UPDATE from Dan:  Geez, Nick, have you been reading my mind? I too have criticized the former Vice President, but, after reading excerpts of the speech, started to wonder today as I drove to the Reagan Library if maybe I had been wrong to do so.

As many of you know, I took pretty direct objection to the former Vice President’s tone, and even his choice to speak out at all since leaving office.

That notwithstanding, I just finished reading his speech today in front of the American Enterprise Institute that the press in their tireless effort to bring about understanding and respect for the truth simply categorizes as a salvo between him and the current president. Of course it’s all gamesmanship to them.

I am immeasurably impressed with not only the measured tone, but also the gentlemanly choice of words and respect shown to the current president. (No, I’m not going to say “as opposed to how the current president treats him.” I think, frankly, Obama, while acting childish and coming up with all reasons possible to deflect responsibility for his own decisions, has at least been cordial with the men who came before him.) His criticisms, nevertheless, are as biting as they are completely spot-on.

Click the above link for the whole speech (recommended) or see the best parts after the jump:

(more…)

Perhaps, because most of the social conservatives I’ve met lean libertarian, I am more sympathetic to them than are many gay people, nearly all of whom only read about them in left-leaning media and left-wing blogs.  From my first encounters with politically active Christians in the 1980s, I’ve been stuck at how similar their attitudes on some issues are to my own.

They didn’t want government to mandate how others should live, merely wanted it to leave them alone so they could practice their faith and educate their children as they saw fit.  They cited numerous court decisions which, they believed, made it more difficult for them to practice their faith and government policies which, they contended, made it difficult for them to profess that faith in public settings.

To wit, a 2004 California Supreme Court decision that “a Catholic group must provide coverage for birth control in its health insurance plan, regardless of the fact that contraception is contrary to teachings of the Catholic Church.“  This ruling forced the group to pay for a service which the Catholic Church forbids.

That is one reason I support New Hampshire Governor John Lynch’s veto of a bill which would recognize same-sex marriages in the Granite State; he asked the legislature tweak the bill, including “language that would protect churches and other religious institutions from prosecution if, for example, they refuse to perform same-sex marriages.“  Given the record of courts in limiting religious freedom, social conservatives have legitimate concerns that should states recognize same-sex marriage, state courts may require religious organizations to act in violation of their faiths’ creeds as did the California Supreme Court five years ago.

(more…)

One of the most simple observations of the past election cycle was that Barack Obama wasn’t really running against John McCain, but rather against George W Bush, the least popular exiting president since, well, ever.  Some analysts even went so far as to joke that John McCain’s first name had been changed to Bush (as in “Bush/McCain” as the title for anything they wanted to throw at the Arizona Senator).

And naturally he should have.  He campaigned on amorphous and ehterial ideas like “hope” and “change”, few plans whose actual discussion would have made him electable whatsoever, and a shady past of his own.  Had David Axelrod suggested any other strategy, he’d have been guilty of professional malpractice.

But why does he now, after having been elected and installed, continue to campaign against George W Bush?  I have the luxury at HQ not to have a TV, and am fighting the temptation at the Undisclosed Alternate HQ to turn this one on lest the chattering classes spoil the beauty of reading.  So instead, I logged on to the White House website; and read the speech myself (well, since the president simply read it himself, anyway…)

It’s astonishing how much he’s still in campaign mode. For 5,484 words, the president goes on about how bad the past 8 years have been, and how the “previous administration” is the reason we’re in such danger today. Were it not for Bush’s actions, so counter to everything sacred in our country today, why I wouldn’t have to be wasting my time on all this, he basically says. To be fair, there are a couple stanzas about some steps he’s taking and their rationale (mostly that, again, it’s all still Bush’s fault). Then comes this hilarious doozy:

Now, this is what I mean when I say that we need to focus on the future. I recognize that many still have a strong desire to focus on the past. When it comes to actions of the last eight years, passions are high. Some Americans are angry; others want to re-fight debates that have been settled, in some cases debates that they have lost. I know that these debates lead directly, in some cases, to a call for a fuller accounting, perhaps through an independent commission.

Clearly the press isn’t going to notice, let alone call Mr. Obama on this irony. But shouldn’t they?

- Nick (ColoradoPatriot) from an Undisclosed (so glad I never told Biden about it) Alternate HQ

If you want an example to buttress Mitt Romney’s point that Democrats are the “Party of government“, just follow the reaction of California politicians to the the landslide defeat of their budget-boasting proposals on the state’s ballot earlier this week.  In contrast to Governor Schwarzenegger who seemed chastened by the results*, a leading Golden State Democrat is blaming the voters.

