Public humiliation for mail thief. 9th Circuit gets it right for once!

A man who was convicted in 2003 of stealing mail was sentenced to, among other things, 100 hours of standing outside the post office wearing a sandwich board that says “I have stolen mail. This is my punishment.” It doesn’t look like the Supreme Court will be overturning the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on this one.

The Chicago Sun Times is reporting:

The Supreme Court is making sure that Shawn Gementera will be wearing his punishment for stealing mail. Literally.

The high court rejected Gementera's appeal Monday of a lower court's sentence that the San Francisco resident stand outside a post office for 100 hours wearing a sandwich board that reads: ''I have stolen mail. This is my punishment.''

In February 2003, Judge Vaughn Walker of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco added the sandwich-board penalty to Gementera's sentence of two months in prison and three years of supervised release.

And needless to say Gementera’s attorney petitioned the Supreme Court to throw out the sentence, claiming that it is cruel and unusual. I’ll give him this… It is unusual!

Craig DeLuz

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

Ballot Box Budgeting…Tax hikes & increased govt. spending coming to a ballot near you!

As the California Legislature proves itself to be more and more irrelevant, liberals have decided to take their tax and spend agenda to the ballot box. Unfortunately, recent history has proven that voters are willing to approve increased government spending as long as they believe that someone else is footing the bill.

The LA Times is reporting:

Actor and director Rob Reiner has collected more than 1 million signatures for a proposition that would increase taxes on the wealthy to pay for universal preschool. If validated by elections officials, the names would be more than enough to place the measure on the June primary ballot.

"We're building a very broad coalition and we're going about this in a very responsible way and we're not trying to shove something down people's throats by fiat," Reiner said, contrasting his proposal with the ones Schwarzenegger and his allies devised this year.

Meanwhile, two groups are gathering signatures for competing initiatives that would raise the state's cigarette tax by $1.50 a pack, to $2.37. That would be higher than in any other state except Rhode Island ($2.46) and New Jersey ($2.40), according to the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, an advocacy group in Washington, D.C. A spokesman for Philip Morris USA said such an increase in California would be excessive.

But the potential revenue from such a tax — about $1.5 billion a year — is being eyed.

But Democrats are not alone in their desire to take increased spending to the voters. In and effort to increase the investment in the state’s deteriorating infrastructure, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is hoping to put a massive infrastructure bond on the 2006 ballot.

Schwarzenegger and Democratic leaders also hope to place on the ballot a gigantic public works project bond to repair the state's sagging infrastructure. The measure would probably be the largest in California history — totaling in the tens of billions of dollars — and could lead lawmakers to put off for the second time a $10-billion bond for a high-speed rail line that is slated for the November general election. A $600-million library improvement bond initiative scheduled for the June primary is less likely to be affected.

While I agree that we must increase our investment infrastructure, I am always leery about going into debt to do so; especially considering that we are in this mess because the legislature has repeatedly taken the revenues from the gas tax (which is supposed to fund roads and transportation) and spent it on a host of other programs (for which the revenues were not intended.)

But even more distressing, I believe, is this fast moving trend toward ballot box budgeting. It is an outcropping of three key dysfunctions that exists in our governing process in California.

1. The current legislative districts promote partisanship and discourage true governance. Compromise on substantive legislation has taken a back seat to partisan rancor and divisive rhetoric.

2. The sizable contributions of public employee labor unions have given them a sizable amount of undo influence over Democrat policymakers. The result has been a dangerous conflict of interest that has representatives of public employee labor unions sitting on both sides the negotiating table when it comes to government spending on their salaries and benefits.

3. Points 1 & 2 combined with the advent of technology and increased political spending has made the initiative process a much more attractive option for interest groups who would rather play on the emotional fears of a relatively under-informed and seemingly unengaged electorate.

I wish I could say that these trends were changing. But the recent failure of initiatives in the special election that would have addressed some of these issues demonstrates that the electorate is at least for the time being, not willing to address these issues. Instead, we have chosen to continue allowing the inmates to run the asylum.

Craig DeLuz

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

Happy Day After Thanksgiving!

Ok... Am I the only one who got dragged from the bed at 4:30 am to hit the 5 am sales? I admitt that I do like to shop. But I usually prefer to wake up first!

let's hear your most interesting post turkey day sales stories!

Craig DeLuz

Mobile Messaging via Treo
(Please forgive the typos!)

Red States give generously. Blue States give generously of other people's money!

Liberals would have us believe that they are much more caring and giving than conservatives. Well the recently released 2005 Generosity Index blows that theory out of the water. As a matter of fact, the top ranking for a Blue State in this survey is 26th!

The Gay Patriot writes:

Well, well, well….

The 2005 Generosity Index is out from the Catalogue for Philanthropy (h/t - Polipundit)
Turns out the states with the least amount to give are the ones that give the most. Topping the list are three of our poorest states in “having” but richest in “giving.”

Mississippi, Arkansas, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee
You have to get to #22 in the Generosity Index to find your first Blue State — New York.. all the way down at # 26.

Where are our the most affluent (and Blue-est) states of the USA in the Generosity Index?

Connecticut - 45th, New Jersey - 48th, Massachusetts - 49th, Maryland - 32nd, and New York - 26th.

When you ask me what I mean by “limousine liberals”…. this is what I mean. The same people that want to keep their private beaches to themselves and their ocean views without windmills for energy conservation. Do as I say, not as I do.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Craig DeLuz

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

Conservative kids are healthy kids!

