Whatever Happened to the Golden State?
One of Hollywood’s better thrillers in the 1960′s was “Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?” In the sixties, despite that flick, the state of California could still lay claim to a relative degree of sanity.
Even into the mid-seventies, the Golden State elected and re-elected Ronald Reagan as its governor so it obviously was then functionally sane. Something happened in and to California after that, however and, long before 2010, California began devolving into a laid-back cesspool.
It still has plenty of nice weather but Mother Nature tends to that. Balmy weather in a broke and broken state, however, doesn’t cut it, unless you’re a nouveau hippy pothead in which case nothing much bothers you.
As for the rest of Californians, who sometimes seem straight and normal when they reject gay marriage, as they did in 2008, and reject pot for all, as they did on Election Day, 2010, they just don’t seem able to see those woods with all those damned trees and all that foul pot smoke casting a haze over the view.
California and Californians have changed significantly over the last 3 decades principally in demographics. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=2498)
Showing posts with label Barbara Boxer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barbara Boxer. Show all posts
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Dems Stage Morality Ploy
Dems Stage Morality Ploy
Not especially known for excursions into questions of morality, two Democrat pols have dredged up the M-word to bolster weak and fatuously immoral policy positions.
“Morality” must be the keyword in this week’s DNC talking points.
First, Senator Barbara Mikulski (D. MD) contended, “I think it’s morally wrong to vote against health care.”
Her twisted reasoning? Invoking Pro-Life sentiments, she adds, “Universal access to health care that would guarantee maternity health, sound wonderful deliveries for children, and so on, I think that’s what we want to do.”
Two cheers for Mikulski! She doesn’t merit a third cheer due to her conscious omission of any reference to the antithesis of “sound, wonderful deliveries,” the provisions for abortion funding in Obamacare.
As Karen Schuberg writes for CNS News, “The Senate health care bill permits federal tax dollars to go to health insurance plans that cover abortion. It also requires that at least one insurance plan available in the insurance ‘exchanges’ the bill will set up must cover abortion:” http://bit.ly/4CXCux
“Senator Barb” either forgot those requisites or she believes it’s morally right to terminate the innocent lives of the pre-born.
Granted, she’s never been married nor has she borne any children and there have been more than a few suggestions that she is a lesbian, http://bit.ly/8j15xB, but shouldn’t good Catholic ladies like Barb have more empathy for babies?
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D. CA) isn’t nearly as squeamish as Mikulski on the abortion question. . .
(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1368)
Not especially known for excursions into questions of morality, two Democrat pols have dredged up the M-word to bolster weak and fatuously immoral policy positions.
“Morality” must be the keyword in this week’s DNC talking points.
First, Senator Barbara Mikulski (D. MD) contended, “I think it’s morally wrong to vote against health care.”
Her twisted reasoning? Invoking Pro-Life sentiments, she adds, “Universal access to health care that would guarantee maternity health, sound wonderful deliveries for children, and so on, I think that’s what we want to do.”
Two cheers for Mikulski! She doesn’t merit a third cheer due to her conscious omission of any reference to the antithesis of “sound, wonderful deliveries,” the provisions for abortion funding in Obamacare.
As Karen Schuberg writes for CNS News, “The Senate health care bill permits federal tax dollars to go to health insurance plans that cover abortion. It also requires that at least one insurance plan available in the insurance ‘exchanges’ the bill will set up must cover abortion:” http://bit.ly/4CXCux
“Senator Barb” either forgot those requisites or she believes it’s morally right to terminate the innocent lives of the pre-born.
Granted, she’s never been married nor has she borne any children and there have been more than a few suggestions that she is a lesbian, http://bit.ly/8j15xB, but shouldn’t good Catholic ladies like Barb have more empathy for babies?
Senator Dianne Feinstein (D. CA) isn’t nearly as squeamish as Mikulski on the abortion question. . .
(Read the rest at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=1368)
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Washingtonian Head-Scratchers and Head-Bangers
The bulk of the news that’s been coming out of D.C. lately hasn’t been very positive but some stories have the redeeming kick of being entertaining even if they are bewildering head-scratchers and/or frustrating head-bangers.
Head-Scratcher Number One:
David Brooks’ Inner Thigh: So, you’re a guy having a nice sit-down dinner in the capital, maybe a cocktail or two, or three, and another guy, an unidentified Republican Senator guy, “had his hand on [your] inner thigh the whole time.”
Such was the experience of New York Times columnist, David Brooks, as told to some television interviewers. Apparently the very liberal conservative Brooks wasn’t in the least upset or annoyed at what PoliticsDaily.com reported as “a sexual advance.”
As PoliticsDaily’s David Knowles opines, ”Why Brooks let the senator keep his hand there for the entire dinner is a mystery. Why he described the incident on television, but then refused to name the politician, is another.”
Good points, both.
I posit a third observation: Maybe it never happened, that it was a fantasy, and Brooks is in the closet.
Maybe not coincidentally, Knowles filed the story under “Republicans. Gay Rights.”
See the giddy video here: http://bit.ly/h2Ya9
And the 48 year old Brooks has the nerve to call politicians “freaks?”
