Saturday, October 30, 2010
It was put in place in the early 20th century because the state legislature was corrupt and, surprise, did not always act in the best interests of the citizenry.
In the 2010 election coming this Tuesday, there are 9 initiatives from legalizing marijuana to ending the independent commission on redistricting. Before there is one meeting of the group.
So, I will take the initiative as presented in the Los Angeles county sample ballot and comment on each one.
LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW.
19 PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Fiscal Impact: Depending on federal, state, and local government actions, potential increased tax and fee revenues in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually and potential correctional savings of several tens of millions of dollars annually.
On Prop 19, vote NO.
I am overall ambivalent about whether marijuana should be decriminalized and or legalized. But this measure, no matter how worded, totally contradicts federal law and in that case will make it way in the judicial system. Most importantly, it is another way that the taxing politcial class crack whores are trying to come up with money rather than seek to cut the size of government.
It is an ill-conceived measure that should not be passed at this time. Federal laws must be changed first and then states should be able to decide to legalize it or not.
REDISTRICTING OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Removes elected representatives from process of establishing congressional districts and transfers that authority to recently-authorized 14-member redistricting commission comprised of Democrats, Republicans, and representatives of neither party. Fiscal Impact: No significant net change in state redistricting costs.
On Prop 20, vote YES.
This will end the state legislature's role in redistricting congressional districts in California. In order to get Proposition 11 on the ballot in 2008, congressional redistricting was permitted to still be carried out by a legislature dominated by Democrats. Thus, a yes vote will make all redistricting in the hands of the state commission on redistricting. It is the only way fair lines will be drawn and that Republicans will be competitive in all partisan offices.
ESTABLISHES $18 ANNUAL VEHICLE LICENSE SURCHARGE TO HELP
FUND STATE PARKS AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS. GRANTS SURCHARGED VEHICLES FREE ADMISSION TO ALL STATE PARKS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Exempts commercial vehicles, trailers and trailer coaches from the surcharge. Fiscal Impact: Annual increase to state revenues of $500 million from surcharge on vehicle registrations. After offsetting some existing funding sources, these revenues would provide at least $250 million more annually for state parks and wildlife conservation.
On Prop 21, vote NO.
Sorry, it is another tax. Actually, it is an increase in the vehicle registration tax. And it has, surprise, exemptions. No one loves the great outdoors more than your humble blogger. And California has a lot to offer in this area. But, once again, we are in a time of economic distress and can not afford another tax that is supposed to fund state parks. That is what we were promised with the so-called vanity license plates. Somehow, I do not trust that this money will stay earmarked for the state parks. We can not afford a luxury at this time.
PROHIBITS THE STATE FROM BORROWING OR TAKING FUNDS USED
FOR TRANSPORTATION, REDEVELOPMENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROJECTS AND SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Prohibits State, even during severe fiscal hardship, from delaying distribution of tax revenues for these purposes. Fiscal Impact: Decreased state General Fund spending and/or increased state revenues, probably in the range of $1 billion to several billions of dollars annually. Comparable increases in funding for state and local transportation programs and local redevelopment.
On Prop 22, vote YES.
One of the great sins in how former Gov. Jerry Brown implemented Proposition 13 was to rob cities and counties of their tax earnings, take it to Suckramento, er SACRAmento and redistribute the money. Supposedly according equal to monies the cites and counties raised. This restores that imbalance in a small way. It deserves a yes vote.
SUSPENDS IMPLEMENTATION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (AB 32) REQUIRING MAJOR SOURCES OF EMISSIONS TO REPORT AND REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING, UNTIL UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS TO 5.5 PERCENT OR LESS FOR FULL YEAR. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Fiscal Impact: Likely modest net increase in overall economic activity in the state from suspension of greenhouse gases regulatory activity, resulting in a potentially significant net increase in state and local revenues.
On Prop 23, vote YES
This is most likely the most controversial of the measures on this ballot. It keeps the so-called Globaloney Warming act from taking place until the California unemployment rate hits 5.5% or less for a full year. The Globaloney Warming Act, also known as AB 32 is nothing more than a scam to "create" a green economy with the full force of the state government behind this economy. And yes, implementation will increase energy costs, fuel prices and create even more job losses than California already has. Sanity must prevail and this must pass to restore sanity.
REPEALS RECENT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW BUSINESSES TO LOWER THEIR TAX LIABILITY. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues of about $1.3 billion each year by 2012-13 from higher taxes paid by some businesses. Smaller increases in 2010-11 and 2011-12.
On Prop 24, vote NO.
At least this measure is a good ol' fashioned tax increase. Again, in this time of economic distress, we can not ask for another tax increase. The size and scope of government must be reduced. It is what the private sector does all the time. We can not afford a tax hike now and must defeat this measure.
CHANGES LEGISLATIVE VOTE REQUIREMENT TO PASS BUDGET AND BUDGET-RELATED LEGISLATION FROM TWO-THIRDS TO A SIMPLE MAJORITY. RETAINS TWO-THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Legislature permanently forfeits daily salary and expenses until budget bill passes. Fiscal Impact: In some years, the contents of the state budget could be changed due to the lower legislative vote requirement in this measure. The extent of changes would depend on the Legislature’s future actions.
On Prop 25, vote NO.
On the surface, it does sound good to penalize a dysfunctional state legislature that takes 100 days to pass a budget. But beneath the surface, gutting the 2/3rd majority for passing a budget would lead to the next step. Gutting the 2/3rd provision for tax increases. The real solution is two fold. Do two-year budgeting vs. annual budgeting and have a part-time legislature that must pass the budget as is within 90 days. This is a stealth way to make it eventually easier to raise taxes in California.
REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN STATE AND LOCAL FEES BE APPROVED BY TWO-THIRDS VOTE. FEES INCLUDE THOSE THAT ADDRESS ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SOCIETY OR THE ENVIRONMENT CAUSED BY THE FEE-PAYER’S BUSINESS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Fiscal Impact: Depending on decisions by governing bodies and voters, decreased state and local government revenues and spending (up to billions of dollars annually). Increased transportation spending and state General Fund costs ($1 billion annually).
On Prop 26, vote YES.
This is a really interesting concept. If the people that keep passing these "fees" and increases in these "fees" really believe they are necessary, they will have to take it to the voters. Passage of this measure may make these bodies think twice before passing these "fees".
ELIMINATES STATE COMMISSION ON REDISTRICTING. CONSOLIDATES AUTHORITY FOR REDISTRICTING WITH ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE. Eliminates 14-member redistricting commission. Consolidates authority for establishing state Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization districts with elected representatives who draw congressional districts. Fiscal Impact: Possible reduction of state redistricting costs of around $1 million over the next year. Likely reduction of these costs of a few million dollars once every ten years beginning in 2020.
On Prop 27, vote NO.
Actually, on this, one should vote HELL NO! This is an attempt by the California Democrat party to end this commission before it begins the redistricting process. It is a bald-faced attempt to take reapportionment away from the people and restore it, in this case, to the Democrat-dominated legislature. I firmly believe that we should, at the very least, wait to see the outcome of what the commission does before eliminating it. If neither major political party likes it, then try to make the change. But this is nothing but a last-ditch effort to never allow the people, all the people, to have their say.
