Sunday, February 28, 2010

Memorial Service Held For Canada's Last World War One Veteran

John Babcock, Canada's last soldier from World War I died in Spokane, Washington this week at the age of 109. He had lived in Spokane since 1932.

"He captured the spirit of adventure. Jack was a part of that generation who went forward with great courage," said Gen. Walter Natynczyk, chief of the defense staff for Canadian Forces.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper added, "John Babcock was Canada's last living link to the Great War, which in so many ways marked our coming of age as a nation."

Expressing sorrow at the passing of generation of Canadian soldiers, Harper added, "Canada mourns the passing of the generation that asserted our independence on the world stage and established our international reputation as an unwavering champion of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law."

Read more HERE

As mentioned in the article, there is one North American World War One Veteran remaining, Frank Woodruff Buckles, 109, of West Virginia.

Saturday, February 27, 2010

AG McKenna, Uphold Washington Citizens ‘Right To Anonymous Speech’

As previously covered on my other blog, Clark County Conservative, the case to release all of the names, addresses and signatures of those who signed the petition to place R-71, a citizen initiated resolution to place the bill SB 5688, enhancements to domestic partnerships, on the ballot has made it to the United States Supreme Court.

See Supreme Court Will Hear R-71 Petition Case and Columbian Urges Supreme Court to Listen to AG McKenna on R-71 Signers.

Given recent events spurred by Democrats in our legislature and Governor Gregoire not only supporting, but signing those measures into law, Attorney General McKenna should immediately withdraw any challenge and keep petition signatures hidden.

I am making this call due in part to the efforts of Democrats to write into law SB 6754, a law that would make signatures of those who sign citizen petitions part of the public record.

Republican State Senator Don Benton, who recently announced his intent to run against Senator Patty Murray for the U.S. Senate, spoke in opposition to SB 6754 saying,

“The majority voted the other night to not publish the votes legislators take in the voter’s pamphlet, which was wrong. Now they want to publicize the names of citizens who sign an initiative. This is clearly an attempt to intimidate citizens to keep them from exercising their constitutional rights.”

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas spoke similar words in a partial dissenting opinion when the Supreme Court struck down some provisions of the campaign finance law.

Justice Thomas said,

“Political speech is entitled to robust protection under the First Amendment…. Congress may not abridge the ‘right to anonymous speech’ based on the ‘simple interest in providing voters with additional relevant information’.”

Justice Thomas, after listing several instances of how activist in opposition to California’s Proposition 8 used such information obtained from their public records to harass, intimidate and threaten supporters of Prop 8 continued,

“The success of such intimidation tactics has apparently spawned a cottage industry that uses forcibly disclosed donor information to pre-empt citizens’ exercise of their First Amendment rights,” adding, “These instances of retaliation sufficiently demonstrate why this Court should invalidate mandatory disclosure and reporting requirements.”

SB 6754 passed the Senate and remains in the House.

The other reason I make this call for AG McKenna to withdraw the state’s challenge to the R-71 case from before the Supreme Court and concede to Justice Thomas’s words is Democrat’s passage and Governor Gregoire signing into law the suspension of I-960, a citizen initiative that placed restrictions on raising taxes requiring a 2/3 majority vote for such increases and for Governor Gregoire not vetoing the very portion Senator Benton mentioned above, keeping legislators names out of the voters guide that voted to increase such taxes.

SB 6130 was signed into law by Gregoire as passed, in spite of Republicans efforts to preserve our “right to know.”

Senator Benton hand delivered a letter to the governor from Republicans that said in part,

“If you cannot veto all of ESSB 6130, I respectfully request that you veto section three of the bill. In doing so you would preserve the peoples right to an advisory vote on tax increases passed by the Legislature. I believe that the citizens have a right to know about legislative actions that increase taxes and that we would do well to listen to their response in the form of an advisory vote.”

He reminded the governor,

“People have the right to know how legislators vote. That’s why they approved Initiative 960 in the first place - they want sunshine on their government.”

His plea fell on deaf ears.

In an election year Democrats are on shaky ground nationwide, voters are being assaulted with the prospect of state sanctioned intimidation tactics should they support a citizen initiative some activist group dislikes by our names, addresses and signatures being made public.

At the same time, Democrat officials have chosen to keep their names private should they vote to further plunge the state into bankruptcy by voting to increase taxes during such dire economic times we face currently, 14.3% unemployment in Clark County alone.

This flies in the face of a free and open society and is something I’d imagine hearing in such countries as Venezuela or Cuba, not America or Washington State.

Senator Benton said in opposition to SB 6754,

“What we are witnessing are actions to destroy democracy and our constitution. When you stomp on the will of the people by acting in the dark of the night to restrict their rights just because you don't agree with their decisions, what else can it be called but an all-out assault on the people’s right to determine how they are governed?”

Mr. McKenna, in light of the actions of our legislators, don’t citizens also have a ‘right to anonymous speech’ if legislators seize for themselves a right to anonymity for votes that carry the potential of harming citizens?

I urge you to petition the Supreme Court to uphold our ‘right to anonymous speech.’

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

When Democrats Faced The ‘Nuclear Option’

As Democrats speak of rahmmimg Obamacare down America’s throat, thoughts float back to 2005 when Democrats were facing such a prospect over Judicial nominations.

Of particular note is then Senator Joseph Biden: "I pray God when the Democrats take back control we don't make the kind of naked power grab you are doing."

H/T Brietbart TV

Sunday, February 21, 2010

Deb Wallace Withdraws, Reportedly Points Finger At Herrera

A surprising announcement from Clark Counties Democrat candidate for the Washington State Third Congressional District seat being vacated by Brian Baird says she is withdrawing from the race.

Deb is the current top fundraiser from Clark County, which makes this announcement all the more surprising.

First in making this known was Politics is a Blood Sport, a noted Democrat blog spot and apparently based off of a report received from a Vancouver For Peace mail list.

The email release stated,

“Deb Wallace just announced her withdrawal from not only the 3rd congressional race, but also her seat in the state legislature when it expires in January. She has not yet announced her endorsement for the 3rd race, but she is endorsing somebody named Monica Stonier (the last name I'm not sure) for her state spot.

