CA Supreme Court Rules in favor of Counterfeit Marriage

The California Supreme court has opted to let AB 205, California's Counterfeit Marriage Act stand.

Sacramento News 10 reports:

The California Supreme Court has upheld a new law that grants registered domestic partners many of the same rights as those given to heterosexual married couples.

The justices unanimously upheld appellate and trial court rulings that the sweeping measure does not conflict with a voter-approved initiative defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.


What AB 205 Says...

Registered domestic partners have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and are subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under [California state] law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses." Cal. Fam. Code 297.5(a). Registered domestic partners will have less security than heterosexual married couples if they travel or move outside of California.

In other words, domestic partner's must look to the rights granted to spouses (married individuals of the oposite sex) in order to determine thier rights.

How is this not marriage by another name?

More Detials to follow!!!!!!

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

California Democrats "Gut and Amend" Moral Issues

Same Sex Marriage and Assisted Suicide are two of the most hotly contested issues in California. Bills that would have legalizing both were killed in the State Assembly. But thanks to a technical process known as “Gut and Amend”, Democrats plan to reincarnate both measures in the State Senate.

The San Diego Union Tribune reports that Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) is currently looking for a bill to hijack.

Despite a defeat in the Assembly and a likely veto from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, advocates of same-sex marriage plan to revive their legislation in the Senate.

Yesterday, they began using a legislative technique known as "gut and amend" to replace the provisions of an Assembly bill that's already in the Senate with provisions from the defeated same-sex marriage bill.

Additionally, Assisted Suicide has been revived by Assembly members Mark Levine (D-Van Nuys) and Patty Berg (D-Eureka) ; a maneuver that went ignored by the mainstream media. But it was reported here “California Assisted Suicide Bill is Brought Back to Life” and Californians Against Assisted Suicide issued a press release stating:

“When the Assisted Suicide bill couldn’t muster 20 votes in the Assembly, the proponents declined to even bring it up for a vote,” said Tim Rosales, a spokesperson for the anti-suicide coalition. “The authors hijacked a bill that had already passed the Assembly and is in the Senate so they would not have to show how truly weak their support was.”

This just demonstrates the commitment and resolve held by those who seek to undermine the values of our culture. Defeat will not slow them down. They will not allow the will of the people or the rule to stop them, and will disregard both unless they fit within their agenda. Leno makes it clear that the fact that his measure violates the law and the will of the voters means nothing.

"I can continue the fight for a critically important civil rights issue," said Assemblyman Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, the author of the same-sex marriage bill. "Why would I not go forward?"

The enemies of moral values are well funded, politically savvy and have adopted a long term approach. On the other hand, our side is poorly funded, politically unrefined and have a tendency to be sporadic and reactive only to immediate threats.

It is crucial that we become proactive in the fight to preserve traditional values. We must be ready to fight at all times. And often we will be fighting the same battle over and over again. But it is crucial that we stand against every reincarnated, resurrected, reinvented and reintroduced version of the same immoral madness. And when all is said and done; be prepared to fight the battle again.

As the bible says, “…having done all to stand, Stand…”

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

"Lost Liberty Hotel" Proposed on David Souter's Land

I hope to God this is for real!

In an interesting commentary on the Supreme Court’s recent decision regarding the use of eminent domain, Freestar Media is reporting on an effort to build a hotel on the site where Justice David Souter’s home currently sits.

On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.

Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Why is this particular piece of property necessary for this project?

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

Now this would be fitting justice for the justice!

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Santa Monica College Faculty Issues Apology to Governor Schwarzenegger

In a very classy gesture over 50 faculty members at Santa Monica College sent a letter to the Governor to apologize for students and staff members who heckled him as he presented the key note address a their graduation proceedings back on June 14th. (Story Here)


June 27, 2005

The Honorable Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Governor Schwarzenegger:

We, the following employees of Santa Monica College, formally apologize to you for the treatment you received while giving your keynote address on June 14. The disruptive behavior of loud-mouthed student hecklers in the audience and the few faculty members who turned their backs on you was unacceptable.

From your clear vantage point, we hope you saw what those of us on the stage behind you saw: Almost all graduates and most of the audience listened attentively, and they stood and applauded repeatedly throughout your speech. Their support for you and for your inspirational message to SMC graduates was shown by the applause at the end of your speech, applause that drowned out the hate-filled banter of the malcontents.

It is unfortunate that a few individuals' disagreement with your educational policies has not manifested itself in more fruitful and more place-appropriate forms of political action. Oddly enough, those who condone these egregious acts do so under the guise of free speech, failing to recognize that responsible participation in a deliberative democracy requires them to extend those same rights to others--even those with political ideologies different from their own. Preventing anyone from being heard is the worst infringement of free speech possible, and it is wrong. Furthermore, it is particularly unfortunate when such a violation occurs at an institution of higher learning, where respect for basic constitutional and human rights is the very air we breath.

Thank you for coming to Santa Monica College to deliver the keynote address. Your words about your experience as an SMC student and how it set the stage for the leader you are today gives us pride in the work we do. Your old professor, Dick Dodge, would also have been proud of how far that extraordinary student of his has gone!

In addition, we commend you for your courage in delivering superbly your entire speech to our proud, eager graduates and their friends and families without acknowledging those who tried to turn the event into a political coup.

You honored Santa Monica College by giving so generously of your time, and we can't thank you enough for your words. In addition, we trust you will not judge Santa Monica College by the behavior of a rude few.

Sincerely,



Fran Chandler, Chair of Business and Accounting Department
Shane Smith, Math Instructor
Co-Advisors, Santa Monica College Republicans

Those who also granted permission to send this letter in their names:

Winniphred Stone, Director of Distance Education
Alan Hong, Professor of Math
Marina Parise, Reference Librarian
Anne. L. Young, Dept. of Music
Ethan Gallogly, Professor of Chemistry
Carole McCaskill, RN, MS, Health Sciences Professor
Perviz Sawoski, Chair, Theatre Arts
Peter Lippman, Business Professor
Jim Downs, Business Law Professor
Megan Granich, Math Instructor
Paul Wissman, Ph.D., Life Sciences
Anne P. Stone, Adjunct, English Dept.
Dr. Michael Schapa, Professor of Accounting and Taxation
Marilyn Adler, Heath Science Dept., Nursing Program
Ron Fitzgerald, CPA, Professor of Business
Sal Veas, Professor of Business
Joshua Coplen, Business Instructor
Kay Waud, Physics Professor
Steven A. Fink, Life Sciences
Jim Downs, Business Dept.
Dr. David Goodman
Rich Robinson, Professor of Geology
Patricia Halliday, Professor of Business
Janie Jones, Instructor, Theatre Arts
Carolyn Feruzzi, Adjunct, Counseling
Eleanor Schapa, Professor of Art and Accounting
Kenneth Buckner, Teacher, Emeritus
William O. Robertson, Emeritus Campus
Linda Babcock, Business Professor
Vicki Drake, Geography Professor
Steve Hunt, Librarian
Lynette Shishido, Professor of Business
Dr. Moya Mazorow, Professor of Mathematics
Christopher Meeks, English
Richard Mednick, Adjunct Associate
James Smith, Chair, Dept. of Music
Jim Sinclair, Business Instructor
Nick DiCamillo, Professor
Gary Strathearn, Adjunct Instructor
Marilyn Goodrich, Administrative Asst., Student Services
Elizabeth Chavez, Adjunct Kinesiology
Jean Georgie, Professor of English
Claudia Celestial, DSPS Instructor
Jonathon Hodge, Planetarium Director
Audrey Roche, Retired Chair, Business, Computing and Public Safety
Herbert McNeely, Police Officer
Christopher Michael Davis, Dept. of History
Mary Colavito, Professor of Life Sciences
Helen LeDonne, Cosmetology
Jenna Gausman, Career Counselor/Counseling Instructor
Karlyn Musante, Associate Faculty, Psychology
Michael Schwartz, Astronomy
William Konya, Professor of Mathematics

