Friday, May 30, 2014

Shinseki Resigned, and so has Jay Carney. . .

I had predicted that Shinseki would resign, and if he resigned, then other members of the Obama Administration would bow out next.

Lo and Behold, Press Secretary Jay Carney has left the building.

I guess he got tired of lying and getting laughed at for trying to spin Obama's endless, seamy frauds into some tapestry of competent fact-finding.

Fox News Contributors speculated, with some mirth, that Carney was jovially shouting "Free at last! Free at last!"

All of a sudden, the troops are no longer rallying around the general.

Then again, President was never a general.

More of a hapless war correspondent, one who spent more time taking pictures of himself and regaling non-existent fans and readers with the dangerous exploits he faced looking out on the battlefield.

Who's next to flee from the Obama Administration?

Even President Bush never hemorrhaged this many staff into the sixth year of his Presidency.

Predictions -- who will resign next from the Obama Administration?

Press Secretary Jay Carney: "Free at Last!"

Judge Rules Against McKay (Why, Scott, Why?)

Raymond McKay -- for US Senate or Not?
Warwick Tech Administrator
Ray McKay
This morning in Providence, Rhode Island Federal Court, Judge Lisi ruled against Warwick Tech Administrator Raymond McKay, who in his bid to keep his job and run for office, attempted to overturn a city ordinance which requires classified employees such as himself to resign their jobs in order to run.

Just a reminder - that ordinance affects 15% of city employees, not the unionized ones. How about that?

What has freedom of speech, assembly, and petition come to in Rhode Island?

Even Buddy Cianci gets to ride the radio waves with his best and worst for Rhode Island in spite of prior felony convictions. Yet a law-abiding city employee who is not a member of a union cannot run for office without giving up his job.

What is astonishing about this outcome, though, is that instead of using three meetings to overturn this ordinance, the Warwick city council chose to waste, er spend time and taxpayer dollars resisting McKay's interest in running for office.

After all this time and money, Warwick Mayor Scott Avedisian wants to raise city residents' property taxes while draining down the city's rainy day funds, too?

Why, Scott, Why? Why, Warwick City Council, why?

As for US Senate candidate hopeful McKay, now he must no decide whether to go on leave, quit his job, or quit his quest for the US Senate seat.

If the city leaders in Rhode Island, specifically Warwick, were more interested in the best interests of their citizens, if they cared about the wealth and well-being of the city and the state, they would not have stalled on overturning that silly, capricious, and arbitrary statute, a legal fight which has ended up costing the city of Warwick more than it's worth.

So what if McKay may not have a chance of winning against three-term incumbent Jack Reed? He deserves a chance to run, as does any other citizen in Rhode Island, and he deserves that chance without having to give up his job to do it. The First President George Washington and his Executive Cabinet did not abandon their farms and livelihood when they served in office. In fact, the first Attorney General had to open his own law practice in New York just to make ends meet, since the federal salary was not enough (those were the days, when men did not seek higher office for higher pay).

With time running out, McKay is weighing his options on what to do next. The federal ruling against McKay is wrong and unfair, and will not be the first time or the last that a federal judge has ignored the spirit as well as the letter of the United States Constitution. Will it be the last ruling from a federal court? At this point, that may be the case, since time is running out for the US Senate hopeful to announce a run.

Thursday, May 29, 2014

If Shinseki Resigns, Everyone Else Has To Go, Too!

Secretary of VA Affairs
Eric Shinseki
The uproar over the poor (even fatal!) treatment of our veterans is beyond unconscionable.

US Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki must go.

Still, in spite of the mounting pressure for the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to resign, the Obama Administration is stalling.


If Shinseki steps down because of the egregious incompetence of the VA, then there will be no reason not to demand the resignation of other executive leaders in the Obama Administration.

If Shinseki resigns, then Attorney General Eric Holder should not be far behind.

From Operation Fast and Furious to the IRS abuses which targeted conservatives, Holder needs to be held accountable for his lack of leadership or diligence in investigating these matters. Following reports that the Department of Justice seized the phone records of  AP reporters, Holder should resign on the spot.

What about Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson?

She has overseen a complete failure of border security during her tenure. Despite the claims that the Obama Administration had deported more illegal immigrants than all other Presidents combined from Eisenhower to George W. Bush, he has unilaterally rewritten or ignored the basic laws of immigration enforcement. Releasing thousands of illegal immigrant criminal defenders back onto the streets, refusing to enforce the rule of law for illegal immigrants under the age of 30 with no other criminal record, and routinely pressuring leaders in Congress despite the will of the American people, Napolitano has no business serving any longer.

