Categories
Affirmative Action Commentary Corruption Gerrymander Links from other news sources.

Next on the agenda, NY.

Next on the agenda, NY.

We see that the left didn’t learn from what Virginia tried. They now want to do another redistricting map to create more Democrat districts.

Unbelievable that they are saying that the gerrymandered black districts will remain. If New York succeeds again in forcing a new congressional map in 2026, it will be the fourth district change since 2021.

Share
Categories
Commentary Illegals Immigration Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Uncategorized Undocumented

What the undocumented worker makes. And the taxes they pay.

What the undocumented worker makes. And the taxes they pay.

Of course, companies benefit on hiring the undocumented. Some pay taxes but many do not. When they do pay taxes, it’s way less than documented or US CITIZENS.

Worker TypeAvg Hourly WageAnnual IncomeIncome Tax OwedPayroll Tax (7.65%)Total Federal Taxes Paid
Undocumented Worker$12.50–$16.00$26,000–$33,280$990–$1,718$1,989–$2,547$2,979–$4,265
Documented Immigrant$20.50–$22.00$42,640–$45,760$3,174–$3,558$3,262–$3,503$6,436–$7,061
U.S.-Born Worker$23.11$48,069$3,948$3,678$7,626

💼 Why Employers Hire Undocumented Workers

This is the uncomfortable but central truth:

Undocumented labor is cheaper, more compliant, and less protected.

Employers benefit because:

  • They avoid payroll taxes
  • They avoid benefits
  • They avoid labor regulations
  • Workers are less likely to report violations

This creates a dual labor market:

Employers and progressives claim that the undocumented sometimes pay taxes. Look at the wage difference below.

Worker GroupTypical Hourly WageNotes
Native-born workers$23–$24/hrBLS median
Documented immigrants$20.50–$22/hrSlightly below natives
Undocumented immigrants$12.50–$16/hr25–40% wage penalty

Share
Categories
Censorship Commentary Democrat Domestic Progressive Terrorism Education Free Speech Hate Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Opinion

What happens when you don’t support mutilation or killing of babies? Your commencement speech gets cancelled.

What happens when you don’t support mutilation or killing of babies? Your commencement speech gets cancelled.

South Carolina Republicans are pushing to strip funding from the state’s only public HBCU after the university rescinded Republican Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette’s commencement invitation following student protests and security concerns.

Students were going to riot and cause physical harm based on the colleges reason for pulling the invitation.

Share
Categories
Back Door Power Grab Blue States California. Commentary Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

The SEIU declares war on California’s tax base — and its economy.

The SEIU declares war on California’s tax base — and its economy.

by Bruce Bialosky.

Unions sometimes destroy entire industries when they demand more than companies can afford.

In California, the union demanding a “billionaire tax” might just destroy the state itself.

The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) is one of the country’s most powerful unions, representing government workers. Its California branch is the SEIU-United Healthcare Workers West.

Its president, Dave Regan, is the principal organizer behind the “2026 Billionaire Tax Act,” which said this week that it has collected twice the number of signatures necessary to qualify for a statewide vote.

Though the California secretary of state has yet to review and approve the initiative, it looks like the “billionaire tax” will be on the ballot on Nov. 3.

The SEIU is one of the country’s most powerful unions representing government workers. San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images

We don’t know how much the union spent to put the tax on the ballot. That will be released by the secretary of state when it has officially approved the initiative.

What we do know is that the union likely spent a huge amount, both in hard cash and staff time, with expenditures drawing on various union funds.

The SEIU’s motivation is simple: 90% of the money that would be collected by the “billionaire tax” would be designated for health care spending. In other words, it benefits the union and its members directly.

The SEIU is pursuing that money, notwithstanding recent disclosures of significant fraud in California health care programs, including Medi-Cal, the local version of Medicaid.

After the Trump administration started examining fraud in hospices, California Attorney General Rob Bonta jumped into the act and discovered $267 million of Medi-Cal fraud in the hospice program. Bonta stated that over the last decade, such fraud amounted to $1.5 billion.

We can all imagine what the real fraud level is, across all of the state’s public health programs.

The SEIU doesn’t care. It is targeting the state’s wealthiest residents, before making sure funds already provided for health care are properly spent.

In effect, the unions are attacking California’s tax base. An unknown number of billionaires have already relocated out of the state. Some have done it very publicly — among them Larry Page, Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brin, Larry Ellison, and Peter Thiel. The amount of wealth that left with them is in the ballpark of $1 trillion. (That represents $50 billion in lost revenue under the proposed new tax.)

The SEIU’s motivation is simple: 90% of the money that would be collected by the “billionaire tax” would be designated for health care spending. In other words, it benefits the union and its members directly. AFP via Getty Images

It is the undisclosed departures that may do the real damage. We don’t know about them, and will not know for some time.

