" from off both the coasts of the Atlantic and Pacific, the Gulf of Mexico, and in Alaska or ANWR, the combined totality, would not exceed four years at current consumption levels. Thus, the 'problem' is much more significant in that the Fifth Year and subsequent years, will determine any decision relative for any hope for achieving any semblance of "energy independence."

And here is an Elected Official who has served over 20 years in Congress and should via osmosis, if anything, been able to address the "unassailable" facts of our daily reality, and sadly, Senator McCain, never rose to this challenge.

Just as I was getting ready to leave for the weekend Cinco de Mayo festivities, my office mate just informed me that she was "clapping" heartily after reading that Senator John McCain was called the "Sugar Mama Express" on the ABC News Network and by one of the Leading Ladies from the FireDog Lake, a political blog that knows how to throw a mean left hook.

As such, they have been following the money trail and found that his financial acumen is quite large and uses his wife's biz as a political tool from which to screen out the usual snoopers for seeking info on to his presumptive and sizable wealth, or wealth that is made public.

And it has come to their notice that Cindy McCain has been carrying Senator McCain for all these many years. For those of us in the Sonoran Desert, this has been pretty obvious for all these many years. However, after Cliff Schecter's book revealed that McCain insulted his wife with the use of a perjorative analogous to a body part, they went into action, determined to apply the appropriate political "framing" mechanism, and came forth with the "Sugar Mama Express". This contrast is a doozy for both traction and effectiveness in the long term. Thus, the "Straight Talk Express" will be taking a beating, and the journalists riding on the bus and covering McCain's presidential aspirations, will be having many a quiet chuckle among themselves.

Of course, the "Big Mama Express" will be bandied all about on the Internet in the months to come, and perhaps, achieve a significant level of use in the traditional top down media outlets? Just thought I would pass on this tidbit of info.

My local paper, a conservative bastion of its particular brand of ideology, and all that follows from it, was encouraging me to go visit their internet blog and participate. Thus, their question:

"Racial profiling here? A requested Justice Department investigation may decide whether Sheriff Joe Arpaio's crime-suppression sweeps involve racial profiling that targets Latinos. What do you think?"

Sadly, the requested investigation by the DOJ was accomplished by the Mayor of Phoenix, Phil Gordon, a Democrat. And additionally, this initial request was followed-up by another request instigated by the Hispanic Caucus in Arizona's State Legislature.

Any yet, anyone with a shred of decency or an ounce of common sense when it comes to the politics and the upper reaches of the law-enforcement biz, knows well that the Department of Justice has NEVER conducted an investigation into "racial profiling" and in any community in America in these past seven years and during the Bush and Cheney Administration. Therefore, an investigation simply won't happen, but all this makes for good "conflict' and thusly, enters into the corporate media pool for further distribution to the general public.

In contrast, Arizona's Department of Safety is required to compile all the relevant data on traffic stops, and this overall "effort" simply came about because of a court settlement in which the State of Arizona, agreed to such a settlement in order to avoid a long and protracted court battle. Therefore, money or a financial settlement was never the issue.

Moreover, the corporate media owners and their journalistic employees will never tell the public that the DOJ will never conduct an "investigation" into "racial profiling" since such behavior never exists. And the mindset that follows, is that any allegation is a direct challenge to the integrity of a law-enforcement official. Yet, we all know that police departments have a few "cowboys" doing their 'shit-disturbing' despite management warnings, and consequently, management's continued opposition to civilian review boards.

Racial Profiling in the City of Angels and Angles: After 320 complaints on racial profiling by the LAPD, the complainants are told they are wrong. And if you believe this behavior does not exist, I have some sun tan lotion for use by alligators for sale.

Here is what the GOP is going to be providing for American Health Care. You will be conveniently disconnected from your Employer; you will be paying directly for your health care insurance; and only the health care insurance 'administrator' will determine what you are permitted regarding "delivery of services"; and there will be no medical deductions permitted since you will be paying with your hard-earned dollars. As such, there will be no co-pay and there will no 'contribution' by your Employer. To wit, you are on your own!

"The School of Journalism at the University of Texas at Austin is offering an online course for working journalists on how to incorporate the voices and views of their communities' Latinos into their reporting.

"The four-week course, "Covering the Latino Community," will teach journalists across Texas how to produce more balanced and comprehensive news stories through online reading material; a series of podcast lectures on topics from U.S--Mexico relations to culture and education; and by teaching journalists how to use some the free research tools available on the Web.

"The course which runs from May 5-30, is being taught by Guillermo X. Garcia, a 1971 University of Texas at Austin journalism graduate and city government and politics reporter for the San Antonio Express-News. A native of Laredo, Garcia has been USA Today's southwest bureau chief, the Orange County Register's Latin American correspondent and Cox Newspapers' Mexico City bureau chief, among many other journalism positions."

"That sort of detailed judicial supervision of the elections process would flout the Constitution's express commitment of the task to the States. It is for the state legislatures to weigh the costs and benefits of possible changes to their election codes, and their judgment must prevail unless it imposes a severe and unjustified overall burden upon the right to vote, or is intended to disadvantage a particular class. Judicial review of their handiwork must apply an objective, uniform standard that will enable them to determine, ex ante, whether the burden they impose is too severe."

However, in Bush v.Gore back in 2000, this constitutional principle was neither considered nor discussed. And to my way of thinking, this legal sophistry is more than sufficient to incur the wrath of the American people. As such, only a fool would fail to recognize the 'political triumphalism' in the guise of this legal sophistry, and thusly, grounds for impeachment with respect to "high crimes and misdemeanors".

Jake Tapper, intrepid reporter for ABC News is telling all who will listen that "Democratic sources tell ABC" that the SuperDelegates are worrying that the Reverend Wright Story will be difficult for Senator Barack Obama to overcome.

Now, I liked Jake Tapper when he was a news reporter in the Phoenix, Arizona demographic market. And it was a pleasant sight to behold to see the he has managed to get himself into the Big Game. To wit, he is carrying the water for ABC News when it comes to the campaign for Senator Obama. As such, he it far too smart to be seen riding on the Straight Talk Express of McCain's campaign for presidential aspirations. And yet, Tapper is proving himself to be wrong-headed.

Sadly, Tapper has now taken the meme of "Democratic sources tell..." and consequently, he is now relying on third party and anonymous sources to sell his 'story'. He should be quoting his "sources" in first person, otherwise, he should be moving on to those persons who want to be quoted. There are many in the political sphere and who would give their eyeteeth to be correctly quoted.

In any event, there are now 300 SuperDelegates remaining to declare themselves for either Obama or Clinton. And this political fight is being fought Behind the Curtain and usually unseen by the Great Unwashed unless a mention is made of another coming forward.

