|
a
running commentary by our trusted california contributors...
|
CRO
Blog archive index
|
|
The
Bear Flag
League
|
|
[1/31/06
Tuesday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
Remove Mark Leno from Committee Chair After
speaking with Mark Leno Monday morning (through our technical
problems), I've come to the conclusion that the Conservative
Schooler is right, it is time to remove Assemblyman
Mark Leno from his chairman position of the Public Safety
Committee. The Schooler has started a petition signing
effort on his blog page, I endorse this effort. Leno's
refusal to see child porn as a violent, dangerous crime
(felony please) demands that this liberal find his waling
papers as chairman. [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[1/30/06
Monday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
Mark
Leno Supports Child Porn I
believe Assembly Member Mark Leno needs to be investigated surrounding
his legislation and comments made on the Assembly Floor regarding
his AB50.
We have an
elected politician allowing for 24 (right now 99) pieces of "child
porn" on one's personal property 'before' they are charged
with a felony. This bring a whole new meaning to the phrase, "what
one does behind closed door is one's own business."
Thursday
morning at 7AM, I called for the investigation after receiving
numerous cell calls, emails and faxes from shocked and outraged
legislators. Here is the official release from the California
Republican Party this afternoon:
Mark
Leno, Chairman of the Assembly Public Safety Committee, has
once again demonstrated what little regard he has for protecting California's
children from sexual predators. Thursday on the floor of the
Assembly, Mark Leno argued that the law should allow a person
to possess as many as 24 pieces of child pornography for "personal
use in one's own home" before being convicted on felony charges.
(Assembly floor debate, January 26, 2006)
"Now,
as a result of further conversations with members of our
caucus, I am prepared to take an amendment to lower that
100 down to 25. And in fact it increases the penalty
from a misdemeanor to allow for it to be charged on a first
time offense, personal use, in one's own home, to be charged
as a felony." (Assembly
floor debate, January 26, 2006)
What
Chairman Leno does not explain is that those 24 items that
only qualify for a misdemeanor crime could be DVDs that hold
up to 9,000 images each. That
brings the total possession of child pornography allowable
as a misdemeanor offense to 216,000 images.
There
is no logical explanation why the Chairman of the Assembly
Public Safety Committee thinks it is appropriate to charge
a person in the possession of up to 216,000 pictures of child
pornography with a misdemeanor, carrying the same punishment
as fraudulently avoiding the payment of a railroad fare.
In
the past, Leno has refused to admit that possession of child
pornography is a violent offense, and even equated it with
stealing a bicycle. The fact is that those who possess
child pornography are creating a marketplace for what amounts
to a sex-slave industry of young, innocent children.
In
an interview on the O'Reilly Factor on September 13, 2005,
the following debate took place:
O'Reilly: The
possession of (child pornography) is a violent crime. If
there wasn't a market, they wouldn't do it.
Leno: And you're welcome to that opinion. As I say, we've got a failed
three strikes law in California, unlike any other in the nation...We can't
afford to lock everyone up for stealing a bicycle on a third offense.
Did
he equate "child porn" to stealing a bicycle?
Did
this politician, lawmaker declare that 24 pieces (99 in his
original legislation) should be considered a misdemeanor -
a simply ticket offense?
It
is impossible to understand why Speaker Fabian Nunez allows
for Mark Leno to continue to sit on the Assembly Public Safety
Committee, let alone serve as its Chair, when sexual predators
are given more protections under the law than the innocent
children they target.
There
would be no market for child pornography if there were no
takers. This is a violent crime against the most innocent
of our community, and Mark Leno believes is it appropriate
for child molesters to have 24 pieces of child porn. This
politician needs to be investigated immediately.
What
a disgrace! [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[1/26/06
Thursday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
"Daddy" Legislature
Tells Union What is Good For Them The Sacramento Bee
reports that a contract approved by a state employee union
has been dropped because the majority party leadership
in the legislature said they would not approve the deal.
The problem is that the members of the union had the audacity
to agree to a provision that would have allowed their members
to opt out of the PERS retirement system.
Unions were
created to protect individual workers from management who would
otherwise take advantage of them. Now the legislature is saying
that a union is not good enough to protect the interests of
its members. Oh, by the way, this is a union of public sector
lawyers that the legislature is dismissing. One would think
that this particular union would be savy enough to negotiate
a contract that is a good deal for its members. Go figure.
