The writing is on the wall. The progressives are on an unstoppable roll which they intend to perpetuate forever by packing the Supreme Court, by declaring Washington, D.C. a state and thus obtain two Democrat senators and by importing as much Democrat voting poverty as possible from Latin America.

Democrats’ legislative actions so far are a clear indication of their plans for the future: spend in deficit on wave after wave of economic stimulus which will soon morph into guaranteed income, on schools located in poor neighborhoods which will most likely become mostly wage rises for the Democrat voting teachers’ unions, on Democrat states like California to offer free health care to immigrants here illegally and on infrastructure which appears to be nothing more than a collection of political slush funds.

Many trillions will be printed, taxes will be raised dramatically, but have you heard of any means of measuring the real economic benefits of any of these investments, like for example measuring the improvement in the performance of the students in poor neighborhoods as a result of this huge investment in those schools?

Where are the solid economical studies and projections and the transparency means to verify, enforce them and possibly make necessary corrections that would justify Democrats’ economic agenda? Would those be Bernie’s hateful ravings against Trump’s tax law? Even the Democrats are balking at the idea of repealing Trump’s tax law because of the adverse effects this would have on our economy.

Virgil Stevens

San Carlos

Recommended for you

(23) comments


Mr. Stevens,

It is always good to hear the opposing side offer their opinion on the matters of the day. I agree with some of what you mentioned but disagree with most. For one thing I think healthcare that is low cost or free for those at the bottom of the economic ladder is a good thing whether they are here legally or not. Someone that is sick and goes to work because they have no choice is less productive and may spread anything they have that is contagious to others thus decreasing their productivity also. If they had simple preventive care paid for they would not wait until they are extremely sick and then go to the local emergency room for extremely expensive care which they will get for free anyway. An ounce of prevention….etc.

In almost every comment from the Republican or right wing side of the aisle the term transparency always seems to show it’s face when talking about the other side. IMHO the past administration was about as transparent as a brick wall, or maybe a concrete wall paid for by Mexico.

My last comment is about your use of the word Democrat. It may be a slip on the keyboard which is possible, or maybe not. You mentioned “Democrat states like California…” Many of the right wing posters in these columns use the term specifically as and insult or slur. The Democrat party rather than the Democratic party as an example. If it is a slip of the keyboard it is no big thing. If on purpose, it is a plain example of why unity and bipartisanship are nowhere near happening in the foreseeable future.

Ray Fowler

Hi, Tafhdyd

I'm fairly confident that Virgil will not be part of the repartee frequently found in the comments section. Like a lot of letter writers, he may not have an online account. So, I am not answering for him but only sharing some of my thoughts on your well reasoned remarks...

We agree. No one should go wanting for the routine health care we sometimes take for granted. But I'm sure you would agree that saddling taxpayers with costs for healthcare for undocumented persons can place an unfair financial burden on some workers. Let's be clear... whenever anyone shows up at a county health facility in need of assistance, they should get it... no questions asked.

In a poll reported in USA Today (today), more than 80 percent of Americans surveyed said they want a secure border, and they agree that persons with expired visas should return home. Over 80 percent. As there are more Democrats than Republicans, that statistic represents persons across the entire political spectrum. It's not as partisan a position as some in the media would have you believe. Maybe this is an issue where we may find some unity.

Transparency? C'mon, man! Trump had no problem talking to reporters... the press didn't like his answers... I didn't like some of his answers... but he engaged. Of course, transparency may be an elusive commodity when the MSM and social platforms arbitrarily censor points of view they don't like. Joe was inaugurated then waited over two months before holding a press conference. Kamala was appointed more than a month ago to deal with the administration's border crisis, and she has not held a press conference since that appointment. Tafhdyd... we are friends... pen pals... I wish we were neighbors and could talk about things like sports. How 'bout them Dodgers? How 'bout them Giants? Only one game back in the standings. But an administration who reinvents the language? Joe said we can have bipartisanship even if no Republicans support a proposal. Skrrrrip! No, you can't. And how about Joe's new definition of the term "infrastructure"? It used to mean things like roads and bridges, but now? A better example might be Joe calling Georgia's voting law a return to the Jim Crow era. No, it's not. BTW... 77% of Americans support showing proof of ID before voting. Remember, that statistic combines Democrats and Republicans... maybe this is another issue where we may be able to find unity.

I know about your pet peeve re: use of the word "Democrat." If used as a slight, I agree, that's not good. But... you have to look at context. Just for fun... I looked up Grover Cleveland online. For political party affiliation, the article said, "Democratic." However, in the first paragraph, the author wrote that Cleveland "was one of two Democrats (followed by Woodrow Wilson in 1912) to be elected president during the era of Republican presidential domination dating from 1861 to 1933." Sometimes the word Democratic fits and other times Democrat fits. I wrote above... "As there are more Democrats than Republicans, that statistic represents persons across the entire political spectrum." It would have been awkward and incorrect for me to write... "As there are more Democratics than Republicans, that statistic... " N'est-ce pas?