And should Hillary Clinton lose in Indiana's primary of next week, her campaign will be on the verge of collapse due to the depressingly reduced mathematical odds for overtaking Obama. Perhaps, Tapper is attempting to continue to sell the water for ABC News by crafting another non-existent "conflict".

I have yet to write much if anything regarding the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Senator Barack Obama's Pastor, and my lack of attention being given to Reverend Wright has been one for my busy work schedule. But, I have been thinking of what to write that would not be perceived as "loading on." And today, I do so.

If one took the time, especially in the 1980's and in particular, the Catholic Church and relative to the Latin America Region, this "theo-liberation theology" would be apparent and seen from all over the radar screen. Thus, a Papal Edict prohibiting the aggressive priests practicing the Catholic faith, seemed to put a kabbosh on these priests. Not so!

Now, I have long argued and for many years, that the behavior of "winning at any cost" was a behavior well-practiced and eventually exported from the USA and into Latin America, and today, we now see such ambitious behavior returning to our nation, and when we do not get exicited or at a minimum, "agitated", the news media becomes disappointed due to a lack of "conflict" and of course, this conflict sells and helps increase ratings and revenues for the shareholders.

So, when ABC News, back in the middle of March, provided their looped snippets, it did cause a considerable stir on the electronic airwaves and followed by the print media. To wit, it was a sizeable feeding "frenzy". And much-enjoyed by all. And this marriage of convenience "moved" the "bitter" discussion forward into even more controversy. Thus, the marriage of convenience was "squared" and which consumed our public discourse, and still does.

And over the course of my overly 40 years of adulthood, I have attended a Sunday morning church service in a pre-dominant African American institution. My attendance has been minimal and to the extent that this attendance could be counted on one-hand. Yet, I am not deterred for entering enter into any substantive conversation regarding Race. As such, the core tenet of an African American church service is Race and Restoration. Ironically, and for me, I am an advocate for this R &R. This R & R is a minimalist standard. Many of us forget that the French, hold to the notion that "We know all and we forgive all!"

From my standpoint, I always attempt to participate in this "constructive engagement" for such a conversation. Why? I consider myself to be an 'expert" given that my mother's ancestry is Apache, and my father's ancestry is Pasqua Yaqui. And yet, I am proud to call myself a Chicano, a Hispanic, and a Latino. More appropriately, I am a melange of European/White, Native American, African American, and even Chinese/Asian. Thus, my federal government seems determined to tell me "who" I am. However, "what" I am, I will determine for myself. And you should too, if you haven't already. If so, you are a Zen Master.

And from the particular standpoint of the African American, "liberation theology" and from whatever permutation one practices, one is ever cognizant that Christianity has two Gods, one for the slaveship owner and another for the slave residing in the ship's cargo hold. Music, language, and culture is differing in reality, and yet, not deficient in reality. And which taken together, leads to a far more colorful and effective approach to this "constructive engagement" regarding racism, bigotry and discrimination. But those who are obviously opposed to the Double Eye, Integration and Interaction, remain mute and in favor of perpetuating both hate and ignorance, as well as fear. And therein, is the challenge that remains before us and for many years to come.

In closing, one should be reminded of the old gambling adage of, "With a chip and a chair, one remains in the game." Thus, having a seat at the decision-making table, is indeed consequential to "what" you are. And finally, I intentionally abstain from any membership in the Authoritarian Regiment of Cavaliers. There is no "restoration" in the Authoritarian Meme.

For my part, it is somewhat tiring for having to explain the Conservative Ideology to my Brethren of Shared Experiences, especially to the younger dudes and dudettes, so I have suggested that what the Cactus Juice Commentaries, is in dire need of, is a "conservative icon" that is willing to spend some "hard time" here at the CVO prognosticating, along with the analytics that goes into assessing the redolent American political behavior.

And if you see yourself as a splendiferous Conservative, and are desiring of a sizeable platform to pontificate and to perform, and while subjecting yourself to the human sacrifice that is constantly visited on a Pundit, then, feel free to send along a "resume" demonstrating a skill set for writing for a political audience.

And if that too includes a business background, that would be considered an added plus. Needless to say but I will, the criticisms can be relentless given that we are in the Age of the Relentless or the constant use of email. If so, cinch up your belt buckle a notch or two and be prepared to take it on the chin.

Alas, for your views on Conservative Ideology, there will be no financial renumeration, but the compensation is one for a satisfaction that is indeed great when one sees one's "words" and "advice" enter the lexicon of our national public discourse.

To wit, it's the historical behavior for "a labor of love." Of course, others see the world differently, so "giving it away" may not be for you. And if having to defend Senator McCain--both the "good" and the "bad" is your cup of tea, join the fray in this contemporary political season and have some good clean fun. Nonetheless, the "ugly" we will leave to the usual wrong-headed suspects.

Now that the United States Supreme Court has rendered it's decision, a 6-3 decision to uphold the Indiana Law, brings full circle the knowledge in the public domain that theGOPs historical attempt to 'deconstruct' the nation's Voting Rights Act, is moving slowly forward. The Question that with some subtlty, should follow, is "What's next?"

If one looks to the current progeny of the National Republican Lawyers Association, and which has long been dedicated to eliminating the Voting Rights Act, the offensive salvo of "vote fraud" has proven to be quite fruitful. But one should also acknowledge that this "fruitful" is also of the poisoned tree and has long been proven counter-productive when it comes to the Double Eye, or Integration and Interaction.

Consequently, making it far more difficult for a voter, regardless of being poor, racial or ethnic, or even elderly, is just another in a long line for the use of voter suppression tactics. And lest we conveniently forget, the Supremos could only admit to three instances of "vote fraud" for the past 150 years of American History. With such thin legal reasoning, the Supremos who voted in the majority for this 6-3 majority opinion, should be ashamed of themselves, to say the least. Of course, the Democrats will remain mutely silent.

In a presidential cycle, candidates very seldom get beyond the usual bromides, such as a Conservative Nominee as in John McCain. He would appoint a "strict constructionist" as a Judge to the United States Supreme Court. And sadly, that leaves the public discourse "hanging in the wind. Voters deserve better!

On the internet there has been a tad of discussion, but the conversation has now come full force to the appointment of Federal Judges. And yet, how the recipient of the Oval Office regarding the two most important areas for decision-making in this Modern Age, is in War and in the Appointments to the Supreme Court.

Some intelligent folks are suggesting that should Barack Obama become President and an opening occurs within the SCOTUS, Hillary Clinton would make a good candidate for such an appointment. Now, we can argue the merits of Clinton making a good Supreme Court Justice, but that begs the question.

