Heard on the Tom/Toms

Stephen Frank, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views,  9/20/23     www.capoliticalreview.com

Suzette Valladares:  I will speak as LONG as I want, I am Suzette Valladares

Monday night the LAGOP held an endorsing meeting for State Senate—to replace the termed out Scott Wilk.  Per the rules, each candidate was given two minutes to speak.  DJ Hamburger spoke for his two minutes and then Suzette Valladares had her two minutes.  With 15 seconds to go, a chime went off, notifying her time was about up.  At two minutes she continued to speak—it took a while but the Chair, the man giving us a “say nothing” CRP Platform, Tim O’Reilly, announced your time is up.  She announced, she had been “attacked” so she is going to speak as long as she wants.

At that point organically, the room broke out with shouts of “YOUR TIME IS UP, YOUR TIME IS UP:–and she continued going.

What were these attacks?  Like a Democrats she was upset that people were told the TRUTH about her voting record.  She SUPPORTED a bill to take away the right of parents to know if teachers were sexual grooming and secretly transitioning their children.  In 2020 she ran for Assembly as a pro-life candidate.  She even signed the Salt and Light Council Family Pledge.  Then in 2022 she voted to put the expansion of abortion on the Statewide ballot.  She did the same reverse  in re: traditional marriage.  The “attack” was repeating her voting record.

A month ago she tried to get the LAGOP endorsement—Valladares fell five votes short.  This time she fell six votes short—and when the video of her meltdown comes out, my guess is that she should not even show up for another attempt. (for the several people that videoed it, I will be happy to publish it).

It is actually WORSE than that!! GOP State Senate Leader Brian Jones came up from San Diego to Arcadia to promote a vote FOR Suzette. CRP Vice Chair Corrine Rankin came from the Sacramento area to push for a Valladares endorsement. The self proclaimed Eisenhower Republican, Tim O’Reilly, recently rewarded with a seat on the CRP Board for providing a Platform the Democrats would applaud, worked for votes for Suzette. The vote was a repudiation of CRP and Legislative leadership. It looks like those from the community and the district want a candidate they can trust–not one that has the “right” endorsements.

For Valladares, this could be the end.  She told pro-lifers she was pro-life and signed a pledge in 2020.  Then on October 4, 2022 she sent a blast text:

“Hi, its Asm. Suzette Valladares.  I support a womens right to make her own health choices and voted to place that right in our state Constitution.  I will vote again to protect that right this November on the ballot.  Thank you.  Paid for by Suzette Martinez Valladares for Assembly 2022.  Txt STOP to opt out.”

It has to be noted that she has been silent about the CRP Platform and its opposition to traditional marriage and the protection of babies.  Was she to get the nomination for State Senate, both Democrats and Republicans will have the same question about her: HOW DO YOU TRUST A CANDIDATE WHO SIGNED A PRO-LIFE PLEDGE THEN SUPPORTED A PRO-CHOICE BALLOT MEASURE?  What does she really stand for?  Except for herself.  Why do GOP’ers lose?  Because our GOP elected officials and leaders support someone who gets caught lying too easily.

 (Periodically the California Political News and Views will publish tidbits of political news, to keep you in the loop of what the pooh bahs know.  The phrase “tom/tom’s” comes from my mentor, Lorelei Kinder who never passed a rumor, just called to tell me what she heard on the “TomTom’s”.  This column is named in her honor.)

As you know, for years now I have been saying that the goal of Patterson and her friends is to close down the California Republican Party.  How else do you explain her Platform that does NOT mention election integrity, opposes traditional marriage, OPPOSES babies (anti-pro-life), does not even mention the number one industry in California—agriculture.  It barely says it support Prop. 13, without a mention as to why.  No mention of seniors, veterans or ethics—and no longer opposes Prop. 47 and 57, the causes of the current crime wave.  Nor does it oppose sanctuary cities!  Literally Jessica Patterson wants California to look like San Fran and New York.

Now her friends are going one step further.  County Chairs and local GOP office holders have begin endorsing DEMOCRATS over Republican for local office—and TWO GOP members of the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors, folks we spent a lot of money to elect—are now endorsing a National Socialist Democrat for State Assembly, over a Republican.’

“ Hagman’s endorsement of Torres was accompanied by endorsements from several other key Republicans, most notably Phil Cothran Sr, who in 2021 had succeeded Jan Leja as the chairman of the Republican Central Committee; Fontana Mayor Acquanetta Warren (a former CRP Board member promoted by Charles Munger Jr.), widely considered San Bernardino County’s leading African American Republican politician; Fontana City Councilman Phil Cothran Jr; and then-former Fontana Councilman Jesse Armendarez, who at that point was pitted in a bruising and ultimately successful election effort for Fifth District San Bernardino County supervisor against fellow Republican Luis Cetina.”

Now, this same bunch is endorsing Robert Torres, son of Congresswoman Norma Torres, for State Assembly.  On Monday night the Central Committee DID endorse Nick Wilson, the GOP candidates. 

When it looked like Michael Cargile (who ended up getting 43% of the vote) had a chance on winning, the CRP Chair Jessica Patterson orchestrated an un-endorsement of Cargile—then sent only a smear laden press release against him—and with NO Party help, still received 43% of the vote.  Imagine if the Party and the self proclaimed Republicans had supported and helped him.

Now you know why the leadership of the CRP is closing down the Party.

Membership Assails San Bernardino County GOP Leadership Over Endorsement Of Democrats

Venturi, San Bernardino Sentinel, 9/15/23  sbcsentinel.com

The center is not holding and things are falling apart on both sides of San Bernardino County’s political divide, reportedly capturing the interest of federal investigators as a mélange of backroom deals involving one of the region’s Democratic Congresswomen, her husband and one of their sons, the chairman of San Bernardino County’s Republican Central Committee, a San Bernardino County Supervisor who was formerly the county GOP chairman, the mayor of Fontana and other influential members of the San Bernardino County GOP and its central committee; the City of Fontana and millions of dollars in federal grant money currently or slated to be funneled to that municipality in the future in return for cross-party endorsements, employment promises benefiting politicians’ family members and speculation in land along a major interstate corridor potentially to be impacted by federal legislative action.

The most apparent anomaly at the core of the upheaval are endorsements some of the most powerful members of the San Bernardino County Republican Party are making of either current or hopeful Democrat officeholders. This has touched off a deep countercurrent of both resentment and resistance within the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee that was on display Thursday night at the committee’s September meeting.In 2013, Curt Hagman was then an Assemblyman who was due to be termed out of California’s lower legislative house the following year. As stepping up to run for State Senate at that point was not a viable option, he sought to continue his political career by entering the race for Fourth District San Bernardino County Supervisors, representing Carbon Canyon, Chino Hills, Chino, Prado, West End, Montclair, Ontario, Guasti and south Upland. That race initially appeared to be a contest between the incumbent Republican, Gary Ovitt, who had formerly been Ontario’s mayor, and Gloria Negrete-McLeod, at that point a one-term Democratic Congresswoman who had formerly been a State Senator and Assemblywoman. Recognizing he would need leverage to force Ovitt out of the race and a substantial amount of money to prevail, Hagman set about deposing the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee Chairman, Robert Rego, and taking on the committee chairmanship for himself. Rego, during his tenure as chairman, had built the county’s Republican Central Committee into a formidable fundraising machine, and the party had used the mother’s milk of politics in multiple venues throughout the county to maintain incumbent Republicans in office or elect fresh candidates bearing the GOP standard, outmaneuvering their more numerous but less organized, less coordinated and underfunded Democrat counterparts.

Hagman knew that Rego would be reluctant to support any effort to oppose the reelection of an incumbent Republican such as Ovitt and outright unwilling to use the central committee’s money in support of a non-incumbent such as himself in an electoral effort against an incumbent Republican. In a power play that involved his coordinating with former Assemblyman and State Senator Jim Brulte who that year was gunning, ultimately successfully, to seize for himself chairmanship of the California Republican Party, Hagman utilized his available resources, which included his then-status as an assemblyman along with the talents of his then-chief of staff, West Covina Mayor Mike Spence, to engage in a round of dealmaking and political horsetrading, to oust Rego as the chairman of the San Bernardino County Central Committee and install himself in that post, a perch from which he could ensure that he would be able to prioritize the spending of local party money to elect him as San Bernardino County supervisor in the Fourth District in the 2014 election cycle. Once Hagman had the local GOP party scepter firmly in hand, he persuaded Ovitt that the better part of discretion would be for him to gracefully step aside so that he could run against Negrete-McLeod.