House Speaker Karen Bass said that we’re just tired and misinformed:

. . . it was really clear that voters were giving us a very specific message– This is too complicated. We don’t want to vote on it. We are fatigued with the number of elections we’ve had especially special elections and we want you to go back to Sacramento and resolve this.

She’s partially right.  We do want our state legislators to resolve this; we want them to make tough choices and cut the budget.  We prefer cuts in services to higher taxes.  In short, we want them to do their job instead of passing the buck onto us.

It’s not just Democratic legislators who don’t like what the voters have said by exercising their franchise.  Hugh alerts us to this headline in the Los Angeles Times: California voters exercise their power — and that’s the problem.

Our power’s not the problem.  The real problem is the power of the public employee unions.  Officials in Sacramento are going to have to do more than cut the salaries of “the governor, attorney general, controller, all legislators and other top elected state officials” an by 18%. They’re going to have to offer an across-the-board pay cut for all state employees while reducing the size of the state bureaucracy to its pre-Gray Davis number.  But, that would mean facing a confrontation with those unions.

It seems our politicians and liberal pundits are blaming the voters rather than focusing their ire on the state employees whose salaries we pay.

* (more…)

We might all better appreciate the most stirring epic in the English language were it not for the tragic events of 1066 which led to the corruption of our language.  Beowulf celebrated the heroic deeds of one of the greatest men of all time, the eponymous Geatish hero, who did not need a weapon to slay the monster Grendel.  That brave warrior was reputed to have the strength of thirty men in his right hand.

Unlike some warriors, many with lesser accomplishments than he, Beowulf did not readily boast of his deeds.  He only related the story of how he slew nine sea monsters to answer Unferth’s challenge that he lost a swimming competition to his friend Breca.  Perhaps that challenge strengthened the hero’s resolve to defeat Grendel — which he did later that night.

Beowulf knew that he would be measured not by his words, but by his deeds.  No wonder the harbor guard reminded him as much in welcoming him to Denmark:  “Each sharp shield-warrior/shall understand the difference (between) words and deeds.”  It wouldn’t be enough for Beowulf to tout his accomplishments as monster-slayer, he would have to slay the actual monster ravaging Hrothgar’s hall.

Now Obama’s supporters are beginning to grouse that there’s a huge gap between the Democrat’s rhetoric and his deeds.  We see this in so many areas, but, notably in the Administration’s decision not to move forward on repealing the Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT) policy banning gays from serving openly in the nation’s armed forces.

Words will only get you so far.  If Obama truly wishes to be a great leader, he needs to emulate one whose very actions defined courage and very manner defined leadership.  The Beowulf-poet left it to someone other that his hero to say what that man knew in his heart; it is the doing which matters.

Years from now, people will only remember the president’s words if he ties them to actual accomplishments.

Last month in the National Review, Mark Hemingway debunked the notion peddled in the MSM, by liberal pundits and on left-wing blogs that the GOP, deprived of political power in our nation’s capital, is also bereft of new ideas.  He held that

The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder, who’s not known for being a partisan bomb thrower, appeared to be vying for the David Broder Award for Lazy Conventional Wisdom when he recently wrote, “My Republican friends keep asking me when I’ll take the GOP seriously again and why I’ve stopped writing about ticky-tak political gamesmanship and GOP consultant tricks. When they’re a serious party with serious ideas, then we can talk.”

Perhaps that notion stemmed from the 2008 campaign when Republican presidential nominee John McCain failed to adequately promote his own policy proposals, particularly his sensible proposal for health care reform.

So, let’s hope that when congressional Republicans put forward similarly sensible proposals, they do a better job than did our party’s presidential candidate in promoting them.  Today, GOProud is helping them do just that.  Yesterday, Republicans Senators Richard Burr (NC) and Tom Coburn, M.D. (OK) Representatives Paul Ryan (R-WI) and Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) introduced the Patients Choice Act, a comprehensive health care reform bill, in the Senate and House respectively.

Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud, was quick to praise the proposal, pointing out “This free-market based healthcare reform bill would expand access to domestic partner benefits and empower individuals – including gay and lesbian Americans – to take control over their own healthcare.“  (Emphasis added.)  I doubt, however, that other gay groups will hail how the free-market aspects of the Republican reform bill benefit gay people.  They seem to discount the private sector’s record in responding to our concerns.  Private companies have been quicker to offer domestic partnership benefits to same-sex partners than have government entities.

