What have the Democrats been thinking?

The Democrats are about to get clobbered…we are told by the pundits…and they are probably correct.

1-The “Tea Party” believes, and tells any who will listen, that the Obama Administration has burdened us all with too much debt, created massive unemployment and invested money in large corporations rather than solving unemployment.

2-The Supreme Court voted 5-4 to allow unlimited donations by corporations, unions and wealthy individuals to any political cause.  Justice Andrew Kennedy said we need not worry about donators being able to hide their donations because with the advent of Internet “searching” skills….it would be impossible for donators to hide their names.

3-When George W. Bush’s Treasury Secretary . Paul O’Neill objected to new tax cuts and warned Dick Cheney that deficits of ½ a trillion dollars for 2002 he was told “Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.”  ( A month later Cheney told O’Neill he was fired.)

The Democrats haven’t told their story to the people …. And so there are even more uninformed voters than usual.

ANSWER #1 – Barack Obama was elected on November 11, 2008 and inaugurated on January 20, 2009.  In the three months before he took office over three million Americans lost their jobs-the biggest such loss in history –  and Bush signed a bill for ¾ of a trillion dollar bail out in October . A bill that had to be paid by Obama.  that arguably saved most of the giants of our financial  industry who, also arguably, were directly responsible for the crisis.  Losing 3 million jobs in 3 months was a first in our history and not surprisingly a drop like that had so much impetus behind it that unemployment couldn’t be slowed down for another six months.

WHY HASN’T THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE GOTTEN THIS MESSAGE OUT?

ANSWER #2 – This year’s election has produced unconscionable amounts of money for political advertising by both Democrats and Republicans.

However, last August, the Republican National Committee had only $5 million in its coffers and was $2mm in debt.  The Democrats, also running low, were prematurely ecstatic, thinking their opponents  wouldn’t be able to generate the large donations for the last few months of TV ads they normally do.   Guess what?  The rich Republicans figured out that donations to the RNC meant their names would be made public. But if they made the same donations to 527 and 501 ( c ) (4) organizations, sometimes called “Shadow RNCs”  .. run by Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie and Michael Duncan and others, the donors names would not be known.  Present estimates are that approximately $400 million is what will be spent by these Republican organizations by November 9. (That figure does not include “regular” donations of about $350million)   Seems that Justice Kennedy was incorrect in his predictions of clarity with donations.  The money will elect Senators and Representatives who will surely have a debt to the corporations and people who  gave the money.  Such political systems have existed before in our world…and they weren’t called democracies.

HOW WOULD INDEPENDENTS REACT TO THOSE FIGURES?  HOW WILL THE SUPREME COURT ACT?

ANSWER #3-When Bill Clinton left office in 2000 there was a $3 trillion surplus.  When Barack Obama took office there was a deficit of $1.43 trillion. That’s a swing of $4.5 trillion after two terms of George Bush tax-cuts.

There is tons of empirical evidence that tax cuts don’t improve the middle class.  The majority of the Bush cuts helped the wealthiest among us more than the poorest among us.  There is also evidence that increasing taxes increases the size of the middle class…as long as the taxes are not designed to pass on to the wealthiest citizens.

Also, Obama was locked into correcting the Mother of all “Recessions” with an almost immediate commitment to another $1 trillion in domestic spending to save American jobs. Additionally nearly $700 million a year was committed to Iraq and Afghanistan.  At least we’re out of Bush’s tragic war in Iraq, and scheduled to start leaving  Afghanistan next year.

Obama got a medical care bill passed that Republicans had blocked since 1932 and every Democratic President had promised since FDR!

The rest of the industrialized world is amazed at the cost of the U.S. health care system to its citizens.  More Americans declared bankruptcy because  of health costs in their senior years than for any other cause. (Until the present loan fiasco that was corrected by the financial reform bill.)

Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, not up for reelection, has dedicated the next four years to overturning  the new health care plan and making sure the President only serves one term.  So much for “hands across the aisle.”

Obama got financial reform passed that would have avoided the terrible recession we are presently experiencing had it been passed during the Bush Administration. Already Republicans are being lobbied to soften the effects of the financial reform. Republican Congressional Leader, John Boehner, who used to pass out checks from big tobacco corporations to Republicans on the house floor, was non-committal when asked if he became Speaker would he disclose what went on in meetings with lobbyists. Of course, Mr. Boehner has received $4.5 million from donors so far this year. Including Googlel, Citigroup, RJ Reynolds.

THE OPPOSITION HAS TOLD YOU WHAT THEY WILL DO DNC – YOU MUST TELL THE PEOPLE!

Charles Antos says “Goodbye” to District One in November

With the upcoming election, when  popular Council Member Charles Antos is not  able to run since he’s just completed his second four year term, his supporters will be looking for his guidance in picking a successor.

Its fitting that there are four candidates vying for his District One seat.  District One encompasses Old Town and Surfside and rest assured that there are private interests at play that would like to have a friend in that  District One seat.

