No Latte – No Peace!
As I read about the union activists who marched outside a Manhattan Starbucks recently, I wondered what kind of moron would demand a guaranteed 30-hour workweek and health benefits to pour coffee.
I soon found out.
They call themselves Wobblies and their stated goals are neither work nor benefits. No, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) want to end capitalism. To accomplish this, they pledge to destroy private business ownership and control all industry throughout the world so that they can abolish the wage system. If you don’t believe me you can review their information for yourself.
When I read about their goals, I wondered why the National Labor Relations Board would even consider their complaint – let alone schedule a hearing for next February.
As destructive as unions have been toward public schools, the auto industry, and Hollywood, I have decided to do something about it. From this day forward, I will boycott Starbucks.
Union members insist that, as Americans, they are somehow entitled to an artificially inflated income that hurts other families. There’s a reason that most Americans rule out pouring coffee as a career choice. If Starbucks refuses to provide you with the lifestyle you seek, maybe you should find something more meaningful to do with your life. I’ve read that New Orleans has inexpensive housing and many job openings right now – far above what Starbucks will pay. There's a saying that when the going gets tough the tough get going. If you're not tough yet, maybe a few cold and hungry nights will light a fire in your soul.
You will find more information about the Starbucks strike here. In the meantime, I will find other non-union coffee houses until Starbucks exterminates their present union infestations. I urge you to do the same.
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
No Latte – No Peace!
Monday, November 28, 2005
Dr. Frankenstein: Igor, would you mind telling me whose brain I did put in?
Igor: And you won't be angry?
Dr. Frankenstein: I will NOT be angry.
Igor: Abby someone.
Dr. Frankenstein: Abby someone. Abby who?
Igor: Abby Normal.
Dr. Frankenstein: Abby Normal?
Igor: I'm almost sure that was the name.
Dr. Frankenstein: Are you saying that I put an abnormal brain into a seven and a half foot long, fifty-four inch wide GORILLA? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING ME?
AMID CONFLICTING STORIES, the LA Daily News reports that Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa wants to take control of the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). While I agree that gaining control over the District’s 87,000 union employees offers some political advantages, I doubt that swapping brains with LA’s educational Frankenstein will help any of the 727,000 children already stunted by years of scholastic retardation.
Except for abortion and the welfare state, America’s public schools may be the most wasteful and destructive anti-child bureaucracy in history. District apologists often blame money, culture, and parents for their failures. But after nearly two generations of decline we have to wonder whether the District’s failure was a deliberate policy to dummify our children rather than a forty-year accident. Whether intentional or not, America’s enemies could not have devised a more cunning plan to sabotage our nation’s future. And like any cancer, when we feed this disease it only gets bigger.
As I described here and here, the Democratic Party cannot survive without the millions of laborers who make up their powerful union base. The same union leaders charged with educating our children are conflicted by their need to populate union ranks with undereducated workers. Teacher unions empower mediocrity to extort inflated salaries and benefits from schools crippled by union teachers. Democrats empower unions that empower them, turning the bond between students, parents, and teachers into an adversarial relationship.
For almost two generations, taxpayers and children have been losing this war through dumbnification, and there’s no sign that public education will improve anytime soon. As a result, the decline of personal income over the next 15 years is expected to be only one of many negative consequences expected by The National Center of Public Policy and Higher Education. Former LAUSD teacher Ari Kaufman also describes many of LAUSD’s failures at a blog he shares with Aaron Hanscom, who blames fatherless households (another liberal welfare state legacy).
I’m no math genius, but if LAUSD’s $13 billion budget was spent on our kids we’d have more than $17,000 a year to invest for each student. So while I support public education, reforms must occur immediately. I suggest the following:
- Voters must pressure democrats for school vouchers so parents can choose competitive private schools for their children.
- Public schools should provide education for high-achievers (top 33 percent).
- For students not qualified for public school, parents can select private schools of their choice paid with LAUSD funds.
- Failing or undisciplined high school students (9-12th grade) shall be given the choice to attend private trade schools that focus on skills like carpentry, electrical work, plumbing, construction, and so forth. Those who refuse can select boarding schools where discipline, academics, and behavioral modification training are available. Many schools like these are available and, as demand increases, more can be built privately within a short period.
- Outlaw tenure for public school teachers.
Anyone who has played sports or raised children know these truths intuitively. And while the Democratic Party might view union teachers as sacred cows, there’s nothing sacred about what they’re doing to our children. If the School Board and Mayor Villaraigosa really have our children’s interests in mind they will abdicate their incompetent control and let parents decide what’s best for their children.
Their refusal to change only confirms their intent.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 10:09 AM
Sunday, November 27, 2005
Last June, West Point graduate and ethics instructor Colonel Ted Westhusing was found dead in Iraq. He’d apparently left a suicide note and shot himself. The civilian contractor who found him disturbed the scene by moving a firearm from where the decedent’s body lay – ostensibly for safety reasons:
I wasn’t at Camp Dublin, but this statement sounded odd. The people there would likely have investigative experience similar to the witness. And as an experienced investigator, his job would be to secure the scene (to keep the other people who show up out) until assigned investigators would arrive. Moving the weapon under this premise is questionable, at best.I knew people would show up. With thirty years from military and law enforcement training, I did not want the weapon to get bumped and go off.
I might be wrong and the Times is notorious for deliberate inaccuracies, but it sounded a little strange.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 10:54 AM
Thursday, November 24, 2005
While no one’s surprised when Democrats accuse Republicans of smearing respected veterans, it’s another thing when the MSM mischaracterizes facts that are easily discerned. Instead of calling Congressman Duncan Hunter’s (R-CA) resolution a trap, as did Newsweek and the Washington Post this week, a little journalism and common sense might have helped Americans understand the issues better – without the distraction of a cat fight.