Simply put, private-sector approaches give us more choices:

The bicameral Patients Choice Act would make quality, affordable healthcare available to all Americans without creating government run healthcare. “Our friends on the left advocate for a larger role for the federal government in our healthcare system; the truth is that expanding the federal government’s involvement in healthcare will expand discrimination against gays and lesbians,” continued LaSalvia. “Federal laws currently prohibit the extension of domestic partner healthcare benefits and refuse to recognize same-sex relationships.”

We all recognize the need for comprehensive reform, but Democratic plans, which rely heavily on increased federal involvement, will only serve to exacerbate health care problems.  Democrats need to learn from the experience of government-run health care around the world where increased state involvement has led to lower quality, fewer services and longer waits.

Kudos to GOProud for pointing out the merits of the GOP’s market-based approach.  Let’s hope other gay groups don’t let their fealty to the Democratic Party and statist ideas prevent them from realizing how this approach, by offering more choices, is particularly beneficial to gay and lesbian Americans.

It’s just the way they are.  It’s in their very nature.  I mean, by definition, they can’t even defend their own positions, so says Robert Frost, the great American poet who spoke at John F. Kennedy’s inauguration:  “A liberal is someone who can’t take his own side in an argument.”

In the wake of the failure of the five finance measures on California’s ballot yesterday, George Will forecasts further decline for the Golden State:

Now California’s mostly Democratic political class will petition Washington for a bailout to nourish the public sector that is suffocating the state’s dwindling — and departing — private sector. The Obama administration, which rewarded the United Auto Workers by giving it considerable control over two companies it helped reduce to commercial rubble, will serve the interests of California’s unionized public employees and others largely responsible for reducing the state to mendicancy.

Looks like the columnist has found his way back to Olympus.

Our Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger doesn’t seem to be able to translate the personal popularity he has long enjoyed in the Golden State into success for the initiatives he has put on the California ballot.  This goes for conservative as well as liberal polices.  In November 2005, voters rejected, albeit not as decisively as they rejected the more liberal “reforms” yesterday,  four propositions he had placed on the state’s ballot for reforms favored by conservatives.

In the wake of the defeat of those conservative reforms, he tapped Susan Kennedy, a “former acolyte of radical activists Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda” as his Chief of Staff.  Now, in the wake of the defeat of liberal measures, will he move in the opposite direction, firing Ms. Kennedy and tapping someone with a background in conservative activism as his top aide?

Kennedy had been deputy chief of staff to Gray Davis, the Democratic governor Schwarzenegger ousted in the 2003 recall.  Thus, barely two years after his election on a reform agenda, the Republican Governor began to return to the policies voters rejected when they elected him.  And yesterday, we rejected policies nearly identical to those which helped spur Davis’s downfall (and Arnold’s rise).

As John Hinderaker puts it, as “governor of California,” Schwarzenegger “lacked the will or the conviction to buck the liberal tide.“  He didn’t buck the tide; he tried to ride it.  And unlike the surfers who flock to our coasts, he couldn’t keep his balance on that most demanding and fickle of waves.

His fall began in 2005 when he failed to enact conservative reforms which, among others things, would have cut the public employee unions’ power and held the line of state spending.  Instead of seeing the defeat as an obstacle to be overcome and thus strenghtening his resolve to push responsible reform, he caved to those who had defeated him.  Hardly the mark of a principled man.  And the sign of someone lacking the determination of the action heroes he played on the silver screen, often relentless in pursuing their goals.

The overwhelming defeat of the five tax-hiking proposals, including one which would extend  tax hikes for two years, shows that even citizens in “blue” California are willing to tolerate reduction in services in order to hold the line on state spending one of the core ideas of the GOP resonates with voters.  The referendum results show that budgetary restraint is a winning issue.

But, it wasn’t just the defeat of the budget measures which provide signs of hope for the GOP.  While perennial politician and ardent left-winger Paul Koretz clings to a 335-vote lead over David Vahedi for the District 5 seat in City Council, the fact that the margin is so close in a very, very liberal district.  To be sure, Vahedi is not a Republican, but he had built of coalition of neighborhood activists and other concerned citizens upset at the status quo in the City.  He ran at the outsider fighting a liberal City Hall.

