OC Political

A right-of-center blog covering local, statewide, and national politics

Archive for the ‘National’ Category

Starbucks CEO Takes Stand on Gay Marriage Issue

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on March 25, 2013

I generally prefer to post about local issues but this caught my eye with the Supreme Court beginning their talks on gay marriage tomorrow.

starbucks

Frederick E. Allen from Forbes Magazine wrote an article about Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz taking a pretty hard stand in support of gay marriage at the company annual meeting. I will first post the article and give my brief thoughts on this afterwards.

Howard Schultz to Anti-Gay-Marriage Starbucks Shareholder: ‘You Can Sell Your

Shares’

At Starbucks’ annual meeting in Seattle on Wednesday a shareholder complained to the chief executive, Howard Schultz, that the company had lost customers because of its support for gay marriage. Last year Starbucks announced its support for Washington’s state’s referendum backing gay marriage, and in response the National Organization for Marriage launched a boycott of the coffee chain.

“In the first full quarter after this boycott was announced, our sales and our earnings, shall we say politely, were a bit disappointing,” said the shareholder, Tom Strobhar, whom the Huffington Post identifies at the founder of the anti-gay marriage Corporate Morality Action Center.

Was Schultz taken aback? Not in the least. He responded, “Not every decision is an economic decision. Despite the fact that you recite statistics that are narrow in time, we did provide a 38% shareholder return over the last year. I don’t know how many things you invest in, but I would suspect not many things, companies, products, investments have returned 38% over the last 12 months. Having said that, it is not an economic decision to me. The lens in which we are making that decision is through the lens of our people. We employ over 200,000 people in this company, and we want to embrace diversity. Of all kinds.”

At that point the audience interrupted in cheers and applause. Then Schultz concluded, “If you feel, respectfully, that you can get a higher return than the 38% you got last year, it’s a free country. You can sell your shares in Starbucks and buy shares in another company. Thank you very much.” More cheers.

A Washington Post poll this week found that support for gay marriage among Americans has shot up to 58% in favor and 36% against, a complete turnaround in less than 10 years. Schultz’s stand isn’t nearly as daring as it would have been a few years back, but still, it’s impressive to see a CEO think about more than the bottom line and get cheered by his shareholders for it.

See a video of Schultz’s remark, courtesy of the Puget Sound Business

Clearly Shultz fears very strongly about this issue and believes in what he is supporting based on his comments. With the looming Supreme Court decision expected this year I expect to hear more from businesses and non-political folks on the issue but I think that this is a huge mistake.

My personal opinions are that businesses should focus on trying to increase revenues in whatever way possible. People who are opposed to gay marriage might continue to purchase products from their but the odds are that some won’t. As an example I recently posted on Facebook that my computer had crashed and a few people recommended that I purchase a service that backs up your data automatically such as www.carbonite.com. I ended up signing up with this service after much consideration due to numerous recommendations and high reviews on different websites from users. A liberal Facebook friend then lashed out about www.carbonite.com being a terrible choice because they advertise on the Rush Limbaugh radio show. It would not have mattered to me whether they advertised on Rush Limbaugh, Rachel Maddow, or Conan I was simply looking for a solid product. Clearly some people are influenced in a negative way by what certain companies do in the political realm.

Starbucks has potentially painted itself into a corner by taking this position. In fairness my opinion does not reflect the specific position that Starbucks took as I have the same issue with Chic-Fil-A who took the opposite stand on the issue. Starbucks should focus on making/selling coffee and Chic-Fil-A should focus on making/selling chicken sandwiches as most people couldn’t care less where they stand on political/policy issues. It’s not like Congress was waiting to hear from Colonel Sanders before they voted on Obamacare.

Posted in National | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

OC’s New Republican Congressmen Vote 3-1 Against Fiscal Cliff Deal; Old Ones Voted 3-2 in Favor

Posted by Chris Nguyen on January 3, 2013

In a far-too-brief summary of the fiscal cliff deal: income taxes increased on people making more than $400,000 (couples over $450,000), tax deductions phase out for individuals making more than $250,000 (couples over $300,000), payroll taxes increased on people making more than $50,000, the death tax was increased from 35% for estates over $5.12 million to 40% for estates over $5 million, the Earned Income Tax Credit was expanded, college tuition tax credits were extended for five years, and federal unemployment benefits were extended for a year.