If I get a chance I may weigh in on transparency later but for now I just wanted to say I basically agree with most of your reply. I don't see anything wrong with your Democratic comments but if you get a minute google Democrat Party (epithet), it gives the gist of what I was speaking about.

BTW, yes it is good to have some meaning to the Giants-Dodgers games again. Hopefully it will stay that way till the end of the season.

Ray Fowler


We find ourselves in agreement, again. Yeah... if someone purposely uses "Democrat" instead of "Democratic" as a pejorative, that's wrong. Some Republicans will use "Democrat" to avoid suggesting that their opponents are more "democratic" than Republicans. That reasoning is a stretch...

Any thoughts on Blue Dog, Yellow Dog and Red Dog Democrats?

Hey! Dodgers and Giants tied for 1st in the NL West... a spirited battle for the division title would be great.


Well Virgil, Biden’s average approval rating sits today at 53.3%, eight points higher than Trump’s all-time high of 45.3, so people are pretty happy with him to date. Why do you suppose this is happening? His main focus on Covid, the 7-day average daily new cases are down 67% since the week before he took office and average daily deaths are now down 74%. When he blew his initial promise out of the water of 100 million shots in arms in 100 days, he didn’t relax, he doubled his goal and met it.

The economy is doing very well, unemployment down to 6.2 % in February when the US added 379K new jobs about 179K more than expected, and added another 916K jobs in March, about 240K more than expected, bringing the rate down to 6% flat. 1st Quarter GDP Growth roared past expectations showing a 10% gain for the first three months of this year. Dow is up 2466 points since January 20, reaching all-time highs this past week. His first COVID Relief bill has a whopping 75% of Americans support. Now he is going big on infrastructure and I would not bet against him on it.

So Virgil, the Democrat's agenda is doing well despite the loyal opposition not backing him on one item and stoking gloom and doom at every opportunity.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

Mr. Stevens,

I share your concerns and agree with your premise. However, I place blame for these problems on the G.O.P. under G. W. Bush. They had a chance to pass legislation that would have circumvented the challenges our nation faces today.

Because I believe, as did President Reagan, that "Latinos are Republicans. They just don't know it yet." If this is true, we need to make sure our new fellow countrymen rise the socio-economic ladder as quickly as possible. I am aware of nothing more powerful than the acquisition of money and stature in society to make someone a conservative. Working hard and using God given skills to gain the aforementioned make one resentful of wastefulness. Which in my opinion, is the only thing people in government do well. Cheers! [beam]


Good afternoon Wilfred,

I was never a fan of GW for reasons other than what you mention. My question is what legislation are you speaking of that he didn't pass that would solve our problems today? (Not to argue, just for curiosity.)

I definitely agree about the wastefulness in government although I think using the absolute term "only" is painting them with too broad a brush. I wouldn't say that it is the only thing they do well but they do have the monopoly on wastefulness.

As for money and stature making one conservative, could you please tell me how much I need? I am doing OK but I certainly would not call myself conservative, especially politically.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

Hello my good friend Tafhdyd,

I'm sorry my language is so ambiguous. It is my belief that immigration is our nation's biggest challenge. Bush and the GOP could have passed legislation when they controlled Congress and the Presidency.

Conceptually the word, only, works to emphasize my opinion; but not if taken literally. I apologize for the ambiguity. Of course, we could debate what you think they do well, if you'd like.

Money and social status making one conservative is dependent on the starting point. It should be remembered (tongue in cheek) that you have white privilege. The people flooding the border would start to notice when federal, state and local taxes deprive them of over half their earnings. Hard work and God given skills are also part of the equation. And those two attributes are very individual specific. All that said, it is of no consequence to people, that think like me, if the McCain, Romney and Bush types dominate the GOP.

Send me your email address if you dare. I would like to send you my phone number. I really like the way you think and would enjoy deepening our friendship.



I have your email from a few months back. I have been trying to decide what to say in regards to some articles I commented on that I said one of these days I would explain why I said xyz or why I have no use for abc. I will try and work on it in the near future. There are a few details I don’t mind telling you but see no need for others to partake in the info.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

If you are saying we could enjoy some private discussions, I agree. I believe we are secure and open minded gentleman. I will take no offense with your decision.


Wilfred, good morning,

No doubt I take things too literally. Maybe that is why I have to ask the following. If you do not care for the likes of McCain, Romney, Bush etc. am I to think that you would prefer Josh Hawley, M T Greene, Lauren Boebert, Jim Jordan, Moscow Mitch, Kevin McCarthy and their like to be the guiding force off the GOP? McCain, Romney etc. I am not a big fan of but I can tolerate them and work with them. The others I mentioned I have no use for and see them as disgusting examples of what not to be.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

Good morning as well Tafhdyd,

I don't see anyone right now. But I can listen to Tulsi Gabbard.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr


My fantasy world would have a microscopically small federal government. The executive and judicial branches would make sure states complied with the Constitution. Nothing more. I don't understand the mindset of people in California. But I don't have to. They have their nature and I have mine. We have chosen where to live our lives, peacefully and in harmony with our respective neighbors. I don't want others to stick their nose in my business, nor do I want to stick my nose in yours.