I attended our neighborhood clubhouse where Deb had reserved for this. (She's lives in Pinebrook as I do.) I thought she'd talk about her race against Baird. Instead she said she was withdrawing so that the best Democrat would win. She said Jaime Herrera, R, looks like the candidate for the Repugs and Deb said Jaimie is often absent at the legislature and others press her vote.

Deb did not have an answer when I asked what she'll do. She supports Monica S, a pro-choice woman for the 17th District.”

Of particular note is the words credited to Deb Wallace above, “Jaime Herrera, R, looks like the candidate for the Repugs and Deb said Jaimie is often absent at the legislature and others press her vote.”

Ignoring the blatant slap at Republicans, if true about being absent and having others press her vote, this could have Jaime Herrera facing an ethics investigation, according to Clark County Politics.

The announced withdrawal has been confirmed now in both the Columbian and the Olympian, neither including the comment about Herrera’s having others press her vote.

In her release, Wallace states, “We cannot let the 3rd Congressional Seat go to an anti-choice, anti-health care Republican. We must come together and support a Democrat who will keep the people at the heart of their mission to serve,” a misrepresentation of Republicans and indicating that the slaughter of the unborn is of utmost importance to Ms. Wallace.

This also leads me to suspect the Democrat Party machine, although they did not pressure Wallace in dropping her bid, according to Wallace, has decided to throw the support behind multi-millionaire Denny Heck, a former Democrat Representative noted for his polarization.

In his initial announcement, Heck said, “I’m personally a little tired of politics by shouting.” Yet, in a 2003 interview when asked about partisanship in Olympia, he replied, “I’m probably part of the problem. I’ve played partisan politics for keeps. I believed in the punishment side of the reward/punishment equation when it comes to internal self-discipline.”

Do we really need more polarization? Even Vulnerable Democrat Senator Patty Murray is now saying, “What worries me about inflammatory language is, it drives us further apart,” in a February 21, 2010 Columbian article.

As this field begins to thin it is more apparent to me than ever that the only real choice for true reform and real representation of Wa. 03 will be David Castillo.

Unlike Herrera, he is not a party insider being manipulated by Washington D.C. insiders nor does he face allegations of ethics for having others press his vote. He is not a heavy partisan who helped set this current recession in movement in a previous occupancy in the House in Olympia that admits to heavy partisanship, but whines about being tired of it today.

We have a unique opportunity to elect a man to send to Washington D.C. who will actually represent us and not the party machine. The candidate who will stand his ground and draw others from across the aisle to his view.

Let’s begin actually bringing America back together.

Let’s elect David Castillo, Washington State Third Congressional District.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Washington State Democrats Continue To Give Voters The Finger

Just as with other states, Washington State is beset with budget woes due to over spending and unfriendly attitudes to business. Here in Washington State we see a proposed budget deficit of nearly $3 Billion and fears of climbing higher.

Oregon recently passed their measures 66 & 67, drastically raising taxes on businesses and those they consider wealthy, which also create and supply the bulk of jobs for working sector voters in the state.

Washington State was handed a gift an a golden opportunity to draw businesses to our state and put people back to work in the private sector, which undoubtedly would bring many tax dollars back into the state treasury.

Unbelievably, our Democrat led State Legislature chose instead to ignore the free gift handed us, focusing their attention on how to further raise taxes and alienate voters.

The alienation comes from the Democrats suspension of citizen Initiative 960, voted in back in 2007 that requires a two-thirds approval from state legislators to raise taxes and public disclosure of such tax increases prior to their being passed along with who voted for such increases.

State Senator Don Benton (R 18th) sent out a release the evening of February 16 saying he, “witnessed an all-out assault on the initiative and referendum process Monday night” and called the action by the majority in the last few days “appalling.”

In the Democrat majority’s removal of “transparency” in I-960, Benton says, “What we are witnessing are actions to destroy democracy and our constitution. When you stomp on the will of the people by acting in the dark of the night to restrict their rights just because you don't agree with their decisions, what else can it be called but an all-out assault on the people’s right to determine how they are governed,” adding, “The majority is way out of line. They were elected to represent the people, not rule over them. It’s outrageous!”

Just today, I have received email from Representative Ed Orcutt (R 18th) wherein he said; “I don't believe the Legislature has set forth clear and concise priorities in dealing with our $2.8 billion budget hole. My fear is that without leadership, without establishing and defining our priorities, state leaders are setting us on a perpetual course of state budget deficits. We already know that a large deficit looms before us for the 2011-13 biennium. Because legislators are making it easier to raise taxes - and setting the precedent to do so - tax increases will become the norm for future budget holes rather than the rarity.”

Examples of pending increases to what taxpayers are faced with are,
· A doubling of the "death tax"
· A 1 percent increase in the state sales tax, making Washington's the highest in the nation
· A tax on candy and bottled water
· A state income tax
· A Hazardous Substances Tax (HST) increase which amounts to a 6-cent per gallon gas tax increase

Indicating the examples are just the ones that have garnered attention, Rep. Orcutt continued, “The full list of tax and fee increase proposals is astounding: A total of 77 bills proposing tax and fee increases have been introduced thus far, for a total of over $3 billion in new state and local taxes or fees for Fiscal Year 2011. These same proposals would amount to over $11 billion in the next biennium! (2011-13)”

This at a time we in Washington State are seeing a statewide unemployment rate hovering around 10% with 14.3% here in Clark County. That is taxes you and I will be paying through increased prices from businesses. That is, from those who will wish to remain in our state with less jobs being offered.

Our current governor Gregoire’s words on taxes all over the place. She campaigns on no tax increases, but what does she do? Gregoire: Raise taxes on bottled water, soda pop, cigarettes & more.

Those are what you and I most likely use, not the so called wealthy. Those aren’t business taxes, they are to be added to what products you and I might be using.

As always can be expected when Democrats are raping taxpayers, we are told the necessity is to “avoid large cuts to education and social services.”

No one ever asks them why do we keep pouring money into those programs and it is never enough. No one asks them why is it those are the only areas they can ever discuss cutting when faced with deficits.

No, instead we hear of Democrats such as State Senator Craig Pridemore actually bragging about sticking it to us, then saying he “stands for the little guy.”

He says he’s “never sold out,” but in a 2005 tax increase Pridemore voted for, he said, “I think the Senate has balanced the budget on the backs of the poor and powerless.” Yet, HE VOTED FOR IT!

