Northern California Politics In The Age Of Trump

Icky! Screen grab from YouTube.

Well, he’s done it again. At the annual gathering of right-wing lunatics known as CPAC a couple of Saturdays ago, President Donald Trump reached out and grabbed America by the … well, unfortunately, you know what I mean.

In what’s becoming his signature move, Trump lumbered on stage and groped the American flag standing to the right of the podium as Lee Greenwood’s “God Bless the U.S.A.” reached its climax. The crowd of raucous supporters ejaculated their approval.

The rest of us sitting at home cringed—or at least those of us with some knowledge of the flag code did. I mean, I voted for this dude who’s taken to dry-humping Old Glory in public, our porn star-poking president (allegedly).

After two years of Trump, and the mainstream media that follows his every tweet, I feel sick, dirty and abused, and I’m not alone. Shasta County is supposed to be Trump country, but I don’t see a lot of people wearing red MAGA hats in public these days.

That’s not to say local Republicans, like 88 percent of their party nationally, don’t continue to support the president and his policies. But more than a few have to be wondering, what the heck is wrong with this guy?

Attn: Brian Dahle, please stop sending me campaign fliers.

At any rate, the apparent Republican front-runners in the 1st State Senate District special primary election on March 26, 6th District Assemblyman Kevin Kiley, and our own 1st District Assemblyman Brian Dahle, aren’t directly channeling Trump in their race to replace the seat being vacated by Republican Ted Gaines. In many ways, it can be said Trump has been channeling them all along.

Like the First Congressional District held by Republican Rep. Doug LaMalfa, the 1st State Senate District, situated in the state’s mostly rural northeast quadrant, was Tea Party territory long before it was Trump Country. While liberal or simply less conservative voters in the suburbs of Sacramento and small cities like Grass Valley, Chico and Redding somewhat dilute this hardcore, ultra-conservative Republicanism, in order to win elections, Republican candidates must run hard-right.

Or at least that’s what they’ve been doing for 30 years, as long as I’ve lived in northern California. In primary elections, especially with the state’s recently added “top two” system, this often leads to comical results when Republicans try to out-Republican Republicans.

For example, I don’t know what the Kiley campaign said about Dahle’s stance on undocumented immigrants, but it was enough to provoke Dahle’s campaign to place the candidate’s support for Trump’s vanity border wall on the front page of its website:

“Brian Dahle is tough on illegal immigration. He backs the border wall, opposes amnesty and led the fight against sanctuary cities. Don’t believe Kevin Kiley’s dishonest smear campaign which makes false claims about Brian’s record. For the truth visit”

As far as I can tell, Kiley hasn’t gone full wall, and a quick trip to did indeed demonstrate that Dahle has voted “no” on four times as many pro-undocumented immigrant bills than his competitor, if only because he’s 20 years older and has been elected to three terms in the Assembly compared to newcomer Kiley’s one.

For the record, all of the bills passed the super majority Democratic-controlled Assembly and Senate anyway.

I continue to be confused by the animus of northern California Republicans toward undocumented immigrants. The First State Senate District is 80 percent white, 10 percent Latino and no one who lives here honestly believes too many illegal brown people is one of our most pressing issues.

Maybe they’re just doing it for the votes. That apparently is dark horse Republican candidate Theodore Dziuba’s plan.

“I am running for state Senate to stop illegal immigration,” the Placerville resident and software engineer states on his website. “Ending the sanctuary state is a moral duty.”

National Nurses United not thrilled California’s Democrats killed single-payer healthcare—for now. From Twitter.

Both Dahle and Kiley claim they’ll fight the liberals in Sacramento while simultaneously “working across the aisle” to ensure the district’s most pressing needs are met. Being the minority party, that means occasionally taking credit for Democratic achievements—or failures.

Dahle shamelessly takes credit for a law that directs up to $1 billion from the state cap-and-trade program to be spent on forest health and fire prevention programs. He conveniently leaves out that he voted against extending cap-and-trade in 2017, a vote that helped him gain leadership of the Republican Assembly after Chad Mayes, a moderate who supported the cap-and-trade extension, was forced out.

Neither candidate mentions anthropogenic climate change in their campaign materials. How could they? They’re all about rolling back regulations and taxes, two tools we drastically need to prepare for the warming climate.

Both candidates take credit for the failure of Healthy California in 2017, which was actually a victory for the special interests they’re always railing on about, this time the healthcare industry, which influenced California’s Democratic-controlled Legislature to shelve the bill because it was “too expensive.”

The bill, SB 562, would have begun the establishment of a single-payer healthcare system in California. No one actually knows exactly what a statewide single-payer system would cost, because the bill doesn’t contain a funding mechanism (clever Democrats!). Both Dahle and Kiley claim its shelving saved us $400 billion in taxes.

No doubt Rex Hime, the fourth Republican candidate in the race, would save us even more.

“I have dedicated my private sector career to fighting taxes, because I understand the damage that excessive taxation has on families and small businesses,” he states on his website.

Needless to say, all four Republicans in the race are as tough on crime as they are on taxes. Somehow, as the minority party, they’re going to undo 10 years of criminal justice reform and lock up all the opiate addicts, ignoring that a primary rationale for the reforms was that the state could no longer afford to send low-level offenders to prison.

It all gets a bit tiresome, this conservative blathering, election after election. When a candidate speaks an honest word, it stands out like a daisy in a minefield. Asked by the Record Searchlight what differentiates her from the other candidates, Democratic contender for 1st District State Senate seat Silke Plueger offered this breath of fresh air:

“For starters, I’m the only Democrat in the race. We have tried having Republican representatives for a long time and it hasn’t worked for the North State. It’s time for change.”

No kidding! The Truckee resident may not have a chance in hell in the conservative 1st District, but at least she speaks the truth more than twice a day. Go to her website and the first message you’ll see is this:

“Climate change is real.”

How much more truth do you need?

R.V. Scheide
R.V. Scheide has been a northern California journalist for more than 20 years. He appreciates your comments and story ideas. He can be emailed at
Comment Policy: We welcome your comments, with some caveats: Please keep your comments positive and civilized. If your comment is critical, please make it constructive. If your comment is rude, we will delete it. If you are constantly negative or a general pest, troll, or hater, we will ban you from the site forever. The definition of terms is left solely up to us. Comments are disabled on articles older than 90 days. Thank you. Carry on.

170 Responses

  1. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Concerning “The Wall” and illegal immigration how can politicians a thousand or more miles from the border claim they are protecting their districts when there is no threat, real or imagined, that affects them?
    Regarding Climate change, an article appeared in the news about the closing of the Navajo Coal Power station near Page, Arizona. While the article pointed out the environmental benefits it mainly was about, what all the climate change advocates ignore, was the devastation left behind in the community. Green jobs do not replace those jobs lost by closure of coal plants and that is a fact completely ignored by climate change advocates. Any talk about climate change needs to include how to help those communities that are left behind.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      I don’t know about Arizona, but California has an over-arching climate change plan that does take in consideration communities that have been left behind, particularly rural communities. The California Carbon Forest Plan, if it is ever fully implemented, will mean jobs, jobs, jobs in rural communities. Now we just need rural leaders who believe in science.

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        My experience with rural jobs promised after shutdown of high paying jobs in the timber industry showed false promises made. Those “Green” jobs never materialized in Trinity County. Family members had to move, I along with others went to the Bay Area, some just took what ever low paying job they could find. Even moving to the better economic, or less depressed, Shasta County didn’t help.
        If this California Carbon Plan offsets that, kudos to them, but it is still built on false promises.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      “…protecting their districts when there is no threat, real or imagined, that affects them?”
      Illegal immigration of course affects us in Northern California. Illegal immigration costs the state tens of billions of dollars annually, money that can be used for more critical issues. Like fixing our prison crisis, our housing crisis, our water storage, etc.

      • Avatar Tim says:

        Not to mention the dilution of what little remains of Northern California’s political influence with the state & federal government (while non-voting slaves counted as only 3/5 of a person for the purposes of government representation, non-voting illegals count as 1 person. And despite generally having conservative values, they tend to reside in Democratic districts so they have a multiplier effect on Democrats’ power).

        • Avatar Matthew Grigsby says:

          So is your argument that…counting slaves as 3/5 of a person was better than counting an illegal alien as a full person?

          And illegal immigrants are not counted when determining representation in government. Where did you come up with that? And they mostly reside in Democratic districts, multiplying Democrat power? If that were true, wouldn’t Arizona and Texas be predominantly Democrat as well?

          • Avatar Tim says:

            I think it is exploitative to count someone for representation but cast their ballot for them.

            And yes, illegals are counted for representation – why do you think there is so much uproar from Democrats over the census citizenship question?

            Q: Are undocumented residents (aliens) in the 50 states included in the apportionment population counts?
            A: Yes, all people (citizens and noncitizens) with a usual residence in the 50 states are to be included in the census and thus in the apportionment counts.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Arizona and especially Texas are shifting towards the Democratic party. And if you look at the blue parts of Texas: Houston, Dallas, Austin, El Paso, San Antonio, Laredo, etc you’ll see they overlay almost perfectly with the parts of Texas with the highest rates of illegals.

            There is a map showing percent of illegals in Texas in this article:

            And there is a map of the Red vs Blue localities in Texas here:

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Since Reagan left office in 1989, 30 years ago, Republicans have won the popular vote for POTUS just once. Conservatives often argue that the Constitution rightfully protects us from the tyranny of the majority. Yet they get apoplectic that the same document requires a census to determine congressional representation, but doesn’t differentiate between citizens and non-citizens. When they embrace the former but gripe about the latter my response is: “Talk to the hand.”

            Texas has about 28 million people. About 1.5 million (5%) are illegals. So, about 2 of their 37 congressional representatives are due to the number of illegals in Texas.

            Texas has about 40 million people. About 3 million (8%) are illegals. So, about 4 of our 55 congressional representatives are due to the number of illegals in California.