The vote on the fiscal cliff provides an interesting illustration of the impact of redistricting on Orange County’s Congressional representation.

fiscalcliffolddist

How the Representatives of the Old Congressional Districts Voted on the Fiscal Cliff Deal

fiscalcliffvotes

How the Representatives of the New Congressional Districts Voted on the Fiscal Cliff Deal

The old OC delegation voted 5-2 in favor of the fiscal cliff deal while the new OC delegation voted 4-3 against the fiscal cliff deal, with the new 8th member not yet seated.

More interestingly, the old districts had Republicans 3-2 in favor of the deal with the Democrats at 1-0 while the new districts have Republicans 3-1 against the deal with the Democrats at 2-0.

Ed Royce (R-Fullerton), Linda Sanchez (D-Cerritos), and Loretta Sanchez (D-Santa Ana) voted in favor of the fiscal cliff deal.

John Campbell (R-Irvine), Darrell Issa (R-Vista), and Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) voted against the fiscal cliff deal.

(Newly Elected Congressman Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach) will not take take office until later this morning.)

Congressmen Gary Miller (R-Diamond Bar) and Ken Calvert (R-Corona) represented portions of Orange County until yesterday but now represent exclusively Inland Empire districts.  Miller and Calvert both voted for the fiscal cliff deal.

Posted in 38th Congressional District, 39th Congressional District, 45th Congressional District, 46th Congressional District, 47th Congressional District, 48th Congressional District, 49th Congressional District, National | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Robert Bork Dead at 85

Posted by Chris Nguyen on December 19, 2012

Robert Bork died this morning at the age of 85. A former Yale Law professor, he was one of the leading originalist thinkers of the last half century. However, the public will likely remember him for two controversies. He was US Solicitor General under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, and was a key figure in the “Saturday Night Massacre” of 1973. President Ronald Reagan appointed Bork to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals in 1982. Reagan’s unsuccessful nomination of Bork to the Supreme Court provoked such a battle that “to bork” became a political verb.

On October 20, 1973, in the midst of Watergate, President Nixon ordered Attorney General Elliot Richardson to fire independent counsel Archibald Cox. Richardson refused and resigned as Attorney General instead. Nixon then ordered Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus refused and resigned as Deputy Attorney General.

Bork was third ranking official at the Justice Department at the time and became Acting Attorney General. Bork then fired Cox. Within days, Bork named Leon Jaworski the new independent counsel. Jaworski would eventually subpoena Nixon’s White House tapes – including the Smoking Gun tape – an action that would lead to Nixon’s resignation.

Reagan appointed Bork to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals with little controversy and a smooth confirmation by the US Senate in 1982.

On July 1, 1987, Reagan nominated Bork to the Supreme Court. His nomination proved to be one of the most divisive in the modern era. Within 45 minutes of Bork’s nomination, Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) declared that Robert Bork’s America would, among other things, be a place where segregation, rogue police, and government censorship would run rampant. The Reagan White House would not respond to Kennedy’s attack for two and a half months.

Bork’s nomination and the battle over his confirmation was so noteworthy that the Bork nomination itself has its own lengthy Wikipedia article, where they describe the entire confirmation battle better than I could in this blog post.

On October 23, 1987, the US Senate voted 58-42 to reject Bork’s nomination to the Supreme Court. California’s US Senators split on the vote, with Alan Cranston (D) voting to reject Bork and Pete Wilson (R) voting to confirm Bork.

The Bork nomination process was so controversial that “to bork” became a verb used in the American political process.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word “bork” as: “To defame or vilify (a person) systematically, esp. in the mass media, usually with the aim of preventing his or her appointment to public office; to obstruct or thwart (a person) in this way.”