If you want to understand how I think, this is the best I can do.




It is almost 5 o'clock here so I have to hurry.

I started on your link but got interrupted but will finish it later. I can see the similarities of the article and your thoughts. The Greeks have stood the test of time with their philosophy and teachings. Not sure with what yet but I will toast your real world wisdom.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

Good morning Tafhdyd,

To elaborate on your 4/27 8/9:26am post, I did not know about Hawley, Greene and Boebert. Thanks for the introduction. Not because I support them, but because you identified them as targets of the left wing media. I now think of them in the same way I think of right wing media targets, Pelosi, Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Waters, Schumer and on and on. Representatives of fellow citizens, not as Whac-A-Moles of lazy, unintelligent news directors.

Overall, what do you think of Ms. Gabbard?


Good morning Wilfred,

Sorry I didn’t see your comment until this morning. I didn’t see much activity on the themes yesterday and didn’t check previous days.

When I saw your comment that you didn’t see much on the horizon for leadership I thought maybe that is a good thing. At least it seemed to me that you are not supporting the current leaders.

Although I don’t follow much of Tulsi Gabbard I remember her from the early primaries., At the time I thought she had some good opinions on most things even though there were a couple of items I didn’t care for. I thought she brought a little bit of fresh air to the scene, but like so many on both sides I didn’t think she would get the backing needed to overcome the big names.

Just curious about Hawley, etc. Did you look up any of their positions etc. or did you put them in the for or against category solely on my naming them? You mentioned targets of the left but they happen to have problems with their own party also because of some of their actions and positions.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr

Hi Tafhdyd,

You brought those names to my attention. The easiest way for me to answer your, "Just curious..." thoughts follows.

I don't believe politicians. It does not matter to me if they portray themselves as left, right or middle. For me, it is pointless to believe the position politicians claim for themselves. The first Bush said, "Read my lips, no new taxes." The second Bush said, "I've abandoned free market principles to save the free market system." In these instances, there is no point in debating whether or not they made good decisions. My point is, politicians do what they must do, when they must do it. And they say whatever they need to say in order to get elected.

Do you remember what I wrote in my "The real choice this November" 09/21/2020 LTE? I still believe it. Do you want a denizen of politics or a businessman to lead the greatest nation on earth? As an update, I would now say... or an outsider..., instead of businessman. As far as the media goes, well, let's just say I have yet to find an unbiased outlet. I will support the person that will fight for drastic reductions in the size and scope of our federal government. Like Trump, only with more brains and leadership qualities. I know, in my dreams, right? 🤣


Wilfred, good evening,

I think we are pretty much in lock step on this issue. For years I have said that both sides, right or left, are crooked or lie or call it what you want. The only way to tell them apart is by who is getting the short end of the stick. IMO if it is the women then they are Democrats, if it is the general public then they are Republicans. There are other examples that I can't mention because of the DJ censors and there are exceptions to my general rule also.

As for your comment about a businessman to run the country. I agree but I also think that a really good businessman may be not want the job. Trump may technically be a businessman but IMO he's not a very good one. A conman yes, he is one of the best, but a businessman, no.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr


Shortly after obtaining my first job, I asked my mentor, "Why is it done this way?". The answer was, "Because it's the way it's always been done." Trump did things differently. Time will tell if, in the end, it changes anything. Regardless of that outcome, I will admire him for trying to change the status quo. The nation is better off now; because the Republican Party has learned how to compete with the Democratic Party.



I will agree that Trump has changed the way things were done and the the country is better off because off it. I think things will change for the better but for other reasons and I don't expect them to happen very soon.

Wilfred Fernandez Jr


Terence Y

Well written, Mr. Stevens. Should we all put on our thinking caps and see how we can get our hands on some of this economic largesse?

Ray Fowler

Hi, Virgil

Excellent LTE. I like the way you focused on positions and not personalities, and I hope we will see a true rebuttal that explains why an open border, packing the Supreme Court, and federalizing voting laws are a good idea. A majority of Americans do not support the administration's policies at the border, in the courtroom and in voting booths. So why are the loudest people in the room pushing hard to get their way just because they are the loudest in the room?

Where is the administration's support of bipartisanship and effort to unify?

Consider the drive to change DC into a state. The founders did not intend for DC to become a state. I feel it is too cavalier to say to DC residents, "Well, too bad... you moved to DC knowing you would not have two senators." But there is a way... retrocession. Residential portions of DC can be returned to either Virginia or Maryland without creating a new state. Such legislation would receive support from both sides of the aisle, and it could be a way to start unifying Americans of all political stripes.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase an Enhanced Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!