ACLU shouldn't be lone voice against surveillance

September 09, 2013

The American Civil Liberties Union has long been the GOP's favorite punching bag.

Former Attorney General Edwin Meese famously dubbed the organization “a criminal's lobby.” In the 1988 presidential campaign, George H.W. Bush used Michael Dukakis' membership in the organization to portray the Democratic nominee as out-of-touch with traditional American values. Even insurgent Republican movements have scored cheap points attacking the country's most reliable defender of civil liberties. In 2010, the founder of the Tea Party Nation included the ACLU on his list of the “top five liberal hate groups.”

From abortion to prayer in public schools, there are plenty of ACLU positions that Republicans will find objectionable. Yet, on the most important issue of our time, whether technology will enable the totalitarian's dream of a surveillance state, the ACLU is not only on the right side of the issue, but leading the fight.

The same can't be said for conservatives, who are missing in action on a fundamental human rights issue. Are constitutionalists abandoning our commitment to the right to privacy? There are dozens of property rights groups, even more religious freedom foundations and an endless number of conservative political committees designed to protect and preserve the Second Amendment. Yet, the Fourth Amendment has been neglected.

Even as nationalized surveillance is far greater than Orwell prophesied, not a single right-wing privacy group has risen to prominence.

It'd be a non-starter for Republicans to embrace the ACLU, but that doesn't relinquish our responsibility to fight the modern era of unprecedented government surveillance. That's why we need a right-of-center answer to the ACLU, designed to protect privacy based on the Bill of Rights.

This summer's staggering revelations by whistleblower Edward Snowden should concern a party that claims as its bedrock principle an abiding fear of big government. Surveillance is massive and growing exponentially every day. The National Security Agency can secretly snoop on the private emails, chats and internet use of millions of individuals worldwide.

Our government now has the ability to store a billion phone calls per day. Late last year, an NSA official boasted that the agency had processed its one trillionth metadata record.

With the help of automatic license plate readers, law enforcement agencies now track our locations without a warrant. According to one government presentation obtained by the Guardian, government bureaucrats can review “nearly everything a typical user does on the Internet.” Under construction by the NSA is a $1.9 billion data center in Utah that is seven times larger than the Pentagon.

If left unchecked, faster computing speeds and chips implanted in every device will give government agencies the power to track every detail of our lives, online and off. This isn't hyperbole or a slippery slope. The Internal Revenue Service's targeting of conservative political groups offers definitive proof of how this information can be abused by government. Imagine what New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and other nanny government officials would do with this endless stream of information.

In recent years, the ACLU, along with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has repeatedly filed lawsuits to stop these unconstitutional violations of our right to privacy. Almost immediately after Snowden's revelations, the ACLU filed a lawsuit to challenge the spy agency's authority to harvest and store phone records. It urged members of Congress to support an amendment by Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., to defund the NSA's unconstitutional programs.

When given an extraordinary opportunity to rein in big government, a majority of House Republicans voted down the Amash amendment. The ACLU's position, given its low standing with Republicans, likely hurt the cause of freedom. Again, a conservative counterpart to the ACLU could have educated these misguided Republicans about the dangers of the NSA's unfettered access into the lives of Americans. It would have provided a constitutional justification based on sound conservative philosophy.

In a fight against the surveillance state, we need all the help we can get.

Paradise Lost

March 13, 2013

California is not too big to fail.

One early December morning, Las Vegas police moved in on the Silverton Hotel and Casino, just off the Strip and known for its 117,000-gallon aquarium. There, having located a getaway black Audi with no license plates, they arrested 31-year-old Ka Pasasouk - a Laotian immigrant with a violent history who had eluded deportation as well as imprisonment. The Dragnet-style work came less than 24 hours after police back in Northridge, a Los Angeles suburb known for a state university campus, discovered what they called a “very grisly tableau.”

Outside an overcrowded boarding house, described in press accounts as unlicensed, lay the bodies of two men and two women, whom Pasasouk has now been charged with murdering. The story captured attention up and down the already tense state, where the phrase “grisly tableau” could easily have found wide use in the ubiquitous conversations about California’s economic, political, and social decay. America’s promised land has turned dystopian.

Especially in the movies, Californians do love to imagine how the forces of darkness could bring an Armageddon-like end to their earthly paradise. That is because, as they leave the theater, it has always still been paradise. Lately, however, life outside the cineplex has also turned dark.

