Will California “boycott” the energy they get from Arizona?
There seems to be plenty of huffing and puffing from Los Angeles politicians as they beat their collective chests about banning travel to, and doing business in, Arizona. But will the politicians refuse to take energy – and water for that matter – from their neighbor state?
I doubt it. I’ve been out of the loop the last three weeks, but I’ve heard the stories about municipalities, cities and other states not wanting to do business with the state of Arizona since they are now so racist for stepping up to enforce the laws President Obama refuses to.
But when I heard about southern California – specifically the City of Los Angeles – planing to boycott Arizona, my first thought was power and water. I’m not too familiar with the quantity of power and water LA gets from Arizona, but from what I read it’s 20 to 25 percent.
I’ve visited the Hoover Dam a few times, I know one side of it is in Arizona, and I know it generates mucho power.
Today I read over at Hot Air that there has been some back and forth between LA Mayor Villaraigosa and some utility officials from the Grand Canyon State.
First the LA mayor backs the suggestion of a boycott, then Gary Pierce – a commissioner from the Arizona Corporations Commissions – suggests the power utility who provides the power to the city could sit down and discuss the contract.
Mind you now, Pierce did not threaten to turn off the power. He just suggested if they really want a boycott, they should put their cards on the table.
Morrissey notes the mayor of LA considered the suggestion a threat, and completely missed the point of Pierce’s great retort.
Yesterday, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Gary Pierce challenged the city of Los Angeles and its mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa, to put their money where their mouths are by ending their purchases of electrical power generated in Arizona. In a letter exclusively provided to Hot Air, Pierce questioned how a city-wide boycott of Arizona would work while LA continues to light the city with Arizona electrons. In response, Villaraigosa bravely … ducked the question entirely:
Mayor Villaraigosa is in Washington D.C., meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderon, but his deputy chief of staff issued the following statement: “The mayor stands strongly behind the city council and he will not respond to threats from the state that has isolated itself from an America that values freedom, liberty and basic civil rights.”
Come on mayor, cut the umbilical cord you and all of your Los Angeles brethren have to the racist state of Arizona. It’s the right thing to do.
Who wants to take a bet on the size of the crowd – mostly from southern California – who will be visiting and partying in Lake Havasu City on Memorial Day Weekend? All those jet boats are ready to go … trust me.
That is priceless! Pierce deserves some sort of commendation for pointing out the gross hypocrisy that Villaraigosa is displaying. I just wonder if Villaraigosa is simply or willfully ignorant of the implications of his bloviating. Like most Democrats, he just doesn't think through the implications of his knee jerk liberal response to what is considered a reasonable response to a huge problem by the majority of the American people.
I wonder: do racist electrons only make white light? Will rose colored glasses fix the problem? 😉
California already has a problem with the rest of the country prior to this ETHNIC problem of illegals (God-in-heaven, Latino is NOT A RACE!!! You can read that as Mexican, Costa Rican or whoever, but darn-it AGAIN, Latino is NOT A RACE; ARIZONA IS DEALING WITH AN ETHNIC ISSUE!! Get it right all of you smart people. Even Homer Simpson, a cartoon character, knows the difference. DUH!)
Back to my main point: Barrett Company, a firearms manufacturer who supplies the military, federal, state, and local police along with a fine line of goods for civilians, stopped doing business with California well over two years ago because California banned one line of its products. I am sure that Ronnie Barrett does business with individuals but, as far as I know, his company STILL does not do business with California as a matter of principle.
California has a problem trying to throw its weight around — this buff and bluster from various California entities is going to come around and bite them in the wallet if they are not more prudent. California is already on thin ice with many organizations — the boycott talk might just turn around on them.
If you think "latino" is screwy, check out the government definition of "hispanic":
U.S. Census Bureau
Persons of Hispanic origin, in particular, were those who indicated that their origin was Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American, or some other Hispanic origin. It should be noted that persons of Hispanic origin maybe of any race.
So what is "hispanic" really? As far as I can tell, it covers anyone that took Spanish in high school or college, or simply lived in a neighborhood that happened to have Spanish speakers in residence. Last time I looked, Spain was part of Europe! Are "hispanics" really Caucasian? If I take Chinese language lessons and hang a Japanese poster in my house, am I "asian"? My head is spinning!!!
I think they are simply trying to create a minority group and perpetuate the new form of segregation called "diversity".
Simply put, the whole issue of "discrimination" with regard to border enforcement is a red herring, designed to put border proponents on the defensive (Alinsky rules 5 and 12. Maybe some rule 3). This issue is not race but proximity (and porosity).