And the answer should be in the realm of, "What makes for a 'good' Supreme Court Justice?" And followed with an Argumentation for appointing a "legal technocrat" or a "politician" as an either/or"?

For the past twenty-five years, Presidents have opted for the "legal technocrat" and each has reflected the political ideology of a Conservative and the legal strictures that embue the thinking of a "strict constructionist." And in this regard, the question of "good" has been excluded and not had any traction for any consideration of an appointment. Consequently, the political consideration has been exclusively fallen to the favor of the political ideology that comprises the "conservative."

In contrast, most politicians have a legal background being that they came to their Elective Office with a formal education in the Law. And the comprehensive legal experience tends to be as a former Attorney General at the state level. Consequently, the skill set for "politics" and this wealth of legal experience, makes for an almost solid candidate, aside from being either a Conservative or not. Having a an appointee with experience in Water Law, Indian Law and the Criminal Defense Bar, would be a boon to the Supreme Court. Sadly said, not much imagination has been demonstrated by the Oval Office, if one is measuring the existing backgrounds of these Sitting Supremos.

And yet, we have to hear of any discussion by a candidate of either party. Perhaps, Senator McCain would appoint his candidate(s) reflecting the notionals for Scalia or Alito, or even Roberts. And as to Barack Obama, he is yet to be challenged as to "what" he would consider as the qualifications and the available reflection of a legal persona. Of course, the "who" should also be included. Perhaps, a "short list" would prove helpful in the "persuading" of the voters.

In the weeks ahead, we should pay careful attention to this subject area, and in particular, our citizenship rights. Take, for example, our status before and under the law, as well as the unnecessary and unwarranted attention by our government to our private and business affairs, will add much angst to our daily lives in the years ahead. When I think of the Secretary of Homeland Security suggesting that my fingerprints are in the public domain, I find such thinking as being anti-Democracy. This intrusive governmental behavior will become the fountain of much litigation in the future, and the legal costs to each of our fellow citizens will also be burdensome as we seek out our Justice and at a diminished level of "fairness."

America's social-democrats on the Internet are investing time and energy to "deconstruct" the Conservatives' "big con" and what better place to start than at Rick Perlstein's web site called the Big Con. Here's how it works:

"What we need is to catalog the 10 or 20 classic conservative 'not sos" -- the big lies or cons that have become central to the story they tell themselves and to the country -- with the basic refutation. So that those of us who aren't historians of the Nixon era can share in the same delightful moment of uh, uh, uh, dither that you produced in Frum."

"The fact is that Reagan signed one of the largest tax increases in history and even by the time Reagan left office, a combination of lower tax revenues and sharply higher spending for defense has created the biggest budget deficit in history. It was so big that his more 'prudent' successor broke his promise to never raise taxes and signed a tax increase to close it -- which helped cost him the election in 1992."

So, if there is any military vet that has the inclination to help with this Community Project, feel free to post at Ms. Digby's web site titled, "Hullabaloo" or specifically at "www.http://digbysblog.blogspot, com". I am sure that should you post at her site, she will also make it a point to forward it on to Rick Perlstein. Or the alternative is to post directly to his web site titled, "www.http//ourfuture.org".

In any event and over the weekend, I will check in and take a gander as to the receipt and benefit of all this time and effort. And once compiled, I will 'assess' the best offerings, and proceed to post here, and all for your's and my enjoyment.

Over at "the Corner" at the web site for National Review Online, Katheryn Lopez or better known as K-Lo, is busily complaining that pornography should be removed from the shelves at the Base Exchanges. She is also complaining that these publishing houses and their products are being supported with taxpayer dollars via the Base Exchanges.

Obvious she knows little or next to nothing, given that the Base Exchanges are financialy self-supporting. But then, that won't stop her from complaining that liberals are at fault. Soon, she will be blaming liberals for the sun rising in the East and setting in the West.

When it comes to Senator John McCain's Political Philosophy for Thought and Action, I find the Senator to be short on Common Sense. And yes, I know that there are many Chicanos who much admire the Senator for his historic behavior while in the military. However, when it comes to the "economics" practiced by Elected and Appointed Officials, he still comes up short, and thusly, I want to know what his Satus Quo Ante is? Of course, that's my story and I am sticking to it.

At the end of the political day, two questions arise regarding this Senator, and which transcends the current view of the general public, and which is virtually non-existent. Upon closer reflection, he is viewed as 1) his economic views are a "work in progress", and 2) his "shallowness" is obvious even by the standards posited by his political supporters.

Nonetheless, Senator McCain finds it morally reprehensible that budget deficits do exist; he views those beneficiaries at the top of the economic ladder with some alarm and suspicion; and he tends to posit the old-fashioned views of the late Barry Goldwater when it comes to small government since our fellow citizens are demanding more from government and are willing to pay for it.

And with the above two paragraphs in mind, permit me to further elaborate in detail. Regardless of what I posit, I encourage our Readers to visit his internet campaign web site. Last week, I spent an hour wandering among all the clutter and came away somewhat disappointed. He did not "spell out" his statu quo ante for this layman with some familiarity with economics. His view of transcending the massive problems facing my America was absent and thusly, he did not "connect."

The reality is much different. Senator McCain has spent over 20 years in Congress (House and Senate) and he is an "expert" on economics, at least to my way of thinking. To wit, he could teach a class on economics to a bevy of doctoral candidates in economics, and not miss a beat or experience a misstep while doing so. That is how good he is. Where he falls downs is in downsizing the Language of Economics so that the presumptive "real people" can viably understand and participate in any constructive discussion, but the mystique of economics, would ruin his reputation for the intentionally-made Great Fumble. In this regard, he is following the persona of George W. Bush, by saying anything to anyone knowing full well that he will not be held accountable since he resides in our national capitol or the non-existent "Accountability Zone", and premised on the unsupportable fact that he did not know what would occur. That is his "out" and as such, I digress.

Now, back to my main point. Senator McCain could be a Professor of Economics in any institution of higher learning in the Industrialized World. I would anticipate and even expect that he knows far more than he is letting on, and especially, regarding the Federal Reserve. Perhaps, I am "damning with faint praise", too?

When McCain initially opposed Bush's tax cuts, he was never vociferous in demanding the requisite spending cuts in equal comprehensiveness. In contrast, the Democrats did as per their constant advocacy and political practice for the construct of "pay as you go." Thus, he never demonstrated any philosophical foundation as the basis for his opposition. And eventually, he did come around to endorsing Bush's tax cuts. And accusing McCain as 'flip-flopping' is a wasted effort as is in asking of any candidate about the wearing of flag pins on the lapel.

