Indiana, Tennesee, Virginia -- what about California?

 The Indiana State Supreme Court just upheld former Governor Mitch Daniels’s signature legislation, which has expanded a state-sponsored school voucher program. Protests from legal opponents argued that the voucher program was providing state funds to private religious institutions. Not so, countered the ruling majority, which correctly pointed out that the parents directly receive the funding, which they then invest in the school of their choice.


Now, the Governors of Virginia and Tennessee have advanced a similar program, in which students in struggling schools can enroll in a better school, regardless of the zipcode in which the family lives or where the school resides.

If Tennessee, Virginia, and Indiana have instituted school choice, why can’t California legislators follow their brave example? Democrats, who claim to care about equity and fairness, must extend “open enrollment” to all California students.

Contact your state legislators. Tell them to support SB 451 (statewide open enrollment).

Henry Waxman Voted for War in 2002

The War in Iraq was a mistake. Many conservatives stated that before the authorization for war, and many more concede as much now. Whether “Bush lied, people died” remains up for discussion. Five separate intelligence agencies concluded that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, including France and Germany, which refused to allocate troops to the region. However, putting aside the heavy, heated partisanship of Jack Neworth’s latest letter, let us remember that Democrats also authorized the war, including Santa Monica’s own Henry Waxman, who resisted supporting articles of impeachment against President Bush. Instead he was investigating steroid use in baseball and ignoring the plight of our veterans. Also, the Democratically controlled Congress in 2007 approved Bush’s troop surge.

National building was and remains a foolish policy, one which Israeli activist Natan Sharansky impugned without first establishing a culture of natural right and respect through law and order. Unfortunately, our nation’s  leaders still refuse to learn this lesson, but we the voters do not have to forget. So far, the United States military-industrial complex is staying out of Syria, a quagmire of differing tribal and religious factions which will only get worse.

If anyone demands prosecuting President Bush, then impeach President Obama, too; but not for just “war crimes”, but for “domestic insurrection”, because of massive debts, deficits, and unconscionable transfers of wealth from  the US Treasury to bailout “Too Big to Fail” Banks, which are “Too Big to Exist” because of the “Military-Industrial-Complex”, which is something worth getting angry about.

Poverty Programs Inpoverish People

Congressman Henry Waxman loves poor people.

Or he loves people poor.

Perhaps he should pay a visit to Stanford economics professor Thomas Sowell, whose research proves that poverty programs create wealth for bureaucrats and economists, and government bought statisticians, but do nothing to alleviate people in poverty.

I cannot think of policies which can be more ruinous to any people than the ongoing handout culture which tells people that they cannot make it on their own. Instead, they need handouts, handouts, handouts.

It is both immoral and unjust to give people other people's money, not just because it unjustly punishes those who work, earn, save, and invest, but because even the takers themselves get taken, and cannot take themselves out of the cycle of dependence.

The system of pay out and bailout is shameful enough with Washington and Wall Street. People deserve a break, too, from the government slop and sloth which keeps people down and out.

If Congressman Waxman really cared about the poor, then why not cut the spending, cut the taxes, and cut the government out of our lives, so that more Americans, more families, can get off the foodstamps and stamp their mark on the big world out there?

Time to Badger the Badger!

How do you like it, Congressman Waxman?

First, he goes

If there is any clearer example of hypocrisy, look no further than this clip.

Waxman wanted to read the Fifth Amendment rights for the Solyndra executives.

Yet he never had a problem castigating CEOs, you never had problems going after colleagues, but now the tables are turned.

Congressman Henry Waxman has quite a reputation with his Democratic as well as Republican colleagues.

Voters are waking up in the Santa Monica Bay, and they have no problem giving Waxman "The Badger" a taste of his own medicine!

Time to badger the badger!

Henry Waxma, Global Warming, and Leaps of Faith

Congressman Henry Waxmanis so concerned about "climate change", that he dedicated another Twitter Account to the issue @WaxmanClimate.

Recently, Congressman Henry Waxman has been reaching out to "faith communities" to "pray up" support for "climate change" intervention. Some of his tweets include:

We should heed the faith community’s call to action on #climatechange http://1.usa.gov/ZQZrFs

then

We are called upon to be good stewards of our environment and address #ClimateChange before irreparable harm is done http://1.usa.gov/ZQZrFs

and also

Protecting the #climate is one of the great moral challenges of our time. http://1.usa.gov/ZQZrFs  #ClimateChange #ForwardonClimate

Frankly, just because "faith communities" claim that "climate change" is a "big deal" does not make it a big deal, no more than if groups of people coalesced to declare "2 + 2 = 5" does it change the fundamentals of mathematics. Truth and substance are not based on the number of people who agree or disagree. Scientific evidence is based on rigorous research, experimentation, inquiry, review, and a healthy skepticism in the face of diverse opinions or divergent facts.