Democrats’ favorite canard is that they will only “tax the wealthy,” drawing on class envy that starry-eyed Liberal followers of theirs love to front. That is how the jobs killing Measures 66 & 67 were passed in Oregon and how they promote tax increases to the public.

But, when faced with increasing their own taxes, as the 2003 Puget Sound Latte Tax, slated to add a “dime a cup to pay for child care and preschool programs,” they handily voted it down.

Those who labeled it “the wrong solution, but the right problem to tackle” have no problem though, voting or supporting raising your taxes if you smoke, drive a car to work or enjoy a beer. Just leave their designer coffees alone, even though “it’s for the children and schools.”

You, the taxpayer, did not cause this deficit problem in our state, politicians did. Spending has been rampant for years now in spite of warnings from Republicans like Senators Don Benton & Joe Zarelli and Representatives like Ed Orcutt. Democrats continually ignored those warnings and as the old saying goes, ‘spent like drunken sailors.’ The difference being, sailors stop spending when out of money.

We have a chance to save the country and our state come November. It’s time to turn the tide an ignore Democrats’ “New Direction” and their “Hope & Change” they ran on. Both have been shown to be abject failures harming the very citizens they claim to support so much.

It’s time to turn the Democrats out to pasture.

It’s time to replace them with renewed Republican candidate who will practice fiscal responsibility, even if we have to keep fires lit under each and every one of them.

Democrats’ have shown they are not willing to listen to us. Their hollow words and promises repeatedly their concern is special interests in unions and government workers.

Republicans failed and in 2006, were spanked pretty hard. Democrats swept in and worsened the country and economy and now, expect us to pony up what we don’t have.

It’s time to spank the Democrats over their heavy-handed partisan tactics and raping you and I of our hard earned taxes.

Stop falling for the glib words and centrist promises made by Democrat candidates. They have shown they have no intention of carrying them out.

This November, show the Democrats what you think of their ignoring our voices. We need to return their extended fingers right at them.


Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Castillo: How Has the Stimulus Bill Worked Out for You?

David Castillo, Republican candidate for Washington States 3rd Congressional District asks;

How Has the Stimulus Bill Worked Out for You?

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

One year ago, the American people were told by this Administration and Democrats in Congress, that we must pass an unprecedented, government spending bill or face economic ruin. What we got was a stagnant economy and out-of-control debt being placed on the backs of our children and grandchildren.

One year ago, the American people were promised by this Administration and Democrats in Congress, that if their plan were implemented we would not see unemployment rise over 8%. What we got nationally was a rate of nearly 10%. While here in southwest Washington – the 3rd Congressional District – unemployment is well into double digits. The district’s largest county (Clark) is over 14%.

This is not an indication that families and businesses are better off today.

Increased government spending is not a solution to job creation. In fact, it is an obstacle. It is time we learn the lessons of the past. Job creators are the risk-takers, the entrepreneurs, and the small business owners who ask for nothing from the government other than they stay out of the way and allow the free market to provide its opportunity for prosperity to all.

This administration came into office with the promise to fundamentally change America. If that means replacing our capitalist economy with some form of government run socialism, then count me out. I will stand with the vast majority of Americans who still believe in a system that places economic and political power in the hands of the people.

Castillo is right, we have not been served well by the current one party system that throws money out like it is nothing. We cannot borrow our way out of the deep debt we are in nor can we continue to punish jobs creators like Obama and the Democrat cabal has been doing this past year.

We were told unemployment would not go above 8% if we accepted their "fix" of a $787 Billion stimulus and we end up with some 10% unemployment nationwide, 14.3% locally.

Obama can claim how well it worked, he can send out fabricated graphs to make it look like it is working, but the proof is in the numbers.

Economists are warning us.

Homelessness continues to rise.

Our tax dollars continue to be wasted.

November is our chance to turn America back to sound footing and reclaim the greatness being squandered.

David Castillo is the candidate ready to tackle the problems and stand with the citizens of Washington's 3rd Congressional District.

Monday, February 15, 2010

One Out Of Five Isn’t Bad?

Showing how out of touch the Obama administration is over terrorism, we need look no further than Obama counter-terror chief John Brennan’s comment about Guantánamo detainees being released and returning to a life of terror against innocent people.

In defending administration estimates of detainees returning to terror, Brennan said,

“People sometimes use that figure, 20 percent, say ‘Oh my goodness, one out of five detainees returned to some type of extremist activity.’ You know, the American penal system, the recidivism rate is up to something about 50 percent or so, as far as return to crime. Twenty percent isn’t that bad.”

Apparently, Mr. Brennan has a problem in differentiating between petty criminals and terrorists.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R SC) labels Brennan’s casualness as “mindboggling and unnerving,” adding,
“I don’t see how most Americans can feel safe when the head of counterterrorism tries to tell us you can get all the information you need within 50 minutes of an interview of a guy right off the airplane who tried to blow it up, and tries to tell us that the process did finally work, and say that a 20 percent recidivism rate’s OK in the war on terror,” in a Fox News Sunday interview.

Representative Peter King (R NY) went further calling for Brennan “to resign immediately or be fired because of his incompetence and inability to do his job.”

King added, “Any homeland security adviser who can't tell the difference between a terrorist and a shoplifter doesn't belong in office.”

Brennan has previously come under fire for the administrations soft handling and excuses made of the Christmas underwear bomber, as well as subsequent admissions failure in “connecting the dots” to have prevented the attempted terrorist attack.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

Black Children Are An Endangered Species

It appears using the race card to send out a message isn't considered appropriate, when it is against the left. Such is the case with the above billboard found in Atlanta, Georgia.

The billboard, part of an anti-abortion campaign, targets Blacks as they "accounted for the majority of abortions in Georgia in 2006," even though they remain in the minority.

Rev. Johnny Hunter, national director of the Life Education and Resource Network says, "It's ingenious. This campaign is in your face, and nobody can ignore it."

Cheryl Sullenger, senior policy adviser for Operation Rescue said, . "Abortion in the black community is at epidemic proportions. They're not really aware of what's actually going on. If it shocks people ... it should be shocking."

Leola Reis, a spokeswoman for Planned Parenthood of Georgia says, "The language in the billboard is using messages of fear and shame to target women of color. If we want to reduce the number of abortions and unintended pregnancies, we need to work as a community to make sure we get quality affordable health care services to as many women and men as possible."

