SCV Talk · Archive
Nine years of the Valley’s town square · 2006–2015
SCV Talk
July 25, 2011· scvtalk.com · WordPress (SCVTalk 3.0) · Wayback capture

Steve Lunetta Pulls a Shocker!

By Timothy Myers SR. — Tim Myers

First I say that recreational use of narcotics should be legalized in the Opinion pages of the Signal and THEN conservative Steve Lunetta effectively endorses the DREAM Act.  The only possible third thing that can happen is Lynn Plambeck and Cam Noltemeyer announcing on Thursday that they have put all their retirement money in Lennar shares!

Seriously,  Steve’s contribution today is heartfelt and shows how one’s strongly held position can turn 180 degrees when someone they know, respect and like is negatively impacted by a policy.   Kudos to Steve for his heartfelt empathy, and don’t pay attention to the vicious comments that I am sure will follow.

Comments (11)

  1. Alan FerdmanJuly 25, 2011 at 9:05 am
    I think that is very true. A person’s opinion is, almost always, tempered when the issue gets personal. It would be better, for all of use, if we would take the effect on other people into consideration, even before it got personal.
  2. 4eyedsueJuly 25, 2011 at 9:07 am
    I was pleased to read both articles. Once again- both in line with my GOP guy for 2012- Gary Johnson!
  3. SaugushomeownerJuly 25, 2011 at 9:36 am
    So make them legal and encourage more illegal immigrants to cross the border with their kids. It is not so much the children are being punished, it is the fact that if we allow it, then illegal immigration will continue. Someone has to be the example and unfortunately it is these kids. BTW, if an illegal family brings a 17 year old child across the border, are you saying they should be given immunity also?
  4. NFICJuly 25, 2011 at 9:57 am
    Walking and other alternative forms of transportation seem to be a significant mitigation to reduce traffic under OVOV. The link below shows walkabiltiy scores in cities across CA. http://www.walkscore.com/CA/ Santa Clarita scores a 46. Not good at all…Just a little better than Brawley.
  5. LindaJuly 25, 2011 at 10:14 am
    You are right about the tendency of people to change their minds when someone they know is harmed by positions they hold dear. That was what was so amazing to me about the case of Meg Whitman’s nanny. Here was someone who was part of her household for many years … and Meg just tossed her out without so much as a referral to a good lawyer. As Lunetta rightly points out, if no one hired illegals, there would be no reason for them to come and stay. One wonders if the agency where this young man was hired has been fined? I would be agreeable to some form of a “Dream Act” but I think the one that was proposed recently was way too lax. Some form of mandatory military or community service and a felony-free criminal record need to be made part of the deal, as does a minimum number of years residency.
  6. lvogelJuly 25, 2011 at 10:42 am
    When I read this column in the paper, I kept looking at the writers name thinking that perhaps I misread it. The whole tone of Lunetta’s article was so different than most of what he writes, and what shocked me more was this would no doubt send his beloved ‘Uncle Earl’ into a tailspin. I know more than one Juan (many as a matter of fact) that came to this country as infants or as young children, and were raised, educated and became productive law-abiding adults in this country. They had no say about coming here in the first place, so why should they be held responsible for their parents choices and taken from the only life (and country!) many have known their entire live? I often never agree with Steve Lunetta, but I have to say good job taking this chance writing an article that for sure will piss off many of his conservative colleagues and especially a big kudos for not taking Earls side for change.
  7. Phil EllisJuly 25, 2011 at 12:26 pm
    I understand that Earl, too, knows many Juan’s and he may just agree with his nephew.
  8. Lori RivasJuly 25, 2011 at 12:19 pm
    It is a beautiful thing when compassion and humility guide governing principles. “…love covers a multitude of sins.” – 1 Peter 4:8
  9. IHeartSCVJuly 25, 2011 at 2:21 pm
    Empathy is fine and dandy, but what about using some basic reasoning, too? Should our opinions and policies really be shaped because we know of one “for instance” or example or story that is emotionally moving? I’m not saying that’s all Lunetta offers to build his case, but anecdotes never make for very convincing arguments.
  10. lvogelJuly 25, 2011 at 6:24 pm
    I don’t know IHeart SCV, I have to disagree on some level. When one has knowledge of another’s plight, or if one actually shares their own story, then the argument is greater. One’s experiences becomes that persons knowledge. I’ve come across many with Juan’s story. They have been in this country for many years. They have been working, going to school and raising their own families here. Basic reasoning to me in these situations would be to not deport this member of our society to a country they have not lived and worked in, but rather offer immunity to them so that they can continue to contribute on even a greater level to our society. You must also add the equation of the children of this man, who were actually born in this country. What good would it do to that family by deporting him to his birthplace? A country, again, he has never known? Then we have a whole new set of problems, IMHO. Again, Juan’s story is not unique. It’s not just a case of one emotional story, there are many just like his.
  11. JayceJuly 26, 2011 at 9:18 am
    When I first read “Steve Lunetta Pulls a Shocker!” I couldn’t stop laughing for about 10 minutes. Yeah my mind goes to dark places sometimes

Preserved as part of the SCV Talk Archive. Text is presented as originally published; presentation has been standardised for readability. The original capture is available at the Internet Archive.

Support