The Sunday Fish Wraps And Great Blog Material

Let me tell you folks, Sunday is a great day for blogging because the local fish wraps provide so much material.
Sometimes, I have to take a while to decide which story I will write about.
But today is a tough one because there are two that catch my eye and I think worth commenting on.
The first is courtesy of the Pasadena Star-News and lefty columnist Tim Rutten.
Today in Mr. Rutten's column, it is a lefty lament about politics today.How it is sooo terrible that nothing is getting done politically. How there is anxiety across the Great Land. Well, on that point he is correct. But let me show you how he frames it:

Too many remain jobless; income disparities continue to grow alarmingly. The rewarding middle-class American norm now seems out of reach to many and tenuous to those who still enjoy it. Social mobility, economic system's glory and our great guarantor of social peace, has ossified alarmingly. Today, children born into the American working class are less likely to better themselves over their lifetime than those born into an English or French family.

Let me write from the last sentence about American children born today being no better off than those born into an English or French family.
People like Mr. Rutten, a former Left Angeles Times columnist, love the European nations and their politics and their way of life. So why the diss to Europe Mr. Rutten? Is it a sudden realization that maybe they are not all you have cracked them up to be? That the cradle-to-grave welfare is a hindrance rather than a glory?
And the aspect of social mobility, well Mr. Rutten, look to our own state as the example of why things are so screwed-up on that level.
California is seeing businesses and those that can leaving the state due to high taxation, anti-business and bad schools. Those that are coming in, fewer than those leaving, are not contributing but simply those willing to work cheaply or taking in our government benefits.
The same song is happening all across the United States as Blue states see migration to Red states because of some of what Mr. Rutten has written about here.
And now after four years of relatively unchecked liberal policies emanating from Washington, D. C., we are see the income stagnation worsen, not better.
But for the total richness of this piece, this is the kicker:

We look to Washington for solutions and find ourselves alone, peering into the abyss just over a "fiscal cliff." Such are the wages of bitter partisanship and brittle ideology.

Sigh!
Timmy, I want to tell you something.
No, I do not look to Washington for solutions. I do not look to Suckramento, er Sacramento for solutions. I do not look to Los Angeles county for solutions. I do not look to Pasadena for solutions.
For you see, they do not come up with solutions to so-called problems but end up making problems when none exist.
What I really look for is these parasitic entities to leave me the hell alone. And the rest of the citizenry alone too.
The so-called "Fiscal Cliff" was a man-made potential disaster. Because the government had to do something.
The push for new oppressive gun control is due to the horrific Newtown massacre in which 20 first-graders were killed at the hands of a crazy man named Adam Lanza.
Because the government has to do something.
So called income "inequality" is a problem in Liberalland.
The government has to do something about it.
And on, and on, and on.
See, people like Timmy Rutten put all their faith in government and believe that there are crisis's on top of crisis's. When in reality, there are things that just happen in this life and that the government can not do all and be all.

Enough of Tim Rutten!
The Left Angeles Times provides the next bit of lefty propaganda and it appears in the sports section.
Why it is a front page expose on the issue of professional gay athletes. Or really the fact that none are "out" yet.
Again, sigh!
Trust me, I have seen variations of this story over the years. And it is the slow time of year in news because of the Christmas and New Year's break. Only it should not be all that slow as this is the college football bowl season and there is the NBA and college basketball. No NHL hockey yet.
But really, is this a front page into all of page nine in a 12-page sport section?
I do no think so. I mean, yes it will be something that happens at some point. That a male professional athlete who may be a baseball, basketball, football or hockey player will say that he is a homosexual.
Yes, like in all other aspects of the great gay outfest, it has people down with it and some not so down with it.
Take former Anaheim Angels* outfielder (no pun intended!) Torii Hunter.
Mr. Hunter is a committed Christian. As he sees it from what he has come to believe, homosexuality is wrong. The sexual act that homosexuals engage in is what is wrong has he believes it.
Here is how Mr. Hunter puts it:

"I will be uncomfortable because in all my teachings and all my learning, biblically, it's not right. It will be difficult."

Like it or not, it is how Mr. Hunter feels about the possibility of playing with an openly gay team mate. Mr. Hunter's view is more than likely a prevailing one but to varying degrees.
Of course to the pro-gay folks, it is just wrong, sexist and of course homophobic. One can not believe that having sex with someone of the same sex is wrong. It is totally cool.
And there is a sense of inevitability expressed by one football running back Arian Foster of the Houston Texans:

"People are more accepting of it. . . .I don't think it will be long."

And Mr. Foster is probably right. Yes at some point a male pro athlete is going to say that he is gay.
But that does not mean everyone is going to be cool about it. But trust me, those that are not will be ostracized. Made to feel much less than human than the gay athlete who says he is gay.
The article points out that the ones that have said that they are gay have done so after playing in their respective sport. And none are anyone that are household names.
The fact is that I am certain that there is probably a gay player on almost every team in pro sports. In the article, Tennessee Titan quarterback Matt Hasselback said that he must have played with a  "closeted" teammate during his NFL career.
But understand this about the four major pro sports in the United States.
It is team focused. Sure, there are some players better than others and they are superstars. But when the team does not work together, they play lousy. It is not about the player that is a druggie or drunk. Sure, they get help if it becomes a distraction. If they want it. It is about the team. Or let me put it in this context.
The Washington Redskins have this quarterback Robert Griffin III. He is on his way to being a star quarterback. But that is not just because he or his coaches call great plays. Or that Mr. Griffin has a great arm. He needs to have that offensive line block the other team so that he can either hand off to the running back or pass to the right receiver. He needs that running back to gain yards to  move the ball down the field. He needs the same from his receivers. If one does not have good linemen, receivers and running backs, he is not all that.
The point is that any distraction is a detriment to the team as a whole.
So imagine that some player decides that he has to tell all that he is a homosexual.
It will, no matter what, be a distraction. No amount of political correctness, wanting to be inclusive, etc. will make it non-controversial.
FWIW, I think those that choose not to be open about their sexuality do so for that reason. That they realize it is about the team and not their own self.
But that does not mean we do not get this kind of article more than we need to. For the gay left, this is one of the last hurdles in their mind for total acceptance. And this will not be popular for me to write but it is all about them and their so-called issues. Never mind what pro team sports is all about. Why a gay has to be open and "proud" and everything else be damned.
Thus I do believe that it will happen and probably pretty soon. Most people will yawn because they are, as Mr. Foster put it, more accepting.
But I do not think that this warrants a huge article in the sports section. A part of the fish wrap that is for stats and stories and analysis of games and those that play them. For at the end of the day, it is about who an athlete has relations with. And that should not be big news.
But I am thankful for the local fish wraps because they just provide some great blog material on a Sunday.