            I’m not saying that’s ideal, but it’s far less crappy than being stuck with a nepotistic cronyistic bumble-fuck porn presidency that a plurality of us didn’t vote for.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Kamala Harris just said she’d be open to allowing 60 million refugees into the US – about ~20% of the current population. You can bet most would reside in urban Democratic districts, further consolidating her power.

        • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

          Tim, as one who actually lives in Arizona, not a thousand miles away, I agree Arizona is turning more Democratic. But, the Democrat candidates that are winning, Senator Kyrsten Sinema is a prime example, have leaned more to the right and picked up independent voters. Republican voters are the majority in Arizona, with Independents second and Democratic voters dead last. The only group that is growing are Independents. And many of the Democrats won because their opponents had moved from California. The most hated person in Arizona is someone from California. That was brought up in every political ad.
          Illegals can not vote and in fact counting illegals in Arizona would be a guessing game at best as ICE has an eye on anyone with a slight tan.

      • Avatar Matthew Grigsby says:

        Please cite these sources that say illegal immigration is costing tens of billions of dollars annually. I don’t believe statements like that for one second because anyone can bandy about statistics. I might as well say the state is spending billions on magical unicorns that produce ice cream and hugs.

        I would willingly support that expenditure, by the way.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Most of the costs cover added expenditures for education, welfare, law enforcement, and medical care.

          • Avatar Matthew Grigsby says:

            Again…proof. Where is the proof? It’s a bold claim to say tens of billions are spent on illegals. Just because something feels true to you doesn’t make it true. This is exactly why we’re in this situation today. Trump fans the flames of feelings and no one ever stops to look at what’s true and what isn’t.

            So…what’s your proof of this cost of tens of billions?

          • Avatar Tim says:


            -$135 billion spent on illegal immigrants & their children.
            +$19 billion revenue from taxes from illegal immigrants
            -$116 billion spent on illegal immigrants & their children.

            With 12.5 million illegals and 4.2 million children of illegals, that works out to about $7,000 (net) spent on the average illegal immigrant/child.

            Most of that is spent on their children (medical & schooling), many of whom have birthright citizenship. And to be fair, the US runs a massive deficit so it spends a net ~$2,500 on everyone in the US.

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            Nice try Tim. The Washington Examiner is a right-wing fake newspaper, citing a right-wing, anti-immigration think-tank well known for its misinformation. Plus, like all of anti-illegal immigrant crowd, they don’t count the value of the labor illegal immigrants provide. This is not proof. This is slanted right-wing news.

      • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

        You anti-illegal immigration guys aren’t very adept economists. If you were, you’d do the math, count the contributions they make to the economy, subtract the public services they use, and discover their presence is a net gain, by far.

        • Avatar Tim says:

          Immigrants are by far a net positive, but their effect on the economy is not felt equally across society. It reminds me of the old joke: “Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose yours.”

          Regardless, a country has a right to enforce its borders. Tolerating/allowing/encouraging a permanent group of 2nd class citizens to come to the US is clearly not the right answer. Comprehensive immigration reform is (but it might as well be a 3rd rail).

          PS If Democrats hadn’t done such a terrible job reaching out to those *who want to work to support themselves* but were left behind by Obama’s urban-centric stimulus, we wouldn’t be in this mess. (e.g. it is not a good idea to tell West Virginians that you’d like to put coal companies out of business). Republicans have capitalized on that vacuum…

        • Avatar Anita Brady says:

          PLUS they pay taxes, sales/state income tax withholding/property via rent/FICA and Social Security deductions AND NEVER GET THAT MONEY BACK. No tax refunds or earned income credit. No Medicare at 65 and so Social Security.

  2. Adrienne Jacoby Adrienne Jacoby says:

    Oh R.V. . . . you had me in the first paragraph. My first chuckle of the morning. . . . . then I read on only to find that you pretty much write what I think. .

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      We are not alone! Audrey Denney is running again against LaMalfa in 2020, and it could be pivotal. Cross your fingers … and vote!

      • Avatar Tim says:

        LaMalfa could be caught pants down with a sheep and still beat Denney – there’s no way a gun grabber wins in this district.

        • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

          The government is coming for your guns! The government is coming for your guns!

          More fear-mongering over nothing.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          He could get caught doing worse than that, I’m afraid.

          In fact, I think he *has* done worse than that—he’s repeatedly screwed his own constituents by voting party line when it’s contrary to their best interests.

  3. Avatar Katie Connaughton says:

    A well summarized account of this bizarre Senate Race. Thanks R.V. Also, on Facebook this morning I found a video of Kris Vallatton interviewing Brian Dahle…Bethel and politics keep mingling.

  4. Avatar George Koen says:

    My over-arching MO will always govern my outlook(s). Mindset! This may be an obvious statement, but every action is governed by the mindset. Be it a stagnant or growth mindset.

    In the conservative field, that mindset is not growth oriented in the least. Their mindset, or thought origens are founded on what they believe their Trump influence d constituents are screaming for. ((Do we hear it locally? Not realIy). I suspect the lack of screaming is an acknowledgement of the deeply questionable and unsupportable ‘leadership’ of Trump and his ilk. ))

    Winning votes based on silly fears all but guarantees an unhealthy democracy/society. Unfortunately it is the local go to. Another assurance is that the conservative voting citizens largely do so emotionally and seldom explore what they are voting for. (This is not self-promotion, but I have yet to concede a discussion to conservative acquaintances.)

    Unfortunately for us in Shasta, they are the majority. And that is why we must never acquiesce.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      “Winning votes based on silly fears all but guarantees an unhealthy democracy/society.” Excellent summation of our predicament in 1st State Senate District, George. Bravo!

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      “…conservative voting citizens largely do so emotionally and seldom explore what they are voting for.” All I can say about that comment is look at the ridiculous ‘New Green Deal’ and how progressives jumped on that as a

      • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

        Haven’t read the Green New Deal, have you? You obviously don’t know what’s in it.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Of course I read it…it is nonsense that will bankrupt the country. That is why the Speaker of the House and most Democrat Representatives dismiss it. What in it do you like or think can be implemented?

  5. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    Wow…where do I start with this over the top rhetoric. How about where Mr Scheide characterizes Trump supporters as ‘lunatics’. Calling half the country ‘deplorable’ didn’t work for Clinton and doesn’t work here either. You really want to call the president hugging that flag as ‘dry-humping? Really?

    “…I continue to be confused by the animus of northern California Republicans toward undocumented immigrants.” Why are you confused? There are 2.5 million illegal immigrants in California costing the state tens a billions of dollars a year. 2,5 million illegals that take up our limited low income housing. We have a Congress, both Democrat and Republican that has ignored the immigration issue for decades now. I thank the president for putting this issue back into the limelight., but all the Democrats can do is obsess about the wall…and ignore any other aspect of the immigration problem.

    “…Neither candidate mentions anthropogenic climate change in their campaign materials.” Why do you suppose? Because in the list of issues that concern Americans, AGW is dead last. It is hard to get excited about global warming when for the past 5 years the east coast has been freezing in the winter, where in California we were beat over the head about AGW and the drought, and where we will never have a wet winter again in the state. Here is the reality. Temperature rise for the past 100 years has been 1.5 degrees. Is that catastrophic? No…it is a rather stable climate. As long as the wild predictions from Al Gore and his experts don’t come to fruition…nobody will care about the 1.5 degree climate change over a hundred years.

    How has a Democrat control legislature helped California? We have a prison crisis, a water storage crisis, an education crisis, a homeless crisis…30% of all homeless in the country live in California. We have a housing crisis and we have a mass migration leaving the state. This state is a complete and total mess thanks to Democrats running the state since 1971. But what do they do? Just find different and creative ways to raise taxes and fees.

    Insulting those that disagree with your politics and calling them names is not the way to win elections.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      First of all, Mr. Cook, I said CPAC is comprised of lunatics, which is demonstrably true. Furthermore, half the country does not support Trump, he lost the popular vote, his approval rating hovers around 40 percent. Study after study has shown California benefits from undocumented workers, so I don’t know where your crazy numbers come from. And if you really want to locate California’s downfall, look no further than the anti-tax, anti-government right-wingers who gutted the state’s tax base in the 1970s. All the numbers go down from there. Finally, this head-in-the-sand attitude about climate change is gonna get all our children killed.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        News flash…we don’t elect a president by popular vote. If President Trump ran on getting the popular vote like Clinton ridiculously did instead of focusing on electoral votes, he probably would have won that too.

        The GOP has not been in control of California since 1971…and here you are still blaming the GOP for the state’s downfall. Reagan hasn’t been governor since 1989…you can’t blame him anymore. Gutted the states tax base? We are the heaviest taxed state in the union…how has that worked for us?

        I do not have a head in the sand attitude about climate change, as a matter of fact it has been a hobby of mine. I actually get in the weeds with looking at actual data and the science. Let me ask you, what is the goal of climate change? Do you want to stop it? You want to go back to a particular year of climate? How do you suppose we are going to stop something that has been going on form 4.5 billion years? According to climate scientists, the increase in temperature has been 1,5 degrees in the past 100 years. Why the handwringing? For years I argued with those that blamed the Ca drought on AGW and how we will never have normal rainfall again, that we should pull out all almond orchards in the state because they use too much water…have you seen the Sac river lately? Oh, we can fill up all those new reservoir sites…oh, wait,..the incompetent state legislature ignored building new water storage. Never mind.

        As far as name calling…what’s the point? Why do it? It doesn’t advance an argument. It just makes you look petty.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        You say CPAC is compromised of lunatics…

        a mentally ill person (not in technical use).
        synonyms: maniac, madman, madwoman, psychopath, psychotic; More
        mentally ill (not in technical use).

        I’ll ask you…You honestly believe that those attending CPAC are mentally ill? You say it is demonstrably true. How about some empirical evidence for your claim.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:


          pe·?dan·?tic | \ pi-?dan-tik \

          1: of, relating to, or being a pedant
          a pedantic teacher

          2: narrowly, stodgily, and often ostentatiously learned
          a pedantic insistence that we follow the rules exactly

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Let me clarify something for you Mr Scheide. You characterize Republicans of having animus towards illegal immigrants. We do not. I, of course understand why these immigrants would want to come to America. If I were in their shoes, I would have the same goal. It is not animus, it is a realization that our immigration system is broken and the fix has been ignored for decades.

