Ron's Log

California Primary - June 5

California's new primary system and newly drawn districts get their first use next month. The Presidential primary remains partisan, however. Too bad about that. The numbers of Presidential candidates for each party:

• Democrat - 1
• Republican - 6 (Ron Paul is still there, as is Fred Karger)
• American Independent - 3 (including Mad Max Riekse whose own website is empty as is his page on the Citizens Party website)
• Green - 3 (including Roseanne Barr)
• Libertarian - 9 (on the mistaken assumption that they will be able to add their vote totals together to win, the Libertarian Party is running every single one of its members as a candidate for President)
• Peace and Freedom - 3

That's a total of 25.

The new primary system kicks in when you get to the candidates for U.S. Senate - 24 of 'em, representing 5 different political parties. Here are the ones who were sufficiently motivated to put a bio in the voter information guide:

• Orly Taitz - who wants a "moratorium on taxation" of any company that repatriates to the U.S. or creates jobs in America. Not clear what she means by "moratorium," but it sounds like "no taxes" to me. "For every dollar in tax revenues on newly created jobs for the U.S. citizens, there will be a dollar in taxation credit for the companies." But I thought there was going to be a moratorium on taxation? Tax credits don't work when there's no tax. Ms. Taitz says "a judge upheld my subpoena for Barack Obama to appear at trial and provide his identification papers." That's good, because I'm not sure who that guy in the White House is, but he appears to be Presidenting While Black, so I say pull him over. Ms. Taitz wants to know why President Obama is using a "Connecticut Social Security number." As retired Social Security employee let me explain what a "Connecticut Social Security number" would be. Numbers were (I can't say for sure that it still works exactly the same way, since I've been out of the loop for 10 years) distributed geographically. If you walked into a Connecticut Social Security office to apply for your Social Security Number, your number would come from the range assigned to that office. It indicates nothing about place of birth, residency or citizenship.
• Elizabeth Emken - who wants to suspend "job killing government regulations and mandates."
• Robert Lauten - wants to reinstate the Glass-Steagall Act. He wants to re-establish the "Hamiltonian Credit System." His website (seemingly designed in 1995) refers to this Lyndon Larouche page for explanation. It seems that it would require the creation of a National Bank, something that most of us will remember from history was considered unconstitutional.
• Dan Hughes - rants for a bit in his bio, but doesn't offer much in the way of concrete ideas. He includes one sentence saying he will cut government spending, reform the tax code, reform government regulations, stop higher taxes, secure the border, repeal "government controlled healthcare." That last one is a bit broad, but I think if as a first step he plans to abolish Veterans Hospitals, he will not get re-elected. He also wants term limits for Congress.
• Mike Strimling - begins his bio with this short sentence: "Tax The Rich." He wants the tax rate on "the wealthy" to be restored to its levels under "Eisenhower, Kennedy and Nixon." One wonders what was different about the taxes under LBJ that makes him skip over Johnson's presidency. "Tax all stock and property worth over $3 million to pay the debt." A sort of federal property tax? Does he have any idea how many federal jobs that will create? "Revoke charters of corporations that refuse to limit political contributions." Because radically destabilizing the economy will work so much better than a Constitutional amendment reversing the Supreme Court's bonehead "corporations are people" decision.
• Dirk Allen Konopik - I can quote his entire bio! "Christian, Veteran, American, NRA, VFW, American Legion, Will stand boldly for Christ." His website is very 2012. Supports a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, would confirm only judges who believe that Christianity is our nation's moral and ethical compass, supports a military sufficiently powerful for global domination, supports "Biblical marriage" (that would be polygamy and the enslavement of women, I think), rebukes "LGBT lifestyles," supports federal death penalty for murder, rape, human trafficking, and child molestation (not all of those are federal crimes yet), on the economy he supports a federal Geographic Information System that will do magic for the creation of new businesses, in education he would put prayer in public schools and defund the teaching of Darwinian theory - he opposes unbiblical curricula, supports an amnesty for illegal aliens (!), believes that the Triune God of the Bible is the only god that has ever existed (this contradicts the Bible), the universe was created 6,000 years ago, evolutionary theory contradicts the Bible and is therefore false, no statement in the Bible has ever been proven false (but that Noah story is looking pretty shaky), all people are descended from Noah's family (there is no explanation of how they came to look so very different around the world with no evolution taking place), he promises to be faithful to his wife, "America's national debt must be removed" (which doesn't sound quite the same as paying it back), he wants to defund Planned Parenthood and goes all Godwin's Law when he states that abortion is legal as was the Nazi holocaust, supports national legislation to ban pornography and prostitution (he offers no definitions or how he would work these anti-business laws around the first amendment), a new constitutional amendment for more religious freedom.
• Marsha Feinland - "Let's decide democratically what we need and make the rich and their corporations pay." She doesn't say much more than that.
• Dianne Feinstein - you should already be familiar with this one. She avoids saying anything outrageously extreme in her statement. Not entertaining in the least.
• Colleen Shea Fernald - she starts out "Dear congressionally betrayed voter, It is time to end government organized crime" She is not, however, a Libertarian candidate. Wants to end the war in Afghanistan.
• Rogelio T. Gloria - Another short one: "I am an experienced U.S. Naval Officer and federal employee." And I bet he dresses nicely, too. A glance at his website, unfortunately, reveals the horror that he has not one single supporter among the vast underemployed population of English majors. His grammar and spelling give every indication that high school graduation was a challenge for him. "We are afraid of losing what little we have and hold on. The Republican have a plan." Born in Hawaii (better check that), he was a Lieutenant in the Navy from 1985 to 2003. He has two master's degrees (he doesn't say in what) and he's working on a "PHD" degree (also nonspecific). He lived and worked in the DC area for several years. He may still live there. It's not clear. "The Department of Energy is a funny agency." Finally, a little bit of humor amidst all this political sludge. He rambles on rather confusedly for several sentences and concludes "Therefore, something must be done now." And there's this patriotic sentiment: "Unlike, Florida, we are not just a warm retirement state; we are a dynamic state that stretches almost entire west coast of the United States." He falls short of endorsing legislation that would take the coastlines of Oregon and Washington and transfer them to California, restoring its god-given destiny.
• Al Ramirez - cut red tape, defend "our" religious beliefs, defend the rights of families, repeal the "government takeover of our health care system," work to address the dilemmas attributable to illegal immigration.

