a
running commentary by our trusted california contributors...

CRO
Blog archive index |
|

The
Bear Flag
League
|
|
[12/1/05
Thursday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
Kennedy's
Direction as Chief of Staff? How
bad is it? I'm not going to lie, it doesn't look good
folks...
The announcement
of Susan Kennedy as the Governor's new Chief of Staff has unleashed
a fury of conservative screaming inside of the state's Republican
Party. I'm sad that it takes an event like this to bring the
conservatives out of their apathetic state. Where was this
outcry and passion on Tuesday, November 8th?
The question
that is being asked in Sacramento tonight; "where does
this leave the Republican Party and where is 'this' administration
headed come the turn of the year?" As far as hope, there
is some - not much - but some to focus on this evening.
From sources
inside of the Capitol, and those who have worked along side
of Susan Kennedy in the past, I'm being told that she is somewhat
a fiscally sound idealist. She is comparable to the governor's fiscally
conservative ideaology of smaller government freeing up successful
business, with lower taxes upon the workers of the state. This
is some good news.
In the past,
Kennedy has been tough on the PUC Board, and she has verbally
gone after Democrats continual 'tax and spend' growth of government.
She might be a mirror image of Schwarzenegger when it comes
to business and economics.
The real
damage comes in relationship to policy. Being the Chief of
Staff, she will be involved in the establishment of the governor's
agenda.
- She
married her partner on a trip to Hawaii, so she is an active
supporter of Assemblyman Mark Leno's "Same Sex Legislation".
- She
is also sympathetic to Assemblyman Gil Cedillo's legislation
that would offer driver's license to illegal immigrants
for California.
- From
a couple of conversations today, Kennedy will be friendly
to Universal Health Care, as well as Universal Day Care.
...just
a few of her ideals that she will carry to the side of Governor Schwarzenegger.I'm
still trying to determine her leanings educationally on legislative
policy.
Being the
Chief of Staff, Kennedy will not be the lone 'agenda setter',
the governor's administration still has some conservative guard
to challenge any liberal legislation, and there are two
names to watch for an indication as to how far this administration
will travel to the left for the new year.
If we have
a resignation of Legislative Affairs Secretary, Richard
Costigan, or Deputy Legislative Affairs Secretary, Cynthia
Bryant, then we have a major problem.
Costigan
and Bryant are the indicators. If they are gone in the next
few weeks, California has a new party affiliation in the governor's
office, the office will have moved from fiscally conservative
Republican to moderate Independent.
We'll be
watching to see who makes it through the Christmas Season in
the horseshoe. [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[11/30/05
Wednesday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
Democrat to Lead Governor's Staff The "Special
Election" loss was more costly than expected. I just
received word that Pat Clarey is out as Governor's Chief
of Staff, and Democrat Susan Kennedy is the replacement.
This item
is now being confirmed around the state's blogger-mill, here
is the Flash Report yesterday...
I previously
reported on rumors that Pat Clarey, the Governor's Chief
of Staff (and a loyal Republican) would be stepping aside
after the special election. Well, apparently the Governor
has decided to name Susan Kennedy as his Chief of Staff.
Susan Kennedy's
resume...
Kennedy
previously served as Executive Director of the California
Democratic Party and as Executive Director of the California
Abortion Rights Action League. She managed two of the most
successful Get-Out-The-Vote campaigns in recent California
history, including the 1992 Coordinated Campaign for Clinton/Gore
and the 1998 Coordinated Campaign that elected Governor Gray
Davis.
Can this
interpreted as nothing more than a big'get lost' to the California
Republican Party?
How should
'conservatives' feel now...after losing the 'special', this
will be the 'new direction' for the Schwarzenegger Administration.
Another point
to the Governor's "possible" placement of Susan Kennedy
as his 'new' Chief of Staff.
I'm told
tonight (by source) that Susan Kennedy is a radical 'Pro-abortionist,
and she is a 'Lesbian'; and she married her partner in Hawaii.
What does
this mean to Assemblyman Mark Leno's "Same Sex Marriage
Legislation"? Hard to say no and veto, when your number
one administration official is a lesbian and married. [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[11/29/05
Tuesday]
[Sharon
Hughes - radio
talk show host, columnist]
12:15 am [permalink]
President Bush's New Illegal Immigration Policy - "I
Oppose Amnesty" "I oppose amnesty," said
President George W. Bush in his speech before a group of
border enforcement personnel at Davis-Monthan Air Force
Base in Tucson, Arizona. He also said, "Our responsibility
is clear...We are going to protect the border - We're going
to expand interior repatriation..We want to make it clear
when they (illegal immigrants) violate U.S. immigration
laws they are going to be sent home and they are going
to stay at home."
