Californians elected this legislature

It’s tempting to blame it entirely on the California legislature, but that’s not fair.  California voters elected this legislature and this governor.  I’m just in the suffering minority, and one of these days, I’ll end up voting with my feet and taking my taxes with me.  (But it’s really hard to leave the Marin climate behind.)

Oh!  Did I forget to tell you what triggered this little sermon?  The California legislature is at work.  The highlights:  fewer guns, more unions.  Just what California needs.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Gringo

    It sounds as if the Golden State will not change until it is totally destroyed. There was apparently good reason for calling it La La Land, Lotus Land.

  • jj

    The list of reasons not to live there – despite the importunings of work partner, employers, spouse, kid, and a certain amount of family – is now sufficiently longer than my arm that it’s dropped off the ends of my fingertips, rolled across the floor, out the door, and is headed down the hall toward the stairs.
    But yeah – the weather’s nice.

  • Kirk Strong

    Somebody help me with this:
    “SB651, by Leno, which would eliminate the requirement that a couple live together to become domestic partners, allow confidential registration of a domestic partnership and let someone under the age of 18 enter into a domestic partnership with parental consent.”
    Does this mean what I think it means that you could pretty much name anybody you want regardless of where they live as a domestic partner and they would then get spousal benefits?  And the registration would be secret?
    Does this mean that an old guy, say in a managed care facility, could register a favored niece or nephew as a domestic partner, and they would receive benefits after his death as if they were his spouse?  Does this mean that an unscrupulous person could get an old person to name him or her as a domestic partner and no one would know until after the old person’s death?
    I can understand the purpose of the other legislation — though I strongly disagree with it — but I fail to see what purpose is served by this bill other than to greatly increase the number of registered domestic partners and the cost of providing benefits to them.

  • Charles Martel

    “The list of reasons not to live there – despite the importunings of work partner, employers, spouse, kid, and a certain amount of family – is now sufficiently longer than my arm that it’s dropped off the ends of my fingertips, rolled across the floor, out the door, and is headed down the hall toward the stairs.”

    Yet another keeper from the fathomess Bookworm Room cornucopia of keepers.

  • Charles Martel

    fathomess = fathomless.

  • Mike Devx

    “The list of reasons not to live there – despite the importunings of work partner, employers, spouse, kid, and a certain amount of family – is now sufficiently longer than my arm that it’s dropped off the ends of my fingertips, rolled across the floor, out the door, and is headed down the hall toward the stairs.”

    I agree with Charles M:  JJ, that was inspired and it’s a keeper!  What joyous fun to read!

  • bkivey

    Not a big fan of Californians in the Northwest: they ruined thier state, and now they want to come north and ruin ours. The problem is that the progressives are fleeing the formerly Golden State like rats from a sinking ship on which they gnawed through the hull. My sister tells similar tales of Yankees moving to North Carolina and deciding that what’s really needed are the same progressive ideas they’re fleeing.

    Still, if you and yours decide to move, you might consider the Northwest. Wth a variety of climates on offer, you might find one that suits.

  • Charles Martel

    I’m going to make a sacred vow now: As a Californian who is seriously considering leaving this beautiful, beautiful place, I hereby and solemnly declare, promise, pledge, avow, aver and state that I will not bring liberal delusions with me if I move to another soveriegn U.S. state.

    I would love to move to Utah. I like the Mormons. I think their theology is loopy, but they are a fine and decent people. I would not mind it at all if they didn’t include me in their social circles or inner lives. The place I’d like to move to in southern Utah has a large community of Mexican Catholics. They were my people when I was a kid and I would be perfectly happy hanging out with them again as an old man.

    No matter who took me in, I would rather die than suggest to them any of the “progressive” nostrums that have destroyed California.

  • jj

    The Mormons are nuts but mostly kindly, and it’s entirely possible that Utah is, just physically, right there on the top step in terms of sheer beauty.  It’s missing the ocean, but that’s about all it’s missing.  Very few cities are sited as Salt Lake is to the Wasatch.  If you’ve never seen it, the mountains are both big, and right there.  Down south: desert – arches, slot canyons; just an amazing place.  When we headed west from New York we damn near dropped anchor in Park City.  

