Previous month:
September 2010
Next month:
November 2010

Earthquakes: A reminder of a deadly question ...

Los Angeles is rife with politically-connected landlords and developers; many spending large sums of money to bend the system to favor their projects.

Over the years I have asked questions about the survivability of a certain class of high-rise buildings in Los Angeles which were to be thoroughly inspected and  strengthened if any deficiencies were found. I have never received a satisfactory answer and thought that I would use this opportunity to re-ask the question.

Why now?

Constantly reminded that we are living in an area crisscrossed  with Earthquake faults, it is once again to consider preparation for California’s fabled “BIG ONE.”

As reported by the Los Angeles Times …

Residents prepare for 'Big One' in  Great California Shakeout

"Millions of Californians were set to participate Thursday in the Great California ShakeOut, an annual event billed as the largest earthquake emergency-preparedness drill in the nation, aimed at educating residents about what to do in the next shaker and how best to prepare for the ‘Big One.’

“More than 2.8 million Los Angeles County residents have registered for this year's event, scheduled to take place at 10.21 a.m., according to organizers. They include private citizens, schools, businesses, government institutions, nonprofit organizations and religious groups.”

“The ShakeOut drill was launched three years ago and is based on scientists' predictions of what would occur during and after a magnitude-7.8 earthquake along the San Andreas Fault, considered one of the most dangerous in Southern California, partly due to its length.”

Scientists predict a 7.8-magnitude earthquake could kill 1,800 people, injure about 50,000 and cause some $200 billion in damage.”

Recent research showing that sections of the fault are long overdue for a major earthquake has some scientists saying the southern portion of the fault is capable of a magnitude 8.1 that could run 340 miles, from Monterey County to the Salton Sea.”

“Such a temblor would be much stronger and longer than the last major rupture along the southern San Andreas fault in 1857, scientists have said.”

“Organizers of the ShakeOut urged Californians not to delay in preparing for an earthquake, by stocking up on food, water, medicines and having some reserve cash. Residents also are encouraged to anchor heavy furniture to walls, learn first aid and devise a family action plan that would include a designated post-temblor meeting place.”

From a previous blog entry …

I have a personal interest in the subject...

First, I vividly remember the Northridge Quake in excruciating detail. Having to seek the assistance of a neighbor to extricate a family member from a jumble of furniture, trying to get gas and water at a local gas station with no power, fleeing the area for a clear, safer area in case of strong after-shocks and dreading the fact that this 6.7 magnitude, 15-second shaker could be a precursor to the dreaded "BIG ONE" that everyone talks about. We never returned to that residence (it was red-tagged as unsafe) except to retrieve our belongings.

Second, one of my good friends, a certified welder and pyrotechnics special effects expert, kept telling me about these buildings in Los Angeles which were put together with a particular welding product and were unsafe. I remember standing with my friend on the floor of a West Los Angeles high-rise and looking at a crack between the wall and the floor -- looking three stories straight down where the building's supports had separated from the frame.

So I was determined to follow-up the subject when I started writing my personal blog.

Today...

The U.S. Department of the Interior - U.S. Geological Survey, in conjunction with the California Department of Conservation - California Geological Survey, released a report titled "The ShakeOut Scenario."

This is not some haphazard guess at what may happen by politically-motivated hacks, it is solid research and the extrapolation by knowledgeable scientists and others; based on the work of some of today's smartest earthquake specialists, engineers and disaster coordinators.

The joint authors of The Earthquake Scenario are: Lucile M. Jones, Richard Bernknopf, Dale Cox, James Goltz, Kenneth Hudnut, Dennis Mileti, Suzanne Perry, Daniel Ponti, Keith Porter, Michael Reichle, Hope Seligson, Kimberley Shoaf, Jerry Treiman, and Anne Wein.

For those Californians who do not recognize the name Lucile M. Jones, she is better known as Lucy Jones who, with her compatriot Kate Hutton are the most prominent fixtures on any serious report on earthquakes in California.

One of my worst fears...

On page 7 (out of 312) in a section subtitled "Buildings," I found this section:

"Steel moment frame buildings built before 1994 were found to form cracks in their connections during the 1994 Northridge earthquake. Similar damage occurred in the 1995 Kobe earthquake and some buildings collapsed."

"Special study was conducted to analyze the behavior of steel frame high-rise buildings in the ground motions modeled for this earthquake. This event shows amplified long period motions caused by resonance in the sedimentary basins, particularly the very deep Los Angeles Basin."

"A special panel of structural engineers evaluated the analytical study and concluded 'Given these ground motions, the collapse of some pre-1994 welded-steel moment-frame buildings is a credible scenario.'”

Because this result comes from the long period ground motions, the area where this type of damage is possible is relatively large and includes much of the urbanized areas of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. It is impossible to determine how many and which buildings are the most susceptible without detailed structural analysis which is beyond the scope of this study. For the purposes of the ShakeOut emergency drills, we posit that 5 steel moment-frame high-rise buildings will collapse and that 10 more will be 'red-tagged.'”

And on page 113, is a more specific section on the problem titled: "High-Rise Pre-Northridge Welded-Steel Moment-Frame (PNWSMF) Buildings; Study by Swaminathan Krishhan and Matthew Muto, California Institute of Technology “ShakeOut 2008: Tall Steel Moment-Frame Building Response” and the comments of review panelists: Greg Deierlein, Stanford University, Ronald Hamburger, SGH Inc. and Jim Malley, Degenkolb Engineers.

For those wishing to read the report, it can be found at by clicking on the Reference Links section at the end of the blog entry.

Bottom Line …

Even though I no longer live within the City of Los Angeles and have very little reason to visit downtown high-rises or large office buildings along the densely-populated Wilshire Corridor, I still fear that there are a number of buildings which were never thoroughly inspected and the extremely expensive mitigation repairs made.

And now, in these economically challenging times, mitigation repair costs would have skyrocketed and property values declined – both reasons  for our elected officials to avoid broaching the subject.

But for whatever good it does, I once again ask if there is a central building registry database containing critical information which is not being released to the public?

Once again, we are reminded that we not only live in a water-starved desert, but in a highly active earthquake fault zone. Every day I look out the window and see the Santa Monica Mountains, I am reminded that they did not get there by accident.

Be well, be safe and take care of yourself, your family and your neighbor first.