Let’s look at both resolutions:
Congressman Murtha’s Resolution demanded that Congress:
- Terminate deployment of US forces in Iraq
- Redeploy forces at the earliest practicable date
- Deploy quick-reaction and over-the-horizon marine presence
- Pursue security and stability in Iraq through diplomacy
If you’re still confused let me propose the following:
- Create three branches of federal government
- Establish voting rights for women
- Create a Department of Defense
- Legalize crack
Congresswoman Pelosi’s "traps and smears" stemmed not from the legitimate vote, but from the MSM’s peevish misrepresentation of Congressman Murtha's stunt. And while I don’t think he's a coward, I'm offended by Democrats playing politics with troops that include my son.
It’s time that the MSM leave their bias with politicians and get back to reporting the news.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 12:30 AM
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
21 Oct 2005
In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate, Peace and the mercy and blessings of God be upon you. Even if our bodies are far apart, the distance between our hearts is close.I send you this account that is appropriate to your position and that removes the veil and lifts the curtain from the good and bad that are hidden in the arena of Iraq.
We recently sent one of our Iraqi brothers to deliver a truck bomb to a target in Najaf. Unfortunately he was spotted by US forces and wasn’t close enough to do more than scorch some parked cars and topple a market stall. Our brave martyr was killed and blown 120 feet into the air and landed on the hood of an Iraqi ambulance. The paramedics didn’t know he was a martyr and, after almost five minutes, revived him.
When our Iraqi brother opened his eyes he was possessed as if by poisonous demons with terrible screams and heresy that would offend all Islamic jurisprudence. They restrained him and drove to the hospital where he was admitted and sedated. After several calls we learned of his survival. Our Brother Abu Abdul went to the hospital to see whether our blessed martyr could be transferred before American forces captured him. After visiting the hospital, Brother Abdul delivered this report:
I have visited our martyred brother. He was wide-eyed and afraid of the sweet perfume of martyrdom. I asked him to be still but he would not rest. He spoke and I listened.
Our Martyred Brother said that after speaking with our Imam, a taxi delivered him to the truck, which he drove to the targeted area. As he approached, Iraqi police fired upon and disabled the truck far from the target.
When our Martyred Brother released the trigger mechanism, he felt a bright flash that filled him with a light brighter than one ever imagined. He was filled with peace and floated in a great white bliss for what seemed many years.
A lorry of gold appeared and a driver wearing a flowing saffron robe wished blessings and welcomed him to Paradise. Again, he said he felt a peace he’d never known before. He rode on pillows to a palace as big as the sky of exquisite splendor. Jasmine filled the air and the driver told him that seventy-two virgins expected him with inexpressible desire.
He again said that the air, the splendor, the white light and a sense of peace had conspired in him to charge passions that he had not seemed imaginable. He shook uncontrollably from weakness and desire for his eternal reward.
A magnificent guard brought him to a great room of banquets, pillows, cushions, candles, and dozens of men. He leaned to one and asked when he would meet the seventy-two virgins. The man smiled and said that he and his seventy-two virgin brothers had been waiting for him.
As realization dawned on him, he was set upon in a frenzied, intrusive, and personal way. It was at this moment that he was revived by the paramedics and driven to the hospital.
At this point, our Martyred Brother begged me to locate a priest and spoke of baptism, Christ, and other blasphemies that are too offensive to repeat for Islamic jurisprudence or this report. I killed our martyred brother before he could offend others.
Several weeks have passed and Brother Abdul has not returned. Others have disappeared and many members of the Holy Jihad Martyr Brigade have called in sick or asked for transfers. The sweet perfume of martyrdom is no longer as fragrant as it once was.
Our only hope is that our Americans Brothers in the Democratic Party and the media will convince the American scorpions to surrender as the Franco and Spanish heretics have done.
Awaiting your response, may God preserve you as keys to good and reserves for Islam and its people. Peace and the mercy and blessings of God be upon you.
And Death to America!
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 3:04 PM
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Some years ago, my partner and I responded to a domestic violence call. When we met the battered and shaken woman, she described how she was beaten and choked as her adult son stole her money and jewelry. After stripping the wedding ring from her finger, he left her bloody, bruised, and crying on the kitchen floor.
As we completed our report, the son returned. When we tried to arrest him he began to struggle against us. Fueled by PCP and cocaine, the man was almost impossible to control. When my partner and I pulled him onto the living room floor the fight was ON with no rules, no help, and no recourse. We were alone with a deranged man who wanted to kill us.
We were at war.
Don’t hurt my son!
As we grappled and fought with the desperate man, his mother closed in and began to kick, pull, and tug at our arms. She was a nice lady who meant well. She didn’t like violence and didn’t want anyone to get hurt. But by interfering with our attempts to control her son, she endangered herself, her son, and those who had come to protect her.
As the woman screamed and fought, she emboldened her son to resist further. By interfering with those who had come to defend her, our victim had become our enemy. Had Democrats conducted a poll, 100% of the residents would have viewed us as occupiers.
War is serious business. In 2001, America committed herself to war just as our warriors committed themselves to victory. That some Americans today behave like hysterical children is understandable. That others exploit their hysterics for political gain is Machiavellian, at best.
War is ugly. War is dangerous. War is hell. And if you commit to war, it must be won.
Toward the end of World War II, Kamikaze pilots flew bombs into our warships. This new and unthinkable tactic killed thousands of American troops and sailors. Had the Japanese convinced us that the war was no longer worth fighting, our world would have suffered a far greater injury than the comparative fraction of a few thousand more American troops.
There’s nothing nice or civilized about war. As a peacemaker who has buried other peacemakers, I understand the risks. We accept these risks when, like me and my son, we leave our comfortable lives and volunteer to defend others. Like war, there’s no turning back. By making our commitment to win we declare to our enemies that they have no chance. By being committed, we save lives and prevent tyranny throughout the world.
Timetables for Withdrawal
Can anyone imagine FDR planning the withdrawal of US troops from Japan or Germany in 1943?