And if one were to get "deep into the weeds" on his economic views, you would quickly come away with the view that McCain firmly believes that any "burden of proof" should be greater on those advocating any tax hike and less on those advocating any spending cut. Of course, this sounds like impeccable use of Common Sense, right? Not so fast, say I! Sadly, for McCain's Argumentation, Common Sense prevails in the form of the Status Quo. However, this impediment of the status quo must be obliterated in order for his "shallowness" to prevail. He too knows this.

In 2010, the Bush tax cuts will expire and the prior and existing tax rates will reappear and prevail as the consummate status quo by the Academy of Economists. And anything beyond, whether in tax cuts for the future or spending cuts for the future, falls into the category of the status quo ante. And in this instance, McCain must deliver his Plan of Action. If not, he is getting a "free pass" by his "guys", the campaign press.

In McCain's use of his political skill set, he must move the goal post and therefore, bypasses the status quo ante and directly targets the expiration of the Bush tax cuts by reframing his argumentation that this expiration date is also the date of a tax hike impacting all of America. This 'twisted" logic defies my reality to the extent that "fairness" in any Argumentation requires the use of ample Common Sense. Long story short, McCain is attempting to 'skew' the Conventional Wisdom by 'reforming' his Language of Economics, or the Great Fumble. To wit, we should feel sorry for him. In this regard, I wish him no such luck.

And yet, his history stands forlornly against him, especially, when he railed that the lack of corresponding spending cuts, would still give too much to the very wealthy. As such, his Republican colleagues in the Senate looked askance at him. McCain's political history is predicated on a Republican version of "bipartisanship" and which has proven to be detrimental to the Democrats. Take, for example, McCain crafted the Gang of 14 in order to avoid the "nuclear option" and he accomplished the identical in the pursuit for the reform of campaign financing. Yet, he never exercised any gusto to orchestrate a "bipartisan" effort to oppose the Bush tax cuts since no Republican would participate and thereby risk the considerable ire of the Bush White House. Bush and Rove had already developed a hard reputation for political payback.

Now, we all know that the private sector economic activity adjusts to the tax and regulatory apparatus. The former Texas Senator Phil Gramm was in charge of crafting the economic construct for the Senate Republicans, and today, this Phil Gramm is now McCain's Chief Economic Advisor for his campaign. Gramm, lest you don't know was once a Professor of Economics and taught for a number of years in the Texas University System. And while in the Senate, he also crafted the innovative approach to a lax regulatory apparatus.

McCain was an aficionado of a lax regulatory framework, and today, we see this evidence at work in a pre-supposed recession in which employment has decreased considerably, homes are being repossessed in even larger numbers, and the Federal Reserve is continuing to bail out both the banking and financial services industries. By today's calculation, the almost $900 billion in taxpayer equity in the Federal Reserve, has been depleted and by January of next year when Bush leaves the Oval Office, I will not find it surprising that there is no dinero en effectivo or cash on hand. This raid on America's equity has been massive and constant and Senator McCain knows this as well, and was readily available to challenge his Conservative Brethren in the Senate, and didn't. Was this a sin of Omission or not? And whether you agree with me or not, will your vote in November provide the exclamation point to McCain's economic views?

As to Senator McCain's affection for budget deficits, he like President Bush inherited from the Clinton Administration, a Balanced Budget and no Deficit, along with a sizeable Financial Surplus in 2001. Today, we have the largest budget deficit in our nation's history of over $300 billion annually. In any event, I anticipate and expect that once the expiration date of the Bush tax cuts has arrived, and thereby increasing the federal tax coffers by an approximate $450 billion annually, McCain will be advocating pro-growth agenda. Thusly, he will be enjoying his self-fulfilling prophesy should he succeed in gaining the Oval Office. And if you are registered as an Independent voter, you will become the target of his Pander Bandwagon. He will be proclaiming his spending cuts and a pro-growth agenda with all the vigor he can muster.

Consequently, we must "demand" his detailed Plan of Action for his Spending Cuts and delivered prior to November of this year. If not, he too will get another "free ride" by the voters, as did President Bush in 2000.

In contrast, the Democrats know that McCain is not as strong as he thinks he is; there is a Bush fatigue across America; his age and stamina will be called into question; his pandering to the Christian Right; his history in Congress; his portfolio of unpopular issues; and his skill set for "working the ref" and in this instance, the press will eventually get around to bursting his bubble for this national perception for "mavrickiness". And yet, Senator McCain should not be under-estimated in any political instance.

In the past, I have fondly criticized "western civilizers" as being a bunch of wrong-headed bald guys and who sit around having nothing better to do than "preach" their nastiness due to their unrecognized lack of self-esteem. And in response, I have gotten some heavy-duty responses in the fully offensive mode. So, using the Internet does provoke reaction, and that too goes with the territory. Thusly, I continue my full-throated behavior, again, but with a purpose.

In Arizona, the Republican member of the State Legislature, Russell Pearce and Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, is determined to wage his version of class warfare, albeit in the guise of a cultural war, on Arizona's educational community. Thus, he has been pushing legislation that would ban schools from any instruction "in conflict with the values of American citizenship and the teachings of Western Civilization." As such, Code Talk for White's Only.

Consequently, Authoritarians are indeed frustrated non-shaggy cats. Of course, their replicating and expressing their angst along the lines of what Stalin and Mao did in their 'concern' for the depredations exhibited by the Great Unwashed of their respective nations, is not surprising. And lest I forget, the State School Superintendent, Tom Horne is in the thick of this issue and the fulcrum for my concern.

And whyfore? It seems that the Tucson High School District is teaching a minimalist form of Chicano Studies, and all without state funding that is accountable to the State School Superintendent, and this truly aggravates these robust, vociferous, and non-shaggy cats to no certain end.

Regardless of where their anticipated legislation leads, a Governor's veto is sure to follow in order to put a presumptive end to all this "preachy" nonsense. I am not convinced of this, as yet. Of the Governor's veto, yes, but, as to a continuing issue that is being preached, this will remain a toxic subject for many years to come. This is an electon year and the Republican need all the political ammunition they can get their hands on. Sadly, these xenophobic cats need to be challenged and challenged aggressively.

And equally important, Robotics. Yes, Robotics. Take, for example, the Robotics Program at the Carl Hayden High School in which the Falcons took home the Robotics International Chairman's Award. Carl Hayden High School is a low-income inner-city school in Phoenix, Arizona and has a predominant student population of Chicanos. This Robotics Team of 22 members just returned from Atlanta, Georgia, winning "all" in a competition that bested the teams from all over the world. Needless to say but I will, this team was the runner-up in the two prior years. Thus, excellence personified, at a minimum.