-- steve

Reference Links …

Residents prepare for 'Big One' in Great California Shakeout | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

May 24, 2008:  NEW QUAKE SCENARIO: COLLAPSE OF LOS ANGELES HIGH-RISES IS A CREDIBLE SCENARIO!

August 31, 2007: PROBABILITY: THE UNCERTAINTY FACTOR IN SCIENCE -- SCIENTISTS CLAIM 1,000-YEAR EARTHQUAKE LULL IN LOS ANGELES -- INDICATOR OF INCREASED RISK?

August 23, 2007:  KNOWLEDGE IS RESPONSIBILITY: ARE LOS ANGELES OFFICIALS HIDING THE TRUTH ABOUT HI-RISE EARTHQUAKE VULNERABILITIES?


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



There is a mathematical certainty to the outcomes of unionized governments ...

It was a routine and random conversation about politics. One of my friends, a well-respected engineer who hates politics, challenged my assertions that public employee unions were bad for government. He demanded that I produce more than anecdotal (and possibly apocryphal) stories and suggested a rigorous mathematical test.

Being familiar with computer modeling, I proposed that I develop a simple computer model of a unionized city government.

Since all computer models are based on assumptions, I  was somewhat  stumped on how to code the union function until I realized that unions meant that more employees were always needed to accomplish the same amount of work per unit of time. 

So I handed him a single piece of paper before I started to enter the computer code necessary to implement the computer model.

Pseudo-code for the union performance model

Vary employees available emp(available) from the initial number emp(init) to the maximum number of employees emp(max)  and divide the available work  work(available) by the number available employees emp(available)  until you reach the maximum number of employees emp(max) allowed by the salary dollars available available_salary_dollars divided by the average salary cost average_employee_salary of a worker.

The source of salary funds from local tax revenues, bonds, state contributions, federal contributions and additional borrowing was treated as a single number.

Since most programmers do a “back of the envelope” estimate of the proposed calculation, I did a little work in my head.

After considering the model for four iterations, I noticed that their was a natural limit to the work/employee equation.

Basically stated: more and more workers did less and less work until all of the available employees appear to do absolutely nothing.

work/employees = work per employee

1/1 = 1

1/10 = .1

1/100 = .01

1/1000 = .001

As you can plainly see: as one unit of work was divided by more and more employees, the actual work performed per employee approaches zero.

When I handed him the piece of paper, he shook his head and has refused to discuss politics. We now talk about his favorite modeling subject: MTBF – Mean Time Before Failure!

I offered to compute the MTBF for unionized governments and he threw a donut at me. I consider this to be the equivalent of throwing in the towel.

-- steve

P.S. We all know the work is actually done by one really talented employee and everyone else takes the credit. That is often the case when you see six city workers watching one sweating “low seniority” worker filling the pothole in the middle of the street.

And we all know that the work will expand to fill the time available as new rules and regulations are implemented -- all of which require people to monitor and prepare the reports. Another example of nonsensical work rules impeding progress. 


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



2010 ELECTION: DEMOCRATS SELLING OUT THE UNITED STATES IN RETURN FOR POLITICAL SUPPORT ...

It is hard to believe that any American citizen, let alone our elected officials, would voluntarily subvert their oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States to aid and abet non-citizen aliens loyal to a foreign sovereign nation in violation of the sovereignty of the United States of America.

And yet that appears to be precisely what the far-left liberal democrats are doing …

Thanks to the watchdogs at the Federation for American Immigration Reform, we are learning of efforts to subvert the Constitution of the United States in favor of foreign sovereign nations whose citizens are in the United States  and do not posses the rights of citizens.

One, by granting them political power equal to  legal citizens …

California’s ultra-liberal San Francisco is allowing a ballot proposition (Proposition D) which would allow non-citizens who are parents, guardians, or caregivers of public school students to vote in local school board elections. It should be remembered that school boards control an extremely large budget and have a great deal of control over how that money is spent outside of the classroom.

And in many smaller school districts, children of legal citizens may be outnumbered by the children of illegal aliens, thus giving non-citizens unprecedented control over Americans.

Proposition D

Shall the City allow non-citizen residents of San Francisco who are 18 years of age or older and have children living in the San Francisco Unified School District to vote for members of the Board of Education?
<Source: San Francisco Voter Guide>

In Maine, Portland’s QUESTION #4 proposal goes even farther. If passed non-citizens would be eligible to vote in all city-wide elections.

ARTICLE IV. ELECTIONS  

Section 12. Qualification to Vote.

Any other provision in this Charter notwithstanding, legal immigrants who are residents of Portland and 18 years old or older on the date of any municipal election shall be allowed to register to vote and vote in municipal elections.

In order to register, a legal immigrant shall provide proof of identify, age and residency, pursuant to Title 21-A, and legal status according to standards established by the City Clerk. Such persons
shall not have the right to run for and hold an elected municipal office. <Source: Portland City Clerk>

Two, by granting illegal alien criminals relief from the judicial process …

“At the direction of Governor David Paterson, the State of New York is reviewing hundreds of pardon applications from criminal aliens who want to avoid deportation based on their criminal convictions.  Governor Paterson announced in May of this year that he intended to pardon certain criminal aliens in order to prevent the U.S. government from deporting them.  He created the Special Immigration Pardoning Board to review applications.” 

All to support radical leftist agenda …

“Supporters of both initiatives contend that legal immigrants deserve a say in their local communities. But, given the far left leaning politics of the groups involved in crafting and promoting the plans, it is evident that the non-citizen voting proposals are partisan tactics designed to create instant new pools of immigrant voters who traditionally vote democrat.” <Source: FAIR>

Bottom line …

I cannot believe that American voters are so unaware, impotent or manipulated by their respective political parties to allow their elected officials to sell out our birthrights to foreign sovereign nations in return for campaign contributions or voter support.

It appears that the far-left Marxists want to severely damage the United States of America and turn it into a “worker’s paradise” like Cuba and Venezuela.

There are those who talk about changing things at the ballot box while others portend a future of armed insurrection to defend the Constitution. But the real battle seems to be to weed out those candidates who persistently vote against American values in favor of fundamentally changing the character of America by allowing an influx of massive numbers of illegal or legal immigrants who will eventually change our laws and simply vote us out of power, out of our jobs and out of our homes.