Imagine my partner and me rolling around on the floor with someone who’s trying to kill us when John Kerry taps us on the shoulder:
I’m John Kerry and I fought in Vietnam. When do you think you boys will be ready to go home? Aren’t you tired, yet? Haven’t you had enough? Wouldn’t it be nice if you were home now? Your chief lied to you and because you’re not as smart as I am you don’t know any better. You've abused prisoners. Your friends have been killed, blinded, and mained. You're not doing anyone any good here. You're part of the problem. What’s wrong with you? Are you sick? Do you LIKE WAR?Thanks Senator, but you might want to get out of the way so that our sweat and blood doesn’t ruin your shoeshine.
If Kerry asked the same question to the mayor, the police chief or the president it would not be any less obnoxious. War is like sitting on a toilet: The answer is always, when I’m finished.
Timetables are traps set by politicians to be used by our enemies. Wars end fastest when the enemy endures perpetual suffering and thinks it could last forever. The prospect of facing America’s vast resources, motivated troops, and endless resolve is far more daunting than telling them to wait until next October. That this must be carefully explained to veterans like John Kerry, John Murtha, and Jimmy Carter demonstrates gross incompetence at best, and is as helpful as pouring lemonade into a gas tank.
In war there are no half-measures or soft hits. When we withdraw from our commitments as Democrats demanded in Vietnam and Somalia, we embolden our enemies and reinforce the American mythology of failure. Our words, deeds, and actions must constantly remind our enemies that those who make war with America face an unquestionable, unapologetic, and painful defeat.
During war, there are only two legitimate questions:
- Do we still want to win?
- What can I do to help our troops win?
America was born in war. Those who threaten our freedoms must be punished by war. And if America is to be free, we must make war upon those who threaten to take our freedoms from us.
These truths are self-evident. Only the uneducated, the addled, and our enemies would disagree.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 12:16 PM
Monday, November 21, 2005
For those who think Republican Congresswoman Jean Schmidt’s comments to John Murtha were outrageous, I’d like you to try this little experiment:
- Find some comfortable running shoes
- Locate a prostitute
- Call him a slut
Now that you’ve caught your breath, find someone of moral character.
NOTE: IF THIS EXCLUDES YOUR IMMEDIATE FAMILY AND FRIENDS YOU MIGHT GOOGLE CONSERVATIVE TO FIND ONE.
Repeat Step Three.
Notice the difference? No need to run? Let me explain.
Like John Murtha, my son and many friends, I am a marine. I was also a career cop. Being called names is part of what defenders of the First Amendment endure. It comes with the territory. On the other hand, if I were a coward and someone reminded me of it, I’d get pissy too.
Until cowards and traitors make themselves a protected class, the terms are useful to identify certain Americans. Like Queen Gertrude, Democrats outraged by Congresswoman Schmidt’s free speech doth protest too much.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 12:39 PM
Sunday, November 20, 2005
Despite the wide approval of my previous opinion piece, some readers complained that the fake letter I posted and said was fake was, in fact, fake. For those who were confused by this, I affirm that the following letter is real. I sent it to Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) this afternoon and am heartened that she hasn’t yet discounted the merits of my proposal the way those pesky Republicans would.
As you may know, Tim Russert questioned a panel of medical experts this morning about the potential Bird Flu pandemic on NBC’s Meet the Press.
After Dr. Michael Ryan of the World Health Organization (WHO) confirmed the Bird Flu’s 52 percent mortality rate, Dr. Anthony Fauci said his concern wasn’t that Americans don’t have a vaccine, but that America does not have the “production capacity at this time to make enough vaccine for the people who might need it.” When Dr. Julie Gerberding said it would only take six months to create enough vaccine to inoculate 300 million Americans, I grew concerned that greedy Republicans (who stole the 2000 Election and declared an unjust war for oil) might use this as an opportunity to negate the role of trial lawyers, who are our last line of defense against these fascist Republican children-haters.
- Like all of America’s corporations, the pharmaceutical industry is more interested about making a profit than serving disenfranchised Americans.These companies blame product liability laws, but if they really cared why do they still make drugs that mostly injure and kill AIDS patients, the poor, and their children and not billionaires? If Bill Gates’ baby got sick, you know that someone here would make a vaccine.
- If Republicans are concerned about product liability, why don’t they make it a government program? Unionized federal employees (like longshoremen) don’t care about rich people and if something bad happened with the serum, trial lawyers could just sue the government instead of the drug companies. The government could then raise taxes or print more money as needed.
- If not for Democrats and trial lawyers, no one would speak for those like me who have no voice in society. Today, when greedy corporations (like Halliburton) take advantage of poor babies and the elderly, trial lawyers and federal judges step in to compensate these victims. Moreover, this compensation demands millions (if not billions) of dollars in retaliation; otherwise these companies would consider these payouts as nothing more than the cost of doing business and raise prices.
- Dr. Fauci states that the US currently has no vaccine production. If a pandemic occurs and people die, fewer Republican billionaires would die than middle and low-income groups around the world the same way tax breaks helped the rich more than the poor. Look at Katrina - until millionaires and billionaires start suffering in the same numbers that ordinary folks do, Republicans won’t care at all.
I hope and pray to my Winter Holiday Creator that you and your peers share my concerns regarding this threat and do what’s right and what’s fair. After all, how can a 52 percent US mortality rate be more important than hundreds of dead babies? Anyone who thinks otherwise should have their heads examined!
On the other hand, a pandemic offers this possibility as well:
If Democrats successfully block vaccine production and millions of people around the world die while Republicans still control the Congress, Senate, and White House, we could blame conservatives for what might become the biggest pandemic in history. And if we can use genocide to generate party appeal, a half-billion flu deaths might not be so bad. And who really cares about all those lazy Katrina victims anyway?