These faculty members have shown true grace and leadership, and have set an excellent example for the students they are educating.

Let's let them know how much we appreciate this gesture. The email for the Santa Monica College Republicans is SMCrepublicans@yahoo.com . I am sure that they will make sure that your encouraging words get to the signers of this letter.


Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Charges of Racism Continue to Mount Against Gay Community

Talk of discrimination is heating up in the city by the bay. Last week I blogged on allegations that San Francisco’s homosexual community is guilty of racism against blacks. (Story Here.)

Well this past weekend the San Francisco Chronicle ran a piece further expounding on the charges against the advocates of “Tolerance and Diversity”

They are among the most maligned groups in society, but when it comes to discrimination, many say, gays can give as good as they get.

While most of the accusations center around a particular nightclub, this racist sentiment reaches much deeper and is nothing new to San Francisco’s gay community.

"I was told that Harvey Milk would be rolling in his grave if he knew a black man was running San Francisco's gay pride parade. I was told Martin Luther King would be rolling in his grave. I was told that I was not qualified, " said Calvin Gipson, who was president of the parade committee from 1998 to 2000 and on the board of directors for five years. He is the director of human services for Glide Memorial United Methodist Church.

"I have been called 'big, black nigger bitch' while walking on the street in the Castro," said Zwazzi Sowo, a lesbian who has lived in San Francisco for 20 years. "I am 52 years old. Nowhere else in my life have I experienced walking down the street and someone calling me a nigger."

And there is even statistical data and studies to back up this anecdotal evidence of racism against blacks.

A 2002 survey of 2,600 gay black men attending pride celebrations, though unscientific in selection, found that 48 percent of respondents thought racism was a problem among white gays.

That survey was published by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute, which in 2004 released the results of a similar survey of 125 mostly gay Asian Americans living on the East Coast. Eighty-two percent of respondents in that sample believed such a problem exists.

A national survey of Latinos will be published later this summer, said Jason Cianciotto, research director for the institute.

Teunis finds evidence of racism in the portrayal of minorities in gay media.

During 2003, the only photographs of nonwhite men published in Out magazine -- a leading gay publication -- were of Latino musicians and black men in advertisements for HIV and AIDS medication, he said.

This creates an interesting dichotomy when one considers how homosexual politicians like California Assemblyman Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) have used black political leaders to forward their own agenda. Instead of pushing legislation that forces Christians to be tolerant of the homosexual lifestyle, he should he should sponsor legislation forcing Gays to be more tolerant of Blacks.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Supreme Court too skittish to take a stand

All the headlines today are reading “Ten Commandments Unconstitutional!” But the truth is that the Supreme Court has once again failed to truly take a stand on yet another moral issue.


According to an AP report in the San Francisco Chronicle:

In a narrowly drawn ruling, the Supreme Court struck down Ten Commandments displays in courthouses Monday, holding that two exhibits in Kentucky crossed the line between separation of church and state because they promoted a religious message.

The 5-4 decision, first of two seeking to mediate the bitter culture war over religion's place in public life, took a case-by-case approach to this vexing issue. In the decision, the court declined to prohibit all displays in court buildings or on government property.

In other words, the ruling did not strike down all displays, only the ones in Kentucky; and as a result, any displays that are significantly similar. But they refused to address the issue of whether such displays are, by their very nature unconstitutional.

The justices voting on the prevailing side Monday left themselves legal wiggle room on this issue, however, saying that some displays — like their own courtroom frieze — would be permissible if they're portrayed neutrally in order to honor the nation's legal history.

So what exactly constitutes “neutrally”? Who determines whether a display steps over the line? The ambiguity of this decision has left a wide open door for liberal anti-God groups like the ACLU and spineless (sometimes anti-God) government entities to set the standard. Basically, the ACLU will sue and municipalities seeking to avoid costly litigation will fold. And thus the standard will be set.

A broader ruling than the one rendered Monday could have determined the allowable role of religion in a wide range of public contexts, from the use of religious music in a school concert to students' recitation of "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. It is a question that has sharply divided the lower courts in recent years.

But in their ruling Monday, justices chose to stick with a cautious case-by-case approach.

This “cautious” approach is basically a refusal by the Supreme Court to take a stand. Either our Country was founded on Christian Principle or it wasn’t. And either it is appropriate for this fact to be publicly acknowledged, or it isn’t.

America is still waiting for an answer!

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Why Same-Sex Marriage and Interracial Marriage are not the Same

A central part of argument used by those who advocate for the legalization of same-sex marriage is based on comparing the issues surrounding the prohibition of these unions to those which once outlawed interracial marriage. These individuals make the case that both instances involved laws which disallowed marriage between certain individuals. And because we would not tolerate the banning of interracial unions, we should not have laws that prohibit two people of the same sex from marrying.

While on the surface this seems to be a very compelling argument it is in fact, overly simplistic. Furthermore, it ignores facts and precedent that has been previously established by decades of family law litigation related to the institution of marriage and the government’s interest in promoting and regulating it.

First of all, it is important to note that laws prohibiting interracial marriage were actually attempts to do away with the traditional definition of marriage, thus redefining it. However, laws prohibiting same-sex marriage are significantly different in that they are designed to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. In point of fact, the term “same-sex marriage” is, by its very nature an oxymoron.

Consider that since the beginning of time, every cultural, religious and legal definition of marriage recognized it as a union between a man and a woman. Even today, there is no major religion that, as a part of its doctrinal teachings, recognizes same-sex unions. And furthermore, every dictionary definition (historical to modern day) has described marriage as being between a man and a woman. For example under the following definitions, the phrases “same-sex” and “marriage” are incompatible:

• Marriage: “That honorable contract that persons of different sexes make with one another.” A New General English Dictionary (1740).
• Marriage: “1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife . . .” Merriam-Webster online, April 20, ( 2005).