To Quote Metallica, You Know It's Sad But True

Yup, if one wants to see the nation's largest state governance and see the disaster that it is, yes as Metallica has sung, this column by Steven Greenhut is sad but true.
In my home state, where I was born, grew up and am still living in, the left-wing Democrats have something that they have never had so much of in my 48 years on God's Green Earth.
Total control of state government.
Yup, the Dems have all constitutional elected offices. The state legislature and by now super-majorities that make the Republicans, BTW, who are they now?!-totally irrelevant.
Led by Gov. Jerry Moonbeam Brown, every single bad idea from the hard-left of the Democrat party will be voted on and thus we will endure at least three-plus years of Democrat ineptency.
So what stands out in Mr. Greenhut's column to me?
Well for one, it is his prediction number two. About the overstating the state budget projections. The reality is that according to the state controller, John Chiang (yup, a Dem), tax revenue projections are off, surprise, by 10.8% this past November. And trust me folks, this will not vastly improve which leads to Mr. Greenhut's prediction number three.
That the Democrats will tax everything that they can. What ever moves. Does not move. Alive. Dead. Everything.
And where did the first trail balloon start?
With the car tax, of course.
Well, it is officially known as the Vehicle Registration fee. Doesn't that sound a lot better than a tax?
California state senator Ted Lieu (D-San Francisco, of course) flew the trial balloon of tripling the tax. Yes tripling it. So, are little Hyundai Tucson, a 2005 one, we pay a "fee" of $122 this upcoming year. If Sen. Loon's Lieu's plan were to go into effect, that $122 would triple to $422 dollars. Four hundred and twenty-two frickin dollars! In a state where for the most part the car is a total necessity, how does this help?
It does not.
But the Democrat crack-whores in Suckramento, er Sacramento, don't seem to care. They would suggest to take public transportation. Or live closer to one's place of employment. Trust me, they think that they have all the answers.
Yet it was former governor Gray Davis wanting to increase the car tax that doomed his second term.
Imagine all those that voted for Brown, the Dems et all somehow thinking why, this is cool?
Go ahead Dems, go ahead.
And while I do worry about Mr. Greenhut's prediction number five, "reforming" the innitive process, once the slew of tax hikes occur, trust me, many of these voters will clamor to do something about it. And that will be two-fold.
Voting for something to end many of the tax hikes and getting rid of Dems in some of the few marginal districts left in the California legislature.
Mr. Greenhut is spot on about the California liberal pundits blaming the Republicans.
But, that cow will not fly.
The state Republicans are totally irrelevant in the legislative process. Only the most absolutely low-info voters will buy into it.
And this is where I quibble with Mr. Greenhut and his prediction number nine.
That the California Republican party will continue the downhill spiral.
I actually believe that this will be the absolute rock-bottom for them. Not that they will rise completely in the next statewide election. But they will make a good move in getting former state senator Jim Brulte to be the next party chairman.
Like it or not, Mr. Brulte is a former legislator. He will make a good spokesman for the party. And I think that he realizes that some of the positions on illegal immigration will have to change. Of course it is more tone than anything that keeps the party from making headway in non-White communities. Like it or not, the Republican party can not win any election statewide in the once Golden State without the votes of Hispanics and Asians. Mr. Brulte gets it. And where he will be able to succeed is when the Dems raise every tax imaginable. It is when historically voters look to the Republicans to keep them down. And I believe that Mr. Brulte can do a good job in candidate recruitment than Mr. Greenhut believes. Yes, it may be that there will be some self-financed candidates for some elections. That does not mean they are all moderate mushes as Mr. Greenhut indicates. That is where a good chairman of the state party can seek a good, conservative candidate that can win a statewide election.
Yeah, it is a tall order in California. But not insurmountable.
It will be a truly painful two years of total Democrat governance almost everywhere in California as Mr. Greenhut predicts. But it is sometimes what is needed. True Democrat governance to remind people how God-awful it can be. It is how a rejuvenated California Republican party can make a difference.
But mostly, as I started this post, it is sad but true that Democrats are ruining running everything and it will be not good for the people of this once Golden State.

Yes, We Will Go Off The Fiscal Cliff And It Is Time Middle Class Americans Realize The Cost Of Big Government

I know that as I write this, there is a very small chance that the powers that be in Washington, D. C. will cut a horrible deal to avert the so-called Fiscal Cliff.
But chances are much less as the hours go on.
So, I stand by my thinking that we are not going to get a horrible deal and that the United States is going over the Fiscal Cliff.
I think that it is going to be a lesson that the middle class would rather forget, but it is necessary for the middle class to learn that big government costs real money.
And once again, Marc Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute and Washington Post columnist explains it clearly. Clearer than House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). Clearer than Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Let's take what Mr. Thiessen wrote here:

During Obama’s first term, federal spending grew to more than 24 percent of GDP — the highest it has been since 1946. Yet almost no one in the country (except smokers and those who frequent indoor tanning salons) saw their taxes rise.

Very true. At least at the federal level most Americans have not seen taxes rise yet the size of government is, well continuing to be out of control.
Again, from Mr Thiessen:

160 million Americans saw their payroll taxes reduced from 6.2 to 4.2 percent.

Very true.
And for a Happy New Year, when the Dear Leader, President Obama, drives the United States off the Fiscal Cliff, that 4.2% payroll tax goes back to the 6.2%.
And as noted in the column by Mr. Thiessen, one of the big reasons that we have not felt the pain, we middle class voters, is because the administration has been essentially borrowing money from our children and grandchildren.
And he should have mentioned borrowing from Red China in the form of treasury bonds.
But what is an eye-opener is that Mr. Thiessen essentially believes that it was a mistake to extend the so-called Bush Tax Cuts.
Why, pray tel?
Because while it did seem to be a quick win for the then newly majority Republican congress, all it has done is continue to let the Dear Leader, President Obama, and his policies off the hook.
In a way, it is big government on low taxes.
But, we all know that the Dear Leader, President Obama, wants to increase taxes on the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll, filthy, stinking rich folks. The once one percent and now two percent of Americans that make a lot of money. Well, those that are unfortunate to earn $250,000 or more.
Ok, will that solve the problems of spending and taxation at all?
Oh, it is estimated that if the Dear Leader got everything he wanted, it would amount to 30 weeks of savings over 10 years. About three weeks a year.
So, again, why not drive over that Fiscal Cliff and let the middle class understand the brunt of expanding government? And let's throw in that the reality is about wealth redistribution? Something that most middle class Americans do not even realize is up President Snidley Whiplash Obama's sleeve.
Trust me folks, my state of California is on this course.
The passage of Proposition 30 was touted as saving education. And a tax on the rich.
Only that is not the fact.
The fact is that the tax revenue will be raised by not just taxing the rich but increasing the state sales tax a 1/4 cent per dollar. Which means that Californians minimum sales tax is now 7.5%. In Los Angeles county where I live, we now have the pleasure of paying a sales tax of nine percent.
Now that does not seem like much, but if one wants to make a big ticket item like appliances, a new car, something along those levels, people may start to think twice.
The point is that government costs real money.
And at some point, people need to realize that.
And maybe, driving over the Fiscal Cliff is the only way to make Americans realize the real cost of having Barack Obama as president.

I Saw A Crime On Chirstmas Night

Christmas night 2012 seemed like any other quiet night.
It was little before 8pm and your humble blogger was getting ready to take Cashew, the Little Guy and Scout the Wonder Dog for their long evening walk.
As I was walking along our street, I saw a silver vehicle speeding down the road. It was being chased by a police car.
Now before the speeding vehicle caught my eye, I did hear a tremendous screeching sound before hand. Then saw a silver vehicle that I thought was one of those big two-ton Ford type pick ups. Apparently, it was an SUV. And what followed was a totally black police SUV with lights and sirens blaring chasing the truck/SUV.
What happened next is very haunting.
Two lights from where I was with the dogs I saw and heard it.
The suspect truck/SUV hitting another car. I could not tell what kind of car was hit. But it turns out to have been a minivan.
It was vicious. The sound. SLAM! And losing sight of the minivan that was hit, yet seeing the suspect vehicle spinning around down the street halfway over the freeway bridge to the next light.
It is all reported here in the local fishwrap.
Yet until reading the article, I did not know that anyone had died. For I did have my dogs with me. A rambunctious puppy and an oldster dog that can barely keep up. So I dared not go further as it was dark and I did not know what to expect.
The police SUV that was chasing the suspect SUV had come to a stop. The sounds of sirens began to screech as I turned down the other street where we continue our walk. It gnawed at me the rest of the night. What was the car that was hit? Were the person or people in that car OK? What about the person or people in the SUV that hit the other car?
The other thing that I thought about in the whole thing is how fast these things happen. But I knew that the minivan that was hit was simply trying to make a left-hand turn. Maybe to get on the freeway for Maple Street is a freeway frontage street. But they had no idea that they were about to be smashed by a speeding SUV. There was no way that they could have stopped as they were proceeding to turn to avoid the speeding SUV. And two people ended up being killed. More than likely they were on the side of the minivan where impact occurred.
But a family's life is ruined. And four people who were breaking the law by evading the police did commit an even worse crime by speeding in one of their SUV's and smashing a minivan of innocent people.
And I saw it all. And I do have a haunting feeling knowing that people died. The closest I have seen this kind of death. And I hope to never see anything like it again.

MERRY CHRISTMAS 2012

Well, since the Mayan Apocalypse did not occur this past Friday, thank God, we have made it to Christmas, 2012.
And what better way to share what Christmas is all about than with Linus Van Pelt and his explanation from the best television Christmas special, A Charlie Brown Christmas:

 



And here to read it from Wikipedia:

 

"'And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not; for, behold, I bring you tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord. And this shall be a sign unto you: Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger. And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace and goodwill towards men.'

 

And I can not say it better myself!