President Reagan then nominated DC Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Douglas Ginsburg, who eventually withdrew after admitting that he had smoked marijuana with his students while a Harvard Law professor.

Reagan finally picked a nominee who went on to be confirmed 97-0: Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Anthony Kennedy-the pivotal swing vote on today’s Supreme Court.

Four months after his rejection for the Supreme Court, Bork resigned from the DC Circuit and then worked for a series of think tanks. His seat on the DC Circuit would eventually be filled by Clarence Thomas, who would be nominated by President George H.W. Bush for another seat on the Supreme Court in another contentious confirmation battle just four years later. During the Thomas confirmation battle, NOW leaders declared, “We’re going to bork him.” The US Senate confirmed Thomas 52-48.

Posted in National | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Bush Address on September 11 Attacks; Obama Address on Navy SEAL Operation Killing Bin Laden

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on September 11, 2012

President George W. Bush addressed the nation on Tuesday, September 11, 2011:

Good evening. Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes, or in their offices; secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers; moms and dads, friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.

The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness, and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed; our country is strong.

A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.

America was targeted for attack because we’re the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.

Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature. And we responded with the best of America — with the daring of our rescue workers, with the caring for strangers and neighbors who came to give blood and help in any way they could.

Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans. Our military is powerful, and it’s prepared. Our emergency teams are working in New York City and Washington, D.C. to help with local rescue efforts.

Our first priority is to get help to those who have been injured, and to take every precaution to protect our citizens at home and around the world from further attacks.

The functions of our government continue without interruption. Federal agencies in Washington which had to be evacuated today are reopening for essential personnel tonight, and will be open for business tomorrow. Our financial institutions remain strong, and the American economy will be open for business, as well.

The search is underway for those who are behind these evil acts. I’ve directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and to bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

I appreciate so very much the members of Congress who have joined me in strongly condemning these attacks. And on behalf of the American people, I thank the many world leaders who have called to offer their condolences and assistance.

America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world, and we stand together to win the war against terrorism. Tonight, I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve, for the children whose worlds have been shattered, for all whose sense of safety and security has been threatened. And I pray they will be comforted by a power greater than any of us, spoken through the ages in Psalm 23: “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me.”

This is a day when all Americans from every walk of life unite in our resolve for justice and peace. America has stood down enemies before, and we will do so this time. None of us will ever forget this day. Yet, we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world.

Thank you. Good night, and God bless America.

President Barack Obama addressed the nation on Sunday, May 1, 2011:

Good evening.  Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who’s responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history.  The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory — hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.

And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world.  The empty seat at the dinner table.  Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father.  Parents who would never know the feeling of their child’s embrace.  Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.

On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together.  We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood.  We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country.  On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.

We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice.  We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda — an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe.  And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we’ve made great strides in that effort.  We’ve disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense.  In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support.  And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan.  Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden.  It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground.  I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan.  And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.  A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability.  No Americans were harmed.  They took care to avoid civilian casualties.  After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda’s leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies.  The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda.

Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort.  There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us.  We must –- and we will — remain vigilant at home and abroad.

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not –- and never will be -– at war with Islam.  I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam.  Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims.  Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own.  So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was.  That is what we’ve done.  But it’s important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.  Indeed, bin Laden had declared war against Pakistan as well, and ordered attacks against the Pakistani people.

Tonight, I called President Zardari, and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts.  They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations.  And going forward, it is essential that Pakistan continue to join us in the fight against al Qaeda and its affiliates.

The American people did not choose this fight.  It came to our shores, and started with the senseless slaughter of our citizens.  After nearly 10 years of service, struggle, and sacrifice, we know well the costs of war.  These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who’s been gravely wounded.

So Americans understand the costs of war.  Yet as a country, we will never tolerate our security being threatened, nor stand idly by when our people have been killed.  We will be relentless in defense of our citizens and our friends and allies.  We will be true to the values that make us who we are. And on nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al Qaeda’s terror:  Justice has been done.

Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who’ve worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome.  The American people do not see their work, nor know their names.  But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.

We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country.  And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.

Finally, let me say to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11 that we have never forgotten your loss, nor wavered in our commitment to see that we do whatever it takes to prevent another attack on our shores.

And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11.  I know that it has, at times, frayed.  Yet today’s achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.

The cause of securing our country is not complete.  But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to.  That is the story of our history, whether it’s the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggle for equality for all our citizens; our commitment to stand up for our values abroad, and our sacrifices to make the world a safer place.

Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are:  one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.  May God bless you.  And may God bless the United States of America.

Posted in International, National | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

2012 General Election Predictions: U.S. Senate

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on September 10, 2012

It is once again time for my prediction series on the 2012 general election races that will appear on the ballot. I am not going to make predictions on all races, but I would say you can expect predictions on over 75% of them.

We are going to kick things off with the United States Senate race between Dianne Feinstein and Elizabeth Emken. In the primary election we had 24 candidates vying for this seat:

United States Senator

  • Dianne Feinstein, Democratic ………. 2,392,822 votes 49.3%
  • Elizabeth Emken, Republican ………. 613,613 votes 12.6%
  • Dan Hughes, Republican ………. 323,840 votes 6.7%
  • Rick Williams, Republican ………. 157,946 votes 3.3%
  • Orly Taitz, Republican ………. 154,781 votes 3.2%
  • Dennis Jackson, Republican ………. 137,120 votes 2.8%
  • Greg Conlon, Republican ………. 135,421 votes 2.8%
  • Al Ramirez, Republican ………. 109,399 votes 2.3%
  • Gail K. Lightfoot, Libertarian ………. 101,648 votes 2.1%
  • Diane Stewart, Democratic ………. 97,782 votes 2.0%
  • Mike Strimling, Democratic ………. 97,024 votes 2.0%
  • David Alex Levitt, Democratic ………. 76,482 votes 1.6%
  • Oscar Alejandro Braun, Republican ………. 75,842 votes 1.6%
  • Marsha Feinland, Peace and Freedom ………. 57,720 votes 1.2%
  • Robert Lauten, Republican ………. 56,524 votes 1.2%
  • Colleen Shea Fernald, Democratic ………. 51,623 votes 1.1%
  • Donald Krampe, Republican ………. 39,035 votes 0.8%
  • Don J. Grundmann, American Independent ………. 33,037 votes 0.7%
  • Dirk Allen Konopik, Republican ………. 29,997 votes 0.6%
  • John Boruff, Republican ………. 29,357 votes 0.6%
  • Nak Shah, Democratic ………. 27,203 votes 0.6%
  • Rogelio T. Gloria, Republican ………. 22,529 votes 0.5%
  • Nachum Shifren, Republican ………. 21,762 votes 0.4%
  • Kabiruddin Karim Ali, Peace and Freedom ………. 12,269 votes 0.3%
  • Linda R. Price, Republican (Write-in)

This data comes directly from the League of Women Voters “Smart Voter” website. Unfortunately for Republicans these numbers say it all. Feinstein almost managed to get 50% of the vote with 23 opponents running against her.

Unfortunately, this race is not Barbara Boxer vs. Carly Fiorina which was extremely competitive. Feinstein is the more moderate Democrat between the 2 Senators. Feinstein also hails from the bay area which is one of the largest 2 voting populations in California (the other being Los Angeles.

Many might argue that Feinstein is vulnerable because she was one of the victims of the Kindee Durkee scandal. However, Durkee may have taken all of her campaign money but Feinstein was listed as the 9th richest member of Congress in 2011. Also Diane Feinstein wrote her campaign a check for $5,000,000 after Durkee took her $4,500,000 during the alleged embezzlement scandal.

This race is going to take millions of dollars to do and with just over  $26,000 left after the primary election it just doesn’t seem like it is going to happen. On the other hand Feinstein had over $3,000,000 as of June 30th in her account

On a personal note I think Elizabeth Emken is a great person and I am hoping that all the stars will align for an upset on election night.

