Craig DeLuz

Writer, Actor, Public Speaker, Media Personality
Posts Tagged ‘Liberals’

Debra Bowen hosts drive by registation, but has no voter reg cards for GOP

According to the California Republican Party, Secretary of State, Debra Bowen’s office refused to fulfull their request for 20,000 voter registration cards. The excuse given was that the delayed budget caused them to run low on printed voter registration cards.

When confronted by the media, Bowen’s office denied any such shortage. Little did the folks at the CRP saved the voicemail message for them from the Secretary’s office. and it tells a very different story.

Meanwhile, Ms. Bowen has hooked up with her fellow Democrats to host a “Driveby Voter Registration” event at the Sacramento Convention Center. I guess they the shortage only applied to certain groups.

DeLuz Brothers Discuss Race And The Presidential Election

This week the Sacramento County Republican Party was in the news for having items on their website that some called racially motivated, others called stupid,sophomoric jokes. In any case, the issue has ignited a firestorm that leaves many asking “Who is really playing the race card in this year’s historic presidential election?”

David believes that the Republicans are up to their old tricks, including fear-mongering. Meanwhile Craig thinks that while some of the complaints are legitimate, the Democrats are also doing whatever they can to deflect legitimate criticism away from their candidate by declaring it all to be racist.

To tune in simply go to http://www.deluzbrothers.com/ and click on the Listen Live Button at the top of the page.

You can even join the conversation by calling in at (347) 237-5073. We will be breaking down the upcoming election and much more. You don’t want to miss the fireworks!

Details Below:

When: Friday, October 10th

Station: Blogtalk Radio

Live Audio Steaming at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/The-DeLuz-Brothers

TIME: 9:30-10 am (PST)

Call in Number: (347) 237-5073

In 2004 Maxine Waters said Fannie & Freddie weren’t broken

As Democrats continue to try and hang the financial crisis around the neck of John McCain, their own words are coming back to haunt them.

Republicans are the ones who have pushed to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Democrats continually fight any regulation.

I am not saying the Republicans are completely free of blame. The fact is, they were in charge in 2001 when this issue first popped up, all the way until 2005. And no legislation was ever passed providing the sort of oversight they knew was needed.

But it is clear from this video and other media reports that Democrats have been the ones preventing the reforms that could have prevented this crisis. I just think it’s sad thata the MSM is letting them get away with such hypocracy.

In 2004 Maxine Waters said Fannie & Freddie weren’t broken

As Democrats continue to try and hang the financial crisis around the neck of John McCain, their own words are coming back to haunt them.

Republicans are the ones who have pushed to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Democrats continually fight any regulation.

I am not saying the Republicans are completely free of blame. The fact is, they were in charge in 2001 when this issue first popped up, all the way until 2005. And no legislation was ever passed providing the sort of oversight they knew was needed.

But it is clear from this video and other media reports that Democrats have been the ones preventing the reforms that could have prevented this crisis. I just think it’s sad thata the MSM is letting them get away with such hypocracy.

Democrats fought McCain’s efforts to address pending finaincial crisis

The following was sent out by the California Republican Party. I figured that I woud pass it on to my readers, unfiltered.
Democrats Attack McCain Even Though They Blocked Reform Efforts He Sought To Help Fix The Financial Markets

Obama’s Congressional Allies Have Been Attacking Sen. John McCain For Engaging In Negotiations On Legislation To Stabilize Financial Markets:

“In Interviews After The Meeting, Obama Pointed A Finger At His Rival For The Faltering Talks…” (Michael D. Shear and Jonathan Weisman, “Debate Still In Limbo As Democrats Blame McCain For Interrupting Process,” The Washington Post, 9/26/08)

Obama Suggested The Negotiations Were Damaged By Presidential Politics. “Obama suggested the talks were damaged by politics. ‘When you start injecting presidential politics into delicate negotiations you can actually create more problems rather than less,’ Obama said on CNN.” (Alison Vekshin and James Rowley, “House Republicans Undercut Bush On Rescue, Slow Talks,” Bloomberg News, 9/26/08)

But McCain Has Led Efforts To Reform Financial Markets:

The Washington Post: “[W]hen It Comes To Regulating Financial Institutions And Corporate Misconduct, Mr. McCain’s Record Is More In Keeping With His Current Rhetoric.” (Editorial, “‘Always For Less Regulation?'” The Washington Post, 9/19/08)

John McCain Urged Action More Than Two Years Ago, Co-Sponsoring Legislation To Reform Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Warning: “If Congress Does Not Act, American Taxpayers Will Continue To Be Exposed To The Enormous Risk That Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Pose To The Housing Market, The Overall Financial System, And The Economy As A Whole.” McCain: “I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.” (Office Of U.S. Senator John McCain, “McCain Statement On Co-Sponsorship Of The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act Of 2005,” Press Release, 5/26/06)