We need to curtail the onslaught of corrupt liberal democrats and the complacent and complicit republicans that support them (McCain, Graham, Snowe, Collins, etc) before the destroy the America we know and love.

Vote for “honest brokers” to serve “we the public.” You are protecting your life and the lives of your children with this vote. You know the difference between black and white, good and evil … so do the right thing on November 2, 2010 – vote for a conservative or a Republican to restore Constitutional checks and balances to this one-party-rule joke they call our government.

-- steve

For California …

Elected Officials …

CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- THE WAY TO FISCAL AND SOCIAL ...

Proposition Recap …

CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- ALL PROPOSITIONS RECAP ...

Individual Propositions …

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 19 (NOV. 2010) – MARIJUANA

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 20 (NOV, 2010) -- REDISTRICTING

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 21 (NOV, 2010) -- VEHICLE LICENSE ...

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 22 (NOV, 2010) -- DIVERSION OF FUNDS

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 23 (NOV, 2010) -- GLOBAL WARMING

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 24 (NOV, 2010) -- TAX LIABILITIES

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 25 (NOV, 2010) -- GOVERNMENT POWER GRAB 

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 26 (NOV, 2010) --ADDS "FEES" TO "TAXES" REQUIRING A TWO-THIRDS VOTE

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 27 (NOV, 2010) -- REDISTRICTING


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR 2010: JERRY BROWN ADMITS LYING ABOUT CALIFORNIA ...

In a stunningly frank admission from a liberal democrat politician, Jerry Brown who is seeking a “do-over” as California’s governor, admits to being a political liar.

Hear him in his own words …

"You say you're going to lower taxes, you're going to put people to work, you're gonna improve the schools, you're going to stop crime... crime is up, schools are worse, taxes are higher."

JERRY BROWN Another lying democrat!

Another say anything or do anything democrat …

Simply put, we cannot believe Jerry Brown about anything.

We know he was the person who introduced public employee unions into California’s government. And we are now on the verge of bankruptcy as state employees, long retired with handsome healthcare and sumptuous salaries are driving municipalities as well as the state towards bankruptcy.

The unions need Jerry Brown to bailout their unfunded pension liabilities – problems partially caused by bad investments, cronyism and outright fraud and corruption.

Jerry Brown espoused Marxist principles which led to the attempt to push people into the cities and to deny them their freedom to roam. The diamond lane, the reduced build-out of our freeways, the decay and disrepair as highway funds were borrowed by the state and channeled into social programs for the illegal aliens, minorities and those on welfare.

He is the man who gave us diamond lanes – telling us that it would improve traffic flow; never mind that drivers needed to cross four lanes of traffic each time they entered or exited the diamond lane – causing all traffic to slow down.

He is the ex-Mayor of Oakland where much of the inner city is a cesspool of corruption, crime, rot and decay. No shining city on a hill there.

Meg Whitman is comparitively superior to Brown in every way …

Meg Whitman worked for a living. And while she does not appear to be very conservative, she is comparitively superior to Jerry Brown.

Bottom line …

We do not need an aging hippy from the 60’s, much like most of the legislature which turned California, a golden mecca for achievement, into a third-world home for illegal aliens.

We need leadership now … not pandering to the unions and preparing California to surrender to Mexico.

-- steve

FYI …

For governor I recommend Meg Whitman. She is more liberal than I like and smarter than the RINO (Republican In Name Only) poseur Arnold Schwarzenegger. Considering that Jerry Brown is ultra-liberal (Marxist) and is totally owned by the unions, this is the only way I feel confident that California will not be totally destroyed.

For governor I recommend Meg Whitman. She is more liberal than I like and smarter than the RINO (Republican In Name Only) poseur Arnold Schwarzenegger. Considering that Jerry Brown is ultra-liberal (Marxist) and is totally owned by the unions, this is the only way I feel confident that California will not be totally destroyed.

                    Governor

[X]  Republican
Meg Whitman
www.megwhitman.com
Businesswoman

Democratic
Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown
www.jerrybrown.org
Attorney General of California 

American Independent
Chelene Nightingale
www.nightingaleforgovernor.com
Business Owner
Green
Laura Wells
www.laurawells.org
Financial Systems Consultant

Libertarian
Dale F. Ogden – John and Ken’s Pick
www.daleogden.org
Business Consultant/Actuary

Peace and Freedom
Carlos Alvarez
www.votepsl.org
Retail Worker

Here I have to hold my nose to vote for Maldonado, who reneged on his “no new taxes” pledge to vote with the democrats to give California one of the largest tax increases in history. As his reward, Schwarzenegger named him as the interim Lt. Governor.


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



CALIFORNIA CONSERVATIVE ELECTION GUIDE (NOVEMBER, 2010)

For those wanting the viewpoint of a Constitutional Conservative, here is all of the voter information (with opposing positions) you will need for your California ballot …

Elected Officials …

CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- THE WAY TO FISCAL AND SOCIAL ...

Proposition Recap …

CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- ALL PROPOSITIONS RECAP ...

Individual Propositions …

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 19 (NOV. 2010) – MARIJUANA

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 20 (NOV, 2010) -- REDISTRICTING

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 21 (NOV, 2010) -- VEHICLE LICENSE ...

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 22 (NOV, 2010) -- DIVERSION OF FUNDS

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 23 (NOV, 2010) -- GLOBAL WARMING

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 24 (NOV, 2010) -- TAX LIABILITIES

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 25 (NOV, 2010) -- GOVERNMENT POWER GRAB

[YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 26 (NOV, 2010) --ADDS "FEES" TO "TAXES" REQUIRING A TWO-THIRDS VOTE

[NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 27 (NOV, 2010) -- REDISTRICTING

[X] California 2010 Propositions -- Voting on "their" agenda ...


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



ELECTION (NOVEMBER, 2010) DEMOCRATS: SCARING THE FOLKS ...

Once again, we find the democrats using scare tactics to motivate their base and promote their corrupt politicians and reaffirming their incompetency ...

 Talking back to Obama ...

Organizing for America

Friend --

Republican Senate candidates Linda McMahon in Connecticut, Rand Paul in Kentucky, John Raese in West Virginia, and Dino Rossi in Washington have all pledged to roll back or eliminate the minimum wage. 