Spelman College professor Beverly Guy-Sheftall calls it "a gimmick," saying, "To use racist arguments to try to bait black people to get them to be anti-abortion is just disgusting."

Accusations of the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger’s involvement in what was known as The Negro Project elicited the comment, "Many black people don't know who Margaret Sanger is and could care less."

SOURCE: Associated Press through Fox News.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

TEA Party Express III - "Vote Them Out!"

If they don't listen, we must vote them out!

You may find more information at

Tuesday, February 09, 2010

Happy 100th Birthday To The Boy Scouts of America

From Rees Lloyd,

"To all the Boy Scouts of America who for a century have pledged to honor and serve "God and Country," and to all the adults who have dedicated untold millions of hours aiding those boys to become patriotic American men of honor, thank you for all your service to America, often in the face of fierce and malign adversity, and may you have a "Happy 100th Birthday (Feb. 8, 1910-2010)!"

May the patriotic service to America of your Boy Scouts of America continue for centuries to come, and may all who love America and the values of the Founding Fathers, which you transmit from generation to generation, honor Boy Scouts for that service, perpetually, in an attitude of gratitude, which you Boy Scouts so richly deserve."

I join Rees in wishing you all a Happy Birthday in your 100th year.

I was fortunate enough to have been in the Boy Scouts of America for the 50th Birthday in 1960.

What I learned during my time as a Scout has been immeasurable to me as I became an adult and served in the United States Army in Viet Nam.

Going off to a war isn't what the Boy Scouts are about, though. It is about decent citizenship, protecting the countryside and serving your fellow man. It's about doing the right thing, honesty and bettering our communities.

Enjoy your days as a Scout and hopefully, you will look back fondly as I do today and reflect on what great times you had and how membership in the Boy Scouts of America helped you to become a man.

When someone sneeringly asks you, "What are you, a Boy Scout?" Look them in the eye and reply proudly, "Yes I Am."

Proposition 8 Opponents Assault on Religion

Pro same-sex marriage proponents are challenging proposition 8, the controversial and much hated measure banning same-sex marriage in California in court. The case is currently paused while U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker reviews the documents and testimony given to date.

That proponents of same-sex marriage would challenge this vote was pretty much a given. Gay activists have resorted to intimidation, harassment and forms of violence in their quest to shove same-sex marriage down America’s throat. A court challenge comes as no surprise.

What does cause me to raise my eyebrows is reading how plaintiffs frame their argument. They seem to have centered their case on voters voting based upon their religious beliefs.

Let me say here that no one knows why an individual votes as they do, nor should they. That is the essence of the secret ballot, voting based upon our individual values and yes, beliefs. Why we select the cause or candidate we do is flat out no one’s business.

Let me explain a little.

The Baptist Press placed daily summaries of how the case was progressing. In nearly every summary, we read of how religion was responsible for voters approving Proposition 8 and banning same-sex marriage in California.

A Time article quotes longtime conservative litigator Mathew Staver saying, “What has struck me is that the plaintiffs have tried to put Christianity on trial rather than Prop 8.”

Even David Boies, plaintiffs attorney says, “the trial has shown that legal discrimination against gays, in particular rules banning their marriage, starts with simple prejudice, in the form of religion-inspired views about the morality of homosexuality itself.”

Day 8 of the trial saw Chinese Christian Hak-Shing William Tam on the stand that lead to the comment from general counsel of, Andy Pugno,

“For the first time (we believe) ever in a court of law, a proponent of a voter initiative was put on the stand to be interrogated under oath about his own political, moral and religious views. Not only was the Prop 8 supporter forced to reveal his political and religious views under penalty of perjury, but he was further forced to defend and substantiate his views so the court can decide whether his views are improper.”

He continued on to note,
“ Clearly the plaintiffs will go to any lengths, even if it means sacrificing the precious protections of the First Amendment, to achieve their goal of invalidating the vote of the people.”

Almost laughable was Day 12as it was seen “plaintiffs are attempting to argue that the gay community has no reliable political allies and is politically powerless in this country,” in spite of President Barack Obama’s call for ending the so called ‘Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy of the United States Armed Service that bans gays from serving openly in the Military.

If that isn’t a “political ally,” what is?

New Catholic Register quotes attorney Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defense Fund saying, “The votes of Christians and other people of faith are without question on trial in California” as it is mentioned that plaintiff’s attorneys presented a “section of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and other Catholic teachings on homosexuality as evidence, presumably implying that these teachings display unconstitutional ‘prejudice and hostility’ toward an allegedly powerless minority.”

Gay activists have long erroneously equated their plight to that of Black during the struggles for Civil Rights in the 1960’s. One of the right denied Blacks in America was the right to vote was the use of literacy tests designed in such a way to ensure Blacks would fail, thereby denying them their right to vote.

Should Gay Activists succeed now, will we see them return and be used to deny Christians their right to vote because it is assumed they vote in accordance with their deep held beliefs that gays disagree with?

Should such a precedent be set, where would it end, if ever?

Oddly enough, while Christians and their deeply held beliefs have been put on trial in San Francisco, left out of the arguments are Muslims who share a deep opposition to homosexuality based upon their religious beliefs.

It’s bad enough that we have to contend with people like Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, teaching that “Paul Was Condemning Homosexual Acts by Heterosexuals” in the book of Romans (1:22 – 27), but trying to throw out votes they don’t like because they assume people voted based upon religious beliefs is abominable.

To take this to its logical conclusion, should the election of Barack Obama be nullified because many feel he was elected solely based upon his skin color?

Of course not!

The First Amendment guarantees each and every American citizen the free practice of religion. Should it be limited if it is felt by the power elite that you might vote in accordance with your beliefs?

Completely missed is that many people oppose same-sex marriage for multiple non-religious reasons. Will the ferret out those reasons to deny a vote by those people now?

This is the dangerous slippery slope many have spoken of for so long. Our right to free beliefs and even a secret vote is being endangered just as it is currently in Washington State with the Supreme Court Case on state sanctioned harassment and intimidation of opponents to same-sex marriage here.

We can no longer afford to remain quiet and hope this all goes away or that judges will follow long established law. Our very liberties are under open assault and if we wish to keep them, we better begin speaking out and making sure we vote according to our beliefs, while we are still allowed to.