The image of idyllic California, as cable watchers from coast to coast know, took another devastating blow in mid-February, when the disgruntled former LAPD officer Christopher Dorner went on his wild, manifesto-driven killing spree. In the frantic, weeklong manhunt, during which police officers managed to shoot innocent civilians who stumbled in their way, a sense of unloosed anarchy descended.

Dorner and Pasasouk. The first a crazed ex-cop who, amid his quadruple murders, managed to tweak a race-troubled LAPD history into a PR campaign that stymied public information officers and even, appallingly, gathered a measure of public admiration. The second a near-perfect symbol of the breakdown of liberal institutions. Both accentuating the sense that everything is falling apart in the storied state.

A civic unease runs through California these days. Premonitions abound of terrible things ahead. Not the space invaders or blade-runners of cinematic imagination, but padlocked -public services, interminable DMV lines, closed classrooms, off-limits recreational areas, public employee strikes, inadequate or nonexistent police, fire, and medical responses.

Just days before the Northridge slaughter, San Bernardino city attorney Jim Penman addressed a crowded city council meeting in the wake of an elderly woman’s murder, telling residents of the bankrupt municipality to “lock their doors and load their guns.” Penman was not alone among California city officials forced to slash law enforcement budgets. Nor did he back down amid the predictable media tut-tutting: “You should say what you mean and mean what you say.”

California voters in November overwhelmingly pulled the lever for a one-party state. Democrats control the governorship, statewide offices, and veto-proof legislative majorities—all beholden to powerful state employee unions. If the recent standoffs with such unions in Wisconsin and Michigan seemed dramatic, just wait for the coming epic in California, a state known for manufacturing drama. No prospective Scott Walker or Rick Snyder, the governors of Wisconsin and Michigan, appears on the political horizon. But that doesn’t mean peace with the unions—the money to buy it doesn’t exist. So there will be a budget war of multiple battles and skirmishes. With Republicans already prostrate, some joke darkly—this, mind you, in the land of Reagan and “sunny optimisim"—of adopting a Leninist approach: Let it all collapse .  .  . break the whole egg carton .  .  . build on the ruins .  .  .  make lots of morning-after omelets. A dark scenario indeed, but name another more likely for Republicans.

To be sure, and before the joke is taken seriously, Lenin actively instigated disorder and turmoil, the better to erect his totalitarian structure and, yes, his one-party state. The gallows humor of California Republicans is strictly passive; they are resigned to let nature take its course, the better to dismantle failed structures and launch productive, pluralistic systems consistent with freedom. The state’s new political dispensation gives Republicans no alternative other than to be ready with workable proposals after the fall.

The grim conversations begin and end with public safety, but every conceivable policy issue—the economy, education, the environment—has made its way into the crucible, testing whether a state can survive with a prosperous, enlightened populace under the political left’s expensive, freedom-killing programs. Our Burkean libertarianism tells us that California’s current travails will prove it cannot.

Take Ka Pasasouk (please). Now charged with orchestrating four homicides, the Laotian had stuck his thumb in the eye of California’s criminal justice and immigration bureaucracies for more than five years. Charged with felonies ranging from auto theft and assault to illegal drug possession, Pasasouk, against probation department recommendations, last September was moved from jail to a drug diversion program by the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office. Upon his release from state prison in 2008, authorities sought to deport him but failed to file requisite paperwork, the Southeast Asian thus becoming emblematic of government failure to serve and protect the public.

With California already under a U.S. Supreme Court mandate to relieve inmate overcrowding by multiple thousands, the Pasasouk case pricked the anxieties of a public already alarmed by what violent crimes may await them. At the end of the year the Sacramento Bee reported that gun sales had jumped  dramatically—600,000 last year alone, up from 350,000 in 2002. Giving credence to the argument that more guns equal fewer crimes, gun injuries and deaths also plummeted over a corresponding period, the latter by 11 percent, though the Bee, not without an ideologically satisfactory explanation, attributes the improved numbers to “a well-documented, nationwide drop in violent crime.” Sure

More recently, reports the San Francisco Chronicle, Oakland police last year arrested 44 percent fewer suspects on violent and other charges than in 2008—not  because of shrinking crime rates but because of a triage policy adopted in the face of lower budgets. Notoriously, Oakland maintains the state’s highest crime rate. Last year saw “a 23 percent spike in murders, muggings and other major offenses.”