      This is what then Senator Obama said about illegal immigration back in 2006. “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants in this country.” Interesting that if he said that in 2019, he would be considered a racist.

      Let me ask you a simple question…do you believe we should have limits on how many immigrants we allow in the country per year, if so, what would that number be?

      • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

        Doug, don’t make the mistake of thinking I’m an Obama fan, there was a reason they called him the Deporter In Chief. Did you see the phrase “open borders” anywhere in the article? The truth is Republicans and Democrats, i.e. the establishment, both benefit from illegal immigration. Your candidates are playing your animus for votes.

    • Avatar George Koen says:

      Yet CA is the 5th largest economy internationally? Sure looks like success to me. Social responsibility produces healthy results.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        So what? Then why did the state have to raise the gas tax (again) because they can’t seem to keep our roads fixed. Why is the state releasing thousands of violent prisoners from state prisons back onto our streets? If we are the 5th largest economy, why can’t we build more prisons? Why do we have a housing crisis if we are the 5th largest economy? Why do a third of all homeless in the country live in our state? Is that ‘social responsibility? We have a housing crisis…so what does the brilliant state legislature do? They now force developers to make solar energy mandatory on all new structures, further driving up costs which will create even more shortages. Why can’t we build more water storage in anticipation of another drought? Why does the 5th largest economy have billions in unfunded liabilities? What healthy results are you looking at? The middle class are fleeing California at a record pace. My own daughter is set to graduate college soon with a well sought after degree…the week she graduates, she is moving to Washington state taking her much needed career with her ( and her state taxes). That is the reality of California.

        • Avatar CODY says:

          Good points. Amazing that we keep electing the same inept tools that got us into these predicaments. Many people I know who are retired have moved out of CA, taking their taxable retirement plan payments with them. Also, a lot of CalPERS recipients have moved (or will move) out of state. CA retirement $ not even being spent here…

          • Avatar Anita Brady says:

            Many? 2,3? CA gains population every year. Adding working families to the state is well worth a retired person/couple leaving. What difference does it make to the CalPERS or CalSTRS if their recipients leave the state? The loss of their taxable income/sales/property taxes is replaced by active, working folks.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            No, Anita…it is the middle class that are fleeing the state, being replaced by low income immigrants.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          Doug — The United States has the highest per-capita prison incarceration rate in the world, by far. California is 41st in per-pupil school spending and 1st in per-prisoner spending (thanks in large part to the powerful California Correctional Peace Officers Association). How is all of that spending on Biblical retribution working for us? Our penal system breeds career criminals. It’s a colossal failure. So your answer is to double down?

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Is your answer releasing them into our communities? You kind of make my point. California spends almost twice as much per prisoner than the national average. I said earlier that we have a prison crisis. A lot of it has to do with the powerful California Correctional Peace Officers Association as you said. That has more to do with our corrupt legislature than anything else. Thirteen states have reduced prison populations since 2010, but they’ve also cut their prison spending by $1.6 billion. But not in California..Noooo…despite a decline in both its prison population and the number of prison staff, California’s prison spending rose 25% since 2010, primarily because salary, pension and other employee and retiree benefits

            So who gets punished? It is you and me and other citizens. It is the county jails that have to house prisoners that are supposed to be in state prison. Over a third of our country jail beds are taken up by prisoners fulfilling state prison terms.

            So I go back to my original premise. That it is the corrupt and incompetent legislature that has been controlled by Democrats since 1971 that can’t or won’t fix our infrastructure. We know why our cost per prisoner is twice the national average, about the same as sending your child to Harvard. What are we going to do about it? When was the last time you heard a California politician discussing our prison crisis? How come the federal courts had to threaten Gov Brown and the legislature for contempt of court? Was the $100 billion choo choo train more important?

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Doug sez: “Is your answer releasing them into our communities? You kind of make my point.”

            One of your sledgehammer rhetorical tools is to put words in the mouths of others. I (and most others here) are not having it.

            And in NO WAY do I make your point.

            You want to double-down on a system that isn’t working.

            I want to tear the prisoner-prison guard industrial complex down to its foundations and start over. Nowhere do I suggest letting thousands of violent felons out of prison.

            But I’ll give you a start:

            1. Release nearly all of those in prison serving time for non-violent drug-related crimes—nearly 400,000 prisoners. That would save us over $30 billion per year in prisoner expenditures.

            2. Stop making it nearly impossible for parolees to get jobs when they’re released from prison by discouraging them from even applying for jobs. Do the opposite, as they do in most of Europe.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          Doug — Good luck to your daughter. According to the Bellingham Harold, Washington State ranks worst (50th) in the United States for poor people to live, owing to the total tax burden. Medium-income households didn’t fare much better. The Evergreen State ranks 48th in that category. It’s one of the best states for wealthy people, and 37th overall across all income levels. That’s based on a survey that aggregates all state and local taxes for 2019.

          California ranks 12th-worst overall across all income levels. Califorians don’t have it that bad, unless you’re one of the über-wealthy—we soak the rich. The problem with California isn’t high taxes—it’s affordability. When you adjust for affordability (based on cost of living index), we drop to 36th best. (Washington drops to 42nd.)

    • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

      Doug — I’d like to engage with conservatives more on ANC, but you’re showing all of the hallmarks of the average Fox News viewer/Trump supporter—especially the disregard for facts.

      You start by saying that Clinton called half the country “deplorables.” That’s not what she said. She said that half of Trump supporters are a “basket of “deplorables.” Given that she was referring to 50% of Trump’s followers, he won 46% of the vote, and only 58% of eligible Americans voted, that works out to 13% of Americans she called “deplorables.”

      Not half. Not even close.

      I could go through and deconstruct the rest of your comment, including the AGW nonsense, but why bother? You’ll just toss out another fist-full of false factoids, I’ll feel like I’m supposed to respond to those as well, and the cycle will continue.

      I’ll pass.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        False factoids? Ok…she only insulted maybe 10 million or so of Americans. THAT is one of the reasons she lost. AGW nonsense? What did I say that was nonsense? I have spent many years studying AGW…not by reading scary headlines, but by delving into facts and the science. I look at satellite data, I know how they have changed the methodology of figuring global temperatures. I study NOAA sea level data. Yes, I realize that I have no life, but it is a bit of a hobby of mine. I am not a scientist and some of the information can be daunting but I muddle through by reading many AGW forums, believers and skeptics alike. So if you can tell me what fist full of false facts I put out, I would love to respond.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          Doug — If we’re going to argue by appealing to authority: I’m not an amateur AGW sleuth looking to confirm my “the sky is falling” biases. I’m a Ph.D. ecologist who has done extensive research on the effects of climate change on forest health, desertification, and effects on U.S. Navy facilities and operations.

          Regarding the latter, you might be surprised by the hoards of brilliant scientists and engineers in the Navy—I certainly was when I started working with them. Those who work on the subject of climate change every day are 100% convinced that AGW is real and is going to effect Navy readiness unless it’s addressed head-on. That has become official Navy policy. Navy’s scientists have concluded the opposite of what you’ve concluded, and are pessimistic that we will be able to do anything at this point to prevent Antarctica and Greenland from melting in the next 50 years. The Navy is preparing for the worst.

          How grim is the outlook? It’s not uncommon among those who work in the field—especially those with kids and grandkids—to seek mental health counseling when they consider the ramifications. Myself included.

          A NAVFAC Rear Admiral and facilities engineer told me: “We’re beyond the point of stopping it. We have to shift our attention from pretending to try to stop AGW toward dealing with the inevitable, or civilization will probably collapse, or this world will be a Mad Max movie in less than 25 years.” A NAVFAC Captain and climatologist told me (over a couple too many beers), his eyes welling up: “I think about how it’s gonna be for my grandkids, if they survive, and I wanna eat my gun.”

          It’s great that you’re able to maintain your Pollyanna outlook, Doug, but it’s shared by very few of us in the profession. Those who share your view are widely viewed as opportunists being paid by the fossil fuels industry to spread disinformation.

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            It’s also worth noting that many AGW scientists believe the latest report released by the U.N., which paints a pretty grim picture for the rest of the century, is too conservative.

          • Avatar Ned Estill says:

            I’ve been wondering lately if the resources we’re spending trying to stop climate change wouldn’t be better spent hardening our civilization against its effects. Now I know, and wish that I didn’t…

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        …by the way. The only show I watch on Fox is Bret Baier, one of the best news shows on the air. I also watch a fair amount of MSNBC and other left leaning shows as a balance. So I do not believe I am ‘average’.

      • Avatar Tim says:


        pe·?dan·?tic | \ pi-?dan-tik \

        1: of, relating to, or being a pedant
        a pedantic teacher

        2: narrowly, stodgily, and often ostentatiously learned
        a pedantic insistence that we follow the rules exactly

        (Sorry Steve, I couldn’t resist)

        • Avatar Tim says:

          Not that Hillary was wrong, but neither was Romney in 2012 when he called 47% of the country “victims who believe the country has the responsibility to care for them.” You just don’t win elections by writing off 1/2 of 1/4 or 1/8 of the country…

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            True…that is one of the reasons Romney wasn’t elected. It was an ill advised statement as was Clinton’s statement. Both of them being out of touch with regular Americans. ..and yes, Hillary was wrong. It is wrong to call millions of Americans ‘deplorable’, as well as calling millions of Americans victims.

      • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

        Wasted away again in Hannityville.

  6. It’s a difficult tightrope to walk; to engage in civilized discussions about sensitive topics about which there may be some wild disagreement. It’s easy to call names and make personal attacks when we feel our political beliefs are under attack. It’s more difficult to keep things respectful even in the face of opposing views.