In 2002, McCain Called For Greater Oversight Of Financial Markets Following Accounting Scandals. “In the aftermath of the Enron collapse and other accounting scandals, he was a leader, with Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), in pushing to require that companies treat stock options granted to employees as expenses on their balance sheets. ‘I have long opposed unnecessary regulation of business activity, mindful that the heavy hand of government can discourage innovation,’ he wrote in a July 2002 op-ed in the New York Times. ‘But in the current climate only a restoration of the system of checks and balances that once protected the American investor — and that has seriously deteriorated over the past 10 years — can restore the confidence that makes financial markets work.'” (Editorial, “‘Always For Less Regulation?'” The Washington Post, 9/19/08)

McCain Led The Charge To Remove Former SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt. “Mr. McCain was an early voice calling for the resignation of Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey Pitt, charging that he ‘seems to prefer industry self-policing to necessary lawmaking. Government’s demands for corporate accountability are only credible if government executives are held accountable as well.'” (Editorial, “‘Always For Less Regulation?'” The Washington Post, 9/19/08)

And Obama Ally Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) Blocked Multiple Attempts At Reforming Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Spanning Back To 1992:

“[Frank’s] Record Is Close To Perfect As A Stalwart Opponent Of Reforming The Two Companies, Going Back More Than A Decade. The First Concerted Push To Rein In Fan And Fred In Congress Came As Far Back As 1992, And Mr. Frank Was Right There, Standing Athwart. But Things Really Picked Up This Decade, And Barney Was There At Every Turn.” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“Two Years Later, Mr. Frank Was At It Again. ‘I Do Not Regard Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac As Problems,’ He Said In Response To Another Reform Push. And Then: ‘I Regard Them As Great Assets.'” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“A Month Later, Freddie Mac’s Multibillion-Dollar Accounting Scandal Broke Into The Open. But Mr. Frank Was Sanguine. ‘I Do Not Think We Are Facing Any Kind Of A Crisis,’ He Said At The Time.” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“Three Months Later He Repeated The Claim That Fannie And Freddie Posed No ‘Threat To The Treasury.’ Even Suggesting That Heresy, He Added, Could Become ‘A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.'” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“In April 2004, Fannie Announced A Multibillion-Dollar Financial ‘Misstatement’ Of Its Own. Mr. Frank Was Back For The Defense. Fannie And Freddie Posed No Risk To Taxpayers, He Said, Adding That ‘I Think Wall Street Will Get Over It’ If The Two Collapsed.” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

Obama Ally Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) Led Efforts To Block Reform Of Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac, After Receiving A Sweetheart Deal On Loans For His Own Houses:

Obama Joined Sen. Dodd – Both Top Recipients Of Fannie And Freddie Contributions – In Opposing Reform Measures And Weakening Existing Regulations. “During this period, Sen. Richard Shelby led a small group of legislators favoring reform, including fellow Republican Sens. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel and Elizabeth Dole. Meanwhile, Dodd — who along with Democratic Sens. John Kerry, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the top four recipients of Fannie and Freddie campaign contributions from 1988 to 2008 — actively opposed such measures and further weakened existing regulation.” (Al Hubbard and Noam Neusner, Op-Ed, “Where Was Sen. Dodd?” The Washington Post, 9/12/08)

Dodd Called On The Regulator For Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac To Lift Portfolio Caps. “Both Schumer and Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., the chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, have called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s regulator to lift the portfolio caps. They argue that allowing the two firms to buy more mortgages, at least temporarily, would inject much needed liquidity into the market and calm the financial markets.” (Michael R. Crittenden, “Schumer Will Seek To Lift Cap On Mortgage Portfolios Of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,” Congressional Quarterly Today, 8/16/07)

In 2003, Dodd, Chairman Of The Senate Banking Committee, Received Preferential Loans From Countrywide Financial On His Two Homes Which Saved Him $75,000. “Senators Christopher Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut and chairman of the Banking Committee, and Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, refinanced properties through Countrywide’s ‘V.I.P.’ program in 2003 and 2004, according to company documents and emails and a former employee familiar with the loans. … Senator Dodd received two loans in 2003 through Countrywide’s V.I.P. program. He borrowed $506,000 to refinance his Washington townhouse, and $275,042 to refinance a home in East Haddam, Connecticut. Countrywide wai ved three-eighths of a point, or about $2,000, on the first loan, and one-fourth of a point, about $700, on the second, according to internal documents. Both loans were for 30 years, with the first five years at a fixed rate. The interest rate on the loans, originally pegged at 4.875%, was reduced to 4.25% on the Washington home and 4.5% on the Connecticut property by the time the loans were funded. The lower rates save the senator about $58,000 on his Washington residence over the life of the loan, and $17,000 on the Connecticut home.” (Daniel Golden, “Countrywide’s Many ‘Friends,'” Portfolio, 6/12/08)

