Warner Todd Huston's blog

Sacramento City College Crushes Student's Free Speech

For Constitution Day this year at Sacramento City College Associated Student Government (ASG) President and student Steve Macias arranged for a group named Genocide Awareness Project, an anti-abortion group, to participate on campus in the Constitution Day activities.

The group was approved for participation by the ASG and set up its booth at the appointed time. And then the world came to an end. Pro-Infanticide groups such as Planned Parenthood set up their own, countering booths the next day and left-wing hatemongers in the student body immediately began to circulate a recall petition to have Mr. Macias removed from the Associated Student Government leadership.

There is also some speculation that this insane, un-American recall effort being visited upon Mr. Macias is being tacitly approved of by the College adviser overseeing the ASG.

Even the local press tried to pile onto an attack of Mr. Macias. The SacCity Express originally reported on October 13 that Macias presented the anti-abortion group under a false name when he submitted the group for the vote of the ASG board. On the 26th the paper printed a retraction admitting their "mistake."

On his FaceBook site, Mr. Macias also reports that one of Sacramento College's professors has engaged in a nasty email exchange with the student, too. "Why Do these teachers feel that it is there role to put us students down?" Macias asks. "I am deeply offended that an instutution that taxpayers pay for and pay to attend would allow this individual to clearly descriminate against people of faith. Calling Christianity 'make believe.' is unacceptable dialougue from Teacher to student. Especially when you seek out and attack the student."

Amusingly, with her quote on the matter, ASG Vice President Debbie Dixon proved that her parent's money is being sorrowfully wasted on her failed education.

“I am highly offended, I have rights, just as they have rights to not be offended!”

Sorry Debbie, dear, but there is NO "right" not to be offended. The Constitution safeguards political free speech but it does not safeguard your right "not to be offended." No one has a right not to be offended because such a right would preclude everyone else's right to free speech in the first place. After all, what one person feels is right and good to say someone else somewhere will find offense contained therein. So, dear, dear, lil' Debbie, no one has a right not to be offended. But, I do have to say, I am offended by your ignorance.

So, what we see with this dispiriting case is typical of the distempered left. All these caring, civilized, open minded, more tolerant lefties are in full attack mode trying to shut down the free speech of people with whom they disagree... as always. Sadly, that's the fascist, Obamaesque sort of actions we are coming to expect from the extreme left and the bubble ensconced, pointy-headed, ivory tower dwellers in academe, isn't it?

The Two Faces of California’s Steve Poizner

As the next Governor of California gears up his – or her - campaign we are witnessing a near complete collapse of state government in the Golden State. It is a situation that the next governor will be faced with immediately, leaving not a second to celebrate victory.

There are some obvious solutions to what ails California: lower taxes, an end to the opulent welfare state, cutting off the free ride for illegals, an end to the free ride that unelected, overly powerful state employees unions have been allowed to attain, and the like, but the question is do any of the candidates on the Republican side have the backbone for the tough decisions that will have to be made before it's too late... if it isn't already.

When I first began to look at California's GOP candidates for governor, I was heartened by the fact that the one Republican elected to state wide office had thrown his hat in the ring. Unfortunately, the closer I look at State Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, the more like a tax and spend Democrat he appears. It is becoming increasingly clear that Poizner does not represent the right direction for California, but more of the same failed liberal policies that have destroyed the state.

An economic truism, proven repeatedly, is that when a government needs income, increasing taxes does not result in a higher take for the treasury. In fact, just the opposite occurs. A recurring pattern shows that individual tax breaks result in more disposable income and increased economic activity. Lowering taxes for businesses results in expansion, hiring, and success. It is a truth that is simply inarguable.

So, the next governor must at the very least ensure that taxes for individuals and businesses are not hiked beyond their ability to keep the state's economy rolling. Looking over Poizner's long history of supporting tax hikes, his intimate connection to unions and his cozy relationship with tax and spend liberals I am not reassured that he would be the sort of Republican that would institute growth programs that might help California get out of its self-imposed, liberal induced death spiral. In fact, just the opposite may be true.