Not only is it unlikely that only a few Senators can roll back the minimum wage in American without the House agreement and Presidential signing, but there are some that believe that this would encourage hiring more part-time teenagers and strengthen the work ethic in America. Of course, the biggest opponent to the idea remains the unions and illegal alien activists who benefit from a strong minimum wage. In any event, this is a boogey-man issue.

Sharron Angle in Nevada, Ken Buck in Colorado, and Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania have all talked about privatizing Social Security -- or eliminating it altogether.

Again, this would be a significant piece of legislation, in some ways more difficult that implementing Obamacare, that would spark national debate. Again, the democrats trot out this hoary tale to scare senior citizens and others to advance their own corrupt and incompetent political agenda. 

Twenty of this year's Republican candidates for the Senate have been asked about climate change, and 19 of them have said that the science is wrong.
But taking stances this extreme has consequences. Pat Toomey is slipping in Pennsylvania. In Wisconsin, Ron Johnson is losing ground. Raese, Paul, and Buck are running out of steam. 

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that global warming is the largest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people by those who will personally and professionally profit from its implementation. It is part of a United Nation scheme designed to promote population control and a Marxist agenda using pseudo-science from government-financed institutions and scientists. The fact that many politicians are beginning to question the U.N. global warming initiative and its effect on our economy is a good thing.

OFA supporters are out there every day, making record numbers of phone calls and contacts at the doors. And these conversations are changing elections. You are making the choice to voters absolutely clear: whether to continue to move America forward, or to go back to the failed policies of the past. 

Yes, I agree … you are choosing to repeal or curtail the Obama policies like:

  • the Stimulus -- which did little or nothing for the economy and supported public employees and the unions at taxpayer expense.
  • Obamacare – which ruined our present healthcare system and insured that everyone received massive increases in their insurance premiums with reduced medical benefits.
  • Cap-and-Trade which promises to enrich Wall Street at the expense of Main Street and implement Obama’s  Marxist wealth redistribution scheme.
  • Nationalization of a major portion of the automotive industry for the benefit of the unions.

This election is an uphill battle -- it's a tough environment and special interests are spending tens of millions of dollars attacking Democrats.

Yes, it is an uphill battle because the majority of Americans have told the Congress and the Obama Administration that we don’t want more corruption and incompetence. Spending billions of unaccountable dollars with little or no effect on the overall economy or the creation of private sector jobs. Oh yes, they created government jobs which they control – but did virtually nothing by lie about creating jobs in the private sector. Lies such as using a statistic, jobs saved,  which does not exist or can be calculated.

The democrat ruling elite (Obama, Pelosi and Reid) have told Americans “we know best” so shut up and go along with our Marxist agenda.

As for the amount of money being spent … they conveniently forget George Soros and all of the democrats other union fellow travelers who are shoveling massive amounts of money into this race … mostly because they need the democrats to bail out the union’s unfunded pension liabilities before union members revolt when they see that their leadership has corruptly mismanagement their investments to benefit the union’s leadership.

Remember SEIU (Service Employees International Union) and ACORN were founded by the same group of militant Marxists that supported Obama.

But the more people find out about this crop of Republicans, the better our candidates do. The call scripts and ads are all ready to go to continue spreading the word. We just need your help to amplify the message. And we have nine days to do it.

The more people who find out about this crop of Republicans, the better the Republicans do … moderates, independents, women, minorities and even many democrats are deserting the democrat party because they do not like what the democrats have done to America and might do in the future with their corrupt and unconstitutional schemes.


Please chip in $3 or more to help tell as many voters as possible about the choice in the final days

<link removed in disgust>

Thanks, 

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America

So why didn’t Obama sign this e-mail?

Bottom line …

It’s our country and we need to restore constitutional checks and balances to a broken one-party rule system which features nothing but corruption and incompetence.

Even Obama’s biggest rats, people like Chief of Staff Rahm “Don’t let a crisis go to waste” Emanuel and Larry Summers, the Senior Economic Advisor who brought failure and catastrophe to the land, are deserting the ship. What does that tell you?

Obama is going down and he can’t be allowed to take America with him.

Vote conservative … You know the difference between black and white, good and evil – so go do the right thing.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



Should we make this distinction when it comes to Islam?

If all terrorists appear to be Muslims; are all Muslims potential terrorists? 

There is currently a debate whether or not Islam presents a clear and present danger to our nation and possibly to a freedom-loving civilization or does that the threat comes only from “radicalized” Islamists – primarily from Saudi Arabia.

Here is the debate as encapsulated in a recent television talk show … 

Question:    Is our government being disingenuous with the American people when it comes to suppressing the threat that Saudi Arabia represents in the Middle East region and to the United States, its allies and trading partners?

Question:   Is this governmental attitude conditioned by Saudi influence with certain elected officials who have received some form of support, either directly or indirectly, from Saudi or Saudi-controlled entities?

Question:   Other than our need to protect Israel from its mortal enemies, are we also advancing Saudi interests by keeping Iran at bay and, in effect, providing military protection to Saudi Arabia?

Question:   Is the leadership (not the ordinary people) corrupt in that they are paying militant Saudi-based insurgents “protection money” not to attack the Kingdom; and turning a blind eye to attacks on other nation-states within the Middle East?

Question:   Considering the number of other countries which are experiencing trouble with militant Muslims, is it possible that a small sect of well-organized, well-funded extremists are responsible for all of the damage?

Question: Can you trust an American President or a Congress who even refuses to name the enemy, those who attacked us on 9/11? To the point of abolishing the word "terrorist" and "terrorism?"

Question:  Can you abide by a religion which fails to separate the difference between religion and the state? Especially when it imposes centuries-old prescriptions to modern problems and hinders the freedoms of the state's citizens?

Question:   Are you willing to bet your life, the lives of your family and children on the answers provided by the government?

Question:   If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck – is it a duck?

The problem can be clearly stated. Consider the fact that migratory Muslims, those entering non-Islamic states, in and of themselves are relatively benign and peaceful. However, when they refuse to assimilate into the culture and reach the critical mass that makes them attractive to power-seeking politicians, then the situation spins out of control. A modern analogy is the Mexicans pouring across the U.S. border. Most of them are fine, hardworking people. However, they have reached a critical mass where they can affect elections and elected officials. Now the politicians seeking their vote must cast them as victims and demand a redress of their grievances. To build a geographical area which supports their own culture and permits new immigrants, legal and illegal, to feel comfortable.