Though local – town, city, county and governmental district/agency – elections in California are by law non-partisan contests, in San Bernardino County the outcome of the races for all political offices are heavily influenced by the party affiliation of the candidates vying for them. The 2014 race for Fourth District supervisor was no exception. Despite Negrete-McLeod’s status as an incumbent congresswoman and an 11 percent voter registration advantage that Democrats had over Republicans in the Fourth Supervisorial District, Hagman, who was able to rely not only on his own fundraising ability but a substantial amount of money in the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee’s bank account as well as the superior electioneering prowess of Spence, who managed his campaign, emerged victorious, with 52.11 percent of the vote in the November election.

Hagman remained as the party chairman, turning that post over to his longtime ally, Jan Leja in 2017. In 2018, again with full Republican Central Committee backing, he beat Negrete-McLeod in a rematch in an even more convincing fashion than he had in 2014, dispatching her in the June primary contest with 53.41 percent of the vote, despite the Democrat’s registration advantage over Republicans in the district having grown to 14 percent. Later that year, Hagman accepted his appointment by his board colleagues for a two-year term as chairman of the board of supervisors. Two years later, in an unprecedented move, the board extended Hagman’s chairmanship of the board of supervisors for another two years.

In 2022, Hagman sought reelection to board of supervisors, finding himself facing a challenge by State Senator Connie Leyva, a former labor leader celebrated as a progressive Democrat. Leyva had represented California Senate District 20 as it was then composed since 2014. Under the revamped term limit restrictions that had been put in place for those first elected in 2012 and thereafter, she was at liberty to run for the California State Senate one more time, but she opted against doing so because the reapportionment that took place in 2021 based upon the 2020 Census had changed the boundaries of the 20th Senate District, including removing Chino, where Leyva lives, from it entirely. Instead, Chino was placed within the newly-drafted Senate District 22, which also includes Ontario, Pomona, West Covina, and Baldwin Park, the home of incumbent District 22 Senator Susan Rubio, also a Democrat. Leyva, who was not willing to run against her sister Democrat Rubio, instead decided to take on Hagman in the Fourth District San Bernardino County supervisor race.

Leyva’s decision to challenge Hagman appeared to be based on a sound set of political calculations. Foremost, the Democrat’s registration advantage over the Republicans in the Fourth District had grown. With the dawning of 101,876 or 44.1 percent of the Fourth District’s 230,908 registered voters were affiliated with the Democratic Party. Republicans in the district numbered 61,233 or 26.5 percent, while 52,198 voters or 22.6 percent were aligned with no party. The remaining 6.9 percent are registered as members of the Libertarian, Green, Peace & Freedom, American Independent or other more obscure political parties. Secondly, Leyva, who was born in 1967, was 54 as the campaign began, a year younger than Hagman and she was 24 years younger than Negrete-McLeod was during her 2018 campaign against Hagman. It was believed that Leyva not only would prove far more energetic and agile than Negrete-McLeod had been but would be able to convert the money she had in her political war chest for reelection to the State Senate into money she could use in her run for supervisor, and thereby subject Hagman, who in six straight contests in 2004, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014 and 2018 had an unbroken string of six victories, to not only the most exacting political test of his career, but outright defeat him.

Before that could occur, however, the ever politically facile Hagman formed an alliance with Norma Torres, who had been a councilwoman with the City of Pomona from 2001 to 2006, Pomona Mayor from 2006 to 2008, then from 2008 to 2013 succeeded former Pomona Mayor Nell Soto as the Assemblywoman representing Assembly District 61 and from 2013 to 2014 succeeded Negrete-McLeod as the State Senator representing the 32nd Senatorial District and since 2015, the Congresswoman succeeding Negrete-McLeod as the Congresswoman representing California’s 35th Congressional District. Of significant note is that Torres is a Democrat. In endorsing Hagman, Torres notably spurned Leyva.

Despite Leyva’s labor and union affiliation, Hagman was able to pick up the endorsements of multiple unions, including the one that perhaps counted most, that of the Teamsters Union representing Sam Bernardino County employees. Torres was widely credited with giving the union bosses clearance to back away from Leyva and embrace Hagman.

One other candidate, Larry Wu, got into the 2022 Fourth District Supervisor race, though the real race was the match-up between Leyva and Hagman. Ultimately, with key Democrat and Democrat-affiliated entities having backed away from her, Leyva never got her campaign on track and in the end, in the June Primary, she proved no match for Hagman, who convincingly defeated her, with 56.87 percent or 27,906 of the 49,072 total votes cast. Leyva managed a relatively anemic 17,816 votes or 36.31 percent with Wu polling 6.83 percent.
In the June primary race for Congress in California’s 35th District, Mike Cargile, a Republican, managed to qualify to go head-to-head against Torres in the November general election. Despite the consideration that Cargile was Republican standard bearer in that contest, Hagman felt himself obliged to, and indeed did, endorse Torres. Hagman’s endorsement of Torres was accompanied by endorsements from several other key Republicans, most notably Phil Cothran Sr, who in 2021 had succeeded Jan Leja as the chairman of the Republican Central Committee; Fontana Mayor Acquanetta Warren, widely considered San Bernardino County’s leading African American Republican politician; Fontana City Councilman Phil Cothran Jr; and then-former Fontana Councilman Jesse Armendarez, who at that point was pitted in a bruising and ultimately successful election effort for Fifth District San Bernardino County supervisor against fellow Republican Luis Cetina.

The 35th District, which spreads across portions of Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Riverside counties, is considered a safe Democrat district, given that 44 percent of its voters are registered Democrats as opposed to 26 percent who are registered as Republicans. Nevertheless, Cargile, fighting that disadvantage as well as the consideration that key members of his own party had undercut him by endorsing his opponent, managed a respectable showing in the November 2022 race, receiving 43,271 votes or 43.8 percent of the total 98,791 cast. Torres claimed 55,520 votes or 56.2 percent for the victory.

Torres’ reelection left a bitter taste in the mouths of many Republicans, some of whom lamented that with an even more concerted effort with Cargile’s electioneering effort and the undivided support of the Republican Party, including that of several of its most powerful and influential members, he might be representing the 35th District in nation’s capital.

Meanwhile, Torres, who is considered by some to be a leading member of the California delegation in Congress, was suffering some recriminations from her own party over her endorsement of Hagman and the manner in which she had cut the progressive and pro-labor Leyva off at the knees.

People from both sides of the aisle began to look into what had gone into the sudden phenomenon of cross-party endorsements in San Bernardino County.

A few interesting factoids bubbled to the surface as a consequence of those inquiries.
One surrounded the City of Fontana’s hiring of Torres’ son, Robert.
Robert Torres was, in the footsteps of his mother, elected to the Pomona City Council in 2016. From 2013 until 2017 he had been employed as a district director with, first, 53rd District Assemblyman John Pérez and then Assemblyman Miguel Santiago. The 53rd District at that time was located in Los Angeles County including downtown, Huntington Park, Koreatown, Little Tokyo, Pico Union, Vernon and parts of Boyle Heights, Westlake and downtown Los Angeles.

From 2017 until 2021, he was unemployed beyond serving in the capacity of city councilman in Pomona. Those four years of unemployment drew to an end when he was hired to serve in the newly created position of public affairs manager with the City of Fontana, one that was created at the behest of Fontana Mayor Acquanetta Warren.

