Last Friday, former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham was sentenced to eight years and four months in federal prison for what has been described as the worst case of corruption in the history of Congress.

I had a theatre professor in college who once said that when you make a choice on stage, don’t be timid – commit to it.  His parlance was, “sin boldly”.  That’s what I thought of when reading the laundry list of Cunningham’s offenses.  He sinned… boldly.  Bribery.  Tax evasion.  Conspiracy.  Lying to government investigators.  The list is long, and the dollar amounts are big.

Was the sentence just?  If anyone was cheated by his actions, it was Duke’s own constituents.  You may want to read their comments.  Some pro… but mostly con (no pun intended).

Political malfeasance isn’t surprising.  What irritates me about Cunningham is that he’s given aviators and the U.S. Navy a black eye, reinforcing every macho “Top Gun” stereotype imaginable.  Okay, that’s not illegal.  But I wish it was.  Organizations like AOPA spend years educating the public about how conscientious aviators are.  I’ve expended a lot of energy on that topic myself, and it all gets wasted when a high profile individual like Cunningham goes off the deep end.

Duke has to repay his ill-gotten gains — at the rate of $1,000 per month.  Since his congressional and military pensions are still in full effect (they can only be stripped in cases of treason), he won’t exactly be left destitute.

The average pension for a former congressman is $55,788 per year, and based on his time in office, he should be getting more than that.  I’d estimate closer to $85,000, based on examples in the CRS Report.  I don’t know what his Navy pension will be, but I assume it would push his income well into the six figure range even while he sits in prison.  I don’t know what you do for a living, dear reader, but to this flight instructor that seems like a lot of dough.

I’m glad the judge gave consideration to Duke’s military service.  Wartime service is honorable and worthy of rememberance.  But I can’t help but feel he’s getting off lighter than a no-name offender would.

I’ve been car shopping lately.  My ‘93 Eclipse is pushing 200,000 miles and though I love the vehicle, people have been suggesting that it may not last forever.

My search was hastened by a breakdown last month.  The idle control motor failed during a battery change.  The guy at Sears who replaced the battery swears it was a simple coincidence that the idle control motor failed at the exact same moment that he worked on my vehicle.  A thousand dollars later, I’m back in business.  But it grates on me for two reasons:  first, I think the tech broke it, and second, the car is only worth a thousand bucks to begin with.

Anyway, car shopping reminds me of how much I hate car shopping.  Nothing like being conned by slick salesmen who conveniently ignore the fact that anyone can find out exactly what dealer costs are on a car — including incentives and rebates from the factory.  I’ve already invested way too much effort for an asset that depreciates every day you own it.

Thus far, the candidates include:

• a (used) Infiniti G35 Coupe
• a Hyundai Tiburon V6 (don’t laugh — it’s a nice car!)
• a V6 Ford Mustang
• a Honda Accord V6 Coupe

I like all four, so it’ll just come down to which one has the fewest drawbacks.  The Infiniti is expensive, the Hyundai has no resale value, the Mustang has a poor reliability record, and the Accord is sold by a company whose salesmen I despise to the point that I swore I’d never buy from them.

They do make a nice vehicle, though.

Speaking of the Accord, someone pointed me to this $6 million advertisement for that car.  Well worth watching.  Hard to believe it only took them 606 takes.

A CPA member found a video I saw years ago and haven’t been able to find since.  It’s a great clip from a BBC television program about Robert “Bob” Hoover, one of the world’s all time greatest pilots.

Click on the photo at the right to view the video.  It shows Hoover shutting down both engines and then performing an aileron rol while pouring a glass of iced tea.  Naturally, he doesn’t spill a drop.

Don’t be fooled by the genteel look of a kindly older man.  Hoover was a World War II figher pilot who went on to be Chuck Yeager’s backup on the X-1 project.  He had a long career as a test pilot, racing champion, and airshow performer.  In fact, Yeager himself called Bob Hoover the greatest pilot he ever knew.