Three out of four school age children in California are out of shape. this according to a statewide physical fitness report card just released. Interestingly, the local counties with the healthiest students are the most conservative politically.

So much for conservatives being "Fat-Cats".

According to the Sacramento Bee:

Locally, Sacramento County scored below the state averages; Placer and El Dorado counties exceeded the state norms; and Yolo and Yuba counties were above average in two grades but slightly below in one.

Statewide, 1.37 million students in fifth, seventh and ninth grades were tested on body fat, flexibility, upper-body strength, aerobic capacity, abdominal strength and trunk extension.

First of all, it is sad that our children are unable to meet these very minimum standards of physical fitness. It is symptomatic of a culture that uses the computer, video games and the television to baby sit their children. It is also the result of public school system educrats who have been scaling down on physical education instruction for years.

Craig DeLuz

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

Should California Republicans Become "Democrat-Lite"?

Everyone has a take on why Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s reform initiatives took such a beating at the poles during the recent special election. At the center of the discussion seems to be the age old debate as to how the Republican Party can attract non-traditional Republican voters and expand the party’s base.

Many Republican leaders in California are guided by the belief that the only way to win is to abandon our socially conservative principles. Others like myself, believe that it is not our principles that must change, but how we message our values and the sincerity of our efforts to work with and for those who traditionally have not voted Republican.

RNC Chairman Ken Mehlman puts it best in this overlooked article in the San Francisco Chronicle back on August 7, 2005 :

"We don't have to choose between motivating our base and bringing new faces and new voices into the party,'' said GOP Chairman Ken Mehlman, who was elevated to the post after successfully managing President Bush's 2004 re- election campaign.

"We talk about a compassionate conservative philosophy that not only unites Republicans, but attracts support among discerning Democrats and among independents.''

Meeting in this traditionally Democratic, working-class city, Republicans spent hours talking about how to reach out to new constituents: blacks, Latinos, Asians, Catholics and women.

Rather than conceal their conservative extremes, party leaders heartily embraced Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, the guest of honor, who told fellow Republicans that his traditional values message "is a good solid message for every community in America.''

As Democrats struggle with their positions on guns, gays and God in order to satisfy disparate wings of their party and lure swing voters, Republicans are promoting conservative values as a way to enhance their electoral standing.

Looking to expand what already is its strongest hold on power in nearly eight decades, the Republican Party sees its strong traditional values message, coupled with the failures of the welfare state and the Democratic Party's rigidity, as the keys to attracting minorities and other new members.

"We're not asking Republicans to become more liberal to lure new voters into the party,'' Mehlman told the delegates.

This is the strategy that helped Republicans re-elect a President with dropping approval numbers, expand their majorities in both the House and the Senate, as well as increase the number of Republican governors across the country.

The discussion about the party's future came at a time of historic strength for Republicans.

The GOP has more seats in Congress than at any time since 1929, when Herbert Hoover was president. Republicans hold the governor's seat in 28 states, including the nation's four largest. And for the first time since pollsters began asking party affiliations, roughly the same number of people identify themselves as Republicans as Democrats.

In Pennsylvania this strategy has resulted in the election of Senator Rick Santorum, who has been one of the most consistent conservative voices in the upper house. It has also been a key influence in the candidacy of former NFL great Lynn Swan for Governor of this swing state.

In Ohio, it is conservative messaging to broad audiences that helped Republicans pass a constitutional amendment to protect marriage, elect a Black Secretary of State, Ken Blackwell, who is also the leading candidate for Governor in the 2006 election. An let us not forget that it was Ohio that was the key win that put President Bush over the top in his re-election bid.

The fact is, conservative values reach across racial and cultural lines. It transcends socio-economic status and even political parties. And the reason we are having problems expanding our base here in California is because party leadership has decided that conservatism won’t work here.

Santorum's politics are not popular with all Republicans, particularly in more socially moderate states such as California.

Duf Sundheim, chairman of the California Republican Party, acknowledged that Santorum's brand of conservatism differs from his own. At the same time, he said Santorum's prominence has no effect in California.

"Our fortunes between now and '06 are more tied to (Republican) Gov. (Arnold) Schwarzenegger than any external factor,'' Sundheim said.

Unfortunately, what Sundheim doesn’t understand is that our success at the ballot box will not be determined by “Star Power” . It is not the popularity of Senator Santorum or Governor Schwarzenegger that will determine our part’s success, but it is our values, how we communicate them and how we translate them into public policy that will be the key to winning at the ballot box.

One only need look at the special election to realize that basing our strategy on the popularity of any one man is a bad idea. I wrote in a recent post “Are Conservatives to Blame?”

From the very beginning, Republicans and Democrats made it clear that this election was a referendum on Governor Schwarzenegger. Republicans were hoping to ride popularity and “star power” to victory, just as they had in the 2003 Recall and the 2004 elections. Democrats on the other hand used it as an opportunity to get away from discussing the actual merits of the Governor’s reforms and instead make his personal integrity the issue. Needless to say the Democrat’s plan was much more effective.

Those of us who have been working in the grass roots trying to expand the base of the Republican Party understand that it will take more than a high profile media campaign to expand our party.

"I don't go into the community with a big 'R' on my chest, because the door will be slammed in my face,'' said David Morgan, president of the California Black Republican Council. Instead, Morgan described a GOP event with hip-hop music and free hot dogs and hamburgers, in which he registered 40 new African American voters.

Pam Olsen, a Florida pastor, said she resisted telling her congregants "vote for George W. Bush.'' But she felt comfortable telling them that "God is pro-life,'' and said she saw many black pastors get involved in helping Bush because of their opposition to same-sex marriage.