There are four people scheduled to challenge for Antos vacated seat: Elley Deaton,  Scott Levitt (son of Mike Levitt  – District Five Councilman) Robert Aguilar and Joe Kalmick.  Most likely there will be a run-off for the Old Town seat since its unlikely that any candidate will get more than 50% of the vote and if that happens there will another election in January.

The other two Council seats to be voted on are: District Three and District Five.  District Three encompasses Bridgeport, the Coves, the Hill and Herron Pointe.  Gordon Shanks is the present Councilman and Amalia Almasy is the challenger.  District Five has portions of Leisure World and Councilman Michael Levitt is being challenged by Anne Seifert.

Hold on to your hats folks…there may some fireworks near election time!

‘Seniors’ personal ads running in a Florida newspaper:

Who says seniors don’t have a sense of humor?

FOXY LADY: ?Sexy, fashion-conscious blue-haired beauty, ?80’s, slim, 5’4′ (used to be 5’6′), ?searching for sharp-looking, sharp-dressing companion. ?Matching white shoes and ?belt a plus.

LONG-TERM COMMITMENT: ?Recent widow who has just buried fourth husband,?and am looking for someone to round out a six-unit plot. ?Dizziness, fainting, shortness of breath not a problem.

SERENITY NOW: ?I am into solitude, long walks, sunrises, the ocean, yoga and meditation. ?If you are the silent type, let’s get together, ?take our hearing aids out and enjoy quiet times.

WINNING SMILE: ?Active grandmother with original teeth seeking a dedicated flosser ?to share rare steaks, corn on the cob and caramel candy.

BEATLES OR STONES? ?I still like to rock, ?still like to cruise in my Camaro on Saturday nights and still like to play the guitar. ?If you were a groovy chick, or are now a groovy hen, ?let’s get together and listen to my eight-track tapes.

MEMORIES: ?I can usually remember Monday through Thursday. ?If you can remember Friday, Saturday and Sunday, let’s put our two heads together.

MINT CONDITION: ?Male, 1932, high mileage, good condition, some hair, ?many new parts including hip, knee, cornea, valves. ?Isn’t in running condition, but walks well.

Now there’s some people who should write for “What’s Up.”

. . . . And You Thought Bolsa Chica Was Saved ?

By Joe Shaw – Member Board of Directors of Bolsa Chica Land Trust

On April 27, the Huntington Beach Planning Commission approved The Ridge. Hearthside Homes’ 22-unit housing project proposed for an important natural and historic site at Bolsa Chica.

Approval required the commission to re-zone the site from parkland to residential. The land had been zoned as open space/parkland for nearly thirty years. The Commission voted 4-3 to change the zoning despite an abundance of evidence that the project is too close to environmentally sensitive habitat and will destroy a sacred Native American burial and ceremonial site. Voting in favor of the development were Janis Mantini, John Scandura. Fred Speaker. and Barbara Delgleize.

Commission Chairman Blair Farely vigorously tried to save the site from being rezoned. and he was joined by Elizabeth Shierr Burnett and Tom Livengood. Nearly sixty people attended the hearing. Speakers from the Bolsa Chica Land Trust and the Amigos de Bolsa Chica argued forcefully against the rezoning and presented a solid case for the Commission to either require an Environmental Impact Report or reject the rezoning outright. The Ridge property. along with the D.E. Goodell property (otherwise known as the Sacred Cogged Stone site). make up a portion of the Bolsa Chica known as the Bluffs. The Cogged Stone site was recently annexed by the City of Huntington Beach and has. in our view; been zoned for residential use without proper environmental review.

The Bluffs feature breathtaking views of the Bolsa Chica and the undeveloped Shea property known as the upper Bolsa Chica Wetlands. They are perilously close to environmentally sensitive habitat areas already under protection, and overlap “ORA 83” and “ORA 86” which are “1S onca y an cu ura y ” significant to Native Americans and to our understanding of the Bolsa Chica’s ancient peoples.

Because of the natural, archeological, and cultural importance of the Bluffs, the Land Trust is once again leading the fight to save areas of Bolsa Chica that others are willing to give up. If you want to be part of this effort, please donate to the Bolsa Chica Land Trust as we fight to Save the Bluffs! Joe Shaw has been a member of the Land Trust Board of Directors since 2009.

(Editor’s Note: “whats up in seal beach” considers the Bolsa Chica Bluffs and Wetlands an extremely important ecological site for all of Southern California.  We encourage our readers to take a walk over the new bridge at Warner Ave and PCH and you will immediately see what’s at stake.)

to

New textbooks for Texas…but not for California?

The School Board of the state of Texas adopted a “new” curriculum last week for social studies and history in its schoolbooks.

It “weakens” or changes, (depending on your political leaning) the history most know of slavery, civil rights struggles in ’60’s and U.S. relationship and involvement with the United Nations as well as hundreds of other items. The changes were brought about with a conservative stamp of approval and hailed by Republicans throughout the state of Texas.  This new take on education will be used to teach 5 million Texas students for the next 10 years.

Of course Texas should be allowed to teach in any manner they it chooses and with that many students they will have no  trouble finding a publisher, however, what is of great significance to other states is that textbook printers sometimes use books designed for Texas in other states.