A lot of people, many in California, find this process unyielding and claim that it ties the hands of state government and legislators. But, if the same people actually did their job in the first place, many of these measures would not have to be on any ballot. I for one think this was a good thing and yes, it was Progressives that fought and got this change done. A change for the better for California.
We have now mere hours til election day on Tuesday. The result is gelling into a Republican repudiation of the Dear Leader, President Obama, the Democrat party and the overall arrogance of those in Washington and many a state house in this Great Land.
So, rather than letting the people like Chucky Cook, Stuart Rothenberg and the Crystal Ball guy, Dr. Larry Sabato have all the fun, here is something a little different.
The Official 2010 Right View From The Left Coast Predictions For Election Day.
As I wrote on my Facebook page, the Republicans will take 65 seats in the House of Representatives. That will increase their total from 178 to 243. The Democrats will be under 200 seats for the first time since the 80th congress of 1947-49. WOO HA ! ! The Dems will end up with 192 seats. That will be a psychological train wreck for the party of Wilson, FDR and now BHO. Count on gnashing of teeth and talk of dumping the Dear Leader, President Obama in 2012.
Folks, it won't get better for the Dems in the senate.
I believe that the wave, no the tsunami, will take the Republicans to a gain of 11 seats and a majority. Yes, I know, some of those prognosticators think that this is a tough hill to climb. But hey, that did not stop Teddy Roosevelt and the Rough riders in the Spanish-American war, right? There are some races that I think are not even on the radar that can bring that majority to pass. Think New York state and the race for Kirsten Gillibrand's senate seat. The GOP actually has a good candidate in Joe DioGuardi that may just pull off a huge upset. Sen. Gillibrand's numbers are weak for an incumbent and even in a lefty mecca that is New York, Republicans are expected to make gains. Why not here? And two years ago, did anyone think that Wisconsin senator Russ Feingold would be saying bye-bye to his senate seat? It looks that way. It is that kind of year.
In the governor's races, the Republicans will win the majority of them. Yes, Meg Whitman is going to pull out a win in California. Charlie Baker will have a narrow win over Dear Leader, President Obama sycophant Deval Patrick in Massachusetts. In the end, four of the top five populated states in the union will be led by Republican governors. That will be California, Florida, Illinois and Texas. Florida and Texas are still growing states and under current Republican leadership. That will just keep going. The Republicans will have 35 state governors compared to the Dems 15.
Keep in mind that many states will also see increases in Republican legislators. Many could see current Democrat majorities ousted. Or split legislatures. And the most important reason is that there will be reapportionment based on the 2010 census.
But here is my admonition.
This will not happen unless we work and work hard to get every voter to the polls on Tuesday.
I will be doing some precinct walking later today. There are phone calls to be made. Arrangements for giving friends rides on election day. So long as they vote the right way, of course! In other words, we need to Be The Wave together. No, dammit, we need to Be The Tsunami. We need to send a crushing blow to the Democrat party. To Nancy Pelosi. To Harry Reid. And most important of all, the Dear Leader, President Obama, himself. In other words, to quote our Dear Leader, President Obama, in this fight we need to bring a knife. That knife is the vote. To vote out those that have ignored the will of the people. To vote against an ever increasing big government. To vote for fiscal responsibility. To vote for, dare I write this, restoring honor to this Great Land.
We have to make the above predictions come true together.
And one more thing to remember.
On election day, roughly about 6pm Pacific time, we will have an idea who will control congress. A lot of polls will be closed in the East coast and the central time zone. More than likely, the predicition will be for the Republicans to at least have the House. If you are in the Mountain, Pacific or outlying time zones of Alaska and Hawaii, YOU MUST STILL VOTE! The Democrats, God willing, will be so discouraged they will leave the polling stations. If we keep voting, that will not only make the predictions come true, but maybe even larger than we can hope for.
Tuesday is going to be a repudiation of the Democrat party. Pure, plain and simple!
Thursday, October 28, 2010
But, that does not stop your humble blogger from making the official Right View From The Left Coast endorsements in the major races in California.
So, away I go!
Meg Whitman (R)
Secretary of State
Damon Dunn (R)
Tom Strickland (R)
Steve Cooley (R)
Mike Villines (R)
State Board of Equalization (Tax Board)
Shawn Hoffman (American Independent)
State Assembly 44th District
Alvaro Day (R)
United States Senate
Carly Fiorina (R)
United States Congress
John Colbert (R)
Now one may be surprised that I chose to not make an endorsement in a couple of races and even backing a member of the soon to be no more American Independent party.
Well, read on to explain why I choose who I do for what office.
For governor, I have to vote for Meg Whitman-don't blame me, I voted for Steve Poizner! As much as I believe that Mrs. Whitman could have run a better campaign and I have a bit of doubt as to whether or not she will turn into another Benedict Arnold, the real rationale is that she is NOT Jerry Brown.
I know, it is a lousy reason to vote for someone.
But another term of Mr. Brown is going to probably bankrupt this state. There is no doubt in my mind that this is Mr. Brown's attempt to eventually find a way to gut Prop 13, the measure that saved thousands if not millions of California homeowners from being taxed out of their homes. And raise a lot of other taxes. After all, Mr. Brown is a Democrat and has been on a government payroll in one way or another for over 40 years. Mrs. Whitman has been leading and building up companies a lot of that time. To me, on that alone the choice is clear. But, I wished that Mrs. Whitman defined Mr. Brown the way that she did to Steve Poizner. We shall see on Tuesday night.
In the race for Lt. Governor, I can not endorse the political whore-yes I am writing it because it is true-Republican and current LG, Abel Maldonado. Mr. Maldonado got the big payoff for supporting Gov. Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger's attempted tax hikes. When the former Lt. Governor, John Garamendi, won his run for a Bay Area congressional seat, Gov. Benedict Arnold appointed the political whore, Maldonado, to the post. He did not deserve it then and does not deserve it now. But I can not advise to vote for someone even worse, San Francisco mayor and Democrat Gavin Newsom. So, all I can tell you is to follow your conscience as I will follow mine.
For the Secretary of State, Damon Dunn is a great candidate and someone that will follow election law. And not be beholden to the Democrat or Republican interests the way the current Secretary of State, Debra Bowen is to her Democrat special interests. Mr. Dunn see that Prop 11, which set up a citizens commission on political redistricting, will be implemented fair and honestly. I just have my doubts about a Democrat hack, Mrs. Bowen, making sure this will be done in the manner that the voters of California chose this past June.
The controller is the one that is going to have to help navigate California out of the financial morass it is in and state senator Tony Strickland is the clear choice. Unlike the current Democrat incumbent, John Chiang, Sen. Strickland will not be making the political decisions to force the legislature and governor to make bad decisions. He will be prudent and make sure people, vendors and others get paid and on time and no IOU's, the seemingly new Cali currency.
The treasurer's race is one I have not really followed and admit, I know little of Mimi Walters, the GOP standard bearer. The incumbent is Bill Lockyer. And he is just Jerry Brown's little brother, moving from one government job to another. On that alone, I would say vote for Mrs. Walters. But, I do not have a strong feeling in this race. So, I do not have that 100% feeling of recommendation.