To you and yours,

 

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

 

 

Sen. Tim Scott And The New South

Today, history was made as South Carolina's first Indian-American Gov., Nikki Haley, appointed the first Black senator from the state in Rep. Tim Scott (R-Charleston).
And it is reflective of the New South.
A South in which it appears that the once God-awful race battles have given way to some pretty amazing changes.
It starts with Rep. Scott.
He won his Republican nomination for South Carolina's first congressional district over the scion of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond. The same Sen. Thurmond who desperately tried to block the Civil Rights Act in 1964. Tim Scott beat Sen. Thurmond's son, Paul Thurmond, in a Republican primary in 2010 and easily won outright election to the seat. In 2012, he has the highest vote percentage of South Carolina Republican congressional delegation in cruising to reelection.
And without a doubt, then Sen. Scott will win election to the seat of the retiring Sen. Jim DeMint outright in 2014.
And then there is Gov. Haley, the first Indian-American to win the governorship in South Carolina in 2010. She defeated a panoply of Republicans and was horribly dragged down by many of those that lost the GOP gubernatorial nod to then Mrs. Haley. She won a tough election campaign and has had her problems since being elected. But she should win reelection as well in 2014.
But imagine that the state that fired the first volley at Ft. Sumnter to begin the War Between the States, better known as the Civil War has an Indian-American governor and will have a Black senator. And both Republicans to boot.
It is indicative of what is the New South.
A South that has elected another Indian-American as governor in Bobby Jindal from Louisiana.
A South that has elected Cuban-American as senator Marco Rubio from Florida.
A South that has elected another Cuban-American, Ted Cruz, as senator from Texas.
A South that has elected all of the above under the banner of the Republican party.
The reality is that while the GOP is having trouble winning in areas of the United States entrenched by the Democrat party, they are winning the South and with candidates that as short a time as 20 years ago would have never been considered seriously.
I think that this is where the GOP starts in reaching out to those who have been for whatever reason, alienated from the party in recent years.
All of the above earned their stripes.
All those that have been elected fought in bruising primaries when they were told that they could not win.
Who can forget that the whole Republican establishment lined up to support that douchebrain Charlie Christ over Marco Rubio? Yeah, look how that worked out what when the actual Republican voters went with Mr. Rubio?
It amazes me that while the GOP is demonized for being racist, sexist, etc., etc., and yet have elected these fine people to high office.
It appears that the South has been ready for positive change and willingly electing people of color where the old timers off to the Glory are rolling in their graves.
It is really the New South and Gov. Haley and Sen. Scott are the positive developments of it.

Carnage In Connecticut

UPDATE:

It is not often that I will praise anything written in the Left Angeles Times. And much less from one James Rainey. But here, on this occasion, he addresses the main thrust of this post. The poor reportage of the media in misidentifying the the killer. The internet and social media are truly great tools, but that does not replace the point that facts need to always be corroborated by at least a second source. Especially in situations such as this. And before anyone goes off blaming Fox News or anything like that, numerous media got it wrong and all over the spectrum. Mr. Rainey's article is worth the read.


Good Lord Almighty.
What can I or anyone else say about this horrible crime that took place today in Newtown, Connecticut?
Look, we know that the left is already salivating and pushing gun control and the right is saying not so fast.
That is for another day and time.
However, I believe that, once again, the media committed gross media malpractice in trying to get the story out and for some, to be first.
For hours, the media reported that the shooting rampage was done by one Ryan Lanza. Yet it was not RYAN Lanza, but his brother, ADAM Lanza that killed 28 people, his mother and himself.
Why is that important? I mean, so they got a name wrong, no big deal because the story was running fast and furious?
Well, no matter how fast and furious a story is breaking, it is always, always important to get important facts such as who committed the act right. Thus, it should not have been reported that the shooter was Ryan Lanza when it was his younger brother Adam that committed the dastardly deed.
If there is one thing that I learned in journalism classes and has stuck with me is why the what, when, why, who and how is important in every story. And how important it is to have multiple verification of information before going public with it.
Remember the Aurora, Colorado movie house shooting? Remember when the name James Holmes was announced? Well the first James Holmes that ABC news reporter Brian Ross picked out of his rump was one connected with the Tea Party political movement. And he reported it on the air. Yet he did not act with due diligence as it turned out the James Holmes was a mentally ill graduate college student.
Now many people will point out, and I do think that this may be true, that Mr. Ross focused on a potential Tea Party angle in an effort to discredit the conservative political movement. But whatever the case, an innocent man's reputation was at the very least tarnished and possibly something more negative than that.
Same for Ryan Lanza.
As it turns out, Adam Lanza somehow had identification that he was Ryan Lanza on his person.
But again, how did it get reported and reported wrong in the first place?
And this leads to another criticism that I have about reporting blatant criminal activity.
The use of the word tragedy over murder.
Usually, I do not like that kind of wording but this story, well it is different.
Twenty children, a whole classroom, were murdered in cold blood by Adam Lanza. Because it was elementary school children, yes it does make it  a horrific tragedy.
In this case, it is correct to use the word tragedy. Yet it should be also reported accurately that this was an act of murder. That a young man, whether or not he had a mental disability problem, did have the presence of mind to kill his mother in cold blood, steal her car, drive to the school that she taught at and kill the school principal, several other adults and the 20 children. This man, Adam Lanza murdered 27 people before killing himself.
So I would suggest that while the culprit of this act is dead, let us not simply refer to his crime as a tragedy. It cheapens the fact that he committed murder of defenseless, innocent people.
And now I have other thoughts.
No parent get their kids ready in the morning for school and thinks that it is possibly the last time that they will see their kid alive. No doubt these parents, husbands and wives, did not think that when they said goodbye and went off on their day.
Yet in the span of several minutes, one deranged individual killed people and ruined countless lives.
It is why I utterly believe that we should always remind the people closest to us that we love them. In my case, I always tell Mrs. RVFTLC every day as I leave for work that I love her. And in most of our e-mail correspondence to each other, the same thing. These kind of events remind me even more how important that is.
It is also very, very important for all of us to take a deep breath, mourn for those dead and those left behind and not spout off on how this could have been prevented.
There is a time and place for that but no way and not in the hours and immediate days of this murderous rampage.
And one more last thought.
Hold on to your hats, but I thought the statement from President Obama he gave at the White House was not only appropriate but clearly that of a caring, loving father.There was nothing political in it. I felt that this one was from the heart. I think it important enough to leave you with this video link to see it.
May God bless those lost. May God bless those left behind. May God bless Nancy Lanza. May God bless the people of Newtown, Connecticut.

A HOMELESS Bill Of Rights?! Only In California. . .

I am not amazed in the least about this proposal from state Assemblyman  Tom Ammiano (D-San Francisco, of course) to give the homeless people of the once Golden State a "bill of rights".
This Assemblyman Ammiano fellow was also pushing to legalize marijuana. You know, because it could be taxed to the hilt of course as a way to "solve" our perpetual budget fiasco.
But this, well this almost wants the pot to be legal because then I can use it to numb my mind to the dread that this state has become that this, more than likely, will get serious consideration in the legislature next year.
In general, the reality of homelessness is something that no society should be proud of. There are multiple layers of reasons why people are homeless. There are three major reasons why there are homeless people. One is mental illness. The overwhelming majority of homeless fall into this category. The two that follow, drug abuse and alcoholism, can be part of the mental illness. In that case, many homeless have the unfortunate trifecta. But some have one only of the three major factors.
So keep this in mind as I present the thrust of this bizarre legislation.
Here are the "highlights" of Assemblyman Ammiano's homeless "bill of rights":

-- Sleeping in public spaces such as sidewalks and parks
-- 24/7 access to bathrooms, showers, water and clean syringes.
-- Car camping on city streets without restrictions
-- "Life sustaining activities" such as urinating and collecting recycling trash
-- Welfare cash payments
-- Meditating or praying in public
-- Panhandling
-- Payment for possessions seized in a roust
-- Right to refuse the offer of a homeless shelter
-- Right to a lawyer in most encounters with the law

