Tag Archives: California Governor Gavin Newsom

Ignoring The Perspective Of The Founding Fathers

Posted on by

On Sunday, Jonathan Turley posted an article about the Founding Fathers and how they would have responded to the idea of a wealth tax.

The article states:

Below is my column in the Wall Street Journal on the bizarre claim of Gov. Gavin Newsom and others that the Framers would have supported wealth taxes, including the proposed Billionaire’s Tax. It is a claim that seeks to mask the economically unwise with the historically unfounded. The Framers sought to protect property from legislative redistributive impulses. James Madison wrote that the bicameral system, and particularly the Senate, “ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority.” That does not sound like an ally of Bernie Sanders and Ro Khanna.

…Was James Madison the Zohran Mamdani of his time? Gavin Newsom appears to think so. In joining the growing number of Democratic leaders supporting a wealth tax, the California governor claimed that the U.S. Constitution and our Founders were all about wealth distribution: “The system America’s founders built,” he said, “was designed to prevent the concentration of power in a few hands, but we have allowed that concentration to happen anyway, slowly, in plain sight, over decades.”

The only problem with this argument is that it is utterly and demonstrably false. The Madisonian democracy is designed to avoid the concentration of political power, not the concentration of wealth.

The article notes:

The Constitution not only protects property, but was later amended to allow for income taxes rather than wealth taxes. Far from supporting a wealth tax, the constitutional system referenced by Mr. Newsom makes a federal wealth tax unconstitutional.

The article concludes:

Nevertheless, wealth taxes make for great politics. What is concerning is that, in addition to a wealth tax, Democratic leaders like Ms. Warren are pledging to pack the Supreme Court if they retake power. A packed court with an insistent liberal majority would let the Democrats push through measures that would otherwise be declared unconstitutional, including a wealth tax.

Congress could then gradually lower the level of wealth needed to trigger the tax, opening up the homes and estates of citizens as an untapped reservoir of money for the taking.

“You’re next” could then apply not just to office holders but to property owners in a push to redistribute wealth.

That strategy may well unfold in coming years, but it will be the realization of a Mamdanian, not a Madisonian, system.

One of the unintended consequences of a wealth tax is that it interferes with the desire to become wealthy. Why acquire wealth of the government is going to take it from you? As stated in the article, a wealth tax will eventually apply to the non-wealthy and wipe out the middle class. The middle class is the backbone of a free republic.

It’s Only A Problem When They Do It!

Posted on by

California has what is called a ‘jungle primary,’ which means there are not separate party primaries–everyone is in one primary, and the top two candidates go on the ballot. Because California is about as blue a blue state as possible, generally that puts two Democrats on the ballot for governor. No problem. However, this year there is a problem. There is a possibility (remote, but there) that two Republicans will be on the ballot and the Democrats will be shut out. If there is a Democrat and a Republican on the ballot, the Democrat wins (even if it takes thousands of mail-in ballots that show up after the election to ensure that victory). But if the Democrats are shut out of the election, California could have a Republican governor (horrors!). So what can be done?

On Friday, Legal Insurrection posted an article quoting Politico:

Gavin Newsom said he’s confident at least one Democrat will advance from California’s June gubernatorial primary, hinting at a “break-the-glass” contingency plan as he declined — yet again — to endorse in the race.

The California governor, speaking at his budget presentation on Thursday, said that rather than pick a candidate, he has focused on ensuring that Democrats are not locked out of the primary, in which the top-two vote getters regardless of party go on to the general election.

“I do not see that scenario taking place,” he said.

Newsom said there was a “break-the-glass” contingency plan to prevent that from happening, and alluded to behind-the-scenes efforts to rally people. He did not specify his activities, but the Democratic Governors Association recently began sending mail highlighting Republican Steve Hilton as a fierce conservative. The ostensible opposition campaign could drive GOP voters to Hilton, ensuring he consolidates the party’s voters and saps the support of the other Republican candidate, Chad Bianco, enough to keep him from finishing in the top two.

The article at Legal Insurrection concludes:

It may be worth taking a closer look at what precisely Democratic operatives are doing behind the scenes to shape — and potentially influence — the trajectory of this race. With so much at stake, you can bet Democrats will pull out all the stops to prevent a Republican from capturing the governorship.