Of course, their robot named, "Virginia's Dream" was named in honor of Virginia Gutierrez. Last year she had a 4.2 GPA, was stopped for an insignificant traffic violation, and was deported to her Nation of Origin, and all because she was brought to the United States, as a child no less, by her parents many years ago while seeking economic sustenance.

And if you are now somewhat confused by my analogy for Robotics, consider how many nations manufacture and utilize robotics; how many nations now utilize nuclear energy and own their nuclear arsenal; and other technological advancements that have not originated in the United States.

These "western civilizers" have embued themselves with their ignorance and hate, and said sadly on my part. Their predictament is on "how" to deport Brown People. And where they are concerned, the Native Americans pose a unique dilemma, especially with regard to the 19 federally recognized Tribes in Arizona. The Question not yet asked or answered is, "What Nation of Origin are Native Americans going to be deported to?" And keep in mind, there are considerable natural resources that are located on each individual Rez. Perhaps, with hat in hand, these Authoritarians will start by asking the Republic of Mexico to take in the Pasqua Yaquis?

And like all things, these 'western civilizers" don't have any solutions other than to "agitate" via legislative "agit-prop" and as part and parcel to their constant need to perpetuate their Fear Mongering to any sensate being walking upright.

And yet, they must be taken seriously. Why? Consider their Pinocchio view of the world, as in being 'damned with faint praise'. Recently, a local Conservative scribe wrote that, "However, the involvement of additional Democratic politicians perceived to be soft on illegal immigration will merely enlage the controversy without adding moral clarity." If so and taken to the nth degree, that means our Elected Officials have way too much power in the selective application of the law, and thusly, these liberal Elected and Appointed Officials should be stripped of their "authority" so long as the Authoritarians are excluded, and can, therefore, continue their inherent right for lawmaking attendant to the subsequent applications of these laws. As such, they have localized themselves as the "deciders."

In contrast, ever the Optimists, we elect and appoint our public officials in the usual expectation that each Elected and Appointed Official will conduct himself or herself with a tad of self-restraint in keeping with the use of Common Sense. And when this does not occur, we express our dismay, and at times, our expression for digust at these Authoritarians. But at the end of the political day, the Ballot Box is always a welcoming sight.

Consequently, not voting has both price and a cost that can be only be measured in both subtlety and nuance for this failure in the selective application and use of the law. Therefore, dedicate yourself to voting and be sure to encourage the young kids of today to vote, since they too will be our leaders of tomorrow.

To add to the note of Curiosity, the class action lawsuit being heard in San Francisco, has the VA scrambling for cover. Despite the evidence of there being 12,000 attempted suicides on a per annum basis, and which this evidence came from an internal email, the VA will have to argue against the statistics. Hard to do and the VA is destined to lose this class action lawsuit, unless the judge can be convinced to toss this case out on a technicality.

Thank goodness, Pennslyvanians are voting today. It's been a long and grueling grudge match between Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. In any event, Clinton will have to defy the political odds, and will have crafted her last gasp, unless and of course, she can achieve a large, significant, and symbolic "blow out" of an election in order to continue to wage her campaign in the weeks to come.

On the other hand, Senator Obama has delivered for the Democrats, an interesting and if somewhat, or what I would consider a "bizarre" moment in politics. To wit, he has no 'ceiling' or one that seems to be apparent in this regard. He has managed to mobilize an additional 300,000 "new" Democrats to the voter rolls. Consequently, he continues to defy the expectations and moreover, continues to expand any percepitive concept of 'ceiling.' And in politics, this is the harbinger of a winner.

And for those who have worked on campaigns, you will recognize the inherent value in accruing large numbers for the voter registration rolls, and which means a certainty for victory. Therefore, looking to November, the continuing addition to and the expansion of the Democratic Party, speaks to a new coalition with this sizeable onset of younger voters.

Have you ever wondered why--after reading your local newspaper you can find the baseball scores or the latest NASDAQ quotations, but you won't find any information on how our Elected Officials voted on any of the current or relevant issues before us? And yet, do any of us complain about this absence of this information? And yet, these media outlets have a sizeable staff of reporters that delve into our political affairs. And therein, is our quest for a better citizenship behavior owed to us by our traditional news outlets.

Given that our various levels of government have large staffs of 'press officers/secretaries', we should all require that our Elected Officials instruct their respective staffs to put their voting records into the usual published media outlets and to include the Internet for our viewing and use.

As a follow-up to Wednesday's debate on ABC News, and the ongoing defensive posture of the moderators in the Thursday press outlets, I was reminded of what Senator Jim Webb of Virginia wrote in the Wall Street Journal in the latter part of 2006, and shortly after he was elected. And keep in mind that Senator Webb was caricatured as a conservative Democrat. Shortly after this opinion piece was published, he was no longer designated as a conservative by the Washington press corps. As such, the following is printed in its entirety.

"The most important--and unfortunately the least debated--issue in politics today is our society's steady drift toward a class-based system, the likes of which we have not seen since the 19th century. America's top tier has grown infinitely richer and more removed over the past 25 years. It is not unfair to say that they are literally living in a different country. Few among them send their children to public schools; fewer still send their loved ones to fight our wars. They own most of our stocks, making the stock market an unreliable indicator of the economic health of working people.

"The top 1% now takes in an outstanding 16% of national income, up from 8% in 1980. The tax codes protect them, just as they protect corporate America, through a vast system of loopholes. Incestuous corporate boards regularly approve compensation packages for chief executives and others that are out of logic's range. As this newspaper has reported, the average CEO of a sizeable corporation makes more than $10 million a year, while the minimum wage for workers amount to about $10,000 a year, has not been raised in nearly a decade. When I graduated from college in the 1960s, the average CEO made 20 times what the average worker made. Today, that CEO makes 400 times as much.

"In the age of globalization and outsourcing, and with a vast underground labor pool from illegal immigration, the average, American worker is seeing a different life and a troubling future. Trickle-down economics didn't happen. Despite the vaunted all-time highs of the stock market, wages and salaries are at all-time lows as a percentage of the national wealth. At the same time, medical costs have risen 73% in the last six years alone. Half of that increase comes from wage-earners' pocket rather than from insurance, and 47 million Americans have no medical insurance at all.

"Manufacturing jobs are disappearing. Many earned pension programs have collapsed in the wake of corporate 'reorganization.' And workers' ability to negotiate their futures has been eviscerated by the twin threats of modern corporate America; if they complain too loudly, their jobs might either be outsourced or given to illegal immigrants.