Oh goodness, where to start.
I guess I will go into the middle of the 10 "rights" this would start and that is welfare cash payments.
Nothing encourages homelessness more than allowing them to be on welfare of any kind and not in some kind of housing. Pray tell Assemblyman Ammiano, how is said homeless person to obtain welfare payments? Since most people who get public assistance are given a debit card, should we just start issuing John Doe or Jane Doe and guess how much to hand out to the homeless? And where will they be able to get one? Should they have a bank account? Inquiring minds want to know.
Oh this is a gasser. That the homeless can meditate and or pray in public. Hey, dude. When children are allowed to do the same in public schools, come back to me on that one.
I really, really love the "life sustaining activities" that include, I kid you not urinating and collecting recycling trash. I note that it stops at urinating and not number two, aka pooping, dumping and you know the rest.
I digress because this reminds me of something I saw a few years ago here in my fair, homeless-friendly burg.
In front of the local First Methodist Church along Colorado Blvd, the Rose Parade route, a cleanly homeless man whipped out his member in front of the church and proceeded to live life the way that Assemblyman Ammiano thinks the homeless should live. By taking a wiz right on some plants.
While the rest of us, you know, those that are not a special class by actually doing things right, would have been arrested for at the very least indecent exposure.
If this God-forsaken bill were to pass as is and signed by Gov. Moonbeam Brown, why it would create a two-class system.
One of my big issues is panhandling.
I hate it.
In the past, those that asked for a quarter or any change would be nice about it. Sheepish because they knew it was not a good thing to do. But now, now these people will ask for whole dollars. And not just a buck. Some have accosted me and asked for five bucks. Five frickin' bucks! Really?! It has happened. And many times, they do not take kindly to the no. They will follow and harass until people breakdown and give money. And let us not forget how some get a little inventive and think that if they have a squeegee and a bucket of water, that gives them a right to come up to your car, wash your windows and, yup, ask for money. Oh, and one is not always asked if they even want their car windows washed.
And here is another digression.
As a purveyor of public transit, let me share with you about the guy who just sits there and harasses people as they get on the bus for quarters. Yup, two Thursday's in a row, this dude who does not seem all that homeless is sitting there really bothering people that the bus driver has had to tell him to lay off.
But, in the old days, said dude would have been thrown off the bus. Not anymore. For those "on the margins" have extended rights us eeeeeevvvvviiiiilllll middle-class folks do not.
The "car camping" is not only wrong-headed but a clear threat to public safety to the homeless and the citizenry. What if a criminal should break into a car and end up killing a "car camper"? What would we say about that? And how about someone using car camping to stake-out places to rob? Ever think about that Assemblydude?!
But here is the kicker.
The "right" to refuse the offer of a homeless shelter.
The reason that there are homeless shelters is to give people a temporary place to stay rather than to be out on the streets, especially in inclement weather. These are places that help, not hurt, homeless people. The fact that most homeless are alcoholics, drug abusers, and mentally ill, a combo or all three is even more reason that they should be encouraged to get off the street.
This is what is wrong with modern liberalism.
They never want to address root causes of problems but they want to create unimaginable "rights" that no civil society can tolerate.
Giving the homeless "rights" to pee openly on the street, harass people for money, taking their lives and the lives of others to risk is not the way to go.
If Assemblyman Ammiano is serious about the homeless problem, he would seek ways towards getting the homeless OFF the streets, not encouraging more of them. What Assemblyman Ammiano should be doing is seeking ways to find common ground that will get as many homeless off the streets. If that means more state funding for mental health programs and hospitals and the like, we need to figure that out.
Treating the homeless like a different, yes privileged class, is not the solution. That means we need to write our legislators and tell them to vote no on this terrible proposed bill.
Because if not, then what would only be in California will spread across this nation. And that would not be a good thing.

The Peggy Joseph Of Politicians

You remember sweet Peggy Joseph from the 2008 presidential campaign, doncha?
Well, if you do not, here is a little palate cleanser of a reminder of Miss Joseph.

In case you forget, here is how Miss Joseph viewed voting for then Sen. Messiah Barack for president:

I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car.

But I do recommend watching the whole short but sweet video. I do wonder if Miss Joseph realizes that she is still paying her mortgage and gas?
But that is just the warm up for this Detroit city councilman, JoAnn Watson.
What did Miss Johnson have to say?

Well, here is some of her thinking of the Dear Leader, President Obama, and what he should do to save her cash-strapped city.

"Our people in an overwhelming way supported the re-election of this president and there ought to be a quid pro quo and you ought to exercise leadership on that," said Watson. "Of course, not just that, but why not?"
How does one unpack this crap?
What does Miss Watson mean by "Our people"? The fact that the city of Detroit is overwhelmingly Black? What about the non-Blacks? Do they count in the 75% that voted for the re-election of the Dear Leader, President Obama?
One will have to go deep inside that gal's mind.
And what kind of leadership would be shown in bailing out a city that is now perpetually cash-strapped? Can't pay it's bills? Has contracted population of over 1,000.000 since 1950? Whole neighborhoods no longer exist. It is so bad that there have been serious proposals to turn vast swaths of vacant land into, I kid you not, urban farms.
Detroit was once a booming, vibrant city in 1950 after World War II. The auto industry was a sign of that boom. In fact, the population of Detroit in 1950 was 1,849,568. By the 2010 census, the population contracted to 713,777 people. It is a staggering loss of almost 1,136,000 in 62 years.
Yet the Motor City seems to think that it is still the Detroit of the 1950s.
It is the only reason I can think of that they are not able to have enough money and then some to pay their bills and hell, have a surplus.
Ahh, but the fact is that Detroit, well there is little if any business left outside of the truncated auto industry. Hence they do not have many fat-cat businesses, you know, those one percenters, a.k.a the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll, filthy, stinking rich folks. And with whole neighborhoods gone, don't count on much in the way of property taxes.
The background of the plight of Detroit is necessary to explain in the briefest of ways because it is why people like Miss Watson basically asks the federal government to bail out her city.
This is a sad case of demographics=destiny.Take a peek here to see what I mean.
Miss Watson is symptomatic as to a huge problem in the United States.
And that problem is dependency., she would have a big-government sugardaday
Back to Miss Joseph really thinking that if she voted for Barack Obama she would have her big government sugar-daddy take care of all her bills.
And Miss Watson, an elected city councilman, perpetuates that dependency by all but begging the Dear Leader, President Obama, to bail out an economic basket case that Detroit has become.
No ladies, what you both need is a wake up call.
What we do not need is to have a Peggy Joseph in elected office in the person of JoAnn Watson.
We do not need to have the Peggy Joseph of politicians.

You Mean The Barefoot, Homeless Dude Is. . .NOT. . .Homeless?!

The above photo of New York City police officer Larry DePrimo performing an act of kindness to a homeless man made the rounds last week.
The act of kindness Mr. DePrimo did was to, out of his own pocket mind you, go to the nearest open shoe store, a Sketcher's, spend at least $75 and buy the barefoot, homeless man a pair of boots so he did not have to have another night of cold feet.
A very nice, heartfelt gesture indeed.
On the surface, it is an act of kindness that many people do not and would not do for such an individual.
But, as the late great Paul Harvey would say, there is the rest of the story.
It turns out that homeless dude, well he is not quite really homeless.
According to this article in the New York Daily News, homeless, shoeless dude is named Jeffrey Hillman. And what's more, he actually has a publicly subsidized apartment in The Bronx borough of New York City.
Now before you scream, "Oh no! Not another homeless-bashing post here!" I am sorry to disappoint you.
This is not a typical case even with all the new reportage.
Clearly, Mr. Tillman has some kind of mental problem. What it is we do not know. But why would someone take assistance in the form of Section 8 housing vouchers, social security disability, and veterans benefits for housing and roam the streets and panhandle? And, rarely if ever use said apartment for shelter?
Why would Mr. Tillman refuse assistance from family members from his hometown of Nazareth, Pennsylvania? That includes his two children.
Again, this line in the article seems to sum it up:

"He needs help beyond mere handouts."

Yes, but because he refuses, he can continue to live his bleak, meager existence. Yet his having housing that he rarely uses because he is out on the streets panhandling and wandering is selfish because a person that can and wants that apartment does not.
What Mr. Tillman needs is to be committed in a mental facility that can address what his mental state actually is and he could be put on medication that will, hopefully, help him find his way back.
I know, the law seems to side with Mr. Tillman and his vagabond existence. And that if he shows any fleeting moment of supposed sanity, he can avoid the above solution.
This is not freedom.
This is someone that is a prisoner to something that most of us can not imagine. Because most people can not and would not want to live the way that Mr. Tillman is currently living. Something is wrong with his mind. And he is not getting help because he is a prisoner of a system that is at best indifferent and a society that ignores the homeless problem because it really does not affect them.
Now Mr. DePrimo, he did nothing wrong. He saw a human being in a bad way and thought that he could do a little something to help. Mr. Tillman seemed to be appreciative. But it is what he said later that is well, what do you make of this:

"After the story of DePrimo's generosity went viral, Hillman turned up again still on the streets and still shoeless. He told a reporter he hid the boots that set DePrimo back $75 so they wouldn't be stolen."

Sooo, if Mr. Tillman would be back at his apartment, they would NOT be stolen.
But again, we who think this way are thinking logically. A person with mental illness will NOT think logically.
And that is what is wrong with this story.
That a homeless, barefoot man who does not have to be homeless is acting as such. That a man with clear mental problems is basically swept under the rug because he refuses the help.
Somewhere there has to be some middle ground that eventually leads to helping Mr. Tillman. That would be the best outcome of this story.

Goin Off The Fiscal Cliff With Linkin Park And "Burn It Down"

Yup, I have liked this Linkin Park song, Burn It Down, since it came out earlier this year.