For me, it’s a close call between Hoover and Jimmy Doolittle for the title of all time greatest.  Doolittle engineered the launch of B-25 bombers off of an aircraft carrier, set many speed records and won numerous air races, and carried out the world’s first instrument flight, so he’s always had my vote.  But I suppose it’s worth nothing that Doolittle also called Hoover the greatest stick and rudder pilot who ever lived.

Anyway, in this clip, Bob Hoover talks about his energy management routine.  Keep in mind the airplane he’s flying is not designed for aerobatics — it’s a business aircraft not designed to withstand the rigors of such activity, so there was little margin for error in his routine.

I used to think that “smell” represented the least valuable sense when piloting an aircraft.  On February 8th, however, it turned out to be just the opposite, because the crew of this UPS DC-8 did smell something about 23 minutes prior to their scheduled landing in Philadelphia: smoke. 

The crew immediately declared an emergency.  Three minutes before landing, the smoke/fire warning light illuminated, and the jet burst into flames upon touchdown at Philadelphia.  The crew evacuated the aircraft via the cockpit windows using escape ropes provided for that purpose (you can see the ropes dangling from the cockpit window in the first photo).

It took more than four hours for firefighters to extinguish the blaze.

The aircraft was a complete loss, but there were no injuries.  When your aircraft catches on fire, that’s all that really matters.  Apparently there were two hazmat materials being carried aboard the DC-8:  amyl methyl ketone and tire repair kits.

Fire is one of the worst things a pilot can encounter in the air.  This accident was probably caused by the cargo, but in general aviation aircraft, fires are usually fed by electrical problems and/or fuel.  There just isn’t a whole lot else that’s flammable on board an airplane.

I teach my students that at the first sign of fire — whether that be smoke, flames, or just a burning smell — the best course of action is to kill the master switch and eliminate everything electrical.  Many electrical systems, especially older ones, have wiring insulation made out of PVC-like material.  When burned, a byproduct of combustion is cyanide gas.

Electrical fires are nothing to mess with.  If you suspect a fire, shut off the master switch immediately.  When you’re VMC, this is an easy call.  Most of us spend the vast majority of our time in visual conditions, so that’s the de facto solution.

In the soup it’s a little tougher.  Airplanes with air-driven flight instruments will continue to function, but the proliferation of all-electric glass panel airplanes has made shutting off the electrical system a bit more complicated.  The two main glass panel airplanes out there are the G1000 and the Avidyne FlightMax Entegra.

The G1000 system I’m most familiar with is the one in the DA40 DiamondStar.  Here, you can shut off both sides of the master switch with impunity, because a small emergency battery exists to power the standby attitude indicator and flood light.  In the Cirrus, however, you cannot do this.  Battery 2 powers the standby attitude indicator.

The best answer in the Cirrus is to shut off alternator 1, battery 1, and alternator 2.  Leave battery 2 on to power just the essential items.  Since battery 2 powers the essential buss directly — bypassing the Master Control Unit and the essential distribution bus — most of the electrical equipment in the airplane will have been shut off, and therefore whatever’s causing the problem will hopefully also be rendered inoperative.

If the problem does not abate, however, then battery 2 should be shut off and the ballistic recovery system deployed.

In some airplanes — and I’m thinking of the Extra 300 and Pitts S-2B here — there aren’t many electrical items.  However, you do have the main fuel tank inside the cockpit.  In fact, it sits right above the knees of the guy riding in the front seat!  An ideal place?  No.  But that’s how it is.  The Pitts is even worse because the analog fuel gauge (basically a bit of translucent tubing) brings the gas into the rear cockpit, too.

I haven’t come up with as many bright ideas for dealing with a fuel fire in a small, closed cockpit.  The best you can do is get the hell out of there.  In most airplanes this is not an option, but in aerobatic aircraft we wear parachutes.  Score one for the good guys!