Corresponding with Fontana’s hiring of Robert Torres were efforts by his mother in her capacity as a congresswoman to obtain federal grants and other funding for the City of Fontana.
Shortly after Robert Torres’ hiring in Fontana, Norma Torres obtained for both Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties as well as six of the cities that fall within her Inland Empire district $2.75 million in clean energy grants, funding that was provided through the Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program. Congresswoman Torres was a champion of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which provided a total of $550 million in Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant grants distributed nationwide. After Los Angeles County, which received the lion’s share of that grant funding at $1,344,700 and San Bernardino County, which received $393,590, Fontana was given the largest portion of the money reserved for the 35th District’s cities. The City of Fontana received $230,640; the City of Ontario got $218,330. The City of Pomona, where she had been mayor and where her son was a councilman, received $188,070. The City of Rialto was gifted $151,580; the City of Chino, $147,470; and the City of Montclair, $76,320.

The federal government’s generosity toward Fontana as a direct result of Congresswoman Torres’ advocacy has grown. Four months ago, Torres unlocked $15 million in RAISE grants, a discretionary funding program for investments in surface transportation infrastructure, specifically earmarked for Fontana.
With the progression of 2023 toward the election year of 2024, candidates for political office in the next election cycle, which will manifest first with the March primary are readying for their electioneering efforts, including scouring the political landscape to size up the competition or possible competition, raising money, securing support, lining up endorsements and forming alliances.

A number of Republicans inching toward, or committed to, running in 2024 have been disheartened to learn that just as occurred in 2022, several of their party’s most prominent and influential members – including the chairman of the Republican Central Committee, Phil Cothran Sr – have committed to supporting the Democrats they are going to run against.

Cothran is a member, with Mayor Warren, his son, Fontana Councilman Phil Cothran Jr, Fontana Councilman John Roberts and Fontana Councilman Pete Garcia, of Team Fontana. Warren, young Cothran, Roberts and Garcia, all of whom are Republicans, compose the ruling coalition on the Fontana City Council. The lone Democrat offering a counterweight to the quartet is Councilman Jesse Sandoval, who is routinely outvoted by the four on any issues of substance in the city. Warren has been able to form that coalition and maintain it, despite the Democrats having an overwhelming 49.4 percent to 20.9 percent voter registration advantage within the City of Fontana. The Republican political primacy is based in large measure upon the willingness of Republican donors and the San Bernardino County Republican Central Committee to commit money and electioneering support resources to assist Warren and her crew of handpicked Republican candidates in the former steel town.

Within the last 30 days, members of the Republican Central Committee first heard and have since confirmed that Team Fontana and Hagman, among other Republican luminaries, have already endorsed not only Congresswoman Torres, but Robert Torres, who vying for Assembly representing the 53rd District in next year’s election.

Dozens of San Bernardino County Republican stalwarts, including what appears to be a majority of those members of the central committee, were outraged, particularly as Cargile is intent on once again carrying the GOP flag in an effort to unseat Norma Torres and Nick Wilson, a recently retired police officer from Chino has declared that he is vying for the Assembly against Robert Torres in the 53rd District.

As chance would have it, at this month’s San Bernardino Republican Central Committee meeting, which was held in Upland on September 14, Hagman was scheduled to speak in the guest’s spot. A number of central committee members, including Cargile and Agnes Gibboney, who in 2020 was the Republican candidate against incumbent Democrat Pete Aguilar in California’s 31st Congressional District, were intent on grilling both Hagman and Cothran Sr with regard to their support of Democrats over Republicans, both past and present.
Hagman gave an upbeat presentation about the function of the county and his role as supervisor, including his participation on more than a dozen subcommittees and joint powers authority boards, which he said took up much of his time on an almost daily basis. Hagman expressed his view that the county, while dealing with challenges and problems had made substantial progress with regard

to a number of pressing issues. He noted that the county had “dealt with COVID with distinction” and had resisted the Democratic administration of Governor Gavin Newsom by “not shutting down businesses. We sued the governor. We lost several times, but still sued him.” He congratulated himself and the board of supervisors for putting an initiative on the November 2022 ballot, Measure EE, calling for the county to secede from the State of California, noting that for decades the Bay Area and Los Angeles would “get more than their fair share of state resources back in tax dollars.” Hagman suggested the ploy had worked when the state in this year’s budget appropriated more to San Bernardino County than its residents had paid in state taxes.
“We have a pretty flush budget in San Bernardino County,” he bragged.

When the time came for Hagman to field questions from those in attendance, Parliamentarian Ben Lopez passed over Gibboney, who had come armed with a litany of inquiries about why Hagman and other members of the central committee were turning their backs on Republicans and embracing Democrats. Cargile, however, was able to press Hagman on the issue of cross-party endorsements. Why was he endorsing Robert Torres in the 53rd Assembly race, Cargile wanted to know, when the Republicans had an earnest and strong candidate in Nick Wilson.

“Sorry, Nick,” Hagman said, half apologetically but half boldly, essentially indicating he would not be rescinding the endorsement of Robert Torres, nor of his mother. Hagman indicated it is folly to “think we are all perfect.”

Nevertheless, he justified his support for Congressman Torres and her son by briefly reminiscing about when he was yet mayor of Chino Hills between 2006 and 2008.

“When I was mayor, she was mayor of Pomona,” he noted, saying he got along with her well at that time. More recently, he said, she had carried legislation that was of benefit to San Bernardino County and as such was a valuable resource at the federal level for local government.

Hagman then came to the crux of the matter. “She stood up and endorsed me over Connie Leyva,” he said. Consequently, he said, he had endorsed her. This year, when Torres’ son jumped into the 53rd Assembly race, he endorsed him, too.

That was meant as no offense to Wilson, Hagman said. “So, before I even knew he [Wilson] was running, I endorsed him [Robert Torres].”

In addition to putting Hagman on the spot, Cargile pressed further with regard to the Team Fontana endorsements of Democrats.

“We have members who have opted to endorsed Democrats,” he said, before citing the central committees bylaws and California Elections § 7413, which states, “A committee may remove any member, other than an ex officio member, who during his or her term of membership affiliates with, or registers as a member of another party, who publicly advocates that the voters should not vote for the nominee of this party for any office, or who gives support or avows a preference for a candidate of another party or candidate who is opposed to a candidate nominated by this party.”

This presented an awkward moment for Lopez as parliamentarian, who was presiding over the proceedings from the dais at the front of meeting room while Cothran Sr and Cothran Jr were some 20 feet or so away, seated in the front row of the gallery.

While no reference was made to either Cothran specifically, Cargile extracted from Lopez the assertion that neither Warren, nor former Councilman and current Supervisor Armendarez nor Councilman Jon Roberts are members of the central committee. At that point Cargile dropped his effort to steer the entire body toward taking action to remove any members who had endorsed Democrats.

Thereafter, the meeting adjourned into an executive session from which members of the public or non-executive committee members were excluded.

After the meeting concluded, the Sentinel was informed by one of the executive committee members that the topic of cross-party endorsement by committee members was discussed.
Cargile told the Sentinel that he was satisfied, at this point, with the incremental step of ascertaining that those Republicans and/or former central committee members who had made the endorsements of Democrats were now acknowledged to no longer be central committee members.

Today, Gibboney told the Sentinel, “I believe that any candidate who seeks the endorsement of the SBGOP and endorses a Democrat should immediately be removed from the central committee and barred from attending or speaking at the SBGOP meetings. It seems that the Republican Party has been infiltrated by RINOs [Republicans in name only] and progressives, which is destroying the morale of our party. It’s like a “clique.” If you go along with everything, you are in. If you disagree, you are shunned.”

Gibboney said, “We need real Republicans who care to preserve our party.”

Another Republican Central Committee member, Matt Munson, said, “I think the basic statement from most of the policymakers is that our county has dominant pockets of Democratic Party voters where leaders would rather just surrender to the Democratic Party than to grow the territories involved so we can change the districts for the better. I understand that policymakers like [Republican Ontario City Councilman] Alan Wapner and Acquanetta Warren want stuff done for their cities, but it should not mean endorsing these politicians so early in the cycle. If politicians want the Republican Party endorsement, they should be tied to the state and county party bylaws and have fidelity to the Republican Party. If they do not have fidelity to the Republican Party, then these individuals should be prohibited from being endorsed by the state and county parties for their next election.”
“Why have a county party when we are just here to surrender to the Democrats?” Munson asked. “We are not here to find the least toxic Democrat in office. We are here to find the best Republican possible to be nominated for major offices such as state legislature and Congress. Robert Torres might be the least toxic Democrat for AD 53, where Curt Hagman and Acquanetta Warren may not want Connie Leyva’s endorsed choice for State Assembly, Javier Hernandez. However, Republican Party voters want bold colors of Republican Party candidates, such as Nick Wilson, instead of the pale platitudes of alleged centrist Democrats who will be whipped to submission in the floor where they will not vote for bills to stop the influx of crime. Robert and Michelle Rodriguez [another Democrat vying for the Assembly in the 53rd District] will vote for most of the tax increases helping to make it harder for working families and retirees to survive in California.”