And now, it seems rather appropriate as we, I really believe hopefully, go off the manufactured "Fiscal cliff" that our esteemed political leadership "negotiated" earlier this year in a debt-ceiling hike.
I think it is a pretty cool video. Doncha think so?
Anyhow, I think it is great to do a little sing along, especially the chorus, because if you really think about it, it is exactly what the Democrats and the Dear Leader, President Obama, wanted to create.
A crisis.
Because as the current mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emmanuel, once said, you should never let a good crisis go to waste.
And it is a sure one for Republicans.
As I have noted here, the Republicans will be blamed no matter how this turns out. So instead of meaningless negotiations, I have now thoroughly come to the conclusion that we on the Republican side, and especially us conservatives, need to let the truck go right off this "Fiscal cliff".
And yes, the private economy will for sure suffer.
And the theme song is, Burn It Down.
Lets just get to the awesome chorus:

We're building it up
To break it back down
We're building it up
To burn it down
We can't wait
To burn it to the ground
So, how does this relate to the so-called "Fiscal Cliff"?
Here, lets break it down, so to speak, from Team Democrat.

We're building it up=building up the government. Creating big government.

To break it back down=having big government, whether they realize it or not, breaks the private sector in many ways. Especially in taxes. Thus the economy will not be about growth in the private sector but how to get money to pay for the public sector.

Let's skip the second Building it up and jump right to this one.

To burn it down=raising taxes and not just on that two percent we keep hearing our Dear Leader, President Obama, and the Democrats rant and rave about. After all, again as noted here, if the feared sequestration does take place, it will not be that two percent to feel the pinch. It will be almost all of us.

See, no matter what the Democrats say about this so-called tax "fairness" in getting that eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll two percent of the stinking, filthy rich, they know deep down that they can not pay for all their big government without more money from the suckers that voted for the Dear Leader, President Obama taxpayers.
Do you like that child tax credit that is now $1,000? Forget it because if sequestration occurs, it goes down to $500. It does not go away, but it gets cut and means more money for the feds.
And expansions of the Earned Income Credit and the Dependent Care Credit, well they go away and it goes back to what it was before.
How do you like only getting only 4.2% taken out of your paycheck for Social Security? Well, that goes back to 6.2% if sequestration happens.
And if you like government tax credits for "alternative" fuels and community development, bye bye!
But see, all this occurs if nothing is done as of January 2, 2014. And the best part for the Democrats is, as duly noted, they will blame the Republicans because they would just not allow the hike in taxes for the two percent of the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll, filthy, stinking, rich folks.
But if they get this money that they need to keep the government going and let some phantom cuts occur in all but defense spending, they think that they can get the win.
Now the Republicans have to go on the offensive and drive it home that they do not want to raise any one's taxes. That they want to keep the tax rates as is and have true tax reform that will benefit all taxpayers and not just put some against each other.
In the meantime, the Democrats can and I think will just let it go. They will not let a good crisis go to waste. They will burn it down to get what they really want.

Yup, I'm Down With Going Over The Fiscal Cliff

As the pundits and partisans hand-wring about what will happen if the United States falls off of the so-called fiscal cliff, I am coming around to this position.
I am down with going over the fiscal cliff.
Now I am not at this decision lightly.
Without a doubt, the Republicans will be blamed if this does indeed occur. And even if a known to be horrible compromise is somehow hatched-up, Republicans who accede to Democrat demands will not be given a free ride.
Ask then-President George H. W. Bush when he collapsed under Democrat pressure and broke the no-new taxes pledge. Did he get credit for "being an adult" or any of the other Washington Beltway euphemisms? Noooo! He got hammered for raising taxes by none other than William Jefferson Blythe Clinton. in the 1992 presidential campaign. Yeah, a lot of good it did Mr. Bush who lost reelection that year.
That is what will happen to any Republican that continues to entertain giving any quarter to the Democrat demands, which will lead to tax hikes.
So, what will happen if no deal is reached and then we go over the fiscal cliff?
The immediate that happens as of January 1, 2013 will be what is called sequestration. It essentially will be a combination of budget cuts and tax hikes.
Now, I link Marc Thiessen (too bad he does not spell Mark correctly!) because it is a useful guide to exactly what happens.
And here are the tax highlights Mr. Thiessen alludes to:

●The employee share of the Social Security payroll tax would rise from 4.2 percent to 6.2 percent.

●An estimated 33 million taxpayers — many in high-tax blue states — would be required to pay the alternative minimum tax, up from 4 million who owed it in 2011.

●The child tax credit would be cut in half, from $1,000 today to $500, and would no longer be refundable for most.

●Tax preferences for alternative fuels, community development and other Democratic priorities would go away.

●And the expansions of the earned income tax credit and the dependent care credit would disappear as well.

Now what Mr. Thiessen does not discuss and is very real about the actual budget cuts is what will happen to the defense budget. It will take the largest hit if indeed budget cuts have to be implemented once the United States falls off the cliff.
But what is in it for the long run for those of us that want to pursue real tax reform and entitlement reform?
Well, I can not say it better than Mr. Thiessen does right here:

Americans had a choice this November, and they voted for bigger government. Rather shielding voters from the consequences of their decisions, let them pay for it.

And therein lie why the Republicans need to let the United States fall off that fiscal cliff.
Because the reality is that the people that did vote for the Dear Leader, President Obama, and Democrats need to come to an understanding.
That big government actually costs real money. And that real money is the taxes that the government will collect from more Americans to pay for such things as the so-called "stimulus" that currently Red China is paying for. And of course there is Obamacare.
See, the Democrats really want people to believe that only wealthy people, whatever they define as wealthy, should have to shoulder the burden of taxes and not all taxpayer need to be part of paying taxes in the first place.
The problem is, there are just not that many wealthy people unless you lower the wealth bar pretty low. The way that Democrats have figured, about $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for a married couple and or household.
And at some point, the Democrats will realize, damn, why that is not enough and wealthy, well, lets see, maybe lets make that $150,000 or individuals and $200,000 for married couples and families. It thus becomes a game of drip, drip, drip until the bar is so lowered that well what Mr. Thiessen describes as the taxes going up happens in one fell swoop.
KA-BOOM!
The problem is that if the Republicans get caught up in some moronic "Grand Bargain" to avoid the fiscal cliff, they will not have any position of strength to fight for serious tax reform let alone entitlement reform.
In other words, real pain must occur before real reform can be negotiated and achieved.
And it is why Republicans need to not try for some deal to avoid the fiscal cliff. We must drive the car right off of it and lay the blame where it belongs-with the Democrats-and then negotiate from a position of strength.

So, How Do California Republicans Stay Principled AND Reach New Voters?

It is a truly pressing question for a state party that did take a serious beating in the just concluded presidential campaign.
Of course, our "friends" at the Left Angeles Times does run this article that of course blames all the losses on. . .wait for it. . .the conservative wing of the party.
Well, the reality is that while the Republican party in California is smaller in numerous ways, it was the conservatives that had the numbers and more or less won their races.
Moderate Republicans lost to Democrats all over the state.
Leading your humble blogger to note a true rule of politics.
When a race is between a Democrat and a moderate Republican, voters go with the real deal, a Democrat. As much as one may berate voters, what they do see is that if they have a choice, then they will go with the real deal rather than a pandering Republican.
So, in the article, it quotes one of those moderates, Rob Stutzman as saying this gem:

"For the business community, there is a recognition that the best path forward for the state from a governance perspective is with moderate Democrats."

Oh, and Mr. Stutzman was doing consulting as a Republican for the California Chamber of Commerce and advising on candidates to back.
Mr. Stutzman was also one of Gov. Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger's leading advisers.
So, one has to wonder who Mr. Stutzman advised the CCoC who to back in the just concluded election.
And in the same article, it cites these moderates of breaking with the party to support the massive tax hikes proposed by that paragon of moderation, Gov. Benedict Arnold, in 2009 that was just supposed to solve our state budget deficit.
And what happened to these people?
Two were ousted form leadership and eventually are out of office and one was almost recalled.
Again, I refer you to the rule I cited earlier.
One person in the article that actually made some sense is the former Republican leader in the state senate, Jim Brulte.
It appears that he wants to run for state GOP chair.
And he is stating the obvious.

"Demographics do not have to be destiny," Brulte said. "But if Republicans don't do a better job of reaching out to all Californians, they are going to be."

He is correct.
But the key is how to reach out to these voters. Do Cali GOPers just shed any principles and run as Demo lite? Or do they reach out to these voters with a compelling, conservative message that at the same time does not make them feel inferior?
Of course it is go for the latter.
And I would recommend that if Mr. Brulte is serious, he should read this awesome piece from Rachel Campos-Duffy in the American Spectator. As a second-generation Mexican American, she has an insight that most of us non-Hispanics do not have.
And the reality is that Republicans are not going to get the majority of Hispanics or Asians in the next election. If at all in the next several election cycles. But it is important to be totally competitive in these communities. It will be through that consistency that the numbers will really change. And the Cali GOP can start rebuilding both with outreach and principles.
One area that Mr. Brulte should take to heart if he cares to read Mrs. Campos-Duffy is the following from her article:

For too long, the party’s strategy has been to hire a few Beltway conservative Latinos six months before an election and call it “outreach.” What’s needed is permanent outreach at the grassroots levels between elections. Conservative Hispanic activists on the ground know that the GOP needs to take a few cues from successful groups like the far-left La Raza, which has made its mark by bringing public policy to the neighborhood level.