I find it a little bit interesting that no matter how crazy or extreme or oversimplified some of these candidates' positions are, those who express an opinion on illegal immigration are thoughtful, cautious, and acknowledge the complexities of the problem. None of them (as far as I saw) said they should all be rounded up and shipped across the border.

In the 36th Congressional District there are only two candidates (Bono Mack and Ruiz). Same story in the 56th Assembly District (Reynaga-Emett and Perez).

Another Sign Of Republican Progress On Equal Rights

Jan van Lohuizen is probably a more reliable person to gauge shifts in Republican Party attitudes than Jon Stewart. He's been doing polling since 1977. Here's an interview with him by The Iowa Republican, published in July last year. He conducted three statewide polls for The Iowa Republican.

In the 1980s, he worked for two of the leading Republican polling firms and spent two years as the opinion research director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

In 1991, he founded his own firm, Voter/Consumer Research. He served as President George W. Bush’s pollster in both of his presidential election campaigns. He is highly regarded by political professionals in both parties.

Here's what he said about Romney in that interview:

I worked for the Romney campaign 4 years ago and it was one of the worst if not the worst campaign experiences I’ve had. I personally liked (and like) Romney, and he’s clearly very bright, but I came to the conclusion that to be a successful venture capitalist you mostly have to be a great pitchman, much more so than a great manager.

Romney clearly is a good pitchman, and I think that in ’08 this was more a liability than an asset: he sounded as convincing telling people he was pro-choice (on tape in his campaign for Senate against Kennedy) as he sounded telling people he was pro-life 4 years ago. That made a lot of people very nervous. It might have been survivable if he switched on just one issue, but he switched on so many that he lost his credibility. I think the damage has proven to be lasting.