Such is not the case with interracial marriage. As a matter fact, in the case of Loving v. Virginia, the court ruled that laws banning marriage between a man and a woman of different races were inconsistent with the traditional definition of marriage and worked against the government’s interest in promoting marriage.

And what was the government’s primary interest in promoting marriage? All case law points to procreation as the number one reason for government’s interest in promoting and regulating the institution of marriage. The courts have deemed that government’s fostering of this optimal environment to have and raise children is the primary interest government has in promoting and regulating marriage.

In the case of Baker v. Nelson the court states “The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis.”

Additionally, in Skinner v. Oklahoma, the court is quoted as saying “Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.” In Loving v. Virginia the court cites this quote from Skinner as the foundational argument for shooting down laws banning interracial marriage.

This is not the case with same-sex marriage, as no offspring can ever naturally result from such a union. Thus making procreation impossible. Therefore the government’s primary interest for promoting marriage does not apply to same-sex unions.

Because of the complexity of our legal system, this message may not be the easiest to communicate to those who do not speak “Legaleaze”. However, it is intellectually honest and supported by the facts. We must not allow those who seek jump on the civil rights bandwagon to get away with convoluting the facts and distorting the truth….

Marriage was, is and always will be a union of one man and one woman. Any other definition just doesn’t fit.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

The Black Republican Council Invites You...

Please Join

California Black Republican Council, Sacramento
Research & Policy Institute of California
California Black Chamber of Commerce
Sacramento Black Chamber of Commerce
Coalition for California’s Future
100 Black Men of Sacramento
Republican Women’s Caucus
Community Renewal Project

In Honoring




Justice Janice Rogers Brown
Presidential Appointee to the US Court of Appeals, District of Columbia


Monday, June 27, 2005
5:30 pm to 7:00 pm

The Sutter Club
1220 9th Street, Sacramento

RSVP to 419-8120 by Friday, June 24th

Space is Limited!!!!

Report Says SF Homosexual Community Discriminates Against Blacks

For all of their talk of tolerance, the homosexual community has a few discriminatory skeletons in their closet.

Kieth Boykin, a Black (and I assume gay) blogger reports on how the Gay community in San Francisco has historically discriminated against African-Americans.

In his classic poem "Tongues Untied," black gay poet Marlon Riggs reflects on his experience of moving to San Francisco decades ago. "In this great gay mecca," he writes, "I was an invisible man, still. I had no shadow, no substance. No history, no place. No reflection."

Marlon Riggs is not alone. Black gay men have complained for years about racism in the gay community, but many of these complaints have been dismissed by the larger gay community as the rantings of a few. Now comes a new report from the San Francisco Human Rights Commission that confirms what many of us have known all along: racism is alive and well, even in the legendary Castro district of San Francisco.

The following are just two examples given by Boykin:

Kaya Nati filed the first complaint with the Human Rights Commission in 2001 when Les Natali told him that it was not “costume night”. Kaya is an immigrant from Jamaica and, at the time, was an outreach worker for San Francisco’s Stop AIDS Project. He was dressed in afro-centric clothing. Les literally ordered him to leave, retrieved Kaya’s bag from bag check, threw it on the sidewalk and told the doorman to give him his money back. Kaya died on Tuesday, April 12, two weeks to the day before the HRC findings were released.

After attending church the night of September 11, 2001, Gertrude East, an African American woman, entered Badlands with friends. Within moments, she was ejected without cause. She and several witnesses report that Natali told her white friends, "You can stay, but that's not welcome here." Ms. East and her friends called the police, who, upon arrival, said, "Let me guess: Wrong color or wrong gender?" and told Natali, "You should be utterly ashamed."

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that at the very same time the homosexual community is trying to attach themselves to the civil rights bandwagon which has mainly been successful due to the efforts of Black activists, they are openly violating the civil rights of Blacks?

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

NAACP Withdraws Resolution Supporting Same-Sex Marriage

Activists on both sides of the same-sex marriage debate were anticipating a heated discussion on the topic during the upcoming NAACP National Convention in July. Well it looks like that debate will not be taking place after all.

Uncommon Sense Media Group has verified that the California Conference of the NAACP has voted to withdraw it’s resolution from consideration by the National Convention. Rumor has it that Julian Bond, himself a supporter of same-sex marriage, made the call to the California chapter and urged them to pull their resolution. Shortly afterwards, the executive committee was convened and voted to withdraw the measure.

Speculation has it that this move by the Bond does not represent a change of heart. Rather, it demonstrates his belief that such a resolution would not survive a vote by the NAACP National Conference. Such a defeat would be a major step backwards for same-sex marriage advocates.

As you may recall, in a post last month “NAACP Trades Marriage for Memberships” I predicted that this might occur.

The NAACP National Convention is coming up in July. It will be interesting to see if Julian Bond (a supporter of same sex marriage) will let the CA NAACP resolution see the light of day.

Although, it was easy to see this coming, as the original passage of the resolution created a firestorm of controversy. At the center of the discussion was the declaration by California NAACP President Alice Huffman that:

"This issue is really an issue that is not clearly understood by many segments of my community, especially the fundamentalists"

Insinuating that Blacks did not understand the issue of marriage. (Also see "NAACP thinks Blacks are too stupid to know what marriage is.")


Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Byrd's Book Signing Attracts "Upstanding People"

Cartoon by Kevin O'Niell

Join the Uncommon Sense Update for a larger version of this Cartoon.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

A Klansman's Guide to Political Success- Memoirs of Senator Bob Byrd

West Virginia Senator and former Klu Klux Klansman, Democrat Robert Byrd has recently published his memoirs. His life story is a glaring example of the despicable role Democrats have played in America's racist past. And how today they have remade their image by rewriting history.

According to the Washington Post:

In the early 1940s, a politically ambitious butcher from West Virginia named Bob Byrd recruited 150 of his friends and associates to form a chapter of the Ku Klux Klan. After Byrd had collected the $10 joining fee and $3 charge for a robe and hood from every applicant, the "Grand Dragon" for the mid-Atlantic states came down to tiny Crab Orchard, W.Va., to officially organize the chapter.

As Byrd recalls now, the Klan official, Joel L. Baskin of Arlington, Va., was so impressed with the young Byrd's organizational skills that he urged him to go into politics. "The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation," Baskin said.

The young Klan leader went on to become one of the most powerful and enduring figures in modern Senate history. Throughout a half-century on Capitol Hill, Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) has twice held the premier leadership post in the Senate...

I don't know if it is more disgusting that Mr. Byrd was a part of the Klan or that his membership in the Klan simply as a means to get into a position of power. He admits that he wanted to use this platform to gain political power.

Byrd says he viewed the Klan as a useful platform from which to launch his political career. He described it essentially as a fraternal group of elites -- doctors, lawyers, clergy, judges and other "upstanding people"...