In California, State Senator Leland Yee has introduced legislation ( SB1451) to protect the largest school system in the United States (California) from using books containing the “revised studies” adopted in Texas.  Critics say the changes are historically inaccurate and minimize the efforts of minority contributions to U.S. hisotry.

For complete coverage of the story go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

Did Rohrabacher go over the top at Chamber Meeting in Seal Beach?

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher spoke at last week’s Chamber of Commerce meeting in O’Malley’s before over 100 members and guests.

Included in the group that heard the Congressman was Mayor Sloan and Councilmembers Levit and Antos. Congressman Rohrbacher agreed to try to include a Seal Beach Chamber meeting on his list of annual stops.

The Congressman’s speech was a little confusing to some.  He took the usual expected shots at President Obama … and then going over the top, as some said,  and called him a “Marxist” instead of just the usual  socialist babble.  To read the entire story click here.

Limbaugh HAS a heart…maybe?

When Rush got out of a Honolulu hospital last week the Drs said his chest pains had nothing to do with heart disease.  Many of us are not sure Rush even has a heart?

Limbaugh was quick to point out — on his way out of the hospital —at a hastily put together news conference, that he “…doesn’t think there is one single thing wrong with the U.S. health system.” 

Good for you Rush.  Most people making $400 million a year also don’t seem to have any problems getting the service they need.

However Rush, lets suppose you really worked hard for a living and didn’t make $400 million a year.And didn’t choose to live in a state that had zero state taxes.

Lets suppose you were just a regular fat 57 year old with a history of drug addiction, back problems, and “undiagnosed” chest pains and had  a job that paid about $36,000 a year….or less.  

Chances are you couldn’t even get health insurance.

Rush you are what’s called a fat cat…who wants to keep all the other cats skinny and without health insurance.

Thank goodness there are a lot of Americans with more empathy for their less fortunate neighbors.

Cut Back the Cut Backs

Furlough days at the UC and CSU campuses may be fun and games for those students looking for a free pass to cut class, but there’s nothing fun about the tuition hikes and fee increases that come along with the higher education budget crisis.   For the 2009-10 year, the state reduced the CSU budget by $584 million, according to the California State University Long Beach President’s letter to campus community. Of the total $584 million, an approximate $42 million was cut from CSULB alone.

As a full-time student at Cal State Long Beach, I just paid $2,185 to enroll for my final semester as a senior, up over $300 from last semester. Although I’m paying more money, I’m attending less school, as professors have been required to cut back on their teaching days without pay.

This UC and CSU budget deficit has been all over the news. Protests have been taking place at campuses throughout California and many have been speaking out about the negative implications that all of this entails.   In addition to increased tuition, admissions have been cut, school fees have been increased, available classes have been reduced and faculty have been let go without the funding to keep them employed.

CSU Chancellor Charles B. Reed announced in November that these budget cuts will produce a 40,000 reduction in student enrollment over the next three years.   “The state needs our graduates to enter the workforce and help the state’s economy recover,” said Reed. “But, when your budget is cut so drastically, we are left with little choice but to restrict our enrollment.”

Limiting admission of students willing and eager to earn a degree is an unfortunate event. Increasing the tuition of those already admitted, in some cases forcing them to leave school as a result of a lack of funding to pay for it, is unfortunate as well.   What’s most unfortunate, however, is that, according to Save The CSU, an organization developed to educate the public on California’s education budget deficit, between 2005 and 2025, “approximately 3 million college graduates will leave the work force.”

With the current budget crisis having such a negative effect on higher education enrollment, once all those employment opportunities begin to open up, what will happen when we find ourselves with not enough college graduates to fill them?  I understand that California’s budget crisis leaves this state in a bad situation. And I understand that reductions must be made as necessary to help California get back on its feet. What I don’t understand is why California’s future, those working to earn an education and make a difference in the world, are the ones forced to pay the price so drastically.

Proposal To Save 8 Billion Dollars A Year On Government Expenses

When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers.  The remaining workers need to find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well.  Wall Street and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of “tough decision”, and his board of directors gives him a big bonus.

Our government should not be immune from similar risks.

Therefore Here’s some suggestions: Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members (Two per state and four for the eight biggest states) and Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State-) Also reduce remaining staff by 25%.

Accomplish this over the next 8 years.(Two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.

Some Yearly Gains Include:

$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress.(267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)

$97,175,000 for elimination of the above people’s staff. (estimate $1.3 million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)

$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.

$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr)

The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and would need to improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country?

We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.

Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (Telephones, faxes, computers, cell phones; to name a few)

SUMMARY OF THIS OPPORTUNITY:

1-$44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
2-$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
3-$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
4-$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
5-$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.
6-$7 ½ billion “pork” reduction added to bills by removing half of Congress!

That’s a savings of over $8 billion just to start; and there’s a good chance they would work faster and harder –and get along with each other.

Congresspersons should have to serve 20, 25 or 30 years- like everyone else- in order to collect retirement benefits. (No telling how much we would save on that.) Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

Is this a joke – – – or maybe not?

Anonymous

« Previous Page