As evidence I point to Commissioner Poizner’s repeated support and donation of large sums of money to anti-Prop 13 ballot measures -- Proposition 13 being the measure that caps property taxes for Californians and also requires a two-thirds majority to increase them. In 2001, Poizner founded and served on the board of directors of an organization named EdVoice whose stated goal is “education reform.” One of those "reforms," however, seems to be an interest in circumventing Prop 13 and raising property taxes so that the education establishment in California can realize more tax money for its use. Like many tax and spend liberals, "reform" for EdVoice seems to equate to an assumption that throwing more tax money at a failed system fixes it.

Because EdVoice is so interested in increasing the money for available education, the group's PAC has a long tradition of lop-sided donations to California Democrats. In fact, a review of EdVoice's donations available at the CA Sec. of State's office reveals a 90+% donation rate to Democrats – most of whom are also supported by the powerful education union the California Teachers Association. (Here is a search of some recent EdVoice donations at the CA Sec of State's office, and another from Berkeley.)

Remember, Poizner claims to be a Republican. Yet before he decided to run for statewide office he had little history of helping other Republicans or supporting Republican measures.

Back in 2004, Poizner raised hackles by again supporting an anti-prop 13 measure. Then Poizner supported a measure that lowered the two-thirds taxpayer approval threshold enshrined in tradition and law to 55% for school bonds. This support for higher taxes caused the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association to launch a campaign against Mr. Poizner as he ran for the 21st State Assembly seat in 2004. HJTA president Jon Coupal sent out a mailing urging voters to "withhold your vote from Mr. Steve Poizner" because of his support for higher property taxes. Poizner’s involvement in another failed measure to institute a parcel tax on every California homeowner seemed to be his strongest expression at the time of his disdain for the average taxpayer.

So what is Poizner saying now about prop 13? Well, today now that he is running for the GOP nomination for governor, suddenly we find a Steve Poizner that has found a nouveau respect for prop 13. On July 10, for instance, a former UCLA chancellor asked the California Supreme Court to declare as unconstitutional the two-thirds requirement to raise property taxes. Poizner immediately put out a press release declaring this effort "frivolous."

Said the release, "The lawsuit challenging the two-thirds vote requirement to raise taxes is frivolous and should be dismissed immediately. We have to do more to protect the rights of California's taxpayers. The last thing we need is to make it easier for Sacramento to raise taxes on working Californians who are already over-taxed."

That is a strong statement in favor of prop 13, isn't it? But how does it square with his nearly 10-year-history of joining efforts to undermine prop 13?

It is awfully easy to believe that Poizner's new found respect for the taxpayers he's been trying to burden with higher taxes for nearly a decade is merely a campaign tactic meant to get him elected. It is very hard to believe his sudden transformation form tax hiker to staunch anti-tax man, don't you think?

(Cross posted at RightWingNews.com.)

Did Obama Say We Should Kill the Old Folks to Save Money Last Night?

I am wondering when the euthanasia folks are going to start touting this one? I mean, it sure seemed to me as if the most caring, most civil, most intelligent president evah just said that healthcare could be cheaper if we don't give old folks and the infirm the full measure of care they now get. It appeared that Obama said we should just let them die or suffer because they aren't worth the effort. Imagine if Bush had said something like this? The left wouldn't have hesitated to call him any manner of names.

Obama said during the ABC Special on Wednesday night that a way to save healthcare costs is to abandon the sort of care that "evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve" the patient's health. He went on to say that he had personal familiarity with such a situation when his grandmother broke her hip after she was diagnosed with terminal cancer.

Obama offered a question on the efficacy of further care for his grandmother saying, "and the question was, does she get hip replacement surgery, even though she was fragile enough they were not sure how long she would last?"

But who is it that will present the "evidence" that will "show" that further care is futile? Are we to believe that Obama expects individual doctors will make that decision in his bold new government controlled healthcare future? If he is trying to make that claim it is a flat out untruth and he knows it.

Does your homebuilder negotiate with your city hall over whether you get a building permit, or does the permit get levied no matter what? Does a cop decide if you really broke the law, or does he simply arrest you and let the courts hash it out? Does your tax preparer negotiate with the IRS or is he supposed to just calculate your tax bill on their terms and have you pay the required amount?

