Saturday, September 14, 2024, 11:18 am | Randy Thomasson
On behalf of your values and telling the truth that the Big Media doesn’t report, SaveCalifornia.com has been posting on our social media WHY “monster” fires spread so rapidly, HOW the Democrat Party politicians’ “crime” bills are deceptive, and WHERE anti-parental-rights and pro-transsexuality judges come from:
P.S. Our post was about the rapid, even explosive, spread of wildfires, not the initial spark or flame. Because anybody can set a fire, but only the government can manage “public lands” to prevent little fires from becoming “monster” fires. Here’s a sample of the many evidences backing up our post:
“California’s Record Wildfires Spurred by Millions of Hidden Dead Trees,” Newsweek, June 12, 2024: California’s record wildfires may have been spurred on by millions of hidden dead trees, according to a new study … Stéphanie Horion from the University of Copenhagen’s Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management who worked on the study, said, “An abundance of combustible materials” is necessary for “a wildfire to erupt” … “and dead trees burn well.”
“Environmentalists Destroyed California’s Forests,” Edward Ring, California Policy Center, September 10, 2020: “And since 1990, when the environmentalist assault on California’s timber industry began in earnest, its timber industry has shrunk to half its former size. Reviving California’s timber industry, so the collective rate of harvest equals the collective rate of growth, would go a long way towards solving the problem of catastrophic fires. Instead, California’s environmentalists only redouble their nonsense arguments. Expect these fires to justify even more “climate change” legislation that does nothing to clear the forests of overgrown tinder, and everything to clear the forests, and the chaparral, of people and towns.”
P.S. The detail of the above post is the Democrat Party legislator’s bill that was signed, AB 1960, while being described as imposing “harsh penalties” against retail thieves, don’t impose any additional prison time except “If the loss or property value exceeds fifty thousand dollars ($50,000), the court shall impose an additional term of one year,” followed by higher tiers.
In contrast, Prop. 36 on the California ballot would make theft, regardless of the value, a felony offense if the offender has two or more past theft convictions, and would increase penalties for offenders who steal, damage or destroy property with two or more offenders (stealing or destroying $50,000 of property is not necessary to be sentenced to more prison time).
P.S. The above post is a reminder that, in addition to unconstitutional Democrat Party judges, RINO governors are a mixed bag, appointing a slew of bad judges who believe neither in constitutional rights, nor natural/God-given/pre-constitutional rights.
Saturday, September 7, 2024, 10:18 am | Randy Thomasson
Sept. 26, 2009: Bridegroom Milton Mbhele, with his four brides at their western wedding in South Africa, which recognizes polygamous marriages.
Get ready to vote NO on unrestricted child marriages, incestuous marriages, polygamy (multiple spouses), bigamy (multiple marriages at the same time), and even people-animal and people-object marriages.
Because that’s what Proposition 3 would functionally legalize.
Prop. 3, placed on the ballot by the California State Legislature, would insert into the California Constitution these 8 words: “The right to marry is a fundamental right.” Now, do you see a limit on number of spouses, an age prerequisite, or a requirement that a spouse be human? And do you see any prohibition of incestuous marriages or multiple simultaneous marriages? They’re not there.
This extremely broad and subjective phrase would legalize much more than if Prop. 3’s proponents had written definitive words, such as, “Marriage is limited to two persons at any one time, who are not close blood relatives, with the written permission of a parent or legal guardian for a minor to marry.” But they didn’t, opting instead to radically permit any and all types of “marriages” in California.
If Prop. 3 passes, and “The right to marry is a fundamental right” is inserted into the State Constitution, all it would take is a California court striking down as “unconstitutional” any existing statutory marriage definition, standard, or limit in the Family Code, Penal Code, and other Codes. Because the State Constitution is the supreme law of California, with the power to preempt conflicting statutes. The legal result of Prop. 3 would be permitting “marriages” with whomever and whatever.
Please help others vote NO on Prop. 3. Here’s an excellent website that’s convincing reasonable people to oppose it. Visit LearnAboutProp3.com.
Realize that the most vulnerable persons who would be caught up in Prop. 3’s marital chaos would be children. Let’s care about kids and vote no on Prop. 3’s marriage anarchy!
States that have codified constitutions normally give the constitution supremacy over ordinary statute law. That is, if there is any conflict between a legal statute and the codified constitution, all or part of the statute can be declared ultra vires by a court, and struck down as unconstitutional. “Codified constitution,” Constitution article, Wikipedia
Monday, September 2, 2024, 10:55 am | Randy Thomasson
Have you considered why California has such bad government? There are powerful forces supporting the New Communist Democrats, who are now three-fourths of both houses of the State Legislature, and who control all the statewide constitutional offices.
Yet the evil forces leading here aren’t the “useful idiots” (foolish voters dumbed down by the “public” schools, illegal aliens, self-centered government employees, etc.).
No, the wealthy, influential entities sustaining the iron-fisted rule of New Communist Democrats in California are both government unions and private unions. Don’t believe it? See how unions fund the Democrat Party Machine:
SEIU, California’s largest private- and public-sector union, nearly exclusively supports Democrat Party candidates and liberal causes. SEIU has also been the top union contributing to federal campaigns, donating $232,694,670 between 1990 and 2016, 99 percent of which went to Democrats.
As reported in late 2023: “Democrats and their causes receive 95.7% of the cash from unions’ political action committees. In 2021-22 the Big Four gave more than $29 million to the SEIU’s United We Can super PAC and the NEA Advocacy Fund super PAC which support federal candidates for office. Another $16 million went to wealthy climate crusader Tom Steyer’s leftwing For Our Future Pac. Some $3 million went to Fair Share Massachusetts which supports a state wealth tax.
“Big money also flows at the state level, where public unions all but run many state capitals. In 2021-2022, the four largest government unions spent $27.9 million in Illinois, $24.9 million in California, $13.2 million in Minnesota and $12.1 million in Pennsylvania.
“Nearly 60% of unions’ annual political spending, or some $400 million, came from membership dues and about 40% came from unions’ political action committees for which workers make voluntary contributions for politics. While unions can’t send dues money directly to candidates, workers might be surprised to see their paycheck deductions funneled to outside groups that spend money on politics (including those that deploy the money out of state).”
As reported in 2021 after Gavin Newsom “won” his recall election, “Organized labor donated at least $25.7 million — or more than one-third of the total the governor raised to keep his job. Unions, of course, have deep ties to the Democratic Party and a stake in nearly every aspect of state government.”
Because of how unions and their “owned politicians” put deceptive tax hikes on the ballot, and since union bosses regularly spend union dues to elect and re-elect corrupt Democrat Party politicians, if you’re a union member, please resign from your union.
Remember, you have strong, fundamental free-speech rights to not be coerced into supporting objectionable union politics. Now that you’ve unpeeled the onion and found the rotten core, will you stop “feeding” the beast?
See how to resign from the union and still keep your job and benefits:
The biblical view of man is work-oriented. It affirms that man was placed on the earth to subdue it to the glory of God (Gen. 1:28; 9:1-7). It is not each man’s right to work. It is his duty to work. What is his lawful right is his right to compete for the job he wants, his right to compete for the labor services he wishes to purchase. No one has a right to my job, including me. Anyone should have the right to compete for my job, including me. And I have the right to compete for his. “A Christian view of labor unions,” Gary North, July 1, 1978
RSS 2.0 Feed