In his current campaign he made the right decision to try to become the leading economic expert in the field. However, if you read what he actually says it sound very hollow and mostly consists of safe conservative dogma; if he has said something original on the economy I missed it. I do think he will be a strong candidate against the President if he manages to get out of the primaries, but whether he does remains to be seen.

But that's just background, so you know where he's coming from. His name is hitting the news today because he has issued a talking points memo suggesting Republicans are shifting and should shift their anti-gay positions. Over here, Andrew Sullivan has shared images of the memo, and formatted the text readably. The story seems to have originated with Burns & Haberman, but they can't format HTML for shit.

Jan van Lohuizen says:

Support for same sex marriage has been growing and in the last few years support has grown at an accelerated rate with no sign of slowing down. A review of public polling shows that up to 2009 support for gay marriage increased at a rate of 1% a year. Starting in 2010 the change in the level of support accelerated to 5% a year. The most recent public polling shows supporters of gay marriage outnumber opponents by a margin of roughly 10%.

He also says polling shows that there is majority Republican support for these positions:

1. Protecting gays and lesbians against being fired for reasons of sexual orientation
   
2. Protections against bullying and harassment
3. Repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell.
4. Right to visit partners in hospitals
5. Protecting partners against loss of home in case of severe medical emergencies or death
6. Legal protection in some form for gay couples whether it be same sex marriage or domestic partnership

Here is his final suggested talking point:

"As people who promote personal responsibility, family values, commitment and stability, and emphasize freedom and limited government we have to recognize that freedom means freedom for everyone. This includes the freedom to decide how you live and to enter into relationships of your choosing, the freedom to live without excessive interference of the regulatory force of government."

Back in August 2011, Jan van Lohuizen recommended that Republican candidates simply ignore gay marriage. "The fiscal issues are so much more decisive than the social issues. Why go out on a limb with this one?"

White House Correspondents Dinner

Video by C-Span. They've broken it up to give you choices: the President Obama part, the Jimmy Kimmel part, or the whole shebang.

YouTube Overreaction

Fred Karger is a moderate Republican who has NOT dropped out of the Presidential race and will be on the June primary ballot in California. His campaign produced this video, which is being hosted on Vimeo now.

He posted it on YouTube originally, but they pulled it two days later saying it violated Community Guidelines. They were never more specific than that, but after Karger reposted it on Vimeo and some brouhaha was kicked up, YouTube reversed itself, making the video available again.

Raul Ruiz Makes It To The "Red To Blue" List

Dr. Raul Ruiz is running against Mary Bono Mack for her seat in Congress. Today he announced that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has put him on their Red To Blue list which means that the national Democratic Party believes he has sufficient support in this district that he actually has a shot at winning the seat. Therefore, the national Democratic Party will begin to provide him with financial, communications, grassroots, and strategic support. There are currently 35 Red To Blue candidates.

You (Yes, You) Can Win A Free Dinner With George Clooney (the real George Clooney)

Good news! Two people will be selected to have dinner with George Clooney, travel and hotel included for the winner and a guest. The bad news is that President Obama will be at the dinner, too. "Three's a crowd, Barack!" Maybe if the winner brings the President a distracting gift, like an iPad, he'll got all wrapped up in Angry Birds and not notice when the winner and George slip off to a quieter place.

Start here. They use the word "today", but the rules say "[t]he Promotion starts at 12:00 a.m. (all times Eastern Time) on April 19, 2012 and ends at 11:59 p.m. on April 30, 2012."

Two winners will each receive the following prize package: round-trip tickets for winner and a guest from within the fifty U.S. States, DC, or Puerto Rico to a destination to be determined by the Sponsor; hotel accommodations; and dinner with President Obama and George Clooney on a date to be determined by the Sponsor (approximate retail value of all prizes $3,200). Odds of winning depend on number of entries received. Promotion open only to U.S. citizens, or lawful permanent U.S. residents who are legal residents of 50 United States, District of Columbia and Puerto Rico and 18 or older (or of majority under applicable law).