For attorney general, the choice is clear. And that is the Los Angeles district attorney, Steve Cooley. His opponent is the San Francisco city/county district attorney, Kamala Harris. Need I write more? Well, I will. Mr. Cooley has led the Los Angeles district attorney's office for eight years and it is highly regarded. Yes, it does not always win some high profile cases. But it does not shy away from taking them on either. Mr. Cooley supports the death penalty and Miss Harris does not. She is very focused on left-wing do-goodism. And believes that her office should go after so-called environmental criminals while because her crime lab made some major screw-ups, many criminals may be let go. No, Mr. Cooley will win this race going away!
For insurance commissioner, it is tough to support the Republican, Mike Villines. After all, he is really no better than the political whore, Lt. Gov. Maldonado. But, Mr. Villines ran a tough primary and won. He was not rewarded the way the political whore, Lt. Gov. Maldonado was. And he won his race fair and square. It will be good to have continued Republican leadership in the office of insurance commissioner.
Now, this endorsement is unusual, but also a necessary one.
For the 4th district of the Board of Equalization, the California tax board, I have to go with the American Independent candidate, Shawn Hoffman. The Republicans blew this by not putting a candidate in. And Mr. Hoffman would bring real world experience over the Democrat incumbent, Jerome Horton. Mr. Hoffman is backed by Tea Party activists and deserves serious consideration for this important but oft overlooked state board.
I have written about Alvaro Day and he is a young man that will bring a necessary youthful outlook in the California state assembly. Mr. Day is young, conservative and not afraid to speak the truth. The Democrat incumbent, Anthony Portantino is but another Democrat hack politician that needs to be sent home.
In the two races for national office, senator and congressman, the choices can not be more stark and clear.
In the senate, Republican Carly Fiorina is the absolute choice to beat the most awful Sen. Ma'am Boxer. Mrs. Fiorina is a solid conservative and will bring a real world knowledge to congress. Something Sen. Ma'am has forgotten in her 28 years as a congressman and senator. Unlike Sen. Ma'am Boxer, Mrs. Fiorina rose to become the CEO of computer giant Hewlett-Packard. And yes, she had to make tough business decisions. And yes, they were not popular. But she made those decisions. And Hewlett-Packard is a stronger company today because of Mrs. Fiorina. What has Sen. Ma'am done lately? Well, more to kill jobs than anything. Voted for the so-called "stimulus", so-called health care "reform", for TARP. Everything that has killed this economy and will kill it. It is why I more than urge you to vote for Carly for senate.
And in congress, another Dear Leader, President Obama, shill, congressman Adam Schiff, needs to be sent home as well. The man to do that is John Colbert. Just read the above reasons and cast a vote for Mr. Colbert. Mr. Schiff has had 10 years in congress and while he has done some good things that all congressmen do for their districts, it is the big picture that I can not stomach. And you should not either. We must end our over dependency on Washington to solve our local problems. And that is why Mr. Colbert will make a great choice over Congressman Schiff.
For the record, I do not link to the Democrats I oppose because I think you ought to consider voting for any of them. It is to provide contrast to the Republican candidates I support or defer support.
We only have a few days. On Tuesday, November 2, 2010, we can be a part of history. We can get sanity back at all levels of government.
But we need to do several things.
One, go to any of the endorsed candidates websites. Drop some money. Also consider volunteering some time.
Make sure to vote. If you have not done your absentee ballot, do it now. You can even take it to the nearest polling station on election day. Vote on election day. Make sure to get those on the fence on the right side and get them to the polls.
But most important we all have a stake in the outcome of this election. Some of my candidates did not make it this far. But that is water under the bridge. We need to get all of these good people over the top. The Dems and the left are very organized, but not exactly excited about voting. We, conservative Republicans, are beginning to catch up. And independents that have been disappointed with the GOP, now is a chance to make a difference. And if you are a disaffected Dem, send a message.
Now is the time to take our state and our nation back!
Monday, October 25, 2010
Why was the Dear Leader, President Obama, in as Blue a state as Rhode Island this late in the 2010 midterm election campaign?
Apparently, not to help the Democrat nominee for governor, Frank Caprio. Mr. Caprio had this for the Dear Leader, President Obama:
"He can take his endorsement and really shove it as far as I'm concerned."
Remember, Mr. Caprio is the Democrat nominee for governor.
It appears that President Obama is not endorsing the Democrat candidate for governor out of deference to the "independent" candidacy of former "Republican" senator and Dear Leader, President Obama supporter, Lincoln Chaffee.
Not the brightest move in one of the most Democrat states in the Union.
And Mr. Caprio had this to add in his diatribe against the Dear Leader, President Obama:
"We had one of the worst floods in the history of the United States a few months back and President Obama didn't even do a flyover of Rhode Island," Caprio said, according to WPRO. "He ignored us and now he's coming into Rhode Island and treating us like an ATM machine."
True that, Mr. Caprio.
The Dear Leader, President Obama, was in the Ocean State in another of the endless Democrat fundraisers in Providence. And he campaigned for the state's Democrat nominee's for congress. Veteran Rep Jim Langevin and candidate David Cicilline. Mr. Cicillne is running for the seat being vacated by Rep. Patrick Burp Kennedy. And the Republican challenger, John J. Loughlin II is making a very serious run at this seat. And it has been in Republican hands before as recently as the early 1990s.
Maybe this is one of the peripheral reasons the Dear Leader, President Obama took time out to visit Rhode Island.
It just does not make sense for the Dear Leader, President Obama, to be in a state like Rhode Island this late in the game.
Unless there is trouble brewing.
My advice is to head over to John Loughlin's website and dole a little cash or any other assistance.
It is time to put the Red back in Rhode Island Red!
Sunday, October 24, 2010
In endorsement after endorsement this political season, it has either endorsement an incumbent or a Democrat. Two exceptions are for attorney general. They endorse Republican Steve Cooley over Democrat Kamala Harris. And for senator the Star-News endorses Republican Carly Fiorina over Sen. Ma'am Boxer.
But today's Star-News endorsement of Democrat Jerry Brown over Republican Meg Whitman is rather bizarre to say the least.
In this time of needing a real outsider to clean up the mess in Sacramento, the Star-News endorses Mr. Brown because, and you have to read the whole thing to get here, he can cut deals.
Really, is that what we need in a time when the state of California is an economic basket-case? In which unemployment is over 12%? When the budget is in an over $19,000,000,000 deficit?
The endorsement claims that Mr. Brown cut taxes, spending and balanced budgets. Two out of three are not exactly correct.
Mr. Brown did not cut taxes. In fact, he was vehemently opposed to Proposition 13, the measure that froze property taxes and saved many from having to sell their homes because of the oppressive, constant rise in property taxes. The only reason he went along with implementing the popular measure is that it won overwhelmingly in 55 of 58 counties. Throughout his two-terms as governor, Mr. Brown was constantly looking for more "revenue" to increase government spending. Mr. Brown support a hike in the gas tax. Supported measures to increase taxes on not-so-favored business and decrease for those favored by the governor. In other words, picking winners and losers by tax code.
In reality, Mr. Brown left California is worse shape than when he began his term as governor in 1975.
Another reason the Star-News states for endorsing Mr. Brown is his commitment to a "green" economy. Specifically about Red China and Texas leading the way in alternative energy innovation.