That reality raises broader questions about coordination, spending, ballot harvesting operations, and other political tactics that could affect the outcome of the contest long before votes are cast. Just as the Republican National Committee deployed teams of attorneys ahead of the 2024 presidential election to monitor election procedures and respond quickly to potential irregularities, Republicans may want to consider a similarly proactive legal and organizational strategy in California’s gubernatorial race.

Similar to what pundits say about any potential deal with Iran, when dealing with Democrats, the guiding principle should be: “Don’t trust and verify, verify, verify.”

Winning At Track Is Easy When You Are A Guy Competing Against Girls

Posted on by

On Saturday, Fox News reported the following:

 A California postseason track meet on Saturday opened with a “Save Girls’ Sports” rally outside the gates and ended in familiar fashion, as one athlete again separated from the field in the jumping events, highlighting growing concerns over competitive fairness in girls’ sports.

Saturday’s CIF Southern Section Division 3 preliminaries in Yorba Linda drew attention before competition began, with demonstrators protesting California’s policy allowing transgender athletes to compete in girls’ sports.

Inside, the focus turned to the jumping events, where biological male AB Hernandez, a senior from Jurupa Valley, competed against women and finished first across all three competitions with dominant performances.

First, let’s get our terms right–he is NOT a biological male–he is a male. His gender was NOT assigned at birth–when he arrived in this world, his parts determined his gender. Without major surgery, there is no way to change those parts.

The article concludes:

Hernandez competed under rules California has allowed for more than a decade. Those rules remain at the center of a growing conflict between state officials and federal leaders over Title IX and women’s sports. That battle has now moved into the courts, with the Department of Justice suing California over its transgender athlete policies.

In response, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office distanced the governor from the lawsuit, emphasizing he was not personally named while defending the state’s existing law.

Saturday’s prelims in Yorba Linda added more data to the growing push to keep biological males out of girls’ events.

The protest set the tone early, and by day’s end the argument had moved off the sidewalk and onto the results board, where the outcome carried real consequences.

In the long jump, Hernandez was able to jump a foot more than his female competitors. I wonder how he would have done against male competition. Female sports is not the place for mediocre male athletes.

Following The Rules Saves Lives

Posted on by

On Friday, Breitbart posted an article about the recent deadly crash allegedly caused by an illegal migrant truck driver from India.

The article reports:

Jashanpreet Singh, 21, was charged Thursday by the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office with three counts of vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence and one count of DUI causing injury in the eight-vehicle pileup, ABC7 reported.

A Los Angeles County high school basketball coach and his wife were killed, with Pomona High School identifying the victims as Clarence Nelson and his wife, Lisa. The third victim’s identity was not publicly released by Friday. 

The article includes a statement by Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy:

“My prayers are with the families of the victims of this tragedy. It would have never happened if Gavin Newsom had followed our new rules,” Duffy said in a statement obtained by Breitbart News. “California broke the law and now three people are dead and two are hospitalized. These people deserve justice. There will be consequences.”

A report from the Department of Transportation (DOT) shows every step where California let Singh obtain his CDL against the department’s policies put in place following the state’s “significant compliance failures” revealed by a recent audit that found that 25 percent of non-domiciled CDLs sampled were issued improperly. 

The article notes:

On June 27, then 20-year-old Singh, claiming to be an asylum seeker, was issued a restricted, non-domiciled CDL. The license included a “K restriction,” which limited him to in-state operation, DOT said.  

On September 26, Duffy formally notified California of its compliance failures after a department audit revealed the staggering amount of improperly-issued CDLs. To fix the issue, DOT required California to pause issuance of non-domiciled CDLs, identify all unexpired non-domiciled CDLs that fail to comply with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations, and to revoke and reissue all noncompliant non-domiciled CDLs if they comply with the new federal requirements.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. Governor Newsom is attempting to put the blame on the federal government, but I don’t think that really works. The bottom line is that we have a lot of people in the country illegally who don’t speak English and are driving large trucks. That is not a good thing.