Government does not work by negotiation. Government does not work from the bottom up. It works from the top down. This singular fact means that no doctor will be deciding if you are too old or infirm to get medical care. It will be a medically untrained bureaucrat that sets a national rule that everyone will have to obey. There won't be any room for your grandma to have a different outcome than anyone else's.

So, what will it be then? Who will decide when medical care is just too expensive to bother with? Who will be left to perish because they just aren't worth the lifesaving effort? Well, for sure it won't be any members of Congress or anyone that works for the federal government because they won't be expected to suffer under the nationally socialized plan. It also won't be Obama's buddies in the unions who are about to be similarly exempted from the national plan, at least if Senator Max Baucus has his way.

Ah, but we are told that Obama's ideas on healthcare are "evolving," dontcha know? During the recent campaign for president (that was only 7 months ago, if you'll recall) Obama insisted that he would never tax your healthcare benefits from work. He even ridiculed McCain for proposing such a plan. Lately, however, he's "evolved" toward saying that such a new tax is on the table. What about his stance against fining people and businesses that don't join his UberPlan? He was against that sort of coerciveness before. Now he's "evolved."

Originally, he said it was "healthcare for all," but as of Wednesday night, it seems he's "evolved" to say that only those worth the bother should get healthcare. The rest should be left to died and/or suffer. If he does any more "evolving" we'll all be finding just who is "worth" what as far as he and his Democrats are concerned. Somehow I'd guess that many of you reading this today won't quite be worth as much as certain others!

Let's hope none of us are ever in a position to find out if Obamacare deems our grandmothers worth saving.

And what ever happened to the left's mantra that healthcare is a "right" and that money should never enter into a life or death decision? Now The One is saying it's just too darn expensive to save the old and infirm? Will our friends on the left now disown Obama the "murderer"?

A Conservative Case for Healthcare to be Made Wednesday

This week, Senator Jim DeMint will give his reply to Obamacare and it is sure to be a conservative reply as he is being backed by several stalwartly conservative organizations in the effort.

Groups like Americans for Tax Reform, Media Research Center, Americans for Prosperity, Conservatives for Patients’ Rights and Tea Party Patriots will all stand behind Senator DeMint's presentation in the Cannon Building in the House Budget Committee Hearing room on the Hill this Wednesday at noon.

DeMint has a full menu of items to propose and we have been informed that the list of issues that will be discussed will include:

  • Do no harm, keep employer-based plans
  • Vouchers of $2,000 for individuals and $5,000 for a family will be proposed for those without insurance whether it be private or employer-based
  • It will be proposed that health savings accounts should be able to be used for insurance premiums -- this is thought a great benefit for employers that want to drop their own plans
  • A national market for health insurance will be proposed so that competition across state lines will improve choice for everyone
  • Block grants to help states with their programs will be discussed, this will prevent guaranteed issued coverage and will also help federal mandates harder to impose
  • Tort reform to reduce predatory and frivolous lawsuits is being considered, as will caps on awards. This will be closely related to Senator Ensign's malpractice law proposal
  • Also, an option for individuals to leave their employer-based insurance plan and to choose a tax credit to pursue their own insurance will also be on the table

DeMint claims that these ideas will help 22.4 million currently uninsured Americans get healthcare coverage at lower costs. It will be cheaper and faster than the Kennedy plan currently finding such a tough road of it in the Senate. DeMint says this plan will save $310 billion over 5 years with the tax credit voucher proposal.

It will certainly be interesting to see where this proposal goes and if the media will give DeMint the attention he deserves.

Fiscal Realism: Adam Andrzejewski Wants to be Illinois Governor

First of all, I know it looks impossible to even say, so let's clear up that last name. It's pronounced An-gee-ef-ski. I know, I know, that means here in Illinois we could possibly go from a Governor Blagojevich to an Andrzejewski. But the difficult last name should stand as the only similarity between the two men, for Adam seems to have some ideas on how Illinois might get out of its fiscal nightmare. I interviewed him not long ago and he had some very interesting thoughts on how to fix Illinois. (adamforillinois.com/)

In fact, Andrzejewski has already made some headway in shining the sunlight of accountability on various sate and local agencies through his self-funded program -- self-funded to stay independent, he said -- dubbed "For the Good of Illinois." Andrzejewski has been at the vanguard of encouraging school boards and county governments in Illinois to put their check registries and finances on the Internet for all citizens to see. In fact, his catch phrase is "every dime online in real time."