What is attracting these new Republican voters is the willingness of Republicans to come to where they are; understand their issues; and communicate how our common conservative values can produce societal and public policy solutions to the challenges they face.

We have a lot of heavy lifting to do to expand our party here in California. And if we are to be successful, it will not be as some sort of "Democrat-Lite" party. "All the liberal values without the annoying tax increases." It will be because we have committed the resources necessary to build relationships with diverse voters and have focused our message on shared values of family, opportunity and freedom as it applies to all Californians.

Craig DeLuz

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

Sacto Dan was wrong. But Senator Dave Cox was out of line.

Normally, I am not one to get in the mix of someone else’s Kool-Aide. But I could not let this unwarranted personal attack on my good friend and fellow Western Alliance member go without comment.

In his post Republican State Senator Cox Backs Mileage Tax Sacto Dan incorrectly states that the Senator is in support of an effort to impliment a new tax on Californians based on the number of miles they drive each year. He uses as the basis for his assertion the following article published inSenator Cox’s November monthly newsletter.

Financing Transportation Infrastructure

For several years now, experts in transportation finance have been talking about the antiquated way we finance transportation infrastructure, both roads and transit. Basically the problem is that we rely on a combination of sales and gasoline taxes to provide funds, but the taxes do not keep up with inflation -- especially in the cost of construction of transportation facilities -- or with the increased fuel efficiency of cars. It also makes no sense if we decide that we want to reduce the use of fossil fuels such as gasoline to improve our air quality.

I recently read an interview with Professor Martin Wachs of U.C Berkeley, a respected expert on transportation issues. He is the former Director of the Institute of Transportation Studies. Professor Wachs points out that in order to increase transportation funds, we currently are in the position of advocating for increased sales of gasoline. He advocates a switch to a more direct user fee based on the number of vehicle miles driven by each vehicle registered in the state. There are technologies being tested which would report a vehicle's miles driven and collect a fee while not maintaining a record of overall usage. This would satisfy privacy concerns. He also advocates the use of High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes, which would create additional highway lanes and charge for their usage based on the time of day.

The leaders in the Legislature are talking about ways to increase funds for our state's infrastructure needs. There will be large bond proposals introduced in the Legislature early next year.

I am interested in your reaction to these types of proposals. Should we sell more bonds? Should we raise gas or sales taxes? Or should we consider more innovative approaches? Send me your thoughts on the different methods of financing this critical need.

Now in the Senator’s defense, nowhere in the article does it state that he is in support of such a tax. However, it is important to note that the article offers only one side of the argument on this issue. If the Senator was truly seeking the opinion of his constitutents on this matter, shouldn’t he have presented a more balanced view?

What I appreciate about Sacto Dan’s blog is that he is not a political insider or profesional public policy commentator. He is your average Joe, working stiff who shares his views from that very same perspective. And I am willing to bet that if what Dan got from this article is that Dave Cox was in support of the Mileage Tax, he is not alone.

After reading this article, I can see how Dan would summize that the Senator would be insupport of the Mileage Tax. But it was wrong to state that the Senator was in favor of such a tax without facts to back it up. Perhaps a better title for the post would have been “Does Republican State Senator Cox Back a Mileage Tax?”

Keeping in mind that Senator Dave Cox has a fairly well established record as taxpayer advocate, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on this question. But the obvious lack of divergent viewpoints in the article is enough to warrant asking the question. And Dan should have done just that... asked the question instead of stating an assumption.

But to personally attack Sacto Dan the way the Senator did on the Eric Houge show was petty and beneath him. He could have offered clarification without the insults. Just as Dan should have given the Senator the benefit of the doubt, I believe that the Senator should have offered the same deference Sacto Dan corrected his error and as President of the Western Alliance, I feel it is my place to state for the record that I believe it is time for the Senator to do the same by publically appoligizing for his persnal attack on a faithful Republican who made an honest mistake.

Craig DeLuz

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

Newdow at it again… Announces lawsuit to remove “In God We Trust” from currency.

We all knew it was coming and here it is. Michael Newdow’s has officially announced his most recent attempt to remove God from the public square.

KCBS News is reporting:

Michael Newdow said Sunday that he planned to file a federal lawsuit this week asking for the removal of the national motto, "In God We Trust," from U.S. coins and dollar bills. He claims it's an unconstitutional endorsement of religion and "excludes people who don't believe in God."

I for one am glad that Michael Newdow is doing what he is doing. For years the Anti-God left has lurked in the shadows, slowly but surly undermining the principles on which this nation was founded. And they have been very effective in their efforts to take over our judicial system, which was at one time based on Judeo Christian Principles and Natural Law and replaced this foundation with a theology of Secular Humanism.

But what Newdow is doing is putting a public face on this assault. Additionally, he is forcing us to have the long overdue public and legal debate as to whether or not we are and should remain a nation whose identity and societal standards are based in Judeo Christian principles; and whether we should acknowledge as much.

The Bible says “Blessed is a Nation whose god is the Lord.” It’s time to find out how blessed we are.

Craig DeLuz

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

Are Conservatives to Blame?

Sacramento morning talk show host (and my good friend) Eric Hogue spent much of last week on a tirade blaming conservatives for not showing up to support Governor Schwarzenegger’s reform initiatives. Well with all due respect to my good friend, the facts tell a much different story.