Look For This Man On The 2028 Presidential Ticket

Posted on by

It is very likely that JD Vance will be the Republican candidate for President in 2028. The Democrat candidate field is a lot more complicated. To name a few possible candidates, I expect to see Gavin Newsom, Mark Kelly, and Josh Shapiro. However, there is someone else quietly making moves who would be a much more viable candidate.

On Sunday, Hot Air reported the following:

One month later, another survey by the Journal showed that people are losing faith that they will achieve the American dream in their lifetime — and worse, they fear it will even be further out of reach for their children and grandchildren. This sentiment should concern leaders in both parties but in particular the Democrats, who have bottomed out with appealing to the middle-class voter.

No Democrat cringes more at those stats than former Illinois congressman, White House Chief of Staff and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Twenty years ago, he led the Democrats’ takeover of the House, and he is widely rumored to be considering a run for his party’s nomination for president in 2028.

Many smart Republicans will tell you privately that of all the folks throwing their name around as possible contenders, it is Emanuel, a brilliant political animal and tactician, whom they fear the most. Why?

Well, there is likely an entire generation of Democrats and journalists who might not know this, but his 2006 midterm election strategy of picking centrist candidates to run for the House in states such as Pennsylvania, Ohio and Tennessee in Republican-leaning districts gave his party the gavel for the first time in a dozen years.

Emanuel said in our interview that the survey numbers from the Journal told him a few important things but one above all: that Democrats really need to start addressing that it is unacceptable for the American dream to be inaccessible to so many.

Rahm Emanuel is a political force to be reckoned with. He is quietly preparing a path to the Democrat nomination for President. He is presenting himself as less radical than the other candidates and attempting to bring the Democrats who have defected to President Trump and Vice-President Vance back into the party. Actually, he is as radical as anyone in the current Democrat Party. Remember, he was a major player in the Obama administration that laid the foundation for a lot of the problems we have now–he was part of the group that enabled the government takeover of healthcare. He will bring back the days of racial division and unequal justice. Be aware that he is on the hunt for the nomination.

This Was Predictable

Posted on by

On Friday, Hot Air posted an article about the rebuilding of the Pacific Palisades area in California that was destroyed by fire in January of this year. There is a strong possibility that rebuilding the areas as it was will never take place.

The article reports:

…But the process is still slow. As of midday July 1, 2025, the LA County Permitting Progress Dashboard showed 890 rebuild applications in the Eaton Fire area, but only 44 building permits have been issued, taking an average turnaround of about 10 weeks to get through the process.

And speed matters. A survey of fire victims found that the longer it takes to rebuild, the more likely it is people won’t move back.

“So even folks that fully intend to move back today, if this process, either through permitting or financing or insurance, takes more than three years, the percentage of people that want to move back drops to like 50%,” Kawahara says.

The article notes the government’s desire to change the character of the neighborhood:

Six months after the devastating Palisades and Eaton fires, California Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled $101 million in funding Tuesday for “multifamily low-income housing development” that will “contribute to a more equitable and resilient Los Angeles.” The priority is for “geographic proximity to the fire perimeters of the Eaton, Hughes, and Palisades fires.” 

Earlier this year, The Center Square broke news that California state law and a local Los Angeles ordinance require fire-destroyed rent-protected housing — which includes all apartments in the city built before October 1978 — be replaced with low-income housing. Because the affordability requirements use county-level income data, not more local incomes, definitions for “low” and “very low” income housing reflect much lower incomes than the norm for the affluent Palisades community. 

“Thousands of families – from Pacific Palisades to Altadena to Malibu – are still displaced, and we owe it to them to help,” said Newsom in a statement. “The funding we’re announcing today will accelerate the development of affordable multifamily rental housing so that those rebuilding their lives after this tragedy have access to a safe, affordable place to come home to.”  

And some people wonder why Californians are moving out of the state. I believe that the property rights of the homeowners in Pacific Palisades are not being honored. That does not bode well for the economic success of the state. In 2010, I wrote an article discussing the correlation between property rights and prosperity (article here). Ignoring that relationship is not a good policy for any state or federal government.

Where Some Of The Unaccompanied Minor Children Went

Posted on by

On July 11th, Townhall posted an article about a recent U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) raid at a cannabis farms in Camarillo, California.

The article reports:

Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott confirmed 10 of the individuals discovered during an immigration enforcement operation at cannabis farms in Camarillo, California, were illegal immigrant minors.