One thing I am absolutely certain of, regardless of how Judge Walker rules, this is headed to the United States Supreme Court. Will it be put to rest once and for all?

With the calls from opponents that Judge Walker recuse himself because of his poor handling of the case and being gay himself, you can expect loud calls of Justice’s Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas to recuse themselves, leaving a favorable court to hear the case and likely approving same-sex marriage from the bench, as was done with Roe v Wade.

Monday, February 08, 2010

A Note To Rep. Chris Van Hollen

Representative Van Hollen, while I am not one of your constituents, I do appreciate the frequent updates I receive from you pertaining to requests for donations to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

I received one such email from you just today, February 8, 2010 concerning the passing of Pennsylvania’s Representative John Murtha. My condolences to his family.

In your email you claimed, “America has lost a patriotic veteran” and “Congressman Murtha worked to ensure that our men and women in uniform and their families had the support and resources they deserve.”

Did you forget when Rep. Murtha accused a squad of United States Marines of “cold blooded murder” in the Haditha case?

The last I heard, 7 of the 8 accused have been acquitted with the 8th still waiting for trial. Is that what you classify as “ensuring that our men and women in uniform and their families have the support and resources they deserve?”

He refused to even apologize to them as it was seen how wrong he was.

Did you somehow forget, or just ignore, Rep. Murtha’s involvement in the ABSCAM Bribery Scandal?

Through his lengthy congressional career, Murtha found political controversy easy to come by.

I can understand you grieving the loss of a friend and fellow Democrat. Although I imagine he left his family well off, I do extend my condolences to them and feel they too have a right to grieve the loss of a loved one.

What bothers me most, Representative Van Hollen is that we saw some very brave men pass on this past year. We saw Ed Freeman, Robert Howard, Lewis Millet, James Swett, George Wahlen, Russell Dunham and I’m sure more that didn’t make the news, much less any extensions of condolence from either the leadership of the Democratic party or the Republican Party.

What is truly the saddest part is that I seriously doubt neither you nor the average American could name what is significant about any one of the men listed without looking them up.

Representative Van Hollen, go ahead and grieve for losing a friend. Send out an email to draw sympathy and maybe even donations for your party. Dance on his grave if you please to gain support for legislation you favor.

But please, extend some recognition for those who have served their country in ways neither you, nor Jack Murtha and very few Americans can even imagine, recipients of the Medal of Honor, our highest Military Award for bravery above and beyond the call of duty.

These men are the bravest of the brave. John Murtha was just an elected official.

The heroes listed were true American heroes deserving of much more than any elected official receives.

Their sacrifices are more deserving than any made by Jack Murtha and yet, you could not bring yourself to send out any notice declaring, “America has lost a patriotic Veteran” at any of their passing.

Thursday, February 04, 2010

Lech Walesa Is Warning Us. Are You Listening?

Lech Walesa, a name unknown to many younger people who were born in the 1980’s, but a name we heard often during the time.

Walesa, born during the Nazi occupation of his native Poland in 1943, grew to adulthood behind the Iron Curtain that separated a free Europe to the west and an enslaved Europe to the east.

The son of a peasant farmer, Lech Walesa, a simple shipyard worker in Gdansk, ignited the spark of freedom in Poland through his organizing of free labor unions, most notably Solidarnosc (Solidarity), in opposition to communist labor unions. With the support of such world leaders as America’s President Ronald Reagan and Britain’s Margaret Thatcher, Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev abandoned the Polish Communist government, leading to Lech Walesa being freely elected the President of free Poland in 1989.

Possibly out of a sense of appreciation for American support, or disillusionment with Barack Obama’s backing out of the Bush administration’s plan of a deterrent missile shield in Poland, Walesa recently traveled to America, Illinois specifically, to openly endorse and support the Republican candidate, Adam Andrzejewski for the Illinois Governor’s race. had the opportunity to sit and talk with President Walesa and have an 8-minute video presentation at the link provided.

Discussing Republican candidate Andrzejewski, Walesa warned America,

“The United States is only one superpower. Today they lead the world. Nobody has doubts about it, militarily. They also lead economically, but they’re getting weak.

“But they don’t lead morally and politically anymore. The world has no leadership. The United States was always the last resort and hope for all other nations. There was the hope, whenever something was going wrong, one could count on the United States. Today, we lost that hope.”

Asked if America were moving towards socialism, Walesa answered “yes,” adding,
“The issue with the banks; and the government wastes all the money; they build a bureaucracy; just for itself.”

Unlike thug SEIU president, Andy Stern who says, “If we can’t use the power of persuasion, we will use the persuasion of power,” and embraces the communist slogan of “workers of the world unite,” Lech Walesa warns America that the world needs New Solidarity, standing up to thugs like the SEIU and other oppressive unions blindly following the teachings of Saul Alinsky and their minions in the government.

His call led Poland to freedom. Are you listening? Will you keep America free?

Wednesday, February 03, 2010

"What exactly did Bush and Cheney do wrong?"

A curious headline sure to instill angst in many people. Yet, that is the question found on left-leaning and asked by noted award winning Liberal, Glenn Greenwald.

Glenn tells in a sub-headline, "Democratic and media elites attack Obama for departing from the prior administration's Terrorism approach."

He writes,

"Just look at these illustrative incidents. Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell went on Fred Thompson's radio show yesterday to demand that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed be put before a military commission -- at Guantanamo. Over the weekend, Time's Joe Klein lambasted the Obama DOJ, and embraced Bush's former CIA and NSA Chief Michael Hayden, by objecting to the criminal charges and Constitutional rights afforded the accused Christmas Day bomber, with Klein decreeing: "the bomber is an enemy combatant. He doesn't have Miranda rights." MSNBC personalities Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie chatted yesterday with their boss, MSNBC Washington Bureau Chief Mark Whitaker, all agreeing that the decision to grant civilian trials for "Terrorists" is "a pure, self-inflicted wound." When Najibullah Zazi was arrested for allegedly plotting a serious Terrorist attack, The New Republic's Michael Crowley said he was so frightened by this that he was open to torturing Zazi. Democratic Senators are threatening to join the GOP in cutting off funds for civilian trials. Democratic members of Congress joined with the GOP to prevent even modest reforms of the Patriot Act and other surveillance abuses. City officials compete with one another over who can be the most frightened and terrorized by Terrorists."