What's America without choices:

• Go here to enter your name WITH A DONATION.
• Or, Go here to enter your name WITH NO DONATION.

Santorum

Some say that in this video, Rick Santorum is finally accepting and embracing what you find when you Google 'Santorum'.

Or maybe it's just mud.

Occupy news

Occupy news today:

• In Washington, DC, Occupy protestors have been camping in McPherson Square and Freedom Plaza since October. The National Park Service has said they will begin to enforce the existing regulations against camping. The Occupiers are staying, but some expect the police to roll in when the media depart and/or it gets dark.
• Oakland City Hall reopened today. About 400 protestors were arrested over the weekend. Chelsea Carter at CNN writes "The mass arrests, described by police as the largest in city history, appear to have injected new life into the Occupy movement as protesters in a number of American and European cities took to the streets Sunday to express their solidarity with the Occupy Oakland group." I suppose that's the media way of looking at it - if the media pay attention then it's alive, if they don't then it's dead. Occupy Oakland has jumped the shark, so it gets attention.
  
  The Oakland protestors were attempting to occupy the Henry Kaiser Convention Center, seen here in its earlier days.

  The front page of the website for the Oakland Police Department features a statement from Chief Jordan right at the top that begins "I want to thank you for taking the time to share your feedback concerning events associated with the Occupy Wall Street movement occurring in Oakland. We have received a large amount of feedback in the form of phone calls and emails from concerned residents as well as individuals across the country and around the world." I was impressed at the level of communication with the public...until I read further and found that this note was here from the October 2011 riots.

  The San Francisco Chronicle has a fuller report on how the rioting went. Based on that I made up the following map:
  
  (1) is Ogawa Plaza which is in front of (2) City Hall. On Saturday the demonstrators started at Ogawa Plaza and headed for (3) the Kaiser Convention Center. The police say they slashed tires on the way. After meeting resistance from the police at the convention center, the protestors returned to City Hall and some proceeded north until they "burst into" (4) the downtown YMCA. 44 were arrested inside the YMCA. I'd like to know the story behind that. Has the YMCA taken sides on this, or were the protestors just looking for a restroom? Later that night was the break-in and vandalization of City Hall. And why City Hall? My guess is because it was a fairly easy target with, apparently, weak security. If the Occupy protestors were serious about rioting and making mayhem where it might count for something, there was a (5) Citibank right there. Only a little further away was a (6) Bank of America. But if they wanted to express anger at the only organization in Oakland who had done 'em wrong, the (7) police headquarters were closer than the YMCA (the YMCA?! of all places?!). What, if anything, was their point?

  Here's an article by Dr. Rita Nakashima Brock who participated in the Oakland Occupy movement. She describes the walk from City Hall to the convention center as peaceful and happy with kids and balloons and a religious altar. Her story doesn't extend beyond the encounter at the convention center.

  And then there's the news about the 15-year old Oakland boy who strangled his adoptive parents who had been having arguments with him about him spending too much time with the Occupy movement. The mother worked "as a physician assistant in a city-run clinic in the Tenderloin and [the father] as a clinical psychologist for inmates in the San Francisco County Jail system." The boy has a black belt in karate.

• The Occupy camp in Charlotte, North Carolina, was torn down today. The protestors had been camping there since last fall. The city passed a new ordinance banning camping in the parks. It went into effect at midnight this morning. As police tore down the tents, some protestors sang the National Anthem and Hokey Pokey. Seven were arrested. There was some hair splitting. The law allows tents for protection from the weather, but not for camping. So the protestors say they removed all their belongings, which would show they weren't camping any longer. The police tore them down anyway. "When asked to explain how police determined what is a campsite, which is banned, and what is an acceptable temporary structure, police Major Eddie Levins said, 'You know it when you see it.'" Major Levins probably also serves on the Charlotte Arts Council.
• The Wellington, New Zealand, police say their Occupy protestors have all been evicted without incident. No arrests were made. On the Occupy Wellington Facebook page the comments seem to be consistent with a peaceful departure. One commenter, JR Murphy, wrote this:

  Had a feeling this was going to happen, decided to come home last night after camping Sunday as they had decided not to fight security and the police - which I wanted to do so I could get in front of a judge about why I Occupy. What the hell are council and police doing - this is a direct violation of our human rights - gunna catch the train today and chalk Wellington with poetry in support of the movement!!!!! I would encourage others to do the same, the council hate it. When writing your messages on the street and buildings only use chalk and don't swear, then you havn't broken any laws. Warehouse have buckets of chalk for $4. Wairarapa train gets in about 12, will start on the streets around Parliament buildings, then the courts and move out from there. Occupy isn't just Civic Square, Occupy is all streets!

• 11 Occupy protestors were arrested in Des Moines last night. They had been camping in front of the Capitol building. They are not planning to re-Occupy any outdoor public space (it is, after all, winter in Iowa), but... "Foremost on the group’s spring calendar is May 1, a day Goodner said Occupiers nationwide will promote as an 'American Spring,' referencing the Arab Spring revolutions in several Middle Eastern countries in Spring 2011." Yeah, May 1, Just randomly picked a date on the calendar when they thought the weather would be nice and it turned out to be May 1. They probably talked about April 30, but that's a Monday.
• During the eviction of London Occupiers bailiffs were said to be "heavy-handed." There they had been occupying a bank-owned building. In the video below you will see one of the bailiffs punch a photographer's camera. Later we see a car, which is said to have been driven by the same bailiff, surrounded by protestors. He accelerates a little into the crowd and mayhem erupts.
  
• In Seattle, Occupy protestors vandalized a Wells Fargo branch.
• In Austin the Occupy protestors seem to have good communication with the city. The city has established a schedule whereby they clean the area where the Occupy encampment is located, on the steps of City Hall, three times a week. The cleaning includes a power wash. Protestors complain that they have to move their stuff, and then when they come back it's wet and icky, and they have to put down tarps to stay dry. The Occupy protestors have started a petition to request the city to reduce the cleaning frequency to weekly and to do it "during the day to save water." The logic behind that is not explained.
The Guardian has prepared what they say is a global map of all Occupy encampments. The map uses 3 symbols and you know what would be helpful? A key to tell you what the symbols mean.
• There are still 19 tents at Occupy Buffalo with perhaps 10 to 15 people. An agreement with the city expires on Wednesday. There have been no arrests in Buffalo.
• In Boise the state legislature is working on a bill that would prohibit camping on state grounds inside the city limits. If approved, the dozen tents would seem to be in violation of the law. Protestors say they are not camping, but holding a vigil, the essential legal difference seeming to turn on the lack of marshmallows. They claim to have good communications with the police. The Times-News of Magic Valley editorialized against the bill that would outlaw camping.
• Occupy Providence has moved out of a public park. This was in exchange for the opening of a day shelter for homeless people which is run by the Roman Catholic Diocese. Private donors have promised to re-seed the park when warm weather returns.
• Occupy Cork has been ordered out of an unfinished building that they began to occupy on January 1. Occupy has agreed to vacate.
• Occupy Bend, Oregon, meets weekly "at Wabi Sabi, Wednesdays at 7 p.m." They seem to be engaged in targeted actions.

Good Ol' Fashioned Red Baiting!

In South Carolina a question about the 99% versus the 1% inspires Mitt Romney to suggest the questioner might be happier in Russia, China, Cuba or North Korea.

If we can just get back to the good old days when Republicans called out those lazy hippie scum as pinkos and commies, then we'll be on terra firma. Soon in this campaign some candidate will surely say "Get a haircut! You look like a girl!"

Who ordered 58 Godfather's Pizzas?

Just the rankings from the Des Moines Register. If you want twisted drama political analyses, you can find those in abundance today.

From BuzzFeed.