It is a matter of assimilation and the ability of our nation to absorb mass doses of cultural disruption. Which brings us to the matter of corrupt politicians who pander to these cultures insteak of seeking to represent all of their constituents; not to mention the activists who gain considerable profit and power from stiring the pot.

It's time our leaders realize that the difference between the immigrants and immigration policy of the past is quite different from the situation today. One, past immigrants struggled to assimilate and move forward as Americans. And two, our immigration screeners accepted only those with skills, education and financial sponsorship. We did not allow the importation of  poverty, illiteracy, sickness and the lack of valuable skills.  

It is time to set limits based on America's ability to absorb divergent cultures and to successfully intergrate those who wish to assimilate into American life. To think otherwise is disingenuous and dangerous. To allow our politicians to continue their pandering for political power and profits is one of the most clear and present dangers facing America today. Something that the left does not wish to realize as their voting coalitions is comprised of self-described victims that have substantial grievances against America, many from historical events over which we have no control and demand no further consideration except as historical lessons of shameful times.

Remember this when you vote. Not only do we face turning over America to the corrupt power-mad Marxists, but we also face turning over our country to those who want to replicate whatever craphole they came from on our soil.

-- steve


“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



CALIFORNIA PROPOSITIONS: HOW THE RADICAL MUSLIMS WANT YOU TO VOTE DEMOCRAT

It appears that the radical Muslims want you to vote democrat …

I believe it is highly instructive to monitor the enemy’s attempted interference in the United States’ political system. Yes, I said “enemies” because I believe CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) to represent certain radical Muslims who support jihad. I further believe that CAIR is the public-relations arm of a more sinister movement that does not wish America well.

And apparently, I am not alone …

Through media relations, lobbying, and education, CAIR presents what it views as an Islamic perspective on issues of importance to the American public, and seeks to empower the American Muslim community and encourage its social and political activism.

The organization was dealt a significant blow to its standing in United States after being named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas funding case. According to CAIR, the organization's membership and fundraising declined after the government named it an unindicted co-conspirator on May 29, 2007.[page 17] The FBI no longer works with CAIR outside of criminal investigations due to its status as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case.  

Critics of CAIR, including six members of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate, have alleged ties between the CAIR founders and Hamas. The founders, Omar Ahmad and Nihad Awad, had earlier been officers of the Islamic Association of Palestine (IAP), described by a former FBI analyst and Treasury Department intelligence official as "intimately tied to the most senior Hamas leadership." Both Ahmad and Awad participated in a meeting held in Philadelphia on October 3, 1993, that involved senior leaders of Hamas, the Holy Land Foundation, and the IAP. Based on electronic surveillance of the meeting, the FBI reported that “the participants went to great length and spent much effort hiding their association with the Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas]. "Participants at the meeting discussed forming a "political organization and public relations” body, “whose Islamic hue is not very conspicuous." <Source>

It appears that CAIR, and by extension the Militant Muslims, overwhelmingly favor democrats and democrat positions – possibly because they have been shown to be the weakest on foreign policy, easily manipulated by such concepts as multi-culturalism and political correctness, and have what may described as a squishy attitude towards national defense; especially with their moral relativism.

With Barack Obama and his fellow travelers in office, it appears that many legal organizations and activists supporting foreign sovereigns are coming out of the woodwork – their actual funding disguised by money laundering operations which would make the narco-terrorists proud.

So let’s see how CAIR wants their adherents to vote… (my comments in red italics)

cairpac-logo

The Cair-California PAC is pleased to endorse the candidates and make the ballot recommendations listed below. To the endorsements or recommendations, please click on the links below or simply scroll through the list. If a specific race or election is not listed, that means that the CAIR-California PAC does not have an applicable endorsement or recommendation; if multiple candidates are listed for a single office, it means that the CAIR-California PAC believes that all are deserving of a vote.

  • Statewide Races
  • Ballot Propositions
  • Unites States Congress
  • California State Senate
  • California State Assembly
  • Orange County Local Races
  • Riverside County Local Races
     Statewide Races

    Governor-

    Jerry Brown (democrat)

    Lieutenant Governor-

    Gavin Newsome (democrat)

    Secretary of State-

    Debra Bowen (democrat)

    Controller-

    John Chiang (democrat)

    Treasurer-

    Bill Lockyer (democrat)

    Attorney General-  (when it comes to legal issues and politics, it is always best to play both sides of the game)

    Kamala Harris (democrat)

    Steve Cooley (republican)

    Insurance Commissioner-

    Dave Jones (democrat)

     Ballot Propositions

    Proposition 20-  (redistricting)

    Yes (agree)

    Proposition 21- (vehicle surcharge for parks)

    Yes (disagree)

    Proposition 22- (prevents the state from borrowing from local governments)

    No (disagree)

    Proposition 23- (delaying AB32 global warming initiative in bad economic times)

    No (disagree)

    Proposition 24- (anti-business)

    Yes  (disagree)

    Proposition 25- (changes 2/3rd to simple majority)

    Yes (big time disagreed)

    Proposition 26- (make fees subject to 2/3rd vote)

    No (disagree)

    Proposition 27- (eliminates public intervention in redistricting)

    No (agree)

  • (Local Recommendations Omitted)

    Bottom Line …

    We need to watch those radical activists who support the democrat party in expectation of some type of political acknowledgement or payback.

    CAIR, the self-professed largest Muslim civil liberties advocacy organization, does not speak for all Muslims and, in fact, does not speak for most Muslims in America. This is a group which should be closely monitored by both citizens and the government as their views on implementing Sharia law within the United States or distracting Americans from the real danger of radical Muslims cannot be allowed to gain traction. As Muslims have done in Europe, the seek to swell their numbers, not assimilate into the national culture, separate themselves in enclaves to build political power bases and then press their cause forward.

    If anything, vote conservative and to restore the Constitutional checks and balances to our current one-party rule. Vote for “honest brokers” to serve “we the people” and for propositions which do not extend government power in favor of politicians, political parties and the public employees with their disruptive unions.

    BUT VOTE – YOUR COUNTRY IS AT AN HISTORIC CROSSROADS AND MAY SOON REACH A TIPPING POINT THAT FAVORS THE FOREIGN, THE CORRUPT AND THE INCOMPETENT.