He started with local schools and was successful at getting $1 million in vender spending posted on the Internet and from there the momentum spread to other government entities.

We picked up municipalities. We picked up townships, Park Districts, community colleges, like the College of DuPage, and then eventually counties, with the resource obviously in DuPage County, and in Cook County. So all across the Land of Lincoln I'm proud to say my efforts have led to nearly 50 percent of the people here in Illinois living with a better quality of government because of my efforts now than before I got started.

For instance, for the College of DuPage, the community college of DuPage County, Andrzejewski was successful not only in having its check registry posted, but also its salaries. And the success of this effort was key in getting the check registry for the entire county government posted.

The effort might also be underway in Cook Country, home of the City of Chicago, as well. According to Andrzejewski, Country Board member Tony Peraica contacted Andrzejewski about replicating the DuPage effort for Cook. After they spoke, Peraica was able to get a currently non-binding resolution to follow the example of DuPage County. Let's hope they follow through with action, now.

Building on his success for fiscal sunlight, Andrzejewski wants to take this program of reform all the way to the State House in Springfield.

But that brought me to the sticky question of government spending and taxes. I asked Andrzejewski if he could promise not to raise taxes and how he might reign in spending? He began talking of property taxes saying that, "our citizens, we can't afford our government any longer." Andrzejewski suggested a true property tax cap as one solution to a rising tax burden.

So, of course, they think it's impossible to put a true cap on property taxes. But we studied that property tax limitation law, and the actual statute runs 49 words, and the [A through O] exceptions run 490 words, and it's why people are being forced out of their houses in a down economy, why older people can't afford their property taxes and have to move, is because the exceptions are more the rule than the rule.

So my proposal is very reasonable: last year's budget plus or minus inflation, with an option, if you can't live with your budget, you've got a compelling reason you need more money, you can go to the voters every two years on referendum and ask for more. This puts people in control of their bill. They'll have visibility that their property tax bill will go up plus or minus by inflation or deflation, and anything more than that they'll have a stake in the outcome of a greater increase. It'll force their local units of government to properly plan, properly involve the citizenry, and force them to live within a budget that everybody else in this world lives within. So I think it's very reasonable, and anybody that doesn't think it's reasonable I think has a hard case to make to the citizens of Illinois.

I asked Andrzejewski about his proposal on the mounting pension mess for state employees and he said that he was soon to announce his pension proposal but was not yet ready to do so.

Talk of pensions naturally led to the question of a balanced budget. Supposedly, Illinois has a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, but not a single citizen believes a word of it.

On all of these things, that's the reoccurring theme, only in Illinois. Whether it's corruption, a horrible state budget, whether there's 10,000 kids on a waiting list for a charter school in Chicago, whether it's property taxes with all those exceptions or a horrible record of job growth, it's just -- the recurring theme comes back to only in Illinois. It has to end.

On a variety of other issues, Andrzejewski seems to be pretty solidly conservative. He's for the right of the individual to bear arms and affirmed that he'd sign a concealed carry law as governor. He is anti-abortion and also says he supports the death penalty. On that last, he had a caveat, because in Illinois he'd have a lot of input on that issue as governor.

The death penalty is an issue that I'm formulating my position on. I've always understood and leaned toward the egregious cases of the death penalty to have that retribution. Now, the interesting thing here in Illinois, as governor I would be able to study each case that comes before me, because the last thing that you want to do, especially in this state, is put to death an innocent man. So I would probably leave the death penalty intact and then studiously review each case for fairness that came before me as governor.

From there I moved on to a national debate currently raging: healthcare. Andrzejewski told me he favors more competition in healthcare and felt he could accomplish that by fostering more openness on what hospitals and doctors charge for their services. He also asserted that he'd "bring transparency to insurance commissions, as well."