Obama Ally Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Has Been A “Leading Voice For [Financial] Deregulation,” Led Efforts To Block Reform Of Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac, And Was Instrumental In The Collapse Of Bank IndyMac:

Until The Current Financial Crisis, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) “Had Been A Leading Voice For Deregulation,” Supporting Repeal Of Great-Depression Era Regulations, Re-Examining Corporate Oversight Laws, And Opposing Reducing Taxpayer Risks Associated With Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac. “Until the current credit crisis, Mr. Schumer had been a leading voice for deregulation: He ha s championed the repeal of a Great Depression-era law that prohibited commercial banks from underwriting securities; he has written an opinion piece calling for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to be ‘re-examined,’ and he has opposed a bill that sought to reduce taxpayer risk in the event of a housing market slowdown by requiring Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to sell their entire investment portfolios of about $1.5 trillion worth of mortgage assets.” (Joseph Goldstein, “Pro-Deregulation Schumer Scores Bush For Lack of Regulation,” The New York Sun, 9/22/08)

Schumer Called On The Regulator For Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac To Lift Portfolio Caps. “Both Schumer and Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., the chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, have called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s regulator to lift the portfolio caps. They argue that allowing the two firms to buy more mortgages, at least temporarily, would inject much needed liquidity into the market and calm the financial markets.” (Michael R. Crittenden, “Schumer Will Seek To Lift Cap On Mortgage Portfolios Of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,” Congressional Quarterly Today, 8/16/07)

__________________________________________

Conservatives keep trying to put this at the feet of the Democrats, but I am not buying it. The above article points out that Rep. Frank was a leading supporter of Freddy and Fanny as far back as 1992. However, between 1994 and 2004, the Republicans controled at both houses of Congress – meaning the Republicans had 10 years – and four years of unified government – to make changes. No… the Republicans were happy with the status quo, and if they had wanted to make changes they had the chance and passed it up.

Still no budget while democrat Budget Chair parties at DNC

So much for working hard to solve the budget. According to the following press release from the CRP, the Chairman of the Assembly Budget committee John Laird (D- Santa Cruz) decided to go to the Democratic National Convention.

Democrat Budget Chair “Cringes” When Caught By Reporters At Convention

“It is time for every Californian to take action. Tell the Legislature that they need to pass the budget now.” – Assembly Democrat Caucus budget website

As California enters its 55th day without a state budget, assembly Democrats are urging Californians to call their Legislator and tell them to immediately pass a budget.

That could prove to be difficult, however, because the Democrat Chair of the Assembly Budget Committee, Assemblyman John Laird (D-Santa Cruz) is partying it up in Denver at the Democrat National Convention.

Despite a late budget that has hurt many Californians, Laird doesn’t seem to be worried. In fact, this morning he was found leading chants of “we are one!” at a convention breakfast. (Source: Capitol Weekly Blog)

KCRA political reporter Kevin Riggs caught Laird playing hooky this morning. Riggs’ convention blog says Laird “cringed” when he was caught by reporters cheerleading at the convention, instead of working to resolve California’s budget crisis. (Source: The Riggs Report)

How can Assemblyman John “What Me Worry?” Laird abandon his duty as Chair of the Budget Committee during our fiscal crisis?

There are 14 Southwest flights from Denver to Sacramento today…the people of California expect Mr. Laird to be on one of them.

Another Episode of “Democrat Senators Gone Wild”

Here is yet another story of a California State Senator acting like a fool.

Two weeks ago, Senator Pat Wiggins cursed at a pastor during a committee hearing, stating that is aurguments were “Bull S***t”.

And yesturday, Senator Carole Migden’s entire staff was sent home after she berrated and yelled at them.

Here is the story as reported by the Capitol Alert:

After yelling episode, Migden’s staff sent home

Sen. Carole Migden’s Capitol staff was sent home on Thursday afternoon and told not to report to work on Friday, after the San Francisco Democrat was heard berating them from the hallway.

Enedina Hidalgo, the director of personnel for the state Senate, overheard Migden screaming, according to a witness to the event. The source said Hidalgo entered the office while the senator was not present on Thursday, informing the staff of their rights.

Soon after, Hidalgo returned to Migden’s office with Tony Beard Jr., the chief sergeant-at-arms of the state Senate. They told the staff to pack up their belongings and escorted them out of the building, the witness said.

A spokeswoman for Migden, Tracy Fairchild, declined comment and referred all questions about the incident to the Senate Rules Committee.

Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, an Oakland Democrat and chair of the Rules Committee, declined to comment. Secretary of the Senate Greg Schmidt, the top aide to the Rules Committee, and Hidalgo also declined to comment.

