Category: Uncategorized

Back at the end of July as the presidential campaign entered the final 100-day stretch, Republican nominee Donald Trump and his running mate, JD Vance, rallied supporters in a state that hasn’t backed a Republican candidate for the White House since 1972.
Was this a fake or was this part of the plan all along? What plan?
Could it be that campaigning in Minnesota, making the blue state of Minnesota appear to be in play, was something of a charade, potentially forcing Harris and Democrats to devote resources in a state they would likely otherwise ignore?
Likewise could campaigning in St.Cloud, Minnesota have been a part of the plan to persuade the Dems and Kamala Harris to pick the present governor of Minnesota, Tim Walz, to be her running mate?
If this was Trump’s plan, it appears to have worked. There have been multiple explanations as to why this lackadaisical governor of a blue state was chosen as Harris’s VP choice. The reasons that I like the best include future impeachment insurance if Harris were to be elected … after all who want Tim Walz to be the president!
The other potential reason for this strange choice of a running mate was to try to win Michigan. It is thought that even though the governor of Pennsylvania as the VP choice might go further to gain Pennsylvania’s electoral votes, Josh Shapiro is not only Jewish, but also a strong backer of Israel in its conflict with Gaza, and this could potentially keep Arabs in Michigan home on Election Day. Of course if Trump were to win Michigan like he did in 2016, or if he should win Pennsylvania, then there will be plenty of second guessing about Harris’s VP choice.
But for me, I think that the “fake campaigning” by Trump/Vance in Minnesota was part of the plan to force Harris to choose Walz as her running mate and it is already paying dividends.

8/8/24
www.californiacontrarian.com

As we all are aware it’s summer and because it’s summer it is warm. At this point in some places this summer seems to be exceptionally warm, but comparatively speaking how warm is it? It seems that it depends on how many years back one goes back when comparing.
Per chance, I happened on this today.
From Watts Up With That:
“The past nine years (2015 to 2023) have been the warmest years within the 174-year observational record of the WMO.” Since WHO is one of the “internationally recognized entities” worshiped by NATO’s High Command, one would have thought that someone would have done enough basic research to work out that it only came into existence in 1950 and that, therefore, the 174-year global-temperature dataset is not WHO’s dataset. It is, in fact, kept by the Hadley Center and the University of East Anglia.
NATO also says:
“Global increase in the number of extremely hot days”: Yet again, NATO has failed to check its facts. In those parts of the world where temperature records have been kept for at least a century, it is plain that the Grapes of Wrath dustbowl years of the 1930s set far more heat records than have been seen since. The United States is a good example –

So yes, compared to the late 1960s and the early 1970s it does appear warmer … however, not compared to the 1930s.
Hmmm!
8/7/24
www.californiacontrarian.com

Over the years I think I have been pretty consistent about how I fell about certain things. For those of you that need convincing , go to www.californiacontrarian.com and check all the way back to April, 2017.
One of my constant and recurrent themes is how the Democrats consistently and repeatedly advocate for things that are going to be adversely felt the most by those among us who are the most economic vulnerable. Kamala Harris is no different from other Democrats in this regard.
From the Daily Wire:
“The Biden-Harris administration proposed a new rule that would allow illegal immigrants to access taxpayer-funded college preparatory programs that were meant to assist low-income American citizens. The new proposed rule from the Biden-Harris Department of Education would allow illegal immigrants who qualify for the Deferred Action Childhood Arrivals Program (DACA) to access federal TRIO programs targeted to serve and assist low-income individuals, first-generation college students, and individuals with disabilities to progress through the academic pipeline from middle school to post-baccalaureate programs.”
While at first glance this might sound kindhearted, when one puts on glasses, it becomes apparent that if a non-citizen is able to take advantage of this largess, it essentially means that some disadvantaged or disabled individual, who is a citizen, will be excluded.
Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) put it succinctly when he blasted the proposed rule from the Democratic administration, noting that it would allow illegal immigrants to take the spots of American citizens (Daily Wire).
I feel sorry for DACA individuals who are here through no fault of their own over the years. However, I have been consistent in stating that their situation should be similar to that of actual American citizens with the caveat that they should never be allowed to vote nor should they be eligible for handouts from the government.
8/5/24
www.California contrarian.com