Munson, who was the Republican candidate in California State Senate District 20 in 2014 and 2018, said, “Yes, Curt [Hagman] may have a personal relationship with Norma Torres, even though they may not agree on issues such as abortion. Norma did not necessarily endorse Curt due to this personal relationship; she personally had a vendetta against former Senator Leyva and did not want to see her promoted to the county board. I do believe most Republican activists feel that Curt sold his soul to get another term on the board. Yes, I would rather have Curt as my supervisor, but in 2026 he should do it without the endorsement of the San Bernardino County Republican Party. I can envision that Alan Wapner, councilman of Ontario, Jesse Armendarez and Curt Hagman will have ads paid for by Robert Torres trying to deceive Republican voters. This is one reason I would like to see individuals such as Curt blackballed from any endorsement for a cycle.”

“There are countless examples of local elected officials who at one time asked for our endorsement and then went against the grain and decided to stab our candidates in the back, such as Rancho Cucamonga mayor Dennis Michael endorsing [Democrat Assemblyman] James Ramos in 2020,” Munson said. “This is the reason we are losing in our county. If our local registered Republican leaders such as city council members or county supervisors do not like our candidates, then simply abstain on endorsing them instead of supporting Democrats for higher office. Why endorse individuals who will make it harder for our state legislative and congressional candidates to run for office? Then we will have a literal uniparty of political eunuchs. If we want California to improve, we need to vote for the Republican instead of the least toxic Democratic Party candidate in the primary.”

Another member of the Republican Central Committee, former San Bernardino City Councilman Henry Nickel, said, “If any elected member of the Republican Central Committee chooses to support a Democrat in any race where there is a Republican opposing that Democrat, I believe that member should be removed for the central committee.”

We have had that discussion before, said Nickel, who vied for the State Assembly in 2018. “When I ran, there were certain members who chose to endorse my opponent, a Democrat. I cannot make exact citation of the state election and our bylaws, but we have the authority to remove any elected member who endorses someone from another party. I don’t think we can remove ex officio members, but we have the authority to remove elected ones who are not in line with the party. I think every member of the party has a mandate to endorse a Republican candidate and not a Democrat in any race that takes place.”

Nickel lamented that “Our party is not as potent of a force as it was before. It has fallen victim to those fringe elements that get us off message and away from what concerns most voters. I do not like to say it but I think our party has become fractured. I think we have become largely undisciplined, and a few vocal members have created discord within the county party. We need to remain focused on the issues that distinguish us from the Democrats.”

Concern about the cross-party endorsements in San Bernardino County has not confined itself to the local politicos who have one dog or another in the hunt. The deviation in expected affiliations has caught the attention of personnel with fewer than four federal governmental agencies who are seeking, and, in some cases, struggling to make sense out of what has occurred.

Those with one of those agencies in particular are perhaps closer than other in sizing up the fuller picture as they have a window on the dimensions of what some of the county’s political players, at the municipal, county, state and federal level are involved in. While some less steeped in the intricacies of the law and what under both U.S. and California statues were surprised to learn that a conflict of interest does not extend to a benefit an the offspring of an elected official realizes as a consequence of his or her parent’s action or vote, investigators examining the manner in which Robert Torres glided into a sinecure with the City of Fontana recognized early on that there was no real criminal implication therein. Nevertheless, other connections and actions which might have proved of benefit to the major players involved are being explored.

One item of interest that has come up is the opportunity for profit that exists in speculation in land within and adjacent to the high-speed rail corridor running from Las Vegas and first to a station in Victorville/Apple Valley and then to Rancho Cucamonga, penultimately to Anaheim and ultimately to Union Station in downtown Los Angeles. It is unknown whether Norma Torres or her husband, Louis Torres or her son, Robert, are getting in on that action, nor is it known whether Hagman or Acquanetta Warren are looking to or have picked up any land out in San Bernardino County’s Mojave Desert running along the I-15 Freeway, which in most spots in the desert closely parallels where the train line is to be constructed.

Norma Torres is a member of the House Appropriations Committee, including its Subcommittee on Transportation, and Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies.

Hagman is a member of the San Bernardino County Transportation Agency, as is Warren.
In those capacities, they would conceivably have input, impact or control, direct or indirect, on where stops along the line, other than in Victorville/Apple Valley, Rancho Cucamonga and Anaheim, are to be located.
-Mark Gutglueck

San Diego is about to become another New York City, thanks to the demented Joe Biden.

“Without even a “please” from the White House, San Diego County has become the latest region to be victimized by Joe Biden’s effort to pawn his illegal alien crisis on someone else.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are dropping off hundreds of illegal aliens at train and bus stations throughout San Diego County because there’s a lack of space between two border fences for the illegals to camp out waiting to be processed.

San Diego already has massive financial problems due to the homeless, drugs and City Hall corruption.  Now make it into New York!

“Without even a “please” from the White House, San Diego County has become the latest region to be victimized by Joe Biden’s effort to pawn his illegal alien crisis on someone else.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are dropping off hundreds of illegal aliens at train and bus stations throughout San Diego County because there’s a lack of space between two border fences for the illegals to camp out waiting to be processed.

Without Warning, San Diego County Becomes Drop-Off Point for Thousands of Illegal Aliens

BY RICK MORAN, PJ Media,  9/16/23   https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2023/09/16/without-warning-san-diego-county-becomes-drop-off-point-for-thousands-of-illegal-aliens-n1727596#google_vignette

Without even a “please” from the White House, San Diego County has become the latest region to be victimized by Joe Biden’s effort to pawn his illegal alien crisis on someone else.

U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are dropping off hundreds of illegal aliens at train and bus stations throughout San Diego County because there’s a lack of space between two border fences for the illegals to camp out waiting to be processed.

“I have been in close communication with the city of Oceanside’s elected leaders and senior staff, as well as local social services organizations, to help the migrants who were dropped off here without a choice, and I applaud their responsiveness,” said Rep. Mike Levin (D-Dana Point.) “I have also communicated my concerns to the White House about the lack of resources provided to our community to deal with this. I’m committed to ensuring a safe, rapid and respectful resolution to this situation.”

Other county officials weren’t so understanding.

“This isn’t humane. This isn’t compassionate,” wrote San Diego County Supervisor Jim Desmond on Thursday. “The Federal Government is failing in its obligation to protect the people of San Diego County. This system is broken and puts our region at risk. If the Federal Government wants to process asylum seekers, it must provide adequate resources to manage people entering our area.”

Sound familiar? It’s almost what New York City Mayor Eric Adams, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Chicago Mayor Brandon Jonson, and a dozen other political and government leaders who are dealing with a border crisis 1,000 miles north of where it started have said.

ABC10:

The drop-offs have overwhelmed nonprofits, such as Jewish Family Service, which runs the shelter system for the San Diego Rapid Response Network, a coalition that supports asylum seekers arriving in San Diego.

“Effective immediately and going forward, the shelter will limit arrivals only to the most vulnerable asylum seekers released by DHS, including those with medical conditions, families, pregnant people, LGBTQI, older adults, etc., as space allows,” a statement from the nonprofit reads.

County Supervisor Joel Anderson wrote a letter to Biden asking for help.

“Receiving assistance from the federal government to process the asylum seekers entering San Diego and immediately halting the lateral transfer of asylum seekers from other states will allow us to better address this continuing humanitarian crisis without adding to our region’s existing homelessness crisis,” he wrote.

Is anyone in Washington listening?

