About Last Week… ‘Please tread on me’

California is where freedom goes to die

“Please tread on me.”

(Photo: Kevin Sanders for California Globe)


Maybe the legislature wouldn’t exactly approve that textual change to the state flag – though some legislators might vote for it, considering their private proclivities – but at least it would be honest.

There are more than 400,000 business-related regulations on the state’s books, doctors were (even if only temporarily) banned from being honest with their patients, parents worried their eight-year-old may be a bit too young to learn about anal sex are harassed, and any attempt to voice any opinion outside of what is deemed appropriate is met with a metaphorical boot stamping on the misthinker’s face.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

As Joel Kotkin recently wrote, California is where freedom goes to die.

Of course, feel free to do things in public that only a few years ago would get you tossed in jail, even if you did them in private.  

So it comes as no surprise that a bill has been proposed to limit how fast cars will go. Scott Weiner, San Francisco state senator and quite possibly a pro-treader, has introduced a bill that will make sure new cars, starting in 2027, cannot travel faster than 10 miles over the speed limit.

So, not quite the “kill switch” proposed by the feds, but at least a “coma switch” would be in every car.  And, because speed limits do things like change, the system would have to track a cars exact location at all times.

One way around this for people with long driveways would be to set an 834 MPH for said driveway and have some fun, but that may be legally impractical.

However, it will help a certain demographic group: stalkers. All they would have to do is to make sure to only buy used cars without coma switches and then they would never have to worry about their prey getting away.

And what will fancy Tesla owners do now when they will no longer be able to hit the “plaid” button?  

Welcome back to khaki, guys.

But the over-regulation does not stop in the driveway; in LA it’s moving into the house.  The county Board of Supervisors, apparently having nothing else to do, passed an ordinance that will set a maximum room temperature so people don’t have to suffer the heat.

First, that’s absurd.  Second, do the four supes who voted for the ordinance not know how INCREDIBLY DAMAGING TO THE CLIMATE AND UNFAIR AIR CONDITIONING IS!?!?

Well, let’s remind them. Eric Dean Wilson wrote a piece for Time a couple of years ago that the county nabobs clearly should read before finalizing the ordinance.

Wilson, who used the phrase “the terrible cost of comfort” in a book subtitle, has much to say on the subject. First, air conditioning can lead to “thermal monotony” which could make people “more vulnerable to heat-related illness.” 

As to thermal monotony, I didn’t know living in San Deigo was so dangerous, but I digress.

But if people are going to have to use – sigh – air conditioning, at least it should be in a communal space:

“The troubled history of air-conditioning suggests not that we chuck it entirely but that we focus on public cooling, on public comfort, rather than individual cooling, on individual comfort. Ensuring that the most vulnerable among the planet’s human inhabitants can keep cool through better access to public cooling centers, shade-giving trees, safe green spaces, water infrastructure to cool, and smart design will not only enrich our cities overall, it will lower the temperature for everyone. It’s far more efficient this way.”

Words fail me.

Speaking of failing words, three Democrats and Steve Garvey faced off in a senate race debate last week.  Garvey did well, though you would not know that from the vast majority of the media coverage.

The never-ending screeching of Adam Schiff, Katie Porter, and Barbara Lee about Big Bad Don was an exercise in talking-point induced tinnitus and utterly meaningless outside of the failed attempt to get Garvey to invoke the Orange Devil as his lord and master.

“Will you vote…” questions are sub-gotchas and remind one of the “why won’t you condemn X for Y?” reporters shout at members of Congress.  The question has no meaning and is just a verbal prop on which the reporter can hang anything they wish.  Didn’t answer?  WHY NOT?  Didn’t condemn?  HE’S EVIL!

But Garvey did have a highlight reel moment when chatting with the egregious Schiff. Adam was yammering on about Trump and democracy and this happened:

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

California is Now A ‘Refuge for Trans Kids’

California already an ‘abortion sanctuary state,’ will now be a ‘transgender state of refuge’

State Sen. Scott Wiener celebrated passage of his bill, SB 107, in August, which just became law January 1st, and now erodes parents’ rights by allowing minor children to travel to California for trans procedures, puberty blockers, known as “gender-affirming health care.”

SB 107 allows non-parent adults to bring minor children to California for experimental and damaging transgender medical interventions, without the knowledge or consent of their parents.

SB 107 now makes California a destination state for “transgender” procedures for minors.

Sen. Wiener claimed that “this is an accepted medical practice,” to the Assembly Appropriations Committee in August. He described the “accepted medical practice” as “Parents allowing their children to have health care.”

A lawyer/mother testified in August that SB 107 is unconstitutional and violates parental rights by offering protections to non-custodial parents to abscond to California for trans gender treatments. “Every Attorney General in the country should be filing lawsuits against California for sterilizing or experimenting on minors,” she said.

The Protect Child Health Coalition warned:

“SB107 would create a series of unprecedented and dangerous exceptions to California law and customary practice regarding cooperation with other states’ legal proceedings. For example, it would forbid the release of medical information, even in a civil or criminal proceeding and even in response to a valid subpoena.”

“Even more shocking is what the law says about parental custody determinations. It would actually authorize parental kidnapping (when a non-custodial parent illegally takes a child from the parent who has legal custody) if the purpose of the kidnapping is to subject the child to radical gender transition procedures.

Never addressed were the “de-transitioner” warnings and experiences of trauma, regret, and often normal issues of confused teenagers. The New York Post did an in-depth report on this important aspect of regret, in which they identified many young people seeking to transition, but are doing so without a proper mental-health evaluation.

“According to an online survey of detransitioners conducted by Dr. Lisa Littman last year, 40% said their gender dysphoria was caused by a mental-health condition and 62% felt medical professionals did not investigate whether trauma was a factor in their transition decisions,” the Post reported.

“I saw children being fast-tracked onto medical solutions for psychological problems, and when kids get on the medical conveyor belt, they don’t get off,” Marcus Evans said. He was the Clinical Director of Adult and Adolescent Services at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust, a publicly funded mental-health center in the UK where many youth seek treatment for gender dysphoria, the Post reported. “But the politicization of the issue was shutting down proper clinical rigor. That meant quite vulnerable kids were in danger of being put on a medical path for treatment that they may well regret.”

This bill was rammed through California legislative committees by the state’s Democrats, and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom ignoring any real “transition” data or real life accounts.

Click here to read the full article the full article in the California Globe