In brief,
here is a summary of the President's remarks outlining his
new policy on illegal immigration. Citing successes by the
border patrol, such as catching over 1,000 illegal gang members,
over 2,000 smugglers, and the increase of funds and agents
on the border since September 11, 2001, the President outlined
a new three part plan to address America's illegal immigration
problems. His speech and plan will definately be the topic
of debate on talk shows this week.
Bush's
Plan:
1) Return all illegals back across the border - through Interior Re-Repatriotion
to their home towns far from the border. Sited success when implemented:
only 8% cross the border again. Non-Mexican illegals are detained, but not
enough beds at detention centers, thus 4 out of 5 that are caught are released
into society and only given a date to appear in court date: 75% don't show
up. This 'catch & release' policy has been in place for decades and the
President said it "is going to end." Will change to a 'catch and
return' policy, as will expand detention facilities as well as expediting
removal of non-Mexican illegals faster (within 30 days).
2) Correct/enforce
existing immigration laws - cited the 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals which ruled that illegals can re-argue their cases
as often as they want; and that businesses must abide by
immigration laws. To help with this he proposed a new temporary
worker plan where 'honest workers' can register for a legal
worker's permit for a set period of time and then sent home.
Also, is proposing a new tamper-proof ID card which he says
will document fraud and make it easier for businesses to
comply with the law. He acknowledged there is alot of controversy
surrounding such a card.
3) Stop
illegals from crossing the border in the first place - described
the bill he signed last month that puts 1,000 more agents
on the border (most of them will be in Arizona); $139 million
to upgrade technology including the use of drones to spot
and catch illegals; $70 million to install and improve barriers
and fencing.
As cited
by WorldNetDaily,
Dan Stein, president of the Federation
for American Immigration Reform, said, "This administration
has a sustained track record of ignoring reality when it conflicts
with what the corporate interests want it to do. The president's
plan is nothing more than a massive illegal alien amnesty on
a six year time delay, while his temporary-worker program ˆ which
will be anything but temporary ˆ is the death knell for
America's middle class...Unless the American people see real,
tangible immigration law enforcement in the interior, no one
will believe there is a serious commitment from this president." His
organization is urging the administration to back a "genuine
immigration enforcement," as in H.R. 4313, authored by
Reps. Duncan Hunter and Virgil Goode.
[11/28/05
Monday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:01am [permalink]
Fred
Barnes: Bush Comeback Via Immigration Reform? Fred
Barnes outlines the problems and prospects for the
Bush immigration reform plan. The key, of course, is Texas
Senator John Cornyn. "The most difficult part would be
creating a path to citizenship for those who came to the
United States illegally but before a cutoff date."
Other difficulties
are evident from this
survey of the paradoxes of illegal immigrant reception
and the successful political use of the issue (Janet Hook, LAT).
Hook exaggerates the success of Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrist
in the congressional race to replace Chris Cox. Single issues
can attract attention but without further support do not create
adherents.
The difficulty
of campaigning solely against illegals is seen in our paradoxical
public policy (Anna Gorman and Jennifer Delson, LAT).
The heart of the matter, in all the frustrations of immigrant,
policymaker, and angry citizen:
"What
we have now is a dishonest immigration policy," said Mark Krikorian,
who runs the conservative Center
for Immigration Studies in Washington, D.C. "We make it
tough to get across the border but easy to get a job. This
is really the central conflict. Everything stems from that."
Or, as I
have frequently put it, our public policy does not know what
to demand from citizens (though we most certainly ought to).
And hence we aren't sure what to require of immigrants. It's
not the number of immigrants that's the problem; it's the number
of Americans. See for example this
critique of Pat Buchanan and Paul Weyrich. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[Jim
Kouri, contributor]
12:03 am [permalink]
Latino Gang Targets African-Americans for
Murder A
federal grand jury returned an indictment that adds a fifth
gang member to an indictment that had previously charged
four others in connection with a six-year conspiracy to assault
and murder African-Americans in the Highland Park area of
Los Angeles.
Porfirio
Avila was named in a conspiracy charge that alleges numerous
violent assaults against African-Americans, including murders
that took place in 1999 and in 2000. The indictment alleges
that Avila was the driver of a vehicle that carried the shooter
who fatally shot Christopher Bowser on December 11, 2000.