The political left may chortle that gun purchasers are panicking, but the reality is that more municipalities are likely to fall into bankruptcy (Moody’s warns of 30 more, joining Stockton and San Bernardino), severely cutting police, court, and jail budgets. State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, a man of the left, in December commissioned an economist and a research group to create a “default probability model” for city bonds.

Stirred into the state’s social instability are the swelling legions of school-aged youths now taking to the streets. Oakland-based Children Now’s research director Jessica Mindnich reports that, over the past dozen years, the number of young people neither in schoolrooms nor in workplaces has grown by 200,000, or 35 percent, disquieting to those who assumed that future generations, if cradled in good intentions, would surpass the achievements of their elders.

In a recent Google search of “prisoner release,” before we could finish typing the second, perfectly appropriate word, the screen suggested instead “prisoner realignment,” which is the Democrats’ euphemism for their response to the Damoclean order by the Supreme Court from May 2011. The idea was to shift “non-violent, non-serious, non-sex offenders” from the state’s prisons into already over-burdened county jails or alternatives such as home detention.

Some 9,000 prisoners were released under the program, with projections of more than three times that number to be freed. Over the nine months before the Public Safety Realignment Act of 2011 was enacted, according to law enforcement officials, property crimes had dropped 2.4 percent. In the nine months following its passage in early April of that year, property crimes rose 4.5 percent. Naturally, scholars are available to tutor the public on the difference between correlation and causation. The public—not to mention the law enforcement community—is not reassured.

Which brings us to the governor, 74-year-old Jerry Brown. Before defeating Republican Meg Whitman in 2010, Brown put in time as state attorney general and mayor of the aforementioned Oakland, not to mention two antic terms as governor back in the 1970s and '80s—when many who voted for him this time around were not yet born. They might have heard about him as a colorful, iconoclastic, “Zen” chief executive who slept on the floor and dated a rock star, and who at least was not the dread millionaire Meg Whitman. But they knew little else and took the leap. 

Unless they were public employees voting out of gratitude, the new-generation, low-information voters likely didn’t know it was Brown who, in his moonbeam years, allowed state workers to unionize in the first place, a decision that propelled the Golden State into decades of budgetary troubles and brought it to its current precipice. Besides placating unions, he also saddled businesses with a slew of environmental regulations and halted highway construction, the makings of a 30-year plague.

Let it not be said that Brown fails to tease and confound commentators, who need him to be fresh. Even in his first gubernatorial incarnation, as he marched to the left, he could come across as a kind of New Age conservative, pinstriped and looking for all the world like a young Churchill in the glow of a parliamentary speech. On alternate days he would make his “small is beautiful” philosophy seem to apply to state government, which to the sober-minded raised questions about his credibility.

In this January’s “State of the State” speech to the legislature, Brown, strangely complimenting his audience for their fiscal discipline, treated us to more of his philosophical eclecticism. He quoted the biblical story of Joseph, cited the Catholic principle of subsidiarity, and, as the pièce de résistance, offered this from Montaigne: “The most desirable laws are those that are the rarest, simplest, and most general; and I even think that it would be better to have none at all than to have them in such numbers as we have.”

Such messages may quicken the libertarian pulse, but only the most naïve could imagine the governor means to roll back big government rather than spread confusion about his direction. Last November, when voters approved his Proposition 30 to raise both income and sales taxes by $50 billion, he spread confusion to a national audience. CNN’s Candy Crowley, invoking the state’s property tax-limiting Proposition 13 of 1978, asked if he thought the birthplace of the tax revolt could now be “the start of a tax-increase sweep.” Brown answered:

Yeah, I do. I was here in 1978, when [the late Prop. 13 author] Howard Jarvis beat the entire establishment, Republican and Democrat, because the property taxes had just gotten out of control. Now the cutting, the cutting and the deficits are out of control. Our financial health, our credibility .  .  . as a nation that can govern itself, is on the chopping block.

Of course, he didn’t specify any “cutting” or “chopping” that he had in mind. Californians with long enough memories know that he was a ferocious opponent of the Jarvis amendment. Once voters overwhelmingly approved it, the “maverick” young governor miraculously remade himself into the measure’s chief exponent and champion. That sort of fast footwork made him legendary and, on occasion, a presidential contender, if usually too clever by half.

