I don’t know what set off the abuse of a few email addresses I publish, but the best I can do for some peace of mind this morning is write about it, expose some forceful, unwelcome sources and then try to rope the moon. I realize most people won’t take the time to read this but it’s helpful to me to write it out, publish it, maybe one day help to balance reality with the many falsehoods I have little choice in reading about from the unwelcome emails I receive from some. Who are Democrats, to-date.
I haven’t visited campaign websites with any regularity other than during last year’s Presidential campaign — in which case, my repeat visits were to Bush/Cheny 2004 and Blogs for Bush and GOP Bloggers (Blogs for Bush and GOP Blogers are not campaign sites but are sites by other interested Republcians, and sites I enjoy) and the RNC website — and, my only viists to the websites I know to be popularized by and about Democrats in office are those by my two state Senators (Feinstein and Boxer), although I have stopped voting for both of them (I did, in the past, vote for both at one time but it’s been a while since either of them represented my views as a voter and my more contemporary votes have gone to Republican contenders for the Senate seats in California).
However, I haven’t even considered a vote for any Democrat in my local political scape for a while now. I do vote for Republicans when and as I can, and when a Republican candidate doesn’t suit my standards, I don’t vote for a Democrat just to vote, but tend to vote for whomever a candidate at least suits part of what I hope for. So far, in any such quandry, I haven’t voted for Democrats.
The closest I have come to voting in contemporary times for a Democrat in the state of California is my earlier interest to the campaign by Jim Gilchrist for the local Congressional seat recently vacated by Republican Christopher Cox. While Gilchrist is not a Democrat as per his official website and literature I’ve read from his campaign, he is a candidate by the “American Independent Party” — although his earlier website didn’t make that clear and it appeared he was a Republican early on, it later became clear that he represented the AIP and has some views I don’t support. Although some I do, and those are as to his views on illegal immigration and border security, which I support.
However, I didn’t vote for Gilchrist in the recent California Special Election. My decision as to the California General Election scheduled for this December is still pending but I am not secure as an individual voter in a vote for the AIP, so it’s an obstacle to my view and preferences. Not a denigration of Gilchrist specifically but a problem to my view as to how and for whom I will be voting, and have. I’d prefer to vote for a Republican candidate again and see the Calfiornia Republican Party (as with national one) and Republicans in office enforce immigration requirements, effectively penalize people in the U.S. who employ illegal aliens in the U.S., secure our borders, deport illegal aliens, revoke the “anchor baby” birthright to citizenship in the U.S. and remove all taxpayer-funded aids and assistance to illigal aliens in the U.S. If those things are accomplished, or at least begun with sincerity, legal immigrants and American citizens and legal residents will have a better go of it. Our own citizens deserve even a meager fare of what illegal aliens are now usurping in and from the country and the problem has to be repaired and repaired soon.
The mumbling, confused positions by many Republicans in office about the issues I just identified confuse me as a voter. I long ago dismissed the Democratic Party and Democrat political candidates from my voting considerations because most of the problems facing our state today (and our nation as a whole, as to similar problems in other states nationwide) are directly defined as those I just identified as to what concerns me: stopping illegal immigration, deporting illegal aliens, penalizing those in the U.S. who incentivize illegal aliens and removing access to taxpayer funded assistance to illegal aliens in the country. The social giveaways have increased the deprivation and difficulty in the country for citizens here, have demeaned the nature of just what it is to provide taxpayer assistance to needy persons. The country should not feel compromised as to helping those who need economic helps, particulalry citizens, while depriving needy citizens to assist people who are in the country by illegal means and have demonstrated by doing so that they have questionable character accordingly. Rewarding bad character is contrary to the nature of citizenship and it’s definitely contrary to the nature of immigration in search of citizenship.
Those are my opinions about immigration and about illegal aliens in the country. And, not to overlook another important issue, the negative effect illegal immigrants have created upon the wages in the country that affect citizens — citizens who have done nothing wrong, seeing opportunities diminished and conditions denigrated by people responsible for criminal behavior, continuing on, many of them, with other compounding illegal behaviors inorder to remain in the country, all paid for by American taxpayers and the suffering of those Americans not taxed but deserving of helps otherwise, the frail elderly and disabled and disenfranchised. The country should focus on assisting it’s own citizens first and welcoming those who display a willingness and capability of respecting our immigration laws and who arrive in the country for purposes of gaining American citizenship.