So if he joined the Klan simply to get into office, how do we know that all he does today isn't simply to stay in office? It is a little hard to tell, since Byrd has not exactly been open and honest about his past.

Byrd's book offers a truncated description of his days with the Klan that does not completely square with contemporaneous newspaper accounts and letters that show he was involved with the Klan throughout much of the 1940s, and not merely for two or three years.

And just because he supposedly left the Klan in the mid 40's that did not mean that his Racist views on Blacks and Civil Rights had changed.

Byrd's Klan past became an issue again when he joined with other southern Democrats to oppose the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Byrd filibustered the bill for more than 14 hours as he argued that it abrogated principles of federalism. He criticized most anti-poverty programs except for food stamps. And in 1967, he voted against the nomination of Thurgood Marshall, the first black appointed to the Supreme Court.

Democrats, not once but twice have elected this man into leadership positions in US Senate. And they want to call Republicans Racist?!


Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Craig to Guest Host for Eric Hogue

MONDAY, JUNE 20, 2005
1380AM KTKZ
5-9AM


Craig will be guest-hosting for Eric Hogue

Featuring:

California Assemblyman Rick Keene
The Western Bloggers Alliance
And much, much more!

Call In Number:
(916) 923-3300

Email:
onair@ktkz.com

Don't Miss it!

Nader Feels Like a Rich White "Nigger"

Liberal nut job, fringe environmentalist, white multimillionaire are all fitting descriptions of former Presidential Candidate, Ralph Nader. But Wednesday night he added a new one to the list.

The New York Daily News reports:

Speaking Wednesday night at a Washington fund-raiser to retire the debt from his 2004 presidential campaign, Nader complained that Democratic Party powerbrokers had kept him off the ballot in such Southern states as Georgia and Virginia - which reminded him of the oppressive Jim Crow laws that denied African-Americans equal rights.

"I felt like a [n-word]," remarked the 70-year-old white multimillionaire graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School.

And sure enough along comes Al Sharpton to put Nader in is place.

"Nader is not a racist by any stretch of the imagination," Sharpton told me yesterday. "He has a good track record. But he ought to be sensitive that he does not sanitize that word."

WHAT??!!! Where’s the outrage? Where are the Marches? Isn’t Jessie gonna demand that he apologize and extort money from him?

I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by the double standard. The same thing happened back in 2001 when California Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante dropped the n-bomb in front of a group of 400 Black businessmen at a Black history month event. When I say the same thing happened, I mean nothing happened. He got a pass.

But there is clearly a double standard as to who gets a pass. Had any Republican said such a think, there would have been a liberal lynch mob formed in every urban city in America. The broadcast media would have cut into regular programming with a special report. And the newspapers would have run and endless series of editorials demanding that he apologize and step down from whatever position of authority he holds.

But since it’s Ralph Nader…. Nothing.

I think Larry Elder put it best in his 2001 piece “Understanding the 'N' word”

The bottom line? Jesse Jackson says "Hymie" and "Hymie-town," apologizes, and all is forgiven. Activist Al Sharpton calls Jews "diamond merchants" and "white interlopers," and merely apologizes. "Good guys" like Bustamante survive, but "bad guys" like Rocker, Campanis and Snyder go down.

See, use of the "n" word automatically means you're a bigot, unless you're a "good guy." Then your past record determines whether we call you racist. Unless it doesn't. Got that?

***UPDATE***

In case you are wondering why I used the word "Nigger" instead of "N-bomb, N-word or Ni**er"Please let me explain.

There are few perks to being a Black man in America. And being able to unashamedly use the word "Nigger" (Ebonicly pronounced "Nigga") is one of them. So I have decided to take full advantage.

So can you. Give it a try!

*WARNING!!!!!
To all White Conservative Readers- Attempt at your own risk!

*(White liberals get one free pass!)


Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Gay Marriage Inevitably leads to Gay Divorce

This week British Columbia’s Supreme Court granted their first ever, same sex divorce.

CBC News Reports:

Two women who got married in Parksville two years ago have been granted a divorce by a B.C. Supreme Court judge in Nanaimo. Gay and lesbians in B.C. won the legal right to marry in 2003, sparking a wedding boom.

Among the gays and lesbians who decided to get married was a woman who can only be identified – by court order – by her initials, J.S.

But the marriage didn't work out. And J.S. filed for divorce last year.

But she says she was shocked to discover that while her same-sex marriage was legal, she wasn't allowed to divorce – because the Divorce Act only allowed a man and a woman to part.

So, in order for B.C. Supreme Court Justice Laura Gerow to grant the “divorce,” she had to rewrite the law, which originally defined a married couple under the Divorce Act as a man and woman. Justice Gerow declared the Act unconstitutional, granting the divorce to the unnamed couple who were “married” in 2003.

Madame Justice Laura Gerow agreed the divorce law discriminated against gays and lesbians. And with the stroke of a pen, she granted the divorce – and changed the law to define a married couple as any two persons.

And this is just the beginning of the beginning! As noted by California Assemblyman Tim Leslie in his January 2004 article entitled “The Case Against Same-Sex Marriage” the fundamental nature of same sex relationships will ultimately lead to the breakdown of the family.

This weeks ruling in British Columbia just goes to prove that this truth is so self-evident that not even newly defined families are immune.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

True Budget Debate or Sad Sitcom?

Although most of the mainstream media reported on the Budget vote, it was interesting all of the interesting facts and details they left out of their reports. So I thought you might be interested in some of more relevant details not discussed.

First of all, it is important to remember that an overwhelming majority of the budget is not really being debated. Interestingly, the amount at dispute is so small in comparison to the overall budget that the Sacrament Bee quoted Democrat Assebmlywoman Jackie Goldberg had the nerve to say that it was just like the Governor’s budget.

We are, make no mistake, voting to support the governor's budget," said Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg, D-Los Angeles. "I find it odd and interesting that it is the Democratic Party that supports the governor's budget and not his own party."


If you remember, In a recent column entitled “$4 billion is the key to budget war” Dan Wietraub points out that the budget debate is really over a small percentage of overall spending.
No matter when it is signed into law, the next budget will total somewhere around $90 billion from the state's general fund, $110 billion from all state funds and about $170 billion in state and federal funds combined. The differences between the Republican governor and the Democrats who control the Legislature, meanwhile, can be boiled down to about $4 billion, perhaps less.

And sure enough he was right! The San Jose Mercury notes:

Depending on who does the counting, the Democrat-backed budget plan differs from Schwarzenegger's latest proposal by $1 billion, maybe $2 billion. Real money, to be sure, but only a sliver of the total.

Both versions give schools roughly $3 billion more than they get now -- although Democrats make available about $800 million more for general purposes. Both infuse $1.3 billion more for transportation projects and rely on the same level of borrowing. Neither raises taxes.