  • Mike Devx

    > No matter who took me in, I would rather die than suggest to them any of the “progressive” nostrums that have destroyed California.

    Ah, yes.  If only every refugee that is fleeing hell on Earth took a good look in the mirror and asked themselves, in what way did I help create the hell that I’m fleeing?  How can I ensure that any poisons I am bringing with me, I do not just end up spewing them into the ground and into the water – into the community – of my new home?

    Why are they fleeing THAT PLACE… and why have they chosen THIS PLACE to flee to?  Then they should live in harmony with the values of THIS PLACE, rejecting all the values of THAT PLACE that led them to flee it in the first place.

    But they don’t, do they?

  • Danny Lemieux

    I am totally with you regarding Utah and the Mormons, Hammer! I had the privilege of working in a small, desert Mormon community and also had the pleasure of knowing and working with some bishops affiliated with Brigham Young U. You don’t have to agree with someone’s religious convictions (I accept that religion is way too complicated an issue for any of us to get it totally right) in order to conclude that they are, as a group, fine people with unsurpassed family values. There is much to admire there.

  • Oldflyer

    Oh, woe!  After many years of entreaty by our daughters, we have made the intellectual commitment to move to California.  Orange County, no less.
    I say intellectual commitment because our feet are dragging when it come to doing the physical things to make it happen.  There is that elephant in the room that keeps asking, “is being near the half-dozen people in the world who care the most for you, and for whom you care the most, worth leaving a place you love (Virginia) and moving to a place that appalls you?”
    We lived in California in the sixties, both in marvelous places like San Diego and Monterey, and in less desirable places, like Lemoore.  It is sad to see how this incredibly diverse landscape has been polluted by a perverse cultural and political climate. 
    As an aside, on a recent drive up I-5 from Orange County to the Bay, area we witnessed the effects that political and environmental insanity  inflicted on the incredible San Joaquin Valley.  The signs along the highway, e.g. “Congressional created disaster” tell a sad story.  The incredible irrigation system that made the valley a national bread basket were a testament to human ingenuity; the empty canals are a testament to human stupidity.

  • Mike Devx

    Best wishes, Oldflyer!   And I hope you agitate to no end the many many leftists you’ll encounter.  Agitate them worse than any oyster has ever been agitated by a grain of sand… and maybe we’ll see a wondrous pearl grow in the community you relocate to.

  • Ymarsakar

    Over the last year, I’ve been visited by around 3 Jehovah’s Witnesses groups and 1 group of 3 men in Latter Day Saints Church or aka Mormons.

     I must live in the vicinity of a lot of churches….

    Anyways, I’ve done my own personal assessment and generally speaking, I am more in harmony with the Mormons than the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Witnesses are more fundamentalist in terms of Bible interpretation and is similar to Quakers in their pacifism and shares many of the Amish taste for seclusion and independence. The Mormons, however, are more closely integrated with the US: one was even in the process of being signed up for the US Army.

    Book, btw I’ve seen Marin, the place where you live, on satellite spy cams. That place is like a country club for rich people. How much land does each house own? The drive to the urban school area is LONG. What is it, 40 miles? No wonder you people carpool.

    I’ve always believed that true liberty requires the complete freedom to move and associate with whomever one wishes. Thus people with families trapped in the hell of Leftist California, do not have as much freedom as the US Constitution was intended to provide: nor as much opportunity. Only when people can move where they wish, irregardless of artificial and human constraints, are they truly grasping the core of freedom. Ideally, they should have the power to move their families from California to, say, Virginia. Yet the Iron Curtain of the Left may prevent just such an action, for totalitarian governments know very well the benefits of an Iron Curtain for the regime’s stability.