In truth, Biden doesn’t care as long as the crisis continues to be hidden by a friendly media. It’s the biggest story of the year, and we’re being kept in the dark.

For our own good, of course.

As expected, the National Socialist Democrat Attorney General of California, Rob Bonta is working hard to prove he is the most National Socialist running for Governor in 2026.  He is suing the oil companies, promoting racism, supports an Open Border, loves taxes, discriminates against heterosexuals and does not believe that girls deserve privacy in a shower or bathroom.

Now he has decided to prove, like Putin and XI, that he does not approve of free speech.

“Social media giant X Corp. sued California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Friday, claiming a state law passed last year violates its First Amendment rights.

Assembly Bill 587, passed in September 2022, requires large social media companies to submit semi-annual reports to the attorney general that include how it defines and moderates hate speech or racism, extremism or radicalization, disinformation or misinformation, harassment, and foreign political interference, among other requirements.

Social media companies must also include information about the actions they take to moderate those categories.

To Bonta, support for free speech, the Constitution, opposition to discrimination must be stopped.  And, ANY scientific information must be kept from the public.  Like the National Socialists of German, government is the only source for “truth”.  Is that a society you want?

The former Twitter sues California attorney general over free speech violations

The social media giant says a state law passed last year mandates speech and interferes with constitutionally protected editorial judgments.

Courthouse News,  9/16/23    https://www.courthousenews.com/the-former-twitter-sues-california-attorney-general-over-free-speech-violations/

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — Social media giant X Corp. sued California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Friday, claiming a state law passed last year violates its First Amendment rights.

Assembly Bill 587, passed in September 2022, requires large social media companies to submit semi-annual reports to the attorney general that include how it defines and moderates hate speech or racism, extremism or radicalization, disinformation or misinformation, harassment, and foreign political interference, among other requirements.

Social media companies must also include information about the actions they take to moderate those categories.

San Francisco-based X Corp., previously called Twitter and headed by Elon Musk, said in the lawsuit, filed in federal court in California, that this violates the First Amendment and the state constitution because it forces social media companies like it to engage in speech against its wishes. It also interferes with constitutionally protected editorial judgments of those companies, pressing them to take action against speech the state opposes.

Assembly Bill 587 — penned by Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, a San Fernando Valley Democrat — was praised by Governor Gavin Newsom in a bill-signing announcement. Newsom said that Californians deserve to know how social media platforms impact public discourse, and that the bill brings needed transparency and accountability.

X Corp. claimed the true purpose of the bill is to “eliminate” certain constitutionally protected content the government decides is problematic.

“The legislative record is crystal clear that one of the main purposes of AB 587 — if not the main purpose — is to pressure social media companies to eliminate or minimize content that the government has deemed objectionable,” X Corp. wrote.

The reports detailing content moderation decisions can also prove costly. X Corp. wrote that social media companies can face fines of up to $15,000 per violation, per day, if compliance isn’t in “reasonable, good faith” — a term that the company said is not defined.

X Corp. also said that the reports it must file with the attorney general force social media companies to stake out positions publicly on politically charged and controversial issues. According to X. Corp, being forced to use the government’s politically charged terms is a form of unconstitutional compelled speech.

The First Amendment gives X Corp. the right to speak freely or not at all, the company wrote.

Additionally, the company claimed, moderating controversial content is inherently political and will lead to questions over if too much or too little moderation is occurring.

X Corp. listed a few examples, noting that some people see misgendering someone as hate speech and harassment. However, others say that forcing someone to call a transgender person by their preferred pronouns violates their right to their deeply held beliefs.

In another example cited by X Corp., in March 2020 some people said it was disinformation to claim the Covid-19 virus came from a lab in Wuhan, China. Others insisted that restricting such statements was censorship.

“As these examples make clear, AB 587 focuses on the most controversial and politically-charged categories of content moderation,” X Corp. wrote. “It forces social media companies to speak publicly and take a position on these controversial topics, notwithstanding that doing so will almost always result in public criticism from one political group or another.”

Gabriel, AB 587’s author, said in a Friday statement that it took almost two years to pass the bill under intense opposition from large social media companies. However, it received bipartisan support after grassroots lobbying by over 80 civil rights and civic groups.

“Assembly Bill 587 is a pure transparency measure that simply requires companies to be upfront about if and how they are moderating content. It in no way requires any specific content moderation policies — which is why it passed with strong, bipartisan support,” Gabriel said. “If Twitter has nothing to hide, then they should have no objection to this bill.”

An inquiry to Twitter’s press email resulted in an automatic reply: “Busy now, please check back later.”

Bonta’s office could not be reached by press time.

X Corp. asks in its suit for a jury trial, along with a declaration that AB 587 violates the First Amendment and the state constitution and that it violates the dormant commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. The company also asks that civil penalties assessed under AB 587 become null and void and that a permanent injunction stop Bonta from enforcing AB 587 against X Corp.

Every once in a while the courts get it right.

“U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday that prevents 16,000-student Escondido Union School District from forcing two teachers into “non-disclosure regarding a student’s newly expressed gender identification” when communicating with parents, or taking “any adverse employment actions” against them. It also applies to state defendants.

“Parental involvement is not optional for correct medical diagnosis of gender incongruence,” Benitez wrote. He cited 100 years of Supreme Court precedent on parents’ rights to “direct the education, health, and upbringing” of their children as well as a binding 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling just last year.”

Like the German National Socialists and the Russian Communists, the California Democrats want government to own your children.  At least in this court, the parents were heard.

Courts surprisingly unfriendly to California school districts that hide gender transitions

Mother and daughter get $100,000 settlement, while federal judge invokes transgender psychologist and international treatment standards against school district. legislation requiring family court judges to consider a parent’s “affirmation” of their child’s gender transition during custody battles.

By Greg Piper, Just the News,  9/15/23 https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/california-courts-surprisingly-unfriendly-school-districts-hide-gender 

Of all the states in which school districts might fear legal trouble for keeping parents in the dark about their children’s decision to identify as the opposite sex, solidly blue California seemed an unlikely candidate.

Yet federal courts in the Golden State are the setting for two of the biggest developments in the heated fight nationwide over student privacy versus parental involvement.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez issued a preliminary injunction Wednesday that prevents 16,000-student Escondido Union School District from forcing two teachers into “non-disclosure regarding a student’s newly expressed gender identification” when communicating with parents, or taking “any adverse employment actions” against them. It also applies to state defendants.

“Parental involvement is not optional for correct medical diagnosis of gender incongruence,” Benitez wrote. He cited 100 years of Supreme Court precedent on parents’ rights to “direct the education, health, and upbringing” of their children as well as a binding 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling just last year.

The injunction protects only plaintiffs Elizabeth Mirabelli and Lori Ann West, but it is “significant because we have almost no court decisions on this issue,” California lawyer Laura Powell, whose suit against California’s medical misinformation law may have played a role in its likely repeal, told Just the News.

“While the state is arguing that the constitution actually REQUIRES secrecy policies, a federal judge says the constitution PROHIBITS them,” Powell wrote on X, referring to state Attorney General Rob Bonta’s lawsuit against Chino Valley Unified School District’s new parental notification policy on gender transitions. 

Bonta secured a temporary restraining order and told KCAL News he believes other Southern California districts with similar policies will be affected by the suit. Orange Unified, Rocklin Unified and Buckeye Union districts are considering or set to vote on such policies, according to The Center Square.

Judge Benitez first came to national attention for ruling against California’s decades-old assault-weapons ban, a decision stayed by the 9th Circuit. 

With the Cuban-born judge reconsidering the ban under new Second Amendment precedent from the Supreme Court, Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom denounced Benitez by name for handcuffing a 13-year-old girl to scare her away from doing drugs like her father who was in court.

Benitez’s order Wednesday does not mince words.

If a student “suffers a life-threatening concussion while playing soccer … a sexual assault, or expresses suicidal thoughts, or expresses aggressive and threatening thoughts or behavior” at school, parents would have “a legal and federal constitutional right to be informed of and to direct decisions on medical treatment” for their child, he wrote.