The real sign of hope for the GOP though came in the race for City Attorney, when San Pedro lawyer Carmen “Nuch” Trutanich shellacked City Councilman Jack Weiss, the more liberal candidate who was backed not just by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, but also by the Democratic Party and labor unions.  Those unions ran harsh ads attacking Trutanich alleging he represented polluters.  But, thse ads didn’t seem to resonate.

Despite the assistance he received from the Mayor and the labor unions, Weiss lost by over ten points.  It wasn’t even close.

What these elections indicate is that certain ideas which have long defined the GOP resonate with voters, even in “blue” states like California, even in liberal cities like Los Angeles.  Yesterday’s results suggest that should the GOP returns to its principles and run against machine politics with reform agenda, they could see themselves returning to the majority, even if jurisdictions where they have long been written off.

Bwa-ha-ha.

CREW [Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington] learned today that the Obama administration is opposing our request that the Supreme Court reconsider the dismissal of the lawsuit, Wilson v. Libby, et al. In that case, the district court had dismissed the claims of Joe and Valerie Wilson against former Vice President Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Scooter Libby and Richard Armitage for their gross violations of the Wilsons’ constitutional rights.

Agreeing with the Bush administration, the Obama Justice Department argues the Wilsons have no legitimate grounds to sue. It is surprising that the first time the Obama administration has been required to take a public position on this matter, the administration is so closely aligning itself with the Bush administration’s views.

And yeah, I KNOW that Joe’s last name is technically “Wilson” — but you KNOW *he* wants it to be Plame (more attention and $$) and frankly she wears the pants in the family from what I can tell.

Man, this is toooooo rich.  Obama Voters=SUCKERS!   LOL.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Just about two weeks ago, at the same time we were switching to a new server, the hard drive on my primary computer crashed, forcing me to take this machine in.  Today and over $500 later, I have this Mac back, my hard drive restored, having lost only some old mail.

I can only blame myself for the loss and the cost.  This has happened before.  I should have backed up my files more often.

As I waited from the folks at the store to get back to me, letting me know whether they could recover the lost data, I did a more extensive review of my own finances than I normally do, seeing if I could come up with some more savings to make up for the cost of the repairs.  And I realized that had I been more prudent, I could have saved upwards of $500 over the past year by sacrificing only the convenience of having a home fax with a separate fax line.   (I canceled the line.)  The additional savings would come from always doing what I normally do–paying my bills on time.

I realized that, over the past year, I had lost about $120 in late payment fees to my various credit cards.  To make sure I have no further late payment fees, I’m making one minor adjustment in my habits–I’m paying off each bill as soon as it comes in.

At the same time as I realize what I could do to save money, the Democratic Congress has passed legislation “to limit the penalties on riskier borrowers.”  To make up for the lost income, credit card companies will be changing their policies, causing those who pay off their bills on time to subsidize those who don’t.  People with credit problems will thus be a little less responsible for their own folly, while those more careful with their money will help pay off their debts.

Guess, I was wrong to review my own finances to see how I could save a little money; I should instead haved asked Uncle Sam or a favor.  I mean, isn’t that the way things are in Barack Obama’s Washington?

Preview of the new ABC TV series “V” — a remake of the NBC alien series from the 1980s.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Hot off the wire:

GOProud Applauds Introduction of the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Bill
Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) lead co-sponsor in the Senate
and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) lead co-sponsor in the House.

(Washington, D.C.) – Today, the bipartisan Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations (DPBO) bill will be introduced in both the House and Senate. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) is the lead co-sponsor in the Senate and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) is the lead co-sponsor in the House.

“GOProud applauds the bipartisan, bicameral introduction of the DPBO bill,” said Jimmy LaSalvia, Executive Director of GOProud. “GOProud strongly supports this common sense legislation.”

Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) join Collins and Ros-Lehtinen as original co-sponsors.

“Passage of the DPBO bill would make retirement benefits, healthcare benefits and life insurance benefits available to domestic partners,” continued LaSalvia.

“As conservatives, we believe that the federal government should take its cues from the successful practices of private enterprise. With more than half of Fortune 500 companies offer domestic partner benefits, it is clear that the time has come for the federal government to do the same.”

“GOProud looks forward to building conservative support for the passage of this legislation,” said LaSalvia.

Major kudos to Senator Collins and Rep. Ros-Lehtinen — she is one of my favorite Members of the US House, I might add.