What the Star-News does not note is that Mr. Brown opposes Proposition 23, which would suspend the California global warming law until unemployment gets down to 5.5% for four consecutive quarters. Sure, few if any media supports Prop 23. Yes, all the environmentalists, dirt-worshipers and their allies oppose Prop 23. And those that do not want to be on the wrong side of so-called Globaloney Warming oppose Prop 23. But, please explain where all the "green" jobs are in California? If we look at this recent study, implementing the global warming act full steam ahead will have a net loss of 500,000 jobs as soon as 2012.
One of those that has led this scam all of his elected life is, TA DA ! ! Jerry Brown.
And let us look at how many different offices and other elections Mr. Brown has run in.
In 1969, Mr. Brown's first foray in elective politics was for a seat on the then new Los Angeles Community College Board. A seat he won.
And Mr. Brown used that to parlay into winning the Democrat nomination and subsequent election to Secretary of State in 1970.
Long time on that community college board, eh?!
And in 1974, he ran for the Democrat nomination for governor and defeated Republican Houston Flournoy by a slim margin.
For some reason, Mr. Brown thought he would make a great president after less than two years as governor. Sounds kind of familiar, doesn't it? So, Mr. Brown stepped into the 1976 presidential contest running for the Democrat nomination. Of course he lost to the worst president in the 20th century, James Earl Carter. So, Mr. Brown went back to the drudgery of being governor.
Yet that did not stop him from winning a second term as governor in 1978.
Once again, the presidential bug got to Mr. Brown. But this time it was half-hearted and not much of a serious campaign. Of course Mr. Carter ran, got the nomination for a second term and trounced by Ronald Reagan.
Now Mr. Brown did not make the mistake of running for a third term as governor in 1982. He wanted to move up to the senate. Yes, Mr. Brown did win the nomination against token opposition. But, alas, Mr. Brown lost this race to Republican Pete Wilson.
One would think Mr. Brown would just slither away.
Mr. Brown once again believed that the American people really, really wanted him as president. He ran a third time and was trounced by a successful Southern governor by the name of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
So desperate for a political platform he ran for mayor of Oakland, California. And of course he won two terms. First in 1998 and again in 2002. One can suppose in Oakland, Mr. Brown would be mistaken for a conservative. After all, he was succeeded by the irrepressible left-wing congressman Ron Dellums.
And if that was not enough, Mr. Brown ran for the Democrat nomination for Attorney General and won election to that post in 2006.
Eleven times running for office. Over 40 years in one kind of office or another.
And the worst thing that Mr. Brown did as governor was signing legislation that allowed collective bargaining for state employees.
Yes, it is true that the cost skyrocketed after Mr. Brown left office. It was his old chief-of-staff, the Gray Era, Gray Davis, that as governor signed deal after deal that bankrupted the state. But it was setting the wheels in motion that Mr. Brown must be blamed for.
No, I am sorry Pasadena Star-News, Jerry Brown is not what California needs in this time of real crises. Meg Whitman is not perfect, but she is not related to a Kennedy-by-marriage. She has a real record as an business executive, not as an action star that appears to have had one knock on the noggin too many. We need someone not beholden to state labor unions and a slew of special interests.
I am disappointed, but not surprised that the Pasadena Star-News would endorse Jerry Brown for governor. Let us, the voters, not make the mistake the Star-News made. I urge you to vote for Meg Whitman for governor.
In the governor's race, Jerry Brown has the lead over Meg Whitman according to the Los Angeles Times/USC poll, 52% to 39% with 9% undecided or do not know. Note that the number polled is rather high, 1,501 voters and out of that, 922 likely voters.
This poll also showed in 2003 that Gray Davis would be retained as governor and the recall election would be defeated. I would continue to question the validity of this particular poll.
A poll at Rasmussen reports is similar, showing Mr. Brown leading Mrs. Whitman, 48% to 42% with about 10% undecided or leaning another way.
One last poll from Survey USA shows Mr. Brown also leading Mrs. Whitman by a 47% to 40% margin with about 13% undecided or leaning another way.
When these three polls are averaged out, Mr. Brown, the Democrat, is leading Mrs. Whitman about 48% to 40% with 12% undecided.
So, what does that mean in the governor's race.
That Jerry Brown better not make decorating plans for the governor's office just yet.
Consider that there is still 12% of voters that are still undecided. This late in a race means that there is movement still to be had for either candidate. While it appears that would be going Mr. Brown's way, some of it maybe due to the so-called illegal alien maid controversy of Mrs. Whitman. Another is that the Democrats are getting more involved in the campaign. And that Mr. Brown is banking on his name and two-term tenure as California governor.
But in as Democrat a state as California has become, Mr. Brown being ahead only eight percent against an unknown a year ago is not all that great news.
One other thing about the polls at this point.
There nothing about those that have voted early by absentee ballot. And that may determine the outcome of this race. Think 1982 in the match up with Democrat Los Angeles mayor Tom Bradley and Republican attorney general George Deukmejian.
In that election, all the polls showed Mr. Bradley with a rather large lead. Come election day and whoops! Mr. Deukmejian wins by about 50,000 votes.
Because Republicans took advantage of the then new way to vote. By mail and early. Although the link continues the canard of the so-called "Bradley effect", the real reason Mr. Bradley lost is the push for people on the Republican side to vote absentee.
It could be happening here and that is not being played out in polling.
The race for the senate is similar to the governor's match up.
Veteran Democrat troll Sen. Ma'am Boxer is leading another Republican unknown, Carly Fiorina but those numbers are closer for the GOP.
Let us look at that Los Angeles Times/USC poll again in this race. It shows Sen. Ma'am Boxer leading Mrs. Fiorina, 50% to 42% with about eight percent undecided or do not know.
In the Survey USA poll, it shows a much closer race with Sen. Ma'am Boxer leading Mrs. Fiorina, 46% to 44% with about 10% undecided or do not know.
And there is the Rasmussen poll that also shows Sen. Ma'am Boxer with a two-point advantage over Mrs. Fiorina, 48% to 46% with about six percent undecided or do not know.
Average this out and Sen. Ma'am Boxer has a narrower 48% to 44% lead over Mrs. Fiorina.
Why Sen. Ma'am Boxer has an advantage is simple. She is the incumbent. And has name recognition. Yet again, an unknown named Carly Fiorina is within striking distance this late in the game.
That says something.
That while it is possible California will vote two Democrats as governor and senator, they are still looking seriously at the Republican candidates. And that there is an unknown about how down-ticket voting may tip the balance. There are at the very least five Democrat congressional seats up for Republicans to pick off. That can translate into how people vote for governor and senate.
I write this now with urgency to fellow conservatives and Republicans.
The race in California is no where near out of reach. It is within reach. We need to focus on getting Mrs. Fiorina in the senate and Mrs. Whitman in the governor's office in Sacramento. And we need to focus on the congressional seats as possible pickups. As well as state assembly and senate seats.
This is no time to wallow in poll numbers. Look at the averages. They are still within reach.
We California voters are a dyslexic bunch. We vote for Democrats yet want Republican governance. Time to make both trains meet at the station.
Some people will take some political meaning of this match up.
You know, Red state Rangers from Texas vs. Blue state Giants from San Francisco.
Well, let those people have their political argument about this match up.
My reason that the Rangers will defeat the Giants is two fold.
One, I believe that the Rangers are the better team than the Giants. They have the best players in each position and better pitching.
The second, most important reason is simple.
I HATE THE GIANTS! ! ! !
Yes, it is visceral hatred for the Orangemen from the dreaded No Cal.