    ANC is one of the few places where we routinely demonstrate how to discuss diverse ideas and beliefs with civility and respect.

    Just a gentle reminder. Thank you. Carry on.

  7. Avatar Ann Webber says:

    I’m in complete agreement with you on this race! As you mentioned that the MAGA hats have not been as visible recently, I would like to add an observation. I work doing mostly political surveys and one question we generally ask is who the respondent voted for in 2016. Frequently they decline to state, and most often they reveal later in the survey that they are supporters of Trump. This reveals quite a bit about their disillusionment with him, or their shame. It’s difficult to take many of them seriously, as I can often hear FOX loudly playing in the background.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      If you see how often people wearing MAGA hats are attacked by the left…that could be a reason. Just consider Jussie Smollet and his portrayal of Trump supporters, making up criminal accusations and false stories. Or notice the lady that attacked a MAGA hat wearing gentleman at a restaurant last month. Or what CNN and the MSM did to those kids from Covington. It is the intolerance of the left, not the Trump supporters why these hats are not visible as much.

      Am I disillusioned with Trump? Well…I didn’t vote for him, but I support most of his policies. I liked Obama as a person but hated his policies…I don’t particularly like Trump, but I support him and his policies, mostly. What’s wrong with having Fox in the background? As compared to MSNBC, CNN or the other Trump hating stations? Is their left leaning bias ok with you? but Fox’s right leaning bias not? Case in point… During the recent North Korea summit that occured the same day of the Cohen hearing, MSNBC spent 132 minutes on Cohen and only two minutes on the North Korea summit . CNN spent even less time covering the summit, CNN spent 141 minutes on Cohen and less than two minutes on Trump’s meeting with Kim while Fox News dedicated 66 minutes to Cohen and 85 minutes to the summit. Which network had a more balanced coverage on that day? Would you agree that a summit between two leaders to try and forge peace in the Korean peninsula is more important than the coverage of trashing the president? I certainly do.

      • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

        Doug Cook,

        Trump had virtually no chance of winning more highly-educated states like California, no matter how he campaigned. His support is centered in the least educated parts of the country (the northern and southern bible belt regions), where he won the antiquated electoral college based on a relative handful of votes.

        In addition, countless people consider MAGA hats an in-your-face endorsement of the racist, xenophobic violence and harassment committed by Trump supporters all over the country, basically at his behest (although I doubt that even Trump could have foreseen the vast extent of that violence – including multiple murders – when he irresponsibly encouraged his followers to punch his detractors in the face and have them “carried out on a stretcher”). To me it seems perfectly understandable that people on the Left would object to something that symbolizes all of that violence and hate.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          There you go again calling the rest of the country uneducated and stupid. As I hjave said before, that is not how you are going to win the next election. You often bring up the subject of violence from the right…but I certainly haven’t seen it much. I do in fact see violence from the left. I see people like Jussie Smollet and others that have to make up violence from the right. He is the one being charged, not some made up Trump supporter. Or how about Mr Zachary Greenberg. Do you know who he is Patrecia? Of course you don’t. He is the suspect that beat up a man on the Berkeley campus. What horrible thing was this man that got beat do? He was signing up people for a conservative group. Is that worthy of being punched in the face? You keep bringing up the violence from the right…but all the recent attacks seem to come from the left. Why is that, Patrecia? ..and why do you want to ignore it. Do you believe this conservative recruiter deserved to be punched in the face?

          In Minnesota a few months ago, GOP state representative candidate Shane Mekeland suffered a concussion after getting sucker punched in the face at a restaurant because of his political views. Not too long ago Antifa leader Joseph “Jose” Alcoff, was arrested and charged with multiple felonies in Philadelphia in connection to the attack against two Marines in. I guess I missed your outrage.

          • Barbara Rice Barbara Rice says:

            Hi, Doug. I see you just joined A News Cafe a few days ago. Welcome.

            I don’t think we have met yet. I am the admin assistant here. One of my jobs is to step in whenever the conversation threatens to get rowdy because once that happens, people back away for fear of getting attacked for simply stating their opinion.

            Sometimes people feel they are only being direct and forthright and open and honest and direct, and they really don’t mean any harm and it’s not their fault if someone took it badly. Because it’s the internet and anything goes and free speech, etc etc.

            Well, that’s why we have that little statement about our policies up there, just below the article and above the comments. It reads, “We welcome your comments, with some caveats: Please keep your comments positive and civilized. If your comment is critical, please make it constructive. If your comment is rude, we will delete it. If you are constantly negative or a general pest, troll, or hater, we will ban you from the site forever. The definition of terms is left solely up to us. ”

            In other words: be nice. Words typed out on a screen do not come across the same way they do when spoken. In fact, that’s a good way to judge a comment: would you say it to someone’s face? If not, maybe it’s inappropriate.

            And lest you think I’m picking on you – I’ve come down hard on R.V. Patrecia Barrett, and Steve Towers as well, not to mention many, many others.

            With that in mind – carry on.

          • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

            Doug Cook,

            The violence from Trump supporters hasn’t stopped (the link below is but one recent example).

            And while I don’t excuse striking the man, your so-called “conservative” was actually recruiting for Turning Point USA – an organization that enlists college students to report professors they consider too “liberal”. Those professors are then placed on a blacklist by Turning Point, and have received death threats as a result.


          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Turning Point USA is a fast growing grass roots organizations that reach out to conservative students on our high school and college campuses. It has been effective in pushing back against intolerance and bias against conservatives in higher education. I encourage you to listen to Candace Owens, She is the Director of Communications at Turning Point USA. She has an amazing story and is leading a huge movement she’s calling “Blexit.” Blexit is the black exit from the Democratic Party. It’s the black exit from permanent victimhood, the black exit from the false idea that we are somehow separate from the rest of America.” It is gaining speed and is growing as shown by the polls where black support of Trump has tripled since the election.

          • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

            Doug Cook,

            The only problem is that your poll is wrong. More legitimate polls found Trump’s approval rating among Black people to be just 12 percent (with a disapproval rating of 84 percent), which is a miniscule increase – from 8 percent immediately following the election.


          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            More whataboutism, with delusions regarding left vs. right domestic violence to boot.

            A report by The Nation Institute and Center for Investigative Reporting looked at the terrorist incidents in the US between 2008 and 2016. Findings:

            115 right-wing inspired terror incidents. 35% of these were foiled (meaning no attack happened) and 29% resulted in fatalities. These terror incidents caused 79 deaths.

            63 Islamist inspired terror incidents. 76% of these were foiled (meaning no attack happened) and 13% resulted in fatalities. These terror incidents caused 90 deaths.

            19 incidents inspired by left-wing ideologies (including eco-terrorism). 20% of these were foiled (meaning no attack happened) and 10% resulted in fatalities. These terror incidents caused 7 deaths.

            The Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security and the Police Executive Research Forum conducted a 2015 survey of 382 police and sheriff departments nationwide. Nearly 74% of respondents stated that right-wing anti-government violence was a top concern, with 42% stating that Islamist violence was a top concern. There was far less fear concern about left-wing terrorism among LE officials.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            BLM supporters had killed at least 11 police officers through 2016 (including 5 in dallas and 3 in Louisiana in 2016 alone), so obviously your list claiming only 7 deaths from left-wing terrorists cherry picks data (probably from biased SPLC or ADL)

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Tim — I didn’t list anything, and those aren’t my data. I can’t vouch for their absolute
            lack of bias. But at least I provided the sources of my data, unlike your attributions of killings by alleged BLM supporters.

            About half of all police killed in the line of duty are black. Resentment of police violence in black communities pre-dates BLM by decades. Even so, there has been a long-standing decline in killing of police (corresponding with a long-term decline in general murder rates). Lastly, BLM does not condone violence against the police or anyone else.

            BLM’s guiding principles:


          • Avatar Tim says:

            Feb 2013: 3 LA officers & 1 LE family member killed by perp angered over his firing/police brutality towards a mentally ill minority.

            Dec 2014: 2 NYC officers ambushed by perp who posted “take one of ours lets take 2 of theirs” and referenced Mike Brown & Eric Garner

            Sept 2015: 1 KY officer killed by BLM activist

            July 2016: 5 Dallas officers killed at BLM protest

            July 2016: 3 Baton Rouge officers killed by BLM activist angered over Alton Sterling

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Tim — I’ll just address the one with the highest body count (5). It was not a BLM protest—the protest was by the Next Generation Action Network, which bills itself as multi-cultural. And during the 2-hour standoff with the shooter—whose motives were clearly racial—he told police that he was acting alone and wasn’t associated with any group.

            You seem strangely invested in pinning these on BLM. It’s odd.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Just find it odd that if these guys had ever attended a Proud Boys rally, they would be called right wing terrorists, yet BLM and its related organizations get a pass.

        • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

          Funny how the Left points out violence by the Right but ignores the violence created by the Left Wing ANTIFA. Many peaceful demonstrations against Trump have turned to violence because of masked ANTIFA attacks injuring many on the left that were innocent. It happened here in Phoenix and the Phoenix PD got the blame when the masked, cowardly, Left wing ANTIFA started their violence. It has happened several times and finally the leaders were arrested.

          • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:


            I see two entirely different issues at play here. Trump rallys often attract white supremacists groups, who in turn attract anti-facists. Clashes between those two groups is hardly the same as stabbing two people to death on the subway, killing one person and seriously injuring others by ramming a car into a crowd, beating a restaurant worker with a metal pipe, shoving a woman down a flight of stairs, shooting a peaceful protester crossing a bridge, and other acts of extreme violence Trump supporters have engaged in since the election – simply based on the victim’s race, religion, nationality, etc.

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Bruce — See my response to Doug above regarding the recent history of political violence in America and how LE officials view the threat of right-wing violence vs left-wing violence.

            Further, a Democrat running for POTUS would commit political suicide by advocating on behalf of ANTIFA or promoting violence against counter-demonstrators at political rallies. In contrast, Trump regularly defends and even encourages violence at his rallies, or defends violent White Power demonstrators as “very fine people.”

