FALL 2011 • VOL. 1, NO. 1
Inside This Issue: Why Conservative Republicans of California is Vital
Not in My Child’s Classroom
Civility? Never Mind
Are You a Conservative Republican? There’s an App for that!
BY MIKE SPENCE PUBLISHER’S CORNER
Why Conservative Republicans of California is Vital It’s time to rally the base and recruit volunteers
recently became firmly convinced that there were many conservatives that wanted a voice in the California Republican Party and local communities. Many of these conservatives didn’t view the existing vehicles as adequate for their political activism. Out of that frustration Conservative Republicans of California was born. There are several immediate issues that need attention. The fight to neuter the CRP Platform and the referendum to stop SB 48 are on us NOW. Throw in redistricting and the Top-Two Primary and there is plenty to do and Conservatives need as many hands on deck as possible. Board of Equalization Member
George Runner Fighting to protect the taxpayers of California.
Paid for by Taxpayers for George Runner ID #1304898
Learn More at: www.GeorgeRunner.com
I don’t think California’s problems are the result of having too many Conservative groups. The focus is to work for less bureaucracy and more power to individuals and local organizations. CRC will be a sister organization to the California Conservative Coalition. The first question I usually get relates to the California Republican Assembly (CRA). CRA has a rich over 75 year history. As someone who was blessed to serve six years as CRA President I plan to stay a member of CRA. It has an important function. Two CRA Past Presidents Sen. Dick Mountjoy (ret.) and FlashReport publisher Jon Fleischman are serving in interim advisory roles until the first organizing convention of the CRC. The interim by-laws also contain the strongest conflict of interest provision of any GOP group in California and want as much transparency as possible. The goal is to get more people involved and with over 5 million registered Republicans there is plenty to do. If CRA members want to be CRC members or vice-versa, that is their decision. I will. CRC should have the numbers shortly to qualify for official CRP recognition. So if you are a pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, limited government Constitutional Republican and want to get involved please check us out at:
www.calconservatives.com Mike Spence is President of Conservative Republicans of CA.
FALL 2011 • VOL. 1, NO. 1
Conservative Republican is the official publication of Conservative Republicans of California. It is published semiregularly and is included as a free benefit to our members. Please direct questions and inquiries to: email@example.com Interested in advertising in Conservative Republican? Contact us at: firstname.lastname@example.org
Interim Board of Directors (partial listing)
President..................... Mike Spence Vice President................ Scott Voigts Vice President................ Pete Weber Vice President................ Tom Rogers
2 Not in My Child’s Classroom Senate Bill 48, deceptively titled The Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful (FAIR) Education Act, requires California social science classes to add curriculum that is positive toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and other minority figures.
3 Civility? Never Mind by MONA Charon
President Obama didn’t go as far as many in his party. Instead, he adopted a pose of wounded worry, noting in his Tucson speech, that our “discourse has become so sharply polarized” and wondering whether we could “pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that — that heals, not in a way that wounds.”
4 Cover Story: Ominous Parallels by Walter Williams
The 1930s depression was caused by and aggravated by acts of government, and so was the current financial mess that we’re in. Do we want to repeat history by listening to those who created the calamity? That’s like calling on an arsonist to help put out a fire.
Secretary......................Peggy Mew Treasurer........................Linda Boyd
Unit Presidents Alameda County............. Connie Cox Butte County.....................Pete Weber Corona.................... (pending approval) Foothill............................ Linda Boyd Porterville.......................... Kelly West San Diego ............. (pending approval) San Gabriel Valley........... Sandy Gray
Are you a Conservative Republican? Join with other like minded conservatives in California. Stand firm for the principles of limited government, strong national defense, lower taxes and protecting our freedom. Membership is only $10 per year. Name:__________________________________________________ Address:_________________________________________________ City/State/Zip:___________________________________________
San Joaquin................Maria England Seal Beach................... Diane Lenning South Orange County....... Scott Voigts Southwest Riverside...... Paul Gregoirre Tehama County......... C. Jerome Crow
o I certify that I am an American citizen, and I am registered to vote as a Republican in the State of California. o Enclosed is my check made payable to CRC.
