At the time of this writing, there are three candidates running for Chairman of the California Republican Party, David Hadley, Steve Frank, and Travis Allen. I am going to publish each of their candidate statements here so that Delegates to the CRP can have ready access to the information prior to their voting. The first statement will be from David Hadley, the second from Steve Frank, and the Third from Travis Allen. These statements were originally published in the FlashReport.Continue reading “CANDIDATES FOR CHAIRMAN OF THE CALIFORNIA REPUBLICAN PARTY – PART 1: DAVID HADLEY”
When a 14-point Republican lead disappears
By Shawn Steel, Former Chairman of the California Republican Party and Republican National Committeeman from California to the RNC
November 27, 2018 The Washington Times
Young Kim was poised to become the first Korean-American woman elected to Congress.
Her 14-point lead was the lone bright spot on an otherwise dismal night for Orange County Republicans. But, over the past week, Republicans have watched the first-generation immigrant’s lead evaporate. With thousands of provisional ballots left to count, her commanding lead is now underwater.
She lost one week after the election.Continue reading “CALIFORNIA REPUBLICANS DON’T NEED VOTER FRAUD TO LOSE WHEN DEMOCRATS CAN SIMPLY CHANGE THE RULES”
My personal recommendations for the California November 6, 2018 Election.
I want to be clear that while I am Treasurer of the Republican Party of Los Angeles County, the following recommendations are my personal recommendations, and are not official Republican Party endorsements, although in most cases my recommendations will be the same as the official Party endorsements.
By Joel Kotkin and Wendell Cox
Across the country, white voters placed Donald Trump in office by a margin of 21 points over Clinton. Their backing helped the GOP gain control of a vast swath of local offices nationwide. But in California, racial politics are pushing our general politics the other direction, way to the left.
By Thomas Sowell
Of all the many things said about Donald Trump, what was said by Roger Ailes, head of the Fox News Channel, said it all in just two words: “Grow up!”
It is amazing how many people have been oblivious to this middle-aged man’s spoiled brat behavior, his childish boastfulness about things he says he is going to do, and his petulant response to every criticism with ad hominem replies.
“Political correctness is the conscious, designed manipulation of language intended to change the way people speak, write, think, feel, and act, in furtherance of an agenda.”
[This appears in the November–December 2015 issue of The Austrian.]
I’d like to speak today about what political correctness is, at least in its modern version, what it is not, and what we might do to fight against it.
To begin, we need to understand that political correctness is not about being nice. It’s not simply a social issue or a subset of the culture wars.
The Congressional Budget Office says the current year’s budget deficit will be a record $1.5 trillion. It also says that over the next decade we’re on track for annual deficits of “only” $768 billion. I suspect the CBO has hired Rosy Scenario to do the bookkeeping, but let’s take that number at face value.
I’m now going to balance the budget, with the help of some experts.
I’ll begin with things I’m most eager to cut. Let’s privatize air traffic control. Canada did it, and it works better. Then privatize Amtrak. Get rid of all subsidies for rail. That’ll save $12 billion.
End subsidies for public broadcasting, like NPR. Cancel the Small Business Administration. Repeal the Davis-Bacon rules under which the government pays union-set wages to workers on federal construction projects. Cut foreign aid by half (although we should probably get rid of all of it). So far, that’s $20 billion.
Oops. That doesn’t dent the deficit. We have to do much more.
So eliminate the U.S. Education Department. We’d save $94 billion. Federal involvement doesn’t improve education. It gets in the way.
Agriculture subsidies cost us $30 billion a year. Let’s get rid of them. They distort the economy. We should also eliminate Housing and Urban Development. That’s $53 billion more.
Who needs the Energy Department and its $20 billion sinkhole? The free market should determine energy investments.
And let’s end the war on drugs. In effect, it’s a $47 billion subsidy for thugs in the black market.
I’ve already cut more than six times more than President Obama proposed in his State of the Union address. His freeze of nondefense discretionary spending would save only $40 billion.
But my cuts still total only $246 billion. If we’re going to get rid of the rest of the CBO’s projected deficit, we must attack the “untouchable” parts of the budget, starting with Social Security. Raising the retirement age and indexing benefits to inflation would save $93 billion. I’d save more by privatizing Social Security, but our progressive friends won’t like that, so for now I’ll ignore privatization.
The biggest budget busters are Medicare and Medicaid, and get this: the 400 subsidy programs run by HHS. Assuming I take just two-thirds of the Cato Institute’s suggested cuts, that saves $281 billion.
How about the Defense Department’s $721 billion? Much of that money could be saved if the administration just shrank the military’s mission to its most important role: protecting us and our borders from those who wish us harm. Today, we have more than 50,000 soldiers in Germany, 30,000 in Japan and 9,000 in Britain. Those countries should pay for their own defense. Cato’s military cuts add up to $150 billion.