These scenarios are fundamentally the same as as a student expressing “words or actions during class that may be the first visible sign that the child is dealing with gender incongruity or possibly gender dysphoria” that could have “significant, adverse, life-long social-emotional health consequences,” the order reads.

Escondido Union’s gender identity policy, known as AR 5145.3, was allegedly “adopted by school district administrative staff, without fanfare, and without opportunity for parental or public input,” Benitez wrote, with the plaintiffs first learning about it during a February 2022 training.

It deems “discriminatory harassment” any nonconsensual sharing of a student’s gender identity with their parents, and Mirabelli and West have “a well-founded fear” of punishment because the district refused their request for a religious accommodation, Benitez wrote.

The policy is not only “in tension” with constitutional district policies including a prohibition on “falsifying information” in school records, but also “dramatically inconsistent with respected medical opinions,” he also wrote. 

The judge quoted transgender clinical psychologist Erica Anderson, who opposes “embarking upon a social transition based solely upon the self-attestation of the youth without consultation with parents” and approves of parents rejecting a social transition to “help their children avoid making bad decisions.”

The first step should not be “immediate and unhesitating affirmance” but rather “a careful professional assessment by a mental health professional with expertise in child gender incongruence,” Anderson said specifically of the district’s policies. “Best mental health practices abhor activity that drives a wedge between parents and children, creating distrust and tension.”

The district doesn’t even have support from the two most recent “standards of care” from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health, which also says it is “appropriate for parents to decide whether to ‘allow’ a social transition for their children,” Benitez wrote.

A California Department of Education spokesperson responded to a Just the News query to the defendants’ lawyers, saying it can’t comment on pending litigation. A district spokesperson told NBC San Diego it was “currently reviewing the decision.”

Last month, the Spreckels Union School District paid Jessica Konen and her daughter Alicia $100,000 to settle their June 2022 lawsuit, according to their lawyers at the Center for American Liberty. 

The mother and daughter alleged the two Buena Vista Middle School teachers who ran the Equality Club started encouraging the girl at age 11 to identify first as bisexual, then as a boy and hide her new names and pronouns from her mother. They also completed a “gender support plan” with Alicia that the school then followed.

The Konens’ lawyers did not answer a query seeking a copy of the settlement. The Los Angeles Times reported Sept. 2 a federal judge approved it Aug. 3, with Jessica and Alicia each receiving $48,000 and another $4,000 for the California Department of Health Care Services for incurred medical expenses.

The lawsuit by the mother and daughter, who is now 16, calls the experience “evil and horrible,” and says they went public with their allegations in 2021 after seeing news reports about the same teachers, Lori Caldiera and Kelly Baraki.

The Epoch Times said it obtained a recording from a seminar led by Caldiera and Baraki at the California Teachers Association 2021 LGBTQ+ Issues Conference. 

They reportedly explained how they actively worked to hide from parents in the “conservative” community what the Equality Club was doing and who was attending – even changing its name to “You Be You” to minimize suspicion – and how they “stalked” students online and in person to recruit for the club. 

An external investigation largely cleared Caldiera and Baraki a year ago, months after they had already resigned due to “harassment” from the community, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. Their comments during the seminar “were not reliable evidence of their actual conduct” leading the club, the Dermyden Makus law firm review concluded.

Outside the courts, gender identity clinics for children are facing increasing pressure from lawmakers, former patients and their own staff. 

Washington University, in St. Louis, announced Sept. 11 its physicians will stop prescribing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones to minors. A new Missouri law that gives minor patients a “legal claim” has created an “unacceptable liability” for the university and its providers, the announcement also said.

WUSTL’s Transgender Center faced scrutiny from lawmakers and state Attorney General Andrew Bailey when its former case manager Jamie Reed, who married a transgender man, went public with allegations that the clinic rushed kids into pharmaceutical treatment, promoted transition as “the solution” for serious psychiatric issues and “downplayed the negative consequences.”

The university itself confirmed some of Reed’s claims, and a recent New York Times investigation confirmed nearly all of them.

Detransitioner Luka Hein sued the University of Nebraska Medical Center and individual physicians Wednesday for negligence by “[p]roceeding straight to breast amputation in a depressed, anxiety-ridden, gender-confused adolescent, who was incapable of understanding the lasting consequences of her decision” at age 16. She’s also represented by the Center for American Liberty.

An “affirming” therapist diagnosed Hein with gender identity disorder after a single 55-minute session “and began steering her toward transgender medical treatment” at the clinic, ignoring Hein’s diagnosed depression and generalized anxiety disorder, antipsychotic medication and traumatic encounters online with “an older man from out of state,” the suit states.

Do you want your doctor to treat your medical conditions, or be a political professor, discriminating against those who views they do not have?

“My now-former pediatrician installed on the wall of every exam room a “Safe Zone” rainbow triangle sticker with the words “sexual orientation,” “gender expression,” and “gender identity.” Meticulously placed in front of the exam table and at a child’s eye level, it was the first thing my daughter noticed on the otherwise blank walls. She asked me to read the words and tell her what they meant. She was five years old and just learning to read. 

I told the doctor this was inappropriate sexual content on the wall and there will be no talk of this sticker with my daughter, but when my daughter asked about the sticker again, the doctor told her, “it’s about being inclusive.” This confused my daughter even more.” 

Would you trust this doctor to tell you all you need to know, if YOU believed the scientific fact—which they do not, that there are only two genders.  If they are not smart enough to know that, they certainly are not smart enough to treat an illness.

SOLAS: My Pediatrician Discharged My Kids Because I Objected To Gender Ideology

NICOLE SOLAS, Daily Caller,  9/15/23  https://dailycaller.com/2023/09/15/solas-my-pediatrician-discharged-my-kids-because-i-objected-to-gender-ideology/

I didn’t know that asking for an exam room free from sexualization and gender ideology would cause my pediatrician to discharge my kids from her care. 

My now-former pediatrician installed on the wall of every exam room a “Safe Zone” rainbow triangle sticker with the words “sexual orientation,” “gender expression,” and “gender identity.” Meticulously placed in front of the exam table and at a child’s eye level, it was the first thing my daughter noticed on the otherwise blank walls. She asked me to read the words and tell her what they meant. She was five years old and just learning to read. 

I told the doctor this was inappropriate sexual content on the wall and there will be no talk of this sticker with my daughter, but when my daughter asked about the sticker again, the doctor told her, “it’s about being inclusive.” This confused my daughter even more. 

An LGBT sticker in an exam room at the office of the author’s former pediatrician. (Photo by Nicole Solas)

After a tense disagreement (in another room) about the politics of the sticker, my doctor agreed that it was reasonable to place younger children in exam rooms without the sticker. But she never placed my children in another room or returned my follow-up calls. Instead, a doctor called me and “invited” me to leave the medical practice. It is illegal to discharge a patient without thirty days’ notice in Rhode Island. 

When I demanded he explain the sexually inappropriate content in the exam rooms of pediatricians who claim to teach children about consent and inappropriate sexual contact with adults, he became belligerent. He yelled at me over the phone, “Come on, Nicole! You can be a better parent! Your child deserves an explanation about sex!” I had never met nor talked to this doctor before this phone call. 

I responded, “You’re a pediatrician! It is not within your purview to demand I talk to my five-year-old about sex!”  But he continued, “The American Academy of Pediatrics…” I interrupted him, “I don’t care about the American Academy of Pediatrics! Doctors performed lobotomies. You’ve been wrong before and you’re wrong again.” Before he hung up on me, he battle-cried, “We will not abandon our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion!”

I pay my pediatrician for check-ups and throat cultures, not ideological finger-wagging about sex education in kindergarten. But at that moment I realized that gender ideology in medicine and education was not about the health and safety of children. It is about people abusing their positions of power to tell parents how to raise their children. It is about authoritarianism. 

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Rhode Island offers “safe zone training” for healthcare providers, and these stickers identify compliant providers. Critics argue these stickers are mere reassurances of “inclusion,” but my former pediatrician told me the stickers are meant to start conversations with children about gender ideology. 

There was nothing on the wall about the irreversible damage of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and sex change surgeries on children. Hasbro Children’s Hospital even advertises that puberty blockers are “completely reversible” in the face of existing research demonstrating loss of bone density and cognitive function from puberty blockers. No long-term studies have been completed on the unknown harms of puberty blockers. 