Responding to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s X post calling President Trump “the real scum,” Scott revealed the “breaking news.”

“Here’s some breaking news: 10 juveniles were found at this marijuana facility – all illegal aliens, 8 of them unaccompanied,” he said. “It’s now under investigation for child labor violations. This is Newsom’s California.”

The Department of Homeland Security’s X account also responded to Newsom’s post: “Why are there children working at a marijuana facility, Gavin?” 

Another article posted at Townhall on July 11th reports:

We’ve gone beyond leftists being annoying and hysterical regarding disrupting Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. It’s now domestic terrorism. ICE conducted a raid on a cannabis farm in Camarillo, California, which devolved into a total circus. They tried to block vehicles, used human chain antics, and were being overall annoying. Then, things got violent. Video clearly shows an anti-ICE activist shooting at federal agents during the mayhem (via ABC 7):

This is in no way acceptable behavior. A political party that justifies child labor and illegal entry into America is not a political party–it is a lawless gang that has lost its way.

Be Careful When You Donate

Posted on by

On Sunday, The New York Post posted an article about some of the donation sites collecting money for the victims of the California wildfires. When you donate to anything, be sure to read the fine print.

The article reports:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom sparked fierce outrage for soliciting donations to victims of the deadly Los Angeles wildfires via his super PAC, which pushed users to add their personal information to a Democratic fundraising site.

Newsom, 57, posted a link on X to californiafirefacts.com, a website set up by his campaign committee, in response to what he claimed was misinformation on the wildfires. 

But the site urges users to give money to the California Fire Foundation and links them to a module from ActBlue, the Democratic Party’s fundraising platform. The ActBlue donation box says the money is being raised by Campaign for Democracy, Newsom’s super PAC. 

…The California Fire Foundation, which helps firefighters, their families and victims, allows users to donate directly without relying on a service like ActBlue to make those transactions. 

Users who donate via Newsom’s fundraising appeal are also automatically signing up for text messages from his super PAC, if they provide their phone numbers.

ActBlue isn’t doing this for nothing:

Observers online also quickly pointed out that ActBlue takes a portion of all donations as a processing fee. ActBlue claims to “charge a flat rate of 3.95% on each donation” to “cover the processing cost.” The Post has contacted ActBlue for comment. 

The article notes:

“Both Gavin Newsom and Elizabeth Warren were exposed for using the California fires to push Democrat fundraising efforts. It doesn’t get much worse than this. Americans, remember these receipts when you head to the polls,” X user Jack wrote.

“Getting a great preview of how a President Newsom would handle a national emergency—hop on a left wing podcast, have the hosts use Act Blue for relief donations (where $ will ultimately get funneled to Dem causes), and then retain the donor lists for future Dem fundraising,” user Vanessa wrote on X, referencing Newsom’s appearance on the liberal “Pod Save America” podcast.

“Newsom….never let a fundraising opportunity go to waste,” user Andrew Laing wrote on X.

Donations directly to The California Fire Foundation, Operation Blessing, Samaritan’s Purse of the Salvation Army might be more effective.

This Was Inevitable

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The U.K. Daily Mail posted an article explaining how Chipotle is dealing with the new minimum wage requirements for fast-food establishments in California. This is not surprising and should give legislators in all states a reason to pause before changing the minimum wage laws.

The article reports:

Chipotle has introduced two robots that can take over tasks normally done by its workers. 

The ‘autocado’ can peel, stone and cut an avocado for guacamole in 26 seconds. Meanwhile, a ‘digital makeline’ portions up salads and bowls based on orders on the app.

The machines are part of an automation drive that Chipotle bosses hope will cut down the number of workers needed – slashing rising labor costs. 

So, it is no surprise they are being put to use first in two of the Mexican chain’s restaurants in California, the company announced on Monday. 

Recent legislation raised the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20-an-hour in the state. 

The controversial wage hike – $4 more than the minimum wage in the state for any other job – was introduced by California Governor Gavin Newsom at chains with more than 60 locations in the US, and came into effect on April 1.

Chains including Burger King have already ramped up the roll out of digital ordering kiosks to cut the number of cashiers needed in Californian restaurants.  