"This ever-widening divide is too often ignored or downplayed by its beneficiaries. A sense of entitlement has set in among elites, bordering on hubris. When I raised this issue with corporate leaders during the recent political campaign, I was met repeatedly with denials, and, from some, an overt lack of concern for those who are falling behind. A troubling arrogance is in the air among the nation's most fortunate. Some shrug off large-scale economic and social dislocations as the inevitable byproducts of the 'rough road of capitalism.' Others claim that it's the fault of the worker or the public education system, that the average American is simply not up to the international challenge, that our education system fails us, or that our workers have become spoiled by old notions of corporate paternalism.

"Still others have gone so far as to argue that these divisions are the natural results of a competitive society. Furthermore, an unspoken insinuation seems to be inundating our national debate: Certain immigrant groups have the 'right genetics' and thus are natural entrants to the 'overclass,' while other, as well as those who come from stock that has been here for 200 years and have not made the top, simply don't possess the necessary attributes.

Most Americans reject such notions. But the true challenge is for everyone to understand that the current economic divisions in society are harmful to our future. It should be the first order of business for the new Congress to begin addressing these divisions, and to work to bring true fairness back to economic life. Workers already understand this, as they see stagnant wages and disappearing jobs.

"America's elites need to understand this reality in terms of their own self-interest. A recent survey in the Economist warned that globalization was affecting the U.S. differently than other 'First World' nations, and that white-collar jobs were in as much danger as the blue-collar positions which have thus far been ravaged by outsourcing and illegal immigration. That survey then warned that 'unless a solution is found to sluggish real wages and rising inequality, there is a serious risk of a protectionist backlash' in America that would take us away from what they view to be the 'biggest economic stimulus in world history.'

"More troubling is this: If it remains unchecked, this bifurcation of opportunities and advantages along class lines has the potentional to bring a period of political unrest. Up to now, American workers have simply been worried about their job prospects. Once they understand that there are (and were) clear alternatives to the policies that have dislocated careers and altered futures, they will demand more accountability from the leaders who have failed to protect their interests. The 'Wal-Marting' of cheap consumer products brought in from places like China, and the easy money from low-interest home mortgage refinancing, have softened the blows in recent years. But the balance point is tipping in both cases, away from the consumer and away from our national interest.

"The politics of the Karl Rover era were designed to distract and divide the very people who would ordinarily be rebelling against the deterioration of their way of life. Working Americans have been repeatedly seduced at the polls by emotional issues such as the predictable mantra of "God, guns, gays, abortion and the flag' while their way of life shifted ineluctably beneath their feet. But this election cycle showed an electorate that intends to hold government leaders accountable for allowing every American a fair opportunity to succeed.

"With this new Congress, and heading into an important presidential election in 2008, American workers have a chance to be heard in ways that have eluded them for more than a decade. Nothing is more important for the health of our society than to grant them the validity of their concerns. And our government leaders have no greater duty than to confront the growing unfairness in this age of globalization."

Obviously, Senator Webb was quite prescient when he authored this article in 2006, and now that the final debate has taken place in Pennsylvania, I believe that Senator Barack Obama "gets it!" As to Senator Hillary Clinton, she may have missed the boat for the simple fact that she is still wedded to the Neo-liberal view of globalization, and her participation in the DLC has not helped her electoral chances. She has alienated the party "activists" when she attempted to do an end-run on these 'activists', and the cost to her campaign has been heavy and long-lasting. Perhaps, she will realize that she can do more for the Democratic Party while serving in the Senate in the years to come, or she can take the onslaught of a suggestion from the Punditry Class and run for the Governor's mansion in the Great State of New York.

Consequently, the voters will decide to follow their economic self-interest in November and prove the national press wrong. Should this occur, the national press and their corporate employers, will not have held the voters hostage to their obvious preference, and that being for Senator John McCain. Perhaps, America will after all, heed the advice of Senator Jim Webb?

The other day, I read that Senator John McCain suggested that the rationale for invading Iraq had now become an "academic argument" given that we are now deeply involved in Iraq. Initially, I found this thinking to be quaint.

Perhaps, Senator McCain has resided in our nation's capitol for far too long, if he is intent on deflecting, diverting and distracting the general public from the wrong-headedness of this proposition, or perhaps, it now reflects a clearer perspective on his character? Or perhaps, this view reflects the concerted views held by his use of the usual cadre of lobbyists that he has surrounded himself with?

In any event, on my re-thinking of Senator McCain's quaintness of an "academic argument", speaks to his longevity for residing in America's non-existent "accountability zone." Obviously, he would suffer fools gladly like myself if that will help him raise the large sums of monies for his continued presidential aspirations.

Regardless, Senator McCain will eventually come forth and be asked to explain himself on why he failed to support a Declaration of War as prescribed by our national Constitution, and he will have to show himself as a person lacking in any substantive character when one factors in that over 300,000 Iraqis have been killed, over 4,000 men and women in uniform have been killed in their dedication to our Constition, and lest we forget, the monies that went to fund this political disaster that could have been better utilized for addressing the 'needs' of our fellow citizens. And the cost has yet to factored into any financial schema for the eventual medical recovery of our Veterans, and which will be in the long-term that is coming due.

And eventually, Senator McCain will asked why he has no real "faith" in the Iraqis solving their disparate issues among themselves? And lest we too forget, a recent survey posited that approximately 65% of the people residing in the Middle East had "faith" that the Iraqis will bridge their issues among themselves. This same survey also posited that an approximate 15% of the Middle East thinks that things will get worse in Iraq. So, the Middle East has a greater level of "faith" in the Iraqis than does the United States have in the Iraqis, according to Senator McCain, given his desire to keep the USA in Iraq for the many, many years to come.

And Congressman Murtha of Pennsylvania--at the age of 75, and who channels the upper echelons of the Pentagon, has called into to question, McCain's calendar age, on the premise that being a Resident of the Oval Office is not for old men.

Consequently, McCain will have to defend himself from a vast array of "academic arguments" from the Democrats who are willing to accept McCain's challenge for going nose-to-nose, politically speaking of course.

For all of her vaunted 35 years of political experience, Hillary Clintion was obviously unwilling to "take control" of the debate. She much preferred to wrangle on her wrong-headedness. And Obama did not rise to the occasion or the opportunity.

Thusly, the Democratic Leadership should be giving them both a "serious talking to", as in taking both out, around, and behind the outhouse, in which the varnish has been removed. What a dreadful experience to have to undertake, but that is what will be necessary.

Of course, had either one taken control of the debate, the fundamental premise should have been on the storyline of "The Democrats have given America Social Security and Medicare, so, what have the Republicans delivered to you?" And "The Republicans now have to show up and put up for delivering to you." And "That they won't do!"

Of course, if you have a 12-year-old daughter and who is president of the student council at a public school, you will recognize that she could have done better than either Clinton or Obama in last night's debate. And that's my "bitter".