In his blog post entitled California's Black Tuesday- What happened to the 'turnout' in conservative counties..? Eric writes:

If conservatives weren't interested in the Gov's propositions, then what's the excuse for allowing the historic proposition defending 'parents rights' and slowing death in the womb? We still had to pull teeth to get the conservative voters to the polls.

The statewide average turnout was near 42%. Most of the Northern Conservative Counties performed well, like Placer County (52%), and El Dorado County (51%).
Once again, we are scratching our heads over Orange County (38%), Imperial County (30%), San Bernardino County (36%), Stanislaus County (30%) and Riverside County (37%); renowned conservative counties with very low turnout to support the governor.

Nearly "one million register voters" in Orange County did not vote Tuesday.

Liberal counties like Marin County (36%), Monterey County (36%) and Alameda County (41%) under-performed as well. Nearly "2.5 million registered voters" in Los Angeles County didn't vote. People were telling me on the show today that the conservative vote did perform on this ballot. If that is true, then 'a conservative good showing' cannot trump the liberal's simplest efforts. If that is true, we (conservatives) are in serious trouble for the future.

So let’s take a deeper look at the numbers!

According the Secretary of State’s Office, the 10 counties with the most registered voters (in order) are:

Los Angeles 3,842,887
Orange 1,491,009
San Diego 1,383,513
Riverside 776,962
Santa Clara 762,551
San Bernardino 753,616
Alameda 704,036
Sacramento 629,847
Contra Costa 492,656
San Francisco 427,539

In six of these counties, Democrats outnumber Republicans (Los Angeles, Santa Clara, Alameda, Sacramento, Contra Costa and San Francisco) and total about 6.9 million voters. In four of these counties Republicans outnumber Democrats (Orange, San Diego Riverside and San Bernardino) and total 4.4 million voters. As a matter of fact, the number of voters in the Democrat controlled Los Angeles County alone is more that the top three Republican counties.

Now let’s compare these to the counties with the greatest number of voters who actually turned out to vote (in order):

Los Angeles 1,575,665
San Diego 640,499
Orange 573,340
Santa Clara 340,787
Alameda 302,348
Riverside 287,827
San Bernardino 273,370
Sacramento 269,372
Contra Costa 244,206
Ventura 179,613

As you can see, the counties are almost identical the ones on the previous list. The only difference is that Republican leaning Ventura County has swapped places with San Francisco County (which happens to be 11th on this list). And once again the number of actual voters out number those is in the top three Republican counties (San Diego, Orange and Riverside) put together.

What these numbers show is that contrary to Hogue’s assertions, turnout in large Republican Counties was about what it should have been. When you actually look at the numbers, the number of voters who turned out in large Republican counties was proportional to the number of registered voters in those counties. Was turnout as good as we would have hoped? No, but it was no worse than should have been expected.

In addition, Eric refers to Imperial County (54% Democrat to 27% Republican) and Stanislaus County (40% Democrat to 42% Republican) as “renowned conservative counties…” According to what numbers?

Then he goes on to link to an article by Dan Schnur, a moderate who was a key advisor to former California Governor Pete Wilson, and refer to it as additional proof that conservatives were to blame for the failure of the special election.

In his piece “Governor, You Win California By Being...You!” Schnur states:

With the benefit of hindsight, an initiative package that included measures that appealed to both the conservative and moderate sides of his wide-ranging constituency would have been much more consistent with the Arnold they voted for in the recall campaign. Paycheck protection, in other words, looks much less threatening if it’s paired with a reconstituted ban on off-shore oil drilling. And budget reform would have been balanced nicely by a companion initiative on early childhood education or health care. Could the unions have demonized a governor campaigning for kids and coastal clean-up? Perhaps, but it would have been a much, much harder sell.

It sounds to me like he is saying that the Governor didn’t do enough during the campaign to reach across the isle or to entice swing voters to support his agenda. And to a certain degree he is right.

From the very beginning, Republicans and Democrats made it clear that this election was a referendum on Governor Schwarzenegger. Republicans were hoping to ride popularity and “star power” to victory, just as they had in the 2003 Recall and the 2004 elections. Democrats on the other hand used it as an opportunity to get away from discussing the actual merits of the Governor’s reforms and instead make his personal integrity the issue. Needless to say the Democrat’s plan was much more effective.

They accused the Governor of breaking his promises to schools and cutting education. They charged him with excessive fundraising; declaring that he was filling his campaign coffers with special interest money. They made it look like he was personally attacking teachers, firefighters and nurses. And they were successful in beating down his approval rating amongst all voters; conservative and swing voters alike.

But it was the conservatives who stood up for him. Senator Tom McClintock traveled the entire state pushing Prop. 76, the Governor’s “Live Within Our Means Initiative”. Assemblymen Ray Haynes and Tim Leslie, arguably the two most conservative members of the legislature wrote editorial after editorial defending everything from the Governor’s budget to his reform agenda. As a matter of fact, Tim Leslie’s was the only legislative district that delivered on the Governor’s agenda 100%.

But having said all that, there is plenty blame to go around. Moderates, conservatives, legislators, party leaders, activists and yes even the Governor’s administration dropped the ball in their own way. Rather than looking to blame others, each of us should take a look at how we could have done better; realizing that next time we will have to do better.

This special election has brought together an unlikely and powerful coalition of special interest groups. They have large numbers and deep pockets. And heading into the 2006 elections, they have caught the scent of blood in the water.

I would suggest that we, rather than make 2006 a referendum on one man, make it about our principles. We must get back to the principles that have led our party to dominance across the country- fiscal responsibility, smaller government, national security and traditional family values. Moderate or conservative, we must support the candidates who support these principles.