Four of Avila's
fellow gang members were previously indicted in August 2004
and are also named in the new indictment. The four previously
indicted were allegedly directly involved in the murder of
Kenneth Kurry Wilson, an African-American man gunned down in
Highland Park on April 18, 1999.
Avila, 31,
is currently serving two life sentences in state prison for
the murder of Christopher Bowser and another African-American
man.
The indictment
charges that the five defendants, all members of the Avenues
street gang, conspired with each other and with other gang
members to violate the civil rights of African-Americans in
the gang's neighborhood by attacking and sometimes killing
the victims.
The conspiracy
charge alleges that the defendants attacked numerous African-American
residents of Highland Park and murdered Kenneth Kurry Wilson
in 1999 and Christopher Bowser the next year. The second count
of the indictment alleges that the four defendants who participated
in Wilson's murder did so because Wilson was African-American
and because he was using the public streets of Los Angeles.
The final count of the indictment charges the same four defendants
with using a firearm during the commission of a conspiracy
and hate crimes.
The previously
indicted suspects are:
- Gilbert
Saldana, 27, an alleged triggerman in the Wilson murder, who
is currently serving a life sentence in state prison for another
murder;
- Merced Cambero, 27, the second alleged triggerman in the Wilson murder, who
is currently a fugitive;
- Alejandro Martinez, 28, who allegedly served as a look-out during the Wilson
slaying;
- Fernando Cazares, 25, another alleged look-out in the Wilson murder who is
currently serving a 34-month sentence in state prison on various unrelated
charges; and
If convicted
of the crimes alleged in the indictment, the defendants face
life without parole in federal prison.
This case
was investigated by the FBI and the Los Angeles Police Department
and is being prosecuted by attorneys from the United States
Attorney's Office in Los Angeles and the Civil Rights Division
of the Department of Justice.
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:01am [permalink]
Kaus
Calls Out LAT on Murtha Mickey
Kaus ( ripped the LA Times and got to the heart
of the matter; it's not a right-wing attack either.
Note
to hapless LAT publisher Jeffrey Johnson: Instead of reviving
Robert Scheer's dormant career by firing him, or having your
telemarketers boast that you've extirpated liberal Michael
Kinsley's insidious influence, why not pay attention to the
bias on the pages people actually read--like the embarrassing
deception in the second paragraph of Friday's
front-page, two-column-headline lead story [Maura Reynolds],
which seemingly proclaimed that "no Democrat was a firmer ally" of
Bush's war against Saddam than Rep. John Murtha, when in fact
Murtha had been a critic of the current Iraq war in 2002, before
it started? Funny how those propagandistic mistakes in the
news pages never get made in a pro-Bush direction, isn't it?
....
P.P.P.S.:
That Murtha error smells like an editor's mistake to me.
That's why your absurd anti-Kinsley spiel won't convince
anybody. The L.A. Times' peculiar bias--a chloroform-like
combination of liberalism and lifelessness--runs deep in
the paper's DNA, in layers and layers of editorial middle-bureaucracy.
Short of laying off 80% of the staff, you will not root
it out in our lifetimes. Conservative readers know this...
Many thanks
to Patterico for
noting this and of course for his on-target drilling of the LAT
over the years;
see his Dogtrainer file.
Mac
Owens whacks Murtha's logic, at NRO. "Murtha has been
a critic of U.S. policy in Iraq for some time despite his
vote to authorize the war." A decorated Marine veteran of
Vietnam and professor at the Naval War College, Owens concludes
that Murtha
dishonors
the sacrifice of these men by treating them as victims rather
than the heroes they are. We owe it to the American soldiers
who have been killed or wounded in Iraq and the Iraqis who
have fought to create a new state to see this effort through
to the end, preventing a replay of the disgraceful episode
three decades ago when the U.S. Congress betrayed and abandoned
our South Vietnamese allies.
UPDATE: Jean
Schmidt, whom Saturday Night Live parodied, for her House speech
attacking Murtha has a history of tepid moderation, as Julie
Ponzi pointed out when she was elected to replace a member
who died. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/22/05
Tuesday]
[Jim
Kouri, contributor]
12:03 am [permalink]
Snoop Dogg Glorifies Death Row Murderer Snoop
Dogg, the celebrated rapper, was once a member of the Crips
gang. Since then he's grown in popularity as an award-winning
rap artist, actor and advertising spokesperson for a number
of products.