He’s still capable of the occasional magic act. A mere month after last fall’s election he announced—abracadabra!—a balanced budget. A “breakthrough,” he called it, pretending his ingenious abstemiousness had taken a giant step toward restoring California’s economic health. One Facebooking schoolteacher even suggested the governor was more frugal-minded than that notorious Republican budget cutter, Wisconsin representative Paul Ryan. Oddly enough, no disgruntled public employees emerged to produce a television spot of Governor Brown wheeling Grandma over a cliff.

Why not? Well, for one thing, Brown claimed that, while balancing the books, he had managed to find $2.7 billion more for schools and an extra $500 million for the university system while keeping a $1 billion reserve fund. Truly, a miracle worker. Moody’s, on record as expecting municipal meltdowns, was sufficiently impressed to keep the state’s ranking at A1—with the caveat that the presumed surplus would be used to pay down the debt. Standard & Poor’s upgraded its rating by a single notch.

Only one problem. The vanished deficit may be the least credible trick Jerry Brown has pulled in his cynicism-breeding career. Wyatt Buchanan of the San Francisco Chronicle explained the “convenient budget trick that helped make this possible.”

Over the past decade, lawmakers have balanced the state budget in part by borrowing money from special funds, revenue that’s raised by specific fees and taxes. Lawmakers have borrowed from those funds in the very lean times, and promised to pay them back.

Brown did this as well, and although he had planned last year to pay back special funds by $5.2 billion in the 2013-14 year, he now proposes to pay $4.2 billion. Turns out, says H.D. Palmer, spokesman for the California Department of Finance, that those special funds “had higher balances” or fewer needs than had been projected.

Buchanan also found a November projection by the Legislative Analyst’s Office that California would see a deficit in 2013-14 of $1.9 billion, “absent the lower debt payments to special funds.”

There remains, as the governor acknowledged, a “wall of debt” amounting to $28 billion. Brown straight-facedly presented a timeline, beginning this July and lasting into 2017, in which the wall would be knocked down in payment increments from $4.2 billion to $7.3 billion.

But that $28 billion, reported the Los Angeles Times, constitutes only a small, if delectable, appetizer to be served up to the Debt Monster over the next four years. The Times:

Numerous reports by state agencies, think tanks and academics have shown the wall of debt to be many stories higher than $28 billion—hundreds of billions of dollars over the next few decades. Brown’s repayment plan does not significantly reduce the sizable debt to Wall Street or account for promises the state has made to its current and future retirees but is not setting enough money aside to cover.

The amusing idea that Brown could play the moderate, or, in the words of the Orange County Register, put “a stop sign in front of his fellow Democrats in the California Legislature,” could turn grim, as disgruntled teachers and state employees, their guaranteed pensions suddenly in doubt, grab their pitchforks and pivot in the direction of the septuagenarian wonderboy. There’s still time to produce those TV spots of Grandma at the cliff, with Brown pushing.

It will not take much for the state union leadership to ally with the more ideologically committed legislators, of whom there are many, to create dramatic tensions and turmoil in Sacramento. And those of us who want to restore California’s fiscal health, not to mention the California dream, cannot count on a Scott Walker-style standoff. There is no Scott Walker, only Jerry Brown, who, loving to confound, could conceivably stand his ground. But that scenario strikes us as pure Hollywood. Brown does owe his political life to the unions, after all.

The governor’s giddy idea that his successful tax increase could sweep the nation runs up against another, more disturbing, trend: The looming municipal meltdown is not just a California problem but one faced by all the big-spending, high-taxing states, such as Illinois, Connecticut, Maryland, and New York. A day of reckoning is likely “at the national level,” according to University of Chicago economist Brian Barry, “no matter what happens to federal taxes or health care spending.”

We’re talking about as much as $4 trillion in unfunded pension liabilities courtesy of these financially troubled big states, whose governors doubtless hope to pass on their woes to Washington. The ever resourceful conservative idea man Grover Norquist, picking up on Barry’s prediction, suggests congressional Republicans exact from acquiescent Democrats a trade. He would exchange for bailout funds a plan to block-grant Medicaid and other entitlements to the states, thereby eliminating the costly, one-size-fits-all federal requirements that so bedevil state budget-makers. It could help.