In fact, a recent Sport Aerobatics article has me thinking a lot about this fuel fire issue.  An aerobatic competitor and CFI named Spencer Suderman wrote an article about the performance of various materials during exposure to fire.  He found that Nomex, the stuff most flight suits are made of, provides only 3 seconds of protection before a 2nd degree burn (blistering) is sustained.  Nomex has other serious drawbacks which Suderman details in his article:

Wearing a Nomex®  flight suit in the cockpit of an acro-mount is a waste of time and money:

1. The design and construction of most aerobatic aircraft with a fuel tank located inside the cockpit means that in a crash the probability of a fuel tank rupture and gasoline coming into contact with the pilot is virtually guaranteed.  Furthermore, lets not forget that high-tech fuel gauge consisting of a piece of clear tubing that is fastened to the instrument panel of virtually every Pitts literally inches from your body!

2.      Nomex®  absorbs liquids like a sponge.

3.      A single layer of Nomex®  carries the lowest protective rating according to SFI, http://www.sfifoundation.com/

Additionally, if you get covered in fuel, that $240 Nomex®  suit is no better than a T-shirt and jeans when it comes to fire protection.

While a pair of cotton jeans will do a reasonable job of insulating you from thermal energy for very short periods of time, natural fibers (cotton, wool) also have the property of not supporting combustion in the absence of external heat.   Natural fibers will absorb liquids such as fuel so if you get drenched you will be toast, literally.

It would however, be better to wear cotton or wool than synthetic fabrics because the natural fibers don’t support combustion nor do they melt into your skin when they do burn.

You don’t fly wearing polyester or nylon against your skin, do you?

The solution is to wear a suit made from a fabric called Dale Antiflame® made from 100% cotton and treated for flame and fluid resistance. (http://www.daleas.com/) 

A single layer suit of this material carries an SFI rating of 5 while a single layer Nomex®  suit carries an SFI rating of 1.  Most race car drivers are wearing this fabric either alone or in layers with other aramids such as Kevlar to gain increased fire protection. 

The problem of overheating and dehydration is addressed through the design and construction of the suit itself.   Sewing in panels of knit Nomex®  on the small of the back and shoulder areas, air circulation is achieved while minimizing the total amount of Nomex®  in the suit.

The bottom line is this:  fire is bad and if you have one, every second counts.  You can’t afford to wait until you’re smelling smoke, seeing sparks, or dodging flames before considering how you’d handle this scenario any more than you can afford to takeoff without forming a plan of action for an engine failure.

Aerobatic pilots often rehearse bailout procedures before egressing the cockpit after a flight.  Next time you fly, take a look around your aircraft.  Think about where the fuel is, where the electrical wiring is, and how you’d respond in VMC and IMC conditions.

Our intrepid UPS DC-8 crew had the benefit of recurrent Level D full-motion simulator training to prepare them for a fire.  GA pilots must take charge of their own preparation for a day we pray will never come.

Grrrrrr.  I really hate spammers.

It’s not bad enough that they send me about 2,000 pieces of junk mail each and every day.  No, they have to usurp my own web site for their nefarious purposes, too.  From my ISP:

We have received a rather large number of complaints of spam being sent in promotion of a URL under your account. Upon further investigation, it appears to be some sort of ‘URL shortening’ tool, used (in this case) to obfuscate the destination of the URL being promoted in the spam.

I have disabled the script in question by moving it into your home directory. If you wish to continue using this tool, we must ask that changes be made to prevent 3rd parties from abusing it in this manner (this may mean modifications made to the script so that only you or trusted associated can use it).

I built the URL shortener so people wouldn’t be dependent on a commercial service for this service.  Sadly, it seems no good deed goes unpunished on the internet.  So I’ve removed the application and the database table.  At least I can take pleasure in the fact that the spammer’s links are now broken.

This is very sad.  It seems that Angel Flight West has suffered the loss of one of its pilots while enroute to pick up a patient for transport to the UCLA Medical Center.

SANTA MONICA, California (AP) — A former TV game show host and his wife were killed Monday morning when their small plane crashed into Santa Monica Bay, authorities said. Rescue crews were searching for a third person also aboard the plane.