You see, I am a tried and true, blue-bleeding Los Angeles Dodger fan.
My father, may God rest his soul, was from Brooklyn. For many years, they were still the Brooklyn Dodgers. Even as they became established here in California. It was just that way.
And I have carried on the tradition of loving the Dodgers. In many ways, the Los Angeles Dodgers are not all that different from the Brooklyn Dodgers.
The Los Angeles Dodgers, more often than not, break our hearts. Much the same happened in Brooklyn.
But, they are my team. And part of being a Dodger fan is to live to hate the dreaded Giants.
Don't care if they are in New York, San Francisco, Kabul or the moon. They are to be hated.
Even though Bobby Thomson is off to the glory, he can never be forgiven for the home run against the Dodgers in 1951 in which sent the Giants to the World Series that year.
Also, one thing that many a baseball fan forget is that the great Jackie Robinson decided to end his baseball career rather than play for the Giants, the team he was traded to by the Dodgers.
But let us come to the present.
Yes, the Giants are in the World Series. To acronym our Vice-President, Joe the Brain Biden, BFD.
The Rangers have never gotten this far before.
The Rangers once played in the worst stadiums in major league baseball, old Arlington Stadium. It was an old minor-league ballpark and additional seats slapped all over the place to increase the capacity.
Then came new ownership in the late 1980s led by George W. Bush and took this team from doldrums to competitiveness. From old Arlington Stadium to the Ballpark At Arlington. And set the stage for where they are today.
Consider that subsequent ownership nearly bankrupted the team. Yet in the middle of a pennant race, it sold to a group led by pitching great Nolan Ryan for $575,000,000. In the middle of the worst economic conditions since World War II.
And the field leader of this team, Ron Washington, is a story all to himself.
After testing positive for cocaine in 2009, he went public with it. He was not fired. Instead, he was given a second chance. And he has made the most of it.
Mr. Washington's story is similar to another one of the Rangers players, Josh Hamilton. Mr. Hamilton's story is even worse than Mr. Washington as he was in a car accident with his parents. His parents recovered. But it sent Mr. Hamilton into a tailspin of drug and alcohol abuse.
This Ranger team is a lot like another team of destiny.
That would be the 2002 Anaheim Angels, who by coinkidink beat the dreaded Giants in that World Series.
My fearless prediction is that the Texas Rangers will defeat the San Francisco Giants, four games to two.
And that is eternal justice for a Dodger fan!
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Now so there is clarity as to what got the panties and undies in a bunch at NPR, here is what Mr. Williams said:
Political correctness can lead to some kind of paralysis where you don't address reality. I mean, look Bill [O'Reilly], I'm not a bigot, you know the kind of books I've written on the civil rights movement in this country, but when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous. Now, I remember also that when the Times Square bomber was at court, I think this was just last week. He said the war with Muslims, America's war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don't think there's any way to get away from these facts. But I think there are people who want to somehow remind us all as President Bush did after 9/11, it's not a war against Islam.
The above is from Wikipedia.
So, if I get this right, when someone speaks the truth, it gets him or her fired? Even it one makes such a truthful statement in a great context of not overreacting to those Islamics in full garb?
In NPR land, why of course.
And just for good measure, NPR CEO Vivian Schiller had this lovely comment in regards to Mr. Williams' comments:
"Williams should have kept his feeling about Muslims between himself and his psychiatrist or his publicist."
WOW! Amazing. From the land of tolerance and down-the-middle coverage of news and current events.
Guffaw! Guffaw! Guffaw!
It appears to Mrs. Schiller that Mr. Williams is somehow irrational for being honest about how he feels when he enters on a plane and there are people in Islamic clothes.
Now that the background is out of the way, the thrust of this post is the fact that the media critic for the Left Angeles Times, James Rainey, is bashing NPR, NPR has lost this battle. Big time.
Now, anyone who reads this blog with any regularity knows that I loathe the Left Angeles Times. Especially people like Mr. Rainey. But, as a broken clock is right twice a day, Mr. Rainey is very spot on in this column.
Mr. Rainey explains that Mr. Williams did not just make the now infamous comment. That he was trying to explain his own anxiety in an overarching theme that Islamics should not be painted with a broad-brush as terrorists and the like.
I especially like this paragraph from Mr. Rainey:
I thought this was the sort of candid conversation about race and ethnicity we were supposed to have. Didn't President Obama suggest that only open dialogue would chip away hardened misconceptions?
Why yes indeed, the Dear Leader, President Obama, did make that comment. And then stuck his nose in a local police matter in Cambridge, Massachusetts involving the arrest of a Black professor by White police officers.
Memo to Mr. Rainey.
Unfortunately, you may have not read the fine print about that conversation. It has to be on the terms of the so-called victims, not the reality of the moment.
Mr. Rainey gives one of the justifications of Mr. Williams' firing from ethics guidelines provided by NPR.
NPR journalists "should not participate in shows … that encourage punditry and speculation rather than fact-based analysis," reads the pertinent section.
Hmm, wouldn't that kind of sort of put NPR out of business? I mean, are all of their current events programming "fact based analysis"?
Once again, Guffaw! Guffaw! Guffaw!
And Mr. Rainey points out that a former colleague, Mara Liasson, NPR Washington correspondent, is a regular Fox News Channel contributor. Mostly on Special Report but also on Fox News Sunday.
And in a bit of honesty, Mr. Rainey writes about Nina Totenberg and her rather opinionated comments about the late senator Jesse Helms and a wish that he or a family member get AIDS? And Mr. Rainey rightly asks the question. Should Miss Totenberg been fired for such an inflammatory comment.
Well, she still has her job. And the great Charles Krauthammer literally gave her the hammer about that on another Washington gab fest show. Coincidental, that was on PBS television.
What happened to Mr. Williams and the reaction of the media community shows one thing. That NPR needs to be put out of any government funding whatsoever. Even if taxpayer dollars only make two to three percent of the annual budget, it is too much. Same for PBS.
If these two public entities make it on donations of listeners and watchers and augmented by money from private entities, then they essentially are no different that the Discovery channel. Or the History channel.
In other words, to be a full part of the public broadcast family, one should be paying for the privilege.
So, get a cable box or a satellite dish.
Psst. I have to tell those who won't do that something.
We are in the 21st century. This is a new communication age. The same need for a public broadcasting company as when these started in the 1960s is not the same as today.
The other, instructive bottom line is that when NPR loses even an ally like the Left Angeles Times, it may really have numbered their days on the taxpayer dime.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Most states will be electing members of their state legislatures whether they are in the lower house or the senate. And many will be electing governors, constitutional officers, members of the judiciary and offer their yeas or nays on many a state referendums.
I want to focus on California.
Here where I live I am represented in the state assembly (lower house) by a Democrat. Surprise! He is one Anthony Portantino. He is a typical California Democrat. A big taxer, spender and in the hip pocket of the state labor unions. He would appear to be in a safe, gerrymandered district.
But this election season, nothing for the Democrats can be all that safe.
A young man is taking the challenge to Mr Portantino head on.
He is Republican Alvaro Day.
Yes, he is very young. And full of energy. And is one that is living the American dream like no other.
