Update on Torrance CCA Proposal

Aram Chaparyan, a staff member in the Torrance City Mananger's Office, sent me the following statement about Torrance's ongoing interest in Community Choice Aggregation:

Good afternoon Mr. Schaper,

 

Staff has not taken any further steps since the City Council meeting. I am aware of other efforts such as City of Hawthorne obtaining a consulting firm to prepare a feasability study and the LA County Board of Supervisors also approving a resolution to further study Community Choice Aggregation.   Staff will continue to monitor other regional efforts and any further direction wil require City Council review and approval.

 

Thank you,

Aram

 

Aram Chaparyan
Assistant to the City Manager
City of Torrance | 3031 Torrance Blvd. | Torrance CA 90503 | 310.618.5880 voice | 310.618.5891 fax |AChaparyan@TorranceCA.gov | 

www.TorranceCA.gov | www.Twitter.com/TorranceCA

Aram Chaparyan, Asst. to Torrance City Manager

 

The CCA Agenda is indeed Obamacare for Energy Policy.

 

There is no choice created through government seizing power from local government authorities in a regional conglomerate, then harnessing power through alternative sources.

 

Despite the extravagant support from climate change activists, the large majority of stake holders in the City of Torrance, including working families and retirees, students and parents, are simply not informed about this proposal.

Mayor Furey, along with Councilmembers Heidi Ashcraft and Mike Griffiths, had nothing more to add on this subject.

Furey affirmed that the city has taken no further action on CCA, but are looking at how the program develops in Hawthorne and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors.

The latter two constituencies are more liberal, or at least more Democratic. Hawthorne's business elements are developing more rapidly and securely. A lengthy beautification process is also expanding the area. With the newly created Wiseburn Unified School District, property values are rising in the western part of the city, too.

Why Hawthorne would pursue the costly CCA program is unclear. As for  LA County BOS, that body has revealed some liberal trends lately, toward expanding government funding of health insurance to illegal aliens. Their interest in CCA should come as no surprise

Los Angeles area residents should be concerned, nonetheless, and keep friends and neighbors informed, along with informing their representatives about the consequences of this program, and why they should reject further time and resources toward its study and development.

Cicilline's Silence on Netanyahu Victory

Despite his immodest Democratic leanings, Congressman David Cicilline has been a vocal supporter of Israel.

David Cicilline on MSNBC (Truth Revolt)

On Truth Revolt, the Providence based Congressman defended the Jewish against attacks of racial bias from left-wing MSNBC journalist Joy Reid:

I think there's a recognition that our two countries share values and that we respect the right and the responsibility of the Israeli government to protect their people federal an ongoing terrorist act. This is not a conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. This is a conflict between Israel and Hamas, a terrorist organization that we've identified as a terrorist organization. So I don't think it's a question of Israel can do anything it wants. But it's a recognition that Israel has a right to defend herself against an oncoming terrorist attack, thousands of rockets. But obviously to do so in a way which reduces the likelihood of civilian casualties but also honors its responsibility to protect its citizens.

Moral clarity is a stunning rarity among Democratic politicians, and Cicilline offered some context for Israel's military actions. Cicilline also invited Rhode Islanders to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's third speech to a joint session of Congress, which occurred a few weeks before Israel's parliamentary elections

Despite his party affiliation, the Rhode Island representative should be commended for supporting the Jewish State. In disgraceful contrast, US Senator Sheldon Whitehouse declined to attend. The junior Senator cited Speaker John Boehner's lack of protocol. In reality, Congress did nothing untoward or unseemly by inviting the Prime Minister to speak. Lest anyone forget, the Constitution establishes Congress with the power to sign treaties, make lies, and join in alliances.

Senator Whitehouse may not understand the full dynamics of Congress, but the Republican majorities certainly do. And so does Cicilline.

Another question emerges: Why did the Congressman say nothing about the US Senator's decision not to attend Netanyahu's speech? Furthermore, despite his ethnic background, Jewish as well as Italian, the Providence Congressman has done surprisingly little to inform voters about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his speech, and his recent victory in the March 17, 2015 elections.

Re-elected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Truth Revolt)

Cicilline has not even published a press release on Bibi's electoral upset. Reports surrounding the final weeks of the Israeli elections attest to state department officials attempting to influence the election for Netanyahu's center-left opponent. The evident rancor between the current Prime Minister and President Obama is unavoidable. Bibi's victory further humiliates Obama's vision of a complain, left-leaning Israeli government, and also sets back his declining political influence at home and abroad.

The American President's open hostility to Israel knows no parallel. The United States and Israel do share values, as Cicilline instructed the MSNBC host, like Western Democracy, the rule of law, the inviolability of human life, the respect for individual freedoms against the state, freedom of speech, religion, etc.

Why does the former Providence mayor say nothing to promote Israel's reassertion of a center-right government? Just because of Netanyahu and his Likud Party's domestic ideological views?

More likely, Cicilline has remained silent because of the President and His party, and their domestic as well as foreign policy views.

A product of progressive academic rearing, which neglects good and evil, and promotes equality as the one and final virtue, President Obama embraces a left-leaning worldview, one in which evil belongs only to those who hold power. Any notion of final authority, removed from man, is a wretched fraud to be resisted.

Nevertheless, might ultimate rests on right, and power has none of itself without a recognition of the truth, of certain consequences which either promote life and liberty or bondage and death. There is no liberty without life. No one lives free without the healthy, wholesome recognition of a benevolent Creator who grants rights and opportunities to all. For the Left, the state and power rest in the arbitrary will of the few, the well-connected, those who are more equal than others.

Obama's worldview of global equality and even results stumbles at the footsteps of the Jewish State, a nation which testifies of a Final Authority, plus the domains of good and evil beyond the limited senses of mankind, the certainty that power and truth come together for good. While liberals demand that the world should work a certain way, the survival and thriving of the Jewish State put to shame the core tenets of progressive principles.

Cicilline deserves recognition for honoring Prime Minister Netanyahu at the joint session of Congress His silence on Whitehouse's absence, and Netanyahu's recent victory, deserves rebuke.

Boston Globe: Run, Warren, Run!

Chicago native, former Saul Alinsky acolyte, First Lady, US Senator, Presidential Candidate, and Secretary of State Hilary Clinton is the inevitable Democratic nominee for President, again.

Hillary Clinton (Truth Revolt)

Democratic leaders in California are already launching “Ready for Hillary” fundraisers. Local activists tout Clinton’s margins of victory in hypothetical match-ups against all known potential Republican contenders, gleefully anticipating another four to eight years of the Democratic Party holding the White House (although likely facing a Republican held Congress).
Democrats are singing: “We’re gonna party like it’s 1992!”. Hoping for another Bush (Jeb) v. Clinton (Hillary) contest, Democrats hope that the former First Lady of the first “Black” President will become the First Lady President in US History. After pulling the lever for the first Black President, and the black eye this country has suffered continuously on account f it, progressive statists and illiberal Democrats want to roll the identity politics dice a second time, and hope that a Woman President will make it all better. Why not go all the way and select a gay, handicapped, elderly Hispanic, and check all the left-wing boxes at once?

Hillary is so inevitable, that the media class, and the low intelligence voters who think them intelligent, have started getting border. Just like in 2008, where Clinton nearly won against a younger, sprier, and much more naïve and dangerous challenger, Hillary is crashing and burning under the weight of her own certainty, and the liberal penchant for identity politics and ideological hubris.

From her frequent gaffes about businesses and her poverty after leaving the White House in 2001, and now the damaging revelations of using a private server for her official Secretary of State email correspondence, Clinton ship is taking on water, and tanking in the public eye. In her latest press conference at the UN, staged to a fault with foreign press asking soft-ball questions, Clinton gave forced answers, which prompted more questions rather than relief.

 

Clinton Faces Email-Gate (The ConservativeTreeHouse.wordpress.com)

 

She had one private account because she did not want the inconvenience of two, yet two weeks prior she admitted in a friendly forum her ownership of two cellphone devices, with their own servers, no doubt. If her technology skills are so lacking, is she competent enough for the White House? What record does she have to run on? A first lady who helped wipe out Democratic majorities in Congress following the heedless pursuit of single-payer HillaryCare? Her middling, unknown term in the US Senate is known for voting for the War in Iraq, which brought down her 2008 Presidential bid. And then there’s the eight years of Barack Obama which Hillary Clinton will have to explain, ignore, or run away from.

Hillary Clinton’s time is running out, and Democratic partisans want someone else, and fast. Already, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is the head, the heart and soul of the political organization: wiped out in Washington and disappearing across the country (except in bankrupted municipalities governed by public sector unions, welfare recipients, and illegal aliens). Iowa Democrats admitted their yearn for someone more liberal.

Independent Socialist US Senator Bernie Sanders (Vermont) indicated numerous problems with Hillary Clinton last year, too Establishment and Wall Street oriented, ignoring the needs of a collapsing middle class. To this day, he is still deciding whether to run for President (and under which banner, either Indie or Dem).

Another name has been making the background ranks, complete with MoveOn.org living room meet and greets, emails, letters, and online petitions:

US Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts).

From a purely political perspective, Warren is one of few Democrats to win election in the last four years. Warren has harnessed the populist Left with uncompromising zeal, railing against Big Business and Big Banks, yet loving Big Labor and pushing for Big Government. She is everything a progressive activist would want. She voted against the last-minute CRomnibus bill. She pulled together a list of Progressive Commandments. She attracts the attention of Left and Right, with pure ideology floating her viability. Plus she is a woman, which would appease the yearning guilt of the Democratic Party itching to elect the First Woman President.

If the momentum from MoveOn.org weren’t enough, the Boston Globe just published an editorial from MoveOn.org activist Anna Galland, dumping Clinton and urged Senior Senator Warren to run. Calling her “the country’s leading advocate for working and middle-class families,” Galland suggests that Hillary’s implosion leads to Warren’s explosion, a Presidential candidate to stop income inequality and inordinate power of corporate lobbyists over the “regular people.

More Democrats should join the chorus for Warren as 2016 Democratic nominee, the true representative of the Democratic Party.

Republicans should hope for a Warren candidacy, and expose the new Democratic Party, hypocritical to its roots, populist face with an elitist spirit, playing up class warfare while creating it, shrouded in the blind faith of Obama’s “Hope and Change” fanaticism. A strong, Republican candidate would shut out the Dems’ 21^ST century version of Walter Mondale. Instead of 1992, Republicans will party like it’s 1984, just as conservative icon Ronald Reagan swept nearly every state in the union.

Run, Warren, Run!

Run, Liz, Run! (Truth Revolt)

LA Times Fail: Sharon Runner Won (Duh!)

State Senator Sharon Runner (R-Palmdale)

The Los Angeles Times reports today that Sharon Runner was elected the next representative for the 21st State Senate District.



The title of the article reads:

Voters send Republican Sharon Runner back to state Senate

 

The first paragraph of the column reads:

Voters on Tuesday sent Republican Sharon Runner back to the state Senate three years after she underwent a double lung transplant. She was the only candidate on the ballot for a special election in a district representing parts of Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties.

She was the only candidate running!

Who else were the Antelope Valley residents going to send to Sacramento on their behalf?

Voters did not so much as send her to office as affirm that she was the only one running.

Perhaps election laws should be restructured in the state of California, ensuring that if only one candidate throws his name in for a partisan race, then there is no need for a ballot.

Question: would Runner have won the seat if no one turned out to vote at all?

Breitbart Fail: Turning into Paul-bart?

The nominations for the 2016 Presidential election is already drawing in heated opinions and large funding streams.

The Marginalized Media is pushing for Hillary, and pulling apart Jeb Bush. The same Media has already trashed New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, even as they had cozied up to him for two years, following his stellar standing against teachers unions and standing up to Garden State denizens in town halls.

NJ Christie got built up
then torn down by media (Bob Jagendorf)

The chattering classes in New York and Washington DC build up moderates then demolish them, all in the end to promote then coronate a liberal. Christie was one of them. He went from gracing the cover of Time Magazine to featuring on a cover in silhouette: "The Elephant in the Room"

The feature was rude and trite, not even remotely accurate. Ultimately, Christie is not only not the elephant in the room (he has lost weight), but he does not look remotely like a contender for 2016.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton disgraced the New York Times Magazine with her face imposed on a planet, and constellations orbiting her.

Now the leftist elements in the media, particularly MSNBC, have gotten bored with Clinton (again) and want someone purely progressive. Clinton's server scandal over a private email account during her tenure as Secretary of State will not go away, the way that the media dumbed down the VA secret wait lists, Operation Fast and Furious, and the tragic massacre of four diplomats in Benghazi.

Now, with a new media rising, democratized, leaning right, and in some cases partisan to the point of inflammatory, the same faults of the Left toward promoting one candidate at the expense of others has emerged.

Breitbart has helped free up the media monopoly which benefited the Left, the Establishment, and Big interests taking advantage of political power and government favors. Sites like Truth Revolt and CNS News.

More right-leaning news sources hold Republicans accountable as well as Democrats, and they should. A free press cannot be essentially partisan, if the media wants to engage readers or maintain lasting influence. The downfall and resignation of Congressman Aaron Schock of Illinois, for example, follows from Breitbart and other news sources holding him accountable for his questionable spending habits.

Regarding the potential presidential contenders, however, it appears that Breitbart is embracing one candidate (or a set of candidates) at the expense of others.

Disclaimer: This author supports Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker for President in 2016.

Matthew Boyle

Matthew Boyle, one of the writers/journalists for the New Media newsite, demonstrates a strong affinity for US Senator Rand Paul. Just looking over the list of his recent articles, Boyle has extensively followed and promoted the junior senator from Kentucky. This Senator has done a number of noteworthy things, not just on the floor of the upper chamber (where he successfully filibustered the nomination of an Obama appointee to force an answer from Attorney General Eric Holder) to strong relationships with Democratic Senators to push moral reforms of the criminal justice system. He also supports defederalizing the War on Drugs, Right-To-Work legislation, and has voted his conscience in alliance with the same Tea Party principles which brought him to office.

He also voiced support for a pathway to citizenship, once calling illegal aliens "undocumented citizens." This rhetoric vividly offended supporters and constituents.  Paul has also denounced institutional segregation in the criminal justice system, yet ignored the cultural pathology in certain black communities. He even rejects Voter ID, while these political statements are viewed as mere posturing to secure the African-American vote.

Clearly, US Senator Rand Paul has his failings. Yet have Breitbart editors and writers exposed these issues? Why do they spend so much time slamming Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker? Conservatives get faulted much of the time for turning on their own. Does this criticism now apply to Breitbart?

Even Twitchy asked: why is "investigative journalist" attacking one of Governor Walker's staffers? No one can ignore "investigative journalist" in quotation marks. In 2014, Boyle relentlessly hammered US Senator Thad Cochran (R-MS), who still ended up winning his Senate seat against primary challenger state senator Chris McDaniel. Evidently, Boyle was deliberately interested in helping the state senator defeat the US Senator.

Now, is he trying to upend Governor Walker's chances? His means of doing so are starting to put his integrity and viability (along with Breitbart's) into question.

Breitbart turning into . . Paul-bart? (Truth Revolt)

The latest attack against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker focused on one of his staff members. The attack was neither relevant nor informative, and almost tabloid in nature. The overextended of the piece, nearly two thousand words, discourages any in-depth appreciation for the column. Editing, conciseness, and direct reporting are key to engaging any audience.

If Breitbart turns into Paul-bart, one has to wonder if anyone is going to read it anymore, or at least no one should be surprised at its diminishing influence to detonate false narratives and reinvigorate free markets, free enterprise, and free people in our Constitutional Republic.

Seattle's Minimum Wage Fail

Sometimes, the best antidote to unfettered liberalism is. . .unfettered liberalism.

Seattle, Washington is the first city to push a forced minimum wage hike to $15 an hour.

How is that working for everybody in the wet, damp Northwestern Metropolis?

A self-righteous, self-promoting socialist sits on the Seattle City Council, and she led the drive with her city colleagues to force the minimum wage:

Socialist Council-member Kshama Sawant was the main proponent of the $15 ordinance. She and her supporters denied that the policy change would hurt businesses in the city. In one interview, Sawant said there need be “no unintended consequences.”

Unintended consequences are the very outcomes which socialist Sawant was hoping to avoid, yet rolled out in full force.

Governments do not create wealth. They can only impose rules and force businesses to make certain choices.

Businesses throughout Seattle have been making those tough choices, and they are not helping the economy. The minimum wage hike was touted as a means of making Seattle affordable for all.

Now, it is getting to a place where it is not affordable at all.

Youth unemployment sits at a 30% high. Not good for young people wanting to strike out on their own with marketable skills.

Businesses are laying off staff, or getting rid of perks like musicians.

Some fast-food restaurants have dispensed with employees altogether. This photo spells out the consequences of forced wage hikes:

How many people want to go to any restaurant where they have to do all the work?

Just to save on costs, the businesses are cutting staff, and yet the service suffers more, and now businesses are getting less. . .business.

The minimum wage hike does not just hike costs, but causes potential consumers to take a hike, dispense with eating out, along with other service driven outings.

A well-known book store in San Francisco closed earlier this year, too, because of the minimum wage hike. The owner never believed that the measure would hurt his business.

The best of intentions created the unintended consequences of higher business/labor costs, and today the bookstore is no more.

Seattle has pushed to city scale the limits of these stupid policies which punish job creators with wasteful, disgraceful policies. All in the name of advancing equality, these forced pay hikes do spread something: unemployment and anemic job growth.

Will it be too late for Seattle to learn its lesson? If a city falls into a divided camp of an enriched political class and impoverished everyone-one, violence may ensue, or the ultimate financial collapse may follow.

Either way, Seattle's presser for wage inequality has created a yawning gap of poverty and loss.



About Measure O Fail

Local elections generally do not generate a great deal of excitement.

The uproar over oil drilling in Hermosa Beach, with Measure O, however, attracted national as well as local attention. The measure failed three to one. No surprise there.

I fear that some Measure O advocates did not answer fears about potential oil spills and explosions.  No wants an Exxon-Valdez disaster along our coasts. However, that disaster was nearly three decades ago. Technology has advanced, delivery of energy supplies has improved, and emergency response times have grown more efficient over time. One Hermosa Beach resident told me that if the safeguards were clear and convincing, he would have supported Measure O.

Consider this example, which demonstrates the worst-case scenario.

The media and environmentalist groups don’t talk about the 2010 oil spill along the Gulf Coast. British Petroleum went into high gear, not just with strong PR campaigns (including the resignation of the CEO, who went sailing will oil was filling up the Gulf Coast). They went to work and cleaned up the mess. The commerce, wildlife, and tourism industries have never been better in the region. Anyone whose business was harmed received remuneration from BP and assistance from the federal government.

One Hermosa Beach resident, who voted for Measure O, told me that in Torrance one can pass twenty derricks and never see or smell anything.

Let us keep in mind that energy exploration will always have risks, but those potential concerns have been greatly mitigated over the past decade.

Walker's Right-To-Work the Right Thing To Do

Pushing aside political reticence, and completing the task which had initiated in Wisconsin in 2011, Governor Scott Walker has signed into law the Freedom to Work Act, and made the Dairy State the 25^th right to work state.

 

Walker’s latest policy reform costs nothing, and advances the liberty and opportunity for individual workers who struggle to make ends meet in a down economy overwhelmed with regressive regulations, burdensome taxes, and inane mandates.

Right-to-work is pro-liberty, protecting not only a man’s livelihood, but preventing labor associations from taking his hard-earned money and spending the funds on candidates and causes, whether he supports them or not, and even if they are against his better interests. For example, the United Food and Commercial Workers brokered a backroom deal with the grocery associations in Sacramento, California to ban plastic bags in the Golden State. This is Big Labor-Big Business cronyism at its worst, hurting hard-working Americans who will face another tax at the grocery store or adjust to the inconvenience of having no bags to carry their purchases.

Thomas Jefferson, one of many Founding Fathers whom Walker fondly references, damned such forced contributions:

"To compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves is sinful and tyrannical."

Walker’s action is an inspiration to millions across the country, including individual employees forced into union membership in order to stay employed, who resent bullying labor unions not representing their best interests, all under the pretense of helping “Working Man”.

The California Democratic Party's Other Candidate: Marcus Hardie

California Democrats feel assured that their prized candidate, Attorney General Kamala Harris, will run away with retiring US Senate Barbara Boxer's seat.

Her announcement has thrown off older, more experienced liberals in the state who have waited for years for an opening. While Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom has rejected a US Senate bid (he sees the Sacramento Governor's mansion in his midst), and Jerry Brown may consider (another) run for the Presidency, a host of Congressmen may see their one chance to continue the retread progressive policies of the Marin County Supervisor who upended the Berman-Waxman Machine in Los Angeles twenty years ago.

Adam Schiff, Loretta Sanchez, Julie Chu, among other California Democratic lesser lights are looking at a bid. Liberal Latinos slighted by the Sacramento Democratic Club, are skulking about for another candidate, now that former Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has declined to run (why give up the lucrative consultant contracts?)

There is another Democrat running for US Senate in California, who has received little press, likely because of his weird coterie of comments and ideas:

Marcus Charles Hardie.

One of his latest articles appeared on The Huffington Post, and the agenda he presses should alarm anyone, even the most ardent of liberal activists:

Gay People Are Gods: Protecting LGBT Communities Is a Divine Right'

Wow! So, where would Harvey Milk fit in this rainbow pantheon? A martyr to the cause, perhaps? The Patron Saint of Twinkies (since that was the offensive defense proffered for the assailant who killed him).

In the first few paragraphs, Hardie relates the harrowing violence of a (supposedly) gay man getting beat down in a Long Beach ghetto. No matter what one's sexual behavior, no one should suffer such abuse. This criminal activity needs to be dealt with, and yet Hardie as a nine year old said nothing, as many in crime-infested areas remain silent: "Snitches get stitches".

Today, as I reflect upon the pain inflicted on this particular gay man, I am inspired with a new dream -- not only an aspiration for LGBT equality -- but a dream of gay empowerment. For without power there can be no true security or freedom of choice.

Marcus Hardie at UC Hastings College of Law

Gay empowerment? He might be just in time, since the California Republican Party just chartered the LGBT Log Cabin Republicans a few weekends ago.

I have a dream today that gay people and lesbians will have a vested and inalienable right to universal marriage equality backed by the power of law. Gay marriage is not only a civil right to be enacted by governments, but it is a fundamental human right bestowed by the almighty hands of God.

Hardie's theology is flawed, to say the least, an the list of comments below this column demonstrate that many right-thinking, and even modern liberal minded readers did not agree with Hardie's take on marriage.

Then the US Senate candidate proposed the following for protecting gay people:

Today, in a major step towards fulfilling this lofty dream of social justice, I submitted an innovative proposal to the offices of California State Senator Mark Leno and California Assembly Member David Chiu.

Just a reminder: State Senator Mark Leno perpetuates anti-gay stereotypes, once explaining his vote on an issue as: "A girl's gotta do what a girl's gotta do."

Really? It appears that Leno is giving into the effeminate stereotype of homosexual men.


My proposal calls for the creation of "California LGBT Police Departments" throughout the Golden State. These police departments, funded by the state, would be staffed exclusively by gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender police officers. The goals of these proposed "LGBT Squads" are to better serve communities while minimizing troubling incidents of anti-gay violence.

A homosexual police force is Hardie's vision for a better California. No discussion about improving our poorly funded, badly managed public schools, or even pension reform, school choice, right-to-work provisions (giving employees the choice whether to join a labor union instead of requiring membership as a condition of employment). He could have discussed tort reform or business friendly policies hich would invite young people and experienced entrepreneurs to invest in California rather than look for the earliest chance to leave the state.

No: Hardie wants a hardy Gay Police Force.

I believe it is important for heterosexual people and homosexual people to love and respect one another regardless of sexual orientation or transgender identity. However, it is also vital for LGBT communities to wield police power backed by the force of law. In other words, we must not only demand "gay rights," but we must also demand "gay power."

They should wield power. What would they do with this power?  Would Hardie's police force arrest State Sen. Leno for his "bigoted" remarks? Beat down anyone who does not recognize marriage other than between one man and one woman? Violence perpetrated against anyone is evil,  and must be punished. Granting unjust, biased power to one group of people in a police force only invites more abuse, corruption, and malfeasance.

Plus: the militancy of homosexual activists should alarm California residents. Here are two listed in this column. What about other Americans? What about Asians in California, and the abuse they suffer? African-Americans are getting killed in disturbing numbers, too, and by other black people. Hardie should be discussing this pathology of violence and murder in other black communities.

The rantings of this column remind some readers of the failed Democratic US Senate candidate from Montana, state senator Amanda Curtis, who didn't have a cloud's chance on a sunny summer day in the Big Sky State of winning the seat to replace disgraced Army vet John Walsh, who had replaced the Democratic cynic Max "Obamacare is a train wreck" Baucus.

As far as homosexuality is concerned, the growing resistance to "the gay agenda" suggests that otherwise intimidated critics are no longer afraid to publish the truth about the sexual behavior. Not only challenging its purported genetic origins, recent articles from BarbWire.com have researched and reported on the growing health problems associated with homosexual conduct. Other sources, including the Family Research Council, have assembled accounts and stats exposing the consequences of homosexual conduct.

Do they really need body guards? Or do they rather need to be protected from themselves? A free society and a limited government is based on the rule of law, but also the basic recognition of human dignity, including the choices of sexual behavior. Better yet, love and respect in tandem with grace and truth are the call to order.

As for the California Democratic Party, and their latest candidate to announce a bid to replace retiring Barbara Boxer, Democrats might want to declare Hardie an illegitimate candidate and shut his whole campaign down.

Media Double-Standard In New Mexico

New Mexico state representative Kenny Martinez (D-Grants, New Mexico) compared rape to drunken sex in college, according to recent reports.

Former House Speaker
Kenny Martinez

Here is the video clip capturing the remark former Assembly Speaker Martinez:

Rape is defined in many ways, and some of it is just drunken college sex.

Excuse me?

During the hearing, lawmakers were discussing a bill which would permit mothers to exclude the biological father from the lives of their children, if conceived by rape.

This pro-family, pro-child bill did pass 11-0 in committee, but Republican representatives, now the majority in the New Mexico House of Representatives, were deeply offended. Rep. Kelly Fajardo of Belen, New Mexico shared:

House Rep Kelly Fajardo

“He’s trying to equate rape with drunken sex,” she said. “Rape is rape and it should not be excused.”

While New Mexican news media reported on the incident, not a peep out of the National Press, which went out of its way to demonize Missouri Congressman Todd Akin, running for US Senate in 2012, when he discussed how rape would prevent conception of another child.

Fox News Connecticut reported:

The remark drew attention in part because it recalled rape-related remarks that cost two Republicans — Indiana’s Richard Mourdock and Missouri’s Todd Akin — Senate races in 2012.

Afterward Martinez insisted he was being quoted out of context — saying he’d also added the phrase “without the ability to consent” at the end of his comment — and insisted on an apology from Republicans who had first demanded one from Martinez.

“To create a political stunt on something this important, I really think they owe an apology to every victim of rape in the state of New Mexico,” he said.

Isn't it interesting that the Democrat turns the tables on the Republicans, and makes them out to be the bad guys? The media engaged in the very political stunt against Richard Mourdock and Todd Akin to jettison their races for US Senate.

This "War on Women" rhetoric is fair game for Democrats, but the media ducks and covers, or says little or nothing when it's a Democrat.

Two years ago, shortly after the 2012 elections, Salon wrote another hit piece against the Republican Party when a California GOP delegate named Celeste Grieg declared that rape rarely leads to pregnancy.

Here are her statements on the Todd Akin controversy, and her thoughts on the rape issue:

"That was an insensitive remark," Greig said. "I'm sure he regretted it. He should have come back and apologized."

Greig, however, went on to say: "Granted, the percentage of pregnancies due to rape is small because it's an act of violence, because the body is traumatized. I don't know what percentage of pregnancies are due to the violence of rape. Because of the trauma the body goes through, I don't know what percentage of pregnancy results from the act."

She actually did not saying anything definitive. Yet she fell under fire from California Democrats. She was summarily removed from her position as President of the California Republican Assembly after that comment, but only because the Democratic Party and then the media made a stink about it.

Where are they now? Why are they not holding House Rep. Martinez to the same standard?

This media double-standard may exist, but at least local and national reporters should call out this unfair disadvantage levied against conservatives and Republicans, and conservatives in general should not be afraid to speak their minds on any issue, including women's health, life, and family.