As could a plan circulated by renowned supply-side economist Arthur Laffer, who would, among other solutions, have California march back to the Jarvis era, reversing Brown’s tax-hike bandwagon. He would moreover have California—in some rankings the worst state in which to do business—leave the 26-state bloc of forced unionism and join the 24 right-to-work states, many of which enjoy higher productivity, personal income, and population growth than their progressive counterparts. Sacramento as currently constituted won’t allow any of it.

Meanwhile the malaise. The once-Golden State now has the country’s highest poverty rate, more than 23 percent. Also depressing: California, whose population is 12 percent of the nation’s, is home to a third of the country’s welfare recipients. A hardened underclass, as Chapman University urbanologist Joel Kotkin has put into uneasy relief, is emerging as a source of social, economic, and political strife.

Laudably, Kotkin wants to see the unemployed raised up via a blue-collar boom, with housing, infrastructure-building, and energy, where the promise of undeveloped natural gas fields could lead the way. Again: Not bloody likely if Sacramento has any say.

Already, as Kotkin points out, the once-prosperous middle class has shrunk essentially to state retirees and those still living in homes protected by the Proposition 13 property tax limits. Allergic as they have historically been to class analysis and warfare, Republicans must answer by showing how a vigorous, free-enterprise economy can jump-start growth, spread prosperity, and lessen the chasm between the hyper-successful creative class on the coasts and the lumpenproletariat left behind on public assistance.

When multimillionaire golfer (and Republican) Phil Mickelson grumbled about his tax burden and threatened to leave the state, he found little sympathy among the suffering Californians who, their personal finances far more modest, are thinking of joining the growing out-migration of middle-class producers. A rebuilding GOP of necessity will have to direct its message to them and to ethnic groups, from the inner cities to the Central Valley, for whom the California dream of self-advancement still resonates.

The class anxieties were forced into relief when Texas’s Republican governor Rick Perry, in radio spots and personal appearances, put the welcome mat out for struggling businesses. As Perry knows, enclaves of California expats are mushrooming in Dallas and Austin suburbs. With exquisite symbolism, the national financial newspaper Investor’s Business Daily announced its plan to relocate its production facilities to the Lone Star State—not the first business to do so.

Brown’s inelegant response? Perry’s ad was but a “fart.” California’s glorious coastline, majestic mountains, and fair climate, reasoned the governor, would keep businesses slaving under his spell. But Perry, the bumbling cowpoke of last year’s presidential debates, has outfoxed him, perhaps having taken Benjamin Franklin’s counsel to “fart proudly.” Let the coastal breezes do their work.

What then, as Lenin might say, is to be done? We may dream that this rhetorically gifted performer might retire, perhaps to join his predecessor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, in a box-office stinkaroo. He does have plenty of experience with make-believe crime-fighting, always a Hollywood favorite.

Other than that, the political choices are excruciatingly limited. Republicans can marshal the constructive ideas of the Laffers and Kotkins while rebuilding an opposition party, but it will require quiet patience and resolve not to join the multitudes of out-migrants. The California we love always offers the most sensual solaces; Brown is not wrong about its natural glories. We must cherish them. That, and sit back serenely in our cushioned movie-house loges, popcorn at the ready, and watch as the horror show unfolds.



Winning Purple: Here’s How


Antisemitism has no place in the Republican Party
Angry with Your Local School Board? Run for Office.
Boycott Beijing: Biden’s Opportunity to Unite Americans

Black Republicans lead political poll reversal
Steel: ‘Zuckerbucks’ Corrupted the 2020 Election for Big Tech

Steel: Democrats Discriminate Against Asian Americans, Demand Reparations
Coronavirus: US-China Talks Must Go Beyond Trade & Include China’s Biomedical Practices

Resolution Regarding China's Organ Harvesting
Conservative lawyers steal page from progressive playbook

Shawn Steel: California Republicans Must Think Like a Political Insurgency to Survive
California Democrats rewrite the voting rules in their favor
When a 14-point Republican lead disappears
Why California Republicans lost it all, even in Orange County (Hint: It's not Trump)
Utility monopoly demands more corporate welfare
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #13
Democrats Face Their Own Proposition 187 By Discriminating Against Asian Americans
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #12
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #11
Silicon Valley: Disturbing by Design
Dana Rohrabacher’s conservative track record is as consistent as it is long
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #10
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #9
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #8
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #7
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #6
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #5
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #4
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #3
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #2
Sanctuary Opt-Out Update - Update #1
The Conservative Movement: Agony, Revolution, and Triumph