Mr. Day came with his mother from war-torn Peru when he was 11 years old. He could not speak English and yet managed to do so with ease. His mother was a divorcee and met Mr. Day's stepfather who taught him the values that make the United States the greatest nation in the world. And with that Mr. Day went to Pasadena City College, completed his general education in nine months. Nine months! It usually takes two years. Then he went on to UCLA and graduated with a double major in political science and history. And all by the time he was 20 years old.
On the issues that directly affect California, Mr. Day is spot on.
Mr. Day supports Prop 23, which will delay implementing of the Global Warming act, AB 32. It is essentially Cap and Tax at the state level. And this will not kill AB 32, just delay it and fine tune it.
Mr. Day also supports Prop 22 which finally stops the state government from raiding cities and counties to cover the endless budget deficits we now have as far as the eye can see.
Mr. Day wants the state to go on a fiscal diet. To live within our means. And while difficult it can be done.
Mr. Day wants across-the-board tax cuts for all Californians. Amen to that, my brother! This state has an income tax, sales tax, property taxes, fees up the wazoo and yet we are broke. And the state wants more. It will not get more unless people are working. Real jobs. Not phony baloney "green" jobs. If people are working, they can pay the taxes. A simple fact that never seems to fall well into the mind of the tax-and-spenders in Sacramento.
Two other somewhat controversial ideas Mr. Day has also are good ones.
One is teaching, OMG!-values in our schools! Mr. Day believes in teaching discipline, personal responsibility, mutual respect, and love of country.
We need a lot of that in our schools. Especially personal responsibility. Too often, our children are taught by an array of people that mistakes they make are not necessarily their fault. They end up in the world thinking that the world owes them something. That they do not have to work hard for it.
And last is continuing to privatize our state prisons.
It is no secret that California has a high prison population. Yet the state is paying on average $49,000 to house inmates in state prisons. Imagine if a private concern would be running these prisons? It could save the state billions of dollars annually.
At least Mr. Day has some ideas.
Go over to the issues on Mr. Portantino's campaign website and it is standard Democrat boiler plate issues. I especially like the "advocate for social justice". He does not address any of the issues that Mr. Day brings up.
And this is really important.
Much is made that the youts, young people, just will go with what is in. What's cool. What's hot and happening. That they will back Democrats and their agenda overwhelmingly.
I think that young people like Alvaro Day put that canard out to pasture.
We need to remember these local races in the upcoming election. And if you are in the California 44th Assembly district, vote for Alvaro Day to send Anthony Portantino into retirement.
Monday, October 18, 2010
On the right, supposedly, is one that seems to have no real visible means of income. She dabbles in writing here and there. She even has a book somewhere out there. In reality, this young gal is a dilettante. Yet, for some inexplicable reason, fellow elites value what this gal has to say.
On the left is one that does have a job. Though not very good at it. He seems to jump from job to job. We do not know a lot about this guy. He has written two books, well received by fellow elites and their followers. Yet to this day, we have no idea his college records. Even though he attended three colleges/universities. The gentleman is kind of like Peter Sellers in the movie Being There.
On the right, I am speaking of Sweet Meghan McCain and her stellar appearance on This Week with Christiane Amanpour.
What wisdom drooled from the mouth of the daughter of Sen. John "F--- You" McCain?
This is what she had to say in reference to the Republican senate candidate from Delaware, Christine O'Donnell:
“Well, I speak as a 26-year-old woman and my problem is that, no matter what, Christine O’Donnell is making a mockery of running for public office…She has no real history, no real success in any kind of business….[the message] that sends to my generation is: one day you can just wake and run for Senate, no matter how [much of] a lack of experience you have. And it scares for me for a lot of reasons. I just know, in my group of friends, it turns people off because she’s seen as a nutjob.”
OK, so you are a 26-year-old woman that does not seem to have a real job. Oh, that's right, you are an author. And how many books did you sell, Miss McCain? As of September 16, a rip roaring 2,644. And what was the title of the tome? Dirty, Sexy Politics. How original! And really Sweet Meghan, what is it that makes you the arbiter of what is or is not a mockery of running for public office? How about a former state senator that gets elected to the United States senate and two years later runs for president? Hmm. Betcha didn't think of that one, eh Sweet Meghan?
No, it is just an elitism that is taking certain precincts on the right. You heard it the night that Miss O'Donnell won the race against Congressman Mike Castle. Karl Rove ranted on Hannity how terrible it was and that it blew the Republicans chances to take the senate. Many others have mocked Miss O'Donnell.
What they fail to realize is that it was Miss O'Donnell that mounted a conservative challenge rather than buy the conventional wisdom that everyone had to get behind RINO* Mike Castle. And with a little help from Tea Party activists and some radio talk show hosts like Mark Levin, Miss O'Donnell won and is the candidate for the Republican party in Delaware. She won the majority of Republican votes in a primary. Something that she has done before.
And another thing. The primary season is over. If Miss McCain cares about getting a Republican majority, then get on board the O'Donnell Express and shut up about all the other stuff.
Well, our shrink had this to say to a group of Democrats at, what else, a fundraiser over the weekend:
"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now and facts and science and argument does not seem to be winning the day all the time is because we're hardwired not to always think clearly when we're scared. And the country's scared.”
Yes, you are right about one thing. The people of the United States are scared. Scared of losing a job. Seeing that adds to an over 10% unemployment rate that shows no signs of abating. Scared of losing their homes. Homes that many bought and are paying for in the old fashioned honest way. Scared of losing their 401K s. Scared of losing investment income. Scared of having taxes raised when they are already paying an array of taxes at the local, county, state and federal level.
I am sorry if that makes us a little bit irrational in your mind Dear Leader, President Obama. But what he fails to mention is the possibility of his prescription for our fears is not part of the problem.
That is the problem. The people just do not believe that you did what you claimed you would do when you were Sen. Messiah Barack. That you would cut taxes. That you would not add to the deficit. That you would implement policies that would not let unemployment rise above eight percent. That you would pay-as-you-go when funding government programs. To be blunt Dear Leader, President Obama, the American people are beginning to see that you have been a fraud. And they, no we are ready to put the brakes on your hyper partisan, left wing agenda.
We need a leader, not a psychologist in the White House. We need some one that does not mock the people that he serves. And that is what the Dear Leader, President Obama, does every time he says things like this. Sir, with the respect of the office of President of the United States, you have failed us. And we are gonna send a message to you.
This multi-faceted elitism of the left and the right is what people are reacting to. We are tired of being told what is good and right for us by people that just do not live in the real world. That is what Sweet Meghan McCain and the Dear Leader, President Obama, like to do. And methinks they are going to be righteously rebuked two weeks from tonight.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Yes, it is linked in the Puffington Post. But it is an actual Associated Press story that shows Republican insurgent John Colbert is making incumbent Democrat Adam Schiff scared. The fact that Mr. Schiff, who won last time with 69% of the vote is sending letters to voters ragging on Mr. Colbert is a good sign that there is progress for Mr. Colbert.
Folks, Mr. Colbert is running really hard. He can use some help. Money, time. Anything.
When an incumbent like Mr. Schiff has to fight off some one like Mr. Colbert, it is a sign that the Tea Party candidates are the real deal. No amount of spin can stop that. No matter what the Democrats and their allies say.
For some reason, I have not been able to find any polling on this race. One suspects that because this is such a Democrat-heavy district, the assumption is that it is a lock for the Dems. But in this climate, do not count on it.