When Sen. Carole Migden was directly asked about Thursday’s events, Perata aide Lynda Gledhill sought to intervene, telling Migden she did not have to comment.

“They weren’t sent home,” Migden said of her staff, before walking away.

Late Thursday afternoon, the phones to the Migden’s Capitol office went unanswered and mail had piled up by 4:45 p.m., stuffed under the locked office door.

On Friday, none of Migden’s regular aides reported to work in the Capitol. Her office was staffed by temporary workers from the Senate Rules Committee.

Migden, known for her brusque attitude, is a 10-year veteran of the Capitol, having served six years in the Assembly and one term in the Senate.

Earlier this year, she lost a three-way Democratic primary to Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco. She was the first California legislator in a dozen years to lose a primary re-election contest.

“We need responsible representation,” Leno said to a Marin audience during the campaign. He campaigned in part on character issues.

Migden suffered a bout of bad publicity during the campaign, especially surrounding an erratic 30-mile drive last May on Interstate 80 in which she careened off the center divider and later rear-ended a car with her state-owned SUV.

She later suggested that medicine she was taking for leukemia may have contributed to the episode.

A no-nonsense lawmaker, Migden admitted during the primary that her curt demeanor sometimes rubbed associates the wrong way. But she was unapologetic. “I make no apologies that sometimes it’s a tough arena,” she said at the time.

Migden will leave office at the end of November.

CTA TV ads target GOP legislators with lies from the left

As the budget battle heats up, the California Teacher’s Association has taken to the airwaves, attacking Republican legislators for not agreeing to vote for the “compromise buget”. The started with the generic ad below. But this morning, I saw the very same ad, only with a tag line at the end encouraging viewers to call Assemblyman Roger Nielo. I also have heard reports of the very same commercial targeting Todd Spitzer.

The funny part is that this commercial is full of lies:

1. “Teachers don’t know what to expect for our schools or how to plan for our students.” – School districts have already passed a budget for the 2008-09 school year. So, they do already know what to expect. Any teachers that would have been let go, already have been. Any cuts that would be required, already have been. And keep in mind, Republicans have already agreed to fully fund Prop. 98. This means that schools will get a $1.8 billion increase.

2. “Thats why lawmakers need to put the partisan bickering asside and pass a ‘common sense’ budget that raises revenue to protect education.” What they are really saying is that Republicans need to agree to raise taxes. The funny part is that most of the money from the proposed tax increases go to social welfare programs, NOT EDUCATION. But even having said that, why don’t they encourage Democrats to agree to common sense budget reforms like a hard spending cap or a rainy day fund?

3. “As a parent and a Republican, it’s time for my letislator to listen to me about schools, not the Republican leaders in Sacramento.” But Democrats should listen to the Democrat leader? This is the set up! But no partisanship here… right?

4. “Call your legislator and tell them to suppport the compromise budget today.” – The only proposed budget that is in print is no compromise. It is the product of the Budget Conference Committee that is dominated by Democrats and has yet to recieve one Republican vote. Even the Governor has insisted that this budget is out of line with what is best for California, and he is “Mr. Compromise”. All it does is raise taxes by $10 billion, increase spending by $3 billion, cuts law enforcement, contains no budget reform and continues to feed their spending addiction.

The truth is, CTA’s view of compromise equates to Republicans folding and doing exactly what THEY and the Democrats want. Don’t be fooled!

HYPE: The Obama Effect

I saw this adv for “HYPE: The Obama Effect” while watching Fox News this morning.

The trailer is even more compelling. I really hope that this movie will help unmask the left’s newest messiah and reveal the fact that once you get past all they rhetoric of “Hope and Change” Barak Obama is nothing more than a Jimmy Carter liberal in a shiny new package.

In Case You Missed it: 8 illegal immigrant crack dealers shielded by S.F. walk away

San Francisco is not just liberal… It is a city that exists on a whole different plain of leftist extremism.

But even knowing that, I have to wonder what the taxpayers in the city by the bay think of paying to fly convicted drug dealers to their home country in order to avoid deportation; or better yet, how about the $7,000 a month they are paying the low security youth camp these drug dealers escaped from.

This article from the San Francisco Chronicle just goes to show the extent to which these liberal sanctuary cities will go to avoid enforcing the law.

8 crack dealers shielded by S.F. walk away

Jaxon Van Derbeken, Chronicle Staff Writer

Tuesday, July 1, 2008

An effort by San Francisco to shield eight young Honduran crack dealers from federal immigration officials backfired when the youths escaped from Southern California group homes within days of their arrival, officials said Monday.

The walkaways are the latest in a string of embarrassments for city officials who are protecting illegal-immigrant drug dealers from federal authorities and possible deportation because of San Francisco’s 1989 declaration that the city is a sanctuary for undocumented immigrants.

