If you live in the new districts in which these five pro-homosexual “marriage” Republicans are running, it’s your decision whether to keep supporting them. But consider this:
2. These five Republicans’ pro-perversity votes are symptomatic of slavish fear of the Tyrannical Left, instead of respectful fear of God or love for impressionable children. To flip from being pro-man-woman-marriage and pro-traditional-family in an election year, in the general election cycle where they might be beaten, is indicative of fear, not moral principle (for how can a principle be moral if it violates the commands of Holy God?). Don’t we need constitutional fighters, who will do what’s right under pressure, not cave and sell-out?
3. Homosexual “marriage” is a harmful role model for impressionable children. Because not only are most male homosexual relationships “open,” their behavior has very high rates of sexually-transmitted diseases. And children are being roped into this, by the government schools or other strangers. What’s more, state schools aim to “groom” children not just into homosexual behavior, but also into cross-dressing and “sex changes.” Most of all, promoting homosexual “marriage” all the more rapidly erodes the difference between Right and Wrong on every moral issue. With fewer and fewer moral absolutes, our culture becomes exponentially more confused, divided, and dangerous.
4. This is not the first time three of these five Republicans have voted very wrong:
Also in 2017, David Valadao abstained on this pro-family amendment that would have banned taxpayer-funded, military “sex changes.” And in January 2021, Valadao was the only California U.S. House Republican to vote “yes” to impeach former president Donald Trump (for the second time).
In 2018, as a California state assemblyman, Jay Obernolte voted “yes” on AB 2439 to establish an “official” State of California “LGBTQ Veterans Memorial.” Then, in 2019, Obernolte voted “yes” on AB 711 to force schools to retroactively falsify a student’s “sex” on former student records. That same year, Obernolte abstained on ACR 99, a Democrat resolution blaming pastors and religious leaders for “LGBTQIA+” suicides. In 2020, Obernolte’s liberal positions were exposed by his conservative opponent, Tim Donnelly.
Back in 1994, Ken Calvert was publicly exposed for having sex in his car with a known prostitute. Still, in light of Calvert’s strong pro-family record since then, I was surprised he caved to the “homosexual marriage” agenda this month.
I am most surprised by Mike Garcia’s capitulation to darkness. Garcia votes pro-life on abortion and calls himself a Christian. And in 2021, he admirably voted against putting homosexuality and transsexuality into federal employment and housing law, stating “equality that comes at the expense of or as a detriment to other free citizens is contrary to American ideals.” Yet now, succumbing in fear to “LGBTQIA+” activists is Garcia’s inexplicable, head-shaking act.
So whether you live in the new District 22 from Hanford to Bakersfield (where David Valadao is running), or in the new District 48 from Murrieta to Santee, then south to the Mexican border (where Darrell Issa is running), or in the new District 23 which includes Ridgecrest, California City, Barstow, Baker, Victorville, Big Bear City, and Twentynine Palms (where Jay Obernolte is running), or in the new District 41 from Corona to Indio (where Ken Calvert is running), or in the new District 27 which includes Santa Clara, Palmdale, and Lancaster (where Mike Garcia is running), now you are more informed and the decision is yours. See the new California congressional district map
“Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them…” Moses’ father-in-law Jethro in Exodus 18:21
“When Christians face two clearly immoral options, we cannot rationalize a vote for immorality or injustice just because we deem the alternative to be worse,” Moore said. “The Bible tells us we will be held accountable not only for the evil deeds we do but also when we ‘give approval to those who practice them,’ (Romans 1:32). “Russell Moore, “Should Christians Vote for the Lesser of Two Evils?”
We’re living in historic, even revolutionary, times. As the U.S. Supreme Court acts for the sake of constitutional justice, here’s some perspective to help you make sense of it all.
No more Roe won’t help California babies
Finally, after 49 years of Roe v. Wade’s unconstitutional, murderous agenda, it’s gone and abortion policies revert to 50 states.
Yet the demise of Roe won’t help California or other states ruled by abortion-loving Democrats. This is all the more reason to stand up for life. Especially since Newsom & Co. want to force California taxpayers to subsidize out-of-state abortions.
A top need of California pro-lifers this fall is to defeat SCA 10, which would go on the ballot to “codify” abortion on-demand in the California State Constitution. By proclaiming “The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion,” SCA 10 would continue the California carnage of taxpayer-funded abortion procedures or pills for any girl or woman, regardless of a girl’s age, the number of abortions she’s already had, or her ability to pay. To be placed on the November ballot, SCA 10 requires a two-thirds vote of both the Assembly and the Senate (it already passed the Senate), followed by an affirmative majority vote of the People.
Today’s SCOTUS ruling striking down the unconstitutional, unscientific 1973 Roe v. Wade and the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey opinions was 6 to 3 (Republican-president-nominated judges for the Constitution and life vs. Democrat-president-nominated judges for unconstitutional murder of pre-born babies). Read the history-making decision yourself
Get ready for more gun-owner freedoms
Unlike abortion, the “sacred cow” idol of Democrat politicians, and which is again a question of states’ rights, the fundamental rights of safety-conscious, constitutional gun owners will likely increase in California now that the U.S. Supreme Court has majorly upheld the Second Amendment in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
The June 23 ruling portends a new era of constitutional equity for gun owners in America. Relying on the God-given liberties preceding our Constitution, it concludes:
The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self defense is not “a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self-defense. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
The practical effect in California is this much-needed, admirable ruling will be used in both state and local lawsuits against the unconstitutional laws of the Democrat politicians. It might take a couple of years, but gun-owner rights organizations are planning to use the New York State decision against California’s unconstitutional ban on “assault weapons,” California’s unconstitutional ban on magazines over 10 rounds, California’s unconstitutional background checks, and the unconstitutional ban of concealed weapon permits in Democrat-controlled counties, such as Los Angeles. So have hope!