Most of those leaving have a residence in other states, including states with no income tax, and have been working overtime with their lawyers and accountants to make sure their official residence is not in California.

To evade California residency, they may have to show that they have a driver’s license from another state; that they get their medical care there; and even that they attend a house of worship there.

(My money is on the tax pros versus the California bureaucrats on that issue.)

We are already seeing the devastating results of the SEIU’s gambit, regardless of whether the billionaire tax actually passes.

In 2024, California collected $129 billion in personal income tax. The top 1% pay 40% of that. The state stands to lose annual revenues of $13 billion if just 25% of those people vacate.

That does not include the revenue from the businesses and employees they are taking with them, which could easily hit $25 billion in the first year.

The SEIU has estimated that a “one-time” 5% tax on wealth will produce $100 billion in revenue. You don’t have to be a financial wizard to realize that will never happen.

Dave Regan, is the principal organizer behind the “2026 Billionaire Tax Act” membersunited4strength.org

That is because every time we are told that a “new source” of revenue will produce a claimed amount, the true amount is never even close to what they project.

The billionaires who do remain in California will also be hiring attorneys and accountants to hide or devalue their assets and assure that they pay as little of the new tax as possible.

You’d better believe they are planning that already. None of them has the cash on hand to pay the prescribed 5% of their net worth. They could be forced to liquidate assets, including their stock of California-based companies.

That will drive down asset values for the billionaires — and also for all of the employees and all the California residents who hold the stocks in their 401(k) accounts.

Economic harm will spread among the residents of the state and boomerang, causing even less tax revenue to be collected.

All this to pay more into government health care programs riddled with fraud, and to punish people for creating jobs and wealth for people throughout California and the country.

The SEIU’s billionaire tax could impoverish California for generations. No billionaire comes close to that kind of destructive greed.

Bruce Bialosky, a former presidential appointee, is a certified public accountant specializing in taxes.  

Share
Categories
Commentary Corruption Democrat Gerrymander Leftist Virtue(!) Opinion Politics The Courts

How the courts can fix the fake Virginia ballot issue.

How the courts can fix the fake Virginia ballot issue.

Short and sweet. The ballot wording may be the proof for the courts to overturn the fake ballot issue. It claimed to bringing fairness to Virginia. But changing the house seats from 6-5 to 10-1 is fair to who?

In closing. Virginia law and the state constitution require a 90‑day waiting period between final legislative approval and the public vote.

According to leftist AI.

The 90‑day requirement was not met for Tuesday’s Virginia redistricting amendment vote. Multiple courts and news outlets confirm that early voting began less than 90 days after the General Assembly approved the amendment, which is why the judge ruled the referendum “ineffective” and blocked certification.

 

 

 

Share
Categories
Commentary Government Overhaul Just my own thoughts Opinion

Time to tell NATO where to go.

Time to tell NATO where to go.

If anyone attacked the US, do you think that any other country in NATO would come to our defense? In the past it’s always been just the opposite.

Now’s the time to tell the NATO countries that the time has come for them to fend for themselves. Buy our weapons and our defense systems. That should be our only involvement.

Share
Categories
Blue States Commentary Corruption Democrat Leftist Virtue(!) The Law

According to Leftists an assault weapon is anything that fires bullets.

According to Leftists an assault weapon is anything that fires bullets.

Seems like the more laws leftists pass, the more shootings we have. Yesterday it was NJ. Today or tomorrow, it will be maybe Virginia. They have a house bill that bans hunting rifles and pistols. I’m sure that BB guns are also on that list.

Lately knives have been the choice of progressives when they go out looking to kill someone. Let’s see if the next law adds knives.

Share
Categories
Commentary Headline News History The Constitution

The Monroe Doctrine

Walter had asked that I post this. It’s relevant for what’s going on today.