But what got very little reporting was that Legislators received the 700 page budget less than 24 hours before they were to vote on it.

"We should have time to look at a real budget," said Assemblyman Michael Villines, R-Clovis. "I've had the chance to go through - since it's been in print yesterday - maybe 200 pages."


As a matter of fact, just about every Democrat who spoke literally read directly from a sheet of paper containing the Democrat Caucus talking points.

But not included in those talking points were some very pertinent facts:

1. Although their budget did not include any new taxes, it also did not include $1.2 million in VLF revenue the Governor promised to return to local governments. Instead of paying of this debt, they want to spend the money on programs. So it’s not new debt, but we are still using debt to pay for programs we can’t afford.

2. While they did not propose any new taxes in the budget, immediately following the vote on the budget they put forth a proposal to significantly raise taxes on California’s highest income earners. NOT JUST THE RICH! But those who earn a lot of money.

3. The state’s commitment to fund STERS actually ended several years ago. But the state has continued to fund it anyway. So the $469 million that Democrats want to give to STRERS is above and beyond the state’s original commitment. This is fine if you have the money. The problem is that California doesn’t have the money.

4. Democrats also forget to mention the fact that their budget is adopted, California will spend about $700 million dollars more than under the Republican’s plan and does nothing to pay off outstanding debt.

5. They also conveniently leave out the fact that Republicans are also supportive of fully funding in home health services.

What took place yesterday, was not an honest vote and a real budget proposal. It was more like a poorly scripted sitcom where the Democrats had to read all their lines and the Absurdity of it all allowed Republicans to deliver all the punchlines.

"The spending addicts are back to score their fix once again," said Assemblyman Ray Haynes, R-Murrieta. "Just like the common street thief, you are going to justify the theft by saying the people you are taking it from are rich."

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Study Shows Vicente Fox Was Wrong! Illegals Taking Jobs Blacks Would do!

Last month Mexican President Vicente Fox made the statement that illegal immigrants “are doing jobs that not even blacks want to do there in the United States.” But a recent study by the Pew Hispanic Center proves that this is not the case.

According to the San Jose Mercury News:

Only 3 percent of the undocumented immigrants work in agriculture. The greatest numbers, 33 percent, work in the service industry.

The rest work in construction, production, installation and repair, sales and administration, transportation and material moving, and management and business.

This dispels the myth that these illegals are simply migrant farm workers, taking jobs that no one else wants. So this is not a question of trying to get Blacks to pick grapes, lettuce or (dare I say it) cotton. We are talking about jobs as maids, welders, carpenters, drivers mechanics, etc.

For Arnoldo Garcia, senior program associate for the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights in Oakland, the Pew report ``proves in a non-political way that undocumented immigrants are fulfilling the needs of the economy.''

How are they fulfilling the needs of the economy? By keeping wages artificially low. Why would a hotel hire a legal citizen as a maid for $10 an hour when he can get and illegal immigrant for $5? It is simple supply and demand. When you increase supply and demand stays the same, prices go down. And Mexico is flooding the market.

In reporting on the same study The LA Daily News points out:

One in every 11 people born in Mexico and still alive is a U.S. resident, and about half of these immigrants crossed the border illegally, according to a comprehensive report released Tuesday. In the Pew Hispanic Center study of immigration trends, analysts estimated that in March 2004 about 10.3 million immigrants from around the world were living in the United States without legal documents to be here -- some 24 percent of them in California. About 10.6 million people born in Mexico live in the U.S. -- about 5.9 million of them illegally.

And many of these are not uneducated, unskilled workers taking menial labor jobs.

One quarter of the country's 10.3 million illegal immigrants have some college education…

So let’s stop pretending that illegal immigrants are only taking the undesirable jobs. They are taking jobs that many Americans, especially unemployed Blacks would love to have.

Eat your words Vicente!

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Prolife Message Goes Hip Hop

As a big fan of Hip Hop and vocal opponent to the negative messages that the rap industry has sought to perpetuate, I am glad to see such a socially relevant issue being addressed by such a well know R&B artist.

Even if you don't like Rap you should check it out!

Below are the Lyrics to "Can I live? " by Nick Cannon.

Talking Ma
I know the situation is personal, but it something that has to be told

as I was making this beat you was all I could think about; you heard my voice

Yeah Just think Just Think, what if you could Just… Just blink your self away..
Just Just wait just pause for a second. Let me plead my case. Its the late 70's Huh
You seventeen huh. And having me that will ruin everything huh it’s a lot of angels waiting for their wings you see me in your sleep, so you can't kill your dreams 300 dollars that's the price of living, what?

Mommy, I don't like this clinic; hopefully you'll make the right decision and don't go though with the Knife Decision but it hard to make the right move when you in high school
how you have to work all day and take night school
hopping off da bus when the rain is pouring
What you want morning sickness or the sickness of mourning?

[Chorus]
I Will Always Be a part of you
Trust Your Soul Know His Heart Is True
If I Could Talk I Would Say To You

CAN I LIVE …. CAN I LIVE? (Repeat)

I am a child of the King ain't no need to go fear me and I see the flowing tears so know that you hear me when I move in your womb that's me being scaring cause who knows where my future holds

yo the truth be told you ain't told a soul yo you ain't even showing I just 2 moths old
through your clothes try to hide me, deny me went up 3 sizes
your pride got you lying saying ain't nothing but a migraine
it ain't surprising you not trying to be in WIC food lines

your friends look at you funny but look at you mommy; that's a life inside you, look at your tummy what is becoming ma I am Oprah bound you can tell he's a star from the Ultrasound
Our Spirits Connected Doors Open Now Nothing But Love And Respect Thanks For Holding Me Down She Let Me Live...[Chorus] I Will Always Be a part of you Trust Your Soul Know His Heart Is True

If I Could Talk I Would Say To You
CAN I LIVE
CAN I LIVE
I Will Always Be a part of you
Trust Your Soul Know His Heart Is True

Its uplifting for real y'all I ain't passing no judgment; ain't making no decisions; I am just telling y'all my story my love life. I love my mother for giving me life. We all need to appreciate life
a strong women that had to make a sacrifice. Thanks for listening. Mama thanks for listening


Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Governor Schwarzenegger Acknowledges the Power of Prayer

Fresno Mayor, Alan Autry prays for the upcoming special election

Since his election I like many others, have been praying for a godly leaders to speak into the life of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. I prayed that it would be someone who is not awed by the Governor’s star power and will speak honestly and openly to him about his faith. Well folks, I believe that our prayers have been answered…in the form of Fresno Mayor Alan Autry.

Mayor Autry was the keynote speaker and the Governor’s Annual Prayer Breakfast. He shared his heartfelt testimony. And in doing so, he demonstrated a genuineness that is rare in today’s political environment. But was most interesting was the testimony given by Governor Schwarzenegger in his follow up remarks.
As reported in the Sacramento Bee:

He told the crowd about kneeling on the floor of a City Hall office in Fresno to pray with Mayor Alan Autry in 2002, when Schwarzenegger was pushing his initiative for after-school programs.