It is not yet clear how the production costs of using Chipotle’s new machines compares to human labor when making Chipotle menu items. 

Also, robots don’t call in sick or require vacations or sick days.

The article concludes:

Chipotle’s sales this year beat Wall Street expectations – boosted by price hikes and a jump in loyal customers. 

But the company has come under fire for its reported varying portion sizes. 

It prompted Chipotle’s then CEO Brian Nicol – who has now moved to Starbucks – to deny that he had instructed staff to scrimp with servings as he revealed the company will be instituting changes to ensure satisfaction.

He revealed Chipotle will be retraining its staff to ensure ‘generous portions’ are consistent across its more than 3,500 stores.

Last month, Wells Fargo analyst Zachary Fadem and his team tested the theory that Chipotle has been skimping on its usually-large portions, after a series of videos posted to TikTok showed employees barely filling their burrito bowls.

The team ordered and weighed 75 bowls – all with the same ingredients –  from eight locations across New York City.

They discovered that the consistency of the burrito bowls varied widely from restaurant to restaurant. Some locations served bowls that weighed up to 33 percent more than others, the study found. 

Even without the minimum wage hikes, fast food is another victim of Bidenomics.

 

How Is The Plan Actually Working?

Posted on by

On Monday, Fox News posted an article about California Governor Gavin Newsome’s plan to end homelessness in California.

The article reports:

As Newsom took over following the 2003 San Francisco mayoral election, the then-mayor-elect said that December he intended to “aggressively” make ending homelessness in his city his administration’s top priority.

The plan involved a 10-year strategy to end chronic homelessness with “tens of millions” of federal dollars in funding to create 550 “supportive housing” units for the troubled homeless, SFGate reported at the time.

Fast-forward to December of this year and the announcement of that strategy is now two decades old. San Francisco, along with the rest of California, is far from solving the problem.

In fact, the growing homeless population has become a central issue in California’s political debate.

“Twenty years ago, then-Mayor Newsom laid out his 10-year plan to end homelessness in San Francisco,” California GOP chairwoman Jessica Millan Patterson told Fox News Digital. “Not only does the problem remain unsolved today, but in the time since, he has taken his failures statewide, where communities across California are grappling with the devastating homeless crisis.”

The article notes:

Newsom was elected governor in 2018 and re-elected in 2022, with 2023 marking his fifth year in office.

Newsom took some heat earlier this year after San Francisco cleared out its homeless encampments ahead of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s summit with President Biden in the city.

“I know folks are saying, ‘Oh they’re just cleaning up this place because all those fancy leaders are coming to town,'” Newsom said at that time. “That’s true, because it’s true – but it’s also true for months and months and months before APEC [Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit], we’ve been having conversations.”

I don’t claim to have a solution to homelessness, but it is interesting that the streets of San Francisco could be cleaned up for a state visit.

If Robert F. Kennedy, Sr., Can Do It…

Posted on by

In case you don’t remember, Robert F. Kennedy, Sr., served as a Senator from New York State from 1965 until he was assassinated in 1968. Anyone who was politically savvy at the time understood that since Ted Kennedy had been a Senator since 1962, it was unlikely that Massachusetts voters (yes, even Massachusetts voters) would elect Robert Kennedy to serve alongside his brother. The Kennedy family did have some roots in New York State, but had much deeper roots in Massachusetts. In the 1970’s when you walked into the house of a good Massachusetts Democrat, there were two pictures over the fireplace in the living room–the Pope and John F. Kennedy.

Fast forward to California in 2023.

Breitbart reports:

Laphonza Butler has apparently removed her “Maryland” residence from her X account as well as her professional biography after Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) appointed her to the U.S. Senate seat in California, which was vacated on September 29 upon the death of Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

After news broke of her appointment, reporter Elex Michaelson captured a screenshot of her X bio, which had Maryland as her location as recently as Sunday:

However, by Monday morning, Maryland was missing from her bio. (Screenshot in article).

The article notes:

According to the website of the pro-abortion EMILYs List organization, where Butler is president, she also served as the president of the biggest union in California, SEIU Local 2015. Additionally, she served as its international vice president and president of the SEIU California State Council. Her bio indicates that she grew up in Magnolia, Mississippi.