On education the candidate had quite a lot to say.

I'm for school choice. Here in the General Assembly in Illinois, school choice doesn't have a chance. What I've done, in terms of policy on education, I would move the ball along the continuum toward school choice, because right now it's not anywhere on the political spectrum of being able to be enacted into law. So the first thing that I would do is support our private schools, especially in this economy. There was just a note in the newspaper the other day that a private school that's been around for a couple of generations in Addison, Illinois is shutting its doors. I would triple the income tax credit for families that send their kids to private school, from $500 to $1,500 a year.

The next thing that I would do is I would completely abolish the cap on charter schools. In Illinois, if we do something well, we cap it, which is crazy. So, in Chicago, the charter schools spend about a third less money with about a third better education outcome for children, but they're capped. There's 10,000 kids on wait lists for these schools. I think that's not common sense. So I would eliminate the cap statewide. And obviously the charter school's a special type of public school. It's not beholden to the state mandates on education or -- that go with the normal public schools, and I think that's also common sense policy.

The other thing that I would do is very innovative. Power should follow students not bureaucracy, so specific to the Chicago public schools, in failing schools I would deliver the state portion, which is significant, thirty-five cents [this was hard to hear in the transcript, so this percentage may not have been what Adam said] to every dollar of funding, I would deliver that directly to the neighborhood school and divert the payment away from the administration center of Chicago public schools itself.

I also asked Andrzejewski just why he was running, why did he want to be governor? His answer was pretty well formulated.

I see an absence of leadership. It's a very fair question, because I wish I didn't have to run. It'd be much easier to do something else. But I see an absence of leadership on principle, on values that regular people share, a common sense that regular people share. And we've just experienced a terrible 10 years here in Illinois. It's certainly a lost decade here in Illinois. And even with the indictments last week of Blagojevich and the whole insider crew, these seven people, the indictment of them, did not change anything here in Illinois. The system of corruption, of bloated government, wasteful spending, nothing systemically changed in Illinois government. It would change if I was governor, and that's why I'm running.

I wrapped up our interview with a few questions about the Republican establishment in the state. Andrzejewski is running as an outsider to politics as usual and that fact is cemented because the state GOP is beginning to line up behind State Senator Bill Brady's gubernatorial bid. Consequently, he does not enjoy the backing of the party establishment. I wondered how Andrzejewski might win over or over come the party establishment?

Well, the party establishment has to make their own case. I feel that it's a very difficult case to make to the voters in 2010. I like my case, I like my position much better. They've got to justify their time over at least the last 10 years. Illinois was a fairly decent state under Jim Edgar. It has declined precipitously into one of the worst states. So if you're a part of the establishment, like Senator Bill Brady, if you've been in the General Assembly for the last 16 years, he's got to make a case, in my opinion, of where he's shown leadership, how he's moved Illinois forward. Where -- what was the pushback that anybody from the establishment in the Republican Party put forward to help move Illinois forward?

That's a case the voters are going to want to hear. With me in the race, that's a case that must be made. And that would be a case that would have to be made if anybody is going to get past a Democrat in November of 2010. I could make the case, what I have done. I've spearheaded one of the most successful grassroots to government movements in state of Illinois history. I think, like I said, I like my case and they have to make their case.

With that the interview ended but I got a pretty good feeling of the seriousness of this effort. Unlike past outsider candidates, Andrzejewski seems to have actually thought out some solutions to Illinois’ woes. I hope that he is able to make some headway in this coming election season if for no other reason than to put some of his ideas on the table to influence the debate and for the Republicrats party of Illinois to answer for themselves.

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Proud to be a Conservative? Well, Show It!

The Cypress Times of Cypress, Texas has started a little effort to help conservatives show that they are proud to be American and proud to be conservatives. Times Publisher John G. Winder decided it's time to show the world that "I Am Conservative America" by having conservatives of all stripes from all across the country send in their photo holding a little sign that proclaims their self pride.