Later, I received a letter providing thirty days’ notice of discharge because the doctor falsely alleged that I made “disparaging comments about the credentials of the pediatricians” and “the doctor-patient relationship so essential to effective care is unlikely to be restored.”

The doctor-patient relationship will never be restored when politics drives pediatrics and drives wedges between parents and children. How can parents trust that pediatricians are capable of providing “effective care” when the American Academy of Pediatrics only recently agreed to a systematic review of the evidence supporting gender-affirming care after silencing member doctors for years?

I had to call seven pediatricians before I found one taking new patients. My pediatrician didn’t care about the health and safety of my children if she discharged them so abruptly amid a shortage of pediatricians and without referrals.

I hand-delivered my children’s medical release to inspect my new pediatrician’s office for political ideology and confirm she was not a member of a medical group prescribing health care contingent on political beliefs.

I now drive thirty minutes to a new pediatrician, but a longer drive in a state that refuses to keep kids safe from pediatric gender quackery is worth my kids having their “safe zone” at a pediatrician’s office free from sexualization and gender ideology indoctrination.

Nicole Solas is a senior fellow with the Education Freedom Center at Independent Women’s Forum (iwf.org/EFC).

AB 1228 will use government to determine the wages paid to fast food workers.  In the case of McDonalds, it will ADD $250,000 per franchise—which is MORE than the profit of each store.  In other words, AB 1228 will shut down fast food joints in California.  Imagine, NO McDonalds, Wendys, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Del Taco in California.  Of course the biggest losers will be the owners who will lose their investments and the hundreds of thousands of young people who will not have a job.  Do not forget the loss of tax revenues

“”The new ‘AB 1228’ legislation has been voted into law and will result in a devastating financial blow to California McDonald’s franchisees at a projected annual cost of $250,000 per McDonald’s restaurant,” the advocacy group representing some 1,000 McDonald’s franchisees said in the memo obtained by FOX Business. 

“These costs simply cannot be absorbed by the current business model.”

Here are some of the new rules franchisees will face if Governor Gavin Newsom signs the bill into law (which he has already pledged to do):

1. It would raise the minimum wage for fast-food workers to $20 per hour.
2. It would apply to restaurants with at least 60 locations nationwide, except for restaurants that make and sell their own bread.
3. It would also create a 10-person council to govern fast-food chains and set guidelines for working conditions and wages. “

You read that right, GOVERNMENT will decides wages, benefits and working conditions.  Now you know why I call them the National Socialist Democrats.

McDonald’s Franchisees Slam Draconian CA Fast Food Bill, ‘Will Result in a Devastating Financial Blow’

By Bob Hoge, Red State,  9/16/23     https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2023/09/16/mcdonalds-franchisees-slam-draconian-ca-fast-food-bill-will-result-in-a-devastating-financial-blow-n2163902

The California legislature has been outdoing itself lately with nutty parent-hating and business-killing legislation. Among other measures, they recently passed AB 957, the “Gender-Affirming’ bill,” which would force you to validate the gender identity of your child or face punishment. 

On Thursday, they were at it again, as the state Senate passed fast-food bill AB 1228, which will impose new requirements and costs on businesses that are already struggling in the post-pandemic, inflationary world.

The National Owners Association, which advocates for McDonald’s franchisees, is not happy:

“The new ‘AB 1228’ legislation has been voted into law and will result in a devastating financial blow to California McDonald’s franchisees at a projected annual cost of $250,000 per McDonald’s restaurant,” the advocacy group representing some 1,000 McDonald’s franchisees said in the memo obtained by FOX Business. 

 “These costs simply cannot be absorbed by the current business model.”

Here are some of the new rules franchisees will face if Governor Gavin Newsom signs the bill into law (which he has already pledged to do):

4. It would raise the minimum wage for fast-food workers to $20 per hour.
5. It would apply to restaurants with at least 60 locations nationwide, except for restaurants that make and sell their own bread.
6. It would also create a 10-person council to govern fast-food chains and set guidelines for working conditions and wages. 

Why are restaurants that make their own bread exempt? I’m guessing some well-financed lobbying group got that language inserted.

Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the bill is that the council will have the ability to keep raising the minimum wage:

At issue is a provision in the compromise that establishes a council that will set wages for fast-food chain restaurants, including a $20 minimum wage for those restaurants starting next April, a 29% increase over the current minimum of $15.50. That, plus potential 3.5% increases over the next five years, could bring the minimum wage for fast-food chain restaurants to $25 an hour by 2029.

The pro-union movement “Fight for $15” is thrilled:

Many often look at California and its crazy legislature and simply laugh. What they fail to realize is that what starts there often ends up in other states:

The NOA suggested AB 1228’s passage could lead to similar efforts by legislative bodies elsewhere in the country, adding, “We need to remain unified so that this can not gain a foothold anywhere else.”

How will franchises deal with the increased cost? They’ll probably have to raise prices or fire some workers:

Faced with a mandate to pay higher wages, fast-food operators will have to decide how they plan to deal with elevated labor costs. Some may raise menu prices, although customers may balk at having to foot the bill. Others may try to make do with fewer workers on hand or to invest in automation to handle more tasks.

Leading up to the passage of the measure, there was an extensive, heated back and forth among the restaurant industry, the governor’s office, unions, and the legislature, and both sides won some key compromises in the final bill. Nevertheless, it’s likely that it will be the consumers who once again end up facing even higher prices.

Social media has made it clear—they do not want facts, they hate science and prefer to be the mouthpieces for a totalitarian government.  They take orders from the National Socialist Democrats, instead of being honest journalists.

Without free speech, democracy ends.  With government providing outright lies and misinformation, freedom ends.

They have killed our economy by censoring scientific facts about COVID, masks, isolation and the closing of churches, schools and businesses.  Now they are claiming that unless THEY are able to censor facts and speech Democracy will die.  In fact, having them censor facts and speech, Democracy has been killed.

Google is Where Democracy is Dying?

Posted by Bruce Bialosky, Flashreport,  9/17/23    https://www.flashreport.org/blog/2023/09/17/google-is-where-democracy-is-dying/

Has it been more than five minutes since you heard someone on the left spouting about how our democracy is in danger? The Washington Post adopted the slogan “Democracy Dies in Darkness,” while simultaneously keeping their readers in the dark about a multitude of critical issues. Despite all the hysteria, the Left ignores the single biggest challenge to our democracy which has been scientifically proven.

Dr. Robert Epstein would be considered by most to be a member of the “elite.” He has a PhD in Experimental Psychology from Harvard. He was Editor-in-Chief of Psychology Today. He has been a visiting professor at international universities and now operates the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology (AIBRT). Politically, he is a self-described life-long center/center-left person who supports the Democrat party.

AIBRT has researched many topics affecting our day-to-day lives including AI, parenting and stress management. Epstein has done a deep dive into manipulation of search engines to alter election results and has testified to Congressional committees regarding his research.

“As of January 2018, the National Academy of Sciences ranked AIBRT’s 2015 paper on the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (SEME) to be in the top 1 percent of all scientific papers the organization monitored in all the sciences, both short-term and long-term. As of August 18, 2023, the paper had been accessed or downloaded from PNAS’s website more than 230,000 times, and SEME had been partially or fully replicated multiple times.”

In his U.S. Senate testimony, he stated:

1. In 2016, Google likely shifted at least 2.6 million votes to Hillary Clinton whom I supported. These manipulations are invisible and noncompetitive. They are controlled by Big Tech companies and there is no way to counteract them.

2. In 2018, on election day, the Go Vote reminder that Google displayed on its home page gave a political party (Democrats) between 800,000 to 4.6 million more votes than the other party (Republicans). That reminder was not a public service, it was a voter manipulation.

3. In 2018, spread across many political races, bias in search may have shifted 78.2 million votes.

Though Dr. Epstein focused on Google, he stated, “If you were to examine the data I have been collecting over the past 6-and-a-half years, every one of you would put partisanship aside to reign in the extraordinary power that Google and Facebook now wield with unabashed arrogance.”