Now he's
using his celebrity and influence on behalf of a multiple-murderer
and co-founder of one of the nation's most bloodthirsty gangs.
He wants the California authorities to spare the life of Stanley "Tookie" Williams.
Snoop Dogg is the latest addition to the hundreds of people
who are protesting against the execution of Williams schedule
for December 13.
"Stanley "Tookie" Williams
is not a regular guy, he's an inspiration," Dogg said. "All
I want to say to the governor is it's about keeping this man
alive because his voice needs to be heard."
Unfortunately
the four people Williams murdered have had their voices silenced
forever. The untold number of people killed, maimed and assaulted
by the gang Williams founded also have been denied a voice
since they are dead or they lack the celebrity status of a
star rapper or the clout of a motion picture studio that made
a piece of propaganda about Tookie Williams, with actor Jamie
Foxx playing a sympathetic Williams on the big screen.
California
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will decide on Williams' petition
for clemency in the coming weeks, and there are many who believe
he will cave in to the Hollywood establishment that seems to
advocate leniency for murders, cop-killers and other anti-social
thugs who suddenly write books, give speeches and tell tales
of life in the meanstreets.
Celebrities
rubbing elbows with gangsters is nothing new. There's always
been a fascination by the denizens of the entertainment industry
with the murderers, drug-dealers, pimps and robbers who populate
the American underworld.
Snoop Dogg
was the highlight of the evening when he was honored as the
final speaker of about a dozen at a large protest outside the
main gates of San Quentin federal prison, where speakers included
former gang members, religious leaders and representatives
from the Nation of Islam.
The anti-death
penalty activists have made the Williams case the fiercest
battle over execution of murderers many have seen in years.
California State officials and police officers believe Williams
is a brutal and unremorseful murderer who deserves death by
lethal injection for viciously murdering four people in 1979
during a spree of robberies.
William is
the author of several books aimed at teaching young men and
teenagers about the perils of gang life. His conversion has
won over high-profile supporters, including actor Jamie Foxx,
who portrayed him in a sympathetic film version of his life.
In an interview
in prison on Wednesday, Williams continued to claim he was
innocent. This in spite of overwhelming evidence of his criminal
deeds. Most of his supporters are African-Americans as were
his victims.
The anti-death
penalty protest had former gang-members testifying how Williams
helped them to get out of the "life."
But not everyone
is buying it. "Stanley Williams does not deserve this
mercy," the Los Angeles district attorney wrote in a response
to the Williams' clemency petition.
"Despite
the overwhelming nature of the evidence against him and despite
the nonexistence of any credible defense, Stanley Williams
has steadfastly refused to take any responsibility for the
brutal, destructive and murderous acts he committed," he
added.
Snoop Dogg
grew up in Southern California where the Crips began. He left
the gang to become one of rap music's mega-stars after his
albums repeatedly topped the music charts. Dogg is also a motion
picture actor and is frequently seen in commercials.
Snoop Dogg
claims the death of Williams will dash the dreams of kids for
a better life outside of the gang lifestyle.
"On
the street we don't have no role models, we don't have no leaders," he
said. To be sure, Snoop Dogg isn't no role model or leader
either.
[11/21/05
Monday]
[Sharon
Hughes - radio
talk show host, columnist]
12:15 am [permalink]
Red Alert on Code Pink: Code
Pink’s invasion on school campuses and recruitment
offices last week with their "Not Your Soldier" & "National
Stand Down" student days on November 17th & 18th
is a disgrace! They have organized students across the
country to stand up to say, "We are NOT YOUR SOLDIERS" - "We
demand for our schools and communities to be military-free
zones" on Thursday, and working together with the
National Call for Nonviolent Resistance to stage a "Stand
Down Day" at military recruiting stations on Friday.
Every red-blooded
American aware of these activities should counter their efforts
by getting this information out to as many people as possible,
and if possible by showing up at the same recruiting stations
to show support for our troops' efforts. And don't think they
don't need it!