"He says, 'Let's kneel down and let's ask the Lord to help us,' " Schwarzenegger recalled. "So I slowly kneeled down, and now he started praying, started praying for after-school programs, started praying for our children.

"I started praying, 'I hope no one comes through this door right now. Please, God, don't make someone come through this door right now and see us two kneeling here on the floor, on this hardwood floor.'

While comical, his comments also demonstrated an acknowledgement of the power of prayer. The Governor went on to share that Mayor Autry also prayed for him as he entered the 2003 recall election and that he believed that much of the success he had in both elections was a result of those prayers. He even closed by asking the Mayor to pray for the upcoming special election. Right there in front of everyone at the breakfast!

As I have said before, Governor Schwarzenegger may not be the Christian Conservative many of us wished he was. But he is a man with a good heart who appears to be headed in the right direction. And with a man like Alan Autry in his life, I feel confident that he will receive godly counsel. Let’s pray that this continues to be the case.

...Keep and eye on Mayor Alan Autry! I think we can expect big things from him!

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Was Howard Dean Right?

It is not often that find myself agreeing with DNC Chairman Howard Dean. But I have to admit, that his characterization of the GOP as a "white Christian party” is not easily dismissed.

(Click Here for More)

Convicted Democrat Politician Still Profits From His Crime

Never let it be said that crime doesn’t pay. It surely paid for one crooked politician. You Might remember Tom D’Alessio. He was one of New Jersey’s most powerful Democrat politicians until he was caught in an extortion, bribery and embezzling scandal. Well it looks like he’s up to his old tricks.

The New Jersey Star Ledger Reports:

Two months after he was released from federal prison after serving time for political corruption charges in 1998, the former Essex County Executive set up a charitable foundation.

D'Alessio called it the Evergreen Fund and has bankrolled it with more than $1.8 million of the nearly $2 million that was left in his campaign fund.

Last year, the foundation reported it gave out $37,750 in contributions of $500 or so to dozens of organizations like the March of Dimes, the United Way and the Boy Scouts. It also paid D'Alessio an $81,708 salary as executive director, leased a $45,665 Mercedes-Benz for him and purchased a $432,000 luxury condominium on Marco Island along Florida's Gulf Coast.

And it was all perfectly legal.

But this is nothing new for D'Alessio.

D'Alessio, once among the state's most powerful Democrats, was indicted in 1992 on charges of siphoning funds from his campaign accounts to pay for a trip to Aruba and using money raised from supporters for personal investments and real estate ventures. A jury two years later found him innocent on those counts, but convicted him of extortion, bribery and money laundering in accepting a $59,000 bribe from a Florida garbage-hauling company. He was sentenced to a 46-month federal prison term.

And what do you think the IRS is going to do about it? According to Trent Stamp, executive director of Charity Navigator in Mahwah, which evaluates philanthropic groups they probably won’t do a thing.

"They gave tax-exempt status to a convicted felon in the first place," he said. "Why do you think they will come back and scrutinize the operations of that organization now?"

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

California Assisted Suicide Bill is Brought Back to Life

That’s Right! Thanks to the legislature’s “gut and amend” process physician assisted suicide is alive and well. All of the language of AB 654 (Berg) , which failed to get enough votes to pass the Assembly, has been put into AB 651 (Levine) which did pass the Assembly and is currently in the Senate.

AB 651 As introduced, dealt with disease management, but the amended version of AB 651 is the reincarnated version of the California Compassionate Choices Act. My guess is that the author, Assemblyman Levine believes that it will have an easier time passing in the Senate.

The good news is that this bill will have to come back to the Assembly again for passage. However, passage in the Senate may be enough to convince some Assembly Democrat holdouts to get on board.

In an interesting twist, a bill that would have ended the gut and amend process AB 92 authored by Assemblyman Tim Leslie (R-Tahoe) was put to death in it’s first committee hearing.

Apparently, it’s ok to kill people, but it’s not ok to kill bills that kill people.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Was Ice Cream Truck Bill Designed to Aide in War on Terror?

My buddy Jedd forwarded the following to me from The Roundup:

Apology time? Way back in March, Gov. Schwarzenegger derided the Legislature for not engaging on serious issues. "But it does look like the legislators, facing the deadline for filing legislation, did find time to introduce bills on cosmetic surgery for dogs, the name of our baseball team in Anaheim and where ice cream trucks can park," the governor said. The latter referred to AB 1148 by Lodi Assemblyman Alan Nakanishi, which would make it a crime for ice cream trucks to double park.

The bill never even got a hearing, but now that a Lodi ice cream truck driver has been arrested with suspected ties to al-Qaida, it does beg the question: Did Nakanishi know something we didn't? Maybe AB 1148 really is a matter of vital national security!

We smell a gut and amend coming...


What I want to know is: What did Nakanishi know and when did he know it?

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

City Should Consider Patriot Act Resolution “Thank You for Ignoring Our last Patriot Act Resolution!”

I know…Wishful thinking!

But in light of the recent discovery of a terrorist sleeper cell in the Sacramento suburb of Lodi, I hope that this incident has woken up all those folks who crowded the Sacramento City Council chambers a few years ago to decry the Patriot Act.

On November 14, 2003 the Sacramento Bee reported:

With the Sacramento City Council chambers packed to capacity by opponents of the USA Patriot Act, council members voted 8-1 Thursday to approve a resolution against the controversial anti-terrorism law.

The vote came after two hours of comment, mostly from groups opposed to the Patriot Act, and makes Sacramento the 209th community nationwide to approve a resolution against the law, which passed in the weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

I was there. The discussion was passionate and civil. However, there was very little discussion of the policing powers granted under the Patriot Act.

It was not mentioned that most of the powers granted in the act were already available to law enforcement to investigate organized crime. This legislation only expanded their ability to use them in investigation of terrorism. There was also little discussion of the fact that of 21,000 reported potential abuses of these powers, not one could be substantiated by the bipartisan congressional panel assigned to investigate them.

Robbie Waters was the only member of the council to speak against the resolution, saying that he had been given no evidence to show that the act has been used improperly or has infringed on anyone's civil liberties.

"In two years, there's not been a single court case holding where the act has been abused," Waters said

And for those of you who are unaware, the Patriot Act expires at the end of this year and must be renewed. I hope that those who opposed it’s passage a few years ago will keep in mind what could have happened here in Sacramento, had it not been for the Patriot Act.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Was Howard Dean Right?

It is not often that find myself agreeing with DNC Chairman Howard Dean. But I have to admit, that his characterization of the GOP as a "white Christian party” is not easily dismissed.