Just the facts: Why gas prices are so high
Why isn’t there a second Revolutionary War over oppressive gas prices? Because the godless government schools have been very successful at avoiding teaching children the Bible, the Constitution, real history, principles of logic, evidence-based research, and truisms such as the commerce law of Supply and Demand.
This week, SaveCalifornia.com produced and posted these three slides to help people realize who to blame for robbing them of their God-given resources and raising gas prices. Please enjoy and share!
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.” Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813, Scottish advocate, judge, writer and historian
Wednesday, June 8, 2022, 2:18 pm | Randy Thomasson
SaveCalifornia.com provides this solely for educational purposes and does not support or oppose candidates for public office.
It’s the day after, and the dust is settling in California’s just-concluded “jungle primary” election.
And while the numbers will change each day until the primary election results are “certified” on July 15, I’m seeing evidence that Californians against government tyranny are more motivated than liberal voters. And I believe there’s the potential for some statewide offices to be captured by constitutional Republicans (or in the state schools chief contest, an in-reality reformer).
Are Californians voting more Republican?
Is California experiencing a conservative resurgence? With all the pain of the last two years, there’s evidence of Californians’ growing support for Republican candidates (especially Republicans who will fight for them) over Democrat candidates:
First, as I watched vote changes late into the night, in most statewide contests, the leading Republican’s lead kept increasing, while the leading Democrat’s numbers (usually the incumbent) kept decreasing.
Second, the initial election-night report of voter turnout showed reliably Republican counties with the highest voter turnout. If we consider recall-energized San Francisco the Democrats’ “high watermark” at 25% turnout, and exclude very-low-population Alpine County, the highest voter turnout was in the Republican strongholds of Mariposa County (42%), Amador County (41%), Sierra County (40%), Plumas County (37%), Modoc County (32%), Calaveras County (30%), El Dorado County (26%), and Del Norte County (26%).
Third, a Northern California congressional shows voters preferring a Republican fighter over his more-establishment Republican opponent. As I write this, Assemblyman Kevin Kiley has more than twice the votes of Sacramento Sheriff Scott Jones.
Because of the harmful manifestations of anti-people policies by the New Communist Democrats in California and Washington, D.C., I’m not surprised if votes for Republican candidates are indeed higher. And, ideally, imagine the surge in the upcoming general election if biblical pastors promoted voting as a clear, practical application of Jesus Christ’s command to “love your neighbor as yourself.” How transformative that would be!
5 statewide seats that could flip
California has eight state constitutional offices that are held by one person. Seven are partisan (Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Secretary of State, Controller, Treasurer, Attorney General, and Insurance Commissioner) and one is non-partisan (Superintendent of Public Instruction).
And while there’s just over a month to count the remaining votes, I see five statewide seats that could be taken from the ruling Democrats:
1. Controller: This is an open seat (incumbent Democrat Betty Yee is termed-out), and the first-place lead of 37% for taxpayer advocate Lanhee Chen. Veteran fiscal watchdog and current U.S. Representative Tom McClintock observed, “The controller’s office is the ideal office from which to wage a crusade in which to eliminate government waste.”
2. Insurance Commissioner: The incumbent Democrat, radical homosexual activist Ricardo Lara, only garnered 37%, which makes him politically vulnerable. I mean, has anyone’s insurance premiums gone down lately? “Reagan Republican” Robert Howell has a chance take this seat if California has a “conservative wave” in the November election.
3. State Superintendent of Public Instruction: The incumbent Democrat, Tony Thurmond of Oakland, received only 45.7% of the vote. With government unions running government schools, which made even liberal parents angry when schools were closed last year, this might be a perfect storm for pro-parent reformer George Yang.
4. Attorney General: The appointed incumbent Democrat, Rob Bonta, along with Governor Gavin Newsom, is incurring statewide blame for the current crime wave. Receiving 54.5% of the vote, Bonta might be deposed by hard-hitting, tough-on-crime messaging by Republican challenger Nathan Hochman.
5. U.S. Senator: Appointed incumbent Democrat Alex Padilla received only 53-54% of the vote for “partial term” and “full term.” Will he be negatively associated with Biden & Co. in November? In contrast, Republican Mark Meuser is a constitutional fighter.
You will have mostly real choices in the November election
Thank you if you voted! I appreciate you visiting our Pro-Family Election Center to equip you. And thank you big-time if you helped others to vote!
As I write this, if the “top two” vote-getters don’t change, nearly all California statewide offices will be a contest in November between a liberal Democrat and Republican, ranging from mostly conservative to constitutionalist.
Below is a snapshot of this morning’s statewide primary election results and the websites of the current “top two” in each contest. Please note that Republicans with percentages in the “teens” expect their Republican rivals’ supporters to vote for them in November. So assume them as practically having, post-primary-election, somewhere between 25% and 40% of the voters’ support.
For example, in the just-concluded primary election for governor, voting for 13 Republican candidates were 35.5% of the voters. These candidates attracted 1,208,643 voters, which is .6315861256658043% of Newsom’s 1,193,663 votes (Newsom “won” 56.3% of the electorate). Do the math: Newsom’s 56.3% x 0.6315861256658043 = 35.55829887498478% or 35.5% of the electorate for Republican candidates in the governor’s race. You can therefore expect Brian Dahle to attract at least this percentage in the general election.
RSS 2.0 Feed