Maybe this over at The Campaign Spot at National Review Online is an indicator that things are really going the Republican and Tea Party way.
Just remember, there is a local candidate named John Colbert that needs some help!
Thursday, October 14, 2010
But the real story is the determination of many people to get these rough and rugged men out from the deep copper and gold mine.
Start with the newly elected Chilean President, Sebastian Pinera. When the miners were discovered to be alive, Mr. Pinera did not fool around. He sent out for help anywhere and everywhere.
Then there is the use of the device, a drill that was able to go the distance and break through to the area where the miners were trapped.
And there was the claustrophobic capsule that lifted each and every man to freedom, in less time than estimated.
And one thing that can not and better not be ignored is the free market and what was able to be used in the rescue.
As noted by The Wall Street Journal's Daniel Henninger, a 74-employee company, Center Rock, Inc provided the drill bit and Schramm, Inc provided the rig that saved the miners.
And at the Ludwig von Mises economics blog, it is noted that there are other innovations that helped as well. Some of the items mentioned were cell phones, special socks and cables. And a lot more.
In other words, as a direct result of free market innovation and progress, something that was unimaginable a mere quarter-century ago happened.
But it also happened because nations and people worked together.
One of the miners that was trapped was a citizen of Bolivia. That president, Evo Morales is to the far left of the conservative Chilean president, Mr. Pinera. But Mr. Morales was at the mine to greet the lone Bolivian, Carlos Mamani. Mr. Mamani was also greeted by Mr. Pinera.
Oh, one last but probably important reason the miners felt that they would be freed.
They mentioned that there was a 34th person with them.
Who would that be?
God, who they said never left them.
A lot of things came together and it is instructive in how to handle a crisis.
I mean, the folks in charge there really do think that Democrats are just going to flock to the polls on election day and stop the Republican tsunami.
Another example of the Times shilling for Democrats is this article on Utah Republican Jim Bennett.
Who is Jim Bennett?
He is the son of the current Republican Senator, Robert Bennett. Sen. Bennett could not get renominated within his own party's convention nominating process. So well thought of by Utah Republicans, Sen. Bennett came in third in convention earlier this year.
And who was Sen. Bennett's campaign manager?
BINGO! Ol' Jimmy Bennett.
Jimmy did such a bang-up job, didn't he?
So, rather than being a mensch and backing the eventual winner, Mike Lee (who won a primary after the Republican convention was not able to agree on one candidate), he is backing the Democrat running, Sam Granato.
And because Utah is as Republican as Massachusetts is Democrat, even with Jimmy Bennett's backing, Mr, Granato is only about 30 points down to Mr. Lee.
And Jimmy Bennett is not alone in his displeasure at so-called fellow Republicans.
There are two other Republicans mentioned in the article. One is Sheryl Allen. She is so mad at the Republicans, she is running for lieutenant governor. As a Democrat. Same for Tiani Coleman who is running for congress as a Democrat.
Here is what Quin Monson a professor at Brigham Young University explained:
"There's a group of moderate Republicans that are disappointed in the direction the state party is taking, but the problem is they're not as large and energized as the group that took out Sen. Bennett."
Tea party backed candidates won and moderate Republicans decided to do what they always do. Take their marbles to the other team. Remember, to these people, conservatives lose they always have to support the moderate winner. Not the other way around.
The real question is why the Times wasted a lot of trees to focus on a race that they essentially admit the Democrats have no chance to win?
Because it is the narrative that the Republicans are divided. That they are in disarray. And that many are flocking to the Democrat party.
If that was the case, why does it appear that the Republicans are poised to take the House, senate and majority of governorships?
Only on 3rd and Spring streets in downtown Los Angeles do they still believe in the Democrat party. One only has to take a look at their state endorsements to get there. Only for the attorney general's race did they endorse a Republican, Los Angeles county district attorney Steve Cooley.
And yet they feel they have a pulse on the average Republican in Utah.
Well, put this shilling in the file. A waste of a story to push a mythical narrative.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Bastions of Democrat dominance are on the brink.
In Oregon, the stoners there are even coming to grips that the Dear Leader, President Obama, is not all that he is cracked-up to be. Two Democrat congressmen there, Peter DeFazio and Kurt Schrader are in serious fights to maintain their seats. It should be noted that Mr. DeFazio won his seat in 2008 with 82% of the vote. And Mr. Schrader won his by a high number as well. Yet Mr. DeFazio admits that he is in the fight of his political life.
If both seats become Republican, then the Oregon congressional delegation will be a majority Republican one by a 3-2 margin.
In Washington state, veteran Democrat Sen. Patty Murray is in a big fight with Republican Dino Rossi. Polls show that he is ahead, although within the margin of error.
Go to the other side of the United States, to New England and there is energy not seen since 1994.
Republicans look poised to gain congressional seats in Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire. On the outside is maybe Rhode Island in the first district. That seat is being vacated by Patrick Burp Kennedy. One hopes that no matter who wins, that winner is one that keeps his or her distance from adult beverage. Right now, only in New York state are there any Republicans in congress. And that is only two. Even in Blue New York state, the Republicans are expected to make big gains.
And let us not forget that if this is a tsunami coming, a Democrat senator in New York may fall. No, not Sen. Chucky Scummer, er Schumer. But Democrat Kristen Gillinbrand. She has a serious race on her hands with Republican Joe DioGuardi. And do not rule out World Wrestling Entertainment executive Linda McMahon upsetting Democrat attorney general Richard Blumenthal.
And there is the South, the Midwest, the Great Plains and, you get the picture.
We will know really early in the West if this is indeed gonna be a tsunami on November 2. And if it is, expect that potential Democrat voters really stay home. That is sure to effect many races out here.
My guess is that Republicans and independents can not wait to vote. Democrats would like this to be over already to concentrate on 2012. And that will lead to a political churning that we have not seen in our lifetimes.
I have wanted to write on this subject, but was not motivated until Dr. Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist seminary, said that yoga is not compatible with Christianity.
On the surface, Dr. Mohler is correct.
But I find that there are caveats to saying whole cloth that yoga is not compatible with Christianity.
In reading Dr. Mohler's essay on the subject, he addresses the spiritual aspects of this popular exercise discipline. And he is right since yoga is a Hindu spiritual practice. And Hinduism is not a monotheistic religion.
Make no mistake, Hinduism is a religion. But it does not believe in one God the way that Jews, Christians and Islamics do. The Hindu believe that there are many Gods. It is a version of Roman, Greek and Nordic religion.
What Dr. Mohler addresses in the essay is that if one is a Christian and does practice yoga, can they be buying into the different Gods that Hinduism focuses on? After all, according to this in Wikipedia, there are six different kinds of yoga practices.
Although it is changing, most of those that practice yoga are not Christians. Many of the leading proponents of the practice are what I would term the usual suspects. Liberals, Hollyweird types, so-called "freethinkers" and those opposed to any form of authority.
What is changing, and what can make the practice much more acceptable to the Christian is the expropriation of the physical aspects of yoga with Christian scripture and discipline.
And Christianity has done it before.
You know the two biggest Holy days in the Christian calendar, Christmas and Easter, were essentially stolen from the pagans. The Roman emperor Constantine was the one that took the celebration of Jesus Christ's birth from pagan ritual. Same with Easter. The reality is that there is no real date to celebrate the birth of my Lord and Savior. Same with Easter. And Easter is a very pagan word as it was the celebration of spring.