For the better interests of our home land's security, Johnson has to go.

"Oops, Did I say that?"

Secretary of State John Kerry has spoken ahead of the administration, to a fault. He suggested that Israel risked becoming an apartheid state if the two-state peace-process failed.

That statement alone should have forced Kerry to tender his resignation.

Then there's Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, an underwhelming leader who is supervising the massive and pitiful withdrawal of American military power from the Middle East, but not for the better. From his terrible answers before the US Senate Armed Forces Committee to the aggravated infusion of alternative social policy into the American military, to the rising number of sexual assaults which military personnel have endured, Hagel has been one bagel of a Defense Secretary. He should resign along with Shinseki.

Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz must step down, too. Making no effort to transform Obama's resistance to the Keystone Pipeline into anything viable, with a set of policies aimed toward the failed green tech lobby instead of promoting oil exploration and energy independence, Moniz is the face of the President's failed energy policy. He has to go.

At least Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sibelius has already resigned. She should be in jail for running one of the most inept and corrupt government expansions in modern US History. She was dragged through one committee hearing after another in the House of Representatives, and she had to endure explaining to Congressmen why the website failed. Thankfully, she is gone, but she should not be forgotten for the terrible legacy which Obamacare has left to this country.

With Shinseki's resignation, the first thread will unravel the rest of the perverted Obama patchwork.

The final cord to get take away? -- President Obama in 2015. From the wasteful, corrupted Stimulus to Fast and Furious, to Obamacare, the IRS Scandals, the EPA affronts, the attacks on AP reporters, the invasions of the NSA into our private lives, the CIA snooping on US Senators, the loss of four diplomats in Benghazi, the endless and illegal executive orders, and now the needless suffering (and heedless deaths) of American veterans in VA's across the country, President Obama has no right to remain in office.

No wonder the President is doing everything he can to avoid forcing Shinseki to resign.

If Shinseki shoves off. .
Then the rest of the Obama Administration
Will have to go, too. . .

Including the President

Oh Great Scott, Why Can't Ray McKay Run?

Warwick Mayor Scott Avedisian (City of Warkick)
Warwick Mayor Scott Avedisian
Warwick, Rhode Island Tech Administrator Raymond McKay wants to run for US Senate against long-term incumbent Jack Reed.

There are a couple of problems, at least to the politicos on the outside looking.

First he is a conservative Republican, not a RINO who runs on the label, but runs from the party's values. He is the President of the Rhode Island Republican Assembly, which critics and supporters have called "The Republican branch of the Rhode Island Republican Party."

The biggest roadblock against his run comes not from his values, nor from his leadership, but from his job. An obscure workplace statute in the Warwick Municipal code lists that a classified employee must resign if he chooses to run for office.

McKay is included in that 15% category of classified employees. Who is not included in that number? Teachers, firefighters, and police officers i.e. union officials.

On its face, this ordinance is unconstitutional. Since when should a man have to give up his job to run for office? Violation of the First Amendment. The statute is also arbitrary, since it discriminates against one minority at the expense of 85% of the workforce.

What gives? That's a violation of the Fourteenth Amendment.

So, in order to run for office, I have to join a union? Or I have to beg my city council to let me run for office on my own time?

Undeterred despite the legal difficulties, McKay reached out to city leaders to get the law repealed. Arguing that the statute unfairly discriminates against him, McKay was unable to move city leaders to remove that code.

He has been to court to seek a temporary injunction, which was denied. Oral arguments to have the statute repealed will continue this Friday (May 30).

Not just the unwillingness of the City Council is disconcerting, but the Republican Mayor, Scott Avedisian, has said nothing and done even less to remedy this situation.

Rumblings from local residents and political leaders argue that Avedisian has deliberately refused to do anything to assist McKay because the mayor is close friends with Democratic US Senator Jack Reed and will do anything to make sure that his political confidant faces no challenges to his reelection run for US Senate.

And now the mayor wants to raise property taxes and dip into the city savings just to balance the city's budget next year, too.

Warwick Tech Administrator Raymond McKay - Why Won't Avedisian let him run?

Maybe someone should have stopped him from running for office in 2000. Is he a classified employee, too?

Well, if Mayor Avedisian has nothing to say about McKay running, then maybe I should throw my hat in the ring and run for office.

Or do I have to ask the Great Scott for his permission to do that, too?