I’ve now cut enough to put us $2 billion in surplus!
Can we go further?
“Repeal Obamacare,” syndicated columnist Deroy Murdock said.
Reason magazine editor Matt Welch wants to cut the Department of Homeland Security, “something that we did without 10 years ago.”
But don’t we need Homeland Security to keep us safe?
“We already have law enforcement in this country that pays attention to these things. This is a heavily bureaucratized organization.
“Cut the Commerce Department,” Mary O’Grady of The Wall Street Journal said. “If you take out the census work that it does, you would save $8 billion. And the rest of what it does is really just collect money for the president from business.”
As the bureaucrats complain about proposals to make tiny cuts, it’s good to remember that disciplined government could make cuts that get us to a surplus in one year. But even a timid Congress could make swift progress if it wanted to. If it just froze spending at today’s levels, it would almost balance the budget by 2017. If spending were limited to 1 percent growth each year, the budget would balanced in 2019. And if the crowd in Washington would limit spending growth to about 2 percent a year, the red ink would almost disappear in 10 years.
As you see, the budget can be cut. Only politics stand in the way.
John Stossel is host of “Stossel” on the Fox Business Network. He’s the author of “Give Me a Break” and of “Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity.” To find out more about John Stossel, visit his site at johnstossel.com.
I Had a Dream
By Jed Gladstein
The following is an essay that appeared in The American Thinker. It is an important piece so I am posting it here in its entirety, with permission of the author.
I awakened the other morning from a dream to a vivid certainty. The certainty is that America is in mortal danger. Our country has reached a pivot point in its national existence, and the American people must now decide whether this country will be victorious or join the long line of historically vanquished nations.
Here is the dream:
A young hawk is let loose in the sky. It is lean and strong and full of life’s surging impulse. And it is hungry. It circles the sky in search of food, and then it dives. In a moment, it fastens upon and tightly clutches a healthy pigeon. It forces the pigeon to the ground. There, it bites open the neck of its prey and sucks the life blood from its heart. In the awful ineluctability of that reality, the pigeon’s submissive protests simply fade into silence.
If my dream is merely the product of “an undigested bit of beef” (hat tip to Charles Dickens), then I beg forgiveness for what will surely be seen as an alarmist article. But if my dream is tinged with prophecy, what then? If America’s light goes out, it will fail in its historic mission to hold up a beacon of freedom in the world, and that will surely be a tragedy for all people of good will. But how many Americans actually understand that it is possible for our nation to fail?
Do we think America cannot die like the hapless pigeon of my dream? If so, we had better think again. Nations have died many times throughout recorded history — big nations, powerful nations. They die from a multitude of causes and in a myriad of circumstances. But when they die, their death is always accompanied by the draining away of the people’s will to survive as a cohesive and powerful nation.
If the American people do not have the will to reclaim their national identity and power from the predators now draining this country into lifelessness, the America we know will surely die. Our country is already gripped tight by foreign and domestic predators, and the sinews of our national power are steadily weakening. If we do not want to be present at America’s funeral, we must summon the will to overcome the mortal dangers that confront us.
For decades, we have allowed one kind of predator to package and sell America piece by piece on the international market for the sake of private profit,  while another kind of predator has been busy on the domestic front giving away huge hunks of American prosperity for the sake of political power.  In consequence, we have lost energy independence, heavy industries, financial solvency, cultural cohesion, educational excellence, and something we used to call the American middle class. But those are only a few of the more obvious outward signs of the deadly struggle taking place in America.
There is also a battle going on for America’s soul. Intellectual integrity, political principles and moral standards are being deliberately attacked and undermined. The assault on America’s universities and public schools by the forces of cultural Marxism has produced two generations of citizens who possess almost no knowledge of American history and very little understanding of the requirements of a civilized society.  Our politicians promote domestic divisiveness while they pursue international policies deliberately designed to weaken our nation.  In their arrogance, the cultural elite inculcate irreverence, glorify nihilistic violence, and demean the Judeo-Christian values on which this country was founded. To survive, our nation cannot allow this behavior to continue unchallenged.
In the epic Indian poem known as the Mahabharata, the Lord Krishna observes that “Destruction never approaches weapon in hand. It comes slyly on tip toe, making you see bad in good and good in bad.” In that succinctly stated truth lies the greatest danger that confronts our nation. Krishna did not mean that warriors lack weapons of destruction. He meant that all wars are won in the will, and when a people lose the ability to distinguish between good and evil they will be unable to summon the will to resist when the forces of destruction approach. 
So, the question for Americans is this: Do we have the will to oppose the predators trying to choke the life out of America, or have we lost the moral clarity necessary to confront the forces of destruction? The answer to that question will determine whether America joins the list of nations whose historical greatness is now just a distant memory. If the triumphant cry of the American eagle becomes the submissive whimper of a dying pigeon, it won’t just be Americans who suffer. People of good will all over the world will have cause to grieve that loss.