Just read
what this young recruiting officer from southern California
wrote to me in response to my
previous article on the subject:
"I
am currently stationed in Las Vegas, NV with the US Army
recruiting command. I read your article and it proved to
me that there are still those out there who see the change
in Americas youth. As a recruiter I get all the static in
the world, the problem is, it is from the youth. I support
that students get involved in the political process. In fact
it’s been proven that students that do get involved
do better in school due to the fact that it takes dedication
and hard work to do things of that nature. What truly bothers
me is that these students that protest and disagree with
the nations policies and involvement in the war on terrorism
do not have all the facts. The only thing they know is what
their parents want them to know. They have no real idea what
is really going on but are fueled by opinions of others and
not there own. I would love to debate with a student who
really knows the facts. I swear if I hear one more you should
pull the troops out of the war I'm going to snap. Like I
really have a hand in the whole political process as far
as this war goes. And where do people get the idea that if
we stop recruiting and no soldiers are joining that they
will stop a draft? I'm sorry if I am just running on. I just
wanted you to know that I appreciate what you wrote and it
warms my heart that someone out there wants to see this nation
change it’s views and do it’s research."
Anti-war
activists who belong to organizations such as CODE
PINK, ANSWER, ANTI-
WAR.COM, and the others, just don't get it (or don't care,
because their leftist
rose-colored glasses have blinded them) that passivity
and appeasement never work with dictators and governments that
want to take over the world. History has put a huge exclamation
mark on that truth. And make no mistake, radical Islamic forces
want to dominate the world! Plus, remember, many of the anti-war
groups have communist roots or affiliations.
What drives
CODE PINK? For one thing - Medea
Benjamin, who heads the organization and is "a Castro-loving
neo-communist and perennial anti- U.S.activist" as FrontPageMagazine describes
her. She is also involved with the counter recruitment movement
of the Ruckus
Society, which she's worked with to provide training
camps for teen counter- recruiters. By the way, the Ruckus
Society is an off- shoot of the eco-terrorism group Earth
First! Benjamin was also involved in organizing protests
against the World Trade Organization (WTO) Seattle meeting
in 1999 which resulted in violent riots. Other driving forces
may be Cindy Sheehan who
has joined their ad efforts. Oh, and then they have their
very own letter
from God extolling on their efforts...
When one
of the most important things a soldier needs while in battle
is the moral support of his countrymen, CODE PINK is working
against them by their actions, no matter what they say.
Last week
we observed Veterans Day, now it's time to take a stand to
show our troops we're on their side, we understand what they
are doing, and appreciate their bravery and commitment during
this terrible time in history, the unprecedented war of, and
against, terrorism.
[11/18/05
Friday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:01am [permalink]
More
Misrepresentation of the Ethnic Japanese Relocation The House
passed by voice vote legislation designating $38 million
to preserve sites used for relocated ethnic Japanese in
WW II (David Whitney, Sacbee).
recommendation
to give the Tule Lake center national historic status is on
the desk of Interior Secretary Gale Norton. This year, Rep.
John Doolittle, R-Roseville, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.,
worked to get $200,000 to preserve the center's jail.
In a
letter to Norton in April, the Japanese American Citizens
League said that, of all the detention centers, "Tule Lake
camp is perhaps the most historically significant," in
part because of the structures that still remain.
The Tule
Lake camp is also important because of its unique role.
In operation from 1942 to 1946, the center was infamous
because, in its later period, it is where Japanese Americans
were taken who refused to sign loyalty oaths or who had
criminal or behavioral problems.
Tule Lake poses
an enormous problem for those who argue there was no reason, just
hysteria and prejudice, for the relocation. It is vitally important
that the Interior Department get the story right. Did the relocation
exacerbate resentment of the government or did it expose underlying
pro-Japan feelings in many? Michelle
Malkin's book provides a convincing response to the conventional
wisdom.
See this thoughtful
critique of her book, and my
response and this reaction.
[visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/17/05
Thursday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:01am [permalink]
California
Windfall Has Consequences--Unfortunately Remember what
the Governor said early on: We have a spending problem, not
a revenue problem. Now that California's tax revenues have
increased beyond public expectation, the legislature will
play catchup and feel room to create further spending problems.
From the Sacbee,
Clea Benson:
Legislative
Analyst Elizabeth Hill said the state will have about
$4 billion more in its bank account at the end of the
the current fiscal year than lawmakers estimated when
they approved the budget in July. She said the difference
is enough to balance next year's budget without raising
taxes or making cuts.
But
Hill cautioned that California will still have an operating
deficit in the future, peaking at about $4.3 billion
in a couple of years.
"The
state has to keep its foot on the gas pedal of getting
its fiscal house in order. We're not out of the woods
yet," Hill said at a press conference this morning. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/16/05
Wednesday]
[HJTA]
12:01 am [permalink]
Third Annual "California Piglet Book" Now
Available The Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation
(HJTF) and Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW) today
released the "2005 California Piglet Book" at
a press conference in Sacramento. For the third year in
a row, the report exposes some of the worst examples of
waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement in California's
state and local government.