Craig DeLuz

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

Why did Prop 73 Lose?

I hate Monday morning quarterbacking. But in this case I felt it necessary to comment, because we came so close to victory. The truth is, Christian conservatives have only ourselves to blame for Proposition 73, the Parental Notification initiative for not passing.

Consider this fact which was part of a San Francisco Chronicle article published this morning:

Opponents raised more than $3 million and spent more than half of it on a television campaign in the state's largest media markets that featured a 30-second spot in which an actress portraying a mother said: "Prop. 73 can't force teenagers to talk to their parents."

Supporters of Prop. 73 only contributed a little more than $1.2 million; of which, around $1million was donated by a handful of individuals and was spent qualifying the measure for the ballot.

Most of the more than $1.2 million that campaign supporters raised came from three contributors: James Holman, publisher of the weekly San Diego Reader and a string of Catholic newspapers; Tom Monaghan, the founder of Domino's Pizza; and Don Sebastiani, a Sonoma vintner and former state lawmaker.

This means that the abortion industry outspent us by more than 10-1.

If we are to be successful in taking back our society and civil government, this has got to change.

The enemies of family and moral values have made it clear that they are willing to invest heavily into the demoralization of society. They have let them take over popular culture through music, movies television and video games. We have allowed them to become entrenched at every level of public educational. And slowly, but surely we are handing over control of the civil government to the most immoral and evil forces America has ever seen. It is no one’s fault but our own.

Imagine if everyone of the 3 million plus voters for Prop. 73 gave one dollar to help pass in it’s passage? Even if just 10 % of those voters had given a mere $10 proponents of this initiative would have been able to match the abortion industry dollar for dollar…commercial for commercial.

In my commentary “Do you Support Prop. 73? ” I wrote:

If we, those who value parent’s rights, those who value the well being of our children, those of us who value life…If we do not step up step up to the plate and support this initiative, it will fail. And please understand, support is not a passive thing.

We truly support those people and causes to which we give of our resources. Our time, our talent and our treasury…These are our resources. And anyone can give. If you only can spare and hour or two of your time to make phone calls, knock on doors or stuff envelopes, that support means something. Even if you can only give $10, that is $10 more to help pass this initiative.

But if you have not given of your resources: your time, talent or treasury, then you are not a supporter of Prop 73. You’re a cheerleader… a well wisher… but not a supporter.

So did you truly support Prop. 73? Or were you just a Cheerleader?

Craig DeLuz

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

Parental Notification Initiative Fails by Slim Margin

What the vote came down to is whether or not folks saw this as an issue related to abortion or an issue related to parents' rights," said Craig DeLuz, a spokesman for the California Parents Rights Coalition, which backed the measure.

"Most parents agree parents should be involved in any major medical decision, including abortion," DeLuz said.


(Click Here for More)

PLEASE WATCH YOUR KIDS!!!! Or this could happen to them (See Video)

This is a Warning: to all of you parents (and I use the term loosely) who let their children run amok in public.

If you don't watch out this could happen to them!

(Click Here to See video) Watch the kid running across the court.

This Picture Says it all...Vote Yes on Prop.73 !!!

The sad part is, in California abortion clinics don't even qualify as PG-13!

How sad is that?

Craig DeLuz

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

Anti-Arnold Campaign Bares all…Including Breasts!

Despite being told by a US District Judge that there was not constitutional protection for those who wish to protest in the nude, a group called Breasts Not Bombs chose to expose their breasts in protest to Governor Schwarzenegger’s reform initiatives.

The Associated Press is reporting:

Two women, members of a group called Breasts Not Bombs, were arrested after they stripped off their tops in public to protest measures backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger at an upcoming California referendum.

Arrested were Sheryl Glaser, 45, and Renee Love, 40, both charged with indecent exposure, disorderly conduct and violating the conditions of the group’s demonstration permit, authorities said.

“Once they bared all, they were arrested,” said Officer Tammy DuTemple.

As if that wasn’t stupid enough, California State Senator Gloria Romero (D- Los Angeles) chimed in suggesting that the state legislature should pass a law clarifying exactly what constitutes indecency when it comes to baring one’s breasts:

“Exactly what is it that we are dealing with when we talk about the indecency of the breast?” she asked. “If a woman were holding a baby here today and breast-feeding, would she have been arrested?”

The San Francisco Chronicle Quoted Sen. Romero as saying:

"What's the difference between a male or female areola?" Romero asked. "Is it the size? Do we take out our measuring tape? I know women who are a size 31 AAA. I also know men who have larger breasts than women."

Memo to Democrats: If you truly want to know what constitutes indecency, just take a look at your legislative agenda!

PS. For those of you hoping to see pictures....SIKE!!!!!!

Craig DeLuz

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

Governor Accuses Unions of Using Scare Tactics…So what else is new?

In his most recent television commercials, Governor Schwarzenegger declares "They're trying to scare you and make me look like I want to be dictator of California,''

While the use of scare tactics is nothing new for Democrats, I can’t remember them being as blatantly hostile and dishonest. This morning the San Francisco Chronicle reported:

Tony Ledoux, a sheet metal worker from Modesto, said the governor is attacking unions.

"I take it personally for every working person in California," he said. "I don't think the people in shiny cars going into the event are union people."

About 80 local firefighters came to protest, said Kirk Summers, a Turlock firefighter.
"We want to send a message to the people of California,'' he said. Prop. 75 "is an important issue that will hurt firefighters and all public employee unions."