In fact, this article fits right in with another, Vulnerable Dems seek distance from Obama

Looks like that hopey changey thing isn't working out too well.

Obama Carries Forward Carter’s Failed Iran Policy

Nov. 4, 1979 is a date few Americans recall, but the ensuing 444 days we referred to as “the Iranian Hostage Crisis”, which began on that fateful November day is etched in the memories of many still as the lack of resolve in dealing with the oppressive theocratic regime of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini ushered in the beginnings of a radical Islamic Jihad that culminated in the horrific September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in America and the subsequent and ongoing “War On Terror” and the slaughter of untold numbers of innocent Muslims worldwide who do not wish to be subjected to the tyrannical leaders of this Jihad.

Allow me to back up a little as much of this began before the day in November 1979 when our Iranian Embassy was overran by radical student followers of Khomeini.

It began with the election of a weak president in the United States, Jimmy Carter on November 2, 1976 and his inauguration on January 20, 1977 as he set in motion several policies that we are still experiencing the repercussions of in acts of terror across the globe.

Joseph Puder outlines much of this at Pajamas Media where he wrote The Continued Failure of U.S. Iran Policy.

Puder tells us,

“The Unites States’ failure to deal effectively with Iran began during the administration of Jimmy Carter when the United States restrained the shah from using “excessive force” against the Khomeinist revolutionaries. This resulted in the overthrow of the monarchy and the establishment of the radical Islamic Republic of Iran.”

“Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor, advised the president not to deal harshly with Ayatollah Khomeini and his cohorts lest a split occur within the Islamic opposition to the Russian presence in Afghanistan. At the time, both Democrats and Republicans considered the Islamists as a weapon against Soviet Communism and its local clients.”

Brzezinski went even further in a purported 1998 interview in the French magazine ‘Le Nouvel Observateur’, addressing the drawing of the Soviet Military into Afghanistan,
“What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?”

President Carter sent Air Force General Robert Huyser to Iran to press the Shah to step down and to encourage the Iranian Military Generals to not resist Khomeini’s “revolution,” after pressuring the Shah to “liberalize” his country. Of this the Shah later said,
“My greatest mistake was in listening to the Americans on matters concerning the internal affairs of my kingdom.”

In hopes of avoiding bloodshed, the Shah stepped down and went in to exile with the American promise from the Carter administration that he would be welcomed, but instead received a message saying, “the government of the United States regrets that it cannot welcome the Shah to American territory.”

Hopes of avoiding bloodshed in Iran were shattered as Khomeini began purging the country of opposition by the executions of at least 1,200 Imperial Army officers who General Huyser had urged not to oppose the revolution, but to peacefully accept it.

Tehran’s Police Officers loyal to the Shah were tortured, beaten and also executed.

Carter triggered the November 4 occupation of the U.S. Embassy after first denying the Shah entry into America and ignoring repeated warnings from our Embassy in Tehran to not allow him into America, allowed him in for cancer treatment.

Known for his “record of advocating Human Rights,” and winning the Nobel Peace Prize, Carter allowed more blood to be spilled in Iran during Khomeini’s first month in power than during the Shah’s entire reign over the country.

A complex plan was hastily drawn up known as Operation Eagle Claw that not only failed to rescue the hostages, but cost 8 Americans their lives in the Iranian Desert.

At this point, America settled into a policy of trying to make deals with Iran, which are continually scoffed at, projecting America’s “weakness” across the region as for decades, radical Islamic Jihadists continually escalated Terrorist Attacks Against U.S. Targets.

Even a Proxy War with Iran by Iraq, given the go ahead by Carter in hopes of Saddam Hussein scoring a quick and decisive victory against the Khomeini regime slid into 8 years of war ending in stalemate, neither winning and both losing considerable, as well as helping Carter loose the Presidency to Ronald Reagan in the 1980 elections.

But the policy of “dealing with” Iran was set in motion as well as elsewhere in the Middle East and the globe, leading to the world’s most wanted fugitive, Osama bin Laden to claim, in a 1999 Esquire interview,
“After leaving Afghanistan, the Muslim fighters headed for Somalia and prepared for a long battle thinking that the Americans were like the Russians. The youth were surprised at the low morale of the American soldiers and realized, more than before, that the American soldier was a paper tiger and after a few blows…would run in defeat.”

Joseph Puder tells us in his Pajama’s Media article,
“The Iranian regime has proven to the world just how easy it is to defy the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) without suffering any consequences. Tehran knows that the UN Security Council will not approve tougher sanctions against it. China has invested billions of dollars in the Iranian oil and gas industries, and hence would veto such sanctions. Russia, which is also heavily invested in Iran, would also not approve tougher sanctions. Moreover, Moscow takes pleasure in humiliating the U.S.”

And, “The Obama administration created a difficult situation and it is ultimately limited to two choices: either bombing Iran or living with a nuclear Iran. It has allowed Tehran to ignore every deadline, while continuing a policy of appeasement.”

Puder tells of efforts by the Clinton and Bush 43 administrations in “dealing” with Iran, all to fall into deception from Iran.

In November 2009, Iranian-American Patriot Hossein Khorram made a speech at the King County Washington Republican Lincoln Day Dinner where he said,
“Tonight I have a message for you, a message from my heart on behalf of the people of Iran - and that message is that they desperately need the United States, the leader of the “Free World” to start acting as one.”

“Our President needs to stand up for the ideals we hold so dear, those of Freedom and Liberty. The people of Iran are entitled, as are all people, to those rights. They do not deserve the fate they currently suffer at the hands of their tormentors.”

In light of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s claim of a telling blow to global powers on Feb 11 and warnings of a terrorist attack by July, can we continue in hopes of appeasing Iran and making deals with them?

As Hossein Khoram says, “the leader of the ‘Free World’… [must] start acting as one” and stop relying on the failed policies of the Carter era.

Honoring The Four Chaplains

Today, February 3 is just another day to most people, holding little if any special significance. Hundreds of men who survived the torpedo sinking of the USAT Dorchester on February 3, 1943 would disagree at this day holding no special meaning.

My friend, Rees Lloyd explains why.