About my voting, returning here to where I am today, these emails…
…the campaign by Jim Gilchrist and his AIP at least promotes an intention to oppose illegal aliens and illegal immigration with a dedicated purpose. So, I took a look at Gilchrist and assuming from his earlier website that he was, instead, a Republican, I wrote about interest in Gilchrist. After I discovered his actual party (AIP), I wondered why the issue was obfuscated, received some questionable emails and comment attempts in this blog from so-called persons also promoting Gilchrist…and, all told, the intuitive reaction I had was to take a second look and once discovering the Party discrepancies, I decided to vote Republican and did and probably will in the future, if not certainly will.
I don’t disparage Gilchrist about these qualities and do support his Minuteman Project affiliation and efforts, as I do, also, support the Minutemen in what they are doing and how. I just won’t be voting for AIP candidates to my current view on many voting perspectives as to other issues that the Republican Party best accommodates in these intense, complex times.
I also never signed up for any newsletters from any campaign to my knowledge. I receive newsletters as per my individual selection from Senators Feinstein and Boxer but not as to campaign literature but as to voter issues in my state that they, as my two state Senators, represent in the United States Senate.
So, it is with surprise that I have to routinely delete newsletters that read as if they were written by the antiquated Lenin revolutionaries from, actually, the local Democrats, union groups touting Democrats and encouraging “denouncing” Republicans and conservatives in general, and the last, most puzzling email, a newsletter from someone calling herself “Gerri Schipske” who appears to be running for “City Council” in Long Beach, CA, writing to “thank” me for my “support,” “vote,” “interest” and otherwise.
I don’t even reside in Long Beach — have no plans to do so, nor have I ever even visited Long Beach, CA except for one time years ago when I attended a U.S. Olympic Team playoff there after receiving a free ticket for the event from my employer (I think it was volleyball or maybe basketball, I can’t now recall which). Thus, I don’t vote in Long Beach, nor am ever likely to even try, much less have much interest in doing so — there’s enough tension in my own voting district as to City Council, School Board, local utilities and Mayorial races to think much about another CA district and/or city, when it’s one I have no familiarity nor interest in (and such is Long Beach, CA).
This newsletter from this Long Beach Democrat candidate goes on to thank me for voting for her, is addressed specifically to an email address of mine that I don’t publish and dishonestly states that I otherwise requested this candidate’s campaign literature, expressed interest one way or another.
None of which could be farther from the truth and certainly represents spamming. It’s one of those “you have to opt out” emails that makes false claims about me having subscribed (I haven’t, in this case, and would not ever, to add emphasis here), me having voted (no, couldn’t, wouldn’t), me having supported (no, wouldn’t) the campaign, and then the information about their glorious Democratic candidacy for Long Beach City Council.
I’m puzzled. I wrote to ask to be removed from this nonsensical (in my view and experience) candidate’s mailing list and the DNC/Union/County politicos who send the rest on behalf of unions, the DNC and various Democratic politicians are either not reading their mailing list too well or they are blatantly making false statemetns in the spamming email practices — spamming because they’re persisting in sending emailed information to people who have not actually subscribed, in any real — as in honest — context.
I have yet to ever receive much of anything from any Republican (candidate, campaign or otherwise) until a week or so before any election (they need to pickup the pace) and especially have never received any spam nor much of any email otherwise from any Republican (campaign or otherwise,, especially for those of us who are registered as Republicans because it helps to clarify candidate positions about voting issues and when the literature arrives in just one week or so prior to any election, some of us have already mailed in Absentee Ballots by that time and our voting may have been revised otherwise had there been candidate position statements available prior to casting the earlier ballot) unless I have first registered to do so with an email address — and that the address I use for those purposes is not the one being spammed by the Democrats/Unions/local county politicos.
And, also either, I’ve never registered for political sites with the email addresses that are being spammed by the Democrats, falsely presenting my “interest” in their various plans and campaigns.
An interesting comparison in behaviors.