Sunday, June 26, 2016

Reflections on the Brexit Vote

Since the Brexit vote, in which voters in the high-turnout UK referendum, voted to leave the European Union, I've seen a lot of words from a number of commentators. The most laughable to me (somewhat paraphrased) was

The only reason I can think of for people to vote against their economic self-interest is racism.
There are several things wrong with this. The two biggest are these:
  • It's a huge assumption to say voting to leave the European Union is against the economic interests of the UK. This is what the "Remain" partisans claimed, but I don't see that should be given a lot more weight than the claims by the "Leave" partisans that Brexit would be better for the UK economically. Indeed, I would say leaving the European Union would be more likely to be in the UK's economic interests (see below).
  • "Racism"? Really? Racism of Europeans against Europeans? How dumb is that? Europeans are all pretty much the same stock — just ask
Other commentators have said
the votes to leave the European Union came from those who feel they haven't shared in the economic benefits of EU membership.
Essentially, they are saying the Brexit vote result was a matter of "sour grapes." But the statistics don't bear this out. Poll results just before the vote show the difference in voters was between the young who favored "Remain" and the older voters who favored "Leave". Or as one correspondent put it,
Millenial socialists who don’t understand vs. older folks who remember what Britain was.
As if to hammer the point home, here's a picture of one of London's young Millenials.

Aside from the voters who don't think of themselves as British, it seems to me a primary motivation was probably a lot simpler: They simply got tired of the overregulation and stupid regulation coming out of the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. Little things like orders that a series of popular products could no longer be sold. Little things like a bureaucratic decree that drinking water is ineffective against dehydration. Little things like labor regulations Britain never had (or needed) till they were imposed by the EU to match those in other parts of Europe. A lot of those objectionable regulations are economic, and getting rid of them may well free the UK economy to grow at a faster rate. But it's also true that some of the recent (and projected soon to come) directives are in the "hot button" area of immigration and EU demands that eath country in the Union take their "fair share" of "Syrian" migrants.

In other words, a key issue area — regulatory overreach and objectionable regulations — is the same there and here. But with the Brexit vote there's an additional factor:

Immigrants, Then & Now

This was written by Rosemary LaBonte to the editors of a California newspaper in response to an article written by Ernie Lujan who suggests we should tear down the Statue of Liberty because the immigrants of today aren’t being treated the same as those who passed through Ellis Island and other ports of entry in past decades. The paper never printed this response, so her husband sent it out via the internet.

Here it is as I received it by e-mail.

The Statue of Liberty

Maybe we should turn to our history books and point out to people like Mr. Lujan why today's American is not willing to accept this new kind of immigrant any longer. Back in 1900 when there was a rush from all areas of Europe to come to the United States, people had to get off a ship and stand in a long line in New York and be documented.

Some would even get down on their hands and knees and kiss the ground. They made a pledge to uphold the laws and support their new country in good and bad times. They made learning English a primary rule in their new American households and some even changed their names to blend in with their new home.

They had waved goodbye to their birth place to give their children a new life and did everything in their power to help their children assimilate into one culture. Nothing was handed to them. No free lunches, no welfare, no labor laws to protect them. All they had were the skills and craftsmanship they had brought with them to trade for a future of prosperity.

Most of their children came of age when World War II broke out. My father fought alongside men whose parents had come straight over from Germany, Italy, France and Japan. None of these 1st generation Americans ever gave any thought about what country their parents had come from. They were Americans fighting Hitler, Mussolini and the Emperor of Japan. They were defending the United States of America as one people.

When we liberated France, no one in those villages were looking for the French American, the German American or the Irish American. The people of France saw only Americans. And we carried one flag that represented one country. Not one of those immigrant sons would have thought about picking up another country's flag and waving it to represent who they were. It would have been a disgrace to their parents who had sacrificed so much to be here. These immigrants truly knew what it meant to be an American. They stirred the melting pot into one red, white and blue bowl.

And here we are with a new kind of immigrant who wants the same rights and privileges. Only they want to achieve it by playing with a different set of rules, one that includes the entitlement card and a guarantee of being faithful to their mother country.

I'm sorry, that's not what being an American is all about. I believe that the immigrants who landed on Ellis Island in the early 1900's deserve better than that for all the toil, hard work and sacrifice in raising future generations to create a land that has become a beacon for those legally searching for a better life. I think they would be appalled that they are being used as an example by those waving foreign country flags.

And for that suggestion about taking down the Statue of Liberty, it happens to mean a lot to the citizens who are voting on the immigration bill. I wouldn't start talking about dismantling the United States just yet.

And that's a good explanation of why previous generations of immigrants were welcomed, to one degree or other, while some of the current immigrants — especially the illegal aliens — are not.

Thursday, June 23, 2016

Your Democrat Congressmen in Action

In Washington DC today

Total truth. No comment is necessary, but I'll add a comment anyway:

It's very sad to see an icon of the civil rights movemeent attempting to deprive people of their civil rights and leading a demonstration in support of that attempt. He and his fellow demonstrators should be ashamed of themselves.

Update: Having gotten a lot of publicity, having promised to stay till they get a vote (on a bill that couldn't even pass in its first committee), and having engorged themselves on a banquet of food brought in,

these House Democrats have now declared their demonstration over.

Sunday, June 19, 2016

If We Were Violent ...

Total truth. No comment necessary.

Saturday, June 18, 2016

Do Background Checks Work?

No they don't and yes they do! Both!! Both answers come from the same speech by President Barack Obama:

This just about sums it up. And yes, this is what he said.

And do you notice? The background checks he says won't work are based on information from our own country, and the background checks he claims will work are based entirely on information from places with no functioning government to collect and report it. I guess President Obama et al. put their faith in Middle East "information" but not in our own country & system and the data they produce.

Friday, June 17, 2016

An Improved Background Check

Liberals and the Left have been insisting we need an improved background check to prevent incidents like happened in San Bernardino and Orlando. Here's one man's suggestion.

A No-Brainer of a Question

This should be a no-brainer of a question, including for all the anti-gun folks and gun-grabbing socialists/liberals/communists. But somehow it isn't.

Is that stupidity or hypocrisy?