The bodies of Peter Tomarken, 63, host of the hit 1980s game show “Press Your Luck,” and his wife, Kathleen Abigail Tomarken, 41, were identified by the Los Angeles County coroner’s office.

The plane was on its way to San Diego to ferry a medical patient to the UCLA Medical Center, said Doug Griffith, a spokesman for Angel Flight West, a nonprofit which provides free air transportation for needy patients.

Griffith said the pilot was a volunteer for the group.

This isn’t the first AFW accident.  I can’t recall if there have ever been any fatal accidents while on a transport flight, but I do know that Angel Flight has an outstanding safety record covering more than two decades.

Everyone in the organization starts and ends with the mindset that cancellations are okay.  If the weather, the aircraft, or anything else is not 100%, pilots are encouraged to stay on the ground.  There’s no pressure to fly — in fact, patients are supposed to have an alternative form of transportation available just in case a flight cannot be completed due to extenuating circumstances.

I flew for Angel Flight for many years, later working as a mission coordinator, and found it to be the most rewarding part of aviation.  I’ve always thought that the pilots got more out of the deal than our passengers, a warm feeling of restored faith in one’s fellow man.  Everyone I flew with was extremely grateful, and had a unique and interesting story to tell.

I don’t think anyone can dispute the fact that Angel Flight makes our world a better place.  Much better.

My heart goes out to the Tomarken family.  Perhaps it will serve as a small comfort to them that their loved ones died while doing something that makes a real and vital difference in the lives of people suffering from terrible illnesses.

When I start teaching aerobatics to a pilot, one of the first things we discuss is when and where aerobatics are allowed.  Or, more accurately, where they are prohibited.  As anyone who’s familiar with government regulation will attest, the Code of Federal Regulations doesn’t tell you what you can do.  It only tells you what you cannot do.

One of the places aerobatics are prohibited is “within the lateral boundaries of the surface areas of a Class B, Class C, Class D, or Class E designated for an airport.”  Anyone who flies acro should know this.  And, to me at least, the definition of a surface area was always crystal clear:  it meant airspace that extended down to the surface of the earth.

What other meaning could there be?

Apparently, for about seven years, the FAA has been operating under a different definition of “surface area” than the rest of us.  Their interpretation meant that the lateral boundaries of B, C, D, and E airspace were, for all intents and purposes, extended down to the surface of the earth everywhere.  If you saw controlled airspace on a terminal or sectional chart, aerobatics were prohibited anywhere within the lateral boundaries, regardless of altitude.

This definition makes no sense.  We refer to the dashed magenta lines on a VFR chart as defining a “class E surface area”.  The charts actually use an abbreviation, “SFC”, to represent surface areas in class B and C airspace.  Finally, there’s the issue of class E airspace.  This is airspace that, while controlled, is usually not directly depicted on a sectional or terminal chart.  If all class E airspace were to extend to the surface when aerobatics is considered, aerobatics would prohibited absolutely everwhere.  No matter where you stick your finger on a chart — any chart – class E airspace exists at some altitude in that place.  It may start at the surface, 700 feet, 1200 feet, 14,500 feet, or some other arbitrary altitude, but it exists there.  Extend it to the surface, and the entire face of the earth becomes a “no fly” zone for aerobatics.

Is it possible someone at the FAA didn’t think this through?

Class E issues aside, the FAA would have been busting pilots left and right for violating this regulation if that definition were enforced.  Aerobatic pilots practice out over the water southwest of Long Beach harbor (between, but not on, V8-64 and V21) all the time.  It sits directly underneath a shelf of class B airspace that extends from 8000 to 10,000 feet MSL:

The good news is that an EAA member from Minnesota didn’t just blindly accept this interpretation.