            You don’t have to dig deep on Youtube to find campaign rally video of Trump encouraging his followers to “rough that guy up,” or pledging to pardon those who engage in violent acts on his behalf. Universally, his MAGA rally attendees heartily cheer his encouragement of violence.

            You’re a good guy, Bruce. At some point you’re going to have to come to terms with it: The Party of Trump is sick to the core.

      • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

        CNN spent twice as much time on the NK summit as Trump spent preparing for it. BTW all cable news sucks, this is a proven fact.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          But yet…President Trump is the first president to actually try to forge peace in the Korean peninsula. It may not work, but at least he is giving it a go. What did the previous 2 or 4 presidents do? Nothing. Can you at least give the president credit for that? Silly question, of course you can’t.

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            U.S. Presidents have been negotiating with NK for more than 60 years. Trump may be the first to meet in person with an NK leader, that’s definitely a positive in his favor. But by not laying the groundwork beforehand, Trump set himself up for failure. Do you really think John Bolton is going to make peace with NK? Not gonna happen.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            The Obama administration adopted a “strategic patience” policy toward North Korea, the result was no noticeable progress had been made in U.S.–North Korean relations.

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            Which is exactly where we’ve been 60 years, including today. You keep swinging and missing. Sooner or later you’ll be out.

      • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

        Doug — Classic whataboutism. You’ll never convince me you don’t watch Hannity. 🙂

        I’ll try to meet you half-way on this one, even though I doubt you’ll see it that way.

        Yes, CNN is sludge. But so is Fox News.

        Nearly all TV news is superficial, divisive, biased, toxic opinion-peddling. We’ve fallen a long way since Walter Cronkite read us the news in his calmly assured, resonant voice. Cable news is where people go to get their political points of view stroked. I can’t watch 30 minutes of Fox or CNN without feeling the need to take a shower afterward—so I don’t watch either. No cable news for me.

        • Avatar Tim says:

          Cronkite is probably the one most responsible for making it OK for journalists to stop reporting the news and start advocating outcomes (e.g. withdraw from Vietnam). I wonder if he would do it over knowing it would ultimately lead to Roger Ailes & Rupert Murdock

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            Cronkite did what journalists are supposed to do, speak truth to power. All he pointed out was the U.S. knew it was losing in Vietnam long before it was forced to withdraw.

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Ha! As I wrote that comment, I recalled how Cronkite (and other anchors of his time) typically ended their programs with short opinion pieces.

            Here’s one of Cronkite’s during the TET Offensive:

            “To say that we are closer to victory today is to believe, in the face of the evidence, the optimists who have been wrong in the past. To suggest we are on the edge of defeat is to yield to unreasonable pessimism. To say that we are mired in stalemate seems the only realistic, yet unsatisfactory, conclusion. On the off chance that military and political analysts are right, in the next few months we must test the enemy’s intentions, in case this is indeed his last big gasp before negotiations. But it is increasingly clear to this reporter that the only rational way out then will be to negotiate, not as victors, but as an honorable people who lived up to their pledge to defend democracy, and did the best they could. This is Walter Cronkite; good night.”

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            As Cronkite’s quote demonstrates, he hedged his opinions very carefully.

            Tim is wrong that Cronkite is responsible for the opinionated state of TV news today. What lead to today’s TV punditry was the abolition of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987. Prior to that, radio and TV broadcasters had to give equal time to both sides. Its abolition led directly to the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. This is well known to people who are actually journalists.

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            The revocation of The Fairness Doctrine resulting in today’s TV news cesspool—another lasting gift bestowed upon us by the Reagan Administration.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          That is why I don’t watch much cable news. I try and watch Bret Bair as much as I can and DVR Rachel Maddow for a different perspective. What I do frequently is watch C-span. I will watch the actual hearings and judge for myself. I just get slightly annoyed when I get pigeon holed as a Fox parrot. I do not watch Hannity…I find his act insufferable. My criticism of Fox haters is that they rally against their right wing bias, but excuse MSNBC and CNN for their left wing bias. A bit of a double standard if you ask me.

          • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

            Yet your views reflect almost nothing EXCEPT Fox and Breitbart’s often fact-less far-right propaganda.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Yet your views reflect nothing EXCEPT fact-less far left wing propoganda…so, there you go.

          • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

            Early in his term Trump threw around a lot of supposed “facts” that came from Fox “News”. Of course the mainstream media had no trouble at all proving that those were blatant lies. If he had quoted sources like CNN, he could have avoided all that embarrassment. “Leaning” Left or Right is one thing – telling outrageous lies is something else entirely.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            But yet…it is the liberal CNN and WaPo that are being sued for the lies they told about the Covington students…not Fox. I used to ask Steens to tell me a lie that Fox told…but he never could.

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            For someone who claims to not be a Trump supporter, Mr. Cook, you sure like those red MAGA hats!

          • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

            Doug Cook,

            Politifact and other fact checkers found that 60 percent of what Fox News reports are either outright lies or mostly false. By comparison CNN has an 80 percent rating for accuracy. As to the Convington situation – their $275 million lawsuit is a joke. Over-privileged white students in videos of the incident can be seen laughingly making rude gestures and noises that ridicule Native American culture. And of course the hats themselves are a blaring in-your-face endorsement of racism and hatred toward maginalized groups.

      • Hal Johnson Hal Johnson says:

        Steve Towers wrote, “About half of all police killed in the line of duty are black.”

        Geez. That’s striking, considering that if my flash research is true, only 12 percent of law enforcement officers are black.

  8. Avatar Candace C says:

    R.V. I agree with you on all points here and you’re one of the writer’s whos pieces I always look forward to. That said, I’ve gotta say that when you say things like “right- wing lunatics” describing CPAC ( I don’t disagree) and “dry-humping Old Glory” I don’t see how you can’t realistically expect some pretty strong push back in terms of the same sort of rhetoric. I personally don’t have a problem with it but it’s not like people like me would watch CPAC and sudddenly be horrified by Trumps rhetoric/actions. We already are. Nothing new there, you’re singing to the choir.

  9. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    All the time, forty years, I lived in the northstate I went through droughts and wet years. During every drought California would talk water storage, damming Cottonwood Creek or raising Shasta Dam, then the wet years would come and water storage would be put on the backburner. In Arizona this years Snow/Monsoon storms have removed all areas from drought status. But, here where the Wall and Immigration are real, the number one concern of the state is still water storage. Number two is education. Even though 2018 saw less wildfires in Arizona than 2017 the state is still discussing wildfire prevention. Of course a lot of that has to do with the 19 Hot Shots who were killed near Prescott. The Wall and Immigration are down the list so I can’t understand the rhetoric coming from a thousand miles away about the Wall and Immigration in the northstate where there are nil illegals. Does ICE even have a presence there?

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      There is no water storage problem in Northern California. The problem is Southern California demand on the total water supply, which is mostly in the north. Any capacity increases in NorCal will be to meet the demands of the south, and mainly financed by socal ratepayers. The problem is conveying that water south without finally destroying the Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. No easy solution.

  10. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    Thank you for the advice Ms Rice. I just discovered ANews Cafe and am impressed with it so far. As Ms Barrett and Mr Towers can attest to, I was a frequent poster on the RS comment section until it became unusable in its latest version. I am an opinionated man, but try like heck to be civil in my discourse. If I push the envelope, I hope you will step in and warn me. Thanks for having me.

  11. Frank Treadway Frank Treadway says:

    Great assessment RV…can’t wait for more on the Dahle connection and Kris Vallotton of Bethel. Dahle opposed the Conversion Therapy bill last year claiming it would not pass the Constitutional test. It was pulled from the leg calendar, but will be back with a re-write, let’s see how he views it this time, especially with Vallotton pressuring him. If voters, regardless of party affiliation, want our tax dollars for infrastructure improvement to come back to Shasta Co, or anywhere else north of Sacramento, they need to think twice before they vote for another lame duck Republican; as the Dems are more than a super-majority. Unless they like twiddling their thumbs and collecting a paycheck.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      “… Dems are more than a super-majority.”
      Then why are you blaming Republicans for ignoring our infrastructure? California has been run by Democrats since 1971. What have they done to rebuild our infrastructure? Other than raise taxes

      • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

        He’s not. He’s blaming these Republicans who keep telling you they take on the liberals in Sacramento and at the same time they work across the aisle.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      I’ve been meaning to talk to you Frank!

  12. Avatar Robert Scheide Sr. says:

    Do it with the right wings favorite programs. GAGG, bang on god, abortion,gays, guns. Say it loud and proud and show us just how intolerant you are. Now add immigrants to the mix and you have their entire program.

    The whole idea is really just one idea BE AFRAID BE VERY AFRAID. They are lead by the RACIST IN CHIEF who every day flogs away on immigrants, people of color and of course Democrats.

    The mood of the nation is scary at best. I’ve been on this planet 82 years and never have a seen the nation so divided. Whites hating blacks,browns, yellows, anything not white. The site of a march of Nazis screaming “JEWS WILL NOT REPLACE US” a site I never thought I would see in this country again. Led by a President who said there were very fine people on both sides of that march.

    If the Republicans don’t want to get name called perhaps they should put forth some new ideas, so far they haven’t. The only indicator at present is the Presidents new budget proposal gutting the social safety net even further. Climate change solutions .NADA.
    Perhaps why they get called names.

    Folks on the right bad mouth the Green New Deal when they (or we for that matter) have no idea what is in it because right not it is just in the talking phase. MEDICARE FOR ALL. call it what you like but it would not put 600,000 people a year into bankruptcies from medical expenses and don’t mention it is actually cheaper. Every other developed country has health care for all, free education, and many other things paid for by taxes.

    Yep call it Socialist if must that doesn’t mean you should not have the benefits provided by such a system.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      Thanks for commenting Dad. We’ll be getting into the God and gays issue next week if everything goes according to plan.