*Oh Great Scott -- May I run for office?*

(What is the world coming to, when a man has to beg just to have a chance to represent his community? Oh brother!)

This ordinance is wrong, McKay should be able to run without losing his job, and Avedisian should give up trying to balance city budgets on residents' backs.

But let me return to the more pertinent question:

Oh Great Scott: Why can't Ray McKay run for US Senate?

The Basis for Our Values - Facts or Feelings?

I spoke with a local official some time ago.

He was rigid on the fiscal issues. "You have to be careful with other people's money."

He supported welfare to work, because if we keep giving to people, then they will never do anything for themselves.

When it came to marriage and abortion, however, he shared that he had changed his views.

He now supports abortion because he had friends who had "made mistakes", and to have a child, in their opinion, would have drastically changed their lives.

Regarding gay marriage, he now has no opposition to it, having met gay people, and therefore judged that there was nothing to worry about.

For me, basing our values on what we think or feel invites error and dysfunction. To decide that certain policies are acceptable because of our infrequent contact with friends and a perception of no harm is not wise, either.

Our values, what determines right and wrong, life and death, cannot be a  matter of limited conjecture or emotional experience.

I was surprised that this politician had such a change of view on the matter, especially since such emotional, personal, and experiential arguments have motivated the demands for more gun control.

The last thing that our politicians should be doing, when it comes to creating and enacting policy, is making these decisions based on personal experience or limited sentiment.

Life is a value which extends beyond our limited view of matters. Marriage has far ranging implications, beyond the life and interests of one couple.

The attitudes, the policies behind protecting life and defining marriage rest on eternal verities, which cannot be dispensed with because of the unique trials which friends and acquaintances have endured.

One of the biggest criticisms I have with school boards rests on the arrogance of the representatives instituting policy when most of them have no understanding of education. Drawing from their limited, non-educational backgrounds, often they pursue ideas which are unworthy, unrealistic, or unacceptable.

And then there's the gun control issue.

How many anti-gun advocates have pressed for reducing access to firearms because of the death of loved ones? How many people related or acquainted with victims in mass shooting have demanded stricter gun laws following those horrific tragedies?

Too many to count.

Such immediate emotionalism has no place in deciding long-standing policies which will affect the well-being and lives of others.

The same holds true not just for gun issues, but on abortion and marriage.

Just because a young couple rejected any form of restraint does not justify killing the child which they created. It's not the kid's fault! Where's the personal responsibility in permitting two heedless people to abort a child because they are unwilling to care for the child or because they fear the consequences of allowing the child to come to term?File:Au palais d'injustice (Père Peinard).jpg

When the politician mentioned that the people he knew sought abortions because they believed that their lives would change completely, where they correct in what they believed? I know of many accounts in which a couple engages in pre-marital sex and they have a child, yet instead of fearing the worst, they get married, and they have a stable and loving home as a result.

The fearful speculations of some couples lead them to seek a permanent solution to a temporary problem. That kind of self-centered calculation is wrong.

As for marriage, the accepted premise has become: people are born gay, and that's the way they are.

Yet this idea is a uniquely modern idea, and an unsubstantiated one. The thousands of accounts of people who identified as homosexuals, only to leave and then live out heterosexual lives, belies the false premise. The consequences of gay marriage in states like Massachusetts and by extension California should raise greater concerns, such as the heroification of gay activists (like pedophile Harvey Milk).

Besides, the documented disease, dysfunction, and death associated with homosexual conduct cannot be ignored, either.

The basis for our values, whether with life or marriage, cannot be based on our feelings, or our limited understanding of certain situations.

Our politicians should know better and enact policy based on the same standards, too.

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Paul Tanaka for LA County Sheriff