I commented at Waxman's townhall meeting in Hermosa Beach on January 30 that I believe in "climate change". I recognize that it has been getting a little warmer these days. Am I worried about it? No. Should the federal government enact far-reaching executive enforcement and legislative fiat to protect everyone of us from the slightly rising temperatures? Not at all.

Research in media hype confirms my doubts about "climate change". To assist my doubts, a  recent program from "CBS Sunday Morning" focused on four difference scientists, each of which acknowledged that the world is getting a little warmer. What causes it, what to do about, whether to worry about, remained as divisive and unsubstantiated as ever a conclusion among the four revered scientists.

Forbes magazine offers some decisive rebuttals to the "climate change" cacaphony, charging that the world is recovering form a "Little Ice Age" in the 19th Century. Human beings thrive in warmer climates. And no one has determined the "correct" temperature for the earth. If a business magazine is not authoritative , the "Climategate" revelations among different "global warming" scientists should grant enough pause on this issue. Emails sent among scientists suggested that data were skewed to justifying a conclusion of dangerous climate distortions.


An extensive number of American scientists have pledged that "climate change" is not the threat that activists claim it to be, as well. How many? 31,000, and counting. The community of experts would suggest that healthy skepticism resides among respectable scholars of science on this issue. The fact that such wide debate exists should cause Waxman and his colleagues to pause on this issue.

But what about all of "those wildfires"? Does that not suggest that the world is getting too hot?

One New York Times blog shared the following:

Scientists taking part in a conference call on Thursday arranged by the nonprofit science outreach group Climate Communication said that while they could not apportion blame to a specific factor, there was agreement that this week’s events fit into a pattern of extreme weather events and catastrophic fires that climate scientists predict will only worsen in decades to come.

They could not "blame a specific factor. The scientists cited then claimed that weather patterns will "worsen". How can they be so sure? Scientific inquiry requires hypothesis, research, and conclusion, yet nothing concrete has emerged.

Patterns over history perhaps suggest that the weather trends mean nothing but hotter weather in the future. Different sources refute this argument:

NASA has shared the following data, with the following conclusions:

The world is getting warmer.

I have not disputed that. Is it a threatening development, a mere trend, or something that the government can do anything about?

Washington Post columnist George Will's article on "Climate Change" cites numerous sources, all of which indicate that periods of cooling and warming have dotted the past two decades, and aside from media scrutiny, there have been no Category Three Hurricanes since Katrina in 2005. Superstorm Sandy was devastating, but what can one expect when a hurricane hits concentrated, urban populations with overseeing, intense media conglomerates all along the Eastern Seaboard. Louisiana media outlets did not possess such media influence in 2005, nor was the region as urban or as populated. These facts do not diminish the devastation of those storms, nor can they suggest that "climate change" is the all-powerful cause and effect of larger trends to come.

Rebuttal articles have contended that George Will cherry-picked a limited time frame, or that his rhetorical efforts are propaganda out of frame climate change "enthusiasts" as "scare-mongers. Yet the diversity of opinion is compelling enough to suggest pause and reflection, rather than alarm and intervention.

The growing miasma about "climate change" (or "global warming"?, or "ozone depletion"?) is starting to look more like a blind leap of faith, one with consequences both unwarranted and unsupportable.

Henry Waxman Helped Close the Fifth Street Post Office

Santa Monica and Congressman Henry Waxman are synonymous. Whether they share the same concerns, however, remains in doubts, since the Fifth Street Post Office is set to close, and Waxman has done nothing but write letters and lament its final days. Moreover, Waxman is much to blame for the closure of the “New Deal” era post office, since he co-sponsored a “raw deal” in seven years ago: "The 2006 Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act" (PAE), which requires the United States Postal Service (USPS) to  fund health benefits for postal workers seventy-five years in advance.

The USPS declining revenue is not just the fault of technology or private services, but a “health insurance mandate” which will now prevent the postman from ringing once (let alone twice) on Saturdays, plus the massive layoffs which will ensue. Under Waxman’s tenure, Congress not only passed legislation which doomed the USPS to a trudged trek of unsustainability, but now his signature legislation, ObamaCare, is driving up health care costs and diminishing access to proper health care for all Americans.

Congressman Henry Waxman decided that steroid abuse in baseball merited more attention than our homeless veterans. He spent hours picking on Big Tobacco CEOs. He investigated lead in toys instead of investigating and invigorating the Brentwood VA. His hastening the decline of USPS is just inexcusable, and should stoke enough outrage that even Santa Monica residents will throw up their hands in resigned disgust with “their” Congressman, who has taken them for granted for so long.

Ben Carson Supports Health Savings Accounts, Henry!

Dr. Ben Carson scored some points in his National Prayer Breakfast.

He suggested Health Savings Accounts are the way to go.

At birth, every person gets a Health Savings Account, along with their birth certificate.

They would be responsible for the money over their lifetime, and then they could leave the money to their children if they do not use everything.

Congressman Henry Waxman voted against tax exemptions for health savings accounts.

Congressman Waxman, you have no business being in office!