The issue “re-surfaced” late last year when Robert Hucker, EAA 443420, Lakeville , Minnesota , filed a petition in advance of the Minneapolis (MSP) Class B airspace expansion slated to go live February 16. That expansion increased MSP’s Class B radius from 20 nm to as much as 30 nm in some areas, including over an aerobatic practice area 25 miles southwest of the airport used frequently by many local aerobatic pilots. Hucker used EAA’s 1998 petition as a basis for filing his petition.

“The (1999 FAA) explanation to EAA’s petition didn’t seem right to me,” Hucker said. “Plus use of the term, ‘surface area,’ was inconsistent, so I decided to put together some facts and file my own petition.” During his fact-finding process, Hucker discovered EAA’s 1998 petition at the MSP Flight Service District Office (FSDO) and used that as the basis of his argument.

In a March 7 letter, Rebecca MacPherson, FAA Assistant Chief Council, Regulations, wrote in a letter to Hucker, “Upon review, we conclude that the EAA was indeed correct in its understanding of ‘surface areas.’ In responding to your inquiry, we concluded that our 1999 interpretation was inconsistent with the term ‘surface area’ as used by Air Traffic Organization (ATO) airspace planners to describe only airspace that touches the surface of the earth.” 

I’m glad someone has been pursuing this.  I didn’t even know this interpretation of “surface area” existed, and I’m a very active instructor and competition aerobatic pilot.  I read everything I can get my hands on.  Accident reports, newsletters, aviation forums, FAA publications.

It leaves me wondering what other interesting FAA interpretations are lurking out there.

High resolution sectional charts for the entire U.S. are available at Kyler Laird’s aviationtoolbox.org.  How cool is that?

These charts are not up-to-date, but they’re great for illustration, teaching, and web-based excerpts.  Also, be aware that the downloads are pretty large.  The south side of the Los Angeles sectional chart was more than 42 megabytes.  The detail is worth it, though.

Kyler has other cool tools on the site.  One of my favorites is the sectional mosaic.  It starts you off with a mosaic of all the sectional charts.  As you click on the image, it drills down into the appropriate sectional, allowing quick access to any point on any sectional in the country.  Beats keeping a stack of expired charts on your desk just for occasional reference.

Just two days after Christmas in 2000, an American Eagle commuter flight developed pitch trim problems immediately after takeoff from Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport.  The pilots had the controls full forward, yet the aircraft was climbing at ”3000 to 6000″ feet per minute.  All pitch trim controls were inoperative.

Take it from someone who’s been there:  when one of the primary flight controls stops responding, it really gets your attention.

Eventually, the flight landed safely at O’Hare.  As a pilot, I found this incident interesting for a few reasons.  First, there’s a screen capture of the departure controller’s radar screen available, which is rare.  Along with the accompanying audio recording of communication between ATC and the flight crew, it makes it possible to see the incident from the “other side of the scope”.

Second, the NTSB report indicates that ten other identical incidents had occured on the Embraer EMB-135LR fleet.  It doesn’t address why no corrective action was implemented prior to this.

Third, although the pilots of American Eagle flight 230 followed the appropriate checklist, the Approved Flight Manual procedure was unclear.  It said to slow down, but it didn’t say how much.  Also, because the pilots thought they had a trim runaway situation, they had pulled the circuit breakers and even if they’d slowed down enough, the trim would have remained inoperative.

I have a zip archive with the Lotus screen capture here.  It contains a self-extracting .exe file.

The NTSB full narrative report is here.

There are a couple of lessons here for GA pilots.  First, this incident seems to be another one of those “think outside the box” moments when standard procedures and checklist discipline don’t cut it.  The pilots of Eagle 230 had to learn to fly all over again, experimenting with spoilers, landing gear, airspeed, and flaps to find the most controllable configuration.  It’s at critical moments like these that knowlege of aerodynamics, aircraft systems, and other academic things can pay off in spades.  This is something I try to impart to my students.

Second, you’ll notice that there are many times when the approach controller will call Eagle 230 and they won’t respond.  I’m sure the PNF (”pilot not flying” — if there was such a thing in this incident!) had his hands full.  Flying the airplane always comes first, emergency or not.  Talking to ATC is secondary.