Charlottesville and the ongoing threat of the alt-right
California’s high-speed rail promoters should heed the wisdom of rats
My family escaped North Korea - Trump's response was spot on
House Passes Bill on Illegal Immigration, Sanctuary Cities
Orange County’s conservative students under attack

OCC should fire bully professor
Steve Bannon’s Real Crime: Providing Deplorables with News Alternative
Hillary Clinton Would Be America’s First Illegitimate President
California can lead in the fight against government overreach
Obama Legacy Includes Christian Genocide
Put Ivanka in Charge – Only the Damsel Can Save Donald in Distress
US Christians key to ending US inaction on Christian genocide
RNC Resolution

Steel: Conservatives Win with Kevin McCarthy as Speaker
Up-close look at Obama’s foreign policy failures and the al Sisi alternative

Republicans make steady gains with Asian-Americans
CA GOP enlists Asian American candidates
Shawn Steel: Not your granddaddy's California GOP
Report from Chicago
California’s party-switchers miss the vote
Silicon Valley and the GOP: Republicans nurturing false hopes
How about amnesty for legal immigrants?

ACLU shouldn't be lone voice against surveillance
Paradise Lost

Notable & Quotable
Romney must win over Asian voters

RNC Resolution Opposing “National Popular Vote Compact"
Scathing Report Undermines All Credibility in Redistricting Process
RDAs will end … when elephants fly?
When elephants fly: the end of the dreaded RDAs
Electoral College Madness
Brown caught between unions, voters

What Happened to Fresno?
Prop 23 Abandoned by Business
Asian Republican Strategy
Obama appoints "devout" Muslims to Homeland Security
Chairman Steele 'full throated' for O'Donnell
The Brown Implosion
The Shill of Silicon Valley
Jerry's Secret : WSJ & Pajamas Media
Report RNC Summer Meeting
The Ruling Class and Maxine Waters
Steele Supports War, But Not the President\'s Policies
Reader Rebuttal: O.C. supervisor race
Ronald Reagan Day
Blanket primary smothers choice
Corporations: Enemy of the People; Key Supporters for Obamacare
Tom Campbell's strange saga with Sami Al-Arian
Taliban gains foothold in Justice Dept
Who will turn ? Who will save the libs and unions?
Is the OC Sheriff Crazy?
Nancy Pelosi's New Ride
Reflections Of My First Trip To Israel
Michael Steele Wins Again
GOP losers target Michael Steele

The Return of CAL-YAF
Kalifornistan: A Movie Review
Applications to the Redistricting Commission : Prop 11
Darrell Steinberg--next door to you--CAIR and Islamists
CAIR- Spies Everywhere Ask Sen Steinberg
Speaker Bass Rejects CAIR
CAIR, Hamas, Arnold and the Dems
Are John Burton and the CDP Crazy?
Today's Commentary: The Three Judges Who Would Release The Criminals
Republicans come roaring back
Speaker Bass Has To Go!
The Orange Grove: Sell and modernize state to solvency
PIONEER HENRY LUCAS, DDS, mobilized other black conservatives
American Indian Charter School-Libs Need Not Apply
California Focus: State government needs RAW deal
50 Ways to leave your leader -- Mike Villines
Feds Prosecutorial Abuse ...Leave Perata Alone
Opinion: California Republicans need to step up to anti-tax plate
California\'s Upcoming Water Revolt
RNC Election: Steele the Winner! Thank you Ken Blackwell
STEELE -- RNC Chair Winner say California Republicans
RNC Race: Bribes, Lies and Hit Mail
RNC Chairman's race gets ugly
What's the real story with the RNC race?