According to the Washington Examiner, on Sunday night, the bio on the website said, “She lives in Maryland with her partner Neneki Lee and their daughter Nylah,” but by Monday morning, that line was removed.

Butler served as a senior adviser to Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign, according to the bio.

Article I Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution states:

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

Admittedly, she was chosen, not elected, but she was not a resident of California when chosen. I guess the Constitution only matters to Democrats when it is convenient.

About That Article V Convention

Posted on by

Many Americans have espoused the idea of an Article V Convention as a way to add two amendments to the United States Constitution–a balanced budget amendment and a term limits amendment. When those of us who are skeptical of the ability of our political class to do the right thing question the idea of holding an Article V Convention, we are told that the checks and balances would prevent any mischief. I am not convinced. We have checks and balances built into our government, and we have had a lot of mischief in spite of those checks and balances.

On Friday, The Western Journal reported the following:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom is eyeing a change to the United States Constitution.

The state’s legislature on Thursday approved a resolution in support of Newsom’s call for a 28th Constitutional amendment, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The amendment would enshrine a list of Democratic gun-control policy priorities into federal law.

…The proposed “Right to Safety Amendment” would limit legal gun ownership to adults 21 and older, enact universal federal background checks on gun sales, create a mandatory “reasonable waiting period” for gun purchases, and ban the purchase of many forms of semiautomatic rifles.

The article notes:

The governor claims the new amendment would co-exist with the Second Amendment despite the proposed amendment’s changes to the American legal understanding of gun ownership.

“The Right to Safety Amendment would preserve the integrity of the Second Amendment, while enshrining in our Constitution commonsense safety provisions that are supported overwhelmingly by the American people,” the progressive governor said in a news release.

…Three-fourths of state legislatures need to approve any amendment to the Constitution before it becomes law, and Republicans control a majority of state houses.

Many of the amendment’s provisions already are law in California, but that state experienced the most mass shootings in the nation between 1982 and August of this year, according to Statista. However, the nation’s most populous state had the eighth-lowest gun-death rate among the 50 states in 2021, according to Giffords Law Center.

I don’t want to let this man anywhere near amending the U.S. Constitution.

Additional Information About The Battle For The Republican Party

Posted on by

On Friday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about the battle between the Republican Club and Republican voters.

The article notes:

The Republican Club has no interest in Ron DeSantis becoming President of the United States.  The Republican Club has interest in Donald Trump NOT becoming President of the United States.  Ron DeSantis is the foil, nothing more.  It’s not about Ron DeSantis, it’s about the Club, the mechanism behind Ron DeSantis – the same mechanism that put $200 million into his campaign as enticement for his usefulness.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis -vs- California Governor Gavin Newsom in 2024 is simply two clubs playing the illusion of choice game.

Ultimately, using history and modern politics as the perspective, if you really boil down the political sauce to its reduced state, what you find is… With DeSantis the DNC Club needs less ballot collection to defeat him. However, that’s irrelevant to the intent of his usefulness for the GOP club.

The article concludes:

For the professional GOP Club, as openly expressed by the establishment politicians within it, the donors behind it and the media who promote it, the goal is to remove the populism within the club and bring back the multinational Club alignment with the corporations.  That alignment was severely damaged by President Trump and the America First economic agenda.

The core of the Big Ugly battle is a Club motive based on money, power and boardroom affluence, in essence, GREED.

For ten plus years on these pages, I have written extensively about how there was always, always, going to be a point where the Big Ugly battle was going to have to be waged.  We have waited and waited, looking at each moment, each conflict, each disparagement, each slight and snub, in hope the spark would ignite.

If the Big Ugly arrives in a contest between President Trump and Governor DeSantis, well, great; it needs to happen.

The bottom line is we need this Big Ugly fight.  Not only does the future of the GOP reside in the outcome, the future of a constitutional republic free from corporatism is contingent upon it.

Yes, this fight is going to be big, and it’s going to be ugly… and in the aftermath, hopefully lots of free footballs.

Bring it!

Keep all of this in mind as you watch the media and the Republican Club promote Ron DeSantis as the answer to America’s and the Republican Party’s problems.