The Monroe Doctrine

As early as 1783 elements of the Monroe Doctrine began to surface in George Washington’s cabinet as the administration crafted a policy of Neutrality that included isolation and non-intervention in the affairs of the European states. In a broadening of the policy, Jefferson’s Secretary of State, James Madison informed the Spanish Ambassador the United States opposed further colonization of the Americas by the European powers.
Portugal and Spain held a large portion of the Americas, mired as they were in colonial dependent economies; Portugal without the necessary manpower to hold such a large territory and Spain squandered its New World treasures in the squabbles of the European powers. The United States continued to be Britain’s biggest trading partner in the Americas after both the Revolution and the War of 1812 as a booming British economy fueled by the Industrial Revolution began the transition from mercantilism to a laissez-faire free trade system.
A change in Spanish policy designed to reinforce its mercantilist economy would spur Independence movements in the New World colonies. Other European colonial powers in the Caribbean openly traded with the colonies of Spain and Portugal. The British dominated this coveted trade, plus being visibly protected by an ever present British Navy.
This change in policy and the invasion of the Iberian Peninsula further fueled the dreams of independence as many of the colonies realized the mother country could not prevent an invasion of its territory, nor quash the drive to independence that began in earnest in 1808.
The Napoleonic Wars (1803-1815) would be the impetus for the increasingly strong colonies of Central and South America to declare their independence. Napoleons invasion of the Iberian Peninsula in 1807 was followed in 1810 with declarations of independence by Argentina, Chile and Venezuela; the trickle of declarations overwhelmed the European home countries eventually ending all colonial holdings in the Central and South America by 1829 with the exception of the Spanish held islands of Cuba and Puerto Rico.
By the end of the 17th century most nations accepted Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius legal treatise “Mare Liberum” a Latin phrase that translates as “freedom of the seas”. It allowed the free navigation of the globes oceans by all nations thereby reducing the barriers to trade. Beginning in 1814 the British Royal Navy assumed the role of international peace keeper under a policy called “Pax Britannica” (Latin for British Peace). This spurred trade forcing some nations to resort to making payment in goods rather than specie (gold and silver) to reduce the drain on the national treasury.
From the middle of the 17th century, many of the European nations with large colonial holdings resorted to mercantilism whereby the colony was restricted to trading with the mother country. This of course resulted in smuggling, clandestinely encouraged by the British it would flourish throughout the colonies. Efforts by the Spanish crown to curtail this illicit trade further fueled the drive for independent statehood.
The formation of the “Holy Alliance” in 1815 to reinstall the “Divine Right of Kings” and “Christian Values” back to governments posed a peripheral threat to the United States. President James Madison pushed aside this issue to pursue the return of Astoria to the United States demanding return of the territory under “status quo ante bellum” after the conclusion of hostilities. The demand went unanswered until the administration of James Monroe took a more direct approach in early 1817; first informing the British they will retake Astoria by force if necessary. Again the demand went unanswered until October 1817 when President Monroe ordered the sloop-of-war Ontario to sail round Cape Horn to forcefully retake Astoria. The British hurriedly sent instructions overland to surrender the fort to the Americans.
The Monroe administration had shown its mettle, the Treaty of 1818 and the Conference of 1819 would be the administrations next political coup. The treaty and the following conference settled a number of long standing claims; the crowning achievement was making the 49th parallel the boundary from The Lake of the Woods to the summit of the Rocky Mountains.
In 1821 the Russian government issued a “Ukase”, a claim that encompassed much of the west coast of North America and closed waters along the coast to all foreign vessels. Push back by the Americans and the British convinced the Russians to modify their claim, establishing latitude 54’40” north as the southern boundary of the Russian claim by the end of 1824.
In a move to protect the trade they had developed with the newly independent nations, British Foreign Secretary, George Canning approached United States Minister Richard Bush with a joint proposal to prevent action by the European monarchs. President Monroe was open to the idea but Secretary of State John Quincy Adams was opposed and quipped, “I don’t want my country to come in as a cock boat in the wake of a British Man of War”.
Adam’s argument prevailed and the President announced the unilateral policy that became to be known as “The Monroe Doctrine” in his 7th annual address to congress, December 2, 1823. The speech written by Adams was long and couched in diplomatic terms contained the elements of the doctrine.
… as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers…
In the wars of the European powers in relating to themselves we have never taken any part, nor does it comport with our policy to do so. It is only when our rights are invaded or seriously menaced that we resent injuries or make preparation for our defense.
We owe it therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as a manifestation of an un-friendly disposition towards the United States.
It is impossible that the allied powers should extend their political system to any portion of either continent without endangering our peace and happiness; nor can anyone believe that our southern brethren, if left to themselves, would adopt it of their own accord. It is equally impossible, therefore, that we should behold such interposition in any form with indifference.
The United States was totally unprepared to back up the policy, but as it meshed with British aims in the Americas the British Royal Navy would be the enforcer again under “Pax Britannica”. The British would violate the doctrine in 1833 when they asserted sovereignty over the Falkland Islands, there was little to no response, under succeeding administrations that would change.
1842; President John Tyler invoked the doctrine as part of recognizing Hawaii’s independence.
1845; President James Polk expanded the doctrine to protect “Manifest Destiny
1862; President Abraham Lincoln warned the French they violated the doctrine by invading Mexico. A military presence on the border after the war convinced the French
1870; President Ulysses Grant’s proclamation concerning Central and South America, …“hereafter no territory on this continent shall be regarded as subject to transfer to a European power”. He invoked the doctrine in a failed attempt to annex the Dominican Republic in 1870.
1895; President Grover Cleveland’s administration would formulate the “Olney Correlation” in response to Britain’s failure to mediate an ongoing dispute with Venezuela. “The United States is practically sovereign on this continent, and its fiat is law upon the subjects to which it confines its interposition”. This marked America’s recognition as a world power.
1898; President William McKinley intervened militarily in Cuba’s bid for liberation from Spain.
1904; Theodore Roosevelt would add the “Roosevelt Corollary” to the doctrine asserting a right to intervene in cases of “flagrant and chronic wrongdoing by a Latin American Nation”.
1912; William Taft’s administration would pass the “Lodge Resolution” an effort to stop agents of foreign nations from purchasing and or controlling assets in Baja California, Mexico.
1928; Calvin Coolidge’s administration redefined the Roosevelt Corollary with the Clark Memorandum asserting the United States had a right to intervene in disputes of its Latin neighbors as a fellow American state but not within the confines of the Monroe Doctrine purpose of opposing European colonization but did not release the memorandum.
1930; Herbert Hoover’s administration would release the Clark Memorandum.
1933; Franklin Roosevelt initiated a “Good Neighbor” policy to the doctrine by asserting a non-intervention clause. The policy would end in 1945 with the beginning of the Cold War.
1948; the Monroe Doctrine would undergo some modifications as its operations began to be directed by The Organization of American States.
1954; Dwight Eisenhower’s Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles invoked the doctrine at a meeting of the Pan-American Conference to denounce Soviet intervention in Guatemala.
1962; John F. Kennedy’s news conference of August29th contained this message: “The Monroe Doctrine means what it has meant since president Monroe and John Quincy Adams enunciated it, and that is that we would oppose a foreign power extending its power to the Western Hemisphere, and that is why we oppose what is happening in Cuba today. That is why we have cut off our trade. That is why we worked in the OAS and in other ways to isolate the Communist menace in Cuba. That is why we will continue to give a good deal of our attention to it”. Kennedy would invoke the Monroe Doctrine in response to the detection of missiles being installed in Cuba, a naval blockade aided in breaking the 12 day stalemate (Oct. 16–28, 1962).
1984; Ronald Reagan’s administration would apparently use the doctrine outside its authorized limits in the Iran-Contra affair. CIA director Robert Gates argued that foregoing intervention in Nicaragua would be “Totally to abandon the Monroe Doctrine”.
2013; President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State, John Kerry said the “era of the Monroe Doctrine is over” in a November meeting of the Organization of American States.
2017; President Donald Trump implied the doctrine might be used as military action might be necessary in Venezuela to counter Iranian and Russian backed groups.
2018; Trump’s Secretary of State Rex Tillerson claimed the Monroe Doctrine “clearly a success”.
Epilogue: The Monroe Doctrine’s 195 year history exhibits both durability and purpose. The standards to which Secretary of State John Quincy Adams ascribed are to be commended. His ability to broach strong language, couched as they were in diplomatic terminology was gauged to soothe rather than inflame passions. Admirably done sir!!
Walt Mow 2026