Looking at all the factors at play in this district I believe that the winner will be:

Dianne Feinstein

Posted in California, National | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

Two Candidates Insert Office Title into Their Names on the Ballot (Sort of)

Posted by Chris Nguyen on August 27, 2012

Aquaman

Sorry that I couldn’t find a picture of Stan “The Water Man” Dziecielski or Gary “Water Watch Dog” Langdale. This picture of Aquaman will have to suffice.

While peering through the various candidates running for office in Orange County, I came across two who had something very odd in common:

  • Stan “The Water Man” Dziecielski, Candidate for Santa Margarita Water District
  • Gary “Water Watch Dog” Langdale, Candidate for South Coast Water District

Usually, the nickname in quotation marks in the middle of a candidate’s would be for something like Robert “Bob” Baker or Daniel “Skip” Marshall.  Stan “The Water Man” Dziecielski and Gary “Water Watch Dog” Langdale are certainly unusual, though both nicknames certainly have a nexus with the office the candidates seek (i.e. water board).

While having a nickname that relates to the office might seem like a good idea at first, I doubt that voters would take “The Water Man” or “Water Watch Dog” seriously.

But then again, it’s happened before.  Byron Looper ran unsuccessfully for the Georgia House of Representatives as a Democrat in 1988, the same year he was a campaign worker for Al Gore’s presidential campaign.  In 1992, he was a campaign worker for the Clinton-Gore presidential campaign and became a Republican.  In 1994, he ran unsuccessfully for the Tennessee House of Representatives.  In 1996, he inserted “Low Tax” into his name, and voters in Putnam County, Tennessee elected Byron “Low Tax” Looper as County Assessor.

(Unfortunately, Low Tax Looper’s tale does not end there.  In 1998, Looper challenged five-term incumbent State Senator Tommy Burks (D).  Burks was shot and killed on October 19, 1998, just 15 days before the election.  On October 24, Looper was arrested for assassinating his opponent.  Due to the way Tennessee law was structured at the time, the deceased Burks was removed from the ballot while the arrested-but-not-convicted Looper remained as the sole candidate on the ballot.  Senator Burks’s widow was drafted into launching a write-in campaign for her late husband’s seat.  On November 3, 1998, Charlotte Burks won the seat with 30,252 votes versus 1,531 votes for Looper, or a 95.2%-4.8% victory.  She continues to hold that Senate seat to this day.  In August 2000, Looper was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole after the Burks family asked that Looper not be given the death penalty.)

If Stan “The Water Man” Dziecielski and Gary “Water Watch Dog” Langdale win their elections, I am left with this question: What’s next?

  • Barack “Commander-in-Chief” Obama
  • Mitt “Business Leader” Romney
  • Dana “Reagan Speechwriter” Rohrabacher
  • Loretta “Financial Analyst” Sanchez
  • Tony “Orange County’s Top Prosecutor” Rackauckas
  • Todd “Orange County Crime Fighter” Spitzer
  • Diane “Taxpayer Advocate” Harkey
  • Tom “The Centrist” Daly
  • Claudia “College Leader” Alvarez
  • Lou “The Taxpayer’s Friend” Correa
  • Larry “Safest City in America” Agran
  • Tom “Hi Neighbor” Tait

The possibilities are endless!

Posted in National, Santa Margarita Water District, South Coast Water District | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Roseanne Barr/Cindy Sheehan Win Peace and Freedom Party Nomination for White House

Posted by Chris Nguyen on August 6, 2012

Peace and Freedom Party Presidential Nominee Roseanne Barr

Peace and Freedom Party Presidential Nominee Roseanne Barr

In an odd turn of events over the weekend, actress Roseanne Barr and liberal activist Cindy Sheehan won the Peace and Freedom Party’s nomination for President and Vice President.

Just two months ago, Barr had been defeated for the Green Party presidential nomination by Massachusetts physician Jill Stein when the latter won the crucial California primary, clinching enough delegates to win the nomination.  Last month, Green Party watchers speculated that Stein would pick Barr to be her running mate, but that came to naught when Stein picked Pennsylvanian Cheri Honkala.