Until recently, San Francisco flew juvenile illegal immigrants convicted of drug crimes to their home countries rather than cooperate with the federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, a practice that drew national attention when The Chronicle reported it Sunday.

When federal law enforcement authorities demanded that San Francisco halt the flights and began a criminal investigation, the city decided to house some of the dealers in long-term youth rehabilitation centers. Some of those centers are run by a nonprofitcompany called Silverlake Youth Services in mountain towns southeast of San Bernardino.

Eight Honduran juveniles who had been convicted of dealing drugs in San Francisco were sent within the past few weeks to the company’s group homes, where one month’s placement costs $7,000 per youth – an expense borne by San Francisco taxpayers.

Within 10 days of being sent to the unlocked group homes, however, all eight youths ran away, said Bill Siffermann, head of juvenile probation in San Francisco. He said his agency has issued arrest warrants for them.

Siffermann said the city has stopped sending juvenile offenders to Silverlake because of the escapes. “We have now eliminated that as a prospect,” he said, adding that San Francisco is trying to come up with an approach for handling the juveniles that does not involve giving them to federal immigration authorities.

San Bernardino County sheriff’s Capt. Bart Gray said Silverlake had reported the Honduran youths as runaways – not as juvenile offenders. Three of the youths were listed as missing from Silverlake’s Douglas House in the town of Yucaipa, 16 miles southeast of San Bernardino, on June 20 and two more on June 22, Gray said.

Juvenile probation officials say three other Honduran youths who had been convicted as juveniles in San Francisco disappeared from another Silverlake-run group home, but it was not immediately known which one.

Silverlake officials confirmed that the youths had vanished but would say nothing further, referring inquiries to San Francisco officials. Silverlake’s operations officer, Jeff Boyd, said he was barred by law from commenting.

SPECIAL FROM CRP: Obama Gives Thumbs Up to the Pelosi Premium

This press release just arrived in my inbox:

OBAMA GIVES THUMBS UP TO THE PELOSI PREMIUM
Meanwhile CA Gas Prices Up $1.82 Per Gallon Under Democrat-Controlled Congress

In 2006, then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) made this bold election-year statement: “Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices.” Nearly two years later, what exactly has that “commonsense plan” gotten California families and businesses?

JANUARY 16, 2007: $2.61 (Source: AAA of Northern CA)

JUNE, 2008: $4.43 (Source: CA Energy Commission)

This week we learned that the Barack Obama is just fine with higher gas prices. In fact, congressional Democrats blocked efforts to lower them and instead proposed higher gas taxes that will further burden California’s working class.

Is this what the Democrat leadership mean by “commonsense”?

The Democratic Majority has given consumers the Pelosi/Obama Premium, which this week clocks in at $1.82 per gallon. That’s right, from the time the new Democratic Majority took control of congress, gas prices in California have skyrocketed almost two dollars from an average of $2.61 per gallon in January to $4.43 per gallon now.

As predicted before the summer driving season, the Pelosi/Obama Premium has only gotten worse, yet Barack Obama and other Democrats have done nothing to help Californians’ Pain at the Pump.

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: The California Dream Act is Back!

With all the new pieces of legislation being churned out of the Bad Bill Mill, I almost missed the resurrection of the California Dream Act by former Speaker Fabian Nunez via AB 2083. This is the scheme originally cooked up by Senator Gil Cedillo (SB 160) in 2006, which would give illegal immigrants access to state funded financial aid.

Without pointing out the obvious fact that we should not be rewarding people for being in the country illegally, I would like to point out some problems with this measure.

First of all, California taxpayers subsidize somewhere between 70-80% of the cost of higher education in this state. This subsidy was expanded to include illegal immigrants thanks to the passage of SB 540 in 2001. So now they want Californians to subsidize the rest of their education? I think not!

Secondly, this measure comes with a low-balled estimated cost of $4.6 million, $12. million of which will come from Prop. 98 funds which funds K-12 education. Does it really make sense to increase spending on illegal immigrants when most state agencies are facing budget cuts? Keep in mind that every dollar spent on financial aid for illegal immigrants takes funding away from the core missions of our higher education institutions along with K-12 education.

Finally, just last year Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed this idea that came to him in the form of SB 1, also authored by Senator Cedillo. He stated in his veto message:

California has over 100,000 students here legally who apply annually for financial aid to attend college, and our state has limited funds available for this important purpose.

While I do not believe that undocumented children should be penalized for the acts of their parents, this bill would penalize students here legally by reducing the financial aid they rely on to allow them to go to college and pursue their dreams.

I find it hard (ok maybe not that hard) to believe that his position has changed on this issue; which causes one to beg the question: has a deal been cut between the former Speaker and the Governor? One can only speculate… And so… I am.