    -- steve

    Capture2-20-2009-8.30.27 PM

     Reference Links …

    CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- ALL PROPOSITIONS RECAP ... (OneCitizenSpeaking)

    Endorsements | CAIR-CA PAC


    “Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

    “Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

    “Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

    “The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

    “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

    “Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

    “Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



    BEWARE OF THAT VOTER'S GUIDE FOR NOVEMBER, 2010 ELECTION (Updated)

    UPDATE: 10-27-10  DECEPTIVE MAILER CHALLENGED

    More democrat douchebaggery?

    The Sacramento Bee is reporting

    The Republican National Committee has told Orange County political consultant Scott Hart to stop using its trademarked elephant symbol on a slate mailer, calling it ‘disgraceful’ since the mailer advocates ballot measure positions that the party doesn't support.

    He continued: ‘The bad faith of your mailer is evident on many levels; first in your false implication of RNC sponsorship, and again in your disgraceful 'recommendation' to vote opposite the Republican position on every ballot proposition."

    [Hart] calls his slate mailer ‘Continuing the Republican Revolution,’ and his website terms it ‘one of the oldest and most respected Republican slate mailers in California.’

    Original Blog Post …

    I am continuing to receive mailers purporting to be Voter’s Guides and even though they prominently feature the Republican Party or Democratic Party name … they are bogus slate mailers.

    Slate mailers which are nothing more than paid politicial advertising by any politician or organization with the dollars to afford the cost of participating in the mailer.

    As a conservative, I am constantly amazed by the slate mailers which self-identify as “Republican” but recommend voting like a liberal democrat. Or those sent to me as a democrat which illustrates the stunning incompetence (Bad lists or data processing) of the mailer. Of course, there is a bright side, it costs the democrats money that will otherwise be unavailable to run attack ads against my chosen candidates.

    The real deal …

    There is but one official source for all voter information in the State of California and it can be found at the California Secretary of State’s office.

    It is up to you to save America …

    But whatever your party, it is up to you to save America by voting for those who are “honest brokers” serving “we the people.”

    As I have said many times over, you know the difference between black and white, good and evil – so get out there and make a difference in returning constitutional checks and balances to our great nation.

    Good luck and Godspeed,

    steve

    As for my own viewpoint, it can be found at:

    Elected Officials …

    CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- THE WAY TO FISCAL AND SOCIAL ...

    Proposition Recap …

    CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- ALL PROPOSITIONS RECAP ...

    Individual Propositions …

    [NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 19 (NOV. 2010) – MARIJUANA

    [YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 20 (NOV, 2010) -- REDISTRICTING

    [NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 21 (NOV, 2010) -- VEHICLE LICENSE ...

    [YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 22 (NOV, 2010) -- DIVERSION OF FUNDS

    [YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 23 (NOV, 2010) -- GLOBAL WARMING

    [NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 24 (NOV, 2010) -- TAX LIABILITIES

    [NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 25 (NOV, 2010) -- GOVERNMENT POWER GRAB

    [YES] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 26 (NOV, 2010) --ADDS "FEES" TO "TAXES" REQUIRING A TWO-THIRDS VOTE

    [NO] CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 27 (NOV, 2010) -- REDISTRICTING

    [X] California 2010 Propositions -- Voting on "their" agenda ...


    “Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

    “Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

    “Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

    “The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

    “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

    “Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

    “Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS



    CALIFORNIA ELECTION NOVEMBER, 2010 -- ALL PROPOSITIONS RECAP ...

    To all who have voted … thank you for doing your civic duty and helping to improve the governance of California.

    While some of us will be disappointed with the results, such is life. It is wise to remember that our founding fathers not only provided a great guideline to an exceptional society, they also provided a way to remedy any mistakes that may have been made by the people – by simply voting in the next election.

    Those who wish to check the status of their absentee or provisional ballot, it can be done by calling one of the telephone numbers listed on the California Secretary of State’s “Check Status of Your Ballot” web site. 

    So for better or worse, here are the RESULTS!

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtDEFEATED – CHAOTIC, POORLY WRITTEN LAW THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED IN FEDERAL COURT.

    YES - 3,412,387 (46.1%) 

    NO - 3,978,314 (53.9%)
    19 - LEGALIZES MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW. PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signature

    Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Fiscal Impact: Depending on federal, state, and local government actions, potential increased tax and fee revenues in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually and potential correctional savings of several tens of millions of dollars annually.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    NO NO NO NONE

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: Individuals age 21 or older could, under state law, possess and cultivate limited amounts of marijuana for personal use. In addition, the state and local governments could authorize, regulate, and tax commercial marijuana-related activities under certain conditions. These activities would remain illegal under federal law.

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: The possession and cultivation of marijuana for personal use and commercial marijuana-related activities would remain illegal under state law, unless allowed under the state's existing medical marijuana law.

    OCS -- I urge a NO vote on Proposition 19 which is little more than a ruse by the democrats to turn out the youth vote in an election with a projected low turnout. This proposition does not affect the current medical marijuana laws and will not supersede federal laws which take precedence over state law.

    Even if Prop. 19 passes, federal drug laws will be 'vigorously' enforced, official says

    "U.S. Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr., in a letter sent Wednesday to nine former chiefs of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, wrote, 'Let me state clearly that the Department of Justice strongly opposes Proposition 19. If passed, this legislation will greatly complicate federal drug enforcement efforts to the detriment of our citizens.'"

    This is nothing more than a political ploy to drive turnout. It is not a serious effort to solve the drug problem.

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtPASSED – MINIMIZES LEGISLATIVE INTERFERENCE WITH REDISTRICTING ACTIVITIES

    YES - 4,268,103 (61.2%)  NO - 2,712,119 (38.8%)

    20REDISTRICTING OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Removes elected representatives from process of establishing congressional districts and transfers that authority to recently-authorized 14-member redistricting commission comprised of Democrats, Republicans, and representatives of neither party. Fiscal Impact: No significant net change in state redistricting costs.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    YES YES YES NO

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: The responsibility to determine the boundaries of California's districts in the U.S. House of Representatives would be moved to the Citizens Redistricting Commission, a commission established by Proposition 11 in 2008. (Proposition 27 on this ballot also concerns redistricting issues. If both Proposition 20 and Proposition 27 are approved by voters, the proposition receiving the greater number of "yes" votes would be the only one to go into effect.)