If it isn't obvious by now. . .
I endorse Paul Tanaka for LA County Sheriff.
Having investigated the ins and outs of the whole Baca-Blue Ribbon Commission - Abuse controversy, I am more concerned than ever about a widespread media bias which slams anyone who is pro Second Amendment as well as fiscally conservative.
There is one reporter at the LA Weekly covering Tanaka and "exposing" a culture of abuse. . .and that's it.
The reports from individual sheriffs, as well as leaders in the organization frustrated with Lee Baca, to residents throughout Gardena and LA County suggest that Tanaka is the best man for the job.
The LA Times, however, has shaped much of the opinion about Tanaka so far. The periodical has become notably (and notoriously) biased toward Republicans, conservatives, and limited government advocates in general. Openly gay, pro-choice Republican LA mayoral candidate Kevin James faced nothing but indicts and scathing criticism in his mayoral run in 2013.
No one should be surprised to see the paper dump on the Gardena mayor, either.
I am convinced that Tanaka's win on June 3rd will be one more nail in the coffin for the LA Times, and perhaps LA Weekly should local journalism insist on negative, biased (even bullying?) smears which are unfounded and unsubstantiated.
At any rate, from his full and concise answers to my questions, to the evidence which doesn't add up in the press against the man, I saw less of a reason to oppose his run for office.
Based on the individual reports as well as taking into account the basic illogic of the allegations against the Gardena mayor, there is no reason not to endorse him.
His record on bringing Gardena and the LA County Sheriff's Department from bankruptcy to financial stability cannot be ignored. I believe that he will clean house in the LA County Sheriff's Department when elected.
Please vote for Paul Tanaka for LA County Sheriff on June 3rd.

Sunday, May 25, 2014

LA Weekly's Gene Maddaus Blocked Me: Why?

Loved the Breeze, but I got a better job. Why was Tanaka forced to resign?

LA Weekly's Gene Maddaus
 Following up on the Big Media smears swirling around Gardena Mayor Paul Tanaka and his run for Sheriff, I learned that this one reported, Gene Maddaus, has been writing most of the heavy-hitting attacks against the mayor and candidate.

I tweeted to Maddaus the following after I met with and confronted Tanaka on a number of the issues which have surrounded his controversial tenure in the LA County Sheriff's Department.

Arthur C. Schaper @ArthurCSchaper May 21
Why is obsessed with ? Why did you leave + Don't Like Paul Tanaka?

He answered me with the above tweet.

Then I also sent:

Arthur C. Schaper @ArthurCSchaper May 21 Still haven't answered my question -- why are you obsessed with ? Explain "forced to resign"

May 21
At this point, I sense nothing but smear and bias Tanaka answered my questions!

 Arthur C. Schaper @ArthurCSchaper  ·  May 22
Why Doesn’t Big Media Like Paul Tanaka?: Why the anti-Tanaka obsession?

Arthur C. Schaper@ArthurCSchaper 24h  (May 24) 
Why Does Not-So Hate Paul ? Still Won't Tell me why!
First of all, Tanaka was not forced to resign.

He retired.

Every major newspaper, including the South Bay's own Daily Breeze reported that.

In November of 2013, Tanaka commented on a Sacramento Public Radio program that he was fed up with the poor leadership in the LA County Jails, but at the same time there was no way that he could he resist the authority of the current leadership and remain there.

He retired, then he announced his run for Sheriff.

It's just that simple.

Now I asked Mr. Maddaus to explain his anti-Tanaka obsessions.

I tweeted him a few more times for an answer.

Lo and Behold -- Maddaus blocked me.

I will cry myself to sleep tonight -- laughing.

I join with the now-deceased Andrew Breitbart in shouting: "I hate bullies!"

I hate media bullies who go out of their way to smear candidates and politicians just because of their values without any evidence to support the allegations.

The liberal Big Media cohorts in our country, and specifically in Los Angeles County, have acted like rich, spoiled adolescents who go out of their way to trash anyone whose "values" do not line up with theirs. The whole sordid, anti-truth miasma reminds me of the petty bet between the two rich, bored old white men in Trading Places, who wagered one dollar that they could bring a wealthy man to nothing.

Today, instead of rich white men taking down other wealthy peers, we have the "mainstream media" trashing conservatives of all colors just to keep a left-leaning mess adrift in our current political cohort.

I have had enough.

It's time to hold "journalists" like Maddaus accountable.

So, Mr. Maddaus: why did you block me? You don't like people writing about you at length with spurious allegations or incessant demands? If you can't take such conduct, then perhaps you should not be engaged in the same.

Readers in Los Angeles County need to start holding our media accountable. From the LA Times disturbed obsession with an old, Jewish basketball team owner, to their systemic neglect of massive government failures, from LA County leaders to the President of the United States (when they are Democrats)

It's time to punch back at this unethical reporting. It's to hold our journalists to the same standard expected of any one of us in our dealings with our peers in the workplace or anywhere else.

No one gets to trash with impunity other people with nothing but inference and hearsay.

Journalists should have a little more integrity than that.

So, Mr. Maddaus, I will ask again:

Why did you block me? Why do you have an anti-Tanaka obsession?

Did you leave the Daily Breeze because you wanted to or were you asked to leave for unethical practices?

Saturday, May 24, 2014

Munger Hunger for the CA GOP

According to party leaders near and dear to me, Charlie Munger Jr. currently controls the California Republican Party.

There is also a blog out there, the Munger Games, which is blasting his corrupting, illiberal influence on the state party to make it more left-leaning.

He and one of the state party leaders, Harmeet Dhillon tried to sue the writers of the Munger Games, but to no avail.

Munger does not like it when people criticize him behind pseudonyms and anonymous blogs.

Charles Munger Jr.

Fine then, Mr. Munger.

I will not hide behind any anonymous blog posts.

What you see, what I write, I will not run from, and you will plainly see who I am and what I am writing.

This party, this state, is not for sale.

The Republican Party cannot be a viable force in any way if the party chooses to be as left-leaning as the Democratic Party.

As George Will commented shortly after the first inauguration of the Obama Administration, we have two parties in this country for a reason.

As Charles Krauthammer had commented after the 2012 elections, the United States does not need two liberal (in name only) parties.

Who are you to use your inheritance to push a political party to the left?

Why are you dedicated to one party rule in the state of California?

What's the point of voting for Democrat-lite when Democrat-full is the real deal?

There is no fiscal conservatism without moral principles, Charlie.

Relativity belongs in physics, not politics, Mr. Munger, so get out of this hollow business of telling the Republican rank and file, the grassroots, and even the Establishment voters with slightly more sense whom they should support.

Instead of attacking Republicans, why don't you start educating people about the dangers of moral relativism? How about denouncing the corrosive progressivism which defines today's Democratic Party, as well as the immoral extent of the union lobby in Sacramento, in public education, and in our business communities?

One again, your expertise in physics (and spending your father's money) has falsely impressed on you the notion that you can dictate the proper dictates of a political party.

No, Mr. Munger, your hunger for power and influence is making the influence of Republican power absolutely powerless.

Did you tell Chairman Brulte to take union money, or is he telling you to support these "centrist" candidates to help create a "New Majority" (more like a permanent minority).

And what is with that stupid tie? Really?

Opposites attract, and every action will cause an equal and opposite reaction.

That's what physics should have taught you, and the same does apply to politics.

There may be multiple dimensions in the laboratory or college chalkboard, there may be worlds enough and time to debate the best ideas and platforms.

But in the real world, the limited three dimensions where no one has the time or energy for the insanity of doing the same thing over and over, right decisions must be made decisively.

The limits of time and space also inspire us to make the most of what we have, and make the best for those who will come after us. The dignity of choice means respect for life, the sanctity of marriage, the inherit right of self-defense, the power of private property and free trade to promote the most just outcomes, and the need for moral certainties to maintain freedom for natural and naturalized citizens.

It is time to cast the Munger Hunger for the GOP into a black hole.

Time to starve this beast.

Mr. Munger, take your hunger for power and influence somewhere else.

This California Republican and the California Republican Party are not for sale.

Gina Semana for Torrance City Clerk

Of the three candidates running for Torrance City Clerk, Jay Scharfman, Rebecca Poirier, and Gina Semana, Gina is the only candidate whom I have had the privilege of meeting and hearing from.

She is the only candidate who is not taking union money or has connections with political insiders.

She has received my vote for City Clerk, and I hope that other Torrance residents extend to her the same courtesy on June 3rd.

1. Why are you running for city clerk this year? Did you ever plan on running for office before?

I am running for City Clerk because I believe the office can be run in a more effective, efficient, and timely manner.  I have worked in the Torrance City Clerk’s office since 2001 and decided 6 years ago that when our current City Clerk retired I would step up and run for office.  I have been able to see where office duties can be improved and streamlined and other processes which are not currently being handled efficiently.

Providing information to the public is one of our main duties as City Clerk and we need to provide that information in an unbiased and professional manner.  I believe I am that person who can bring my natural leadership ability, the working relationships I currently have with city employees at all levels and the voice to speak up in providing an open government to the people.


2.  What is your political party affiliation? Why?


My strong belief in their core values


3. Tell us about your prior professional/political experience and how they can help the City of Torrance?

My professional experience has been a total of 15 years in the public sector with 13 of those years in the City Clerk’s office and during that time I have seen where many improvements can be made and processes handled in a more efficient and timely manner.  Cross-training and succession planning are a huge priority for me so that if anyone was to call or come in to our office requesting information any of our eight team members should be able to assist with knowledge and confidence.  Currently, each position is specialized and it is difficult to provide assistance or information if that team member is out of the office.