All in all, a successful outcome due in large part to the flight crew’s ability to think quickly on their feet and prioritize the workload when it got too high.

Perhaps whoever designed this sign lost sight of the, uh, “larger picture” — if you catch my meaning.  It doesn’t help that the pilot is sporting what appears to be a bicentennial porno mustache, circa 1976.

I’ve been trying to think of a good caption for this photo.  Suggestions?

I keep a stack of quarters in a small tray built into the center console of my car.

I’ve been doing this for years.  After all, you never know when you’ll have to fork out some change at a parking meter.

I always keep the tray full, because if you let any gaps develop in the tray, the remaining quarters start clanking together in a most annoying fashion.

Another thing that’s been happening for years?  THose quarters being stolen by the guys at the local car wash, a place called “Checkered Flag”.  They swipe them while cleaning the interior of my Mitsubishi Eclipse.

I couldn’t care less about the money.  Hell, if the guys are that hard up for money, I’d happily tip them an extra few bucks.  But it’s annoying to lose fifty cents or a dollar in quarters every time I take my car in to get it cleaned.

There are two possibilities here.  Either they think I won’t notice that my change tray, which was full and silent when I drove in, is now rattling like cheap aluminum siding in a strong wind.  Or they just don’t care if I notice.

Every time I go in there, I mean to talk to the manager about this.  Then again, there’s a part of me that says “Hey, you have all this money and they have to work twelve hours a day in order to put food on the table — let it go.”

The thing is, if they’re stealing money out of my car, who knows what they’re stealing out of other people’s vehicles…

FDC 6/4280 ZLA CA.. FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS 25 W PALM SPRINGS, CA. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. PURSUANT TO 14 CFR SECTION 91.137(A)(2) TEMPORARY FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS ARE IN EFFECT WITHIN A 3 NAUTICAL MILE RADIUS OF 340223N/1165315W OR THE PALM SPRINGS /PSP/ VORTAC 281.0 DEGREE RADIAL AT 25.0 NAUTICAL MILES AT AND BELOW 11000 FEET MSL TO PROVIDE A SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION.

The TFR text says it’s for “accident investigation”. I wonder if this is the accident they’re referring to:

YUCAIPA, Calif. - Authorities have located the wreckage of a plane owned by Cessna Aircraft that crashed Tuesday in steep terrain in San Bernardino County. Both men on board, a Cessna employee and the president of an aircraft sales company, were killed.

The FAA says the Cessna Caravan disappeared off radar about 5 p.m.

The plane was en route to Ontario from Wichita, Kansas, where the Cessna company is based.

Cessna CEO Jack Pelton identified those aboard as Steve O’Neill, a regional sales manager for the company, and Rick Voorhis, president of Pacific Aircraft Sales in Reno, Nevada.

Curious.  Why would a GA aircraft accident require a TFR? I don’t recall having seen this before, especially for an accident that is not “high profile” like the crash of JFK, Jr.’s Saratoga.

This TFR is not quite as large as it seems.  It’s from the surface to 11,000 feet MSL, but the terrain is notated on the Los Angeles sectional as reaching 6,600 feet MSL in that area.

A fellow CFI sent me a real gem.  I’d have to say this is the ultimate short field landing.  It’s so short that half of it takes place on the water.

This wouldn’t be such a big deal except for the fact that the aircraft in question is not a sea plane.

You can do some pretty amazing things when you push a capable bush plane like the Super Cub in this video clip to the edge of it’s performance envelope.

Of course, you can just as easily end up in a heap at the end of a gravel bar in some remote corner of the 49th state.  So as the Templar Knight told Indiana Jones, “choose wisely”.

It does make for interesting viewing though, doesn’t it?  I think I’ll show this clip to the next student who looks at an 1500 foot runway and claims they couldn’t possibly land there.

Dan sent me a couple of companion pieces to yesterday’s entry.  Both are cockpit-based videos of a tailwheel airplane landing on a gravel bar.

