It was 55 years ago this evening, at 10:04 pm, that a bolt of lightning hit the Hill Valley Courthouse. Thanks to the work of Dr. Emmett Brown, 1.21 gigawatts of electricity was harnessed from the lightning and directed into the time-traveling DeLorean allowing Marty McFly to return to 1985.

Cheers to this notable date in Hollywood movie magic history!!

It is, in large measure, because of George W. Bush that I started blogging.  While I had been so incensed by his decision to back the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) in February 2004 that I wrote in Rudy Giuliani in the California primary and had, in March of that year, considered voting Libertarian in the fall election, I came around while following John Kerry’s campaign.

That Democrat seemed more interested in playing to Democratic critics of W and posturing for the media than in addressing the real security threats to our nation.

And while Bush had an imperfect record on domestic issues and intervened in an issue — amending the federal constitution — from which that charter excludes the executive, he did demonstrate a clear recognition of the need to take an aggressive stance against the enemies of the United States.  By the summer of 2004, I was back to supporting his reelection.

It would seem that most gay Republicans would understand that, while disappointed with his stance on the FMA, the nation faced more pressing challenges.  And John Kerry was clearly not up to those challenges.  With so much at stake, Log Cabin could at least have been more diplomatic in the manner of its non-endorsement.  But, they did it in a manner clearly designed to hurt George W. Bush and, with recent revelations about their funding made manifest in recent months confirming suspicion we then had, in a manner intended to help John Kerry.  Not a very responsible thing for a Republican organization to do in time of war.

Thus, when I read Bruce’s post telling Log Cabin to stick it, I eagerly e-mailed him thanking him for speaking up — and later accepted his invitation to join this then-fledgling blog.

I say all this as prelude to a passage which particularly struck me in the former president’s memoir.  When he asked Dick Cheney to serve as his running mate, that great and good man told the then-governor of Texas that his daughter was gay.  ”I could tell,” Bush wrote

. . . what he meant by the way he said it.  Dick clearly loved his daughter.  I felt he was gauging my tolerance.  ”If you have a problem with this, I’m not your man,” he was essentially saying.

I smiled at him and said, “Dick, take your time.  Please talk to Lynne.  And I could not care less about Mary’s orientation.

While we all may remain disappointed about the former president’s stand on FMA, we continue to accumulate evidence that popular notions of his supposed bigotry in the gay community notwithstanding, George W. Bush does not hate gay people.

It would be nice if folks in the gay community acknowledged W’s reaction to his running mate’s openness about his daughter’s sexuality — and to that vice president’s sterling record on gay issues.

When former President George W. Bush’s memoir, Decision Points, arrived the other day, I started reading it almost right away.  And while the style may be kind of staccato, even sterile, the book is a good and easy read.  Yesterday, when I couldn’t focus on much at home, I took it with me when I set off to a local Starbucks and in an act surely subversive in Los Angeles read it out in the open.

I get the sense in watching this good man in his various television appearances promoting the book that he is a man at peace.  He doesn’t agonize over his legacy or feel the need to demonize his successor or his critics, the latter who are legion.  He has been attacked more viciously than have been some of his predecessors more worthy of reprimand and endured insults his critics wouldn’t level against enemies of our nation, yet he takes it all in stride.  Or at least appears to.  He just brushes it off, as if par for the course.

When, in his book, he does address such criticism, he puts it in historical context:

The shrill debate never affected my decisions.  I read a lot of history, and I was struck by how many presidents had endured harsh criticism.  The measure of their character, and often their success, was how they responded.

By this standard, he is a man of sterling character.  He acknowledges that some suggested he “should have pushed back harder against the caricatures.”  But, he believes would have debased the presidency “to stoop to the critics’ levels.”

Advice to all of us, particularly those in the political arena, who experience the slings and arrows of outrageous attacks.

From the Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire:

“We didn’t lose the election because of me,” Ms. Pelosi told National Public Radio in an interview that aired Friday morning. “Our members do not accept that.”

Instead, the California Democrat attributes the loss of at least 60 seats to high unemployment and “$100 million of outside, unidentified funding.”

Always looking for someone else to blame, are we, Nancy?  Well, it does seem par for the course for your party.  Does seem that you guys are always looking for excuses when the answer should be obvious to anyone to who can read election returns and exits polls.  To paraphrase an expression from one of your party’s political operatives:

It’s the big-government policies, stupid.

Why is it that Democrats are always trying to find excuses for their losses?   Why do they never consider that their policies may be to blame?

