Unconstitutional California

[Varmit]

Yes, Kansas has illegal immigrants, but I don't see too many Sanctuary Cities in kansas.  California has, what, like 30 of them?  As far as California being anti-military, here is an article from the San Fancisco Gate, I would have posted here but it is to long http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2005/08/24/cstillwell.DTL

Just to list a few points in the article:

-  various leftist groups, and even some city officials, are trying to erase the military's presence altogether. In short, San Francisco has declared itself a military-free zone.

-Following on the heels of their success in sometimes violently shutting down job fairs that include military recruiters on college campuses, the counterrecruitment movement is now looking to broaden its influence. Instead of merely protesting the existence of military recruiters on campuses, the movement wants to ban them altogether.

-The nonbinding measure simply asks that individual schools and colleges consider banning military recruiters and denying recruiters access to their student directories, which would violate section 9258 of the No Child Left Behind Act. In the process, these schools could very well have to forgo federal funds.

-Probably the most blatant example of San Francisco's anti-military bias was displayed last month by the city's Board of Supervisors when they voted 3-8 against docking the WWII/Korean War-era USS Iowa as a floating museum at the Port of San Francisco

-Supervisors who voted against the resolution based their decision on opposition to the war in Iraq and the military's enforcement of the federal "don't ask, don't tell" policy

I realize that San Franciso is only one city in the state, however it seems to me that if the same feeling didn't run throughout the state then the state gov't would have stepped in to put an end to this.

Heres an article about Berekley http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/252363  Berkeley California has been the subject of news for months since the City Council of Berkeley issued a resolution calling the Marines "uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

Seems pretty damn anti-military to me.

[Diane Amberg]

SF and Berkley have had anti military elements for many, many years. I'd be surprised if the media ever portrayed them any other way. Berkley was THE place to go to protest VietNam. Got a lot of media coverage.

[dnalexander]

I realize that San Franciso is only one city in the state, however it seems to me that if the same feeling didn't run throughout the state then the state gov't would have stepped in to put an end to this.

Heres an article about Berekley http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/252363  Berkeley California has been the subject of news for months since the City Council of Berkeley issued a resolution calling the Marines "uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

Seems pretty damn anti-military to me.

There is no arguing that San Francisco and Berkeley have very strong active anti-war movements. To characterize the whole State of California that way is a wrong assumption.  Billy, you know the state would have no authority to step in on any of those issues since none of them violate any laws. There is much support for the military here, a large part of our economy comes from defense contractors. My guess is that from it's sheer size more California taxes and citizens are involved in the war than any other state in the country.

David

Check out S.F. Fleet Week, USS Hornet, SS Jeremiah O'Brien, USS Pampanito, Suisun Bay Liberty ships (where the Iowa is housed where Californians are restoring it, along with other supporters)

[larryJ]

Wow!  It took me a long time to follow up on the links, but I read them all and all the links to all the other links.  A Sanctuary city is one that restricts the law enforcement officers from stopping a car just because there is a suspicion of the legality of the driver.  However if that person is driving erratically or commits a traffic violation, then the officer can stop the car.  At this point, as in all states, the officer is required to ask for a drivers license (and here is California) proof of insurance and the registration.  Then the officer will check on the status of these documents to make sure they are current and legal.  If the documents are not current or legal, then the officer has the right to question the citizenship of the driver.  This is sometimes interpreted as protecting illegal aliens, but in reality protects those suspected of being illegal and who are legal citizens of this country from being wrongfully deported.  This has happened and this is why these cities have this law.  Nothing more.

Many California cities have this law basically to protect themselves from lawsuits resulting from illegal deportation.  I did note that Kansas, at last count, had no Sanctuary Cities.  