In the first clip, our intrepid pilot uses the “waterski” arrival, touching down with the main wheels on the surface of the river and sliding right up onto the gravel bar.

In the second, he drops in from above some trees and lands on a short, curving spit of land.

I’m not sure what kind of airplane this is.  It’s got a hinged top cowl, so I assume it’s a Super Cub or derivative?

As usual, don’t try this at home.

Damn Foreigner is back, and it’s good to see him among the living (posting?).

His most recent entry was on a topic that is near and dear to his heart: immigration.  He’s a smart guy and makes some salient points.

However, I was left wondering what solution he might offer to fix this thorny problem.  Should we allow anyone into the U.S. without any regard for who they are, why they’re here, or what our needs might be?

I don’t think that’s what he proposes.  But there are some who feel that way.

As a Southern California native, I’ve noticed some things about this area.  To put it bluntly, the quality of life is falling due to overpopulation.  This is a long term trend that I’ve been watching over a period of decades.

When I fly over Southern California, the city extends as far as the eye can see.  From Santa Barbara to the Mexican border, and from Oxnard to Palm Springs.  It’s a solid mass of densely populated metropolis that covers 10,000 square miles.

Our resources are limited.  The land can only hold so many homes.  The roads can only hold so many cars.  The schools only so many kids, the land only support so many people.  The hospitals, the social infrastructure, they are also limited.

From what I can see, we reached those limits a long time ago.  And for better or worse, a significant percentage of Socal’s growing population are illegal immigrants.  They are not the only source of population growth, but according to the INS, for every three legal immigrants that enter the U.S., one enters illegally.  We take in about 900,000 legal immigrants and another 300,000 illegal ones every year.

This is why I feel that strong border control is necessary.

I am not anti-immigration.  I have always said that America’s strength derives from the freedom and diversity of her people.  However, for the reasons I stated above (not to mention national security — a porous border is an obvious asset to those who would harm us), we need to control the rate at which immigration takes place.

I also believe that, as a soverign nation, controlling immigration is our right.  It does not make us racists, despite what many would have you believe.

It’s ironic that when other countries control their borders tightly, they are not accused of jingoism.  To wit, a good friend of mine recently moved to Vancouver to work as an actor.  He’s a law abiding citizen with a clean record, but Canada decided he was not necessary for their work force.  He was compelled to return to the United States, and he did.

I don’t blame Mexicans with a third world standard of living for seeking out a better life.  To be honest with you, if I were in their shoes, I might well be doing the same thing:  trying to sneak across the border.  On the other hand, I couldn’t honestly fault the United States for trying to keep me from entering the country illegally.

DF noted that some who wish to come to the U.S. don’t have a “line” to stand in.  Are we sure this is the reason they cross into the U.S. illegally?  As he said, the process of legal entry takes time.  There is a certain ease to simply crossing the border rather than dealing with paperwork and delays.

Illegal immigration isn’t just bad for the United States.  It can be disastrous for the immigrant.  As DF noted, illegals are ripe for exploitation since employers know they cannot seek the legal protections and remedies that the rest of us enjoy, lest they risk detection and deportation.

U.S. immigration law allows for entry into the U.S. via four basic methods:  family sponsorship, employment, diversity, and political asylum.  There are myriad ways to get into this country legally, but it’s entirely possible that some people simply don’t have a legitimate claim for entry into this country.

For example, Mexico might well be given a low priority on the “diversity” list since so many Mexicans have recently immigrated to the U.S.  So many, in fact, that according to the Southern California Association of Governments, Hispanics are no longer a minority group:

The Hispanic population now represents the largest ethnic group (40.57%) in Southern California, followed by White (38.85%), Asian (10.19%) and African American (7.30%).

The bottom line?  We cannot take everyone who wants to come here.  The demand exceeds our ability to supply, especially here in California where, according to the last census, we took in more aliens than New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois, and New Jersey combined.