RELATED:  ”Yeah, when the right-thinking folks get it wrong,” Glenn Reynolds quips, “it’s never their fault.”

One step Governor-elect Brown could make to help tackles the state’s budget deficit would be to cut the wages of all public employees.  When I checked his web-site and found the Democrat was soliciting suggestions, among the three I offered was one encouraging him to do just that, cut all income over $42,500 earned by public employees by 15%.  (At the time, I thought the national median income was $42,500; it appears to be about $1,000 higher).

At the federal level, Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, according to the Washington Examiner, is proposing a different kind of salary cut.  He’s calling for

. . . a federal pay freeze a minimum first step toward what eventually should be a 10 percent cut across the board. If the GOP’s historic landslide victory in the 2010 election was about letting Washington know it’s time to rein in runaway government growth and put Main Street’s needs before those at either end of Pennsylvania Avenue, Chaffetz’s proposal is the least that can be done. It is also the right time to do it, when the public is genuinely fed up with the status quo. Given the nation’s economic woes, we would love to see the Washington establishment defend the idea that taxpayers should continue to subsidize government salaries inside the Beltway.

“Cuts in federal personnel,” Don Surber contends, seeing the Utah Republican and raising him . . .

. . . must be made. And they must be deep. And they must be painful.

The government is broke.

This is what bankrupt companies do.

Surber, via Instapundit.  With Americans who toil in the private sector seeing their salaries cut across the country, it’s about time government workers share their pain.  After all, it’s those of us who work in the private sector who are paying the salaries of those who work in the public sector.

Let’s hope our elected officials in Washington — and Sacramento — take this action to reduce the costs of government and to remind public employees that they are not immune to economic downturns.

Last night, while preparing dinner, I caught out of the corner of my eye, the scroll on the bottom of the screen on FoxNews, reporting that outgoing California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was calling a special session of the legislature to deal with a $6 billion dollar projected deficit.  I had read it was $19 billion.

Later in the evening, when checking the blogs, I read that “News came out today that the California budget deficit is actually closer to $25 billion, twice what we are told.“   A google search offered this explanation on Bloombergeme BusinessWeek:

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, citing a $25.4 billion budget gap over the next 19 months, declared a fiscal emergency and called lawmakers to a special session next month to begin dealing with the problem.

Schwarzenegger, a Republican whose term ends in January, late yesterday ordered the session to start Dec. 6, the day newly elected legislators are sworn in. He wants to take steps to erase an officially estimated $6.1 billion gap that has already emerged in the budget enacted last month.

In addition to the gap forecast for the fiscal year through June, the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office yesterday projected a $19 billion gap in the following 12 months.

Whatever the real budget gap, with the election of Democratic Governor as well as the retention of an unpopular Democratic legislature, the voters in California have spoken:  they don’t want Republicans to fix this problem.

Now, thanks to the passage of Prop. 25, they need not worry:  Democrats in Sacramento don’t need Republicans to pass a budget.  It’s their problem now.  But, somehow, I don’t think that’ll stop them from blaming Republicans.  Where there’s a will, there’s a way.  And California Democrats do always find a way to blame the opposing party.  Only this time, they’re going to have a tougher time convincing the citizens of the Golden State. (more…)

GOProud’s release on Pentagon’s Working Group on DADT:

According to The Washington Post, sources familiar with the findings of the Pentagon’s Working Group say the study will show that an overwhelming majority active duty and reserve troops do not believe lifting the ban on gays in the military would be harmful.  More than 70 percent of active-duty and reserve troops said the effect of repeal would be positive, mixed or nonexistent.  Additionally, the study will conclude there is only minimal and isolated risk to our current war efforts in the lifting the ban.  In response, Christopher R. Barron, Chairman of the Board of GOProud, the only national organization representing gay conservatives and their allies, issued the following statement:

“The findings of the Pentagon Working Group will confirm that now is the time to repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ These findings should be dispositive for anyone who honestly wants a policy that reflects what’s in the best interest of our military and our national security.  Those who continue to oppose repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will do so in the face of overwhelming and compelling evidence to the contrary from the Pentagon’s Working Group.

“We urge Republicans in the Senate to follow the recommendations of the Pentagon and join with the growing chorus of conservative foreign policy leaders like former Vice President Dick Cheney, potential 2012 Presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani, former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, Liz Cheney of Keep America Safe, and Fox News’ Charles Krauthammer in supporting repeal of this failed policy. (more…)