And I would also note that it seems to me (and I am certainly biased as the Treasurer) that GOProud is doing a lot more to advance gay conservative causes in the past few weeks than Log Cabin Republicans did for the past few years.

I’m just sayin’.

There is a LOT more to come.  Thanks to Jimmy & Chris, GOProud is on Capitol Hill talking with leading GOP lawmakers on a regular basis.  It is a great time.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UP-UP-UP-UPDATE:  As I head to bed at 12:30 PST (3:30 GayPatriot blog time), these are the returns with 87.8% of precincts reporting:

The “Yes” votes comes first, followed by “Yes” percentages, then the number of “No” votes, with their  percentages on the first five measures in bold.  

(Back to original post.)

With just over 17% 21% 22% 23% 31% 34% 44% 48% 58% of precincts reporting, measures 1A-E are going down to defeat, with “Yes” breaking 40% only on Measure 1-B.  

63.3% 63.5% 63.7% 64.0% 64.3% of Golden Staten Voters are rejecting 1-A. (UP-UP-UPDATE:  This percentage has remained pretty constant throughout the evening, it doesn’t look like there’s any new news to report.)  Voters are rejecting Propositions 1-B, 1-C, 1-D and 1-E with 60.5% 60.8%, 62.5% 62.9%, 63.3% 63.8% & 63.9% 64.4% respectively.

Measure 1-F to hold the line on elected officials salaries is passing handily.

This is a victory for those who prefer spending cuts to tax cuts and should send a lesson to legislators in Sacramento–as well as state capitols across the nation.  And even in Washington, D.C.

UPDATE:  From perusing the Secretary of State’s website, I only find one county where the measures are ahead . . . . it’s the home county of the Speaker of the House.  With 73.5% of precincts reporting, even voters in San Francisco are rejecting the measures.

UP-UPDATE:  All measures (save 1-B and 1-F) failing even in liberal Alameda County where Oakland is located.

In response to the vitriol directed against Carrie Prejean, she wonders:

Why didn’t [the] Human Rights Campaign step forward to defend Carrie from mistreatment? It would have been such a brilliant move — in one fell swoop, gay marriage advocates could have allayed growing fears. Are they really all about love and tolerance, or are they — as many Americans now experience them — a movement that increasingly dehumanizes those who disagree with it, calling them “bigots” because that’s a word that means “your views don’t count.”

She’s onto something.  Can you imagine Joe Solmonese might have impressed those outside the narrow circle in which he travels, if  he had said,

While we disagree strongly with Miss Prejean’s viewpoint.  We appreciate her civil expression.  Just as gay people shouldn’t be maligned for being open about our sexuality, so should supporters of traditional marriage not be maligned for being open about their viewpoints.  A healthy debate about gay marriage benefits us all.

But, somehow, I don’t think Joe will listen. I already offered some advice which neither he nor any of his confrères (or consoeurs, as the case may be) seem to have followed it.

Just wondering… if allegedly-gay Adam Lambert loses American Idol, how long will it be before Perez Hilton (and the gay minions) declare it is because Americans are homophobic and want to deny Adam his rights?

PS – I have no idea, and don’t care, if Lambert is gay. But P.Hil has been pushing that meme to the hilt.

On Election Day?  Just felt everything shaking.

I’m blogging from the Ft. Lauderdale airport and a report just came over Twitter from a gay media organization. I’m hoping one of my co-bloggers can find out more.

But the gist is that the Defense Department says there are no plans to end the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

GP readers: Feel free to link the articles in the comment section if you find out more…

So… “Hope and Change”?

Or more empty Obama promises to The Gays?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While the Governor whom I once so enthusiastically supported, having given generously to his reelection campaign in 2006 hobnobs in Washingon, D.C. with the president, I did a very un-LA thing and walked, yes, walked the three blocks to my polling place to vote against the ballot measures he strongly supports.

I saw that walk as representative of this day of electoral defiance.  I defied the powers that be in our state capital by voting, “No,” on measures 1A-E and defied LA custom by walking a distance greater than two blocks.  Some Angelenos even drive to their next door neighbor’s.

At about 2:40 this afternoon (5:40 GayPatriot blog time), I was the 85th voter in my precinct, indeed, I was the only voter at my polling place during the time I was there.  Low turnout in my precinct is a good sign, given how far left my neighbors lean.  Let’s just hope it’s a little higher in the “redder” regions of the state.