Merry Christmas to Igancio "Nacho" Ramos & Jose Campion
Dirty Dem Money
How do we forgive RINO's?
Hollywood Blacklist : We are all Mormons
Go to the movies with the Dukes
Jerry Brown on the Warpath
Surveys, Surveys Everywhere -- But Who Is Reliable?
Bernard Parks and The Unions : a David vs. Goliath story
Who wants to win the most?
The Battle for Glendale: Jane vs. the Interloper
Republican Woodstock - - Sarah takes LA
Abandoning Michigan? No way says Sarah
Conservative Resurgence at RNC May Change Party
SEIU: Corruption Runs Deep
What's the rush on the budget?
Who is Abram Wilson?
Obama Swimming In Money -- More Than All Presidential Campaigns Combined
Today's Commentary on the News
UC Cancellations, by Clinton, Waxman and Nunez : Victory for students and conservatives
The worst guy in LA :Part Two - - Mark Ridley-Thomas vs. Parks
The Battle for LA : Parks vs. Ridley-Thomas
America's Grifter : Laura Richardson MC
The worst guy in LA : Mark Ridley-Thomas
SCOC accused Ridley-Thomas of "denigrating Latinos" : The Battle for LA - - Part 2
The Battle for Los Angeles
The Obama we never knew: ACORN
Hillary claims Obama not reaching white voters
Jews and Blacks: Bradley Coalition Breakup
I never liked Rockefeller
Mike Ramirez 2nd Pulitzer
L.A. Grad Rate for H.S. 45.3 %
State GOP Declares War
Useful Idiot : Mike Thompson
Democratic Party's Racial Divide
VIDEO: SFSU College Republicans Take On CODE PINK in Berkeley
The Trojan Horse a simple idea plus media sensation against Prop 93
Dems bow to the Bey of Oakland

Korea moves to the Right
Parsky Commission Fails Rogan
Speaker Makes Best Argument Against Prop 93
College Reps Confront the Left and Terrorism Next Week
The Governor Does Good : Ridley-Thomas gets it on the chin
LA Times goes bonkers or just another day at the office?
Electoral College Reform: Putting California in Play ; Paul Singer vs. Stephen Bing
Muslims Sue FBI in California
SF State College Reps Rip the Left
9/11 Two Anniversaries ...Europe Saved From Muslim Extremists ..324 years ago
Big Changes in LA County - Bernard Parks is running for Supervisor
Day 31 : Korean Christians Held by Taliban
Political Earthquake, Equalizing California Electorial Votes
Gore is Good
Legal Aid Foundation organizing Union : Violates Federal Law
Rescue Dawn - - The best summer movie
Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's July 31st Hearing on Border Guards
Infidel : Summer Reading
Pacific Research trains School Board Members
Dead Bill Walking : SB 801
Blood Sport : Slamming Jerry Lewis
Frank Baxter Ambassador to the Republica Oriental del Uruguay
UCI: The war against the 5th Column
LA Times Smearing Ken Calvert
Bradley Article - Supremely Disappointing
The Death of a Moderate Muslim
Freedom Fighters Invade UCI
Who Really Cares?
Where does the CRP live ?
Packing Heat at the LA Central Com : War at the 37th
Illegals play Capture the Flag
Happy Birthday, California Republican Party!
Times Editorials returns to boredom
Billionaire Broad a Backstabber?
LA councilman fights good jobs
The Remedy: Out Work The Democrats
Should the Republican Party Stay Republican?
Parsky Back in the News
The Wealthy Left Finance CA Politics
LACCD Beachhead
Revolution in the Belly of the Beast
Gasoline on the Pension Fire
CRP 's Future Chess Moves
Viet Power
Liberation in North Korea in LA
GOP registrations for hourly fun
Terminator Care DOA?
The California GOP: $16,000,000 Answers

Presidential Funding
20 Million Questions
Brownback The Only Conservative?
Taxes good for Business
Arnold must steer clear of drift to left
Review: The People's Machine

The Emerging Mcclintock Era
Schwarzenegger's Back
Will Arnold Jump The Shark?
The Governor's Initiatives
Initiatives At Home And Abroad

Not Just Bush Scored A Victory On Nov. 2
Against Prop 62
Vote No on 62
Play The Initiative Card
'Voter Choice': Reform-free Reform
Don't Take the Bayou State Cure
Dem Dominance of State is Dead
A Downright Reaganesque Speech

Arnold's Army
Winners and Losers
The Conservative Question
Governor Croupier
Recall Choice Really Between Tom, Bill, Arnold
Who CAIRs?
People Must Demand Recall
Golden Possibilities

State Republicans See Light in 2006
Don't Snicker ... Bill Simon Could Actually Win
'Same-Day Voting' Makes Hanging Chads Look Quaint
Lionesses of the Left Eat Judicial Nominees Alive

Escape Artist

An Attempt at an End Run on Prop. 209
Don't Force Lawyers to Join the State Bar