Honoring the Four Chaplains
By Rees Lloyd

February 3 is “Four Chaplains Day” in America by the unanimous resolution of the U.S. Congress in 1988.

Who are they, and why do we honor them? Do we Americans, generally, know, and transmit to our young, the story of the Four Chaplains and their heroism in World War II; their willing, knowing, and loving ultimate sacrifice of their lives in service to God and country so “that others may live;” the lesson of their lives?

On February 3, 1943, the Dorchester, a converted luxury cruise ship, was transporting Army troops to Geenland, escorted by three Coast Guard Cutters and accompanied by two slow moving freighters.

On board were some 900 troops, and four chaplains, of diverse religions and backgrounds, but of a common faith and commitment to serve God, country, and all the troops, regardless of their religious beliefs, or non-belief. The four Chaplains are:

Rev. George Fox (Methodist);
Father John Washington (Roman Catholic);
Jewish Rabbi Alexander Goode;
and Rev. Clark Poling (Dutch Reformed).

At approximately 12:55 a.m., in the dead of a freezing night, the Dorchester was hit by a torpedo fired by German U-boat 233 in an area so infested with German submarines it was known as “Torpedo Junction.”

The blast ripped a hole in the ship from below the waterline to the top deck.

The engine room was instantly flooded. Crewmen, who were not scalded to death by steam escaping from broken pipes and the ship's boiler, were drowned.

Hundreds of troops in the flooded lower compartments were drowned, or washed out to the frigid waters, where most would die.

In less than a minute, the Dorchester lost way, and listed on a 30-degree angle. Troops on deck searched for life jackets in panic, clung to rails and other handholds, saw overloaded life boats overturn in the turgid water, leaped overboard as a last desperate hope for life. Many with life jackets drowned when the life preservers became waterlogged.

Of the 900 troops and crew on board, two-thirds would ultimately die; most of those who survived, had lifelong infirmities and pain from their time in the icy waters.

Dorchester survivors told of the wild pandemonium on board when it was hit and began sinking. Many men had not slept in their clothes and life vests as ordered because of the heat in the crowded quarters below. There was panic, fear, terror; death was no abstraction but real, immediate, seemingly inescapable.

The four Chaplains acted together to try bring some order to the chaos, to calm the panic of the troops, to alleviate their fear and terror, to pray with and for them, to help save their lives.

The Chaplains passed out life jackets, helping those too panicked to put them on correctly, until the awful moment arrived when there were no more life jackets to be given out.

It was then that a most remarkable act of heroism, courage, faith, and love took place:

Each of the four Chaplains took off his life jacket, and, knowing that act made death certain, put his life jacket on a soldier who didn't have one, refusing to listen to any protest that they should not make such a sacrifice.

They continued to help the troops until the last moment.

Then, as the ship sank into the raging sea, the four Chaplains linked hands and arms, and could be seen and heard by the survivors praying together, even singing hymns, joined together in faith, love, and unity, as they sacrificed their lives so “that others might live.”

The few survivors testified to the selfless act of the four Chaplains:

“The ship started sinking and as I left the ship, I looked back and saw the chaplains with their hands clasped, praying for the boys. They never made any attempt to save themselves, but they did try to save the others. I think their names should be on the list of ‘The Greatest Heroes' of this war,” testified Grady L. Clark.

“I saw all four chaplains take off their life belts and give them to soldiers who had none. The last I saw of them they were still praying, talking, and preaching to the soldiers,” attested survivor Thomas W. Myers Jr.

“It is impressed clearly in my mind that these chaplains demonstrated unsurpassed courage and heroism when they willingly gave their life belts to four enlisted men, who, because of the utter confusion and disorder brought about by the torpedoing, had become hysterical. They helped save the lives of many of the troops,” testified John F. Garey.

These testimonies, taken from author Dan Kurzman's valuable book “No Greater Glory: The Four Immortal Chaplains and the Sinking of the Dorchester in World War II,” are but some of the sworn statements of grateful survivors upon which Congress awarded the Four Chaplains an unprecedented “Congressional Medal of Valor” in 1961.

Earlier, in 1944, they were awarded Purple Hearts and the Distinguished Service Cross. They did not receive the Medal of Honor because of restrictions limiting that medal to combatants. In 2004, delegates to The American Legion National Convention representing 2.7-million wartime veterans, voted to support making an exception and awarding the Medal of Honor to the Four Chaplains.

The lesson of their lives is as inspiring as is the lesson of their ultimate sacrifice. Information is available from a number of sources, principally by the Immortal Chaplains Foundation, and the affiliated Chapel of the Four Chaplains, which awards the Immortal Chaplains Prize for Humanity, and whose logo is: “That others may live.” (; The Immortal Chaplains Foundation, Hamline University, Box48, St. Paul, MN 55104)

At the dedication of the Chapel of the Four Chaplains in 1951, then-President Harry S. Truman said their sacrifice reflected the fact that “the unity of our country is a unity under God.”

“This interfaith shrine will stand through long generations to teach Americans that as men can die heroically as brothers so should they live together in mutual faith and good will,” President Truman said.

Ben Epstein, a Jewish survivor who often spoke to audiences about the Four Chaplains, was quoted by author Kurzman as describing the meaning of their sacrifice by putting a question to himself, and, thereby, to all other Americans:

“I ask myself, could I do it? Take my life preserver and give it to someone else?

Absolutely not. I don't think I could do it. I didn't do it. And I ask you in the audience how many of you could do it? And I don't want an answer. That's why I say their bravery; their heroism is beyond belief. That is one of the reasons why we must tell the world what these people did.”

On this and every Feb. 3, Four Chaplains Day, what the Four Chaplains did, and the lesson of their lives, should be told, including in every classroom in the country. But will it?

We can help that happen by demanding that our local schools inform our children of the lesson of the lives of the Four Chaplains. The American Legion has been conducting annual Four Chaplains remembrances for almost one-half a century, publishes material, and has produced a video, “The American Legion Remembers the Four Chaplains,” all of which are available through its Chaplains Program. (; The American Legion, Attn: Chaplains Program, PO Box 1055, Indianapolis, IN 46206 (317-630-1212).

[Rees Lloyd is an unashamed American patriot, and a career-long civil rights attorney who represented the late Cesar Chavez until his death in 1993 and whose work in anti-racism has resulted in multiple awards, including by the California Assembly and Senate, and numerous African American, Mexican American, Asian American, and Native American organizations, and profiled by such media as the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Daily Journal, "20/20,""Nightline," and other media.]