Cherry Picking The Facts

Posted on by

I belong to a few liberal groups on Facebook–it helps me understand some of the thinking that is going on among liberal Americans. Sometimes I am amazed by what I read. Today was one of those times.

The following comment appeared:

Proof positive that leftist policies and socio-cultural norms (both legislatively and socially)are not only ideal, but a proven success.
That’s right republicans, states you run are economic failures , that’s a proven fact.
Toss that bible and take a lesson from the left coast. We moving on up to 4.

The comment was in reference to an article that appeared in Bloomberg with the following headline:

California Poised to Overtake Germany as World’s No. 4 Economy

Contrary to popular belief, the Golden State has proven resilient, outperforming its US and global peers.   

Note–the article at Bloomberg is an opinion piece–not a news article!

The article notes:

Gavin Newsom is as familiar as anyone with the media narrative of earthquakes, persistent wildfires, droughts, homelessness and companies fleeing California to Texas for a tax- and regulation-free lifestyle. This is nothing new. California’s governor recalls a 1994 Time Magazine cover story citing “a string of disasters rocks the state to the core, forcing Californians to ponder their fate and the fading luster of its golden dream.”

And yet, “the California dream is still alive and well,” the state’s 40th governor said in a Zoom interview a month before his probable reelection.

Attention–gaslighting alert!

Please follow the link if you choose to read the rest of the article. Meanwhile, here are a few facts.

The California Department of Justice reports:

Facts for 2021:

Crime Rates per 100,000 Population
* The violent crime rate increased 6.7
percent in 2021 (from 437.0 in 2020 to
466.2 in 2021) (Table 2).
* The property crime rate increased 3.0
percent in 2021 (from 2,114.4 in 2020 to
2,178.4 in 2021) (Table 2).
*The homicide rate increased 9.1 percent
in 2021 (from 5.5 in 2020 to 6.0 in 2021)
(Table 2).
* The burglary rate decreased 5.3 percent in
2021 (from 365.4 in 2020 to 346.2 in 2021)
(Table 2).
* The rape rate increased 8.6 percent in 2021
(from 33.8 in 2020 to 36.7 in 2021) (Table
2).
* The motor vehicle theft rate increased 8.2
percent in 2021 (from 422.4 in 2020 to
457.1 in 2021) (Table 2).
* The arson rate decreased 4.4 percent (from
29.6 in 2020 to 28.3 in 2021) (Table 2).

In January 2022, Channel 10 News in San Diego reported:

A story you may have seen claims so many people are leaving California that U-Haul ran out of trucks in our state.

It’s apparently true.

U-Haul put out a news release in which it said California was the state that saw the biggest loss of one-way U-Haul trucks in 2021.

…California’s population has been steadily declining as more people leave the state while the number of people moving here has dropped.

The California Health Care Foundation reported the following in June 22:

The number of people experiencing homelessness served by California’s homelessness response system (Continuums of Care) increased from 188,000 in 2017 to 255,000 in 2020.

The Public Policy Institute of California reports:

The gap between high- and low-income families in California is among the largest in the nation—exceeding all but four other states in 2020. Families at the top of the income distribution earned 11 times more than families at the bottom ($270,000 vs. $25,000 for the 90th and 10th percentiles, respectively).

None of this sounds like a great place to live. Between crime, homelessness, and the income gap, it doesn’t sound like a socialist paradise. California is beautiful and has a wonderful climate–why do you think so many people are leaving?

When The Political Left Can’t Win At The Ballot Box, They Go To The Courts

Posted on by

Yesterday Politico posted an article about the recall of California Governor Gavin Newsom.

The article reports:

A complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California argues that the state’s recall provision violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution by allowing sitting governors to be replaced by candidates who have received fewer votes. The plaintiffs, Rex Julian Beaber and A.W. Clark, want a court order either prohibiting the recall election or adding Newsom’s name to the replacement candidate list. Elections officials have already sent millions of ballots ahead of a state deadline today.

…Constitutional law expert Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, raised that precise scenario in a New York Times op-ed last week arguing California’s recall process is unconstitutional. Chemerinsky and law and economics professor Aaron Edlin argued for altering the rules to allow governors stand as candidates on the second question and advocated for a legal challenge compelling the courts to intervene.