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: The responsibility to determine the boundaries of California's districts in the U.S. House of Representatives would remain with the Legislature.

    OCS I urge a YES vote on Proposition 20 because “we the people” are tired of being subject to the “special deals” made by state legislators to keep certain “pre-arranged” districts firmly within the party’s control. Thus our so-called legislators have been able to manipulate elections for years to insure long-term incumbencies which works against “we the people” and promotes a sense of entitlement – often combined with some degree of corruption.

    As columnist George Will noted: "If Democrats lose control of the House by a small number of seats, this might be condign punishment for a practice they favor and that Republicans have cynically encouraged — racial gerrymandering. It concentrates African-American voters in majority-minority districts in order to guarantee the election of minority candidates." <Source>

    Minority candidates who DO NOT represent ALL of the people -- only their minorities; viewing everything through the prism of the self-serving personal interests. The reason why local corruption blossoms.

    We need to put the redistricting process back into the hands of the citizens of California.

    Please note: this is one of two redistricting proposals. We also urge a NO vote on the deceptive Proposition 27 which would abolish the Citizen’s Redistricting Commission and return to control over redistricting to corrupt and self-serving legislators.

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtDEFEATED – USING AUTO-RELATED SURCHARGES TO FUND PARKS.

    YES - 3,048,756 (41.9%)  NO - 4,227,021 (58.1%)

    21 - ESTABLISHES $18 ANNUAL VEHICLE LICENSE SURCHARGE TO HELP FUND STATE PARKS AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS. GRANTS SURCHARGED VEHICLES FREE ADMISSION TO ALL STATE PARKS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Exempts commercial vehicles, trailers and trailer coaches from the surcharge. Fiscal Impact: Annual increase to state revenues of $500 million from surcharge on vehicle registrations. After offsetting some existing funding sources, these revenues would provide at least $250 million more annually for state parks and wildlife conservation.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    NO NO NO YES

    YES - A YES vote on this measure means: An $18 annual surcharge would be added to the amount paid when a person registers a motor vehicle. The surcharge revenues would be used to provide funding for state park and wildlife conservation programs. Vehicles subject to the surcharge would have free admission and parking at all state parks.

    NO --A NO vote on this measure means: State park and wildlife conservation programs would continue to be funded through existing state and local funding sources. Admission and parking fees could continue to be charged for vehicles entering state parks.

    OCS I urge a NO vote on Proposition 21. This is a legislative ploy to allow the legislature to surcharge vehicles for non-vehicle projects, thus raising vehicle registration fees to fund legislative special projects. It also serves to provide funding to unionized public employees to insure their full employment during times of budgetary crisis. Since there are other methods to fund state parts and wildlife programs, this is a sham to establish the poor precedent of allowing vehicles to be surcharge for legislative “special projects.” One such future project may involve funding medical expenses for illegal aliens hurt in vehicular accidents.

    This places a burden on all vehicle owners with the promise of free admission to state parks for only a relatively few Californians.

    The measure is deceptive and I urge a NO vote.

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtPASSED – PROTECTS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WHILE FORCING THE STATE TO RAISE TAXES OR BORROW MONEY ELSEWHERE

    YES - 4,291,832 (61.0%)  NO - 2,750,022 (39.0%)

    22 - PROHIBITS THE STATE FROM BORROWING OR TAKING FUNDS USED FOR TRANSPORTATION, REDEVELOPMENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROJECTS AND SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Prohibits State, even during severe fiscal hardship, from delaying distribution of tax revenues for these purposes. Fiscal Impact: Decreased state General Fund spending and/or increased state revenues, probably in the range of $1 billion to several billions of dollars annually. Comparable increases in funding for state and local transportation programs and local redevelopment.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    YES NONE YES NO

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: The state's authority to use or redirect state fuel tax and local property tax revenues would be significantly restricted.

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: The state's current authority over state fuel tax and local property tax revenues would not be affected.

    OCS – I urge a YES vote on Proposition 22 to stop the state from grabbing or delaying the disbursement local funds to “paper-over” continuing structural deficits of the state’s own making. By voting YES, you would be forcing the State’s legislature to accept its fiscal responsibility. We the people demand fiscal and budgetary responsibility and this would be a good first step.

    Thumbs Down Clip ArtThumbs Down Clip ArtThumbs Down Clip ArtDEFEATED – POTENTIALLY THE MOST DISASTROUS LEGISLATION EVER PASSED AS IT MAY RESULT IN THE DESTRUCTION OF CALIFORNIA BUSINESSES

    YES - 2,806,234 (38.9%) -  NO 4,404,634 (61.1%)

    23 - SUSPENDS IMPLEMENTATION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (AB 32) REQUIRING MAJOR SOURCES OF EMISSIONS TO REPORT AND REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING, UNTIL UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS TO 5.5 PERCENT OR LESS FOR FULL YEAR. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Fiscal Impact: Likely modest net increase in overall economic activity in the state from suspension of greenhouse gases regulatory activity, resulting in a potentially significant net increase in state and local revenues.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    YES YES YES NO

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: Certain existing and proposed regulations authorized under state law ("Assembly Bill 32") to address global warming would be suspended. These regulations would remain suspended until the state unemployment rate drops to 5.5 percent or lower for one year.

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: The state could continue to implement the measures authorized under Assembly Bill 32 to address global warming.

    OCS I urge a YES vote on Proposition 23 to save California from environmentalists who have already put forth onerous rules and regulations which would cripple California’s businesses and drive both people and businesses from California to more business-friendly states.

    Without discussing the scientific validity of global warming, suffice it to say that California, acting alone and in a leadership position, will have absolutely no measureable effect on the Earth’s global climate and will place California at a significant competitive disadvantage with other states and nations.

    It would be folly, in these hard economic times to cripple California’s economy and raise all energy prices for California residents. Therefore, I most strongly urge a YES vote.