      You’re right. Northern California Republicans run fear-based campaigns because they’ve got nothing else.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        You are blaming the GOP for ‘fear-based campaign’? Really? That is exactly what you and your father are doing… inciting fear.

        “…The mood of the nation is scary at best”, “…Whites hating blacks,browns, yellows, anything not white.”

        That isn’t fear based? It is the left that is inciting fear and divisiveness…not the right.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          Doug sez: “It is the left that is inciting fear and divisiveness…not the right.”

          White nationalist marchers: “The Jews will not replace us!”

          GOP Congressman Steve King: “White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization — how did that language become offensive?”

          POTUS Trump: “Name one country run by a black person that’s not a shit-hole.”

          POTUS Trump: “Democrats want anarchy, they really do, and they don’t know who they’re playing with, folks.”

          POTUS Trump: “I said it the other day, yes, she is a low-IQ individual, Maxine Waters. I said it the other day. I mean, honestly, she’s somewhere in the mid-60s, I believe that.”

          POTUS Trump: “Knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell…..I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise…”

          Yeah, Doug. It’s the left inciting fear and divisiveness. Not Dear Leader and his followers.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            How easily you can ignore the left inciting fear and divisiveness. How quickly we forget about conservatives being forced to leave restaurants and being taunted and attacked by the left. Or Hillary Clinton fanning the flames by stating, “…You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about,”
            Or Maxine Watters inciting violence by urging the left to confront conservatives wherever they are, “…”Let’s make sure we show up wherever we have to show up. And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

        • Avatar Patricia Barrett says:

          First of all Maxine Waters wasn’t “inciting violence” (although Trump has done so on numerous occasions). And as I recall, her statement was made in relation to thousands of children of all ages being torn from their parents and tossed into concentration camps. It now appears that many of those children have simply been “lost”, and will never be reunited with their families.

          You might also recall that the harassment of minorities, non-Christians, Gay people, women, etc. by Trump supporters started (on a massive scale) long before Ms. Waters suggested verbally confronting Trump’s top minions.

        • Avatar Robert Scheide Sr. says:

          No Doug it simply is what your president is doing

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      “…The only indicator at present is the Presidents new budget proposal gutting the social safety net even further.”
      We currently have a $21 trillion debt and climbing. So we do nothing about curbing spending? Sure…you are 82 years old, it doesn’t matter to you, but it does to my children just starting out in life, they are the ones that will be burdened by the debt.

      “…Folks on the right bad mouth the Green New Deal”
      There are plenty on the left that are bad mouthing the Green New Deal, including the Democrat Speaker of the House.

      I just don’t have the energy today to refute your other over the top claims…too nice of a day.

      • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

        Yes, the debt burden we’re leaving to our children and grandchildren is a nightmare.

        According to the Congressional Budget Office, here are the ordinal rankings of administrations who added most to deficit spending as a percentage of GDP (largest increase first):

        1. Bush II
        2. Reagan
        3. Bush I
        4. Clinton
        5. Obama

        Trump hasn’t been added to the list yet, but he’ll certainly be #1 or #2.

        The culprit is presidential budgets presented to Congress that don’t cull spending, coupled with tax cuts that primarily benefit the wealthy and greatly reduce revenues. The lack of spending cuts dates all the way back to Reagan, who explicitly argued that spending cuts weren’t necessary. That was based on supply-side economics and the infamously wrong “Laffer curves.” (Bush I, to his credit, called it “voodoo economics.”)

        The problem is that Republicans have never abandoned voodoo economics. As Clinton was leaving office, the United States was poised to begin running surpluses and paying down the federal debt. Bush II immediately cut taxes upon entering office, and deficit spending skyrocketed.

        VEEP Dick Cheney then famously opined: “Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.”

        Cheney didn’t mean they *literally* don’t matter. He meant that it doesn’t matter at the ballot box—that running up the nation’s credit cards to create the illusion of prosperity comes at no short-term political cost.

        The only reason NOT to cut taxes and spur deficit spending, then, is if you give a damn about the future of your kids and grandkids. GOP leaders clearly don’t—all they care about is the über-wealthy accumulating an ever-increasing share of the nation’s wealth.

        Trump has proved it yet again.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          I frequently criticize the GOP politicians for their lip service on controlling the debt. Republican politicians don’t get a pass from me. Why don’t they care about the debt? Democrats and Republicans alike? Because the American public doesn’t care about the debt…they want all their free stuff. They want free medical care, they want free tuition, they want their entitlement programs. They don’t want any federal programs budget cut (except the military).

          The food stamp budget grew from $17 billion a year before the great recession to $84 billion by 2014. Now that we have a booming economy with near record low unemployment rates, do you believe we could reduce that budget? If you try…the left goes berserk. That is but one example of how we can’t control spending. I would like to see every federal agency have a reduction in their budgets of 10%..yes, including the military.

          From what I gathered from your comment is that you wish to blame the GOP for out of control spending. Or are you criticizing the GOP for not doing an adequate job of reigning in the free spending Democrats? The far left is certainly praising the New Green Deal…what will that do to our national debt? Does anyone on the left care?

          • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

            You don’t know how anything works.

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            If, after reading my comment, you took my criticism as blaming the GOP for out-of-control spending, you might have a reading comprehension problem. I clearly stated that the GOP has established a pattern of cutting taxes for the sake of cutting taxes—THAT’S the problem. The Reagan Revolution began with Reagan saying that tax cuts would in and of themselves fix deficit spendings—really no need to cut spending, he said. After quadrupling the federal debt, the GOP switched tactics and decided that the federal debt doesn’t really matter. And then under Bush II, they doubled what they’d previously quadrupled.

            The mentality is transparent: “Pfffftt. We’ll be dead by the time the shit hits the fan. Who cares?” Frankly, I don’t understand how guys who support the GOP and what they’ve done can look their kids and grandkids in the eye.

            My criticism in my preceding comment speaks for itself. Putting words in the mouths of others in the form of absurd questions—your last paragraph—is one of your favorite rhetorical tactics. I think you’ll find that ANC’s commenters are too bright to fall for cheap slight-of-hand tricks like that.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            You believe That tax cuts are responsible for the debt? “…We’ll be dead by the time the sh**t hits the fan.” That was my criticism of Mr Scheide Sr. His knee-jerk reaction to Trump’s wanting to cut spending. We can’t possibly look at budget cuts to alleviate the debt. That we have to do it all with tax increases. Tax increases do not stimulate the economy. We are taking in more tax revenue after the tax cuts than before.

            The difference between you and me is, I can easily place the blame on the debt on both parties, while you simply blame the GOP. President Trump never mentioned the debt in the State of the Union speech…President Obama never mentioned the debt in his SOU speeches. Congress has no political will to cut spending. Are you willing to make the tough choices to reign in the debt, or will you support candidates that want to expand the federal government? So far only Sen Rand Paul is out there speaking of the debt. Sen Paul introduced his “Penny Plan” budget last year…Paul’s budget plan would cut 1 percent of most of federal spending, except for Social Security, which amounts to a cut of about $30 billion. Sounds sensible, right? 1% cut should be easy for every gov’t agency. But no.. most Senate Republicans and all Senate Democrats roundly rejected that motion in a 21-76 vote. So you think anyone in Congress is serious about reducing the debt? Did you hear any outcry from American voters about this vote? No, because the majority of voters want the free stuff, and politicians want to get reelected.

  13. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    As this discussion proves there is a major discourse in America and nobody wants to have an intelligent conversation. Whether they are on the Left or the Right they state their facts are the true facts. Both sides complain about the news the other side watches, heck they probably complain about the other side’s music. It is like kids in a schoolyard, I had plenty of experience keeping control in a schoolyard, “They said it first! I didn’t do nothing!”
    A clear example are the wildfires. While the left complains Climate Change caused the fires why did Arizona right next door have fewer fires in 2018 than California? It is called preventive maintenance. I saw this in Colorado and Wyoming where the states hired contractors to cut down beetle kill to prevent even more wildfires than what happened. California can’t clean up it’s dead forests because the contractors have to get so many permits that the usable wood has rotted or burned up by the time they get the permits. In Wyoming and Colorado the beetle kill was cut quickly and created a second economy in rural areas. Opening closed sawmills and furniture makers. Red Feather has a solid market for it’s beetle kill furniture. The areas cut were like a clear cut but left the young trees that survived. They also did not spray herbicide over the area and wildflowers sprouted feeding wildlife. California needs to get over it’s 5th greatest consumer ego and look at what is being done in other states. By the way California may be the 5th biggest economy but New York and Texas are 11th and 14th. It is population that drives economies.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      Candace is correct, Bruce. You turned around and did the exact same thing. There are many reasons why California’s forests are in worse shape, not just your unsubstantiated claim that too much regulation is the cause. California doesn’t have the same geography of Wyoming or Arizona. It certainly has more forested land. The scale of the beetle disaster spreading north from the Southern Sierra Nevada is far beyond the scope of the timber, woods products and most importantly biomass energy industries to handle. The state has an aggressive plan to tackle the problem, its part of the Green New Deal.

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        RV, Colorado and Wyoming have been aggressively tackling the beetle kill for a dozen years and it is not part of any Green Deal, where did you come up with that. The beetle kill hit Cheyenne quickly, I lost 14 trees on our property alone. Every year the trees are sprayed in the Spring and it has stopped the onslaught. In Colorado, where I had a trailer up the Poudre Canyon, the trees were sprayed and special retardant packages were placed on select trees. The dead trees were cut by contract woodsmen before they had rotted because the state was on top of the problem. And I personally talked to Colorado Forest officials about the beetle kill. In their opinion the beetle kill was mostly killing older larger trees while young ones were surviving. The reason for this was because of warmer winter temperatures the beetles could bury deep into the larger older trees and survive, but the beetles would die in the thinner young trees from the cold. Whether the younger trees would grow with an immunity from the beetles was the Colorado Forest Service hope. Of course it would take several years to find out. That young trees survived is true as I would drive through areas where beetle kill had killed many older trees and the young green trees stood out like a beacon in the dark.
        Perhaps the beetle kill was Nature’s way of culling the old and useless. Kinda like how ancient man would leave the old and infirm out for the bears to eat.

        • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

          The beetle kill is directly realted to climate change, and that’s why dealing with the aftermath is part of the Green New Deal. The market for “blue wood” is limited and 150 million dead trees need to be removed because they spew carbon as they decay. The Green New Deal means this: we need to restore our forests to resilience, or risk losing them entirely. That’s going to take work, work costs money, and it’s the proper role of government to step up when the private sector won’t.

  14. Avatar Candace C says:

    Bruce, You started by saying both sides state their facts as if they’re the “true” facts and that basically the arguments presented by others here today don’t wish to have an intelligent conversation. Whether I agree with which arguments you deem “intelligent” you went on to do the exact same thing you’re criticizing.

  15. Avatar Bruce Ross says:

    Trying but failing to resist the temptation, let me offer a few thoughts.

    It is true that we have relatively few immigrants — legal or otherwise — in the North State. So perhaps illegal immigration is less of a problem on a day-to-day basis.

    Nonetheless, voters in the region get very frustrated when their state government overtly obstructs the enforcement of federal immigration laws, to the point of protecting criminals from ICE. They get very frustrated when they face daunting costs to educate their children but learn the state is spending taxpayers’ money to subsidize the college educations of young adults who aren’t in the country legally and likely won’t be able to work legally upon graduation. They don’t understand why they face crippling health care costs but pay taxes to subsidize Medi-Cal for people who, again, aren’t in the country legally in the first place.

    Are any of those views so unreasonable?

    As for “shamelessly taking credit” for steering cap-and-trade money toward forest health, no member of the Legislature accomplishes anything alone, but this was an issue Brian Dahle had been advocating for pretty much from the day he was elected to the Legislature. And he was a member of the conference committee that negotiated SB 901. And yes, the investment in forestry was the part he insisted be in the bill. No, he didn’t vote for the cap-and-trade extension. But if the state’s collecting the money, it should be spent as sensibly as possible — which for him means more money on healthy forests and less on high-speed rail.

    As for mailers, campaigns can be ugly. The unfortunate thing is negative campaigns work. But today’s mail includes a lengthy list of specific things Brian Dahle has worked on to help the region while one of the other candidates has a piece denouncing Dahle for — wait for it — once hugging a liberal. (Seriously!) If you think those Republicans are all the same, you might engage in a little more reporting to clarify the real differences.

    • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

      Bruce, in an article in LA Times they stated that when cities, sanctuary or otherwise, report criminal action it is collected by a national data company, for other police departments to search for criminal backgrounds. Something needed so PD can find info on criminal suspects. This third party data collector is the one reporting the results to ICE.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        Just last week a woman was killed in her home by an illegal. This man, Carlos Arevalo Carranza, is not only undocumented, but also a self-admitted gang member with a long history of arrests. He was deported by federal immigration agents in 2013 but returned to the U.S., committing a series of crimes.

        The Chief of Police in San Jose acknowledged that ICE had previously asked to take custody of him six times However, Santa Clara County has a policy of not cooperating with ICE. How does this policy make any sense at all?

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          I’ll agree in part, but not all.

          It makes no sense for a local jurisdiction to arrest someone with a record of committing violent crimes in the U.S. and not cooperate with ICE.

          On the other hand, if an illegal immigrant mom with kids who were born here and are U.S. citizens gets busted for failing to pay a jaywalking ticket, I don’t think it’s crazy liberal hooey to refrain from turning her over to ICE.

          I guess that makes me a “family values” guy, huh?

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            I agree with you on that…I just don’t think that happens very often. It shouldn’t at all, but it is not a reason to lump violent felons in the same category.

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          Also, Santa Clara does not have a policy of not cooperating with ICE. State law prohibits them from cooperating with ICE unless the accused illegal is being held on violent crime charges or has previous convictions on violent crimes. In the absence of that, in order for the County to have held Carranza they needed to be presented with a warrant. ICE didn’t produce a warrant.

          In recent years, federal courts have ruled that holding illegals beyond their release dates, without warrants from ICE, is unconstitutional and a violation of the right to due process.

          Once again, Doug, you play loose with the facts.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Here is a statement from the San Jose mayor about this crime…

            “This is a devastating tragedy– and my thoughts and prayers go to Ms. Larson’s family during this awful time. I’m grateful to Chief Eddie Garcia and our San Jose Police Department officers for their work in apprehending and arresting this individual and keeping our community safe.

            It is long overdue for the County to reconsider its current policy of ignoring ICE hold requests for predatory felons, which undermines the safety of the very immigrant communities we collectively seek to protect. On July 10, 2015, I sent a letter urging County leaders to review their policies to ensure federal immigration authorities prosecute violent, predatory individuals who pose a serious threat to our residents.

            My views were consistent with those expressed by Police Chief Eddie Garcia, and with the proposed policy of District Attorney Jeff Rosen, who sought to have the County accept ICE detainers for individuals, like the defendant in this case, arrested for prior first-degree home burglaries and other ‘strike’ offenses.

            The County’s policy has nothing to do with the City’s decades-long policy of declining to have police engage in federal immigration enforcement, which was implemented to protect public safety. In contrast, the current County policy of ignoring detainer requests for individuals arrested for strike offenses and convicted of multiple felonies undermines public safety, and violates common sense. I hope we can restart this conversation to make progress where we all agree: we can both keep our City safe from violent criminals and protect our law-abiding immigrant community.”

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            Yes, and the County has responded to that by saying what I said above. The guy is being characterized by the mayor of San Jose after the fact as a violent offender, but he wasn’t being held on such a charge and hadn’t been previously convicted of a violent crime in California. It wasn’t County policy that prevented holding him longer than his sentence—it was state law and court decisions.

            ICE could have remedied that by presenting the County with a warrant. They didn’t.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            An Oct. 9, 2018 detainer notice from the Department of Homeland Security , that was shown on Fox News by a source with knowledge of the case, noted that Carranza, 24, was to be deported – but a second document dated the following day was stamped with a notice that the request was “NOT HONORED PER COUNTY POLICY.” The second document showed the request had been sent to Santa Clara County.

    • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

      I’ve probably left the impression in this discussion that I tacitly approve of illegal immigration. I don’t. My reasons for opposing illegal immigration are a far cry from the reasons typically shared by Republicans. My concerns center on environmental sustainability. In my opinion, the United States has enough damned people. We don’t need more, and we especially don’t need more from pro-natalist cultures—sorry/not sorry if you find that offensive.

      Sure, we spend a lot of money on illegal aliens, but every credible study I’ve seen shows that they’re a net-benefit to our economy—though, as Tim correctly notes, not everyone shares that benefit. I’ve said this before: They come here for economic opportunity—following the Bush II crash of 2008, there was net migration back to Latin America, where it’s cheaper to live during tough times. If we *really* wanted to stem illegal immigration, we’d fine employers $10,000 and put them in jail for a month for the first offense of hiring illegals. Second offense: $50,000 and a year in jail. No exceptions. But nothing like that’ll ever happen, because too many employers who hire illegals as cheap, hard-working laborers are Republicans.

      Instead, we get a ridiculous proposal for an expensive, ineffective wall—a pandering jokes-on-you piece of rancid red meat thrown to the jeering, xenophobic, racist chumps who make up Trump’s base.

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        Steve, actually I was given another example of Mexicans taking jobs Americans don’t want. My son is a CDL driver/trainer for CR England. He has a dedicated route with Wal Mart distribution centers in Phoenix. England just recently gave all their drivers a substantial pay raise to keep drivers. The drivers also have retirement and healthcare. This is an $80,000 a year job with paid free training, no student debt. My son trains the new drivers, gets extra money for it, and he said the driver he was training didn’t show up today, quit. He says the white drivers are the ones who don’t stick but the Mexican drivers do.
        Any white American want a good paying job with benefits, come to Phoenix. CR England is hiring and offer free paid training. And they are not the only trucking company doing so.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        I am always amused hoe Steve so easily blame just the GOP for our woes and gives the Democrats a pass, oh well. I am with you as far as employers. My business has used E-Verify for years and is effective in separating those with fake papers. Republicans keep introducing E-verify bills, but it always goes nowhere.

        What makes you think a wall is ineffective? Where did you get that fact from? Schumer and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez? I just watched a long Congressional hearing on C-Span where the border control experts said the opposite. That walls are effective. Why is the left obsessing about the wall? Because they want to avoid making up the issue of fixing our broken immigration system. In today’s world, if you come out for immigration reform, you are immediately labeled a as a racist. President Obama’s stance on immigration when he was running was no different than Trump’s. Was Obama a racist too?

        • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

          Doug — As I said above (and you’ve conveniently ignored), I am not pro-illegal immigration. I’m not even particularly pro-legal immigration.

          Let me revise my “ineffective” argument a bit. I think walls are marginally effective in some contexts. They are not the best option in terms of cost/benefit ratios. Building Trump’s enormously expensive wall from sea to shining sea would create incentives to go around, under, or over the wall. Lots of illegal immigrants are from areas of Asia, and Trump’s wall isn’t going to stop that. There are more cost-effective ways of doing the job.

          Opposing illegal immigration doesn’t make you a racist. But there are hoards of Trump supporters who oppose illegal immigration of Latin Americans primarily because they’re racists and/or xenophobes.

    • R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

      It’s cool, Brian Ross, no one knows you’re candidate Brian Dahle’s district director. Whoops. Anyway, thanks for commenting! I promise not to flame you!

      Despite your decidedly strange anecdote about why northern Californians dislike illegal immigrants, we both know the way to stop the hiring of illegal immigrants and therefore the flow of illegal immigrants is to jail and/or seriously fine their employers, the majority of whom are Republicans.

      I humbly submit that a candidate who brags about bringing money to his district from a bill he not only tried to unsuccessfully kill but used that no vote to establish his anti-environmental credibility to score a leadership position is the very definition of shameless.