Share
Categories
Back Door Power Grab Blue States Commentary Corruption Democrat Elections Gerrymander

You make the call. Did Spanberger lie to voters during the campaign about how she would not pursue this gerrymandered redistricting?

You make the call. Did Spanberger lie to voters during the campaign about how she would not pursue this gerrymandered redistricting?

What she said when she was running.
In 2019, Spanberger publicly criticized gerrymandering and positioned herself as a supporter of fair, non‑partisan redistricting.
According to reporting, she said that:

Gerrymandering is “detrimental to our democracy.”

Opposing it should be a “bipartisan priority.”

She supported Virginia’s independent redistricting commission, which voters approved in 2020.

These comments aligned her with a reform‑oriented, anti‑gerrymandering position.

And today.
Supporting a Democratic‑led redistricting amendment

Backing a plan that critics say would create a 10–1 Democratic congressional map

Arguing that the change is a temporary.

Share
Categories
Commentary Crime January 6 Links from other news sources.

Finally going after a J6 alleged criminal.

Finally going after a J6 alleged criminal.

The NY Times is reporting that The Justice Department has assigned its civil rights division to investigate Cassidy Hutchinson, a former White House aide who outraged President Trump four years ago after her testimony before Congress implicated him in the violence that erupted at the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, according to four people familiar with the matter.

If true, it’s about time that the actual criminals of J6 are brought to Justice.

According to the Times, Hutchinson’s testimony was contradicted by several other witnesses who were actually there.

The vehicle in question was the presidential SUV known as “The Beast” — a heavily modified Cadillac used by the Secret Service for the president’s transport. Based on its physical layout, it would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, for Donald Trump to reach the steering wheel from his seat.

Vehicle configuration and constraints:

The president rides in the rear compartment, separated from the driver by a bulletproof glass partition and reinforced panels.

Share