I know, I know. if you are a conservative and are reading this posting, I'll bet your first thought is to roll your eyes. I do know how you feel because I did the same thing. After all, isn't it the "feels-good idiots" on the left that indulge in these sorts of empty gestures? These are the sorts of fluffy, pointless things that leftist goofballs do, right? We are serious, ya know? I mean, posting our photos on some webpage ain't a'gonna change anything, we all know.

But, wait. Stop and give this a little more thought. Remember the self-loathing, anti-American citizens of this country that created a webpage that pleaded with the Euroweenies that they love so much asking their forgiveness for voting for George W. Bush... twice? Remember the "I'm Sorry" website? And now there are some half-wits posting photos of themselves holding signs to show how giddy they are that they support a woman's "right" to infanticide. These sorts of efforts, as ridiculous and substance free as they seem, get all over the news. Why, the whole world talked about the self-flagellating "I'm Sorry" website. These sites promulgate the loony-left far and wide.

And since we've never tried to mount much of an effort to reply, we almost seem timid in our own stance as conservatives. Well, the tea party movement changed that perception. It showed the world that we aren't ashamed, or maybe just too busy to bother to show it. If only to keep our own momentum barreling ahead, let's do this.

And, what the heck. Think of this as catharsis. It's a finger in the eye of the hate mongers on the left.

So, don't be bashful and have some fun. Be clean, make your little sign that says "I Am Conservative America," take your photo, email it to Publisher@TheCypressTimes.com, and let's show the world we aren't afraid to be seen as conservatives. I just sent in mine.

You KNOW what I have to say now, dontcha? "Lighten up, Francis" and do it

I know it's cheesey. But so what. Let your ConFlag flay, baby!

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Will the Real Republican Please Stand Up?

"I am not beholden to any party."
California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, candidate for governor

That must be true given Steve Poizner’s history of political donations. Poizner has given, and generously at that, to both Republican and Democrat candidates for office in addition to several Democrat controlled committees, this based on he and his wife’s publicly reported accounts, anyway. Oddly, Poizner's wife happens to be a registered Democrat who Poizner has “blamed” for many of the Democrat contributions that have his signature affixed. Such donations include: a $10,000 contribution to the Democratic National Committee on 10/02/00; $1,000 to John Forbes Kerry on 02/15/01; and a $10,000 donation he made to the '00 Gore/Lieberman Recount Committee.

In fact, there is quite a lot of chatter out there that seems to point to Poizner's less than stellar Republican credentials. He has been termed everything but a conservative for the last 5 years.

Poizner himself has been eager to play down his Republican designation. For instance, Poizner once told the San Mateo County Times, "I am a frustrated moderate Republican." Poizner seems to be a RINO poster child who is frustrated because his billion dollar fortune can’t buy him the stature, no pun intended, of the current Governor. Poizner ran for the State Assembly in a liberal Bay Area district, spent millions of dollars of his own money and still lost. He ran that race as the "model of a liberal GOPer" according to press accounts then. "Poizner's major donations have gone to candidates who oppose equal pay for women. He has donated thousands of dollars to candidates endorsed by the National Pro-Life Council and then he sends out tons of literature pretending to be pro-choice," wrote the San Mateo County Times (San Mateo, CA), October 22, 2004.

These days, now that he's running for governor, he's suddenly trying to sound more "Republican." But past associates and his own past statements don't seem to square well with his the new rhetoric.

Here are a few examples:

  • Former deputy mayor of Los Angeles and candidate for Insurance Commissioner Gary Mendoza, a moderate and a decent guy, said, “Less than one-one-hundredth of Republican primary voters supported the 2000 Gore-Lieberman recount, as did Steve Poizner, who is really a Democrat.” (The Hotline, September 16, 2005, The Daily News of Los Angeles, June 26, 2005)
  • Poizner has been called an “Arnold Republican,” a label that implies moderate social policies compared to the traditional party platform. (The Stanford Daily October 28, 2004)
  • “I don’t think either party in Sacramento does a very good job of representing people like me.” (The Stanford Daily October 28, 2004)

All this explains why he has supported several "open primary" proposals (which he now conveniently opposes) in the past. Perhaps he felt there weren't enough people like him in the party? Does California need more people like him in the GOP? After all, it's the Republican party - not the RINO party!