      As for the fliers, I got another one today, my fourth! Mr. Dahle has at least $500,000 to spend on this campaign, please keep wasting some of it on me.

  16. Avatar Candace C says:

    Bruce Ross, If tomorrow we stopped using any of our California tax dollars to subsidize Medi-Cal costs for illegal immigrants we would still have many people facing crippling health care costs. While perhaps being a reasonable concern for some who think along those lines, cutting subsidies to illegal immigrants is not the panacea for our current healthcare woes. There are things I would prefer my tax dollars not be used for but it doesn’t mean I don’t understand, I just don’t agree.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Illegal immigrants know that if they are able to get across the border they are home free…that they are eligible for free education, health and welfare benefits, employment. If we stop the incentives for these people, they weren’t be so eager to cross the border. As an employer I got many applications a week from illegals..yes, even in Redding. As soon as we started using E-Verify and checked Social Security numbers and other forms of identification, we began to turn away those with false papers. What do you think happened? The word on the street was my business used E-verify and they stopped applying at my restaurant. Why can’t Congress pass an E-verify bill? That alone would cut illegal immigration by a large amount.

      • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

        I don’t know, Doug….why don’t they? The GOP controlled Congress for the first two years of Trump’s term and didn’t do it. Why not? Why focus on Trump’s Wall?

        I’ll hazard a guess: Because GOP businessmen don’t really want effective illegal immigration control. They want Trump’s Wall because the idea of Trump’s Wall pleases their rank-and-file voters.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Why don’t Democrats want to deal with immigration? The Democrats enjoyed control of congress under Obama…why didn’t they do anything about it? See, once again I am able to criticize both parties while you just want to blame only the GOP. Why the double standard?

      • Barbara Rice Barbara Rice says:

        I am retired from Shasta County HHSA. Fact: undocumented immigrants are not eligible for ongoing cash aid (what most people think of as “welfare”) or other federal programs except for non-cash relief in emergencies. They may receive emergency medical care – the same as US citizens without insurance. Some may qualify for SNAP (AKA food stamps); see

        Undocumented children/the children of undocumented immigrants are indeed eligible – in fact, obligated – to free education, the same as US citizens.

        • Avatar Tim says:

          Pregnant illegals and illegal children also qualify for MediCal.

          Jerry Brown also applied for an ACA waiver to allow illegals to purchase subsidized insurance through Obamacare exchanges. He withdrew the waiver request with Trump in office, but it likely would have gone into effect under a Clinton presidency.

          Community Health Centers and Disproportionate Share Hospitals also both receive general federal funding despite serving illegals. While individual procedures are not covered, federal funds subsidize the overall cost of operation (much like how planned parenthood doesn’t use federal funds to pay a doctor to perform an abortion, but it does use those funds to keep the lights on, general staff paid, and the clinic in supply of sterile equipment).

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          The children of illegals that are born in the US are citizens, and therefore eligible for welfare benefits. 63 percent of households headed by a non-citizen reported that they used at least one welfare program, compared to 35 percent of native-headed households. Of households headed by non-citizens in the United States for fewer than 10 years, 50 percent use one or more welfare programs; for those here more than 10 years, the rate is 70 percent.

  17. Avatar Larry Winter says:

    Nothing on Steven Baird? This big State of Jefferson proponent ran as a Republican that supported the SOJ and decried AGW and raising the minimum wage. For this Special election he was running as a Democrat to pull votes from the other Democratic candidate and according to the Union (serving western Nevada County) “Baird has said on his website that he supported free college for everyone, a guaranteed minimum universal income of $50,000 per person and “late term abortions up to and including the 25th year.”
    Unfortunate for him that he’s since withdrawn from the race because it’s been proven at the Presidential level that sarcasm can win elections.

  18. Frank Treadway Frank Treadway says:

    The only real Democrat running in Senate District 1 is Silke Pfleuger of Truckee. This is a grand ploy by the GOP and the SOJ to confuse Democrat voters that they have two choices, not so. This guy is trying to be clever, but it won’t work. Even though he dropped out, he may get 2-6% of the vote, but with so many Repubs, it virtually assures the top two will be a Democrat and a Republican. He’s not Pro-Choice, does not support free college & does not support a guaranteed income, stop lying to your desperate SOJ followers.

  19. Avatar Anita Brady says:

    I write Postcards to Voters and I want to tell you a story: Last week’s special election in a state senate district in TN, we wrote over 50,000 postcards to urge Democrats to vote. On Tuesday, a bit more than 4,000 GOP votes to fewer than 1500 Democratic votes sending a Republican to the state house (again, as their GOP State Senator had not done much for them for their previous terms). So, lack of turn-out doomed these people to more of the same.

    This will be our fate if we do not mobilize turn-out for the 26th of March and then again in June.

    • Avatar Linda Cooper says:

      Hello. I wrote postcards during the last election. I sent them to a business because I had little time for research. I’m impressed that you also did this.

      Anyway, I don’t know how to respond to all the topics with making the indentations, etc. However, upon reading Steven or Stephen or Steve’s comments regarding immigration, I agree that some would be surprised with my perspective. I’m a – I guess liberal. And this is my perspective. I am a meat and potato individual. By that I mean, make sure the resources are covered. Plan for the soup pot. Will there be enough meat and potatoes? If you have ever been in an ER room and waited for five or more hours to see a doctor, well the answer is nope. There is so much demand on “the system.” So many people choose to have so many children. (I had one.) In fact, I laugh when I hear people wanting better medical care. Because guess what, there are not enough doctors to meet the demand. And really, thankfully there are still some doctors willing to practice medicine. Those who haven’t committed suicide while in medical school. Because it’s just so damn hard. Want all you want, for a doctor. But those doctors are a vanishing resource. Dentists make more money I hear. How to balance all of that with who will pick the lettuce, etc. I just don’t know.
      Yeah, regarding the “borders.” My husband tells me, well one doesn’t have a country without a border. I don’t want a wall. What I long for is some personal responsibility, and certainly kindness in my soup. Not having wars all the time would help as well. Because isn’t that what displaces people? Yet, all those folks making money off of war wouldn’t like that. So, war we go. Over and over.
      Back to meat and potatoes. It’s pretty simple. When I was in a position of supervising, I would explain to the staff this: first you clean the restrooms, next open the doors. Sure, count the money, but I trust you. If there’s a problem, I will account for it. However, after all is said and done (did I write that), making sure the public has a good experience is the most important.
      Today has been a difficult day. I’m sure for all of us. When the resources are reduced, people seem to need to empower themselves and kill others. Fear seems to be the bottom line.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      What is interesting is that the special election that just occurred was because of voter harvesting that happened. Coincidentally… California just made voter harvesting legal. Gotta love our corrupt state

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        You know better than the State GOP? Coincidentally, they aren’t making corruption charges.

        “To say we were caught flat-footed by this is just not true,” Matt Fleming, a spokesman for the California GOP, told Fox News. “We were well aware of this, we even did it ourselves, we pay attention to election laws.”

        “The Democrats are creating a new, highly efficient tool to turn out voters,” Neugebauer added. “If Republicans can’t find a way to match it, we’re going to lose more elections all over the country.”

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          That doesn’t make it right. This is exactly whyTenn is having special elections. You think having party workers going door to door to harvest ballots is ethical? You think having Democrat…or GOP for that matter workers fill out ballots for those too lazy or unconcerned to vote? I see you don’t care much for the integrity of our voting system, as long as it benefits your party

          • Avatar Larry Winter says:

            I didn’t give my opinion one way or the other as I was just pointing out that your statement of “Gotto love our corrupt state” was not supported by the State GOP. Our election laws as well as our Constitution don’t discriminate against lazy, uninformed voters so the ethical question is rather moot. How you can glean that I “don’t care much for the integrity of our voting system, as long as it benefits your party” is so wrong and misplaced (didn’t vote for Feinstein or Clinton) that I can only see it as just typical online trolling.

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            :::rolls eyes:::

            I see Doug is shoe-horning into your mouth absurd opinions that you never stated or even hinted at. Welcome to the club. It’s a big club.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Ok…you got me. I am guilty of a bit of trolling with my comment. Apologies. However, it doesn’t change the absurdity of a practice that is so nefarious in one state that it caused a special election but is not only encouraged in California but voted on and made legal by our legislature..that, yes…is corrupt. . The fact that a GOP official made a statement that the Democrats got us…we should have thought of it first. Does not make the practice ethical. I would be just as disturbed if the GOP did the same.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Just curious, Anita..why are you involving yourself in a local election from another state? If I was from Tennessee…I would be like, “mind your own business, your state has enough problems, why interfere in our business”

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        Actually Doug, as I watch the AZ news showing illegals running on the beach around the wall at the California/Mexico border I would say the same thing to north state politicians pushing a wall in Arizona or New Mexico. Fix your own state first!

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          The difference is that a wall is a federal project that affects all of us. Whether a state legislator in Tennessee is a Democrat or Republican does not affect me in the slightest and I can’t imagine spending a minute of my time trying to affect the outcome of a local race 2,ooo miles away.

          • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

            LaMalfa is the only north state politician that votes on national issues. All the politicians mentioned in this article vote on state issues. I repeat fix your own state first.

          • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

            There’s a new sheriff in town, and first thing he’s gonna do is git them city fathers to enact spare-time and a buttin’-in ordinances.

            Can’t abide no waistin’ spare time nor buttin’ in.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        Bruce…I think you misunderstand my comments. My friend Anita said she sent 50,000 postcards to citizens of a state senate district in TN encouraging Democrats to vote.. I was just curious why Ms Brady concerned herself with a state senate election from a state she doesn’t live in. It just seems odd to me.

        • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

          Doug, I understand. When I lived in Wyoming any issue, fracking, legal MJ, wolf delisting would receive 50,000 or more comment and petitions concerning those issues, most from out of state. Wyoming counted those thousands of out of state comments as one comment. I would imagine Tennessee does the same for the 50,000 postcards. One postcard would have the same impact.