Video: Waxman to Issa: ‘I will have you physically removed’

I find it interesting that the committee chair didn’t care at all about the rules of conduct that he is supposed to be enforcing. But then again, the only rule that Democrat representatives seem to care about is “Majority Rule”.

Rep. Richardson Bails on Her Mortgage

This little nugget was reported by the LA Times blog and linked on the DrudgeReport:

Report: California Congresswoman walked away from $578K mortgage

Capitol Weekly reports that newly elected California Congresswoman Laura Richardson walked away from the mortgage on her $535,000 Sacramento home, letting the house slip into foreclosure and disrepair less than two years after she bought it with no money down.

“While being elevated to Congress in a 2007 special election, Richardson apparently stopped making payments on her new Sacramento home, and eventually walked away from it, leaving nearly $600,000 in unpaid loans and fees,” the publication reports.

Richardson, a Democrat from Long Beach, declined to comment for the Capitol Weekly story, and her office did not immediately respond to a request for comment from LA Land.

Read more…

Democrat Party’s racist roots are starting to show…

Despite years of trying to portray themselves as “The Party of Diversity” the true face of the Democrats are finally showing through, as exit polling from primary after primary shows that race is playing a major role in how Democrats are voting.

North Carolina & Indiana:

Race again played a pivotal role in Tuesday’s Democratic presidential clashes, as whites in Indiana and North Carolina leaned solidly toward Hillary Rodham Clinton and blacks voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama, exit polls showed.

West Virginia:

One in five white voters said race was an important factor in their vote and 83 percent of them voted for Clinton against Obama, who would be the first black major-party presidential nominee.

Mississippi:

As has been the case in many primary states, Obama won overwhelming support from African-American voters. They went for him over Clinton 91-9 percent.

But Mississippi white voters overwhelmingly backed the New York senator, supporting her over Obama 72 percent to 21 percent.

As a matter of fact Alan Fram of the Associate Press wrote:

Exit polls of voters in Democratic primaries also show that whites who considered the contender’s race _ Clinton is white, Obama is black _ were three times likelier to say they would only be satisfied with Clinton as the nominee than if Obama were chosen.

Isn’t this the enlightened party? … Open to a diversity of cultures?

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

This just goes to show that the party that fought to keep slavery, founded the KKK, instituted Jim Crowe, authored the Southern Manafesto and fought against the 1964 Civil Rights Act hasn’t strayed too far from it’s racist roots.

As far at their modern day racist policies… I’ll leave that for another post.

Democrat Party’s racist roots are starting to show…

Despite years of trying to portray themselves as “The Party of Diversity” the true face of the Democrats are finally showing through, as exit polling from primary after primary shows that race is playing a major role in how Democrats are voting.

North Carolina & Indiana:

Race again played a pivotal role in Tuesday’s Democratic presidential clashes, as whites in Indiana and North Carolina leaned solidly toward Hillary Rodham Clinton and blacks voted overwhelmingly for Barack Obama, exit polls showed.

West Virginia:

One in five white voters said race was an important factor in their vote and 83 percent of them voted for Clinton against Obama, who would be the first black major-party presidential nominee.

Mississippi:

As has been the case in many primary states, Obama won overwhelming support from African-American voters. They went for him over Clinton 91-9 percent.

But Mississippi white voters overwhelmingly backed the New York senator, supporting her over Obama 72 percent to 21 percent.

As a matter of fact Alan Fram of the Associate Press wrote:

Exit polls of voters in Democratic primaries also show that whites who considered the contender’s race _ Clinton is white, Obama is black _ were three times likelier to say they would only be satisfied with Clinton as the nominee than if Obama were chosen.

Isn’t this the enlightened party? … Open to a diversity of cultures?

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

This just goes to show that the party that fought to keep slavery, founded the KKK, instituted Jim Crowe, authored the Southern Manafesto and fought against the 1964 Civil Rights Act hasn’t strayed too far from it’s racist roots.

As far at their modern day racist policies… I’ll leave that for another post.

Night of the Living Democrats!

The video says it all! Even you liberals should find this funny!

__________________________________________

Oh wow…. THAT was funny! I liked the reference to Reagan as the equivelent of garlic and holywater!!!

Here’s another funny one!!!!!!!

Night of the Living Democrats!!!

The video says it all! Too Funny!

Darwin


Dawkins – Beware The Believers- [Dicky D Rap]
Uploaded by randomslice

Star Jones Lynches Bill O’Reilly for saying he wouldn’t lynch Michelle Obama…Huh?