Head-Scratcher Number Two:
Stuart Smalley Critiques SCOTUS History: Pretend-Senator Al Franken is such a comic! Having stolen his seat in the U.S. Senate, he made his virgin flight in that role by brilliantly observing that Sonia Sotomayor was “the most experienced Supreme Court nominee in 100 years. . . [whose] story is inspirational and one in which “all Americans should take great pride in.” http://bit.ly/W59PU
You can take the comedian out of Saturday Night Live but you can’t take SNL out of the comedian unless, that is, he was serious?
First of all, I’m not nearly as curious about a Supreme Court nominee’s “story” and life experiences as I am in her legal expertise and ability to accurately interpret the Constitution from the point of view of the Founders and not according to pressure groups, or her empathy.
Secondly, surely Smalley/Franken has heard of Judge Robert Bork, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and any number of other borked and successful nominees whose experience make Sonia’s inconsequential and who believe in the sanctity of our Constitution.
No doubt he Googled Sotomayor and discovered she has served many years as an (affirmative action) Second Circuit Court Judge, in which capacity she felt she was qualified and mandated to establish public policy.
That belief in itself should be sufficient to disqualify her and reduce her very moving personal history to irrelevancy. I, too, came from a difficult South Bronx life but I believe in a strict interpetation of the Constitution so can I please be Obama’s next pick?
As for Smalley/Franken, he would love whomever Obama chose as long as he or she were a leftist and as long as he or she received the leftist imprimatur.
What a travesty.
Head-Scratcher/Head-Banger Number One:
Barbara Boxer’s Excursion into Hyperbole: She didn’t mention pestilence, incurable boils, plagues of locusts, the Black Death, Washington and New York sinking beneath the Atlantic, or China invading us, but Senator Barbara Boxer covered most other bases.
Should the Senate not pass the global warming/cooling/changing bill, she warned, we should prepare for “dire results: droughts, floods, fires, loss of species, damage to agriculture, worsening air pollution and more:” http://bit.ly/iSLWz.
That “more” is the really scary part. It could very well include . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)
Head-Scratcher Number One:
David Brooks’ Inner Thigh: So, you’re a guy having a nice sit-down dinner in the capital, maybe a cocktail or two, or three, and another guy, an unidentified Republican Senator guy, “had his hand on [your] inner thigh the whole time.”
Such was the experience of New York Times columnist, David Brooks, as told to some television interviewers. Apparently the very liberal conservative Brooks wasn’t in the least upset or annoyed at what PoliticsDaily.com reported as “a sexual advance.”
As PoliticsDaily’s David Knowles opines, ”Why Brooks let the senator keep his hand there for the entire dinner is a mystery. Why he described the incident on television, but then refused to name the politician, is another.”
Good points, both.
I posit a third observation: Maybe it never happened, that it was a fantasy, and Brooks is in the closet.
Maybe not coincidentally, Knowles filed the story under “Republicans. Gay Rights.”
See the giddy video here: http://bit.ly/h2Ya9
And the 48 year old Brooks has the nerve to call politicians “freaks?”
Head-Scratcher Number Two:
Stuart Smalley Critiques SCOTUS History: Pretend-Senator Al Franken is such a comic! Having stolen his seat in the U.S. Senate, he made his virgin flight in that role by brilliantly observing that Sonia Sotomayor was “the most experienced Supreme Court nominee in 100 years. . . [whose] story is inspirational and one in which “all Americans should take great pride in.” http://bit.ly/W59PU
You can take the comedian out of Saturday Night Live but you can’t take SNL out of the comedian unless, that is, he was serious?
First of all, I’m not nearly as curious about a Supreme Court nominee’s “story” and life experiences as I am in her legal expertise and ability to accurately interpret the Constitution from the point of view of the Founders and not according to pressure groups, or her empathy.
Secondly, surely Smalley/Franken has heard of Judge Robert Bork, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia and any number of other borked and successful nominees whose experience make Sonia’s inconsequential and who believe in the sanctity of our Constitution.
No doubt he Googled Sotomayor and discovered she has served many years as an (affirmative action) Second Circuit Court Judge, in which capacity she felt she was qualified and mandated to establish public policy.
That belief in itself should be sufficient to disqualify her and reduce her very moving personal history to irrelevancy. I, too, came from a difficult South Bronx life but I believe in a strict interpetation of the Constitution so can I please be Obama’s next pick?
As for Smalley/Franken, he would love whomever Obama chose as long as he or she were a leftist and as long as he or she received the leftist imprimatur.
What a travesty.
Head-Scratcher/Head-Banger Number One:
Barbara Boxer’s Excursion into Hyperbole: She didn’t mention pestilence, incurable boils, plagues of locusts, the Black Death, Washington and New York sinking beneath the Atlantic, or China invading us, but Senator Barbara Boxer covered most other bases.
Should the Senate not pass the global warming/cooling/changing bill, she warned, we should prepare for “dire results: droughts, floods, fires, loss of species, damage to agriculture, worsening air pollution and more:” http://bit.ly/iSLWz.
That “more” is the really scary part. It could very well include . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)