These complicated issues are now in your hands. In the name of Al Gore and cheese handouts, I urge you to carefully consider my concerns.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 1:51 PM
Saturday, November 19, 2005
Among recently discovered documents, university scholars have uncovered a blueprint that clearly states how this domestic war is being fought. Written in 1945 by former US Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark (1899-1977), it provides the strategy with which to defeat America from within.
From: AttyGen T. Clark
Re: Proposal for a Post-War Democratic Plan
Dear Mr. President:
Now that the United States Armed Forces have overcome the external threats posed by our German and Japanese enemies, I’ve been asked to outline a strategy for maintaining Democratic Party control over the US populace in the post-war.
The DNC is fortunate to have maintained control of the House, Senate, and presidency throughout the war, for had the GOP been in control they would likely exploit their position as well. For this reason, I’ve been asked to produce this outline.
I. MEDIA CONTROL
1. After discussing various matters with sympathetic news editors and publishers, it’s clear that they understand and sympathize with our goals and agree that control of the media is vital for maintaining control over both our US citizenry and foreign allies.
3. Democratic control of information will be vital in the coming decades. In return, the aforementioned publishers expect to gain the necessary cooperation to scoop stories over less-cooperative editors who still hold quaint notions of being an “incorruptible voice for the people” or other nonsense. With this understanding, the DNC and the Media Group will likely marginalize uncooperative competitors to a point of ineffectiveness and financial failure. The Group assures us that this can be accomplished discreetly and without any overt promulgation of written or otherwise transmitted directives.
4. Friendly reporters will be promoted as their more independent, unreliable, or otherwise unsuitable peers are marginalized and terminated. Reporters who excel will eventually assume editorial positions and can be carefully monitored and cultivated by publishers in The Group. After two decades, The Group believes that unsuitable reporters will have been purged entirely.
1. After speaking with the Education Group, we are assured that control of school curriculum is vital for developing appeal of the Democratic Party to young voters. After decades of reliance on the KKK and other reckless and embarrassing mobs to secure votes at the ballot box, the DNC must develop a friendlier strategy if we are to encourage voters to choose Democratic candidates. For example, if history books and teachers irresponsibly described the conduct and history of the Democratic Party and their treatment of blacks, Chinese, and other lesser non-whites and women, it could harm our chances to maintain a strong position on moral, social, and cultural issues at the voting booth.
2. Actual misrepresentations should not be made, for questions might arise from some outspoken historians. Rather than changing uncontrolled materials that implicate former and current Democrats, publishers can omit certain periods and acts in a way that grade school graduates and their parents are unlikely to notice. By the time they establish their own careers, the Media Group will be able to re-enforce earlier studies with newsprint and radio.
3. Public schools should be carefully and gradually degraded so that the majority of children will be unprepared to enter college or seek white collar jobs. We’ve met with union officials (Union Group) who believe that they can accomplish this through careful hiring rather than administratively asking teachers to modify curriculum. The Union Group believes that by securing pay, tenure, and other benefits above their non-union peers, they can appoint malleable educators and administrators and establish multi-million dollar bureaucracies that can transfer large tax revenues through union coffers directly toward Democratic candidates.
4. The benefits are multifold in that the Union Group not only secures Democrat legislators but also delivers marginally educated school graduates into other higher-paying union jobs over non-union jobs. By using union strikes and other bargaining mechanisms to secure pay and benefits, the Union Group can coerce corporate concessions to raise prices, union income, and union dues in the name of fairness, equity, or other monikers the DNC chooses to promote.
1. After careful discussions with presidents and senior administrators of numerous public and private universities, it appears unfeasible to proceed as directly on college campuses. At the onset, we were concerned that any action against “academic freedoms” would be met with resistance. After much consideration however, we believe that union and DNC contributions will eventually produce the controls we seek. Once college presidents see the financial writing on the walls and witness more cooperative universities and colleges receive funding and assistance, they will eventually replace tenured professors with more suitable candidates.
2. The same conditions apply to the legal profession as well. As a career lawyer, judge, and soon-to-be US Supreme Court justice, I appreciate the appeal of representing the poor, downtrodden, and underprivileged who will come largely from public schools, union ranks, and various lesser groups that can sustain a legal industry and judicial power necessary to generate income from corporate lawsuits and settlements. Like unions, our many trial lawyer associations can generate significant returns to be targeted toward Democratic elections and candidates. One positive consequence is that uneducated union workers are more likely to render favorably verdicts than educated and successful professionals.
A comprehensive report is forthcoming. This note outlines the larger report that I expect will satisfy all of your questions. This plan offers the elegance of simplicity that, once started, will not require detailed guidelines or roadmaps. Once it is implemented, I urge you to destroy this synopsis and all copies and references of my formal report. No other copies have been generated.
If properly managed, the symbiotic relationship between the Unions, Media, and Legal Groups and the Democratic Party can secure Party appeal and control for generations to come. With market forces and technologies like the development of the cathode ray tube (Tele-Vision), it’s unlikely that the Democratic Party can lose control over the US population without the miraculous development of unforeseen inventions and applications. In this way, the DNC can apply natural market forces to secure our moral and political position without the primitive means still used by some Democrat segregationists in the South. In this way, the Democratic Party can wear the clothing of reform and virtue while assuring Party control for generations to come.
As your close friend and newest Supreme Court appointee, I urge you to proceed with this plan at once. I will be honored to give the word.
Thomas C. Clark
This document accurately describes conditions in America today. As public schools waste billions of dollars to expel illiterate and uneducated union laborers, the unions that protect marginal teachers and their students strong-arm corporations and consumers; and direct millions of dollars in union dues toward Democratic candidates. Trial lawyers extort billions of dollars in gratuitous lawsuits while the legislators who enjoy trial lawyer and union support block reform.
The media, academia, and unions that indoctrinate and enforce the Democratic Party line has become the greatest threat to democracy America has ever faced. While it’s easy to loathe America’s transcontinental villains, it’s harder to bite the hand that feeds and clothes a union worker’s family. And regardless of this document's existence, the success of their plan is undeniable.