By now, we all know that Senator Barack Obama inartfully used the word "bitter" to express his frustration that voters tend to vote contrary to their economic self-interest, and thusly, cling to what they have long cherished, i.e., religion and guns. And in today's lexicon, all this can be seen and heard on the internet and in great abundance as well as in the electronic and print medias.

However, I found that a couple of things or three, have now entered into this discussion. First, it's ironic that these pundits, having been paid millions, are now "in-touch" with blue collar workers. Secondly, I also find it ironic, that most voters are urban dwellers. And thirdly, I find it even more ironic that Senator Hillary Clinton has "gone negative" in any campaign commercials airing in the Great State of Pennsylvania.

And equally important, tonight's presidential debate will be hosted by ABC News, and both Clinton and Obama can test themselves with urban dwellers to see if both the Urban and Rural Dwellers have the same 'values'? Let the fireworks commence!

It will be hard to accomplish unless a serious level of recognition is acknowledged given that the Undocumented Immigrant has departed in large measure, and thusly, the lack of this usual economic activity for the always accruing tax base, is now not available for the 'easy' political and economic solution.

And those of us who are deemed amateur economists have tagged this anti-immigrationist behavior as the 10% 'compromise' given that Arizona's economy has suffered in the range of 10% across the board. To wit, Arizona has a budget shortfall of a little over $1 billion in a $10 billion budget for this year and this shortfall is expected to be even larger next year. Consequently, Arizona's recession can be laid at the doorstep of the Anti-Immigrationist Fervor for Nativism, and therein, is Arizona's "recession" being found.

Recently, the Mayor of Phoenix, Phil Gordon, took to the news media and fired a salvo across the bow of the Anglo "movers and shakers" in Arizona to encourage them to speak out loudly, and as such, these "movers and shakers" have been speaking, albeit quietly to the Newspaper-of-Record, the Arizona Republic, with its sizable statewide circulation. Thus, yesterday's Editorial, and which can be found on page B-4, in the Valley and State Section, and titled, The Issue: Arpaio's Round Up or "Feds, do your job". The following is printed in its entirety, and the empasis in 'bold' is mine.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his deputies have been busy in recent months, sending "messages" to all willing to listen -- and, suddenly, there are plenty of people listening across the country -- that is no other government entity will enforce laws against illegal immigrants, he will.

Now, Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon, an out-spoken critic of the sheriff's sensational roundups, has sent a message of his own. This one, to U.S. Attorney Michael Mulkasey, asks that the federal Justice Department and the FBI intervene to stop the sheriff.

The mayor's request for federal intervention is spot-on. Illegal immigration is a federal matter, suited to federal jurisdiction. In his appeal to Washington, Gordon is effectively asking the federal government do the job it should have been doing for decades but has lamely neglected.

At least one federal lawsuit has been filed against Arpaio's sweeps. Last fall in Cave Creek, Maricopa County deputies stopped a vehicle driven by a White man and, in the process, detained a Mexican citizen who happened to be in the car.

Even though Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres had documentation, including a stamped visa, proving he was in the country legally, the Mexican tourist was forced to endure nine hours of custody before being released in downtown Phoenix.

This is the sort of appalling treatment of citizens and visitors alike that is guaranteed to multiply unless the feds take action now. Even one of Mayor Gordon's own staf f-- a Hispanic, needless to say -- has been scrutinized by sheriff's deputies in one of the "sweeps."

In the heated controversy, Gordon himself has much for which to answer. Had the Mayor taken more decisive action -- indeed, any action whatsoever -- to protect the interests of Pruitt's Furniture store during that on-going circus of protestors on both sides squaring off, Arpaio at least may have been slower to assume the duties of federal immigration authorities.

Now, we must endure the spectacle of sheriff's deputies and posse members using traffic stops and other barely concealed ruses to pretend they are not conducting racial-profiling. It is a demeaning and wholly unnecessary misuse of law enforcement.

Unnecessary, that is, because the federal government has refused to do its job. It's time it started by responding to Gordon and investigating this brewing civil rights catastrophe now engulfing Maricopa County.

Sadly, this conservative newspaper, conveniently detracts, diverts, and deflects, their 'blame' onto the Justice Department, and to a lesser extent, Mayor Phil Gordon. The newswpaper just cannot bring itself to address the well-known reality that Arizona's "surge" of nativism and the intense dislike for folks with brown skin, and thusly, they too can be conviently ignored and cavalierly dismissed.

Moreover, Arizona's economic coffers are suffering, and the newspaper cannot issue a 'critique' directed at the State Legislature for their egregious history for passing laws that created this "surge" of inhumanity towards our fellow man. As such, conservatives hang tuff together, despite the DFHs and their 'whining' about the Constitution.

In a New York Times Sunday Book Review, Dr. Niall Ferguson writes of a book titled, "Terror and Consent" and authored by Democrat and Neo-Conservative Philip Bobbitt, in which Ferguson reinforces the right-wing theme of Bobbitt's political schema.

First off, I truly find it offensive when a highly-skilled writer such as Ferguson writes junk-crappola on the eliminationist vision for those who enjoy their stay in the political gutter. Moreover, I also find it highly distasteful that the New York Times would make abundantly available its valuable column-inch space to review a book that will not find any niche-space in the foreign policy arena, even though, Bobbitt has a long and frank history in foreign policy efforts, both in and out the Executive Branch of government.

"The task he [Bobbitt] has set himself here is to challenge nearly all of our existing ideas about the so-called wars on terror, in the belief that only a root-and-branch rethinking will equip us to deal with the problems posed by 'the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, mass terrorist atrocities and humanitarian crisis that bring about or are brought about by terror.

"Bobbitt's central premise is that today's Islamic terrorist network which he calls Al Qaueda for short, is like a distorted mirror image of the post-Wesphalian market-state: decentralized, privatized, outsourced and in some measure divorced from territorial sovereighnty. The terrorists are at once a parasitical on, and at the same time hostile toward, gobalized economy, the Internet and the technological revolution in military affairs. Just as the plagues in the 14th century were unintended consequences of increased trade and urbanization, so terrorism is a negative externality of our borderless world.

"The difference, of course, is one of intent. The rats that transported the lethal fleas that transported the lethal enterobacteria Yersinia pestis did not mean to devastate the populations of Eurasia and Africa. The Black Death was a natural disaster. Al Qaeda is different. Its members seek to undermine the market-state by turning its own technological achievement against it in a protacted worldwide war, the ultimate goal of which is to create a Sharia-based "terror-state" in the form of a new caliphate."

In any event, one must keep in mind that when a person was wrong on War, invariably, that same person will be wrong on Peace. And of course, we all have access to the ballot box, and where we can make the huge difference in both the direction and in policy of our nation. That's as it should be in order to slap down the wrong-headedness of some of our fellow citizens.