First of all, is the Republican Party White? Any objective onlooker would have to agree that the ethnic diversity of our party does not reflect the diversity of America. All too often, as I attend party events, I am one of few, if not the only Black in the room. There are generally a few more Latinos and Asians. But for the most part, the Republican Party is pretty white. But that does not mean that our party is not diverse.

We have diversity of ideas. In the Republican Party you can have divergent viewpoints on some issues and still be in leadership. You can be pro-life or pro-choice (President Bush vs. California Governor Schwarzenegger). You can be for or against affirmative action (Colin Powell vs. Ward Connerly). You can stand for traditional marriage or support giving rights to same-sex unions (Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlich, Jr. vs. Vermont Governor Jodi Rell). But in the Democrat party unless you support abortion on demand, racial preferences, same-sex marriage and a whole host of other liberal policy initiatives; you will be silenced. Democrats only believe in the image of diversity, Republicans believe in diversity of ideas.

Secondly, is the Republican Party Christian? The GOP was founded on the same principles as our nation; that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. These principles find their roots in Christian faith and biblical scripture.

John Quincy Adams once stated, “Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?”

So if being Christian means that we support the Christian Principles upon which our nation was founded, then Yes. We are Christian. But the real question to Mr. Dean and other Democrats is “Why aren’t you?”

As George Washington said in his farewell address “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars…”

So in the final analysis, Dean’s generalization of the GOP may be correct in image, but not in substance. We are a party of principle first and image second. And unlike their Democrat counterparts, Republican leaders are not interested in making meaningless political statements to appease a few special interest groups. They seek to make a meaningful difference in the lives of all Americans.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Al-Jazeera Says No To Airing Violence Against Animals...But Beheading Of Infidels Still Ok

Al-Jazeera, the middle-eastern television network famous for airing beheadings of kidnap victims has refused to air and an ad by the PETA. I guess liberals are not the only ones who value animals more than people.

According to WorldNet Daily:

The sheep, raised for wool, are later shipped alive to the Middle East for slaughter. The footage shows lambs partially skinned alive during a procedure called "mulesing." Sheep are repeatedly kicked as they are loaded onto what PETA calls "death ships." Other sheep are are shown being dragged and kicked in the head as their throats are slit while other sheep watch.

Who is the biggest hypocrite in this story?

PETA because they would seek to broadcast a commercial “decrying the violent slaughter of innocent animals” on a network that broadcasts the violent slaughter of innocent human beings.

Or

Al-Jazeera because they refuse to broadcast a commercial “decrying the violent slaughter of innocent animals” on a network that broadcasts the violent slaughter of innocent human beings.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Is There And Alternative To Affirmative Action? Yes!

Some low income San Jose area schools have seen a dramatic increase in college attendance rates in the last few years. And it wasn't because of race-based set asides and preferences.

It was because Student from San Jose State University worked in these schools to help create a college going culture.

The San Jose Mercury News notes the following:

Six years ago, a group of San Jose State academics and master's students adopted the entire seventh-grade class from three lower-income San Jose schools. They had one goal: to see if intensive tutoring and mentoring would result in more kids going to college.
Even they were amazed by just how many more. The number of graduates headed to four-year universities from Lincoln, Gunderson and San Jose High Academy shot up 89 percent compared with last year, to 340 students.

Too often the administrators of affirmative action programs have focused on the wrong things. First, they targeted students based on their race, as if it were the only factor as to why these students were not getting admitted to college. Socio-economic status took a backseat to their ethnic background.

The second misstep was to provide admittance to students without proper preparation. And as noted in a previous blog “Racial Preferences…Help or Hindrance?” this practice inevitably would set these students up to fail.

Well the folks in San Jose State seem to have found the answer.

San Jose Unified School District has made it a ``vital priority,'' Tweten said, for teachers to instill a ``college-bound culture'' in their students. Already, the district is one of the few to require graduating students to take all of the classes needed to apply for four-year colleges -- whether or not they plan to pursue a degree.

So much effort is going into low performing student populations that the needs of potentially college bound students are not being met. But these folks are actually taking the time to see that all students (including those on the bubble) are actually prepared to be successful in college. The GEAR UP program, they are targeting those who might fall through the cracks. And while they’re not using race as a factor, I’ll bet that more ethnic minorities from these schools will benefit.

"Only 20 percent of counselors' time is devoted to helping kids learn about going to college,'' Tweten said. ``That means kids are practically getting close to nothing in understanding the complexities of making college a choice and how to go about doing that.”

Unfortunately though, state funded programs like GEAR UP are in danger of loosing their funding. Under the Governor’s proposed budget, such “outreach programs” will not receive funding. More specifically, the dollar amount equal to their funding last year was eliminated from the Higher Education portion of the budget. And ultimately, it will be up to the two state college systems (UC & CSU) to decide if they will cut these programs or continue to fund them and find other places to make cuts.

If as conservatives, we are truly about creating equality of opportunity then we have to support academic preparation programs like GEAR UP. They steer students to college who otherwise would never have considered it a possibility otherwise. And they do it without race-based set asides. But they seek out students who are interested in success and prepare them to be successful.

So as budget negotiations ramp up, let’s encourage Republicans and Democrats to steer a few buck to save these programs. I believe it would be a wise investment in our state’s future.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Definition Of Insanity- Giving A Liberal Your Checkbook

Definition of Insanity- Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. (Also See- Democratic Buget Prososals)

Last week, liberal newspapers up and down the state published editorials supporting Governor Schwarzenegger’s budget proposal. But that is not enough for the special interests and the Democrat controlled Legislature. They come up with their own plan!

An editorial in the Riverside Press Enterprise sums it up best:

The budget proposal that Assembly Democrats unveiled Tuesday would set California on a (familiar) road to fiscal disaster.

Tax increases and increased spending…that about sums up the Democratic Budget Proposal. All they have to offer is the same old tax and spend scheme that put us in debt in the first place.

In 1995-96, state income tax on stock options and capital gains -- mostly the province of the well-to-do -- brought in about $2 billion. By 2000-01, that revenue hit $17 billion, then fell to $5 billion two years later. By then California had committed the higher sum to ongoing programs, causing the state's current budget mess.

The Democrats in the legislature have refused to face the reality that California has a spending problem. Or rather, they have a spending problem! No matter how much money comes into the state coffers, they find a way to spend more. And they haven’t seen a government program they didn’t like. Unless of course a Republican proposes it.

But it is not as though they are incapable of saying “NO!” They’ve said “No” to fiscal accountability in schools. They’ve said “No” to any attempt to reform our state pension system, which has seen the cost to taxpayers go from $150 million to over $2.2 billion in the last five years. They have said “No” to allowing school districts to save millions of dollars by contracting out some nonacademic services. They even said “NO” to school textbooks that are over 200 pages! (See “Children Can’t Read? Get Rid of The Books!” )

They know how to say “No.” They just can’t seem to say it to the special interests.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

Earn $100 for Watching MTV!