California needs a real Republican alternative to Democrats and the Arnold Republicans. Is Steve Poizner a real Republican?

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Why Did Calif. Republican Poizner Donate To Gore/Lieberman Recount Fund?

California's gubernatorial race is widening on the Republican side with one famous name from the business world, ebay's Meg Whitman, one former congressman, the 15th District's Tom Campbell, and current State Insurance Commissioner, Steve Poizner all ready to hit the ground running. But as each candidate is vetted, some are wondering if Steve Poizner is a Ronnie(Reagan)-come-lately to the Republican Party as it has been discovered that Poizner donated money to the Gore/Leiberman Recount Committee in 2000.

IRS records* confirm that Mr. Poizner gave the hefty sum of $10,000 to the recount effort, a fund to which Jane Fonda is also listed as having donated $100,000. Records also show that Poizner donated $1,000 to Al Gore's run for president as well as $2,000 to John Kerry's.

 

Of course, the big question is, why would a Republican give such a large amount to a fund dedicated to overturning the election of a Republican president? And compiled with his generous contribution to overturn President Bush's election, there is no record of Poizner having given to any Republican campaign previous to the 2000 general election.

So what is going on here? What sort of "lifelong" Republican donates money to overturn a vote that put a Republican in the White House? How long has Mr. Poizner been a Republican, anyway? The first anyone really knows of Poizner's GOP pedigree is when he unsuccessfully ran for the State Assembly as a Republican against Ira Ruskin in 2004, though before that he worked in the Bush White House as the Director of Critical Infrastructure Protection.

What is Steve Poizner's explanation not only for being a late comer to the GOP officially, but also for donating quite a lot of money to a fund that would have helped Democrats take the White House in 2000? As it happens, Poizner does have an explanation of sorts. He says his wife made him do it.

In a recent interview with John Fleischman, for instance, Poizner says that he was merely supporting his wife, a registered Democrats. And in February, Poizner told the

But it isn't just his donations to Democrats -- whether it really was his wife or not. Poizner also has a record of being against tax cuts. He spoke against the Bush tax cuts in 2004, in 2006 Poizner joined an effort to abolish Calif. Proposition 13, a law that places protections on local property taxes to keep them from being easily raised, and he also donated the amazing sum of nearly $200,000 in support of Proposition 39 back in 2000, another pro-tax effort. This coupled with the donations to Democrat candidates sure raises suspicions that Poizner is a typical tax and spend liberal.

Whatever the case, these are some interesting questions that Poizner should be pressed on. After all, Republicans have been frustrated to see their candidates time and again run as staunch Republicans, only to turn into Democrat lite once in office. California's Republicans deserve to know just who and what they are voting for. Does Poizner lean toward Democrats? His donation to the Gore/Leiberman Recount Committee certainly raises the question and so does his past efforts pushing for higher taxes. And if this truly is just a case of his wife's donations, if he truly has changed his tune on taxes then let's hear Poizner's conservative ideas. Let's press him on these issues before we settle on his candidacy.

*(The IRS form with both Poizner and Fonda's contributions listed appear on Schedule A, page 101 of 140 of the form 8872 for the period October 18, 2000 through November 27, 2000 on the IRS website)

(Photo of Commissioner Poizner credit: Randall Benton/RBenton@acbee.com)

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

John Kasich for Ohio Gov

in

This guy has some major chops. I was born in Ohio and now I wish I still lived there just to be able to vote for John Kasich for Governor. But it can't stop me from donating money to him. It shouldn't stop you either:

www.KasichForOhio.com

Obama's Healthcare Deception -- It's Just a Giant Power Grab

Obama's plan will eliminate the private insurance industry, "its premised on doing so." He intends to create a socialist, government controlled health care system regardless.

Obama wants a single payer healthcare system. His deception offers a "choice" that is intended to disappear shortly whether people want their private insurance or not.

(H/T verumserum.com)

Be sure and Visit my Home blog Publius' Forum. It's what's happening NOW!

Syndicate content