Here’s the deal…

On his radio show, Bill O’Reilly was responding to a caller regarding some recent allegations against Michelle Obama, wife of presidential candidate, Barak Obama. O’Reilly responded to the caller declaring that:

“…I DON’T WANT TO GO ON A LYNCHING PARTY AGAINST MICHELLE OBAMA UNLESS THERE’S EVIDENCE, HARD FACTS, THAT SAY THIS IS HOW THE WOMAN REALLY FEELS. IF THAT’S HOW SHE REALLY FEELS — THAT AMERICA IS A BAD COUNTRY OR A FLAWED NATION, WHATEVER — THEN THAT’S LEGIT. WE’LL TRACK IT DOWN.”

Well in response to his comments former TV personality Star Jones felt it necessary to write an open letter to her fans on her website in which she stated:

I’M SICK TO DEATH OF PEOPLE LIKE FOX NEWS HOST, BILL O’REILLY AND HIS ILK THINKING THAT HE CAN USE A RACIAL SLUR AGAINST A BLACK WOMAN WHO COULD BE THE NEXT FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES, GIVE A HALF-ASSED APOLOGY AND NOT BE TAKEN TO TASK AND CALLED ON HIS CRAP.

Where was the racial slur?

He was saying that he did not want to join the rest of the right wing media (what little of it there is) in going after Michelle Obama without some proof that she had said or done something wrong. He wanted here to have her day in court.

Back in the days of the “wild west” people used to bring together mobs to go after and punish people whom they believed had done wrong. These mobs were not concerned with justice, they simply wanted vengeance. We used to call these mobs “Lynching Parties”. And they did not only lynch black people!

Like most liberals who attack conservatives, Star Jones is pretending to play mind reader; acting like she has a crystal ball that allows her know the motivations behind what someone says. She then plays on people’s fears and biases (in this case black people) to make a declarative statement that has little to know basis in fact.

It is a stretch to say that O’ Reilly was advocating for the “lynching” of Michelle Obama. And it is absurd to say that he said it the way he did because she was black.

Let’s not be so quick to judge the motives of others when they say something questionable. Bill O’Reilly wasn’t willing to “lynch” Michelle Obama without giving her a chance. So let’s return the favor and not be so quick to lynch him.

Star Jones Lynches Bill O’Reilly for saying he wouldn’t lynch Michelle Obama…Huh?

Here’s the deal…

On his radio show, Bill O’Reilly was responding to a caller regarding some recent allegations against Michelle Obama, wife of presidential candidate, Barak Obama. O’Reilly responded to the caller declaring that:

“…I DON’T WANT TO GO ON A LYNCHING PARTY AGAINST MICHELLE OBAMA UNLESS THERE’S EVIDENCE, HARD FACTS, THAT SAY THIS IS HOW THE WOMAN REALLY FEELS. IF THAT’S HOW SHE REALLY FEELS — THAT AMERICA IS A BAD COUNTRY OR A FLAWED NATION, WHATEVER — THEN THAT’S LEGIT. WE’LL TRACK IT DOWN.”

Well in response to his comments former TV personality Star Jones felt it necessary to write an open letter to her fans on her website in which she stated:

I’M SICK TO DEATH OF PEOPLE LIKE FOX NEWS HOST, BILL O’REILLY AND HIS ILK THINKING THAT HE CAN USE A RACIAL SLUR AGAINST A BLACK WOMAN WHO COULD BE THE NEXT FIRST LADY OF THE UNITED STATES, GIVE A HALF-ASSED APOLOGY AND NOT BE TAKEN TO TASK AND CALLED ON HIS CRAP.

Where was the racial slur?

He was saying that he did not want to join the rest of the right wing media (what little of it there is) in going after Michelle Obama without some proof that she had said or done something wrong. He wanted here to have her day in court.

Back in the days of the “wild west” people used to bring together mobs to go after and punish people whom they believed had done wrong. These mobs were not concerned with justice, they simply wanted vengeance. We used to call these mobs “Lynching Parties”. And they did not only lynch black people!

Like most liberals who attack conservatives, Star Jones is pretending to play mind reader; acting like she has a crystal ball that allows her know the motivations behind what someone says. She then plays on people’s fears and biases (in this case black people) to make a declarative statement that has little to know basis in fact.

It is a stretch to say that O’ Reilly was advocating for the “lynching” of Michelle Obama. And it is absurd to say that he said it the way he did because she was black.

Let’s not be so quick to judge the motives of others when they say something questionable. Bill O’Reilly wasn’t willing to “lynch” Michelle Obama without giving her a chance. So let’s return the favor and not be so quick to lynch him.

Hate from the Pulpit

Senator Barak Obama’s quest for the presidency has been in major turmoil over the last few weeks. These problems have stemmed from controversial comments made by his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. These statements were made from the pulpit of his church which Obama attended for over 20 years. For those of you who have not heard these comments, let me just say that they were incendiary, anti-American, racist and needless to say, not very Christ-like. (Click Here to see the video)

But the fact that Jeremiah Wright would make such hateful comments doesn’t surprise me at all. The truth is, he is not the only “Man of God” that has chosen to use his platform to advance an agenda that has nothing to do with God.