Some of those attending the rally had to park their cars and run the gantlet of protesters shouting "Shame on you!"

So Are the Democrats lying and using scare tactics? Let’s look at what they are saying:

Prop. 74

They call it: The Teacher Terminator
Their Lie: It is an attack on hard working teachers. It will allow good teachers to be fired for no reason and with no due process.

The Truth: Prop. 74 is an attack on teachers…BAD ONES! It allows school districts to take their time in evaluating teachers before granting them jobs for life. Additionally, it provides a way to fire tenured teachers who are not doing their jobs. Currently it can take up to three years and cost more than $200K to fire a bad teacher.

Prop. 75

Their Slogan: Don’t Silence Our Voice
Their Lie: Governor Schwarzenegger is trying to silence working families. This initiative will prevent unions from raising money and contributing to causes and candidates that support the working man. This measure is an unfair because it doesn’t limit corporations who give money to Republicans.

The Truth: Nothing in Prop. 75 prevents unions from raising money. Nothing in the measure prevents union members from agreeing to have their dues go for political contributions or from giving even more if they wish. All Prop. 75 does is require the unions to get permission BEFORE taking money out of their member’s check.

Prop. 76

They call it: A Power Grab by the Governor.
Their lie: This would give the governor unprecedented, unchecked power to cut education and social programs.

The Truth: Prior to 1983 the Governor of California had the power to do exactly what is in Prop. 76; only back then, he did not have to give the legislature first crack at solving the problem. Also, this measure does not give the governor the ability to cut education below Prop. 98 levels without a two-thirds vote of the legislature.

Prop. 77

They call it: A Republican attempt to takeover California.
Their lie: This initiative will take control of the redistricting process out of the hands of the people and put it in the control of unelected, unaccountable judges.

The Truth: Back in 2001, Republicans and Democrats in the California Legislature agreed to a redistricting plan that would create a permanent Democrat majority in the state legislature and a permanent Republican majority in the state’s congressional delegation. The agreement they reached drew lines that were so gerrymandered it was dubbed “The Incumbent Protection Act”. Prop. 77 places the redistricting process in the hands of individuals who have no direct interest in the outcome of the process. And once they are done, the map that they have drawn goes to a vote of the people.
_______________________________

While I realize that I am, for the most part preaching to the choir, I felt it necessary to get the Governor’s back on this one. The Democrats are clearly using scare tactics to get voters not to back the reform initiatives.

I just wish that Gov. Schwarzenegger would take the gloves off and call them what they are….LIARS!!!!!

Craig DeLuz

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

Tales of Atrocities in Iraq found to be lies… Where’s the MSM?

Former Marine Sgt. Jimmy Massey has spent the last two years accusing American soldiers of committing horrible atrocities against the people of Iraq. And the MSM from around the world has not hesitated in spreading his unsubstantiated lies.

Well now it appears that all of his accusations have turned out to be untrue. And as usual the truth is made available and the MSM refuses to report it.

Thank God for the St. Louis Post Dispatch who, over the weekend, reported:

News organizations worldwide published or broadcast Massey's claims without any corroboration and in most cases without investigation. Outside of the Marines, almost no one has seriously questioned whether Massey, a 12-year veteran who was honorably discharged, was telling the truth.

He wasn't.

Each of his claims is either demonstrably false or exaggerated - according to his fellow Marines, Massey's own admissions, and the five journalists who were embedded with Massey's unit, including a reporter and photographer from the Post-Dispatch and reporters from The Associated Press and The Wall Street Journal.

Massey played liberals, the MSM, and the Anti-American international community to gain celebrity and line his own pockets.

Last month, Massey's book, "Kill, Kill, Kill," was released in France. His allegations have been reported in nationwide publications such as Vanity Fair and USA Today, as well as numerous broadcast reports. Earlier this year, he joined the anti-war bus tour of Cindy Sheehan, and he's spoken at Cornell and Syracuse universities, among others.

So where are Vanity Fair and USA Today now? Are they going to issue retractions and apologies to the marines in Massey’s unit? They were, after all, complicit in smearing their good names. When are the officials at Cornell and Syracuse universities going to issue an request for forgiveness to their students for allowing them to be misled and lied to?

While I am glad to see Massey exposed for the fraud he is; I believe that it would be shameful to allow him to get away with his lies. Unfortunately, he probably will not face any criminal charges. Furthermore, the MSM will say nothing about the fact that he lied; primarily because in their fervor to spread the news that America is evil, they failed to do their jobs and check the facts.

Craig DeLuz

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

The Lying Liars on the Liberal Left and the Lies They Let Loose With….

I have spent the last month speaking all over northern California on behalf of the California Recovery Team, promoting the Governor’s reform package. And needless to say, I have heard those on the liberal left who oppose the Governor’s reforms tell just about every lie they could to discourage voters from supporting these important reform measures.

So seeing as how I have just about heard it all, I thought I would debunk some of the most egregious of their false declarations.

Prop. 74
1. It punishes good hard working teachers. Prop. 74 gives administrators more time to evaluate and train new teachers. Additionally, it makes it easier to remove bad teachers.

2. Tenured teachers can be fired with no due process. Prop. 74 changes the process for removing an underperforming teacher who has already achieved tenured status. It states that if a teacher receives an unsatisfactory evaluation two years in a row, the school board will have the option to release that teacher without the usual waiting period required in the current process.