While the power structure was focused on Russian interference, Epstein stated it does not shift many votes. Dr. Epstein said though Google censored mainly conservative content it also censors “progressive and socialist content.” This single entity, which is not accountable to anyone, should not have this kind of power. And our government does not want to amend Section 230 to make these operations more accountable to someone.

In April 2023 Epstein published in Gatestone a detailed update of his position on this issue, https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/19608/election-threat-big-tech.

As you know, many elected officials deny there is any material fraud in our elections. Hans Von Spakovsky has developed a database hosted by the Heritage Foundation of actual convictions of people across the country for voter fraud violations. Epstein states “Those are tiny incidents compared to what is happening here on a massive scale. That is because Google search results are seen each day in the United States 500 million times.

Many Republicans express what appears to be deeply suspicious thoughts about our national elections. Dr. Epstein states “in general, Republicans cannot win. It is because there are so many different methods available to these tech companies for manipulating opinions and votes without people’s awareness.” Maybe their suspicions are warranted.

Epstein believes the bias is apparent on its face. He says the people who work at the major tech companies all have the same politics and the proof is that 96% of Google’s political donations go to one political party and that is not Republicans.

Dr. Epstein has already collected extensive data backing up his claims. He wants to collect more. To do so he needs substantial financial support. He wants to monitor Google 24/7 to expose their manipulations.
Epstein’s research may explain some of the losses in close elections for Republicans. However you look at the situation, giving AIBRT the tools to protect us from this proven trickery may be worth Republicans focusing their efforts to reverse the techs from altering our elections.

The Left is expert at deflection. While they encourage procedures like ballot harvesting, mailing ballots out to every resident of a state and never tracing those ballots, month-long election “days,” registering people based on their obtaining a driver’s license without proof of citizenship, and legalizing non-citizens voting in elections, they point fingers at Republicans for imaginary voter suppression. The real danger to Democracy may be embedded in search engines like Google. You will never hear a peep from the Left because Google shifts elections towards them and they believe winning is everything.

In May, the Congress approved a new budget.  As part of it, there was a small cut in spending—and an unlimited increase in the debt.  Since then the debt has grown to vote $33 trillion–$2 trillion since May!

There is talk about a government shutdown in ten days.  The bigger question is whether we can afford to keep the government OPEN after September 30—without massive cuts and a clear statement NO MORE DEFICIT SPENDING.

Without that, we need to save ourselves—let government shut down.

$296,524,000,000 Added To US Debt in One Month As JPMorgan Chase Issues Economic Alert

Henry Kanapi, Daily Hodl,  9/15/23   https://dailyhodl.com/2023/09/15/296524000000-added-to-us-debt-in-one-month-as-jpmorgan-chase-issues-economic-alert/

A seemingly unrelenting wave of debt is piling onto America’s balance sheet.

New data from the U.S. Treasury Department show the federal debt increased by over $296.524 billion from August 8th to September 8th, reaching a total of $32.940 trillion.

The new numbers come as JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon issues a warning on America’s fiscal trajectory.

At a conference hosted by Barclays, Dimon told reporters that America’s rapid rate of spending is bound to have a significant impact on households.

“I just think people make a mistake to look at real-time numbers and not look at the future. And the future has quantitative tightening.

We’ve been spending money like drunken sailors around the world, this war in Ukraine is still going on. Those are really big buts. To say the consumer is strong today, meaning you got to have a booming environment for years, is a huge mistake.”

Meanwhile, Congress is facing pressure to pass a new budget before funding for the US government runs out on September 30th.

If a deal is not reached on time, about three of out five federal civilian workers are expected to be furloughed as portions of the government shut down.

Goldman Sachs says a shutdown would likely lower America’s economic growth by 0.2% per week until a deal is reached.

“Over the years, there have been many near misses and more false alarms than actual shutdowns.

That said, the ingredients for a shutdown — a thin House majority, a dispute on spending levels, and potential complications from various political issues — are present.”

A seemingly unrelenting wave of debt is piling onto America’s balance sheet.

New data from the U.S. Treasury Department show the federal debt increased by over $296.524 billion from August 8th to September 8th, reaching a total of $32.940 trillion.

The new numbers come as JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon issues a warning on America’s fiscal trajectory.

At a conference hosted by Barclays, Dimon told reporters that America’s rapid rate of spending is bound to have a significant impact on households.

“I just think people make a mistake to look at real-time numbers and not look at the future. And the future has quantitative tightening.

We’ve been spending money like drunken sailors around the world, this war in Ukraine is still going on. Those are really big buts. To say the consumer is strong today, meaning you got to have a booming environment for years, is a huge mistake.”

Meanwhile, Congress is facing pressure to pass a new budget before funding for the US government runs out on September 30th.

If a deal is not reached on time, about three of out five federal civilian workers are expected to be furloughed as portions of the government shut down.

Goldman Sachs says a shutdown would likely lower America’s economic growth by 0.2% per week until a deal is reached.

“Over the years, there have been many near misses and more false alarms than actual shutdowns.

That said, the ingredients for a shutdown — a thin House majority, a dispute on spending levels, and potential complications from various political issues — are present.”

I could never imagine that the folks in the financial world could be so ignorant.  Here is a very credible financial newsletter, The Street, claiming that OPEC is the reason we have high gas prices.  Have they forgotten that Biden is closing down American oil product, ending leases and demanding that we drive EV’s?

OPEC is only doing the cut backs because WE are cutting OUR oil supplies.

Too bad the financial media is ignorant.

Does filling your gas tank hurt? Thank OPEC

Gasoline prices continue to surge at the pump, thanks to $90-plus crude oil.

CHARLEY BLAINE, The Street,  9/17/23  https://www.thestreet.com/retail/does-filling-your-gas-tank-hurt-thank-opec

It’s September, and drivers are doing what they usually do in September. They’re driving less. And using less gas as a result. 

But less driving is not having any effect at the gas pump. The American Automobile Association’s U.S. national average price was $3.876 a gallon on Sunday, up a half-cent from Saturday and 1.3% from a week ago. Worse, the price is up 27% just for the third quarter.

The problem is, of course, the rising price of crude oil. West Texas intermediate, the benchmark U.S. crude closed Friday at $90.02 per 42-gallon barrel, up nearly 3% for the week, 7.6% for the month and about 27% since the end of June. 

The main culprits are Saudi Arabia, the chief power of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, and Russia. The duo announced earlier this month they were taking 1.3 million barrels of crude oil a day off the global market. And WTI promptly jumped.

So did Brent, the global benchmark, which closed at $93.93 a barrel, up 3.6% for the week and 8.2% for the first half of September. It’s up about 25% since the end of June, though just 9.3% for the year. 

At some point this fall, cooler weather will set in, along with the demand drop-off after the summer. That should force refiners and gasoline retailers to trim prices.

Rising gasoline prices were the biggest factor in the 3.7% year-over-year gain in the U.S. Consumer Price Index for August. The Bureau of Labor Statistics noted a 10.6% increase in gasoline prices during the month. 

That said, U.S. gasoline prices are still 22.3% lower than the $5.016-a-gallon peak reached in June 2022. Prices fell fell 36% through the end of 2022.  

The pump-pain is greatest for drivers in California and Washington State, whose statewide averages Sunday were $5.658 and $5.046 a gallon, respectively. 

The average California price jumped 23 cents a gallon in the last week, with the highest price in Mono County at $6.427 a gallon. 

Mississippi continued to have the lowest statewide prices at $3.304 a gallon. The lowest county price was in Stone County near the Gulf Coast at $3.179 a gallon.

The oil-price-jump has been a boon for energy investors. The stocks in the Standard & Poor’s Energy Sector are up 19.8% since the end of May, tops among the 11 S&P 500 sectors in that time frame.

Chevron  (CVX) – Get Free Report rose 1.8% this past week with ConocoPhillips  (COP) – Get Free Report, up 0.5% and Exxon Mobil  (XOM) – Get Free Report, up 1.8%. 

Airline stocks fell. They are perhaps the most vulnerable group of stocks when fuel prices jump. American Airlines Group  (AAL) – Get Free Report fell 4.8%.