The Democratic Party has painted Americans into a corner not unlike the cul-de-sac that social policies have created in Europe. One cannot imagine our national ignorance of Europe’s prima facie failures, nor America’s media, academic, and union-driven refusal to accept the obvious.
To maintain the control that America’s corporations and military threaten to wrest from THE LEFT, the Democratic Party flirts with treason to sabotage the underpinnings of our country. What shocks our consciousness isn’t the contents of the Clark Document, but the devastating accuracy of its imaginary authenticity.
Had Thomas Clark actually published such a memo in 1945, he and his co-conspirators would have been hung before one could say Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. That the results of the letter are perpetuated by unions, educators, and the DNC today deserves at least the same fate.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 12:10 AM
Thursday, November 17, 2005
I was running errands today when I caught part of Michael Medved’s radio interview with Robert Greenwald, the producer of WAL-MART: The High Cost of Low Price. Greenwald argues that Wal-Mart’s four percent profit is too high and should be controlled by the government like other socialist nations do.
I’ve heard Greenwald before and won’t watch his films for the same reasons I ignore Michael Moore, Al Jazeera, the Clintons, The Times, and CBS. Without wasting my time exploring Greenwald’s rooterspeak, I offer these experiences:
The Travel Agent
Carol was a high school graduate who’d hustled odd jobs as a cocktail waitress and door-to-door saleswoman before marrying a man who owned a small travel agency. Like many boutique agencies, he used the office for the travel benefits while Carol learned the business. When she acquired the agency after their divorce, the agency was little more than a lease, license, and four employees.
When she sold the company in 1997, Carol had grown her company into a $200 million success, employing hundreds of agents in offices from Tokyo to Paris and throughout the US. She has been honored as one of California’s top 100 business owners and top five women entrepreneurs.
Like most non-union companies, Carol rewarded top employees with better pay and incentives than her competitors. The key to her success was great service. She learned that by taking care of her employees, her agents took great care of her clientele. And although she charged higher prices, her clients were willing to pay for the best travel service in America.
The ex-Cop Convict
While I have explained here and here how and why the LAPD fired me in 1993, I never described how I paid bills as an unemployed ex-cop convict.
It wasn’t easy. After 13 years as a police officer, my career was over. No one wanted to hire me. I applied at dozens of convenience and retail stores and, as expected, no one called back. I couldn’t blame them; after all who would want to hire a bad cop convicted of beating up people?
After weeks of job searches made worse by the displacement of workers after the Northridge earthquake, I found work as a full-time (24/7) live-in caregiver for an adult autistic man for $2000/mo.
As the man’s primary caregiver, I read all I could about autism and developed a program that prepared him to move from his mother’s home to an assisted care facility. Other parents of autistic children and adults learned of my success and asked if I would enroll their own children into my program. Had my conviction not been overturned and my LAPD job returned to me, I would’ve earned at least as much as my LAPD career had provided – even with the stigma of being a disgraced ex-cop.
The Hardware Store
Koontz Hardware is a small family-owned business almost ten miles from my home. It’s pricier and more distant than the Home Depot and other big box improvement stores.
I have certain talents, but handyman isn’t one of them. I’ve wasted many hours at discount stores where employees are either too busy to help or, if they do, I feel like an idiot for asking dumb questions. More often than not, I bought things I didn’t want and forgot things I didn’t know I needed.
Unlike the other large retailers, when I enter Koontz Hardware, employees seem to rush from all sides; and after awkwardly describing the thingamajig I’m looking for, they offer a selection, instruction, and recommendations of which item would work best for me. I pay more, but I’ve never felt cheated by their great service or selection. Shopping there is well worth the price and I doubt Wal-Mart or Home Depot will ever dent their sales. Koontz offers service and expertise that Wal-Mart could only dream of.
Koontz Hardware, like Carol and me, never has to worry about billion dollar corporations moving in next door, for we understand hard work and customer service in ways that unions and federal bureaucracies never will. As union workers focus on their own personal benefits and are scolded if they become too productive, non-union workers are free to excel, grow, and prosper.
As we watch France’s inglorious suicide, it’s hard to understand why so many still accept the Democratic Party’s socialist schtik as third world immigrants are still coming to America to escape it. One needs only to glance at the results of Europe’s socialist experiment to dismiss it outright. But Democrats and their unions would rather destroy us all than lose their Cold War against America.
The next time you shop at Wal-Mart, try to imagine the employees all replaced by Teamsters, auto workers, federal employees, or the French. Ask yourself what kind of service you could expect from overpaid employees who can't be fired?
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 7:21 PM
Monday, November 14, 2005
You’ve probably never heard of Cliff Baker or Vernon Chong. Neither knows the other, for their lives are divided by geography, generations, and families. They are connected only by their love of country. Both are patriots.
On October 25, 2005, my son celebrated his 18th birthday at Camp Pendleton with his Marine Corps platoon. Cliff was there not because he seeks war, but because it was hard for him to continue in a college where left-wing professors further indoctrinated classmates already stunted by years of public education.
As Cliff celebrated his birthday, Vernon Chong sent this letter to his senator. A graduate from the Stanford University School of Medicine and career military surgeon, General Chung has seen the horrors of war and the sacrifices made by our young men and women to guarantee the peace so many of us take for granted today.
Whether you support our president or not, General Chung’s letter reminds us of how high the stakes are. There is nothing partisan in his comments. He’s retired and possesses no more authority than his citizenship and understanding of history. It's important to read his comments completely, for no one in America has more authority or experience on the subject.
Subject: War on Terror
To: Sen. Saxby Chambliss
From: Major General Dr. Vernon Chong, USAFR
This WAR is for REAL!