On Sunday I write about individuals who act on principle, and should be praised for this. Tanja Benton is such a person … a person who had strong religious beliefs and refused to get the COVID vaccine, based on principle.
I was always against vaccine mandates for younger individuals, and so it easy for me to admire a person who stood firmly against vaccine mandates.
(For those of you who did not believe in religious exemptions for the COVID vaccine, the question that comes up is, “Could you admire a person who stands up for what he/she believes in, if you do not believe in that same thing?” Here you could be for the person, and not necessarily for what that person believes in … but I digress.)
From the Epoch Times:
“BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee officials told Ms. Tanja Benton in August of 2021 that she would need to be ‘fully vaccinated’ to keep her position. Ms. Benton refused, saying aborted fetal cell lines were involved in the development of the COVID-19 vaccines and she couldn’t ‘in good conscience consume the vaccine, which would not only defile her body but also anger and dishonor God.’
While Ms. Benton said her position became fully remote in 2020, BlueCross BlueShield said it would have involved some in-person interaction with clients.
Ms. Benton was told to pursue other positions within the company and applied for two. But she was fired on Nov. 4, 2021, and was told five days later that, ‘Unfortunately, all positions require the vax now,’ according to an email.
Tanja Benton had worked at the firm for 16 years when she was fired.
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, presented with the case, cleared Ms. Benton to sue her former employer.
Her lawsuit charged that BlueCross BlueShield violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which says an employer may not “discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment” because of that person’s religion. Employers can disregard religious exemption requests if they can prove accommodating them would create an undue hardship.
BlueCross BlueShield “cannot prove that allowing Plaintiff to continue her employment as a Bio Statistical Research Scientist without being vaccinated for COVID-19 constitutes an undue hardship,” the suit stated. The company “also cannot show that it made any good-faith efforts to accommodate plaintiff’s sincerely held religious beliefs.”
To make a long story short,Tanja Benton won her lawsuit.
She was awarded $177,240 in back pay, $10,000 in compensation, and $500,000 in punitive damages, according to a document made public by the federal court in eastern Tennessee on June 30.
Her sincere religious beliefs combined with persistence and resolve paid off for Tanja Benson.
8/4/24
www.californiacontrarian.com

The Gaza pier was one terrific, terrible waste of our taxpayer money by Biden/Harris, but this is not an isolated instance of wasting taxpayer’s money by the Democrats in charge.
Look at what is happening in North Carolina ( from the Epoch Times on 6/26/24):
“The U.S. government has allocated $387 million since 2022 to care for unaccompanied migrant children at a North Carolina school campus that has yet to house a single child.
Illegal immigrant children entering the United States without a parent or guardian have never been placed at the Greensboro campus, which remains unoccupied but operational, according to a government fact sheet updated June 14 and a former employee interviewed by The Epoch Times”
But it gets worse … “Although the 100-acre Greensboro facility is empty of children, hundreds of employees worked 24 hours, seven days a week training and preparing to receive children this spring, the former employee said. The facility includes 31 buildings, an $18 million athletic center, a natatorium, and a 22-acre lake.
“The campus, once a Jewish boarding school, was ready to receive children at the Greensboro Influx Care Facility on March 15, according to an Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) fact sheet.
“The Greensboro facility is the latest of three such sites for unaccompanied minors aged 13 through 17 managed by the ORR, which operates within the Administration for Children and Families (ACF), which is a division of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
“Two other influx care centers are in Texas: Pecos Children’s Center and Dimmit County Children’s Center. None of the Texas facilities currently have children either, according to ORR, which recently closed a fourth facility at Fort Bliss, Texas.”

So let’s get this straight … in anticipation of large numbers of illegal migration children, the Biden/Harris administration spent vast millions of taxpayer dollars on various centers, including the one in North Carolina. But these centers were never operational, most likely because these children were directly released into the U.S. … where and to whom??
Hmmm!

8/3/24
www.californiacontrarian.com

Once again the Democrats, specifically Joe Biden and his inflation, is taking its toll on those who can least afford it.
From the San Diego Union on 7/1/24 Tribune by Kristin Taketa:
“More than 6,400 students enrolled in San Diego Unified this past school year were considered homeless — and that number is likely an undercount. Homelessness takes different forms, and it could mean students and their families are living in a shelter, in a vehicle or doubled up in somebody else’s home.”