Mail checks and form to: Conservative Republicans of CA • P.O. Box 877 • Monrovia, CA 91017 Or Join Online at: www.CalConservatives.com
F A L L
2 0 1 1
TA K I N G A C T I O N
Not in My Child’s Classroom The Referendum to Overturn SB 48
istory must be honest.” And with that short rationale, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a law requiring school teachers to be dishonest. He also set in motion a conservative uprising to overturn the new law. Senate Bill 48, deceptively titled The Fair, Accurate, Inclusive and Respectful (FAIR) Education Act, requires California social science classes to add curriculum that is positive toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and other minority figures. It also prohibits curriculum that reflects adversely on these same groups. Proponents of a referendum to overturn the law note that it is an invitation to retroactively “out” historical figures who did not consider their sexuality to be a part of their legacy. They also believe it is a mandate to contradict the teaching that many students receive in
their homes. Apologists for the law have found it increasingly difficult to defend the act as “fair.” Even the notoriously liberal Los Angeles Times condemned the new law by noting “Real history is richer and more complicated than feel-good depictions.” On July 15, 2011, just one day after the Governor signed SB 48 into law, a broad coalition filed the paperwork necessary for a referendum or “people’s veto.” The coalition hopes to gain by the end of September the nearly 505,000 signatures required to put the matter on the June 2012 ballot. By law, the necessary signatures must be gathered within 90 days of the Governor putting his signature on the bill. “When we turn in the necessary signatures, the law is suspended until the vote,” said Karen England, Executive Director of Capitol Resource Family
FA L L
2 0 1 1
Impact. “Plans to distribute educational supplements starting in January and to force the purchase of newly revised textbooks will have to be put on hold also.” In response to the effort to pass the referendum, members of the California Assembly have already stripped an existing bill of its language and replaced this with wording identical to SB48. “This shows not only their fear that we will be successful, and their contempt for the decision they believe the people of California will make, it shows ignorance of the political process,” said England. “The courts have ruled that once a measure has been rejected by the public, the Legislature can not enact the same or substantially similar measure. It has to go back to the voters.” At least one leader in the homosexual community has made known his concern that this law will be overturned by the voters. Roland Palencia, Executive Director of Equality California, a
B y M ona C h aren CULTURE AND EVENTS
Civility? Never Mind
hen a deranged gunman shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and 20 others in January, partisan Democrats leaped at the chance to blame Republican rhetoric for the crime. The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman was among the first warning, “You know that Republicans will yell about the evils of partisanship whenever anyone tries to make a connection between the rhetoric of Beck, Limbaugh, etc. and the violence I fear we’re going to see in the months and years ahead. But violent acts are what happen when you create a climate of hate. And it’s long past time for the GOP’s leaders to take a stand against the hate-mongers.” Krugman was just the, excuse the expression, opening salvo. The sanctimonious hand wringing that followed from NPR programs, liberal editorial writers and cable chat shows was continuous. All use of war metaphors was declared out of bounds. There was to be no more talk of primary fights, battleground states, targeted districts or shots across the bow.
Perhaps even the word campaign was too tainted. Markos Moulitsas, Keith Olbermann and other usual suspects rushed to blame Sarah Palin and the Tea Party movement — thereby displaying incivility in the guise of condemning it. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois suggested that comments such as Palin’s trope, “Don’t retreat; reload,” were responsible for Jared Loughner’s brutal mass attack. “These sorts of things, I think, invite the kind of toxic rhetoric that can lead unstable people to believe this is an acceptable response.” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was in the United Arab Emirates at the time of the attack said: “We have extremists in my country. A wonderful, incredibly brave young woman Congress member, Congresswoman Giffords, was just shot by an extremist in our country.” President Obama didn’t go as far as many in his party. Instead, he adopted a pose of wounded worry, noting in his Tucson speech, that our “discourse has become so sharply polarized” and
wondering whether we could “pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that — that heals, not in a way that wounds.” Later, the president called upon all Americans to “be civil because we want to live up to the example of public servants like John Roll and Gabby Giffords, who knew first and foremost that we are all Americans, and that we can question each other’s ideas without questioning each other’s love of country, and that our task, working together, is to constantly widen the
sponsor of SB 48, recently acknowledged to reporters his fear that should the referendum make it to the ballot, his side would lose. “The prospects are not good if this gets to the ballot,” Palencia said. “I am not under any illusion.” Still, even some supporters of the referendum are expressing concern that
necessary signatures can not be gained in such a short time relying primarily on volunteers. But England notes the strength of the pro-family and religious community. “We certainly need the profamily community to work hard in the remaining weeks to qualify the referendum, but the volunteer effort on this is
unlike anything I have ever seen,” said England. “We are talking about what will be taught to their first graders. Now it’s personal.” Petitions may be downloaded or quantities ordered for distribution from the Stop SB48 web site at www.stopsb48.com
It’s easy to decry “ incivility on the part
of your opponents — much harder to call out those on your own side.
See Civility, Page 8
F A L L
2 0 1 1
Ominous Parallels B y W alter E . W illiams
eople are beginning to compare Barack Obama’s administration to the failed administration of Jimmy Carter, but a better comparison is to the Roosevelt administration of the 1930s and ‘40s. Let’s look at it with the help of a publication from the Mackinac Center for Public Policy and the Foundation for Economic Education titled “Great Myths of the Great Depression,” by Dr. Lawrence Reed. During the first year of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, he called for increasing federal spending to $10 billion while revenues were only $3 billion. Between 1933 and 1936, government expenditures rose by more than 83 percent. Federal debt skyrocketed by 73 percent. Roosevelt signed off on legislation that raised the top income tax rate to 79 percent and then later to 90 percent. Hillsdale College economics historian and professor Burt Folsom, author of “New Deal or Raw Deal?”, notes that in 1941, Roosevelt even proposed a 99.5 percent marginal tax rate on all incomes more than $100,000. When a top adviser
FA L L
questioned the idea, Roosevelt replied, “Why not?” Roosevelt had other ideas for the economy, including the National Recovery Act. Dr. Reed says: “The economic impact of the NRA was immediate and powerful. In the five months leading up to the act’s passage, signs of recovery were evident: factory employment and payrolls had increased by 23 and 35 percent, respectively. Then came the NRA, shortening hours of work, raising wages arbitrarily and imposing other new costs on enterprise. In the six months after the law took effect, industrial production dropped 25 percent.” Blacks were especially hard hit by the NRA. Black spokesmen and the black press often referred to the NRA as the “Negro Run Around,” Negroes Rarely Allowed,” “Negroes Ruined Again,” “Negroes Robbed Again,” “No Roosevelt Again” and the “Negro Removal Act.” Fortunately, the courts ruled the NRA unconstitutional. As a result, unemployment fell to 14 percent in 1936 and lower by 1937.