To get out of a difficulty, one usually must go through it. Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII). The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means. First, let's examine a few basics:
1. When did the threat to us start? Many will say September 11, 2001. The answer as far as the United States is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us:
* Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979
* Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983
* Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983
* Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988
* First New York World Trade Center attack 1993
* Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996
* Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998
* Dares Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998
* Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000
* New York World Trade Center 2001
* Pentagon 2001.
(Note that during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581 terrorist attacks worldwide).
2. Why were we attacked?
Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter.
3. Who were the attackers?
In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims.
4. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25%.
5. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful?
Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler (who was also Christian), that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests).
Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the six million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others.
Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way -- their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing -- by their own pronouncements -- killing all of us "infidels." I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die?
6. So who are we at war with?
There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting.So with that background, now to the two major questions:
1. Can we lose this war?
2. What does losing really mean?
If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions.
We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean?
It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is:
We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us, over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly, for terrorist(s) to attack us, until we were neutered and submissive to them.
We would of course have no future support from other nations, for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see, we are impotent and cannot help them.
They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslim terrorists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do will be done. Spain is finished.
The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslim terrorists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast!
If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us, if they were threatened by the Muslims.
If we can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else?
The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war, and therefore are completely committed to winning, at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost.
Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win.
So, how can we lose the war?
Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by "imploding." That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose, and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win!
Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation.
President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war! For the duration, we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently.
And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII, and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then.
Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him?
No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness, and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head.
Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening. It concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause.
Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war, perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue, involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war, by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein.
And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters, who recently were burning Americans, and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq.
And still more recently, the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of American prisoners they held.
Compare this with some of our press and politicians, who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners -- not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them.
Can this be for real?
The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can.
To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned -- totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they are absolutely oblivious to the magnitude, of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim terrorists have been pushing us, for many years.
Remember, the Muslim terrorists stated goal is to kill all infidels! That translates into ALL non-Muslims -- not just in the United States, but throughout the world.
We are the last bastion of defense.
We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant.' That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world!
If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the world will survive if we are defeated.
And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equal rights for anyone -- let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the world.
This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read.
If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little, on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves, over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar?
Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece.
And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power.
They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"?
I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.
After reading the above, we all must do this not only for ourselves, but our children, our grandchildren, our country and the world.
Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal and that includes the Politicians and media of our country and the free world!
Please forward this to any you feel may want, or NEED to read it. Our "leaders" in Congress ought to read it, too.There are those that find fault with our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that we must UNITE and stand as ONE!
Lithonia , GA
My family and I understand the stakes. To this we pledge our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor. CB
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 12:39 PM
Friday, November 11, 2005
As Mary Mapes explained herself to Bill O’Reilly last night, I sensed a respect for Jayson Blair I hadn’t felt before.
After the New York Times was shocked-shocked to find one of their own making up stories, Blair was easy to loathe. But as he willingly admitted his fabrications and reasons behind them, Mapes defended herself with what she called The Journalistic Standard.
While I’m certain that Mapes’ politics met with the mainstream media’s minimum standard (e.g., attack conservatives/defend liberals), I reopened my Associated Press Stylebook & Libel Manual to Chapter Six:
If the story is libelous or potentially libelous, if you can’t prove it and its not privileged, don’t (publish) it. If it is already on the wire, KILL IT AT ONCE.
Don’t try to fix a possibly libelous story by elimination, correction, sub, or new lead. If there is any unprivileged or unsafe material in the story, the dangerous portion MUST BE KILLED.
Although this standard is clear, Mapes’ defended herself further:
Other journalists in the past went with things they believed but could not prove…
Although true, I suspect that journalists like Jayson Blair, Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, and Patricia Smith have found other careers.
Sometimes stories are important enough…
I wanted to strangle O’Reilly when he interrupted her: Important enough to do what, Mary?
In the end, she blamed CBS for caving under a conservative blog attack. What Mapes forgets is that most customers don’t like to be lied to. Although accountability to consumers is something new for recklessly arrogant journalists, I assure her and CBS that they have nothing to fear: For unlike leftwing bloggers and the media outlets that inspire them, bloggers like me adhere to a much higher standard. And although Mapes might one day join the blogosphere herself, I doubt I’ll ever link her site to mine. After all, I have standards to maintain.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 12:56 PM
Monday, November 07, 2005
Last night, my friend Genevieve invited me to stand with her on a Santa Monica sidewalk to support Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. I declined and she went without me. I thought about my absence all evening, but by the time I saw her on television that night, any residual guilt was gone.
If you haven’t already noticed, conservatives are almost non-existent at public rallies and demonstrations. It’s not that we don’t exist. Our absence doesn’t stem from apathy or inattention either. Of the conservatives I know, almost all are too engaged with careers they’ve built, children they didn’t abort, and too happy to leave their homes to face off with unhappy people.
I believe, however, that the biggest reason conservatives don’t show up in large numbers at public demonstrations is that we don’t have union handlers to pressure us into interrupting our free time under threat that we might lose our jobs. As indefatigable as conservatives are, most would rather not waste their time or energy competing with the coercion and fear used to herd union members onto city streets.
Think about it: If 500 union activists faced off with 15,000 conservatives in Westwood tomorrow, do we really think that someone stuck in traffic will say, Wow, that’s a really clever sign – I think I’ll join the Republican Party. Probably not. What bigger message can we deliver than by securing the Oval Office, House, and Senate? Yelling at union employees to leave the plantation is as pointless as telling Bruins to become Trojans. You can’t push a string and you can’t coerce freedom and happiness. Conservatives demonstrate not by scrawling haiku on cardboard signs, but by how we live.
Trying to convince undecided voters is equally pointless; for if she (or he) has a life, a career, a family, and spiritual fulfillment, she’s already conservative whether she knows it or not. If she’s unhappy, depressed, lonely, friendless, and uneducated, the union slavery that offers companionship, three meals, and a cot may look pretty good. Nothing we say will convince her to leave the plantation until she wants more for herself.