The California
Piglet Book combines elements of two perennial CAGW publications,
the "Congressional Pig Book" and "Prime Cuts," with
HJTF's knowledge of the California state budget. The report
is but a sample of areas in the state budget where wasteful
or corrupt spending can be eliminated, providing a valuable
resource to legislators, local officials, the media and taxpayers.
"Californians
are threatened with immense tax increases while the waste and
fraud of tax dollars runs rampant," said Jon Coupal, president
of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association. "From payroll
and pension abuse to tens of millions of dollars for a pretend
railroad, the 'California Piglet Book' gives enough examples
to make any California taxpayer cringe."
The entire
report is available for reading or downloading at http://www.HJTA.org/CalPigletBook2005.pdf .
For a hard copy, call HJTA at 916-444-9950 or send an e-mail
request including your complete mailing address and zip code
to PigletBook@HJTA.org
[11/15/05
Tuesday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:01am [permalink]
Arnold
Bond Bond?
That's Arnold, not James (Evan Halper, LAT).
In reverting to the major failure of his early months as
Governor, Schwarzenegger will propose a massive bond measure
($50 billion?) to rework California's infrastructure and,
moreover, rescue his political standing. Pat Brown projects
with Democrat deficits, which of course will now be bipartisan
deficits. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/14/05
Monday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:05am [permalink]
Arnold
Steinberg's Tutorial Arnold
Steinberg continues his tutorial for the Governor:
In
fact, his first year was business as usual. The new governor
became just another pol. He did not cut spending. He did
not raise taxes. He borrowed. But even that would have been
OK if he had changed the system. Then he would not have needed
Tuesday's special election.
....
You do not borrow $15 billion without incorporating
change. People had a sense of crisis, and they were
ready. Why, when there was urgency, did he delay?
Why, Steinberg
asks, did the Governor separate recovery from reform, and wind
up splintering the coalition that elected him? For other Steinberg
commentary,
including his "interview" with the Governor, start with these links here. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/11/05
Friday]
[Sharon
Hughes - radio
talk show host, columnist]
12:15 am [permalink]
Election Results - Has California Gone Mad? Election
Returns...that's right...what we vote for comes back to
(haunt?) us.As a Californian I'm pretty upset right now.
At midnight with 60% of the precincts in Not one of the
measures that should have gotten a "YES" vote
did (73 - 77).
ESPECIALLY
73 which would have required parents to be notified if their
daughter was planning an abortion. Over 50% of Californians
voted NO on this one. huh? Parents now don't think it's their
business to know what's going on with their teenager? No, they
bought into the lie that teens need 'confidentiality' when
it comes to parents knowing, "otherwise they won't go
to the counselors and abortionists for help."
I have to
ask...where were all the conservatives and Christians in this
election here in California? Not in the voting booth, that's
evident. If they were 73 would have passed. And not only 73
but 74 on Teacher Tenure basically requiring more accountability
- failed; and 75 on Union dues which would have prevented unions
from automatically using members's dues for political purposes
without getting their approval - failed; and how about 77 on
Redistricting - failed!
But that's
not all. In San Francisco a bill, Prop H, banning handguns
was passed by 57%. Now, only the police can have guns. Everyone
else will have to turn them in... by April. And Prop 1 "College
not Combat" preventing military recruiters access to schools
or the schools would...here we go again...lose their federal
funding - passed.
Was Texas,
which banned same sex marriage with 74% of the vote, the only
state conservatives dominated in? (I haven't read all the returns
yet, but so far on ballot measures that's the best reported).
The liberals
are gleeful with all their 'victories'...but that's only made
possible because conservative, pro- family registered voters
stayed home. The numbers are there even factoring in voter
fraud and the like. Prop 22 proved that.
[11/10/05
Thursday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:05am [permalink]
Post-Mortem
or Pre-Mortem? This
is no time for moderation. The Governor needs to consider
the bad advice he has gotten from his advisers and reflect
on why he accepted it. He must reject the caricature he has
become: Last night he thanked those who voted against the
propositions.
Is this so distant from
the answers “the
Governor” gave
in his
interview with
Arnie Steinberg? He has to get past the “nurses kick Arnold’s butt” talk that
will haunt him for some time.