Just this week the San Francisco Chronicle wrote about sermon delivered by a Rev. Amos Brown on Easter Sunday. According to the Chronicle:

The Rev. Amos Brown’s Easter sermon at the Third Baptist Church of San Francisco didn’t have much to do with Jesus’ crucifixion or resurrection from the dead and instead covered everything from skyrocketing gas prices and the subprime mortgage crisis to race relations in the United States and presidential politics.

During his fiery Sunday morning speech, he called President Bush a “one-eyed man,” told the predominantly African American congregation that the country is as segregated now as it was 50 years ago and said “America is running on fumes right now … we are on the wrong road.”

So, instead of using the occasion to recognize the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ; Rev. Brown chose to berate the President of the United States, and declare the recent criticism of Obama to be a conspiracy hatched by white America. I must have missed that part of the Easter Story…

Like the Pharasis in Jesus’s time, Jeremiah Wright and Amos Brown have taken to perverting their roles as Shepards, leading their congregants not to Christ, but to a modern day “Black Nationalism” that is based in hatred and mistrust of America; White America, specifically.

Now this is not to say that these men are not entitled to express their opinions. But God holds those who represent him to a higher standard.

I will not go as far as saying the Barak Obama agrees with all of his pastor’s views. But I do believe that his decision to sit under the teachings of a man who possesses such heartfelt views does raise legitimate questions about his judgment.

And his lack of judgment in the selection of his pastor should serve as an indication of how he will go about selecting his advisors, should he become president.

Conservatives Are More Liberal Givers

Liberals would have us believe that they are much more caring and giving than conservatives. Well in his recently published book, “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism.” Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University details his study proving that conservatives are much more giving of their time and money than are liberals.

In a recent column at Real Politics, George Will writes:

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data. They include these findings:

— Although liberal families’ incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

— Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

— Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

— Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

— In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

— People who reject the idea that “government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality” give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

These findings are consistent with those of the Catalogue For Philanthropy who for the last 10 years have produced the Generosity Index. According to their findings New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland and Connecticut (all blue states) rank the highest in per capita income, yet all five are in the bottom half of states in per capita giving. In fact, every single blue state ranks in the lower half, with New York holding the highest position at #26.

Conservatives do believe the society has a responsibility to aid elderly, care for our children, protect the environment and provide a helping hand to the less fortunate. But over time we have allowed liberal “feel good” programs to be put in place that have slowly but surely heaped society’s responsibility upon government.

This has summarily relieved Democrats of any guilt over the fact that they have done nothing to fulfill their responsibility to their fellow man and the world in which they live. As long they have lobbied for the government to do it, they feel that they have done their part.

Why give should I feed the homeless when the government can do it? Why help my neighbor find a job when the government can do it? Why should I do anything to help others when the government can do it? But who winds up paying for these programs? The middle-class tax payer… That means me and you!

And despite the recent liberal wave of tax initiatives aimed at fleecing high income earners to pay for their “feel good” social programs; we will still wind up paying the bill. Why? Because as California Assemblyman, Ray Haynes once put it- There is nothing more portable than a rich man and his money. And when their henchmen get through rewriting their financial books (ala John Kerry and Theresa Heinz-Kerry) they wind up paying close to nothing in taxes.

Then they have the nerve to say that THE RICH AREN’T PAYING ENOUGH!!!!!!! And they accuse conservatives of not caring about children, the elderly, the poor or the environment. Well I think this study shows that this is simply not the case.

This study just goes to show that Liberal’s generosity begins and ends with other people’s money!

Memo to Blue States: How about you start putting YOUR money where your mouth is instead of MINE!

Guilty by Association?

You had to know that I was going to post this!

Now I am not going to spend a lot of time trying to tie this guy to Barak Obama or insinuate that he thinks this way as well. There are enough pundits out there doing this. But I will raise the question about whether one should question his judgment when it comes to following a man who would preach such hate.

And before you get started….By any objective standard, this is hate speech. If you doubt it, ask yourself this question, “If a white pastor were saying the same thing about black people, would you consider it hate speech?” Barak Obama himself has worked to distance himself from his pastor’s comments by comparing his former “Man of God” to a crazy uncle with whom he does not always agree.

Well maybe you can’t choose your family. But you can chose with whom you chose to associate. And you most certainly can choose your pastor. Clearly, Mr. Obama chose this man to be his pastor; the man who married him to his wife, dedicated his children and was his spiritual teacher 20 years. One has to wonder how much his views line up with his pastor’s views and whether someone with that mindset should be president.