    I don’t view the Mormons as nuts probably because by society’s standards, I am so far into the extreme, few can consider me normal. After all, I’m as comfortable talking to criminals, ex cons, and big bruisers as I am talking to missionaries from churches and other ideologies. Everyone there is someone I see as a learning opportunity. A way to test my inter-personal and communication skills, as well as my people observation and feedback abilities. The group of 3 Mormons who came by a few months ago asked me, “For what reasons did you invite us into your home”. I got the sense that this was new enough of an experience that they were mighty curious. I knew already, by comments here and what I’ve heard about people’s response to Witnesses, that I was perhaps a bit unusual in my passion for speaking and discussing religion with missionaries who just happen by where I live. So I had already given it some thought and consideration, which expressed itself in my answer: I said that unlike most people, I’m rather comfortable around people with different belief systems because I don’t feel threatened by them. It’s because I have a center of balance. Many people believe whatever they are told or wait for the masses to give them the go ahead to jump on the band wagon. I’m not like that. Thus a lot of people are afraid of Rush Lim, Witnesses and Mormons creep them out or are “annoying” (as one associate told me), because at one level or not they lack certainty in their own beliefs and are afraid that if they listen, they will be converted. And I say, nobody’s going to convert me or convince me of anything, just by talking to me. Those here probably know the details of why that is.

    A lot of people, and this is from personal observation, don’t feel comfortable or safe around strangers. The reason why I am different, I surmise, is because I am relatively confident in my ability to survive or destroy other human beings. Even unarmed, I have no worries that 3 men that were strangers to me, were a threat. Part of that was due to my personal assessment of their character and body language, and the other part was the knowledge that I could call upon H2H skills that would have a good chance to overwhelm the three. My training doctrine is that if one is worried about one opponent, one trains against 3 opponents. And if one is worried about 3 opponents, one trains against 9 opponents. And if one is afraid of 9 opponents, one should train against 20 opponents at once. Ruthless efficiency and overpowering firepower is a central tenet to me. Yet, at the same time, pacifists and other missionaries who talk to me, are never aware of this, because I don’t give out a violent or aggressive vibe. And so they are surprised, as the Mormon group was, to find that they are actually welcomed by a person who seems to be comfortable, when in their experience (perhaps), normal people are uncomfortable and dislike missionaries like Mormons. They wondered why I was different. Often times I wonder the same.

    The other things I noted and were surprised by, was that even though these individuals did far more Bible Studies than I had ever considered doing, they did not know the history of Judea during Jesus Christ’s lifetime. When I began to speak about the effect of the historical Jesus Christ in Judea at around 30 AD, one could not have asked for a more attentive audience. I mentioned the wars and rebellions which Jesus Christ tried to stave off, and successfully so, with his “Give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and give unto God what is God’s” line. I mentioned how after his death, the Jewish people tried to rebel 3 times, which made Emperor Hadrian (Roman Emperor) rename their province from Judea to Palaestine as well as exterminate several hundreds of Jewish villages in retribution for attacks on Roman legions quartered in Judea. Jesus Christ was not kidding when he told the Jews what he did. Because Christ knew what was really going to happen if people tried to take up arms against the Roman Empire. This was my response to their question of what I believed and why I believe in the God that I do, yet refuse to believe in the God of the Bible, the Book of Revelation or Revealed Truth concerning the Nature of God. I simply told them that my search for truth uncovered the fact that the Bible was based upon historical truths, such as Jesus Christ, and that because the authors of the bible were human, that their interpretations of events weren’t guaranteed to be the truth.

    Another thing we discussed was how to tell the difference between false prophets and true prophets. Their view is that the founder of the Mormons was a true prophet. I assess the truth of any religious claim not just by what the founder or prophet did in their lifetimes (Moses, Jesus, etc), but also by the work, good or evil, their descendants and disciples do afterwards. Not only must the founder be free of evil (Mohammed doesn’t qualify on that basis alone, and thus that means Islam as well), but their descendants, the Mormons, must continue that good work. Because a true prophet is also a true teacher, and if they cannot teach other people to be good, then it doesn’t matter if they themselves heard God or not.