3. Education groups like the CTA and the CFT are opposed to it. The California Teachers Association (CTA) and the California Federation of Teachers (CFT) are not education advocacy groups. They are labor unions! Their primary job is to fight to increase their member’s salaries, benefits, job security and political power; not to fight for our children.

Prop. 75
1. It limits public employee union’s ability to engage in political advocacy. There is nothing in Prop. 75 that limits the unions ability to donate to political candidates, support initiatives or lobby the legislature. Additionally, there is nothing in the measure preventing their members from saying “Yes. You may use my dues for political purposes.” And if their members are as supportive of their political agenda as they say they are, what are they afraid of?

2. It imposes an onerous and expensive administrative process on unions. By their own admission, they already ask employees if they want to opt out having their dues go to politics and get their dues back. All Prop. 75 does is require them to get their members permission before they take the money out of their check.

Prop. 76
1. It gives the Governor “unprecedented” power to control the state budget. “Unprecedented” basically means that no governor has ever had this power. Well, prior to 1983, the governor of California had the ability to make midyear adjustments to state spending in order to keep the state budget in balanced. And prior to this power being negotiated away, California didn’t have ongoing structural deficits like they do today.

2. It allows the Governor to unilaterally cut education and transportation. First and foremost, Prop. 76 requires the governor to call a special session of the legislature if state spending exceeds projected revenues. And the legislature has 45 days to make the appropriate spending cuts necessary to get the budget balanced again. But if they do not act within that time, the governor can then make the cuts needed to bring spending back in line with revenues. So the legislature does have a say. Also, Prop. 98 does not suspend the 2/3 vote requirement of the legislature to fund schools at a rate lower that that which is required under Prop. 98. And it prohibits the legislature from ever suspending the funding requirement for roads and transportation as outlined in Prop. 42.

Prop. 77
1. It takes the redistricting process out of the hands of the people. The current redistricting process is already out of the hands of the people. The way things stand today, the state legislators who draw up the district boundaries have a direct interest in how those lines are drawn. In essence, we have candidates choosing their voters, instead of voters choosing their candidates. This is a clear conflict of interest. Under Prop. 77 a bipartisan panel of judges (with no direct interest in the outcome) will draw the lines based on legal criteria that the legislators have repeatedly ignored. Then those districts go to a vote of the people.

2. Voters will be disenfranchised if this is done in 2006 because the census data is too old. The voters are currently being disenfranchised by the current gerrymandered districts that are designed to protect incumbents. When redistricting is done in 2006, the lines will be drawn as they should have been back in 2001.

3. Minority voters will be disenfranchised. Actually, the court produced redistricting of 1991 demonstrates that when a non-interested party is in control of the process minority representation actually increases. Under the law, geographically contiguous neighborhoods and communities of interest should be kept together. However the Democrats have traditionally divided up ethnic communities in order to strengthen otherwise marginally Democratic districts. That is exactly what happened in 2001. And an example of the outcome is the fact that membership in the California Black Legislative Caucus is at an all time low.
_______________________

Now I know that there are many more lies being told by the liberal left. But I would be typing from now until after the election if I were to point them all out.

Why don’t you help me out? What are some of the lies you are hearing for the Lying Liars on the Liberal Left?

Craig DeLuz

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

Ventura County Democrats try to run homosexual candidate out of congressional race?

Once again, hypocrisy abounds in the liberal camp. In this case Brett Wagner, a homosexual candidate for congress is accusing the Ventura County Democrat Party of derailing his candidacy because of his sexual orientation.

While I don’t know that his being homosexual is the reason for their actions, it is clear that they are actively trying to get him out of the race.

The following is an Associated Press story released today:

California Democratic Party investigating candidate allegations

VENTURA, Calif. (AP) The California Democratic Party will investigate allegations that Ventura County party officials improperly asked congressional candidate Brett Wagner to quit so someone else could run against Republican Rep. Elton Gallegly.

Wagner, who suggested last month that party leaders want him out because he is a homosexual, urged an investigation in hopes the group of officials get booted from their positions within the party.

During an Oct. 5 news conference, Assembly District 37 Committee Chairman Tom Parker and Ojai Valley Democratic Club President Sue Broidy, among others, outlined concerns about Wagner's campaign finances, his employment background and alleged use of a nonprofit to advance his campaign.

They also worry that the issue will hurt anyone who wins the Democratic primary next June, upsetting their hope to unseat Gallegly, whose 24th Congressional District stretches from Simi Valley to Vandenberg Air Force Base.

Twenty-four party members signed a petition delivered to Wagner's office.

Wagner, who has no intention of withdrawing his candidacy, said during an emergency meeting of the Ventura County Democratic Party Central Committee that the group's allegations were unfounded.

Region 14 director Bob Manley of the California Democratic Party said he will oversee the investigation.

Wagner said members of the group violated their oaths of office when they signed the petition as delegates of the 24th Congressional District and ran personal attacks on his character.

``One of the problems I had with this group ... is they floated out a series of scurrilous and unfounded allegations against me,'' Wagner said.

Broidy denied there were any scurrilous allegations. She said she and the other four people at the Oct. 5 press conference called for Wagner's resignation as individual members of the party and were not acting as representatives for their groups.
_______________________________________

I guess not even Democrats are exempt from having the “Bigot” card played against them.

(Hat tip to California Assembly Communications Staff)

Craig DeLuz

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

THE LIE CONTINUES! Past President of American Academy of Pediatrics says study distorted to defeat Prop. 73

Apparently abortion advocates will go to any lengths to misrepresent the truth about Parental Involvement laws in order to defeat Proposition 73 (The Parental Notification Initiative) on the upcoming special election ballot in California. Well this time one of their own is blowing the whistle on them.