This is where the whole contradiction of the Eastern meaning of yoga and whether a Christian can practice it or not has raised concern among many diverse groups of Christians from Roman Catholics to fundamentalist Protestants and everything in between.
In the linked article from The Blaze, one Stephanie Dillon, is an Evangelical Protestant Christian. And she said this about how she has incorporated Christian aspects to yoga:
She (Dillon) said she prayed on the question of whether to mix yoga and Christianity before opening her studio, PM Yoga, where she discusses her relationship with Jesus during classes.
“What I found is that it opened my spirit, it renewed my spirituality. That happened first and then I went back to church.” Dillon attends Southeast Christian Church in Louisville and says many evangelical Christians from the church attend her yoga classes.
Personally, I do not get how an Eastern religious practice got her closer to God and Jesus, but I can not argue and will not. For God is God and he leads us to Him in ways that we do not nor can not understand. And if you think that a Christian view of practicing yoga is not out there and happening, you are wrong.
There is this group, Holy Yoga, that incorporates Christian discipline in the practice of yoga. And when one visits this website, it is very clear that these are committed Christians. Another site that is also very Christian and very yoga is Yahweh Yoga, a place where yoga instructors are trained. Take a look at what they believe and argue that they are not really Christians. You would be hard pressed to do that.
Type in the words Christian Yoga on your search engine. At AOL, it is one of 1,060,000 potential matches.
See, it is happening. Christians are taking an Eastern religious practice and making it distinctly Christian.
What Dr. Mohler and others are talking about is practicing yoga as an Eastern spiritual discipline rather than practicing it from a Christian point of view.
And there is where I am on it. If one practices it with a mind fixed to God through Jesus Christ, no problem. If one practices it without that, then as a Christian it is a contradiction. And thus it is incompatible with Christianity.
So, Dr. Mohler is right. But he should be aware and encouraging the Christianizing of yoga. And it is happening right before our eyes.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Consider that while then Sen. Messiah Barack ran as a centrist, when he let slip his economic views to Joe the Plumber before the 2008 election, he still won.
It was as Prof. Hanson notes a Perfect Storm of events.
No left-winger in the past was able to pull it off.
Not George McGovern.
Not Walter Mondull, er Mondale.
Not Michael Dukakis.
Not John "Reporting for duty" Kerry.
It was Barack Hussein Obama that was finally able to win the White House and have a large majority of Democrats in both the House and Senate.
Yet rather than learning anything from the last time the Democrats controlled the levers like this, in 1992, Team Dear Leader decided to delude themselves into believing the hype.
That the American people finally accepted left-wing ideas. That the American people wanted to become fat, lazy and disengaged as their European ancestry is now.
Uh, no, we really did not.
What 2008 was really about was the voters revolting against then President George W. Bush. Although he was not on the ballot, because of the Perfect Storm of events, the energized Democrats voted. Independents voted against Republicans is places that had not voted for a Democrat since the Lyndon B. Johnson landslide of 1964. Many Republicans stayed home, burned out and frustrated. Hell, a few even bought just enough of the hype that they did vote for then Sen. Messiah Barack.
What we have is one of the most partisan presidents evah. Period. There is no escaping it.
And seizing on opportunity have tried to ram through the most left-wing of the Democrat agenda that they could in a generation.
What will happen is that a resurgent Republican party will take back congress. And it will go all the way down to the statehouse level.
And the only reason that the Democrats will have to blame for this is themselves.
And Prof. Hanson lays out the agenda that would have prevented the impending political tsunami.
Had the Dems and the Dear Leader, President Obama, pursued a clear centrist agenda of jobs, cutting deficit spending, putting off so-called health care "reform", stayed out of clearly local matters and used a more unifying tone rather than its us vs. them, the losses in the midterm election may have been modest at worst.
But no, not this guy, the Dear Leader, President Obama.
Clearly this guy fumbled any chance to be a truly great leader. A uniter, not a divider. And with a congress in the hands of the opposition, the Republicans, there is no indication that will change.
The Democrat party will pay for that. But most importantly, the American people are going to pay for the big-headedness of our president.
Let us hope that for the sake of this Great Land, we will find a way to come together in a meaningful way after November 2.
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
But, the reality is that now in the home stretch of the 2010 midterm elections, it is what amounts to the last gasp of the Democrats as the reality sets in that they may very well maybe out of both houses of congress. They maybe the minority of governors in the United States. And an outside chance they will be in the minority of control of state legislatures.
So, when you see the kind of polling that seems to show the Dems gaining, remember that it is Pyrrhic. It is not reality.
Even in the latest Gallup poll that seems to show the American public split down the middle, among registered voters, 46% to 46%, see at the link that the Republican and or Republican leaning voter is much more enthusiastic about voting this time around. However, two models, here show that the Republicans will make substantive gains come November 2.
Yet the Obamawhore media will point to the former, inaccurate read over the latter, accurate read.
And the same Obamawhore media is going orgasmic over the hated Rasmussen poll showing the congressional generic within the margin of error, 45% to 42%.
As the Vice-President, Joe the Brain Biden, said, we have to gird our loins.
This is to be expected.
So, this is a call to arms to my fellow conservatives, Republicans, independents and discerning disgruntled Democrats.
Here in California alone are at least five potential races the Republicans can win.
Start right here in my congressional district, the 29th. The race between congressman Adam Schiff and John Colbert. Don't forget to give some cash right here. And if not cash, get a yard sign. Make some time to make phone calls.
And there is another opportunity in the 47th congressional district between congressman Loretta Sanchez and Van Tran. This district was once the home district to B-1 Bob Dornan. Yet since Mrs. Sanchez won this seat in 1996, it has been gerrymandered hardcore to keep her safe. This is the best chance since then for the Republicans to get this seat back where it belongs.
In Central Cali, there are two races that may bode quite well for the Republicans.
District 18 is where incumbent Dem Dennis Cardoza was bought off for his yes vote on so-called health care "reform" with a pledge to open water to starved farmers in the breadbasket of the United States, the Central Valley. The Republican is Mike Berryhill. Mr. Berryhill is a rancher and one that will bring that sense to congress come January.
In the 20th congressional district is another Dem bought off with the promise of water from the Democrat leadership.
Jim Costa is running against Andy Vidak and the latest polling shows this race a dead heat. Mr. Vidak is within the margin of error.
Up in the 11th district, Jerry McNerney is running against Republican David Harmer. Mr. Harmer ran for the Republicans in the 10th district special election that was run earlier this year. That was won by Democrat John Garamendi. And polls show Mr. Harmer making serious headway that it is a toss-up race at the moment.
Right there are five races for congress that could increase the California Republican congressional contingent from 19 to 24.
And do not forget the senate battle between Sen. Ma'am Boxer and Carly Fiorina. The polls still show Sen. Ma'am Boxer ahead, but it is tightening and Mrs. Fiorina is starting to run some new ads on radio and television.
See, there is everything going for the Republicans and yes, conservatives. The Dems are beyond playing defense. They are simply swinging at every bad pitch out there.
This is why we have to get serious in the next 27 days and get out there and carry these candidates over the finish line.
Do not be discouraged. Pay no attention to pro-Democrat polls.
In other words, gird our loins and get to work!