The first link was to the SF-gate which is part of the San Francisco Chronicle.  It is an OP-ED piece, that is, an opinion written by a member of the staff.  It is her listing of the facts surrounding the subject and her opinion of those facts.  OP-ED opinions are only allowed in the paper if the editors of that paper think they are worthy of print.  This article was allowed because in the next election there will be a proposition in San Francisco banning military recruitment from all campuses and so on.  This is considered a "feel good" amendment just like the one that San Francisco passed a few years ago ordering the Federal Government to get out of Iraq.  That is pretty much like the horse's tail telling the horse's head which way to go. Interestingly enough, the more links I followed led to a Socialist newsletter.  The author of this opinion piece is entitled to her thoughts and is protected by the first amendment to publicly state them, but because it is listed as an opinion piece, it is to be taken with a grain of salt..

As far as military recruiters, the group responsible for initiating the petition to ban Military recruiters is called "College not Combat" and they have their own website.  Their aim is to get the state to provide scholarships to those young people who feel that they can't afford to go to college so they sign up for the military.  These scholarships already exist.  I think I am not in favor of any group representing anybody or anything that has to oppose someone else "violently" unless there is an attempt to overthrow the government in which case would be a war.

Larryj

[larryJ]

And more!!!  Check out this one.

http://wwwwakeupamericans-spree.blogspot.com/2008/03/breaking-letter-from-move-america.html

By the way, Berkeley rescinded that letter asking to have the marines removed from their city once they realized how much money they were losing from the feds and the additional cost of providing police protection of the demonstraters both for and against.

And David, good point about the military support in this state economically.  Compare it, Billy, if the Marines were ousted the end result would be similar to Boeing in Wichita losing an Air Force contract or two.  There is an old saying that if you want to know where something came from, follow the money. Ousting a few Marine recruiters out of San Francisco or Berkeley does not make the whole state liable for adverse opinions. 

And I wanted to ask, Billy, did you have any other questions about states economys or gay marriages?  Your last post seemed to focus on anti-military. 

Larryj

[Diane Amberg]

Thanks Larry. I wasn't willing to tackle that one since you two live there.. I do believe CA has free speech just as the rest of us do, so I can't imagine the Govt. getting in the way unless it became violent.

[Varmit]

One thing that gets me about the whole free speech thing, you can be anti-military, anti-christian and such, I don't see any "Hate Speech" laws being passed in that say you can't.  However, if you're a preacher or just a normal person don't you dare say anything against gays or muslims.

[Anmar]

One thing that gets me about the whole free speech thing, you can be anti-military, anti-christian and such, I don't see any "Hate Speech" laws being passed in that say you can't.  However, if you're a preacher or just a normal person don't you dare say anything against gays or muslims.

Oh please, preachers across the country are railing on gays, muslims, and even eachother almost weekly.  Don't you ever listen to Rush?  or Micheal "Savage"  Weiner?

[Varmit]

http://www.cwfa.org/articles/6458/CFI/family/index.htm

http://www.repentamerica.com/pr_bibleofftrial.html

Yes I do listen to Rush, I also hear him and others being called racist, homophobic etc.  The fact is that a person can say whatever they want to about Christianity or Christians and no one says anything about it.  But if a person says anything negative about gays or muslims then all hell breaks lose. 

[Diane Amberg]

 I'm not real big on organized religion in general, and I admit I don't go to church as often as I probably should. I can only speak for my own situation, but my favorite Minister spoke "for" things not "against" things. He wasn't the fire and brimstone type. He was all about acting as Jesus would on an everyday basis. Moderate in all things.  Doing good wherever you can. Loving all your neighbors,  finding a place in your heart for all people, not just the ones who agree with you. Doing what you can to help people in need. He felt the church wasn't just a gathering place for saints, but a loving home for sinners too, who might change their ways and see the light.  I hope I haven't offended anyone but that's how I feel. Maybe that's why I don't care for labels and generalizations. There are bad people out there, too many, I'm afraid, and if they come at me too hard, well who knows. But not all of any group are bad, unless that is their specific intention. Them I'll stay away from, or do what I can to stop them if they mess with me or mine.