The ultimate
irony of this is that the union that negotiated this contract
may well end up with a worse deal because of the interference
of the legislature. Why do we have unions when we have a legislature
that always knows best? [Leonard
Blog]
[1/25/06
Wednesday]
[Ken
Masugi - Local Liberty Blog - Claremont
Institute] 12:02am [permalink]
 Highland
Blows Off Baghdad-by-the-Bay The
right-thinking city
council of Highland, CA (just east of San Bernardino)
takes a page from the left's playbook, prohibiting city expenditures
for official travel:
In
protest of an anti-military recruiting ballot measure that
San Francisco voters approved last year, Highland's five-member
City Council recently voted to prohibit the spending of city
dollars on trips that would send employees there for conferences
and training events.
Highland
City Councilman Larry McCallon said he supported the resolution,
which was unanimously passed at the Jan. 10 meeting, to
show support for U.S. military personnel and to tell Americans
outside the state that San Franciscans do not speak for
the rest of California. [visit Local
Liberty Blog]
[1/24/06
Tuesday]
[Sharon
Hughes - radio
talk show host, columnist]
12:15 am [permalink]
Gay
Marriage - Where Do Teachers Stand? While pundits
are debating whether "Brokeback Mountain" may
herald acceptance of gay marriage, many taxpayers and
teachers may be surprised to learn that almost a year ago
the California Teacher's Association (CTA) endorsed AB19
supporting gay marriage. Bill Collins, Legislative Advocate
for the largest teacher's organization in the state, wrote
a letter to Assemblyman Mark Leno on February 18, 2005
in which he said, "The state has no legitimate reason
to discriminate by prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying...use
our endorsement of AB19 as may be helpful to its enactment."
The Capitol
Resource Institute asked, "What is the CTA doing
lobbying for gay marriage? Why are union dues being spent
to support this venture? The CTA's own mission statement
limits their involvement to issues affecting teachers as
professionals. How is gay marriage an issue that professionally
affects teachers?" In Collins' letter he states that
the endorsement was "voted by some 800 teacher-delegates
from throughout the state." But does this endorsement
represent the majority of California teachers?
A Princeton
poll conducted by Pew
Research in July 2005 shows the majority of Americans continue
to oppose gay marriage. As well, the majority of Californians
oppose gay marriage. Five years ago over 60% voted for Prop.
22 which, "ensures ... that California will not permit
same-sex partners to validly marry within the state. Without
submitting the matter to the voters, the Legislature cannot
change this absolute refusal to recognize marriages between
persons of the same sex." More recent polls show Californians
still want marriage to stay between one man and one woman.
While Assemblyman Leno's AB19, which would have altered the definition of
marriage, 'a union between a man and woman' as adopted by the Legislature in
1977, failed
by 4 votes, on September 7, 2005 the California Assembly, became the first
in the nation to approve same-sex marriage, by voting in favor of another
bill by Mark Leno, AB849.
But this effort was stopped by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's veto,
because it did not represent California voters as expressed by Prop. 22.
Concerned
that this is not the end of the battle for marriage VoteYesMarriage.com is
currently seeking to have California join the 18 other states
that have amended their constitutions to ban gay marriage and
is working to get a solid initiative on the ballot. Randy Thomasson
of Campaign for California Families stated recently, "Whether
for 2006 or 2008, VoteYesMarriage.com is devoted to giving
the people the chance to protect marriage from the clutches
of the bureaucracy."
Still, the
question remains, "Does the CTA speak for the majority
of California teachers?" Does the NEA and other state
teacher organizations speak for teachers across the nation?
Frankly, it is difficult to determine as there is little documentation,
research or polls, to accurately verify where teachers stand
on this issue.
There is,
however, a plethera of websites and articles pointing out the
need for teachers to be trained on how to teach about the homosexual
lifestyle, even in kindergarten, 'hate crimes' against gay
students and teachers, and statistics by pro-gay groups about
the negative attitutdes of teachers that need to be changed.
For instance, according to
N.O.W. 85% of teachers oppose integrating lesbian, gay and
bisexual themes in their curricula, and GLSEN reports 80%
of prospective teachers report negative attitudes toward gay
and lesbian people.
I would appreciate
information from anyone who knows of any valid research on
where teachers stand on this issue.
In the meantime,
let me ask California teachers, and teachers from across the
United States: Are you in favor gay marriage? Do the delegates
of your teacher organizations speak for you? Vote in our poll HERE,
just scroll down to the gold box on the left sidebar. We will
publish the final results the first of February.
Will gay
marriage become a reality in California, in America? The classroom
is being used as a major battlefield for this issue. What side
are teachers standing on? Please tell us. Voters and parents
want to know.
Endnote:
Currently in California AB606 is
before the state legislature, which if passed will give the
state superintendent unprecedented authority to withhold funds
to any school district that is found to have violated 'hate
crimes' as outlined in the bill.