This past week proved most eventful for left-wing third parties.  On Wednesday, the Green Party’s Stein and Honkala were both jailed for a sit-in at a Philadelphia bank.  The next day, Barr jumped the Green Party ship and announced that she was the seeking the Peace and Freedom Party’s nomination for President and had selected Cindy Sheehan as her running mate.  Shortly after Barr’s announcement, Rocky Anderson, who had won the Peace and Freedom Party’s California primary, withdrew from the race.  Then, Barr and Sheehan won the Peace and Freedom nomination at their convention over the weekend.

The Peace and Freedom Party’s incredibly generous rules do not require their nominee “to run in the primary or be a registered party member,” State Party Chair C.T. Weber told the Sacramento Bee.

The Peace and Freedom Party, which calls itself “California’s Feminist Socialist Political Party,” has ballot access in California and Florida.  The party is also seeking ballot access in several other states.  Might I suggest Ohio, Virginia, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Wisconsin, or Iowa?

This entire episode leaves two important questions:

  1. Is there still time for Barr to seek the presidential nomination of The Rent Is Too Damn High Party in New York?
  2. Since President Barack Obama’s campaign has already run hit ads on Mitt Romney featuring Romney singing America the Beautiful, will Jill Stein’s campaign run hit ads on Roseanne Barr featuring Barr singing The Star-Spangled Banner?


Posted in California, National | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Congress: Declaration of Independence

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on July 4, 2012

You really should be spending time with your friends and family celebrating Independence Day instead of reading a political blog, but since you’re here, this came over the transom 236 years ago today…

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

Posted in National | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Poll: 65% of Americans Trust Obama Over Romney to Handle Alien Invasion

Posted by Chris Nguyen on June 29, 2012

Happy Friday, readers!

In a new poll, National Geographic has found an issue that should gravely concern the Mitt Romney campaign and thrill the Barack Obama campaign.

65% of Americans believe Obama would better handle an alien invasion than Romney.

65% of Americans believe the man in the picture on the left is better suited to handle the situation in the middle picture than the man in the picture on the right

There is a gender split on this pressing issue though, as 68% of women but only 61% of men believe Obama would deal with an alien invasion better than Romney.

On this, as with many other issues, Obama fares better with younger voters than older voters. 68% of citizens under the age of 65 believe Obama could better manage an attack by space aliens than Romney while only 50% of citizens over the age of 65 believe Obama would be more successful in case of an alien attack.

79% of Americans apparently believe that the government is hiding information about UFOs.  55% believe there’s a government agency similar to Men in Black that goes after Americans who have seen UFOs.

More info on the National Geographic poll here and here.

Jay Leno has a theory as to why Obama dominated Romney in the ability-to-handle-alien-invasion poll: “Once the aliens landed, they’d see there were no jobs, and they would go back home.” (See 2:18 in Jay Leno’s Tonight Show June 28 Monologue.)

Posted in National | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Obama Health Care Law; Declares Lying About Receiving the Medal of Honor is Free Speech

Posted by Chris Nguyen on June 28, 2012

In a busy day at the Supreme Court, the justices issued their first opinion of the day.  They ruled 6-3 in United States v. Alvarez that it is within a person’s First Amendment rights to lie about receiving the Medal of Honor, striking down the Stolen Valor Act as unconstitutional.  Conservative Chief Justice John Roberts joined conservative swing voter Anthony Kennedy and the court’s four liberal justices: Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg.  The dissenters were conservative justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Antonin Scalia.  Kennedy authored the opinion.

The second opinion of the day was the one everyone was waiting for: in a 5-4 decision in National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the entire health care law officially known as the Affordable Care Act but often called Obamacare.  The individual mandate was held unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause but was upheld under the power to tax.  The shocker: swing voter Anthony Kennedy was in the dissent.  It was conservative Chief Justice John Roberts who not only voted with the four liberal justices but who wrote the opinion.

Posted in National | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »