Bay Guardian Endorsements We'd Like to See

It's election season again, and busy and/or lazy liberals everywhere in this town will be grasping for the inevitable election endorsements from SF Bay Guardian - San Francisco's establishment/alternative weekly. Like the urine-soaked Panhandle after the Bay to Breakers, they have become a sad fixture of the City. Many years ago, they started printing a clip-out version - sparing people the pain of actually reading their endorsements.

The SF Weekly has done a nice parody of these annoying dirges... they'd be funny if they weren't so true... aw hell, they're funny anyway...

Can't remember what the Bay Guardian endorsed for next week's election? Neither can we, so for your convenience we're reprinting an abridged version of its voter guide.

Governor

Jerry Brown

We wish we knew which Jerry Brown we're voting for: the crazy young man who used to run California, or the crazy old man who just won't go away. Either way, we're in. There's only one thing we'd rather see Jerry Brown do than be California's next governor, and that's Jerry Brown going out of his way to run for every office Gavin Newsom wants from now on. That would be putting the public first.

Lieutenant Governor
Jerry Brown

Anybody who's thinking of voting for Gavin Newsom for lieutenant governor should write in "Jerry Brown" instead. Just to see the look on Newsom's face. Oh, like you really care who ends up as lieutenant governor.

Attorney General

Kamala Harris

Let's recap. Kamala Harris has a plummeting conviction rate, a drug lab whose staff are actually on drugs, and her office has neglected to inform defense attorneys about cops who have been convicted of crimes. So why are we endorsing her? Because one of our editors is a cutter, and this was the best way he could hurt himself. God, we feel so alive!

U.S. Senate
Barbara Boxer

Many people claim Boxer has been a terrible senator, but we had a late lunch that day and missed the whole thing. We asked them to repeat what they'd said, only slower this time, but it turns out we weren't going to listen anyway. Re-elect Barbara Boxer.

Congress, Eighth District
Nancy Pelosi

We honestly can't remember the name of the person running against her. Is it Cindy Sheehan again? Because that would be different: Sheehan would have won last time if we'd only endorsed her harder.

Congress, Seventh District
George Miller

It would be an exaggeration to say we picked his name out of a hat. It was more like a helmet. But it was a very good helmet. Made by a small local business. Quality headgear.

Secretary of State
Debra Bowen

Progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive, progressive! If that's more "progressives" than you have after your name, then you are morally obligated to vote for Bowen.

Controller
That one guy

You know, the guy who's running for the office? Unopposed ... we think? It'll come to us. We know this one, we really do. Man, are we really excited to endorse him, too. He's done, like, great ... controllery ... things for the past two (or maybe four) years. Really kept stuff under control for the people of California. Dignity: the word that comes to mind when we think of our state controller.

State Senate, District 8
Leland Yee for Mayor

Popular with his district and a powerful force in Sacramento, Leland Yee for Mayor is a shoo-in to return to the state Senate, where he will start the Leland Yee for Mayor for Mayor campaign. Sources say it will really be the kickoff to his eventual run for governor.

State Assembly, District 13
Tom Ammiano

When the history of progressive politics in San Francisco is written, it will prominently feature two things: 1. Steve Jones' bicycle and 2. Tom Ammiano. Together, they led a revolution in San Francisco politics that successfully alienated a broad coalition of voters. Ammiano continues that noble tradition in Sacramento. He deserves to be re-elected for that. But honestly? He had us at "Kiss my gay ass." We couldn't have said it any better, and we tried.

State Ballot Measures
Proposition 14 (Open primaries)

No!

Open primaries will make it easier for people to vote for the candidates they like, instead of the candidates who are best for them. Party hacks and political pamphlets will lose influence, and then what will you do? You need us! Admit it, and vote no.

Proposition 15 (Limited public financing of elections)
Yes! Yes! Maybe! Wait — yes!

Public financing in San Francisco has supported no underdog candidates, but has led to several costly lawsuits. Naturally, we want to see the same efficiency applied to every election you vote in.

Proposition 16 (Mandating a two-thirds vote on public power)
Rape, rape, rape!

Throughout all of history, there has never been an organization more oppressive than PG&E. Nazi Germany? Hah — PG&E has made twice as many Jews suffer by charging them too much for electricity. The Khmer Rouge? At least they reused every part of their victims. The Republican National Committee? It works for PG&E — at least, according to a diagram by our unpaid interns. Someday you'll see it; someday you'll thank us. History will absolve us. Vote no, or be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes.

Proposition 17 (Auto insurance law changes)
Nooooooo

As we understand it, this measure emerged out of a plane crash on a mysterious island inhabited by a smoke monster who kills some people and saves others 15 percent or more on their car insurance. But we might be getting it mixed up with something else that was ultimately disappointing.

San Francisco Ballot Measures

Proposition B (Earthquake safety and emergency response bonds)
Yeeeeeeeeeesssssss

This is a multimillion-dollar bond on a public project. And those always turn out so well. Just the thought of public money coursing through the system makes us shiver with delight. It doesn't matter what it's for, and it doesn't matter that the city won't really tell us. Vote yes: This measure's so bad it's good.

Proposition D (Retirement benefits)
Yes! Yes! Yes!

We've tried to explain to San Francisco's activists why Prop. D works, but they didn't like it because it doesn't mention global warming even once. So instead we'll say this: They would have voted for Prop. D in the '60s. Or, at least, the '60s as we remember them; the actual '60s got us into this pension mess in the first place. But that doesn't matter now.

Proposition E (Budget line item for police security)

Yes

Our only problem with this measure is that it doesn't go far enough. Not only do we need to know how much money was spent on Gavin Newsom's security detail — even though the police chief will tell us anyway — we also need to know who the officers assigned to it are, the names of their children, and a log of the officers' sexual activities that goes back at least five years. The citizens of San Francisco deserve to know whether their cops are sex-positive. Why? Because democracy requires access to information.

Proposition G (Transbay Transit Center)
Sure, why not?

Ending on a purely symbolic policy statement with no force of law or practical impact just feels so right. If only all our endorsements could be this good.

Leftist's Wet Dream Coming True!

This article in the SF Chronicle no doubt caused a few erections among the Lunatic Left!

Here's the article with emphasis and comments mine...


White's In State 'Below the Replacement' Level

California's white population has declined since 2000 at an unprecedented rate, hastening the day when Hispanics will be the state's largest population group, according to newly released state figures.

There were half a million fewer whites in California in 2008 than in 2000, a period when the state's overall population grew by 4 million to 38.1 million, according to a study released Thursday by the state Department of Finance (the same Dept. of Finance that predicts that the state's population will be 60 million by 2050!).

By 2008, whites made up 40 percent of Californians, down from 47 percent at the turn of the century. In 2000, Hispanics comprised 32 percent of the population; that number grew to 37 percent in 2008.

Analysts said the decline can be attributed to two main causes - a natural population decrease as Baby Boomers enter their later years and die at a faster rate than younger whites have children, and a migration from California since 2001 among whites who sought affordable housing as real estate costs soared (and sought to flee from a third-world state).

"This is the first decade to see a year-over-year consistent population decrease due to natural causes," said Mary Heim, chief of the Finance Department's demographic research unit.

The study also confirmed projections that a steadily growing Hispanic population will surpass whites as the state's largest racial demographic in 2016. Hispanics are expected to become a majority of all Californians in 2042, Heim said.

Most Bay Area counties reflected the state's shifting numbers - Alameda County, for example, dropped from 41 percent white to 36 percent - while showing spikes in Hispanic, Asian and multirace categories.

Yet, San Francisco's racial mix remained consistent. Forty-four percent of the city was white in 2008, 30 percent was Asian and 14 percent was Hispanic, just as it was in 2000. Only the city's African American population showed a slight decline, from 7 percent to 6 percent.

Below replacement level

Hans Johnson, a demographer at the Public Policy Institute of California, said white women in recent decades have tended to pursue higher-education degrees and stay in the workplace, leading them to have fewer children. The white population is now "below the replacement" level, Johnson said. "They're simply not replacing themselves."

The median age among California's whites is 44, while the median age for the Hispanic population is 28, according to the study.

Stephen Levy, director of the Center for Continuing Study of the California Economy, said the study also reflected how skyrocketing real estate prices pushed workers from California during the housing bubble from 2005 through 2007.

"This is a good look at what happens when your housing prices get way out of line with the rest of the nation," Levy said. "It will be interesting to see what happens when the market corrects itself."

Reverse of a trend

Johnson said migration into California was a national trend until the 1990s, when the number of out-of-state transplants began to decline.

Lower-paid California workers headed to cities like Phoenix, Las Vegas and Seattle, where they could make similar wages but pay less for housing.

"California is no longer attracting large numbers of people from other states," Johnson said. "And a lot of those who did come to California from other states were white, reflecting the ethnic composition of the country as a whole.

"Now," he said, "that flow has dried up."

The decline among whites and increase in other groups in California is a long-standing trend, Johnson said.

"It's just faster now."

Now, the figures may be accurate, but the analysis is bullshit. Many whites are fleeing California because the place is rapidly becoming a foreign country, where you can hardly get on the phone to a local business or agency and not expect to have a hard time understanding the person on the other end.

The other bullshit assumption is that this is "just happening," and is therefore inevitable. California's slide into third-world-dom has been planned and exploited by businesses and by the Democratic Party. It is no accident whatsoever that all of this is happening here.

This is perfectly fine for the hard left - whose alleged concern for minorities pales (no pun intended) against the real driving force - which is seething anti-white racism. Leftists don't give a fuck about minorities any more than big illegal employers do; they are simply pawns in a game - bigger profits for business, bigger political profits for leftists. Oh sure, they'll get to know their names and be friendly and all, but it's just an act - a means to the end - not to elevate minorities but to tear down whites.

I defy any of you Leftist scum to deny it.

A Rare Opportunity to Vote for Common Sense in San Francisco: Vote Non-Communists Into The DCCC

There's an election this Tuesday, June 8th, and way down the ballot is an obscure but important race that - if it goes the right way - could begin to swing this town away from the suicidal hard-left path it's been going on for the last decade.

San Francisco is a one-party state - much like Mexico under the PRI - and for the most part people here have given up on the idea that San Francisco's government is anything resembling a democracy. There is only one game in town, and that is the Democratic Party.

Only Party Members can vote in this important race, so if you are a Democrat and still have a semblance of a brain and/or a soul left after 10+ years of the Progressive Stalinism of the Board of Supervisors, then please make a vote against anarchy and for common sense.

Here's CW Nevius with the scoop...

Tuesday's election features contests with big-name politicians and national issues. In San Francisco, it also includes an obscure race for a nonpaid position few people know exists.

That's the important one - for Democratic County Central Committee.

If there are moderate San Francisco voters who support the Democratic Party but are turned off by political fringe issues like legalizing prostitution, now is the time to show up. (I will suggest some moderate candidates at the end of the column.)

Who is elected to the DCCC will have a domino effect that starts with the November election and the Board of Supervisors, influences the appointment/election of the next mayor, and - if a clever, but sneaky change to the rules passes - extends years into the future.

If you are running for supervisor in San Francisco and have the DCCC endorsement, you're in. According to 25-year DCCC member Arlo Hale Smith, since 1990 the committee has endorsed 43 candidates. Forty were elected.

"In a one-party town," said Smith, "the endorsement of the Democratic Committee is the tiebreaker - particularly in local elections where people don't pay attention."

DCCC Chair Aaron Peskin, the former president of the Board of Supervisors and a shrewd political wheeler-dealer, scoffs at that.

"My next order of business," he said, "is to call my friends and remind them that I am running. Because I'll bet two-thirds of them don't even know there's an election."

But the facts say otherwise.

"In the old days nobody spent $100 on the (DCCC) campaign, much less $1,000," said John Burton, current chair of the state Democratic Party.

Today, candidates for supervisor are exploiting a loophole that says there is no limit on individual contributions for DCCC.

For example, Rafael Mandelman, a progressive candidate for supervisor in District Eight, spent $28,102.17 on his DCCC race through May 22. His opponent, moderate Scott Wiener, spent $58,402.85 over the same period. Mandelman and Wiener can't use the money for their supervisor's race, but until the DCCC election they can use it to get out ads to promote their names.

But the real reason these races are so hotly contested is that if the Chris Daly-Peskin progressives can gain seats in the DCCC, they can control issues. And finally, there is a proposal by Daly to realign the DCCC, which now has 12 seats in both District 12 and District 13. He wants to add seats to politically progressive District 13 to give the far left an advantage for years to come.

"Personally," said Peskin, "that's not on my list of things to do."

But Wiener, who lost a bitter battle for chair in 2008, sees serious problems.

"This proposed rule change is designed to accomplish one thing . . . moving the DCCC even further to the hard left," Wiener said. "When the Democratic Party starts representing only one line of thinking . . . that will be a huge loss."

So, if you're happy with the far-left agenda, check out the Bay Guardian. (Progs with name recognition like Peskin, David Campos, David Chiu, and John Avalos are probably shoo-ins. Daly is not running.)

For those who'd like to see a swing to families, kids, and civility on the streets, here are some suggestions:

District 12: Bill Fazio, Matthew Tuchow, Mike Sullivan, Arlo Smith, John Shanley, Meagan Levitan, Alex Volberding, Mary Jung, Dan Dunnigan, Ron Dudum, Andrew Clark and Tom Hsieh.

District 13: Keith Baraka, Catherine Stefani, Stuart Smith, Scott Wiener, Calvin Louie, Joe Alioto Veronese, Owen O'Donnell, Linda Richardson, Leslie Katz, Chuck Hornbrook.

Just don't forget to vote.

More Nazi Tactics From Obama's "Purpleshirts"

The lyin' purple people beaters at Obama's favorite thug factory - the Service Employees International Union - have again engaged in gestapo-like tactics to intimidate their opponents, this time actually aided and abetted by the police (whom always, let us not forget, always have the potential to behave as thuggishly as any union when they don't get what they want).

The sick story comes to us from an editorial at the SFExaminer....

Imagine you are sitting at home on a peaceful Sunday when you hear buses pull up in front of your house and begin disgorging hundreds of angry people waving signs with threatening messages, shaking their fists and crowding onto your lawn. Soon, hundreds of screaming people are tromping on your flower beds, peering into your windows and scaring neighbors, who nervously begin placing calls to 911.

As the noise levels rise and demonstrators start banging on your front door, you begin to fear that something very bad is about to happen. Then, you spot the police cars and relief floods over you. “At least the cops will keep things under control,” you tell yourself. But your relief is shattered when you realize the cops you thought were there to protect you are actually from another jurisdiction and they are there because they escorted the mob to your address.

Sound like a fantasy, something that could never happen here? Guess again, because that exact scenario played out last week in Bethesda, Md., an affluent suburb bordering the nation’s capital. The demonstrators were from the Service Employees International Union, the target of their anger was the home of Bank of America Deputy General Counsel Greg Baer, and the cops escorting the group were from the Metropolitan District of Columbia Police Department, which, like departments across the country, is represented by the Fraternal Order of Police union.

Although it’s standard procedure across the nation when officers from one jurisdiction cross into another to provide advance warning, that was not done in this case. The only person inside the Baer home when the demonstrators and Washington cops arrived was one of Baer’s young sons, who locked himself in the bathroom until his father arrived to rescue him after bravely forcing his way through the crowd. Eventually, Montgomery County, Md., police appeared on the scene and the demonstrators later departed.

There are multiple lessons to be gleaned from this highly disturbing situation. Such tactics are standard fare for SEIU, whose leaders think it’s just fine to target the private homes and families of people associated with whatever company the union has decided to demonize. These assaults are clearly meant to shock and intimidate.

Congress long ago banned secondary boycotts from union tactics. It’s time to put a stop to all such assaults on private homes and families. And the conduct of Washington police highlights another critical question: Should law enforcement officers be pawns of union bosses?

Collective bargaining should no longer have a place among those sworn to protect and serve the public.

SF History Post - U2's Vandalism of Valliancourt Fountain - 1987

Oh yeah... I was there.

I had just started work at the (now defunct) Tassajara Bakery in Cole Valley, and begged my new manager to let me off early so I could race down there.

The famous graffiti was interesting, yes, but the most amusing part of the day was when Sir Bono commented on a sign which read "SF Loves U2" - and went into a profanity laced tirade which ended in "they'll be peace in Oyrland but not with yer Oy.R.A. royfles!!!"

It's interesting to see 50,000 people simultaneously look at each other and go "what the hell is he saying?"

Apparently, Bono - forgetting that he was in a city whose initials were "SF" - thought that the initials referenced meant "Sinn Fein."

Fortunately, I did get to see U2's two performances that week at the Oakland Coliseum. I say fortunately cuz this free show kind of stunk.


Thanks to Peter Hartlaub's "The Poop" for the memory jog.

Arizona Sing-A-Long: Read Immigration Law!

Change We Can Believe In!

For the first time ever, two top-tier test cricket nations met and played in the United States!

New Zealand and Sri Lanka - both coming off of somewhat disappointing World Twenty/20 performances - got to take a mini-vacation of sorts before getting down to business at the Pearls Cup, happening at the United States' one and only ICC-approved cricket ground - the main field at Central Broward Regional Park in Lauderhill, Florida.

Hopefully, this will become a regular happening, where top-tier teams will come to the USA for T20 series and maybe even honest-to-God test matches! A T20 World Cup would certainly seem to be in the offing as well. All we need is more than one stadium.

My feeling is that - rather than trying to woo the Oakland A's or the SF 49ers - the South Bay/Silicon Valley should try to capitalize on its huge Indian and West Asian population and build a regulation cricket ground. It would be a lot cheaper and a lot more useful.

Now, to those of you regular readers who are wondering why the hell this blog is spending so much time on the relatively obscure sport of cricket, it's because it's what I'm into lately, and ultimately this blog is about me and my interests and concerns. If I wanted to try to boost readership, I might write about something I could care less about (like Basketball, ghetto rap music, facebook, twitter, etc. etc. etc.). Match results to follow.

Just you wait until the World Cup starts!

More:

The story of Central Broward Cricket Ground

Photo Series of CBCG

England Win Cricket World Twenty/20!

Whoo-hoo!

Obama's coming to San Francisco? Who cares!

England won a major cricket tournament for the first time in many, many years by defeating Australia in the final of the World Twenty/20 in the West Indies!

Pakistan put up a great fight in the semi against Australia but came up a little bit short, while England very easily dispatched Sri Lanka.

Sometimes you need to look beyond the local to find something to cheer about (are you listening Giants? 49ers? Sharks? Obama?!?).

Obama's Coming To San Francisco. Great. Swell.

Our illustrious President Barack Obama will be visiting perhaps his only remaining hotbed of support this Tuesday, May 25th.

Me... I'll be working. Someone's got to!

According to the blog Mission Local (with emphasis mine)...

President Barack Obama is coming to San Francisco on Tuesday May 25 to help fundraise for the re-election of Senator Barbara Boxer.

According to a press release sent by immigration rights advocates the fundraiser will be at the Fairmont hotel. They are also asking people to go to Grace Cathedral near the Fairmont Hotel at 4:00 p.m. to put an altar with photos of loved ones (note: presumably the Bologna's will not be welcomed).

Their demands: 1). Push for comprehensive immigration reform, 2) end police and ICE collaboration, 3) end deportations. (our response: 1) fuck you, 2) fuck you, and 3) fuck you)

Interesting that no one is copping to this supposed immigrant's rights angle directly.

All the news blurbs say that Obama's visit is to fundraise for Barbara Boxer, and not to lobby for comprehensive immigration reform (read:amnesty), or bash Arizona - though presumably there will be a bit of that as it is now very trendy with the local Marxist scum who will no doubt be stepping up the pressure on Obama to destroy America faster than the pace he's going.

After bathing in the glow of the great admiring unwashed, he will then go to Fremont to speak at a solar energy company.

And then he'll be gone. Hopefully without causing too much damage.

San Francisco: Where PC Trumps Common Sense Everyday

More politically correct clap-trap from San Francisco.

As everyone knows who rides the transit system here, MUNI has a serious problem with fare evaders. It costs the system gobs of money every year, and, by all accounts, appears to be getting worse every day.

Occasionally, MUNI and the Police Department do the absolutely unthinkable and try to actually enforce the law. Yeah... stupid, I know. But it even works for a while, until the populace's collective liberal panties get in a twist and then it's back to the same old shit.

Here's the latest from SFGate...

Does this ever happen to you? I'd been producing a radio piece about fare enforcement over the course of a few weeks. Then the day it aired I learned that the mass enforcement had been suspended. We added a quick explanation to the story and aired it as planned, but I wish we'd had more time: In the days since, as I've done more reporting, it's become clear that the craziness my recorder captured was indicative of the larger problem that got the program suspended.

Here's what happened: Last year Muni started a new effort to get people to actually pay to ride its buses and trains. The most effective way it found to do this was "saturation enforcement." That meant putting about 15 uniformed officers in one spot at a time to bust fare evaders. (When there are fewer ticket-writing inspectors, they are simply outnumbered by scofflaws, who simply walk away scot-free.) Even though the policy was effective - fare evasion has gone down significantly since they started - Muni said it would abandon the saturations and go back to putting a couple inspectors at a time in each spot. Why? ...

... Because of complaints to San Francisco's Immigrant Rights Commission.

People were worried that inspectors were demanding proof of payment from riders who didn't speak English, evoking the image of officers badgering the old Chinese man who simply can't understand what he is supposed to do. But ironically, the saturations actually decrease the possibility of this kind of cultural misunderstanding. With that many officers in one spot there will always be one who can speak your language. When I was on the Muni platform, I heard several inspectors speaking fluently in Spanish and Cantonese.

It wasn't just immigrants that felt picked on: mild-mannered, middle-class, fare-paying riders were driven into an irrational spittle-flecked rage by the sight of the inspectors. There's something about this show of force that rubs people the wrong way. This is all totally irrational, but it's also real, so Muni has to take it seriously. Whether or not public policy is right, it also has to make people happy. Call it the Feeling/Thinking problem. After all, the ultimate purpose of any government agency is to make the lives of the people better and happier. If any program, even if it works, perpetually causes strife and outrage, then it has failed the Thinking/Feeling test. So should Muni stop? No, it just needs to figure out how to do enforcement that makes people feel more secure - rather than less.

Lorena Melgarejo, vice chair of the Immigrant Rights Commission, says that the people she represents need fare enforcement; they are the ones who depend most on a functioning bus system: "This is our Muni," she says. "We don't want to lose $19 million a year and have Muni cutting those lines that we need because people aren't paying." But, she says, the fare enforcement should work, "the same way the census this year has worked." That is, a careful campaign to convince people that the effort is not against them, but for their benefit. Little changes could help, she adds, like if the inspectors wore white shirts, rather than dressing like cops (or immigration officers).

Really both sides in this fight want the same thing. It's gotta be tough for the Muni inspectors to bend to accommodate irrational behavior. But if they can figure out a way to both be right, and make people feel good - if they can solve the Thinking/Feeling test - it will make their jobs a heck of a lot easier.

Same old bullshit.

Now, out of the many classes and genres who evade fare paying, the biggest problems are usually with the insane, the homeless dirtbags, and black ghetto youth, but in terms of sheer numbers, nobody beats Mission Street (that's the Hispanic section for those of you who don't know S.F.) and the huge numbers of people who jump on the back of buses for free. Now who knows if they're "illegal" or not... my guess is that it's just another "entitlement" that "immigrants" (translation: non-whites) have grown very accustomed to.

It's actually a bit of a running joke... many times I've seen people jump on the back to have the driver yell at them something to the effect of "Come on... this isn't Mission Street!"

Fare evasion will always be a crime because it is committed mostly by the "downtrodden" and "socially vulnerable" (translation: anyone who isn't white - though insane or drug-addicted dirtbags get a bye), and therefore nothing will be done that might "offend" the thieves.

Sadly, a Rudy Giuliani-style crackdown would never work here - and not just because of the fascistic political correctness; SF's transit system is almost the opposite of NY's - it is bus based rather than train based - and thus is much, much harder to police (not like MUNI or the cops have any real interest in trying).

No good fare evading bastards!

Pakistan Hit By Hurricane Hussey!

Australia pulled off an incredible win in the semi-finals of the World Twenty/20 Championships in the West Indies, successfully chasing down 192 with one ball to spare, thanks to the massive batting of Michael Hussey.

I know this means nothing to our American readers, but if you ever wanted to know what cricket was about, watch the highlights of this match. Sure, it's not test cricket (that's the 5-day variety), but it was one of the best twenty-over matches I've ever seen.

Next up: the final... England v. Australia on Sunday.

Cricket: It's what's for dinner!

Note: Well... at least he can speak English...

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?!?

Man... they must be smokin' some good shit at the Chronicle editorial offices!

I suppose it's no surprise really... but the Chron has endorsed Kamala "I've never met a criminal I didn't like" Harris for the Dems' Attorney General of California candidate...

California's attorney general has the widest portfolio of responsibilities of anyone outside the governor's office. Crime, environment, corporate fraud, consumer protection. This list goes on. Not surprisingly, the Democratic candidates for attorney general presented an array of contrasts in both their emphasis and their knowledge of the issues. San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris stands out in this field both in her grasp of the issues and the clarity of her priorities (...fucked up as they are...).

Harris said her No. 1 goal would be to reduce the recidivism rate of inmates leaving prison, which contributes to an overcrowding crisis, adds to the state deficit - and erodes public safety. As she noted, California releases 120,000 inmates a year. Seventy percent of them return to prison within three years (Her solution: it doesn't count as recidivism if you never send them to jail again!).

"It's one of the biggest challenges that can be fixed in our state," Harris said.

In San Francisco, Harris' "Back on Track" program for first-time offenders between ages 18 and 24 has produced impressive (hardly) reductions in recidivism through job training and other life skills. It also generated a touch of controversy (which even the pro-amnesty Chron couldn't ignore) when it was revealed that some of the participants were undocumented immigrants, and thus could not legally (because they're "illegal") fill the jobs they were being trained to do.

Harris did not flinch at questions about the problems. The program screening was tightened, she said. Besides, she added, innovation in law enforcement necessarily involves an element of risk (to the public, of course).

The worst risk of all to public safety is to accept a 70 percent recidivism rate.

Her opponents include Rocky Delgadillo, the former Los Angeles city attorney; Facebook executive Chris Kelly, who has poured $8 million into his campaign; and three termed-out Assembly members - Alberto Torrico, Ted Lieu and Pedro Nava. Delgadillo, who lost to Brown in the 2006 primary, comes closest to Harris in applicable experience - but does not have nearly as well developed a vision for the statewide office (Oh Christ! You mean Harris has a vision of what she wants to do with - or to - California? That is fucking frightening).

Harris has clearly raised the level of the San Francisco district attorney's office in the last six years (which, considering she replaced Terrance Hallinan, is not saying much). Its conviction rate has reached a 15-year high (again, not saying much). The office has had some unsettling lapses, such as its inability or unwillingness to identify (or even acknowledge) the problems with the lax treatment of young drug dealers (known as "Kamala's Kids") under the Sanctuary City ordinance, or the colossal mess in the Police Department's crime lab. The best that could be said in each case is that she was not well served by some of her subordinates. But Harris has demonstrated her ability to confront and correct problems, and to learn from them. She is the Democrats' best choice for attorney general.

Harris' grandiose vision - Jesus help us - will no doubt require a lot of "elements of risk" that will certainly put the California public in serious jeopardy.

Not that she gives a flying fuck. Kamala's chief concern is for the criminal. They are, after all, the real victims. This is what passes for rational thought in the minds of those like Harris.

Fortunately, judging from the comments section, it looks like few are buying the Chron's glowing assessment of Harris' failed tenure...

* Fortunately, people outside S.F. get to vote on this one. No Harris, no way.

* you've got to be S####ING me...

* "San Francisco’s 800 plus unsolved murders rate ranks as one of the highest in the nation." Candidate against the death penalty--even for a felon who used an AK47 to gun down a cop! My ass. Harris, go get a real job.

* i dont know who wrote or edited this garbage but harris could not litigate herself out of county jail. all the 100,000 idiots released from state prison should be given a sentence in a bigger cell namely mexico. send harris there too. the stupidity of the san francisco crime lab cannot be ignored and left to the SFPD. can HARRIS.

* What???? OMG, this can't be serious, but absolutely stranger things have happened. Gotta go make sure I'm registered to vote. Jeez Louise!

* "Harris has clearly raised the level of the San Francisco district attorney's office in the last six years. Its conviction rate has reached a 15-year high"

Let's not forget that conviction rates were abysmally low under Harris' predecessor, ol' "Kayo" Hallinan, to the point where the SF Chronicle itself did an article about them. Remember, all improvements are relative.

* I'm all for aggressive prosecution of criminals, but not at the expense of sound judgment, which she clearly is lacking.

As far as I'm concerned, Ms. Harris got where she is because she was one of Willie Brown's girlfriends. She's done nothing positive with the job. ANYONE else would be better.

* Is this a joke? Ms. Harris couldn't prosecute a turnip much less be an effective Attorney General.

* Violent criminals are registering to vote as we speak...

* How could someone with such poor judgment be seriously considered for such an important position. I'm a Liberal Democrat, but this woman is incompetent, at best. This paper's recommendation of this person is really kind of insane, isn't it?

* I am sure they will love her in Red Bluff and Bakersfield given that she is seen as too liberal for S.F. Not a snow ball's chance of winning anything east of Treasure Island.

* Don't get me wrong, I've met her, and she is a bright, charming person. Which has nothing to do with being an effective prosecutor. She doesn't have that in her DNA.

TV Anchor? Sure. Even Supervisor or something. But she is not a leader in the never ending battle between good and evil, because she does not convey fear of consequences to criminals of any stripe.

She conveys wishy-washiness and a lack of focus on the right outcome -- the one that serves justice to the victims and punishment on the victimizer.

* "Harris said her No. 1 goal would be to reduce the recidivism rate of inmates leaving prison..."

Her number one goal SHOULD be to enforce the laws of the California AND protect its citizens.

Nevermind the touchy-feely, people-are-basically-good, social programs.

* This woman wouldn't make a good meter maid. Her color, sex and mouth got her where she is, and is incompetent at any level of measurement.

* Are you effing serious??? No wonder your readership has dropped off. She is about as qualified as my cat to be AG!!! She won't make it past the primary.

* I couldn't disagree more. How crime has snowballed in the city during her tenure should give most Californians pause. Thankfully Harris is despised in San Francisco, and a nobody to the greater state.

* The Chronicle's editorial board have really taken leave of their senses, this time. I wouldn't vote for Harris, even if hers is the only name on the ballot.

* Kamala Harris isn't qualified for any elective office in California, including dog catcher. If we had a truly just society, Ms Harris would be run out of town on a rail. She has failed miserably at her job of DA. And let's not forget that she slept her way into politics by servicing Willie Brown.

ALERT! PRO-ENFORCEMENT RALLY TODAY AT CITY HALL!

Steve Kemp from GG Minutemen has alerted us to an emergency demonstration today (Saturday May 1st) at City Hall in San Francisco. Come show your support for the Citizens of Arizona!

Here is the e-mail in its entirety. Please read it.

Join us in San Francisco to Counter Protest (Illegal) "Immigrants May Day Labor March"!
Stand up for Border Enforcement and Legal Immigration to America!
WHERE: Civic Center Plaza, San Francisco
WHEN: 1 pm, Saturday May 1, 2010

PURPOSE: To stand up for American Citizens rights for Secure Borders, Support Arizona who is trying to secure its state, and Boycott San Francisco for slurring anyone who opposes illegal immigration.

WHO's COMING:
Pro-illegal immigration groups, SEIU, La Raza, etc (them): It's their rally, so they'll pull out all the stops. With politicians and the media fanning the Arizona flames, we're probably in for some heated moments.

Anti-illegal immigration groups (us): The Golden Gate Minutemen, the Pleasanton Tea Party, members from other Bay Area Tea Parties, SF 912'ers, and a variety of Citizens who want border security, the drug trade stopped, illegal alien crimes halted, and entitlement money cut off to illegal aliens.

NO MARCHING FOR US: The OPPOSITION will gather at 24th and Mission and march up to the Civic Center. DO NOT GO to 24th and Mission! That's their march!

DON’T TAKE THIS LIGHTLY! We are there to peacefully protest, but be prepared!! Watch out for each other and keep the person next to you under control. Stay in groups and don't go anywhere alone. Don't let the opposition provoke you into verbal or physical altercations. Remember, news cameras will be there watching for trouble and want to make us look bad, and make the illegals look like victims.

SFPD: The SFPD will surround us with a barricade and have Officers there to protect us.

BRING: Bring American flags, video and still cameras, charged batteries, snacks, water, sun block, but leave the kids home.

SIGNS: Keep them clean and as positive as possible. The opposition loves to label us "racists" and "hate mongers", so don’t give them any ammo. Here are some ideas:

- Illegal isn’t a Race
- Equal Justice is Color-Blind
- Not Angry, Not Hateful, Just Not Silent Anymore
- US Citizenship is NOT a human right
- NO Amnesty - NOT on my dime!
- We support the citizens of Arizona
- Boycott San Francisco
- Jobs for Citizens and Legal residents


Tell your friends!


I'd like to add a few things.

The deck is very much stacked against us. The illegal immigration supporters will be angry and easily provoked.

They hate us.

The media hates us.

The City Government hates us.

And my guess is the Police aren't too thrilled to see us either.

The SFPD's presence, unfortunately, may not serve as a deterrent to those who are predisposed to violent confrontation. My guess is that they will do all that they can to make sure things don't get out of hand. But you can count on extreme verbal abuse, things probably being thrown at us, and provocation to physical fights.

Remember... I am a former leftist. I know these people, I know their tactics, I know how they think, and I know what they're capable of.

And they WILL hurt us if they are given the chance.

Peace, love, tolerance... I hope that there is no one out there who still buys that garbage. These people fancy themselves as revolutionaries and have no qualms about hurting people that don't agree with them. None whatsoever.

Be especially on the lookout for diversions. A typical tactic is to create a diversion - a small skirmish off to the side - to attract the Police's attention. Then, once they're occupied, they attack. If a diversion occurs, bunch up. Do not spread out. If someone gets pulled away, pull them back into the group. Don't try to retaliate.

Remember... WE THE PEOPLE are the enemy.

Someday, if we stand together, we may live in a country where that is not the case.

SEE YOU THERE!

Some Heartfelt Advice For "Moderates"

... and by "moderates" I mean everyone to the right of Che Guevara who still lives in S.F.

I've long given up on the Democratic Party in San Francisco. But a lot of people are still on the roles, if not believers. And I don't think a single one of them would argue that the City has moved WAY too far to the left.

How can it be, you're wondering, that if so many of society's cretinous heathens can't, don't, or won't vote, then how is it that we keep getting candidates that looked like they were handpicked by drug cartels, street hooker conventions, and asylum inmates?

CW Nevius unravels the mystery, and offers a wake-up call for those San Franciscans who are a) City Democrats and b) still sane in spite of it...

Moderate Democrats in San Francisco often complain that far-left politicians don't represent their values. Middle-class families are frustrated that their concerns - like safe streets - are undermined by ideologues with wild claims of a "police state." Developers are exasperated when their projects are subjected to endless delays, even when the property has been a vacant eyesore for years.

Would you like to see things change?

Then I've got some bad news for you.

You're going to have to get involved - or at least start paying attention.

The next two months will see a battle for the political soul of the city. It will pit the progressives against the moderates in a face-off that will have huge implications in the November elections and, perhaps, the election of the next mayor. The key is control of an obscure but incredibly influential organization called the Democratic County Central Committee.

Rather than complaining about the direction of the city, middle-of-the-road Democrats have to get active. They have to vote in the June DCCC election and they have to do their homework on the candidates to learn if they represent moderate values.

"If you want to see change in the city, change to the culture of the Board of Supervisors, and bring some common sense and reason back to the city, it starts with the DCCC," said David Latterman, a local pollster.

If you are not sure what the DCCC is, you are not alone. (Note: I have in the past referred to the DCCC as the "Gay Mafia" - mostly because their ranks include a who's-who of the gay ultra-left. Most of them got in by being gay, counting on unflinching support from the City's gay voters, and then used the position to fight not just for gay issues but for a cornucopia of Marxist imperatives - from handcuffing and vilifying cops at every turn to their unwavering support for illegal alien criminals. One of the reasons they get away with it is that gay voters don't seem to care what a person stands for as long as they're gay. Hopefully that will change.)

"If you stopped people on the street and asked them what the DCCC was, most of them wouldn't know what you were talking about," Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier said.

San Francisco political insiders know. The DCCC endorsement doesn't necessarily mean a win in every election - it just seems to work out that way. In 2008, the DCCC went 6-for-6 in supervisor races (the seventh, Ross Mirkarimi, used to belong to the Green Party and was not eligible for a Democratic endorsement) and 3-for-4 in the school board elections.

That's no surprise. San Francisco is a liberal Democrat town. When the official voice of the local Democratic committee sends out recommendations in mailers - and it has a nearly unlimited budget to do so - voters listen.

"But when Mrs. Jones receives her Democratic voter guide in the mail," said Scott Wiener, former chairman of the DCCC and candidate for supervisor in District Eight, "she's thinking of the party of Barack Obama, not the party of Aaron Peskin and (Supervisor) Chris Daly."

There's the rub. In 2008, Peskin and Daly unapologetically staged a takeover of the DCCC. They ran a slate of well-known names, including Eric Mar, David Campos and David Chiu, all of whom won seats as supervisors later that year. When they won seats on the DCCC, Wiener was voted out as chairman and replaced by Peskin, the former president of the Board of Supervisors.

Now, there's nothing illegal or evil about that. In fact, a few years ago people complained about then-Mayor Willie Brown controlling the DCCC. Peskin and Daly promised to dismantle the Willie Brown machine.

They did. Then they created their own.

"Aaron Peskin is building a political machine that would make Willie Brown blush," Wiener said.

Campos scoffs at that idea.

"We don't sit around trying to figure out what we, as a machine, should do," he said (Note: BULLSHIT!). "I talk to everybody."

Maybe so, but with the DCCC's unmistakable power, a progressive voting majority will guarantee endorsements of far-left candidates in the November elections for supervisor. And remember, if Gavin Newsom leaves office as mayor, the supervisors will elect his successor. The stakes are huge.

The election for the DCCC is in June. You should be sure to vote. And you should make sure you know who you are voting for.

MSM and the Left Decalre War on Arizona - and America

Stand Strong, Arizona!
America Supports You!

Lying Leftist shitbags across the nation are on the verge of brain-popping aneurysms following Arizona's enactment of sweeping anti-illegal immigration legislation.

The protests have already turned violent as the "peace, love, and understanding" crowd pelt police with bottles and bloody demonstrators with whom they don't agree. The hypocracy and arrogance is astounding - but not if you know them; it's par for the course.

The MSM have come out with slanderous editorials calling an entire state "Nazis." Here's just a few of the lying, biased hit-pieces by our allegedly "objective, non-partisan" media...

Nikitas3 on RedState summed it up thusly...

Two of the three Navy Seals accused of allegedly punching a most-wanted terrorist during capture in Iraq now have been cleared of the charge. We conservatives all expect that the third, Matthew McCabe, will be cleared as well. He has taken a lie detector test about the incident and passed it.

Yet why are we even seeing these charges?

Answer: Because people on the political left are doing everything they can to undermine our military and our national security. These terrorists are trained to lodge false complaints against the American military whenever they can, and leftists in the American legal system and media are poised to immediately echo those charges in order to hamstring our war on terror.

Now the state of Arizona will soon impose a tough new immigration law after drug violence from Mexico has spilled over into Arizona with kidnapping, murder, mayhem, and the killing of a rancher named Robert Krentz. Liberals oppose the new law vehemently - the same leftists who are seeking to prosecute our troops and CIA agents whenever possible in the war on terror.

But after decades in which illegals have flooded into America, obtained hundreds of billions of dollars in public services, crowded our hospitals and schools, and, in a small minority, committed large amounts of violent crime, the people of Arizona decided to act. Their legislature passed, and Republican governor Jan Brewer signed a law to allow the state’s police officers more freedom to search suspected illegals. 70% of Arizonans support the new law in one poll, including Democrats, independents and Republicans.

Fox News reported:

‘The law makes it a crime under state law to be in the country illegally. It also requires local police officers to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants; allows lawsuits against government agencies that hinder enforcement of immigration laws; and makes it illegal to hire illegal immigrants for day labor or knowingly transport them.

…”We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act,” Brewer said after signing the law. “But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created a dangerous and unacceptable situation.” ‘(end of excerpt)

The law even requires every Arizona resident to carry ID papers which the left is calling unconstitutional. Yet these same liberals are allowing the government to force us to buy health insurance.

The tough Arizona law is akin to a tough response to terrorists after years of attacks on the United States. This is not to compare terrorism to illegal immigration, but indeed to compare terrorism to those illegals who are bringing serious drug violence to Arizona.

Most Americans believe that illegals want to come here and work hard, and many do. But the violent element among illegals is rising every year, and the situation in Arizona is out of control. And after decades of federal failure to control the border, the state of Arizona now is reacting.

President Obama and his allies - the same people seeking to prosecute our Navy Seals and CIA for every perceived departure from Geneva Conventions protocol in our war against terrorists – are protesting the Arizona law. Obama said, “If we continue to fail to act at a federal level, we will continue to see misguided efforts opening up around the country… That includes, for example, the recent efforts in Arizona”

And there is the crux of the issue: The federal government has failed to protect the border, and the primary reason for that failure is that liberals in the Democrat party and in academia and the media have tied law enforcement’s hands at every turn and allowed the border to run amok, just like the progressives who are hamstringing our war on terror at every opportunity.

Had they allowed reasonable control of the border - which could be easily achieved - there would be no need to take such action as the Arizona legislation.

But for Democrats, defending illegals - and terrorists - in a blanket fashion and minimizing their criminality is perfectly in keeping with their stance on all criminals since the 1960s.

Conservative mayor Rudy Giuliani’s crackdown on crime in New York City in the 1990s came after decades in which the city’s liberals let criminals run wild with a toothless justice system and rampant political correctness toward bad people.

As far as lefties are concerned, Arizona should simply accept the violence, just as the people of New York City did. And leftists believe that if terrorists attack us, then we must either seek to understand it, or be prepared to read those terrorists their Miranda rights and guarantee them American Constitutional liberties if we capture them. This is sheer stupidity that is going to cost Dems big-time in the November elections.

To keep the new Arizona statute fair, the governor has ordered Arizona law enforcement agencies to develop a training course on implementing the law without violating civil rights.

Liberals fear racial profiling, which is a standard objection in their opposition to any effective tactics against identifiable people like Middle Eastern hijackers. Yet in that case, profiling would make airport screening vastly more efficient, and would end the practice of scrutinizing little old white ladies as potential terrorists, which is actually a more severe and intrusive form of reverse profiling.

Open-border groups are angry about the Arizona law. They are part of the movement to legitimize and legalize every illegal alien in America. And in protests by immigrants’ rights groups just one day after the Arizona law was signed, the protestors turned violent, pelting police with bottles. This we expect from the violent left and comes after endless false charges about bad Tea Party behavior.

Even the Mexican government is angry about the law, and for good reason. The government there is seeking to force as many of that nation’s poor into the United States so that they do not further burden the Mexican economy.

With detractors like that, Americans should see clear to support the Arizona law. Under the current system of sanctuary cities and illegals’ rights pursued at every turn, along with billions in federal and state handouts to illegals every month, the pendulum has swung way too far over to the side of the aliens. How about the constitutional and civil rights of Americans like rancher Krentz to live in their own country in peace and security? Where is that debate?

Until we move the pendulum back with strong action, the problem of unchecked and dangerous illegal immigration will continue to fester and to threaten our security and the safety of our own American citizens. And if illegals continue to participate in violent protests - and they will - it only will strengthen the case against them.

News Flash: After 50 Years Flower Children Still Mad at Their Parents

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the true enemy of the Left is not the "rich."

Leftists and "the rich" are actually a lot closer to each other than you might think. Both often have very questionable morals. Both often have rampant superiority complexes. Both are in favor of one-world government. Both inevitably support amnesty.

No, the true enemy of the Left is the middle class. Always has been since the flower children revolted against their middle class parents in the '60s. The Left has always viewed the middle class as too stupid to know what its own best interests are.

The robber barons are not the enemy because they steal from the people; the people are the enemy because they are too dumb to see it. The Left's assumption here is that they wouldn't be too dumb to see it, if only they would listen to those who were smarter than them - namely US. This is, after all, just a cry for attention, albeit on a grand - almost theatrical - scale.

Which is why you see the Left screaming in apoplectic fury over any mention of Sarah Palin, and writhing in spasms of pure hate over Arizona's new anti-illegal immigration measures, and, at the same time, completely letting the rich off the hook.

To continue along this vein, we have a recent editorial by R. Emmett Tyrell Jr. from the Washington Times...

The liberals hate the middle class. There. I said it, and I am glad. Once again, I am a truth teller, in this case speaking truth to stone heads. So certain am I of the truth of my asseveration that I honestly doubt any liberal will take issue with me. Can you imagine a liberal coming forward and saying: "Wrong Tyrrell! I love the middle class." Well, I guess I can imagine it because liberals are effortless liars. Yet what specifically about the middle class might the liberals adduce to demonstrate their affection? The middle class' sobriety? Hard work? Love of country? Love of liberty?

The liberals' contempt for the pulchritudinous Sarah Palin is obviously fired by their hatred of the middle class. She has said nothing that many ordinary Americans have not said privately, though she does it with charm. I was particularly charmed by her playful taunt directed toward the Prophet Obama at February's National Tea Party Convention in Nashville, where she said: "How's that hopey, changey stuff working out for ya?" At the time, President Obama's polling figures were low - not as low as they fell later, but low - and not much was "working" for him. Things have not improved.

What seems particularly to offend the liberals is that Mrs. Palin is from Middle America and from a state whose citizens pride themselves on self-reliance. Then, too, it has to hurt that she is so easy on the eyes while being the antithesis of the feminist. By the way, has there ever been a comely feminist? Yes, Gloria Steinem had her moments, but then, as the years went on and her gripes and disappointments multiplied, her anger got the best of her, and today her face looks like a gnarled fist. Mrs. Palin could teach her a lot, starting with a pedicure and maybe a prayer. That is another thing that brings the liberals to a boil: Mrs. Palin's being a person of faith. For some reason, religion really alarms liberals, unless it be the religion of the Prophet Muhammad. Now there is an evolution in liberal thought I would not have anticipated.

The Tea Party movement is another perfectly middle-class phenomenon that sets off fires of indignation with the liberals. I could understand if they simply disagreed with the Tea Partiers. The Tea Partiers favor freedom, limited government, low taxes and addressing the staggering debt that government is piling up. These are values liberals do not champion. But the liberals have to go further, depicting the Tea Partiers as violent racists. Once again, we see how fluently the liberals lie, starting by lying to themselves.

Last week, during a seminar at the Heritage Foundation on my new book, "After the Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery," Michael Barone, surely one of the most learned political observers of our time, made a very instructive point. While writing his fine book "Our Country: Shaping America From Roosevelt to Reagan," he discovered that there was in the late 1930s a growing resistance against the New Deal's spreading governmental tentacles. Very much like today's Tea Party participants, Americans were becoming uneasy about the cost and coercion of Franklin D. Roosevelt's huge government projects. Moreover, as Amity Shlaes has demonstrated in her recent book, "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," the New Deal was not ending the Depression but lengthening it.

Mr. Barone thinks that had World War II not arrived, this late-1930s Tea Party manifestation would have supported a stiff challenge to FDR's precedent-breaking third term. He speculates that there is something about America that makes many of its citizens relish their freedoms and suspicious of government involvement in areas Americans envisage as off-limits to government power and inefficiency. That something in the Constitution, which might explain why liberal judges want to be free to ignore it or disfigure it.

Yes, the liberals hate the middle class, and I think I tripped across the reason for their hatred while finishing "Hangover." Whereas conservatism is fundamentally a temperament to delight in reality, in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, liberalism is fundamentally an anxiety. The environment? The Constitution? The middle class? Liberalism is an anxiety about reality. The liberals prefer fantasy to reality - hence their fluency in lying about the Tea Party movement and the pulchritudinous Sarah Palin.

Obama's Brown Shirts At It Again

Sunday March 21st saw a pro-amnesty/pro-open borders march in Washington that drew thousands of illegals and their pimps, laughingly calling on a Congress hanging by a thread to take up the most divisive issue in America and take action on erasing America's sovereignty.

As disgusting as this is... it is free speech. Even they have a right to voice their opinions. This is a sentiment that is not, however, advanced to those who oppose amnesty.

Jim Robb of NumbersUSA reports of the all-too-predictable doings of SEIU goonsquads at the rally....

Roy Beck was criminally assaulted Sunday, March 21, on Washington's National Mall by opponents of free speech coordinated by the Service Employees International Union. Roy was there to cover the pro-amnesty march.

S.E.I.U. is the pro-illegal immigration union connected in media accounts with political intimidation and assaults in recent years.
What happened Sunday continues S.E.I.U.'s and its allies' months-long strategy of dogging Roy's every public appearance, trying to shout him down or hounding event organizers to bar him from speaking. We have never tried to deny them their freedom of speech.

But this time the S.E.I.U. went much further. It sent a team of "mimes" and S.E.I.U. employees to stalk, push, shove, harass and whistle down Roy and his TV crew for several hours. It was very aggressive, including incitement of the crowd toward violence.

Roy filed criminal assault charges against the mimes and their S.E.I.U. organizers, who spent hours trying to block our webcast. (All of this can be seen and heard on the homepage of NumbersUSA.com.)

When the Federal Park Police finally ordered the S.E.I.U. agitators to move away from Roy and our TV crew, one of the "mimes" took the confrontation to a new low by falsely accusing one of our colleagues of assaulting her -- some three hours after it supposedly took place! The Park Police, acting on the word of the agitators, hand-cuffed and arrested our colleague on the National Mall. (We got him out of custody before the night was over, but he still must fight the pending criminal charge in court!)

While I'm certainly not surprised by this type of thuggery from the far left - and not surprised at all that it came from the Bolsheviks at the SEIU - it is a bit surprising that very few people seem to have any problem with it. But that's the way the left is... the ends always justify the means - which is very easy to do because to argue that the ends do not justify the means is to suggest that there are some limits that one must not cross. This is not a problem for the left, who will stoop to anything to get what it wants - or more truthfully, to get what it believes people need (whether they want it or - especially - if they don't).

When you have no values or morals, it's pretty easy to rationalize just about anything.

I'm not saying that everyone in the SEIU is a Stalinist punk. But the leadership certainly is, and the mouth-breathing cretins on the mall in Washington certainly are. They can fuck off and die.

This is the guy right here...

You may have heard of this guy Scott Brown... the Republican who shocked the country by winning "Ted Kennedy's Seat" in Massachusetts. But I'm guessing you probably haven't actually heard him speak before.

So here's your chance.

Listen to what he's saying. If you Dems out there want any chance of maintaining a majority in any corner of Washington... listen. Because it's clear - as Scott says - that you are just not getting the message.

Eight months away. Eight months away.

Sunday's Arena Rock Moment

Genesis were elected into the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame today. One of the great arena rock bands of all time.

Genesis of course spawned both Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins, and fans to this day debate which was era was better - the old era with Pete as the singer, or the "new" era with Phil. I guess I'll just have to post a Peter-era video and let you decide....

You're right... they both rock!

Carl Edwards: Cue the DICK

What a dick!

"I don't know you..."

Carl Edwards screwed up big time in the Atlanta race, wrecking Bred Keselowski on the front stretch and ruining a 6th place run for the #12. Edwards was 156 laps down when it happened.

NASCAR black-flagged Edwards immediately and called him to the truck, meaning a points penalty may be coming.

Commentators remarked that the wreck was similar to the Talladega flip he did last year after running into Keselowski on the front stretch. They were similar... in the sense that both wrecks were Edwards' fault.

I've been looking for a driver ever since my boy - Ward Burton - hung it up a few years ago. I'm liking Kurt Busch more and more. Finding a driver can be a tough undertaking. How did you pick yours?

btw... you may notice I've been a little lax in blogging. Sorry. Been working a lot and when I haven't been working I've been sick. I'll pick it up as the election comes... you'll see.

But really... what a DICK!