Yes, Mrs. Campos-Duffy is totally spot-on. Especially her point about carrying outreach between elections.
As an pseudo-Anglo who has lived among Hispanics all my life, I know that for sure there is a lot of work to do. Many Hispanics and now Asians will just not think about the R-word because of some pre-conceived ideas. And of course there will be those that think we can not reach out to certain voters because all they want is their snout into the government trough. Again that is not true and they just need to be sought not just because they are Hispanic and or Asian. It is because they are but another part of the American dream and could be Republicans if only they were sought after.
The really frightening aspect of the obliteration the Cali GOP took is the reaction of people like this dude, Mike Madrid, a supposed Republican consultant:

"It will be easier to moderate the Democratic Party than to fix the California Republican Party."

Good Lord, insert laugh track here, please!
The Democrat party is so dominated by the lefties from Los Angeles county and the Bay Area that if one followed Mr. Madrid's "logic", he would be inviting the kind of lefty rage that conservatives had in cutting a deal to raises taxes under Gov. Benedict Arnold.
What needs to be done is someone who is a conservative that can follow a game plan to contest not only every part of this state, but for those votes that the Democrats take for granted. Like Hispanics and Asians. And remember it will not be done overnight. It is part of a long-term strategy.
I am beginning to think that for the start of this task, Jim Brulte would be a good choice for Cali GOP
chair.
But the bottom line is that we cannot lose out principles in the process.
And that leads back to the question of how does the California Republican party do just that?

HAPPY THANKSGIVING 2012

" In everything give thanks; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus."

1 Thessalonians 5:18

Today is Thanksgiving day in the United States. A day that has been set aside to give thanks for whatever we want to give thanks for.
I for one am thankful to be living in the greatest nation in the history of the world.
And I am, without question, thankful for Mrs. RVFTLC. She does put up with a lot being Mrs. RVFTLC! And then there is our son. Our dogs, Master Cashew and amazingly Scout the Wonder dog. We thought that last thanksgiving might be the last one. But at 15 1/2 years old, she is alive and kicking.
And of course for other family and friends.
But most important, for me, is to give thanks to God for all that I do have in this life.
We do seem to emphasize what we percieve as falling short. But it is what we have that we should give thanks to. We should strive for what we may not have  but want. It should not consume us.
Yes, there is the wonderful food that is connected with Thanksgiving. Turkey, stuffing, ham, prime rib, mashed potatoes, candied yams, the actually God-forsaken green bean cassarole, pumpkin pie. But rememeber who we will be sharing it with. Yeah, some of the people we may only see once a year. Or even that day is the only time  we will see some people.
What I mean about sharing it with is those that do not have the life that most of us have.
Before we go to our Turkey day festivities, Mrs. RVFTLC will stop off at our mission church in El Monte, California and help serve Thanksgiving to those less fortunate than we are. It is something that gives a real meaning to the day. And solidifies what it means to give thanks.
So, remember that in between the turkey and football, give thanks to God for the life that you have. Not the one that you think that you want.

Sen. Marco Rubio Shows Obamawhore Media Hack HOW To Answer A Gotcha Question

Oh, if only Todd Akin of Richard Mourdock had just a wee bit of Sen. Marco Rubio, they would have never gotten in trouble when rape and abortion questions came up in their respective campaigns.
Sen. Rubio conducted an interview with GQ magazine and the interviewer, Michael Hainey, asks a load of seemingly pedestrian questions. But then, out of nowhere, Mr. Hainey asks this amazing question:

How old do you think the earth is?

Whiskey? Tango? Foxtrot?
Really, where did that question come out of? Was it being saved if Mr. Akin got by the rape/abortion question?
Seriously, here is the question and Sen. Rubio's very good response:

GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?
Marco Rubio: I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

This is brilliant!
First, don't let Obamawhore media hack trick you. It is obvious that this is a trick question. So, Sen. Rubio starts with a cool dude response:

I'm not a scientist, man.

Exactly. Sen. Rubio is not a scientist. Nor is he, as he goes on to explain, a theologian. In reality, the way he answers the question is to bring up more questions. Question that Obamawhore media hack did not ask. I think that Sen. Rubio left him flustered.
Now, if Mr. Hainey did his homework, he would know that Sen. Rubio is a Roman Catholic. Most even very devout Roman Catholics do not believe that the earth was created in seven, 24 hour day and is about 6,000 years old. The easiest way to explain what Roman Catholics believe is exactly what Sen. Rubio said.

It;'s one of the great mysteries.

That is what most Roman Catholics believe.
So why does this Obamawhore media hack ask such a question?
Because without a doubt, this tool really thought that he would trip up this rising Republican star.
But little did this hack know that Sen. Rubio is ready for this kind of crap. And he answered it beyond appropriately.
Riddle me this, folks.
Would our current occupier of the White House been asked a question like, oh I don't know. Let me pull this out of my hat.
Would the Dear Leader, President Obama, ever be asked this.
Do you believe in Black liberation theology?
Would that be deemed an unfair question?
Well, yes my friends. Yes it would.
Because how dare anyone ask our Dear Leader, President Obama, if sitting in the pews of Trinity Church in the South side of Chicago and listening to the "Rev" Jeremiah Wright drone on about the subject for 20 frickin years, he believed in the main tenet of what he preached?
Yet somehow, Sen. Marco Rubio is supposed to answer a question the greatest minds ever have not been able to answer with absolute certitude.
No, he does not and he did but did not directly spout off something stupid.
My friends, this is how to not give the Obamawhore Media Complex their jollies.
Republicans need to read this interview to see when trapped with a gotcha question, do what Sen. Rubio did.
Turn it around and make said hack look as foolish as can be for asking such a question.

Some More Post Election Thoughts

OK, can't seem to get enough of this self-flagellation over the presidential election a week ago Tuesday.
I mean, how else are we going to learn how Mitt Romney lost to Barack Obama, right?
Well, maybe this is another reason.
OK, on the surface, Mr. Romney is kind of right. But I think that is what politicians do, right? Especially Democrat pols. It is in the Democrat DNA.
But it was the tone and yes, bitterness, that Mr. Romney made the comment. That was surprising and tone deaf to a huge reason for his defeat.
That no matter how much he tried, he could not help that he was a wealthy, White male running against the United States' first Black president.
And he does not have to deliver any more red meat to the Republican activists. Nor give any more fodder to the American left.
Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal was correct to refute Mr. Romney and to state something that should be obvious.
That Republicans have to fight for 100% of votes in elections.
And that is what has ailed in reality both political parties, but especially the Republicans, in the last several election cycles.
So, who is ready for some wit and wisdom from The Architect, Karl Rove?
Well, this piece in The Wall Street Journal was actually very good.
And while he did make a buffoon of himself on election night, he offers some good advice for future campaigns.
This one caught my eye:

Republicans should also emulate the Democratic "50-state" strategy by strengthening the ground game everywhere, not just in swing states.