How many these 6,400 are children of illegal immigrants? Although I read and then reread the newspaper article more than once, I can find no mention of the legal/illegal status of these families/children. Then I emailed the article’s author and asked her that specific question … after more than a month, still no response!
Is this problem an offshoot of Joe Biden’s open border policy or Joe Biden’s inflation? Either way how does President Biden or the Democratic California governor, Gavin Newsom, propose that this problem be solved? … all is quiet on this western front!

San Diego school board Trustee Richard Barrera thinks that schools have a responsibility to help students whose families who are experiencing homelessness in particular, because schools are often the most stable place in a student’s life, Barrera further said, “School staff may be better able to help families because they have developed trust with families that other government agencies may not share.”
“And it’s critical for schools to address poverty issues such as homelessness, because they often prevent students from being able to attend school at all.
“The issue of homelessness is obviously something that is growing in San Diego, and schools can’t simply bury their heads in the sand and not pay attention to the issues that students are dealing with outside of school,” Barrera said.

I do not have a problem with providing some form of protected shelter for these children so that they can attend school, but the question has to do with who is paying for the expected expenses of these children/families? To my way of thinking, it should be the federal government or the state government, and not the local school districts.

8/2/24
www.californiacontrarian.com

As we are all painfully aware our recent and still present out-of-control inflation has caused the price of most everything to go up significantly … food, gasoline, transportation, and, yes, home prices and consequently homeownership has become a pipe dream for many.
From CNN.com:
“The dream of homeownership feels out of reach for many American families.
The vast majority (86%) of current renters in the United States say they would like to buy a home — but can’t afford one, according to a CNN poll conducted by SSRS released Monday, 7/29/24.
Among those same renters who can’t afford to buy a home right now, 54% think it’s unlikely they’ll ever be able to, the poll found.”
And to make matters worse, in order to try to stem inflation there has been an increase in interest rates which makes home ownership further out of reach for many.
Again from CNN.com:
“Younger people especially are having trouble buying a home right now. The CNN poll found that 90% of renters younger than 45 say they’d like to buy but can’t afford it, compared with 79% of those age 45 and above.
Not surprisingly, younger Americans are more hopeful that situation will change.
Most adults (53%) younger than 45 who want to buy but can’t afford it believe it’s at least somewhat likely they’ll eventually be able to buy a home. That’s compared with just 32% of those 45 and older.
Among renters who want to buy but can’t afford it, 40% say the biggest barrier is saving for a down payment, according to the CNN poll.
Nearly a third (31%) say the biggest obstacle to buying a home is high interest rates. Just 17% say the inability to qualify for a mortgage is the biggest hurdle.”
So there you have it … inability to save for a down payment because high inflation is eating into any possible saving, and high interest rates … both ravages of Biden/Harris’ inflation.
Thank you, Joe/Kamala!

8/1/24
californiacontrarian

Last week when I referred to “incompetence” in those who are supposed to be in charge, I was told by a reader that I shouldn’t be so harsh as all humans make mistakes.
However on 7/29/24 I read two seemingly unrelated stories that on further reflection summarize the incompetence of those who are supposedly in charge of our government. For the second time I want to emphasize the word “incompetence.”
The first incredible piece of news was an ABC interview of the local Butler, PA SWAT team. The spokesman for the SWAT team said that they had no communication with Secret Service prior to the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. They were supposed to meet them upon arrival and it never happened.
Hmmm!
The second story from PJ Media:
“More than three-fourths of all personal income tax from American taxpayers will go directly toward paying off the interest on our massive and ever-burgeoning national debt. FAIRtax reported the sobering data on July 20, explaining, “Interest Payments on U.S. National Debt Will Shatter $1,140,000,000,000 This Year – Eating 76% of All Income Taxes Collected.” Yet politicians from both parties only increase instead of restricting government spending. We are headed for a national financial catastrophe of epic proportions.”
From Twitter:
Peter St Onge, Ph.D has an excellent 3:47 video going into the details of why this is a cruel joke on the American people. And also on Twitter … Elon Musk: ‘America is headed for bankruptcy fyi.’

So there you have it! 76% of taxes paid by Americans are going to service our debt. What do we get for the other 34%? … an incompetent, or worse, Secret Service that failed to communicate with the local Butler, PA SWAT team!
OMG!
Hmmm!