My point is that I believe conservative demonstrators are as practical as V-12 hybrids: And while some of us may think we need fuel-efficient muscle cars to impress the competition, I’d rather relax in the grandstand with my family and friends to watch the Democratic Party’s demolition derby. What better message can conservatives share that matches our deliberate non-appearance at their contrived assemblies?
Personally, I can’t think of a better way to demonstrate.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 11:21 AM
Sunday, November 06, 2005
As I penned The Union Contract last week, I referred to the opinions of slave owner Edmund Ruffin (1791-1865) who described slavery as a compassionate means for saving lazy people from death and despair:
When… great loss fall upon slave-holding countries, it is not the laboring class that feels the first and heaviest infliction, but the masters and employers. If a slaveholding country… suffers…calamity, every slave is… assured of his customary food and other allowances, and of a master's care in sickness and infirmity, even though the master class… have but half the previously existing profits, or value of capital…
Ruffin believed that some people have no natural or physical wants… (and view) …labor as an evil greater than (an) uncertain future… and consequent death from want.
Hence, among any savage people, the introduction and establishment of domestic slavery is necessarily an improvement of the condition and wealth and well-being of the community in general, and also of the comfort of the enslaved class, if it had consisted of such persons as were lowest in the social scale – and is beneficial in every such case to the master class, and to the community in general.
As cynical as Ruffin’s ideas seem today, they are the blueprint of the Democratic National Committee’s (DNC) forty-year policy of handouts, entitlements, and affirmative action on the premise that blacks cannot survive without them. And like Ruffin’s three meals and a cot, the DNC demands nothing more than servitude and loyalty in return.
Masters, Handlers, & Slaves
Throughout the 19th Century, slave masters used whips, lynching, and torture to enforce loyalty among slaves. With the advent of political correctness, today’s MASTERS use more subtle forms of coercion to direct HANDLERS like the AFL-CIO, SEIU, and UAW to ensure that millions of laborers remain loyal to the DNC. Belligerent slaves are still dealt with.
Although millions of Americans inspire greatness and freedom from slavery, the DNC endorses hustlers like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Donna Brazile to perpetuate Edmund Ruffin’s mythology to keep the DNC Plantation strong and the slaves loyal. While free and courageous intellectuals like Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Mason Weaver are vilified, the media ENFORCERS sit silently, daring US soldiers to say something insensitive to terrorists.
Until recently, the DNC has been able to control the information flow from the media to the public. With no other source for information, Americans were forced to unquestionably accept misinformation.
Although changes have occurred with talk radio, the Internet, and bloggers, school children are still subject to the forces of union teachers and university professors. Like the theocratic school teachers who preach hatred in the Middle East, union teachers impose a liberal curriculum that not only dumbs down our children, but instills the sense of hopelessness and despair necessary to fail. And when these kids do fail, union jobs are often waiting to exchange inflated wages for submission to handlers and loyalty to the DNC.
The cycle continues…
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 7:05 PM
Saturday, November 05, 2005
When I worked Wilshire Division (LAPD) Union President Tony Amador endorsed Jerry Brown for governor. All of the ads depicted him as LAPD's representative in support of his candidacy and Brown was elected. We kicked Tony out of office but the damage was done. Amador retired and Brown appointed him to the state parole board.Union President Ken Risen was the president years later when Brown ran for re-election. Once again, ads depicted our union president endorsing Brown. LAPD officers protested and Ken retired to an appointment by Brown to the state parole board. No one found any LAPD officer in support of Brown.
The AFL/CIO controls most or all these protesting unions. The union members have little to say about what their unions do.
I support 75.(Name Withheld)
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 10:04 PM
Friday, November 04, 2005
After more than 25 years as a union member of the Los Angeles Police Protective League (LAPPL), I tried to register onto their website this morning. When I pressed ENTER a pop-up appeared: MEMBER NOT FOUND.
This typifies my relationship with the union.
Codes of Silence
I had a similar experience in 1992. After I broke LAPD’s “code of silence” to question Warren Christopher’s legitimacy as he blamed his client’s excessive force policies on four LAPD officers, City Attorney Jim Hahn retaliated with false charges against me. When I asked my union for a lawyer, they gave me one who had no trial experience. As a career investigator who had worked with dozens of lawyers, I detected this one’s incompetence almost immediately. When I asked for a replacement, union officials told me to use him or pay for my own. I kept him because I had no other financial resources.
As a result, I was convicted, sentenced, and fired from the LAPD. Suddenly unemployed with a mortgage, a family to feed, and employers unwilling to hire convicted ex-cops, I begged my union for another lawyer to appeal my case. After blaming me for my conviction (I refused to accept a lesser charge), they reluctantly provided one who not only confirmed my first lawyer’s incompetence, but also the gross misconduct of the judge and prosecutor. I returned to work in 1994 and retired honorably in 2000.
Retaliation is not unusual for union members. Unions use membership dues to silence those who break rank, often paying six-figures or more to silence those who survive it.
I’m not saying that my union should be disbanded. If I dropped out tomorrow, I wouldn’t be entitled to the resources that occasionally help other officers. So despite their consistent record of using my dues to pay for legislation and candidates I oppose, I pay so that others might get the help they need.
This is not exclusively an LAPPL problem, but a failure of unions throughout the United States. Members who break rank and uncover corruption or other workplace problems are routinely targeted for retaliation, and those who ask questions face similar risks. It is this coercion that makes Proposition 75 so important for union workers.
During the 1980s, I arrested dozens of union workers for heroin intoxication outside of the Van Nuys General Motors Plant. Had an employee approached someone above his union representatives about junkies nodding off while welding Cameros together, they could have expected the most primitive forms of retaliation. GM didn’t close that plant because of corporate greed, but because they could no longer afford to employ workers who built substandard products and slammed heroin during their coffee breaks.
If you want to see these things for yourself, get a union job as a teacher, firefighter, nurse, or cop. It’s there and everyone knows it.