YES!
The Architect is correct.
Folks, the Republican party can not keep writing off states before campaigns begin. Sure, I don't think that Republicans can win in California or New York in the very immediate future. But it is possible that by the next presidential election, there is something in place that will make candidates actually come to those states. And that will excite Republican voters and get them out into the hustings to dig up some votes. After all, how are state parties supposed to get more than 38% of the vote in California? Or 36% in New York state? Maybe 40% in New Jersey? You get the picture.
There are a lot of nuts-and-bolts points that he made that are also good.
But what about the most obvious?
That since one Ronald Wilson Reagan, the Republican party has nominated moderate after moderate and lost almost every election since 1988.
It was not lost on RD Brewer over at the Ace of Spades. It was he who made the salient point.
The history is pretty bitter for the most part except for the two election wins by George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.
In 1992, not long after George H. W. Bush caved on the infamous 1988 pledge to not raise taxes, his campaign was not even on autopilot. It was in total disarray. Pat Buchanan ran in the primaries and made some serious damage. And yup, I contributed to that damage by voting for Mr. Buchanan in the 1992 Cali GOP primary. And with the unwitting help of Ross Perot, we got Bill Clinton.
But if once was not enough, and the Republicans not exactly helping themselves, Sen. Bob Dole, a good man, was nominated and went on to defeat. Again, he could not really explain why he should be president and how a Dole presidency would be different from Mr. Clinton's.
By 2000, the Bush name was transferred in part to the oldest son, George W. Bush. A successful governor in Texas, he decided to run for president. He ran as a conservative reformer. he wanted to bring that to Washington. And after a brutal election campaign and the Electoral College debacle, Mr. Bush did eventually win the election. And in 2004 much the way one Barack Hussein Obama ran in 2012,  Mr. Bush did win reelection with similar if not eerie numbers as the current occupant of the White House.
But by 2008 and no anointed successor, the Republicans had an all-out war and the Vietnam vet and Arizona Solon, John "F--- You" McCain won the nomination and became the loser against the Dear Leader, President Obama.
And we all know the story of the just concluded campaign.
Mr. Brewer notes that not one of these candidates was as articulate or governed as conservatively as did Mr. Reagan.
And as Mr. Brewer notes, it is the elephant in the room.
But I think a good start is being made by Gov. Jindal of Louisiana.
After all, he is the governor of a Southern state that has long been, well I don't quite know how to say it nicely, a backwater and Democrat corruption factory.
And Gov. Jindal has been a strong reformer. And he won reelection by a staggering 66% of the vote in 2011.
And he does not run for a third term, he would be able to make that run for president.
He is saying the right things and doing the right things.
Thus he should be looked at very seriously and now.
My ending thoughts.
Mitt Romney can not be bitter about this loss. He can not say that the Democrats just bought off the very voters that they needed in a cold manner.
Republicans need to rethink a lot of the nuts-and-bolts about campaigns.
We must nominate a candidate that can articulate conservative ideas and not alienate anyone. The way that Ronald Reagan did.
And, Bobby Jindal is on my shortlist for 2016.

Can The Cali GOP Get Its Act Together?

Yeah, I know that this is a hilarious question since the last several election cycles seem to say a big fat N O!
It is very important to go back to how the California Republican party is now a third-party in this once Golden State.
The stats are just a part of the story, but a very important one.
Lets go back to 2000 because that is the beginning of the 21st century and the Democrats began the long march to where they are about to be today.
In 2000, as usual, there were more registered Democrats than Republicans in California.
Here is the breakdown and the percentages are rounded off.

2000
Democrat
7,134,601 (45%)

Republican
5,485,492 (35%)

Decline To State (Independent)
2,256,316 (14%)

Fast forward to this past election

2012
Democrat
7,966,422 (44%)

Republican
5,356,608 (29%)

Decline to state (Independent)
3,820,545 (21%)

While Democrats have lost a whole percentage of registered voters over this time, they have gained almost 832,000 new voters.
The Republicans?
Not only have they lost six percent of registered voters but have lost nearly 129,000 registered voters.
And the big winners?
Those choosing to register with neither political party as the Decline to State has jumped seven points and over 1,154,000 registered voters.
OK, now you get the state of the parties currently in terms of registration.
Another stat worth looking at is the presidential results since 2000.
Yes, the Republican candidates have lost every time.
But it did not start off as bad as it has become today.
Here are the presidential election results since 2000 and without third parties.

2000
Bush (R)     4,567,429 (42%)
Gore (D)     5,861,203 (54%)

2004
Bush (R)     5,509,826 (44%)
Kerry (D)    6.745,485 (54%)

2008
Obama (D)  8,274,473 (61%)
McCain (R) 5,011,781 (37%)

2012  
Obama (D)  6,414,573 (59%)
Romney (R)4,413,120 (38%)

Now look at several things.
One, Democrat numbers increase almost every election. Except this year. And after the Republican high water mark of 44% in 2004, the numbers and percentages precipitously drop like an anvil. Granted the numbers for the just concluded presidential election are not final, but the bottom line is this.
The new high water mark for California Republicans seem to be about 38% of votes.
And even in the GOP strongholds the Dems made some striking gains.
Thus, California is about to endure total Democrat rule.
The Democrats control all the elected constitutional offices and are about to have a super-majority in both the Assembly (lower house) and the senate. Out of 120 legislative districts total in the assembly, it appears that the Republicans will have a grand total of 40. Forty out of 120 available seats.
So the overall numbers suck, the question or multiple variations are why?
Even though there was an alleged Republican as governor from 2005 to 2010, that governor, Benedict Arnold Schwarzenegger, did absolutely nothing to improve the Republican party standing in any way.
By the time Benedict Arnold ran for a full term in 2006, he was politically lobotomized and was nothing but Democrat lite.
The GOP in California has done absolutely nothing to keep up with the very substantial change that has taken place in this state.
It is now much more Asian and Hispanic. In fact, there is no race group over 50% in the state. Both the previously mentioned groups are rising fast.
The Whites?
Well, if they can they are getting out. Regrettably, what we are seeing statewide is White Flight. But it is not all race related.
It is a combination of things that have driven mostly Whites from leaving California. The high cost of living. The difficulty of doing business here. The continuous tax-and-spend mentality from the city level to the state level.
But now, many people of color who have gained economically are beginning to follow Whites outta here.
But the Cali GOP has never been able to shake the damage from the vote in 1994 for Proposition 187.
It did pass and had it been implemented would have essentially cut all assistance to illegal aliens.
Then Republican governor Pete Wilson, bless his heart, a moderate Republican and struggling to win reelection decided to back the measure and it passed by an amazing 60%-40%.
Now one has to realize that a sizable number of Hispanics did vote for the measure. In fact according to the link, about 23% of Hispanics voted for the measure. There were not enough Whites to get to 60%,
But, alas, Proposition 187 never was implemented. And since then, the California Democrat party has never let the California Republican party off the hook on that one.
And it seems that the party has decided that it is not worth the effort to have real, genuine outreach to Hispanics since that time.
And that is a huge problem in this state.
The reality is that the Cali GOP has no message for its base let alone for non-Republicans to consider.
It is a rudderless ship that is about to hit a coral reef.
But, there are ways to right this wrong if the party really wants to get back into the game here in California.
One, it must pursue what I would call a middle-class agenda.
It must explain why it is bad to have higher taxes all the way around. It must stand for the homeowners who in fact and indeed have the highest burden in term of paying state and local taxes.
It must stand for making public education second to none. It must take the time and effort to explain that public charter schools are the future of education. It must be forward looking. It must be inclusive in this way. It must meld education with being an American.
It must explain that excessive regulation is a cause and affect as to why joblessness remains in double-digits. That if there is reasonable deregulation, it will bring business to the state and not less.
It must remain and explain why it is tough-on-crime. And that crime knows no race and or economic background. It must pursue that it will not only enforce the death penalty but find ways to speed up the process so that executions can go at a much faster pace. And the fact that voters voted to keep the death penalty, it is a totally winning issue for the Cali GOP.
Now, this will upset most conservatives who consider themselves social conservatives, but the party will have to downplay that aspect of the coalition.
Not shun so cons at all. But the reality is that if same-sex marriage gets on the ballot next time, it will pass, not be rejected. We can explain why it is a bad thing, but should not have candidates run on that as an issue. Same with abortion. What we have to do is educate as why it should not be the way that it is now. And we must not let illegal immigration define us or be defined by the Dems and left. We must  point out that it is a federal issue and that the federal government must pursue the policies to secure our borders. By that, the Cali GOP can not support so-called "Sanctuary" cities and point out that they are violating federal law. Again, pick the battles that can be won, not keep fighting losing efforts.
All of this requires some very hard, serious work on the part of the Cali GOP.
It means that it has to get volunteers to do some things that have been lacking.
It means getting involved in the ethnic events around the state.
Chinese New Year is coming up. Get some Republican registration booths at all the celebrations. Have material in Chinese, Cantonese and Mandarin, the primary dialects. And they must be manned by Asians, not old White people. No offense to those since I am a middle-aged White guy.
Cinco de Mayo. Same as above. Have material in Spanish. Have Hispanics manning the booths.
Martin Luther King Day in January. Again, same as above. And of course have Black people involved.
And we have to keep at it because we will not have a mass sea change of minds by the 2014 state election.
The Democrats did not get to where they are now over night and neither will the Republicans.
It has to be a long-term strategy and a genuine effort that minority groups have never seen before in this state.
Again, many of the issues are on the Republicans side. But we have to be willing to get into the game. We can't keep whining and hand-wringing.
It is time to get to work.
We need to have a strong Republican party in California, the largest state in the nation. We need to have that strong party to get back to having actual presidential races in which the candidates come here instead of Florida. Or Michigan. Or Pennsylvania.
If not, we will just go the way of the Northeast state Republican parties. Into irrelevance.