Dr. Joseph Zanga says:

“The AAP authors cited the Henshaw study for four points, and in each case they misrepresented the results of the study. Unfortunately, this misinformation has been repeated countless times by opponents of Proposition 73 and extensively reported in the media. We hope that AAP, Planned Parenthood, and the media will do the right thing and acknowledge these errors”

The following is the full press release that came to me this morning from the California Parent’s Rights Coalition:

American Academy of Pediatrics Caught in Scientific Deception…
PAST PRESIDENT SAYS STUDY IS DISTORTED TO DEFEAT PROPOSITION 73

SACRAMENTO- The current president of the American College of Pediatricians and a past president of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), along with two other California physicians, have called on AAP to immediately withdraw “for correction and further study” its statement opposing parental involvement laws, including Proposition 73 in California. The physicians, all Fellows of AAP, cite “indisputable inaccuracy and bias” in an AAP study that is being used to distort the truth in effort to defeat Prop 73.

Joseph Zanga, M.D., FAAP, along with Jane Anderson, M.D., FAAP, a Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco, and Paul Macdonald, M.D., FAAP, a pediatrician in private practice in Ukiah, sent a letter Monday to the current AAP president challenging the numerous significant errors in the AAP statement, errors that have been repeated by Proposition 73 opponents and widely disseminated by the mass media.

Dr. Zanga, professor of pediatrics at the Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University in Greenville, North Carolina, was President of the AAP from 1997 to 1998 and currently serves on its Bioethics Committee.

Several misrepresentations in the AAP statement involve a 1992 study of minors seeking abortion by Stanley Henshaw and Kathryn Kost. In 2003, Dr. Henshaw testified that the AAP statement concerning the percentage of minors who inform a parent of their planned abortion in the absence of parental involvement laws was “entirely incorrect.”

Other areas in which the AAP statement was false included the most frequent reasons minors cited for not telling parents and the percentage of minors who involve an adult other than a parent in their decision.

According to Dr. Macdonald, “Though I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt, the distortion and misquotation of data are so obvious that I am forced to conclude that the AAP authors are attempting to promote a specific political agenda.” He added, “I was angered and saddened that, in the nine years since the original publication of this statement, no update has been approved correcting these egregious errors. Any high school student comparing the AAP statement with the Henshaw study could spot these errors.”

“The AAP authors cited the Henshaw study for four points, and in each case they misrepresented the results of the study. Unfortunately, this misinformation has been repeated countless times by opponents of Proposition 73 and extensively reported in the media. We hope that AAP, Planned Parenthood, and the media will do the right thing and acknowledge these errors,” Dr. Anderson said.

_______________________

Please help Stop the lie and Support Prop. 73 (Click Here)


Craig DeLuz

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

Pro-Life Teen Expelled from Catholic High School

A those of you who are regular Western Alliance readers know, last month a Sacramento Catholic High School released a teacher who spent her off duty time volunteering at a local abortion clinic. Well the daughter of the woman who exposed this teacher has now been expelled from that same school.

In her blog Stand Up and Speak Out, Katlyn Sills reports:

As of Saturday, October 29th, I was given official notice by express mail that I am expelled from Loretto High School. This was given completely without forewarning, without a meeting, and without a chance to say goodbye. My family is now seeking legal advice, and more details will follow.

And while the details of why she was expelled have not yet been made public by the family, I have it on good authortiy from fellow Western Alliance member CA High School Conservative that the action was without merrit.

Please contact the contact the folks at Lorreto High School, Sacramento Catholic School Department and the Catholic Diocese of Sacramento and encourage them to reinstate Katlyn Sills and allow her to continue her education at Lorreto.

But remember- because we do not know all of the information, I would encourage you to be non-confrontational or accusitory. But it is ok to be firm and vocal in your support of Katelyn.

One only need read the thoughtfulness of how she and her family addressed this whole issue to see that this is an articulate and bright young lady who has a passion for protecting innocent life.
(See Loretto Teacher Fired: Part 2)

Contact info:

Lorreto High School
Website: www.lorreto.net
Phone: (916) 482-7793
Fax: (916) 482-3621
Email: aperez@loretto.net

The Sacramento Catholic School Department
Website: www.csdsac.org
Phone: (916) 733-0110
Fax: (916) 733-0120
Email: csd@diocese-sacramento.org

The Catholic Diocese of Sacramento
Website: www.diocese-sacramento.org
Phone: (916) 733-0100
Fax: (916) 733-0195
Email: webmaster@diocese-sacramento.org (This was the only email address I could find on their site.)


Let’s make our collective voices heard!

Canadian version of a guest worker program… Fast-tracking visas for foreign strippers.

As we here in the United States debate the merits of a guest worker program, our northern neighbors are debating the value of their own policies; in particular their “blanket approval” policy for visas to foreign strippers.

This morning the Ottawa Sun is reporting:

The Liberal government is "complicit" in the trafficking of women with a visa policy that fast-tracks foreign strippers and lap dancers, a Conservative MP charged yesterday.

Diane Ablonczy accused the government of misleading Canadians last year when it claimed to be "cancelling" the controversial policy of issuing temporary work permits to exotic dancers based on a labour market opinion from the Human Resources department.

But the "sordid truth" is that the welcome mat is still rolled out to foreign strippers, she told the House, citing a Sun story over the weekend.

Isn’t Canada another one of those “progressive” foreign countries that liberals here in America think we should emulate?

Craig DeLuz

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