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtDEFEATED – PRO-BUSINESS INITIATIVE

    YES - 2,912,221 (41.5%)  NO - 4,101,719 (58.5%)

    24 - REPEALS RECENT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW BUSINESSES TO LOWER THEIR TAX LIABILITY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues of about $1.3 billion each year by 2012–13 from higher taxes paid by some businesses. Smaller increases in 2010–11 and 2011–12.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    NO NO NO YES

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: Three business tax provisions will return to what they were before 2008 and 2009 law changes. As a result: (1) a business will be less able to deduct losses in one year against income in other years, (2) a multistate business will have its California income determined by a calculation using three factors, and (3) a business will not be able to share tax credits with related businesses.

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: Three business tax provisions that were recently changed will not be affected. As a result of maintaining current law: (1) a business will be able to deduct losses in one year against income in more situations, (2) most multistate businesses could choose to have their California income determined based only on a single sales factor, and (3) a business will be able to share its tax credits with related businesses.

    OCS – California is not a business-friendly state, both on matters of taxation and onerous rules and regulations. Unions and their public employees want to suck every available dollar out of corporations to fund their social justice programs. Therefore, I strongly urge a NO vote on this matter lest we, once again, disadvantage California’s businesses in a competitive environment – all for the benefit of public employees. Again, I urge a NO vote.

    Thumbs Down Clip ArtThumbs Down Clip ArtPASSED -  MAKES THE PASSING OF A BUDGET IN A ONE-PARTY STATE EASIER

    YES - 3,884,542 (54.8%)  NO - 3,212,365 (45.2%)

    25 - CHANGES LEGISLATIVE VOTE REQUIREMENT TO PASS BUDGET AND BUDGET-RELATED LEGISLATION FROM TWO-THIRDS TO A SIMPLE MAJORITY. RETAINS TWO-THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Legislature permanently forfeits daily salary and expenses until budget bill passes. Fiscal Impact: In some years, the contents of the state budget could be changed due to the lower legislative vote requirement in this measure. The extent of changes would depend on the Legislature's future actions.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    NO NO NO YES

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: The Legislature's vote requirement to send the annual budget bill to the Governor would be lowered from two-thirds to a majority of each house of the Legislature.

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: The Legislature's vote requirement to send an annual budget bill to the Governor would remain unchanged at two-thirds of each house of the Legislature.

    OCS – California is a one-party state run by the democrats, therefore I urge a NO vote on proposition 25 to require a two-thirds vote on budgetary items lest the democrats pass funding initiatives without regard to any opposition. Considering the past performance of the democrats who have shown little or no fiscal responsibility in funding their “social justice” initiatives to fund environmental projects and provide aid and comfort to illegal aliens to the detriment of legal California citizens, reducing the voting requirements to a simple majority would be extremely irresponsible and dangerous to California’s continuing survival.

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtPASSED – ELIMINATES A LEGISLATIVE REVENUE LOOPHOLE

    YES - 3,692,156 (52.9%)  NO - 3,298,677 (47.1%)

    26 - REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN STATE AND LOCAL FEES BE APPROVED BY TWO-THIRDS VOTE. FEES INCLUDE THOSE THAT ADDRESS ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SOCIETY OR THE ENVIRONMENT CAUSED BY THE FEE-PAYER'S BUSINESS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Fiscal Impact: Depending on decisions by governing bodies and voters, decreased state and local government revenues and spending (up to billions of dollars annually). Increased transportation spending and state General Fund costs ($1 billion annually).

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    YES YES YES NO

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: The definition of taxes would be broadened to include many payments currently considered to be fees or charges. As a result, more state and local proposals to increase revenues would require approval by two-thirds of each house of the Legislature or by local voters.

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: Current constitutional requirements regarding fees and taxes would not be changed.

    OCS – I urge a “YES” vote to force dishonest legislators to face the fact that they can no longer disguise taxes as fees to elude the necessity for a two-thirds vote. It is time that “we the people” demanded fiscal responsibility of our legislators.

    Thumbs Up Clip ArtDEFEATED -- MINIMIZES LEGISLATIVE INTERFERENCE WITH REDISTRICTING ACTIVITIES

    YES - 2,783,908 (40.6%)  NO - 4,072,505(59.4%)

    27 - ELIMINATES STATE COMMISSION ON REDISTRICTING. CONSOLIDATES AUTHORITY FOR REDISTRICTING WITH ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.
    Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

    Eliminates 14-member redistricting commission. Consolidates authority for establishing state Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization districts with elected representatives who draw congressional districts. Fiscal Impact: Possible reduction of state redistricting costs of around $1 million over the next year. Likely reduction of these costs of a few million dollars once every ten years beginning in 2020.

    OCS CA GOP PC CA DEM
    NO NO NO YES

    YES -- A YES vote on this measure means: The responsibility to determine the boundaries of State Legislature and Board of Equalization districts would be returned to the Legislature. The Citizens Redistricting Commission, established by Proposition 11 in 2008 to perform this function, would be eliminated. (Proposition 20 on this ballot also concerns redistricting issues. If both Proposition 27 and Proposition 20 are approved by voters, the proposition receiving the greater number of "yes" votes would be the only one to go into effect.)

    NO -- A NO vote on this measure means: The responsibility to determine the boundaries of Legislature and Board of Equalization districts would remain with the Citizens Redistricting Commission

    OCSI urge a NO vote on Proposition 27  because “we the people” are tired of being subject to the “special deals” made by state legislators to keep certain “pre-arranged” districts firmly within the party’s control. Thus our so-called legislators have been able to manipulate elections for years to insure long-term incumbencies which works against “we the people” and promotes a sense of entitlement – often combined with some degree of corruption.

    We need to put the redistricting process back into the hands of the citizens of California.

    I also urge a YES vote on Proposition 20 to stop corrupt and self-serving legislators from continuing their special deals and using redistricting for their own purposes.

    Bottom line …

    Once more, we find our formerly golden state in jeopardy from the corrupt democrats and complacent republicans who have managed to perpetuate their one-party rule. With few exceptions, definitely not “honest brokers” to serve “we the people.”

    I would be prepared to initiate a recall process involving all of our elected officials if they continue to pander to the illegal aliens and special interests who are destroying our state and pushing us ever onward towards bankruptcy.

     -- steve

    Reference Links:

    Election Results – Official| State of California

    State of California – Official Voter Guide

    California Republican Party – Official Voter Guide

    California Democratic Party – Voter Guide


    “Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

    “Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

    “Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

    “The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

    “A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

    “Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

    “Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS