City Orders Bar to Take Down "Thank a veteran for your freedom!” Sign

Good God...

And, of course, the city is in California.

From CBSLA.com (via Drudge):

Veterans are rallying around a local bar whose owners say they have been ordered to removed a sign that salutes their service. 

“Thank a veteran for your freedom!” says a large sign perched above Johnny’s Booze and Pool. Vets love it and make up a significant part of the establishment’s clientele. 

“I love this place. The sign gives me the pride back that I lost … I struggled a lot when I first came back,” an Army vet told CBS2′s Stacey Butler.  

But someone complained to the city about the sign, and now the bar’s owners say they’ve been ordered to take it down. 

“We received a letter in the mail from the city stating that we have to remove it within two days or they were going to fine us, like, $940,” says co-owner John Marovic. 

Co-owner Johnny Kresimir says he has until Tuesday to remove the sign or pay the fine. He plans to fight it, and has issued a plea on Facebook for support.  

[...]  

The issue has some of the sign’s supporters scratching their heads. 

Said one veteran: “I can understand city ordinances, but it’s been up there for 10 years. I don’t understand why it’s a problem now.”

It could be worse. The bar might put up a cross. Or even a nativity scene during the Christmas season. Steps have to be taken to control such aberrant displays.

It's good to see that the freedom of speech is alive and well in Huntington Beach.

The Lying Liars Lie Some More about California ObamaCare Exchange

And the Light-bringer gave unto California ObamaCare and 5 million sung his praises... oh.... well 645,000 people looked over the website. They were... stoked.

Is there any standard related to the professional American Left that isn't in tatters? Is there anything that is considered beneath them?

Not much.

From The L.A. Times (via Drudge):

California's health insurance exchange vastly overstated the number of online hits it received Tuesday during the rollout of Obamacare. 

State officials said the Covered California website got 645,000 hits during the first day of enrollment, far fewer than the 5 million it reported Tuesday. 

The state exchange had cited the 5 million figure as a sign of strong consumer interest and a major reason people had so much difficulty using its $313-million online enrollment system. 

Dana Howard, a spokesman for Covered California, said the error was the result of internal miscommunication. 

"Someone misspoke and thought it was indeed 5 million hits. That was incorrect," he said.

Well, at least they had a valid excuse. Also it was probably a few rogue people in Cincinnati...

 Howard said the revised Web traffic still represents a huge response. He said the number of unique online visitors Tuesday was 514,000 and the state received 19,000 calls. 

Meantime, Californians were still running into computer problems and long hold times during the second day of enrollment under the federal healthcare law. 

Those glitches have prompted Covered California to shut down its online enrollment system twice.

Yup, people are lining up for ObamaCare. They all can't wait until it kicks in fully in 2014... conveniently after the elections.

Judge Orders California to Release 10,000 Prisoners

"Now look judges, there's nothing I can do about it. So you're just going to have to wait with me until the problem escalates to the point where we can no longer just ignore it. And getting a mere federal order is not an indication that we're even close to that point. It's the California way."

Man, am I glad I left that state.

From Reuters:

A panel of federal judges ordered California on Thursday to ease overcrowding in state prisons by reducing the number of inmates by about 10,000 this year, and criticized in harsh terms what they described as foot-dragging in dealing with the matter.  

The three-judge panel also repeated an earlier warning to potentially hold California Governor Jerry Brown in contempt if a reduction plan is not implemented. The governor said he would seek a stay of the ruling. 

California, the nation's most populous state, has been under court orders to reduce inmate numbers in its 33-prison system since 2009, when the same three-judge panel ordered it to relieve overcrowding that has caused inadequate medical and mental healthcare. 

The issue has become a political football for Brown, partly because reducing the population in state prisons has meant that local jurisdictions have to host some convicts in county jails who previously would have been sent to state prisons. 

Earlier this year, the judges rebuffed a request by Brown to vacate the 2009 order. Brown had contended the state had fixed the crowding problem and that further prisoner releases would harm public safety. 

"The history of this litigation is of defendants' repeated failure to take the necessary steps to remedy the constitutional violations in its prison system," the judges said in Thursday's ruling.  

[...]  

The judges said if current efforts to reduce crowding do not result in the state reaching a prison population target of 137.5 percent of capacity by the end of the year, the state must then free prisoners from a list of inmates at low risk of recidivism.

"Failure to take such steps or to report on such steps every two weeks shall constitute an act of contempt," the judges said.

Brown, a Democrat, has said he lacks the authority to enact certain measures to reduce prison crowding. In court papers filed earlier this month, attorneys for the governor said state officials were working on legislation to solve that problem.

The legislation would, among other things, make it easier for inmates to be released on parole for medical reasons and establish a parole process for elderly inmates who are a low risk to the public, the state's court papers said.

Thursday's ruling stemmed from class action litigation accusing the state of failing to provide prisoners with adequate mental and medical healthcare. That led to a 2009 ruling that treatment of inmates in the state's overcrowded prison system violated constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment.

In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the 2009 order to reduce California's prison population.

Don Specter, an attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, said the ruling would mean cutting the prison population to around 109,000 inmates from about 119,000 currently, which amounts to about 150 percent of capacity for the prison system.

So when California's prisons are only overcrowded by 50% more than their capacity, then the problem will be fixed. Huh.

Well, clearly the solution is for California to impose a prison tax against the wealthy-- that is anyone with a job or running a small business-- and thus enrich the coffers of the prison guards' unions. Or California could legalize certain criminal behaviors, like 2nd degree murder and armed robbery, and thus reduce the amount of inmates coming in to the system.

Realistically, any solution in California is going to involve tons of money, with accompanying graft. I really have no idea where they're going to get the money (probably raising taxes-- my bet is another increase in the sales tax), but I can't wait to see how this all plays out.

California Lawmakers Pass Bill Requiring $50 Fee for Ammo Purchases

California: Mankind's Last and Best Hope to Face Down the Twin Scourges of Middle America and Sane Fiscal Theories

Along with a whole gaggle of various gun restrictions. Does anyone want to bet on if this is going to decrease crime in Compton, Oakland, Watts, or any other place these lawmakers haven't set foot in, or won't travel to without an armed escort?

From the L.A. Times:

California lawmakers Wednesday advanced a dozen gun-control measures, including background checks for ammunition buyers, and gave early approval to a tax penalty on the Boy Scouts for barring openly gay leaders. 

Legislators also voted for a new $75 charge on real estate transactions to pay for affordable-housing projects. 

Mass shootings such as the one in Newtown, Conn., in December spurred Democratic lawmakers to look for ways to tighten California's gun laws, already some of the toughest in the nation.

So let's see here... Control guns to increase crime, then raise taxes, and then punish politically incorrect and therefore politically unpopular institutions. It's like a Christmas wish list of trendy American Leftist policies. And people wonder why California is sinking without the benefit of a mega-quake from the San Andreas...

Californians who want to buy ammunition would have to submit personal information and a $50 fee for a background check by the state, under a bill passed by the Senate. The state Department of Justice would determine whether buyers have a criminal record, severe mental illness or a restraining order that would disqualify them from owning guns. 

Ammo shops would check the name on buyers' driver's licenses against a state list of qualified purchasers.  

[...]  

The Senate also OK'd a bill that would outlaw the sale, purchase and manufacture in California of semiautomatic rifles that can accommodate detachable magazines. The measure, SB 374 by Steinberg [Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento)], also would require those who own such weapons to register them with the state. 

The Assembly joined the action on guns by passing a measure to require the state Department of Justice to notify local law enforcement agencies when someone buys more than 3,000 rounds of ammunition. The bill would also ban kits that convert magazines to carry more than 10 rounds and would extend a ban on gun ownership for anyone who conveys a serious threat of violence to a licensed psychotherapist. 

Yup. According to California's legislature, there's not a problem that can't be solved by over-regulation, notification/intimidation, and collecting taxes/fees for ineffective government programs and filling political coffers. Well, actually I suppose those programs are only ineffective if you believe that their purpose is to do what they're nominally supposed to do. If you think these of these programs as vehicles for enriching politically connected relatives/spouses, or political allies (public employee unions, for instance)... well, then they're quite effective.

This is like reason number 75,978 as to why I left California and will never return. Well, that and the basically ignorant and arrogant belief that anyone not from California or a big city in the east is an stupid and/or evil, possibly inbred, hick that will attack you on sight.

Think I'm kidding or exaggerating? I'm not. I've had conversations with family and friends in California who, in all seriousness, have claimed that the Tea Party thinks that's it's OK for men to rape women(!) because that's just the way it is in "other" parts of the country. I bet you didn't know that California is one of the last bastions of humanity in this country-- a country whose morals have, apparently, decayed to the point of Mad Max 2.

California Awards $ 1 Billion High Speed Rail Contract to Firm Partially Owned By Sen. Feinstein's Husband

"My household just loves high speed rail. Cha-ching!!"

A pure coincidence, I suppose.

Nope. No fraud or conflicts of interest here. Just move along.

From Crazifornia (h/t Doug Powers @ Michelle Malkin):

Out of the entire universe of those who could have won the first phase construction contract for California’s high speed rail boondoggle, who would stand out as the last person who would win it if there were no political patronage.

Put another way, who is the most likely person to win it if there is political patronage?Both questions have the same answer: Richard Blum, the husband of California senator Diane Feinstein.

So, who won the contract? Blum, of course, as the principle owner of Tutor Perini, the lead firm in the three-firm consortium selected by the California High Speed Rail Authority.

Yes, Diane, it really does look that bad to us little people.

A High Low Bid

The Perini-Zachary-Parsons bid was the lowest received from the five consortia participating in the bidding process, but “low” is a relative term. The firms bid $985,142,530 to build the wildly anticipated first section of high speed rail track that will tie the megopolis of Madera to the global finance center of Fresno. Do the division, and you find that the low bid came in at a mere $35 million per mile.

And that doesn’t include the cost of rolling stock (that’s engines and cars to the normal among us). Nor does it include the cost of electrifying the route. Does it at least include the cost of land acquisition? No, it does not.

As this fiasco progress, remember that this $35 million per mile represents the best California can do on the section of track the High on Crack Speed Rail Authority selected to go first because it will be the cheapest.
 

Oh, it gets better though. Perini has a reasonably long history of money laundering and conspiracy.

Just having Blum/Perini win the contract is corrupt enough. But it gets much more corrupt, says The National Black Chamber of Commerce:

According to the New York US Attorney’s office: “Following a four-week trial, a federal jury in Brooklyn yesterday (March 9, 2011) found Zohrab B. Marashlian, the former president of Perini Corp.’s Civil Division, an international construction services corporation, guilty of fraud and conspiracy to launder money. The charges arose out of Marashlian’s false representation to New York government agencies that Disadvantaged Business Entities (DBE’s) were performing work in connection with major public works contracts, when, in reality, Marashlian had non-disadvantaged businesses favored by Perini Corp. do the work.” Tutor Perini paid Marashlian $14 million in salary while all this was going on. Two days before Marashlian was to receive a multi-year prison sentence he committed suicide. A fellow employee is currently doing a long prison term for the same case.

Perini has been caught doing such things over and over again. They are absolutely ridiculous in California projects. … According to the Seattle News some of the Perini headlines read: “In February, Tutor-Saliba and Perini agreed to pay $19 million to settle racketeering and fraud allegations in a San Francisco airport project.” … “The companies are embroiled in an 11 – year legal battle over $16 million in extra costs on a Los Angeles subway job.” (Emphasis added)

Eleven years for $16 million in extra costs for the L.A. subway? How long do you think the court cases involving cost overruns involving this boondoggle will be? I may not live to see an end in sight and I'm forty.

Well, just reason number 3978 for me fleeing California. But don't worry, we'll all be paying for it when California turns to the Feds for bailouts. That's coming soon.

Miserable California

Forbes put out their America's most miserable cities of 2011 list recently. A California city not only took top honors, but 4 out of the top 5 cities were in California. And not coincidentally all four cities are in the swath of land between San Francisco/Sacramento and Merced. And with the exception of Bakersfield (a city that has been lowly regarded since well before I was born), all the California cites are between Sacramento/San Francisco and Fresno. Well, generations of entitlement programs and a hyperactive state legislature can work wonders...

The top 10 cities are:

1) Stockton, CA

2) Miami, FL

3) Merced, CA (about halfway between Fresno and Stockton, and 50 or so miles east of San Jose)

4) Modesto, CA (about halfway between Stockton and Merced)

5) Sacramento, CA

6) Memphis, TN

7) Chicago, IL

8) West Palm Beach, FL

9) Vallejo, CA (about 10- 15 miles north of San Francisco as the crow flies)

10) Cleveland, OH

Fresno (ranked 17th), Salinas (ranked 18th), and Bakersfield (ranked 20th) were all in the top twenty cities. Amazingly Detroit, the city of wild dogs, urban farming, bears, and unbelievable amounts of government corruption, was ranked 15th.

In the Forbes article Kurt Badenhausen states "We considered 10 factors, things that people gripe about around the water cooler every day. Most are serious issues, including unemployment, crime and taxes. A few are not as critical but still elevate people's blood pressure, such as the weather, commute times and local sports-team performance."

Not a perfect list of factors... I think anyone who has lived for any length of time in a high traffic area like the greater Los Angeles area would not refer to commute time as a non-critical factor. And please factor out the sports teams... I mean come on. "Sure, I don't have a job, my car radio was stolen, and my house is now worth 50% of what I paid for it, but the local basketball team is doing great! That makes my day..."

When my wife and I packed up and left California about five years ago, my friends and family were both incredulous and convinced that we'd soon be back after tasting life and weather outside of our home state. To this day, I'm incredulous that they won't leave.

Gov. Schwarzenegger's Shameful Commute of Sentence for Political Ally's Son

On his last day in office California's governor Schwarzenegger commuted the sentence of the son of a political ally. Former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez had worked with Schwarzenegger on a variety of issues when Speaker, and had, by all accounts, become close to the governor. Fabian's son, Esteben Nunez, had plead guilty to voluntary manslaughter in the stabbing death of Luis Sanchez near Sand Diego State University and was sentenced in June, 2010. Just before leaving office, Schwarzenegger shaved more than half of Nunez's sentence. (h/t to Michelle Malkin's coverage of this story)

From the June 25, 2010 AP article:

"Ryan Jett, 24, and Esteban Nuñez, 21, son of former state Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez, were sentenced to 16 years in prison, the steepest punishment available under the law. The men had previously pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

"Sentencings for two others involved in the brawl were postponed until Friday.

"'Everything you do in life has a consequence,' Judge Robert O’Neill told Nuñez and Jett. 'People are judged by the company and they keep and the actions they do.'"

A nice sentiment, but of course that's all reversed now. Thanks, Gov. Schwarzenegger.

The AP article continues:

"The four defendants, all from Sacramento, were originally charged with murder and assault. Nuñez and Jett pleaded guilty in May to voluntary manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon. They also admitted using a knife in the incident and causing great bodily injury.

"Rafael Garcia, 20, pleaded guilty last year to conspiracy to destroy evidence and faces a possible prison sentence of up to three years. Leshanor Thomas, 21, pleaded guilty in February to assault with a deadly weapon and conspiracy to commit assault with a deadly weapon. He faces a sentence of up to four years and eight months.

"Deputy District Attorney Jill DiCarlo has said the four men became angry in the early-morning hours of Oct. 4, 2008, after they were kicked out of a fraternity party. They roamed the SDSU campus 'looking for trouble' and eventually challenged Santos and his friends to a fight on 55th Street near Peterson Gym.

"'It’s sadly pathetic that Luis wasn’t even at that fraternity party and yet he paid the ultimate price,' said Kathy Santos, the victim’s mother. The family lives in Concord.

"Prosecutors said Jett fatally stabbed Santos and that Nuñez is legally liable for the death as an aider and abettor. The prosecutor said Nuñez stabbed two other victims, one in the left shoulder and the other in the stomach and back. A fourth man was seriously injured when Thomas punched him in his right eye.

"Defense lawyers have argued that their clients were not the aggressors in the alcohol-fueled brawl and instead acted in self-defense. Nuñez’s lawyer, Brad Patton, said witness statements indicated that Santos may have had a gun.

"Prosecutors have said Santos was not armed.

"After the fight, Thomas drove the men back to Sacramento. According to witness testimony, Jett, Nuñez and Garcia drove to the banks of the Sacramento River where Nuñez placed a plastic bag on the ground containing clothing. Jett doused the bag with gasoline and set it on fire.
Prosecutors said the men tossed knives into the water."

An ugly incident, all the way around. Yet, hardly something worthy of a being commuted... unless your dad is a politically-connected buddy of the governor.

From the L.A. Times article by Evan Halper and Tony Perry:

"In his final night before leaving office, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger commuted the prison sentence of the son of former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez who had pleaded guilty to taking part in the slaying of a college student.

"Schwarzenegger announced the move in a batch of eleventh-hour press releases e-mailed to reporters. He also announced he was granting several other commutations and pardons and giving plum government appointments to political allies and the spouse of his chief of staff.
Esteban Nuñez, who was sentenced to 16 years in prison for his role in the October 2008 stabbing death of college student Luis Dos Santos near San Diego State, had his prison term commuted to seven years by the governor. In a statement, the governor noted that Nuñez, while involved in the fight, did not inflict the fatal knife wound to Santos' chest. He cites a finding by the court that it was a friend of Nuñez who stabbed Santos through the chest, 'severing his heart.'

"'I do not discount the gravity of the offense,' Schwarzenegger's statement said. 'But given Nuñez's limited role in Santos' death, and considering that…Nuñez had no criminal record prior to this offense, I believe Nuñez's sentence is excessive.'

"Fabian Nuñez, a Democrat, grew close to the governor while speaker. The two worked together to pass the state's landmark global warming law, which was a signature achievement of Schwarzenegger's time in office. Fabian Nuñez is a business partner of the governor's chief political advisor at the consulting firm Mercury Public Affairs.

[...]

"Santos, a software engineer in Concord in Northern California, said Esteban Nuñez 'had already gotten lucky once' when prosecutors accepted a plea bargain that allowed him to avoid standing trial on murder charges, which could have led to a life sentence.

"He said the family was not warned about the impending commutation and learned about it Sunday from reporters. 'The governor did not even have the courtesy to notify the victim’s family,' he said. 'This is dirty politics: cutting backroom deals. I guess if you’re the son of somebody important you can kill someone and get all sorts of breaks.'"

Well, Schwarzenegger certainly thinks that you should get all sorts of breaks...

Schwarzenegger's justifications are nonsense and seems to boil down to "I mean sure Nunez stabbed a few people, but he didn't kill anyone... " Nunez wasn't a guy just waiting in the car. He picked a fight, stabbed two people during the fight, and clearly aided and abetted Jett in the killing of Santos.

As Malkin points out, "This is bipartisan political cronyism at its worst."

Keeping it Classy: Brown Camp Refers to Whitman as a "Whore"

Ah, California... It seems that I'm that reminded about twice a week as to why I left.

From the Los Angeles Times article by Seema Mehta:

"In a private conversation inadvertently captured by voicemail, Democratic gubernatorial nominee Jerry Brown or one of his associates can be heard referring to his Republican opponent Meg Whitman as a 'whore,' saying she cut a deal protecting law enforcement pensions while the two candidates competed for police endorsements.

"The comment came after Brown called the Los Angeles Police Protective League in early September to ask for its endorsement. He left a voicemail asking Scott Rate, a union official, to call him, then apparently believed he had hung up the phone. The voicemail captured the ensuing conversation between Brown and his aides.

"With frustration, Brown discussed the pressure he was under from police unions to pledge not to reduce public safety pensions. Months earlier, Whitman agreed to exempt public safety workers from part of her pension reform plan: the bid to enroll new government workers in 401(k)-style plans instead of pensions.

"'Do we want to put an ad out? … That I have been warned if I crack down on pensions, I will be — that they'll go to Whitman, and that's where they'll go because they know Whitman will give 'em, will cut them a deal, but I won't,' Brown said.

"At that point, a voice — either that of Brown or a second person — can be heard saying: "What about saying she's a whore?'

"'Well, I'm going to use that,' Brown says. 'It proves you've cut a secret deal to protect the pensions.'"

Nice. It's good to see Brown is going to use that whore tactic. Of course It wasn't that long ago that Brown compared Whitman Nazi Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels.

Keep on keeping it classy Jerry... But hey, it's the Tea Partiers and the Republicans that are angry and uncivil in politics, right?

Jerry Brown Said What? Seriously?

Jerry Brown, California's Democrat gubernatorial candidate, compared his Republican opponent Meg Whitman to Nazi Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. He also said that Whitman was outspending him and in two months Brown would be portrayed as "a child-molesting..." This is not a joke... at least not on my end.

From the blog of KCBS political journalist Doug Sovern, Sovern Nation (h/t NewsBusters.com):

"Brown boasted about his legendary frugality. "I've only spent $200,000 so far. I have 20 million in the bank. I'm saving up for her." It's true - his stay-on-the-sidelines, bare-bones primary run cost him almost nothing, at least in California political terms. But he also fretted about the impact of all those eBay dollars in Whitman's very deep pockets. "You know, by the time she's done with me, two months from now, I'll be a child-molesting..." He let the line trail off. "She'll have people believing whatever she wants about me." Then he went off on a riff I didn't expect.

"'It's like Goebbels,' referring to Hitler's notorious Minister of Propaganda. 'Goebbels invented this kind of propaganda. He took control of the whole world. She wants to be president. That's her ambition, the first woman president. That's what this is all about.'

"I pointed out that most politicians want to be president someday. Gavin Newsom, for example. 'Sure, sure he does. But they can't control it. Look at Barack Obama, he got in and it's all out of his control. I wanted to be president. I ran for president three times, you know.'"

Oh, Jerry... I'm too young to remember him being governor, but I've heard the stories and I remember at least one of his runs for the presidency. If there was a choice between Alvin Greene and Jerry Brown for any office, I'm honestly not sure who I'd pick.

Later Brown's camp had this to say (also from Sovern's blog):

"Jerry Brown's campaign spokesman, Sterling Clifford, confirms to the Associated Press that the conversation took place, describing it as 'a discussion after a chance meeting while they were exercising. I wouldn't vouch for the accuracy of it, but I also don't want to dispute the accuracy of it. It was jogging talk taken out of context.' He says Brown was not comparing the Whitman campaign to Nazis.

"UPDATE: Friday afternoon, Jerry Brown issued the following statement: 'I regret making the comments. They were taken out of context.'"

You know between Whitman vs. Brown and Boxer (need anymore be said about this woman?) vs. Fiorina (she who is responsible for the demon sheep ad), California's political races are going to be awfully entertaining. Is it any wonder that California is currently circling down the giant toilet bowl right now? Oh, and I lived in SoCal for 33 years, have I mentioned that?

"Time" Article on Calif. Budget Crisis Proves this "News" Magazine is Irrelevant

Do you believe that California's current financial situation (bordering on crisis) stems from a lack of taxation?

A former California resident of over thirty-three years myself, I know of absolutely no one who believes this. And considering the amount of taxes Californians pay (California has the highest sales tax, gasoline tax, and vehicle registration fees in the country, and the highest corporate tax of the Western states) it's not hard to understand the universality of that opinion. Likewise considering the dismal condition of California's public schools and quality of public education, the horrible state of overcrowded county hospitals and clinics, the public works projects (walk around Los Angeles with unsullied eyes, observe cratered streets, crumbling sidewalks, and "out of order" parking meters), and crime rate (I was shot at twice in the L.A. area while working as a driver for a special effects company-- and this was several years after the Rodney King Riots), one often wonders where this colossal amount of money has gone.

Everyone is hit hard. "The top 1 percent of Californians (incomes of $2.3 million and up) pay 7.8 percent in state taxes, while those making $20,000 or less pay 11 percent of their incomes in state taxes. In other words, the lowest wage earners can expect to see up to $2,200 of their income sent to local, county and state governments in the form of sales tax, gas tax and other taxes."

Ah, but just an hour ago I read this article by Kevin O'Leary in Time under the heading of U.S. News (as can be seen here at this link). Please read it. I was honestly struck dumb-- not by its insights, mind you, but by the sheer ineptitude and idiocy of it. True audacity.

A sample of O'Leary's article: "What has brought California to such a perilous state? How did its government become so wildly dysfunctional? One obvious cause is the deep recession that has caused tax revenues to plunge for all states. But California's woes have a set of deeper reasons: direct democracy run amok, timid governors, partisan gridlock and a flawed constitution all contribute to budget chaos and people in pain."

Is this man serious? "Direct democracy run amok?" A "flawed constitution" (it would be amusing and telling for O'Leary to list the flaws in California's constitution but he doesn't)? "Timid governors?" This is the voice of an American reporter? Why, if only people couldn't vote directly and governors had the proper will, then things would get done-- in this case repealing Proposition 13, a check on taxing residents out of their houses as property values increased. California is one of the most tax-heavy states in the country and it's falling apart... but O'Leary and Time would have you believe that the problem is not enough taxes.

I was going to break this moronic article down line-by-line, but found that Warner Todd Huston at NewsBusters.org already did on a practical level, and managed to do it with a mind seemingly unclouded with incredulous derision (as my mind currently is). Please, read his analysis as he tears O'Leary's astonishingly weak argument down while exerting only a modicum of logic and research.

What is significant in this nonsense, to me, is O'Leary's and the Time editors' apparent belief that they can control truth so haphazardly. I have routinely scoffed at many claims made within Time in the recent past, all of which showcased ideological zeal replacing research and reporting, but this article was the most brazen attempt to pass off unsupported viewpoints as news, ideology as fact.

The writers and editors of Time have proved to me what a low opinion they hold of their readers. These men and women apparently think they simply can cram propaganda into our heads without even the unethical pretext of distorting the facts-- they simply created their own (I never dreamed of a day when I would pine for the intentional distorting of facts...). A simple re-writing of history and a mere claim is all they need, and they expect their readers to ignore the mountains of evidence that surrounds all of us daily. This is not a matter of a difference of opinion, nor a view colored by conflicting ideologies. This is something else entirely.

Jean-Paul Marat, of the French Revolution, was famous for his espousal of executions. In his paper, Friend of the People, Marat would routinely call for the guillotining of those disloyal to "revolutionary convictions." He would make baseless promises that conditions would stabilize and improve (Paris in particular and France in general was in utter chaos at the time) if more "counter-revolutionaries" were executed. And after they were marched off to the guillotine, beheaded, and things remained chaotic, Marat would once again call for blood and promise improvement just after this next batch were killed. It was a cycle repeated until his murder in 1793.

Time seems to have have subscribed to a (thankfully) bloodless form of the Marat theory of journalism. They make baseless promises that more taxes will allow the government to take good care of you. Good schools and freeways and universities and help for the struggling poor and wonderfully progressive prison psychiatrists are all right around the corner... Ignore the fact that massive funds are already overspent on ineffective programs, pipe dream projects, and unconscionable graft and waste. Wait, not enough to pay for it all? Just another painful tax hike and then everything will be okay... Just one more... And then another... We promise it'll work this time. Trust us.