2 0 1 1
feature Roosevelt had more plans for the economy, namely the National Labor Relations Act, better known as the “Wagner Act.” This was a payoff to labor unions, and with these new powers, labor unions went on a militant organizing frenzy that included threats, boycotts, strikes, seizures of plants, widespread violence and other acts that pushed productivity down sharply and unemployment up dramatically. In 1938, Roosevelt’s New Deal produced the nation’s first depression within a depression. The stock market crashed again, losing nearly 50 percent of its value between August 1937 and March 1938, and unemployment climbed back to 20 percent. Columnist Walter Lippmann wrote in March 1938 that “with almost no important exception every measure (Roosevelt) has been interested in for the past five months has been to reduce or discourage the production of wealth.” Roosevelt’s agenda was not without its international admirers. The chief Nazi newspaper, Volkischer Beobachter, repeatedly praised “Roosevelt’s adoption of National Socialist strains of thought in his economic and social policies” and “the development toward an authoritarian state” based on the “demand that
“Let’s continue to work together to fight for freedom and liberty.” Assemblyman Curt Hagman
collective good be put before individual self-interest.” Roosevelt himself called Benito Mussolini “admirable” and professed that he was “deeply impressed by what he (had) accomplished.” FDR’s very own treasury secretary, Henry Morgenthau, saw the folly of the New Deal, writing: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. ... We have never made good on our promises. ... I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started ... and an enormous debt to boot!” The bottom line is that Roosevelt’s New Deal policies turned what would have been a three- or four-year sharp downturn into a 16-year affair. The 1930s depression was caused by and aggravated by acts of government, and so was the current financial mess that we’re in. Do we want to repeat history by listening to those who created the calamity? That’s like calling on an arsonist to help put out a fire. Walter E.Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
Are you a Conservative Republican? There’s an App for That! Take your involvement to a new level with the official Conservative Republicans of California app for iPhone/iPad and Droid. H Keep up on the latest conservative news. H Stay involved with CRC. H Twitter, Facebook, Videos and more... Scan the barcode to download our free app. Use a free QR Reader to scan the codes, or visit the iTunes App Store or Android Market to download.
F A L L
2 0 1 1
circle of our concern so that we bequeath the American dream to future generations.” Within days of the “national conversation” provoked by the Tucson violence, union demonstrators were drawing Hitler moustaches on pictures of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and describing his supporters as “pigs.” The civility crowd was unmoved. It’s easy to decry incivility on the part of your opponents — much harder to call out those on your own side. Peter Wehner, a former Bush administration official and respected conservative commentator, has been critical of Herman Cain (for his comments about Muslims) and Tea Party Nation CEO Judson Phillips (for describing liberalism as a philosophy responsible for a billion deaths), among others. It’s harder to cite examples of liberals policing their own
ranks. Barbara Walters condemned those who rushed to blame Sarah Palin for the Giffords shooting. But no other examples spring to mind. Here’s a new opportunity. If the Democrats meant even one word of what they said in January about civil discourse — they can loudly and unequivocally condemn the following: Rep. Maxine Waters has invited the Tea Party “to go to hell.” Fellow Black Caucus member Rep. Andre Carson recently said, “Some of these folks in Congress right now would love to see us as second-class citizens . . . This Tea Party movement would love to see you and me . . . hanging on a tree.” Vice President Biden described the AFL-CIO as the “only thing keeping the barbarians from the gates.” Teamsters leader Jimmy Hoffa topped them all. Warming up the crowd for an
Obama speech, he said “We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war. President Obama: This is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong.” President Obama, are those the kind of “healing” words you had in mind? Find out more about Mona Charen and at www.creators.com.
We Can Stop SB 48, but we need your help. We have filed a referendum with the state to overturn and repeal SB 48. We have until September 30th to gather 750,000 signatures to force the issue onto the ballot so California voters can decide. Will you join our effort? There are just three simple steps to helping...
1. Visit our website: www.StopSB48.com
2. Download the petition, sign it & mail it back.
3. Tell all of your friends to do the same.
Visit www.StopSB48.com Today
Paid for by Stop SB 48 • ID #1339956 • 660 J Street, Suite 250 • Sacramento, CA. 95814
What is SB 48? SB 48 is a new law that’s been misrepresented to the public as a bill aimed to end bullying. But the bill says nothing about bullying. Instead, it requires all public schools — including charter schools — to include positive discussions of the sexual orientations of transgender, bisexual, and gay Americans in all grades from K-12.