Jed Gladstein is an attorney, author, educator and professional speaker.
 Although they are certainly not alone, the international energy cartels come readily to mind in this context, with their massive assault on American wealth, power and independence.
 The “welfare society” in America, for example, is a national disgrace. Predicated on legal compulsion, it impoverishes those who must support it and degrades those it purports to help. Three generations of “Great Society” economic dependency is more than enough to convince any reasonable observer of the truth of the Chinese proverb: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
 The demonstrable decline in civic literacy in America is appalling. The decline in historical literacy is just as bad. It is no accident that this decline has been accompanied by the ascendancy of cultural Marxism in American education. Although the evidence of that ascendancy is too voluminous to cite here, I have had occasion to refer to it before in an article entitled The Point of the Dagger. For those who want to study the phenomenon in depth, a good place to begin is the excellent website created by David Horowitz’s Freedom Center.
 I have already written, for example, about the extra-constitutional attempt of the current administration to make America subject to “transnational” law. Quite recently, the Obama administration’s policies were implicated in the move to topple the dollar’s preeminence among world currencies. Soon, the administration plans to cede American sovereignty over large sectors of American industry to unelected officials at the United Nations. These are only a few of the many instances where the activities of America’s political elite and the bureaucrats who report to them serve to weaken rather than strengthen America.
 Lack of moral clarity abounds in America. A recent example is a statement by Congresswoman Jane Harmon, Democrat from California. Ms. Harmon is considered by the political left to be “a leading Democrat hawk.” But during a recently televised panel discussion about the possibility of American success or failure in Afghanistan, Ms. Harmon quietly confessed, “I don’t like winning or losing.” For someone who is supposed to be a “hawk” on matters of national defense, that statement betrays a remarkable degree of moral ambivalence.
In reading a post on Shrinkwrapped today I came across the initials BDS. Of course I wanted to find out what they stood for. My quest took me to a post of Charles Krauthammer in December of 2003, which somehow I missed since I read Krauthammer religiously (Don’t tell the ACLU).
Krauthammer is a psychiatrist who no longer practices but instead writes insightful commentary on Townhall, the Washington Post and Newsweek. He defines the term, Bush Derangement Syndrome as:
“Bush Derangement Syndrome: the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush.”
Read his article to get the full definition of BDS. He concludes with:
The sad news is that there is no cure. But there is hope. There are many fine researchers seeking that cure. Your donation to the BDS Foundation, no matter how small, can help. Mailing address: Republican National Committee, Washington DC, Attention: psychiatric department. Just make sure your amount does not exceed $2,000 ($4,000 for a married couple).
Then, I came across this post titled, “Bush Derangement Syndrome Revisited,”from a psychiatrist who writes the Shrinkwrapped blog. Now I think that we all come across people who have been afflicted with this disease from time to time, so it would be worthwhile to review both the Krauthammer article and the Shrinkwrapped post to get a full understanding of this illness. The MSM and liberals seem to be particularly vulnerable to this incurable affliction.
In the news today is a report of John Kerry, who appears to have been so damaged by his inexplicable loss to Bush in the last election, that he has been unable to come to terms with his defeat, that he somehow manages to believe, in an almost delusional way, that he can still become President someday soon:
Kerry Touts Bush Impeachment Memo
Failed presidential candidate John Kerry said Thursday that he intends to confront Congress with a document touted by critics of President Bush as evidence that he committed impeachable crimes by falsifying evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
He is now out there with the Deaniacs and others who are convincing themselves that Bush, all Republicans except John McCain, the US Military, and anyone who supports our efforts to win the war in Iraq are evil, sadistic monsters who are much more dangerous than Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. I do not think Bush Derangement Syndrome is a full explanation of this phenomenon.
BDS is only part of a larger syndrome. Illiberal liberals, those who cry “fascist” and “Bushhitler” the loudest, leftists, ranging from outright communists to softer socialists, have defined much of their sense of themselves in terms of the virtues conferred upon them by their superior intellect and superior moral positions.”
He then concludes:
This, then, is what gives Bush Derangement Syndrome its emotional power and passion. If the progressives are wrong about Bush, wrong about the direction of our country, wrong about how best to organize a society and produce freedom and wealth, then they have been wrong for the last 30 years. They would have to accept their complicity in the deaths of millions. They would have to deal with being allied with monsters who killed indiscriminately and sadistically, rather than on the side of the angels. How could they face themselves if they were wrong? Their guilt would be overwhelming. They have chosen to seek protection in their anger even if it is delusional because the alternative would be, literally, unbearable.
You should read the whole article. It explains a lot about the irrational anger and dangerous antics of liberals and those on the left, from a psychological perspective.