I received the following email regarding a post from back in February “Sex And Nudity On MTV?...I'm Shocked!!!!”

This individual has made an interesting accusation, but an even more interesting offer I thought you might like to take them up on.

Craig,

You refer to your blog site as "Uncommon Sense" but perhaps it should be called "Uncommon Lies." I just came across a story you carried on Feb. 4 of this year, which claims there is nudity and sex on MTV. While it is true that there there are plenty of sexual situations and verbal sexual references on that cable channel, it stops right there. MTV does not, I repeat, does not show nudity. It censors out all nudity at all hours of the day, period.

Anyone who claims to have seen nudity on MTV is either lying or hallucinating. In fact, I'll issue a challenge to anyone who still thinks I'm wrong. I'll pay $100 each for every verifiable incident of nudity on MTV. Don't worry, I'm not risking anything by making this challenge. I've never had to pay out a dime on it and I never will.

To protect the integrity of your blog site, you should immediately disavow that story.

Regards,

Terry Mitchell
www.commenterry.com

This was my response:

Terry,

Thank you for your comments, however obtuse they may be.

The quote that I used was from the CBS News article on MTV. I even made it a point to link to the article. So I think your accusing me of lying is a bit of a reach.

Not that I have any problem disavowing CBS News, but if you sincerely have a problem with the accuracy of their story, take it up with Dan Rather…ugh… I mean CBS News.

But I will also say this, there is very little difference between showing a woman completely nude and showing her in thong and a bra or with her exposed nipples distorted using computer graphics. And anyone who thinks there is a significant difference is either in complete denial, seriously needs glasses or is a poster child for the coarsening of our culture.

There is a reason why those in the rap industry have dubbed these women “Video Hoes.” Their provocative displays denigrate women, especially those who are professional dancers. These talented artists are being replaced in today’s music videos with less talented women who are willing to get as naked as legally possible on national TV in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator of modern culture.

Now as much as I disagree with it, I support their right to this! But I don’t think it should be on TV at all times of the day. AND IT IS!

And if MTV, VH1 and BET have a right to televise it, then I have a right to call my cable company and complain. Just as you have a right to conatct me and complain about my Blog.

You get an A for effort. But an F for substance.

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

It’s Not About Marriage. It’s About Acceptance.

In yesterday’s debate on same-sex marriage, California Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy made what was probably the most profound statement I have ever heard from him. He exposed the effort to define marriage as nothing more than an attempt to gain acceptance.

The San Jose Mercury News quoted Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg as she attempted to characterize those who do not support same-sex marriage as bigots:

``Unless you are willing to look me in the face and say that I am not a human being just as you are, you have no right to deny me the access to marriage in this state or anywhere else,''

Please note that Ms. Goldberg does not mention the rights, she is seeking the acceptance as a human being. This sentiment was echoed in the committee hearings where same-sex couples testified one after another that government approval of their unions would hopefully aid them in gaining the acceptance of their families.

What Ms. Goldberg does not understand is that those of us who support traditional marriage love and accept her as a human being. And despite our moral objections to her lifestyle choice, we do not seek to outlaw her right to love or be intimate with whomever she wishes. What we object to is being forced to honor that lifestyle. And that is exactly what we would be forced to do if our government put it’s official stamp of approval on it.

Dennis Mountjoy was speaking for most Californians when he stood up to defend, not just marriage, but traditional moral values.

``What the homosexuals in the state of California and in the United States want is not rights, they want acceptance,'' said Mountjoy. ``They want my children to be told that homosexuality is OK, that it is natural. I'm here to tell you that it is not OK and it is not natural and I will not have my children taught that.''

And this is not a right-wing, religious extremist, Republican point of view. As a matter of fact, 13 Democrats either voted against AB 19 or at the very least refused to support it. Democrat Assemblyman Alberto Torrico made it clear that this was not as much about civil rights, but about what is right.

``I'm going against part of me that's been a civil rights champion all my life,'' said Torrico, who did not vote on the bill. ``But it's all about what I think God wants for us, and I can't get around that.''

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

California Says No to Same Sex Marriage... This Year!

AB 19 (Leno) came up for a vote this evening. All of the Republicans and even a few Democrats stood up for marriage.

I cannot tell you how difficult it was to watch the debate and not be saddened by the fact that such a debate should even be necessary.

Assemblyman Tom Harmon received a legal opinion from the California Legislative Counsel stating that AB 19 violates state law, because any measure that seeks to amend or substitute a measure passed by initiative must also be passed by initiative. Mr. Leno was also advised of this opinion and still pushed this bill.

Sacramento Assemblyman Dave Jones stood up and declared that Proposition 22 only spoke to marriages performed outside of the state of California, which is a complete lie.

In an affidavit by the author of Prop 22 it was noted that the language was constructed with the intention of outlawing the validation of same-sex marriages in California or recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states. Thus the language “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid (addressing in state marriages) or recognized (addressing out of state marriages) in California.” And Assemblyman Ray Haynes did a masterful job of pointing this out.

As of 6:30pm the initial vote was 35 in favor and 37 against with 8 members not voting. The bill was put on call, to give members who have not yet voted a chance to vote. This means that unless Democrats are successful in getting the support of 6 of the 8 members who have not voted, AB 19 will fail.

Good Job!!!!!

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com

California Democrats Declare War on the Rich! Again...

It was only a matter of time before Assembly Democrats proposed fixing California’s budget woes by increasing taxes on the state’s highest income earners. But it is always interesting to see how they try to put an new spin on the same old failed rhetoric.

Tax the Rich!

The Sacramento Bee is reporting:

So for the first time in years, legislative Democrats are unified in flatly calling for tax increases to help balance the budget.

Specifically, Núñez said, they want to restore two top income tax brackets.

The highest earners now pay a 9.3 percent state income tax. Under the Democrats' plan, married couples earning from about $285,000 to about $570,000 would pay 10 percent, while those who make more than that would pay 11 percent.

Now keep in mind, this is on top of the 1% tax levied on the rich to pay for mental health. And don’t forget about the 1% tax that Meathead Rob Riener is pushing to pay for universal preschool. Are you starting to see the pattern?

Democrats don’t want to live within their means. And they know that the average taxpayer isn’t willing to pay more to cover their spending spree. So as usual they go after their favorite ATM machine…The Rich.

Unfortunately though, there is noting more portable than a rich man and his money. And as we continue to increase taxes on high income earners to pay for government programs, they will eventually leave.

For example, when Tiger Woods signed his $90 million deal several years ago he went from being a legal resident of California to being a legal resident of Florida. This move saved him about $4 million a year.

I am not saying that this one proposal will cause a mass exodus by the rich. But this “Tax the Rich” mindset will. One percent here and one percent there will eventually add up. And as it does, those whom we are targeting to pay for all these new programs will get tired of being soaked.

Then guess who will be left holding the Bag?

Craig DeLuz

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com