See also The True Story of the Four Chaplains and The Four Chaplains Memorial Foundation

Monday, February 01, 2010

“Illegal Immigration Journal” -- A Sign Of The (Changing) Times?

Contributed by REES LLOYD

Can you believe that in the Age of Obama (as it is being called by some, while others refer to “Obamanation” as more accurate), dominated culturally by Progressive political correctness (e.g., the Ft. Hood Massacre, the investigation report of which never alludes to the fact that the perpetrator is a native-born Muslim Jihadist) and dominated politically by ultra-liberal multicultural self-declared “Progressives” (including among others Obama, Himself; Lady MacBeth in the State Department and her husband, the former Priapic President; members of Congress including the eighty-one Democrats in the Congressional “Progressive Caucus;” and including, of course, the Portland, Oregon City Council and Mayor Sam Adams, the Men’s Room Smoocher), that in such a situation, there is actually an elected public official with the integrity and courage to establish a website entitled, “Illegal Immigration Journal?”

Well, amazingly enough, it’s true. The public official is Andrew P. Thomas, who is the Maricopa County Attorney in Arizona. His publication uses the name for illegal aliens which is enshrined in American law: “Illegal Immigration Journal,” not some euphemism, i.e., “Undocumented Workers Journal.”

Thomas writes: “As County Attorney, I take all crime very seriously, including crime associated with illegal immigration, which is at high levels in the Southwest. Together we can combat this problem. Education is a key component, which is why I have created this website." He then provides useful information on illegal immigration.

Whether you agree or disagree with Maricopa County Attorney Thomas’ views, he at least has the courage to address publicly what is a major American problem, i.e., non-Americans illegally entering America, the overwhelming majority from Mexico, the overwhelming majority having no interest whatsoever in abandoning their allegiance to their native land or its language and culture, and pledging their allegiance to the United States, exclusively and without reservation.

It takes courage for a public official to address forthrightly the problem of illegal entry into America by non-Americans, i.e., “aliens,” anywhere, let alone a state like Arizona, where so-called “Hispanics” or “Latinos” now make up almost one-third of the population (i.e., 30.2 per cent), which percentage is certain to rise due to the higher-birth rate (twice the rate of non-Hispanics) and the continuing flood of Mexicans into the U.S.

Politicians count votes. Progressives, i.e., ultra-liberal intolerant neo-fascists, are quick to attack as “racist” anyone who publicly opposes “illegal immigration,” or who doubts the wondrous benefits of “diversity” or “multiculturalism.” Fear of being attacked as a “racist” for any criticism of illegal entry into the country in violation of our laws has brought about a case of cowardly lock-jaw on the issue, particularly among but not limited to the political and other elitist classes, i.e., successful business leaders, academics, media, bureaucrats, etc., et al., and ordinary Americans fearing attack as “racists” if they speak views contrary to the Progressive politically correct command. So, it is a manifestation of integrity and courage for County Attorney Andrew P. Thomas to raise the issue publicly in his “Illegal Immigration Journal.”

Indeed, contrast Thomas’ forward-looking act to call illegal aliens by their proper legal name and publicly confront the issue of their impact on America, economically, politically, and culturally, with the backward-looking, stuck-in-political-correctness of the ultra-liberal, self-proclaimed “Progressives” dominating Portland, Oregon who, in the present economic recession continue to operate an Illegal Immigrant Hiring Hall at taxpayer-expense; continue to pour approximately $1.5-million taxpayer dollars into the non-American “IRCO” (Immigrant and Refugee Community Organization); continue, despite overwhelming opposition by the Americans affected, to spend over $80,000 to change the name of 39th Street -- the former street of two-time Nobel Prize Winning scientist Linus Pauling -- to “Cesar Chavez Boulevard” in order to appease so-called “Latinos” who are exploiting Cesar Chavez’ name and work to honor themselves; and who voted for the tax increasing measures 66 and 77 in order to “tax the rich” and job-creating small businesses in order to provide more tax money for more of the same -- and thereby effectively disenfranchised more than a score of lesser-populated, lesser-urbanized counties which voted against those tax-increases.

Do the public sector unions and the politicians they control by their campaign contributions really believe they are only carrying out the “will of the people?” If so, let the taxes imposed by measures imposed by 66 and 67 be collected only in the counties in which the cities voted for them. Wouldn’t that reflect the real “will of the people?”

It must be recognized, that the almost $7-million ($6.8) in campaign funds for those tax increase measures, 66 and 67, were overwhelmingly contributed by public sector unions, acting in their interest, not the public interest. That is, it was unions representing government employees, i.e., wealth consumers living on taxpayer dollars who now have higher salaries, benefits, and pensions then those working in the wealth-producing private sector, which spent millions to effect a greater tax burden on those producing not consuming the wealth, i.e., the taxpayers who provide those higher salaries, benefits, and pensions enjoyed by the government employees. In short, former “public servants” are fast becoming the public’s masters. Moreover, Progressives are heralding public sector unions, which financed the tax-increasing measures 66 and 67 as the strongest component of current Progressivism. Ponder that for a while.

Thus, it takes courage, indeed, for Maricopa County Attorney Andrew P. Thomas to publish his “Illegal Immigration Journal,” whether you agree or disagree with the points he makes. Therefore, with due notice of Progressive political-correctness, diversity, multiculturalism, cultural relativism, and bilingualism, I must say, bilingually:

“Viva el abogado de Maricopa County,” Andrew P. Thomas!
“Viva la lucha contra pusillanimous politicians and elitist liberal ‘Progressives’ who are a cancer in the American body politic, including in particular Portland, and Oregon!”
“Viva los estatos unidos!”
“Patria o muerte. Venceremos!”
Or: “Press 1 for English.”

[Rees Lloyd is an unashamed American patriot, and a career-long civil rights attorney who represented the late Cesar Chavez until his death in 1993 and whose work in anti-racism has resulted in multiple awards, including by the California Assembly and Senate, and numerous African American, Mexican American, Asian American, and Native American organizations, and profiled by such media as the Los Angeles Times, Los Angeles Daily Journal, "20/20,""Nightline," and other media.]