Hugh
Hewitt's column is a must-read. He emphasizes the need
for the Governor to listen to respected conservatives, of
whom none can be found in his regular company. The key decision
coming up for him is his choice to replace Judge Janice Brown
on the California Supreme Court.
Dan
Walters has sober advice for the Governor.
A
straight-talking, humbled Schwarzenegger would lay out the
issues that need attention and offer specific and credible
proposals to deal with them, no matter what the reaction would
be from those inside the Capitol who are more interested in
playing partisan or ideological games than taking care of the
public's business.
Is the initative
dead as a means of curbing liberal follies in Sacramento? Aside
from Prop 75, the paycheck protection from union politics measure,
the Governor's initiatives were far too moderate (teacher tenure)
or muddled (redistricting) to receive enthusiastic support.
They were enough, however, to generate enormous opposition.
A more popular governor might have pushed them across the finish
line, but he proved to be more a liability than a help. The
high turnout and the "no" mentality even caused the loss of
a no-brainer initiative on parental notification of a minor
child's abortion. This initiative went down by the narrowest
margin of all, by 53-47%. Conservative parts of the state,
such as Orange
County, supported the Governor but not by sufficient margins
or turnout. See the numbers here.
(By the way, even restoring the
cross on the Redlands City Seal lost.)
The results
certainly indicate the downside of relying on direct democracy:
well-funded demagogues can win.
Jack
Pitney at NRO warns Dems to beware of hubris. And Arnold
is back, Arnold Steinberg, that is, with praise for the Governor's
efforts.
I
agree, though, with Republican strategists that many of those
angry at the special did stay home; otherwise, the results
Tuesday night would have been worse. Still another "no" syndrome
would be television-ad fatigue. The media buys were overkill.
Even casual TV viewers like myself saw every single spot many
dozens of times. Who knows what befell a more regular viewer?
One way to rebel was to stay away. Another way was to vote "no" on
everything. [My underscore]
John
Lott on San Francisco's gun control measure, which passed
by 58%: the gun ban is an unconstitutional violation of state
law prohibiting such local interferences with individual
rights.
Finally,
a note on character and politics. I conjecture that the Governor's
financial arrangements with a weight-lifting magazine and more
personal scandal hurt him a lot more than the campaign stuff
the LA Times dredged up. Back then the nominee was a
movie actor; now he's our Governor, and voters rightly now
hold him to a higher standard. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/9/05
Wednesday]
[[Carol
Platt Liebau - editorial
director CaliforniaRepublic.org] 12:03
am [permalink]
The
War Over Wal-Mart I've long been amazed by the mindless
hatred that liberals display for Wal-Mart. Currently
on AOL, there is a piece discussing
the attacks on the company -- and Wal-Mart's increasing
efforts to respond to
them (none too soon, I might add!).
But there's another site you should check out -- it's the blog for one of the
indie films being made in Wal-Mart's defense (the company has asked that it be
run side-by-side with the anti-Wal-Mart propaganda film being released -- hey,
anyone can hope . . .). The name of the film is
called "Why Wal-Mart Works," and the link to the filmmaker's blog is here.
It's worth a look.
Oh, and here's the
site Wal-Mart has established to try to set the record straight on some of the
more egregious untruths being told about it -- at the moment, it's pointing out
three substantive errors that are made in just three minutes of the anti-Wal-Mart
film.
[11/8/05
Tuesday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
Why We 'MUST' Pass Prop 23 on Tuesday One
of the "main reasons" that California voters
should support 'Prop 23', is that fact that Planned Parenthood
has been encouraging statutory rape, and we have the audio
to prove it. By supporting 'Prop 23', you'll be encouraging
the reporting of 'statutory rape' against minors in California.
Listen for
yourself,as Planned Parenthood encourages a 14 year-old, (assumed
pregnant girl), to visit the clinic in preparation for an abortion
after being impregnated by her "22 year-old" boyfriend.
Many of the office location encourage her to be driven to the
office by the 22 year-old adult, and they offer permission
for him to pay for the abortion.
Many of these
phone calls were preformed in the Sacramento area. You can
hear the actual audio, as well as read the transcript. Make
sure to pass this to others who are voting Tuesday.[Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[11/7/05
Monday]
[Sharon
Hughes - radio
talk show host, columnist]
12:15 am [permalink]
Court Gone Mad! 9th Circuit Court Rules Against
Parents The new ruling by the 9th U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals stating, "There is no fundamental
right of parents to be the exclusive provider of information
regarding sexual matters to their children...Parents have
no due process or privacy right to override the determinations
of public schools as to the information to which their
children will be exposed while enrolled as students," has
Californians in an uproar, and rightfully so!