The uniforms and smiling faces we see on the “No on 75” campaigns are either actors or members compensated by their union leadership. When clerics join those against 75, you’ll often find America’s enemies and unions nearby. Large crowds of school children are coerced into marching not because they support union positions, but because they like the extra credit for excused truancies far from campus environments infested with incompetent teachers, drugs, and gang shootings.
Two hundred years ago, democrats controlled slaves by making it a crime to teach blacks how to read and write. By keeping them dumb, poor, and barefoot, blacks were powerless to gain their deserved freedoms. Like today, educated blacks were despised by the slaves they left behind, and the slave owners who lost control over them.
Whether intentional or not, the Democratic Party’s control of public schools throughout America does the same thing to powerless and mostly low-income students today. As teachers dumb down and indoctrinate our children, they create the senses of failure, isolation, and entitlement necessary to repopulate the disaffected class that keeps the Democratic Party alive. This is why teachers and politicians who send their children to private schools oppose school vouchers and privatization for their low-income neighborhoods. In this way, the Democratic Party retains slave ownership of the disaffected while their religious and political leaders corral and direct their herds. And like the KKK, the unions have become the enforcers of this contract: That uneducated people surrender to unions for guaranteed wages in exchange for their democratic vote. For these people and their children, freedom is as challenging today as it was one hundred years ago.
Why Democrats Oppose Prop 75
Proposition 75 is about control: Democrats need the media to indoctrinate, handlers to lead, and union bosses to enforce, populate, and control their disaffected base. They rely on Freedom’s foreign and domestic enemies to help them perpetuate the corporate greed mythology. And as long as the media convinces individuals of their powerlessness, Democrats will control their constituency.
To break free from these mechanisms of poverty, Americans must end the Democratic Party’s union stranglehold on our public schools and civil servants. If union workers vote for Proposition 75, it stands to become their Emancipation Proclamation of the 21st Century!
Vote YES of PROPOSITION 75!
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 11:39 PM
Thursday, November 03, 2005
As California’s Special Election heats up, THE LEFT behaves increasingly like the unintentional offspring of George Soros and Tokyo Rose.
Another ex-liberal and I were in Santa Monica this week where leftist advocates (dressed as ministers) used an All Saints’ Day service at Governor Schwarzenegger's Santa Monica church to rail against our upcoming election. Ex-Liberals weren’t welcome as these “religious leaders” gathered to convict Schwarzenegger faster than Pontius Pilate could say FLOG HIM. The only time they broke from their script was to demand how I learned of their "secret news conference."
Secret? It seemed that if these leaders were really interested in the dialogue they demanded from our Governor, they would’ve been glad to share their comments with anyone. I can’t imagine “servants of God” keeping sermons or press conferences secret – unless they feared someone from their parish might learn what was said. Although Daniel knelt unafraid among lions, these people seemed uncomfortable in the sunlight.
United Methodist Lay Minister Margaret Lindgren IHC began with her facts and figures:
Eighty percent of the California budget is already assigned for different things and (Propositions 73-77) would take away the last twenty percent… I understand that they would take us back to the day before the Magna Carta because that’s how much power would be in the hands of the governor…
I could forgive Marge’s take on the budget and history, but I couldn’t understand why her peers would ask voters to rely on her insight to vote correctly? After all that the Catholic Church has done to prey on their own, why would the LA media parrot her violation of the Ninth Commandment?
Rabbi Steven Jacobs of Temple Kol Tikvah stepped in:
My understanding of the propositions… is that it’s so confusing that it’s divide and conquer… most people don’t understand it so what’s happening is that we’re getting a great deal of emotion in response on both sides… we’re here to speak up for the millions of voices in California.
Maybe if Rabbi Jacobs referred voters to the Special Election website rather than Marge, less confusion would ensue.
After rambling about LA’s naked and poor, Rev. Sandi Richards of the First United Methodist of Los Angeles exclaimed:
The Governor has tried to cut those wages back and has tried to silence the working people. Dialogue is critical and he has not done that.
I’m sure Sandi’s blathering had nothing to do with the union labor used in her $6 million church renovation this week.
Peter Larwin, Executive Director of Progressive Christians Uniting closed with this:
As an ordained minister, I know a wolf in wolf’s clothing… I'm sure he does.
People who manipulate people of faith for their own partisan interest are drawing people in great numbers and then having the whole of the governor’s agenda passed in that fashion and for that reason alone we would have to call attention to that.
Is it the role of people of faith, particularly religious leaders, to hang back in a case like this and say well we can’t get involved because it’s too much in the political sphere… we call attention to the illicit nature on the attack of common morality that’s covered in this election process… 75 is a direct attack on the checks and balances in the way government operates…
Peter’s morality impressed me – until I found George Soros’ $100,000 donation in his pocket. Clerics paid by foreigners to throw state elections: why that's almost almost as creepy as raping alter boys.
As the reporters packed up, one admitted she was there “only to get one side.” When we asked her for clarification she denied saying what was on our tape, but insisted that she had no time to interview anyone else. Another reporter identified her as Lorena Dominguez of Univision 34.
I’ve been a union member for 25 years. I’m still a union member. I will vote YES on Propositions 73 through 77 because they’re good for me, my family, and my state. If Prop 75 passes, my union will be required to ask me before they misdirect my dues to support causes that hurt my family.
For example, if I like Candidate Smith, I don’t want my union dues misspent to support Candidate Jones. Proposition 75 finally gives police officers, teachers, nurses, and firefighters the voice we haven’t had for decades. This is why unions all over the country are now fighting so hard against it. Proposition 75 returns control of unions to workers – where our power should be. Although this will not stop my union from retaliating against me, it’s a great start.
I urge a YES VOTE on Propositions 73, 74, 75, 76. 77, & 78.
I urge a NO VOTE on Propositions 79 and 80.
Posted by ex-Hollywood Liberal at 2:15 PM