[1/23/06
Monday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
The 'Un-Endorsement of Arnold' by the GOP The
Republican Party is considering an "un-endorsement" of
Governor Schwarzenegger, what a wrong headed direction
for the GOP leadership to take.
Recently
this idea was floated by Michael
Schroeder at Capitol News, what follows is my response
(offered January 14, 2006) to Schroeder's strategy.
I start
here: I'd love to be able to say that a 100% conservative
candidate can win a statewide election in California, but
it is just not true. This state is 35% social liberals,
and 35% social moderate...conservatives 'might' have a
voting base 30% - maybe.
The
last "Special Election" was the death to fiscally conservative
ideals in California for the next 10 years. Where were
you people? Did you (we, I'm a GOP'er) still have sour
grapes over 'Arnold versus McClintock'? We couldn't even
pass Prop 73 to protect our own children - get real.
The
liberals and unions "own" this state! Yeah, I know..."Arnold
made too many mistakes". OK, Arnold made mistakes and he
has taken s turn toward the LEFT, I'm as mad as the next
GOP'er - and I have stated such on this blog page and on
the show, but this is not time to start stoning him and
hand the election to the Dems and Unions...not smart, wrong
headed.
The
2003 Recall was about Arnold vs. Bustamante, nothing more.
Voting for McClintock in the 2003 Recall would have handed
the election back to the Dems and to Bustamante. Can you
imagine; we recall Davis, but Bustamante wins the election,
ignorant! A worse state (pun intended) than we are in today!
State
Senator Tom McClintock cannot raise enough money, and he
cannot win a statewide election (lost Controller race twice).
As soon as Tom runs as the sole GOP candidate, the media
will turn on him, and the union money machine will destroy
his favorability poll numbers immediately. Tom is a GREAT
speaker, and he is a great politician in the Capitol. But
he has numerous weaknesses. He is not well liked (even
inside of the party),burned too many bridges, and
raising money is always an issue.
Consider issues
like homosexuality, abortion, racial tension, welfare,
educational spending, affirmative action, radical immigration
reform and just his uncompromising attitude...Tom McClintock
will be an easy target for the unions, the media and the
liberal/centrists voting block of California. Remember
McClintock's "all white better days of California were
in the 50's" campaign ad? Can you say 'out of touch'?
Ask
yourself, "Why do Dems and media praise Tom all of the
time?"...because they want him to be the sole candidate.
Did he get 'tough press' against Arnold in the 2003 recall
campaign - No, he was the darling of the media. He was
puffed up by many a liberal/Democrat 'spinster'...they
know what they're doing.
Back
to the issue, we missed the "real reform" in November;
controlled union contributions, fair elections and districts,
and a drive toward budget accountability. We made a mistake
on pension reform, but we were trying. We had the Gov (Administration)
headed in the right direction...but we left him hanging
out to dry! Now, the 'wanna be liked" governor has turned
his ship toward the LEFT. He is looking for votes and a
base for victory in the face of TWO powerful 'union fueled'
Democrat candidates come November. He understands that
he needs to have one more vote than the next guy to stay
governor - do we?
Hey...there
are some wins...right now we have TWO statewide, Constitutional
offices. This is a good opportunity to work toward a third.
I'm speaking of Tom's race here, the Senator's best chance
is for Arnold to stay in office and for McClintock to run
as the "balancer" of the ticket. Establish McClintock
as Arnold's conservative conscience. BUT NO...the
party wants to attack Arnold and replace him with McClintock.
Senator Tom needs ALL of the support he can gather right
now to face Jackie Speier for the election.
By
removing Arnold's endorsement, we are handing her
the election before the primary, by eating our governor
and confusing the voter base. Right now, we'll be lucky
to have Bruce in the Sect of State Office when the smoke
clears.
Prediction:
Arnold wins a very, very close race (and I'm not sure right
now). Bruce returns (easily), and Tom is defeated by Speier
55% to 45% in the vote because of the media and the union
money. Replacing Arnold means "Just Bruce", and nothing
more.
If
you're mad at Arnold, then the GOP should release (in writing)
its determined platform, and its criticisms of the governor's
new direction - not the governor. Offer a press brigade against
his direction, but don't remove the endorsement and offer
another candidate, it will kill the party for the future.
If
we want the Gov to STOP nominating liberal, Democrat judges,
state such. If we want him to remove Susan Kennedy, state
such as a party. If we are upset over the increase in borrowing
and the hike in minimum wage rates, state such AS A PARTY...LOUDLY...but
don't attack the Gov personally. It will destroy interest
and the voting base and hand the elections to the Dems.
Communicate,
message, campaign people...but don't attack the only Republican
governor this state may see for the next 10 years.
"Drop
the knives and walk away from the kitchen drawer!" [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
| 