The liberal
ninth district court known for it's legislating from the bench,
such as in the recent case where the court ruled the Pledge
of Allegiance unconstitutional because it contains the words
'under God', dismissed a lawsuit by California parents on November
3, 2005 who were sued the school district because a sex survey
with inappropriate, nosey questions was given to children in
the first, third and fifth grades. The survey was administered
by the Palmdale School District and asked students questions
such as if they ever thought about having sex or touching other
people's "private parts" and whether they could "stop
thinking about having sex. Other questions in
the survey inivolved:
Touching
my private parts too much
Washing
myself because I feel dirty on the inside
Not trusting
people because they might want sex
Getting
scared or upset when I think about sex
Having
sex feelings in my body
Can't
stop thinking about sex
Getting
upset when people talk about sex
The parents
argued that they have the sole right "to control the upbringing
of their children by introducing them to matters of and relating
to sex." But the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit
dismissed their case with Judge Stephen Reinhardt writing for
the panel, "no such specific right can be found
in the deep roots of the nation's history and tradition or
implied in the concept of ordered liberty."
Can you believe
this? It is absolutely outrageous! And if that weren't enough...The
superintendent of the California school district involved in
the 9th Circuit Court ruling questioned
the motives of the parents involved in the case.
The same
day House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi sided
with the ninth court opposing a Republican plan to split
the liberal, San Francisco-based court in two. The Democrats
are not happy that this made it's way into a must-pass House
budget reconciliation bill.
This is no
small matter. Just because their rulings are so over the top
doesn't mean they won't set precedence that could make it harder
and harder for pro-family Americans to win cases involving
other constitutional laws and violations. The Ninth Circuit
is the largest of all the U.S. circuit courts covering nine
states.
This only
highlights the importance of what kind of judges sit on the
highest court in the land, the Supreme Court.
[11/3/05
Thursday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:05am [permalink]
Debate
Over Prop 77 : Unexpected Twists Commie-turned-conservative
David Horowitz opposes Prop 77, the redistricting initiative. Jubal is
astonished. Also on Hack 'n Flack is Irvine assemblyman Chuck DeVore's endorsement,
arguing that Founding principles are at stake. He notes the disparities between
the House the Founders knew and what we have now. Thanks to Silence DoGood on
that site for pointing
out my op-ed
on 77, which makes illegal immigration a hidden but major issue in the current
districting scheme. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/2/05
Wednesday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:05am [permalink]
Parental/Spousal
Notification Laws Patterico points
out the LA Times' subtle alteration of
an Alito opinion. The left will try to turn spousal/parental
notification into an anti-woman issue. In fact, the public
overwhelmingly supports such laws. See our previous posts on
this subject, featuring the scholarship of Michael New
on the positive effect of parental notification laws.
The Alito
opinion may be read here.
The LA Times has an op-ed on
husbands' legitimate interest in the prospective abortion of
their children. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[11/1/05
Tuesday]
[Chuck
DeVore - Assemblymember, columnist] 12:02
am [permalink]
Follow up on the ballot proposition
money race. There are two broad categories of
propositions on the ballot on November 8th. One category
is that of reform vs. status quo. For the most part, liberals
are opposing reform and Governor Schwarzenegger and his
allies are supporting reform. Propositions 72 through 77
fall into this category. The other category is that of
business or anti-business propositions. Propositions 78-80
are in this latter category.
What’s
been raised so far and what’s the cash on hand for each
broad category as of today?
Liberals
have amassed $102.3 million in opposition to Props. 73-77 with
$7.1 million cash on hand.
The Governor
and his allies have raised $36.8 million to support Props.
73-77 with $1.4 million cash on hand.
As for the
business initiatives, the forces of socialism and regulation
have amassed $67.5 million to support Props. 79 and 80 with
$1.6 million cash on hand.
Business
has raised $120 million to support Prop. 78 and oppose Props.
79 and 80 with $3.8 million cash on hand.
If you merge
these together, assuming that to be pro-business is to be pro-reform
and a friend of the Governor while the opposite is true, then
the combined funds raised of $326.6 million breaks out like
this: $169.8 million against business and reform with $156.8
million for reform and pro-business. Cash on hand: $8.7 million
for the liberals and $5.2 million for reform. [www.ChuckDeVore.com]
Go to CRO
Blog October 2005
Go to CRO
Blog archive index
|