4. What measures, reforms, and policies would you implement on a city level to bring in more business and increase economic activity in the City of Torrance.

As a City Clerk candidate I do not have the ability to implement policies in bringing in new business, however, I do support increased economic development and activity to bring in more business as well as working with the businesses that are here and keeping them in Torrance.


5. What concerns do you have about crime and public safety in Torrance?

I do not currently have concerns about the crime or public safety in our city. We have an excellent police department.


6. There are growing revelations about the city's massive pension liabilities -- $400 million, an online reports confirm that at least 600 city employees out of 200 are earning at least $100,000 a year in total compensation (per 2012 data). What reforms or steps do you support to deal with these massive pension liabilities?

I was concerned a few years ago, I believe it was 2005, when the CalPERS contract was negotiated and amended for our safety personnel with the 3% at 50 plan and see how that has affected our city now with the pensions.  I agree we need to make changes and see the big picture.

7. How have residents and prospective voters responded to your campaign?  

I have had great support from residents, prospective voters, as well as city employees regarding my campaign.  While I have been out precinct walking several people I met in the beginning were surprised to hear about the election and also that the City Clerk position is elected.  One of the duties as a City Clerk is to get the information out to the voters and it has been a pleasure providing that information along the way.


I do hope that people are informed when they go to the polls. The fact that we will be getting a new mayor, four new councilmembers, and a city clerk is the first time in Torrance history that has happened with such a HUGE turn over in our local government.
For more information, please visit

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Elan Carr for the 33rd Congressional District

Elan Carr for Congress
For the moment I heard that a Republican had thrown his hat in the ring for the 33rd Congressional District, I did everything I could to reach out to the candidate and get him down to the South Bay.

When I learned that Steve Cooley had endorsed a gang prosecutor, Elan Carr from the Valley, I reached out to Cooley's office.

The former district attorney contacted me personally.

Now that's class.

Cooley gave me all the key contacts for Carr's campaign staff, who took down all the information I could offer them about South Bay contacts. Someone in league with the campaign shared with me that Carr has a home in Torrance as well as in the Valley.

I also learned that the former LA County District Attorney lives in the South Bay. Perhaps he could help host a fundraiser for one of his deputies.

For the next month, I spoke with campaign staff, learning more about his views on key issues. I invited him at length to make his name known in the South Bay as soon as possible, so that he would have the best name recognition and win the primary to get in the running for the House Seat in November.

Carr finally came to the Beach Cities Republican club in April.

His presentation was spot on. He focused on fighting crime and providing the best education for students in all parts of the county. Despite his lock-em-up record as a gang prosecutor, Carr lamented that the deeper issue, no education and no opportunities for legitimate advancement, was setting so many youth on a dark path.

Carr has retired military friends who live in the South Bay, including city council candidate Milton Herring. That evening, he received quite a reception from conservatives, many of whom were worried that no viable Republican would emerge to take the "Waxman seat" for the GOP.

The best was yet to come for me, though, after the meeting.

I approached him right away and asked questions regarding his stance on issues.

Regarding abortion, he submitted that Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, and he was not going to change that. He does support gay marriage.

I pressed him on the Free Speech issue, that private businesses were getting sued and forced to comply with gay marriages. He admitted that he had not considered that aspect yet, and would get back to me.

[5/22/2014 Update:] Elan Carr informed Craig Huey's website researchers that he does not support forcing clergy to officiate gay marriages if they violate the conscience or the values of those ministers and their congregations. I support this position, and I am glad that he took my question seriously enough to have an answer prepared for

At least he was honest.

I probed further about the abortion issue. He does not support partial birth abortion, abortion as birth control, or taxpayer funded abortions

Directly he answered each with "No!"

That was much better.

Regarding the Second Amendment, he did support background checks, but not an assault weapons ban.

Even better.

Regarding Obamacare, he stressed that the current law simply is not working. I asked about reforms needed, and he mentioned ideas which I had neglected to remember, like tort reform

When a candidate advocates for values you care about, when he is putting the words in your mouth before you can say them, you know that you have a pretty good candidate.

He does support a pathway to citizenship, but he also recognizes the need to deal with the welfare state, which creates a negative attraction for immigration.

He answered all my questions.

Later, he recalled that I had contacted his office to get him to come down to the South Bay. He was glad about that. He even called me a few days after his son Samuel was born.

Carr is good enough for me, a viable Republican who is consistent, connected, and competent.

Please vote for Elan Carr for Congress on June 3rd and November 4th.