“The court could declare the recall election procedure unconstitutional and leave it to California to devise a constitutional alternative,” Chemerinsky wrote. “Or it could simply add Mr. Newsom’s name on the ballot to the list of those running to replace him. That simple change would treat his supporters equally to others and ensure that if he gets more votes than any other candidate, he will stay in office.”

Beaber, a Los Angeles attorney and clinical psychologist, would not say in an interview if he’s a Democrat.

“I would prefer not to say, simply because I think it’s irrelevant,” he said Monday. “To me it would be unfortunate if party politics was the driving force behind the consideration of this lawsuit. This lawsuit seeks on its face to declare a current California remedy as unconstitutional and it would apply regardless of whether it was a Democrat or a Republican already in office.”

I wonder if there would be all of this constitutional concern if a Democrat were leading in the election to replace Governor Newsom.

The article concludes:

Elected Democrats have not publicly embraced Chemerinsky’s reasoning or backed such a legal challenge. But Attorney General Rob Bonta said Monday that he was monitoring both the lawsuit and the underlying legal debate.

“We’re aware of that argument and some of the other concerns and we’ll be making sure we stay abreast of this issue and monitoring it,” Bonta said, adding of the lawsuit, “We’ll be coordinating with the secretary of state’s office to determine next steps.

The recall process has been used in California on elected officials since 1913. According to the California Secretary of State website, there were four attempts to recall Governor Newsom in 2020. Only one qualified to move forward. In 1968 and 1972, there were attempts to recall Governor Ronald Reagan. Those attempts did not qualify to move forward. It’s interesting that this time the process is being challenged in court.

The First Amendment Under Attack

Posted on by

Yesterday WND posted an article about California Governor Newsom’s lockdown of churches during the coronavirus.

The article reports:

Just as California Gov. Gavin Newsom was being ordered to pay $1.35 million for the legal fees of a church whose members sued him over his coronavirus-related lockdown orders, another fight has erupted over the same problem.

…The case that just was settled was brought by Liberty Counsel on behalf of Harvest Rock Church of Pasadena, whose leaders were “threatened with daily criminal charges” for staying open and claiming constitutional protection for their actions.

The case went to the Supreme Court where the justices decided 6-3 that the church could allow larger crowds.

The other, and continuing, fight concerns Santa Clara’s war against Calvary Chapel San Jose.

Most recently, a decision denied the county’s demand that it be allowed to see the church’s financial information.

Now both sides have submitted a letter to a judge hearing the case asking for guidance on the looming fight.

Santa Clara County is insisting on access to “Calvary’s sources of revenue, loans, and budgets, claiming these requests are relevant to determine how much Calvary ‘profited’ during the pandemic,” according to a statement from Advocates for Faith & Freedom, which is working on the case.

The article notes:

The county already had sent “two threatening letters” to the church’s bank, which “coerced the bank to temporarily sever the relationship.”

“The first letter informed the bank that Pastor (Mike) McClure had been held in contempt of court and that he and the church were facing fines and sanctions of over $1 million. The second letter was to inform the bank that Santa Clara County Superior Court had set a contempt hearing and that the county would seek further fines and sanctions against the church. The letters made no mention of an appeals process, that the church was challenging the constitutionality of the fines, or the recent Supreme Court decisions vindicating California churches,” the legal team explained.

The article concludes:

The church charges that the county’s goal is to assess “excessive and burdensome fines” against the church.

“The county falsely equates a church to a commercial enterprise, revealing a fundamental misunderstanding of a church’s distinct purpose and unique legal protections,” the letter said. “Unlike a business, churches do not function to earn a profit.”

The church has not claimed it lacks funds to pay the county’s fines; it alleges the fines “are altogether illegal or, at best, the amount of the fines is excessive considering the nature of the offense and the fact that it was the county, not the Calvary, that broke the law.”

The county claims the church “profited” during the pandemic and so its revenue is pertinent to “the fines.”

Unfortunately the taxpayers of California will be the ones who are hurt by this action. They will pay the legal fees for the county. The county (or the state) has no business looking into the finances of a church. If a private citizen wants to do that, I suspect they could–most churches are fairly transparent about their finances. However, it is not a county or state matter.