If This IS How Team Romney Ran The Campaign, THIS Would Not Have Bode Well For The United States

This could end up being a vulgar rant. I do not want it to be. But I warn you ahead of time.
As the fog of the results of this past Tuesday's presidential election lifts, a rather deeply disturbing aspect of the Romney campaign is not coming out.
We were told over and over again that the Republicans were going to win the ground game in all the swing states. That we had advantages that the Democrats did not. Yada, yada, yada.
One of those "advantages" was dubbed ORCA.
It was supposed to change the face of the election and help Mitt Romney become the 45th president of the United States.
But, in the hands of Republican "strategists", of course they turned this into a disaster.
In this account by Jack Ekdahl, there were problems from the start. It was promoted to the volunteers in "rah-rah" sort of way. Re: Amway. Any questions that were asked about drawbacks, not answered. And this is very important. This was not a coordinated effort with the actual Republican party but from Team Romney.
A huge mistake there.
Read Mr. Ekdahl's account of how badly things were done to get an idea of two election cycles being ran by, to be blunt, morons.
There was the haphazard Sen. John "F--- You" McCain campaign, that pretty much imploded before a single vote was cast on election day in 2008. And if this is true, and it pains me to write this, a campaign that had a significant tool to reach voters oversold and thus blew the age-old theory of direct, personal contact. One-on-one with voters.
Oh, and Team Obama?
They did that.
And the reality is that the Democrats have the built in organization to do that with their alliances.
Folks, we Republicans can not run campaigns and win elections if we do not seriously stand as an alternative to the other side. And we must not throw out the baby with the bath water.
I blame a lot of this on someone thinking that they are the next Karl Rove.
Yes, he was the architect of George W. Bush's wins in 2000, and 2004.
But that was then.
The Dems of course studied all that he did in 2004 to win this election.
And basically, it was to get the minimal amount of electoral votes to the majority of 270 or plus.
And of course the Dems did better once they got their hands on it.
Say what you want about it being a nasty campaign. It was. But while the public face of that campaign was there for the world to see, they were busy doing  a little modern stuff and classic retail one-on-one contacts. And, they looked for new voters. They were smart enough to realize that there was a let down in the historic 2008 race.
Bottom line.
Team Obama played smart and used everything at its disposal.
Team Romney played, well lets just say that they played and lost.
I credit Team Obama for doing what should always be done by both parties. Never ceding any place.
Sure, this time they did, but wait because they are going to try to open the field in 2016 because they will have to.
Once again, because of downright ineptitude, the Republicans foolishly already gave up ground before the primary season.
We can not hope to win elections if we keep letting California, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin stay Blue.
At least Republicans are competitive in Michagan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. But at the presidential level, it is like Lucy Van Pelt pulling the football away from Charlie Brown.
Here is some advice for the next big thing in the GOP.
One, chuck these worthless consultants. They have no clue. Elections need to be fought everywhere and anywhere. Starting from a negative, well it means we narrow on the margins rather than the nation as a whole.
Two, candidates must be at ease talking about basic conservative ideas. They must be able to move the debate. Being defensive or brushing it aside gets you Mitt Romney. And the list is rather long.
You know, California was pretty Democratic when a guy named Reagan ran for governor in 1966. Most Republicans thought that he did not have a chance to even win the nomination. But he did and because he was clear and totally comfortable talking about conservatism, showing a contrast to then Gov. Edmund "Pat" Brown, the current governor's dad, he won.
It is not all about the bells and whistles, but practicing the time-honored tradition of constant retail politics.
Dems get it and GOPers do not.

Losing This Election Sucks

Hmm, I probably should stop with the headline, but it is true.
Losing this election to the Worthless Leader, President Obama, really does suck.
I mean really, what did it come down to for many people?
That Hispanics feel so alienated from the Republican party that they will go with the guy that really in a bad sense wants to keep them down?
That people really think a photo-op and just showing up after a hurricane hits New Jersey and New York is awesome?
That people believed that even after George W. Bush being out of office for four years the bad economy is still his fault?
That the Republicans did not make a hard enough case not just about replacing the Worthless, ah the heck with it, President Obama but what they had to offer and why it would be better?
Coalition politics really do work?
There are a lot more questions to ask but generally, yes to all of the above.
While I do believe that illegal immigration should not be rewarded, the reality is that we Republicans, and I include myself, have not emphasized enough that a reality is that some people who did come into the United States illegally will have to be given an oppertuinity to stay. But any deal has to have the reality that the reason there is mass illegal immigration in the first place, especially from Mexico and yes, Red China, is because of the condidtions in the home country. And that the United States must have stronger border security. Period. We can not be snookered like last time. It must be real and implemented.
We have to do a lot better explaining that to all people, but especially Hispanics and Chinese/Asian Americans. And until we do, well it is going to be hard to win elecions anywhere.
Hispanics want to be part of the United States. They really do. And so many are very much proud to be Americans. Even the many that came here illegally. I do think that a lot of rethinking that is going to be needed. I do not pretend to know the answer. It is not blanket anmesty, thats for sure.
A photo-op or two should not be a determining factor in voting for anyone.
But it was for President Obama.
It just looked awesome to many people that he showed up, had that concerned look on his face, hugged a few people and standing next to Gov. Chris The Cow Christie, a supposed Republican, well for many people that was enough a reason to vote for President Obama.
I don't get it really. I mean, it is an unwritten part of the job description to show up to such things and assure the populace that all will be done to help. I suppose it all gets back to the infamous Hurricane Katrina and the rather sucessful narrative of an uncaring then President George W. Bush. Nevermind that the then mayor of New Orleans, Ray Nagin, and then Gov. Kathleen Blanco were both telling Mr. Bush that they did not need any assistance. Until it was too late.
However, it does run into a fact. That people want a leader that they feel they can relate to. And until the dreaded Katrina, a lot of people thought that Mr. Bush did relate to them. Wanna know why there is not a President Kerry? Because Sen. John F. Kerry could not connect to people.
And here is a bipartisan memo.
No more presidential nominees from Massachusetts.
Michael Dukakis, John Kerry for the Dems and now Mitt Romney for the Republicans. All three are now losers and shows that Massachusetts governance is still too much for most Americans. And while Mitt Romney was more technocrat than anything, he was a Republican and reasonably conservative. But, that almost cost him the GOP nomination and in the end, the White House.
The economy still being W's fault?
It is the biggest stretch, but Team Obama has dipped into that well sucessfully time and time again. And it keeps working.
But I think it is more of an overall attempt to create hatred of the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll rich.
The Bushes, the Romneys. Eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll rich people. Oh sure there are more,  but they stick out.
And when it is down to the gutteral, street-level fight of "us vs. them", sorry folks, the Dems have that corner down. It is in a sense the whole reason for their being. Never mind that the eeeeevvvvviiiiilllll rich that they skew and roast over the coals are in fact more in line with them than Republicans.
And a news flash.
Big business ain't Republican and certainely not conservative. It goes with whoever will do their bidding.
What we need to do is teach what conservativsm and conservative principles are about. Most people do not have a clue. If you look at it through the prism of partisan politics, then yes it can be hard to realize that many people are, indeed, much more conservative that they even realize.
Don't get me wrong. Elections are important. But it can only do so much. The culture in many bad ways is changing. In other ways it has improved. It is not all one or the other. \
But that leads to coalition politics.
Sorry, but that does work. And it has for both sides and especially in the last 12 years.
In the end, Team Obama got it together and they went to work. Team Romney? They were fighting it out over a primary season in which, quite sucessfully, Team Obama defined him and he did nothing to refute it.
You may not like their coalition. I don't. But we have to study that and learn from it. One other thing is that, once again, the GOP just does not get how to attract the youth. The youth are hyper-tech savvy. Team Obama knows it and has been able to use it and keep them for now in their camp.
For now? What do I mean?
Because my friends one thing to learn in the last 20 years is that elections are a cyclical thing. And by the end of the eight years of Obama, the nation will be ready to try something new. Some of that coalition that Team O built will not be able to be kept on the Democrat plantation. Blacks may not feel as anxious to vote as they have in the last two elections. In fact, while their coalition was kept together, a lot of people did not seem to be engaged as voting was down all accross the board.
Many of the groups in the current Dem coalition will tire. And with the right candidate, it is possible that in 2016, the Republicans can take back the White House.
A lot of people are just going to scream that the Republicans are going to just have to chuck all that makes them Republicans and become Dem lite.
I see that from my lib Facebook friends.
But that is not as much the issue as perception.
When we nominate candidates that can not articulate their positions in a clear and coherent manner, as I always say, people will vote for the devil they know, the Dems, rather than what they are not sure about, the GOP.
John McCain and Mitt Romney are the latest to not get it.
It is not just about messaging but what the hell do they believe. Why did they run for president in the first place.
There is more to say on all of this.
But for now, the honesty of today is simple.
Losing this election sucks.