Today is my birthday, so I have been given the "gift" that, at a minimum, comes in two-parts, and I am searching for the third by the end of the day. First was the opportunity posit my commentary on the "offensive" of the wingnuttery. The second and the third if possible, will follow after this commentary on the "trifecta".

And Today, is a national holiday and titled, Chicano Military Veterans Day. And yes, I know that CMV Day is not nationally recognized, but then, I don't need the federal government telling me when I can enjoy my self-designated Holiday. So, go out and take your spouse out to your favorite spot, enjoy a good meal, and thoroughly have a good time. This day only comes once a year for a self-celebration. To wit, we all have large egos, and to wit, we all have healthy egos and we have been known to use them, and wisely in due course.

"[A recent] survey found that 82 percent of American Christians felt they had a "moral and biblical" obligation to support Israel, including 89 percent of evangelicals, but also 76 percent of Catholics. It's this last statistic that's striking evidence of Americanization---I haven't seen comparable polls elsewhere, but it seems exceedingly unlikely that even a majority of Catholics anywhere else would agree.

"...The policy point is this---does anyone think three-quarters of the grandchildren of today's Hispanic Catholic immigrants will be similarly pro-Israel? It's not that Latin immigrants are uniquely anti-Semitic (I suspect they're more than anti-Semitic than today's Asians or yesterday's Irish and Italians, but less so than Eastern European immigrants); rather, our ability to Protestantize them (in the sense I'm using it) has declined dramatically compared to a century ago."

And as you can see, the "western civilizers" at not only at it again, but are determined to 'convert' me to their way of thinking. Consequently, they're determined to not see any more of this Hemisphere's Undocumented Immigrants arrive into the United States, and thus, they gotta keep the Mexicans, albeit the grandkids, out of the United States for their fear of not being sufficiently 'pro-Israel' in the future.

Colorado's Senatorial Candidate Bob Schaffer has went into hiding until Vice President Cheney leaves Grand Junction and for having attended a fundraiser for Mr. Schaffer. It seems that Mr. Schaffer is advocating an immigration construct that includes barb-wire enclosures, beatings, forced abortions, and child sex trafficing. And yes, I am not making this up. The Catholic Archbishop, conservative that he is, will be saying 'something' in the next few days, and Mr. Schaffer will be on the hot seat and the target of some Catholic ire.

John Yoo and who is known for having crafted the "torture memo" for the White House is being called to account. The Law Dean at Boalt Hall has said that Yoo "may have offered bad ideas and even worse advice" but the Legal Dean won't be firing him.

The Toughest Sheriff in America, Maricopa County's Sheriff Joe Arpaio of the 'pink underwear', 'green bologna, and 'tent city' fame, has crossed the line of Common Sense in his determination to arrest Undocumented Immigrants. As such, his "crime suppression" Program has run into a road block of considerable and concerned opposition.

His latest foray of last week into Guadalupe, Arizona, has now given the Sheriff a string of second doubts. Although Guadalupe is adjacent to Phoenix and Tempe (Home to the Arizona State Sun Devils), Guadalupe is primarily a bedroom community of both Yaquis and Chicanos. Arpaio did not take kindly to their non-existent crime wave, so the Sheriff went into the municipality in order to exacerbate to his heart's content. And after two days, the Sheriff got an earful from the Lady Mayor.

Notwithstanding that Guadalupe has for years, contractually paid over these many years, to the Sheriff's Department for law enforcement services in the municipality, and consequently, the local citizens became quite dismayed and disgusted with the offending constabulary, by showing their public defiance, and by protesting in large numbers, as well as with some suggesting the numbers to be in the several hundreds of participants.

Now, fast forward to earlier this week in Mesa, Arizona, and which is adjacent to Tempe and Scottsdale. The Chief of Police and former Deputy Chief of the Los Angeles, California Police Department, sent his letter to the Sheriff "demanding" of the Sheriff a "two-day notification" alert should the Sheriff also show up to conduct his "crime suppression" Program in his fair city. With this 'advance' notice, the Chief can redirect his officers accordingly.

It seems that Chief Rascon is concerned that the citizenry may get angry, and given what was experienced in Guadalupe last week. And the President of the Police Union had this to say, "Watch what is happening in Phoenix and Guadalupe." Moreover, the Union Honcho says, "The crowds are getting bigger and different types of militias are showing up armed."

And how did Sheriff Arpaio respond? In his usual customary fashion, he said, "The bottom line is they don't want me to enforce immigration laws in the City of Mesa. We are not going to be deterred."

The Sheriff seems to think that "showing force" is going to intimidate the Yaqui and Chicano Communities. Of course, history shows otherwise. And in the Governor's Office, the tourism officials are getting nervous, especially with NASCAR in town. It's bad for biz.

Part One: When the economy is going well, taxes should be reduced in order to let people keep more of their monies. And if the economy is struggling, taxes should be reduced to stimulate the economy. Got it!

Part Two: If things are going badly in Iraq, our troops must stay to turn things around. If things are going well in Iraq, our troops must remain in order to insure that progress is maintained. Got it!

Due to the lack of humor to be found among the headlines of the news media outlets for this past week, and among the attendant players, I just haven't been able to find anything that challenges my taste buds for humor. So, perhaps, it's a tad depressing not to see 'something' that can be equated to the human foibles of the lifelong pursuit for 'greatness'. Of course, should something "amazing" occur between now and tomorrow morning, I will ready at the starting gate with paper and pen in hand, and I anticipate that I will not be disappointed. So, remain stout of heart.

As you know, PBS did a non-fiction documentary lasting over four hours inclusive of the usual video snippets and 400 interviews. It was an impressive undertaking to say the least. And the producers and PBS are to be commended.

However, the far more important impact is in the wealth of knowledge that was delivered to the Internet, and as such, made available to anyone for a perusal that engages the curiosity of almost anyone who has a hankering to know more and in much greater detail.

As an introduction, General Petraeus will finish his public testimony later today before the House. If so, then, it would be incumbent on one of the major polling firms to conduct a survey to determine if America reaffirms the views posited by General Petraeus.

3. As the Respondent, should the next President--in the role of Commander-in-Chief, order an immediate military "stand down order" in order to commence a prudent and safe withdrawal to be completed within 120 days?

Since General Petraeus was unwilling to testify that we are safer now and will be more safer in the future, he has let the "cat out of the bag" for a possible open-ended military stay. Added to this, Senator Biden finally got Ambassador Crocker to admit that Al Qaeda in Iraq is miniscule in concentrated form, but is more likely to commit its viol