Making It Easier For Illegal Aliens To Vote

Is there really any other way to say this? It looks like the Democratic supermajority in Sacramento is dead set on allowing illegal aliens to vote in California elections.


I am stunned that this looks like it is going to be actually voted on. AB 131 is on its way to the State Senate. Apparently, the Democrats in Sacramento have a bill before the Legislature, authored by Das Williams (D-Santa Barbara), which allow people to register to vote without having to list where they were born. As it stands right now, county registrars cannot accept a voter registration if all the boxes are not filled in. Under this proposed law, the registrars/clerks would be allowed to accept voter forms that are missing this one piece of information.

Now who would want to avoid putting their place of birth down on a form to vote?

The argument is, that there is no threat that illegal aliens will get to vote in elections. The reason why? Because you have to sign your information, including a promise that you are in fact a US citizen. For someone who is already breaking the law by illegally being here in the country, is that really going to be a big deal to lie on this form as well?

Now, do you need an ID to register to vote? Well, according to my county (San Francisco), you do not. They ask for a CA Driver's license or the last 4 digits of a Social Security Number. However, if you have neither, they will assign you a unique identification number. Then, Department of Elections is supposed to vette the filing. How are they going to do that with no ID number that attaches to anything except the application and without a place of birth?

I would submit, the Democrats in Sacramento do not want them to do an actual verification.

I'm just at a loss for words at how stupid we are a state to place our future in the hands of a supermajority from either party. This is what happens.

Opening Day.....

Well that sucked. But then I remember, we dropped how many to start the season last year? Let's get them tomorrow.

Can't let the Dodgers have all the fun.

 Go Giants!

The International Law Case For Israel

Not that it will matter to the true believer progressive types who want to cast the Arabs as victims, heroically opposing Israel's aggression. Still, its a very good, concise explanation of why Israel is just as legitimate as any other state under international law.

Giants Sweep!

Giants Win the Pennant!

The Board of Supervisors Has Failed, Will San Francisco Do The Right Thing?

Earlier tonight, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors failed the City and County of San Francisco. They voted 7-4 to sustain the charges against Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi and remove him from office.

So why am I saying they failed? Because in order to remove the Sheriff Mirkarimi, the Board of Supervisors had to have nine votes.

Who were the holdouts in favor of a spouse abuser? They would be:

John Avalos
David Campos
Jane Kim
Christina Olague

All four of these people need to lose their jobs. And that is difficult for me to say since Mr. Avalos is a friend of tenants rights. But yet, he has failed to do what was necessary for the City. These four supervisors have made it clear that spousal abuse is not enough to remove an elected official from office.

Let's think about that for a second. When Sheriff Mirkarimi's wife, Eliana Lopez, made her statements on the tape, she said "This is the second time this is happening... We need help and I'm going to use this just in case he wants to take Theo did said (sic) that he is very powerful and can do it."

 Now, the Sheriff's supporters make much of the fact that Ms. Lopez has since retracted the statement. However, let's consider how abused spouses react sometimes. In fact, its not just sometimes, but its so common that the International Classification of Diseases recognizes the existence of a Battered Persons Syndrome. Part of the cycle (and I am simplifying things here) for someone who suffers from this is that the couple goes through a period of buildup, culminating violence, and then the victim feels that the violence is there fault and the accept the contrition of the abuser and remain in the relationship thereby allowing the cycle to continue again.

So what happened here? Eliana Lopez states that she has been assaulted by her husband before. It would not be hard to believe that Sheriff (then Supervisor) Mirkarimi made some apology that it would never happen again. However, it seems that it did. And now it would not be far-fetched to believe that the Sheriff has promised that it won't happen again. And she has fallen for it and said whatever she needs to protect her abuser.

If you don't think that's possible, you are living in fantasy land.

Now, there is another aspect to consider. Abusers abuse their spouses, in part, so that they can exercise control over them. Is that trait something we really want in the person who is the Sheriff of San Francisco?

So because of the failure to vote in favor of the removal of by Supervisors Avalos, Campos, Olague, and Kim, San Francisco has a Sheriff someone who has, at a minimum, admitted to false imprisonment (that was the charge his domestic violence was plead down to). Is this the message that we as San Franciscans want to send? That if you are a politician who says the right things and get reelected, that we are going condone spousal abuse?

Sheriff Mirkarimi has shown that he is lacking any shred of morality by fighting his removal, but not his innocence of all charges. If he had any integrity, he would have resigned so that he could work on his family issues.

He has not.

The District Attorney has failed to vigorously prosecute this case. Instead, the DA's office cut Sheriff Mirkarimi, a person the DA has to work with to be effective, a deal that allows him to say he has never been convicted of domestic violence.

The Board of Supervisors, after the Ethics Commission found that he had committed official misconduct, failed to sustain the charges by the required 2/3rds (9 votes).

So, the question is simple: Do we as San Franciscans want to say that spousal abuse is acceptable?

 If we do, then we leave the Sheriff in office. If we do not, then we must remove him

I know my answer. What is yours?

Yeah, the press is just so doing their job this time...