7/31/24
californiacontrarian

Right now the liberal Main Stream Media (MSM) is somehow trying to dispute that Kamala Harris was ever the “Border Czar” despite multiple past referrals to her as such in/on the same MSM.
Now although she was never formally designated as the EV Czar, perhaps those of us who prefer the freedom of choosing what kind of car we want to purchase and drive should shift our focus to “Kamala, the EV Czar.”
From The Washington Free Beacon:
“During her 2020 presidential campaign, Harris vowed to implement climate policies ensuring 50 percent of all new passenger vehicles sold are EVs by 2030 and 100 percent are EVs by 2035, an archived copy of her campaign website shows. She also backed a mandate requiring all new vehicle purchases for corporate fleets, transportation networks, and heavy-duty vehicles be electric by 2030.
Months after she announced in January 2019 that she would run for president, Harris also cosponsored the so-called Zero-Emission Vehicles Act, a bill that was later modified to include language mandating 43 percent of car sales are electric by 2027 and 100 percent are electric by 2035.”

Granted that while it is unlikely that I will be around by 2035 and it is also extremely unlikely that I will be driving in 2035, I still want the freedom to drive the type of car that I desire, and that is only one reason the I will not vote for the “Kamala, the EV Czar.” Apparently I am not alone.

A poll conducted earlier this month by Remington Research Group on behalf of the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, which opposes EV mandates, found that 59 percent or more of likely voters in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin oppose bans on gas-powered cars in their states, which will likely determine the winner of the election.
Larger majorities in those states reported that a candidate’s position on stopping bans on new gas cars would be an important factor in their vote.
“This new polling underscores what we have been hearing from the American people of all political stripes for months—that they do not want the government banning gas cars, mandating electric vehicles or imposing regulations that restrict access to the types of cars that best meet a family’s needs and budget,” American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers president Chet Thompson said at the time.

Soon the MSM will be denying that Kamala was ever gung-ho on EV mandates … reminiscent of what those in charge were doing in George Orwell’s “1984.”
7/30/24
www.californiacontrarian.com

Do individuals in positions of authority have an obligation to admit when they have been wrong? Ideally speaking the answer should be ‘yes,’ but as we all are aware, this happens very rarely. Take for example Janet Yellen telling us that inflation was only going to be temporary! Because she is the Secretary of the Treasury, we would have expected that she would know what she is talking about. However, she could not have been further off base as inflation continues, now many years later. Did Janet Yellen ever apologize or recant her wildly wrong prediction about inflation? … Err, not that I am aware of!
So again back to my original question … Do individuals in positions of authority have an obligation to admit when they have been wrong?
My answer would be, “yes, if they are honest.”
And this gets me to J.D. Vance and his criticisms of Donald Trump many years ago. Vance called himself a “never-Trump guy” in 2016, but his perception of Trump transformed and he endorsed the Republican nominee for president in 2020. The vice presidential nominee issued a formal apology in 2021 for his previous statement about Trump.
Are you listening, Janet Yellen?! … A formal apology!
I think that J.D. Vance is an honest guy and I think he is a good choice. Pollster Frank Luntz appears to agree, but for a different reason. He said on 7/28/24 that former President Donald Trump’s selection of Republican Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance as his vice presidential candidate could be crucial to winning the election.
From the Daily Caller:
Trump picked Vance as his running mate, and has stressed the senator’s dedication to “fight for the worker.” Luntz, on “Inside Politics,” said Vance appeals to “paycheck to paycheck voters,” who he described as “the most important segment of the population” for the election.
“J.D. Vance comes from the background that Trump’s focusing on, so he’s credible. And he’s got the language because this is how he grew up,” Luntz said. “To me, the most important segment of the population, the one that makes or breaks, are these paycheck to paycheck voters, people who have jobs, they’ve been working, they may not be college graduates and they’re struggling. And it represents one-fourth of the American electorate. Normally, they vote Democrat over Republican by about two to one. Trump brought it to three to two, even closer. That segment, if they break for Harris, she’s the next president. If Trump can keep them, he’s the next president.”
“J.D. Vance appeals to them because … it’s who he was. It’s not a segment we talk about. It’s not a segment we see. I get them in focus groups because I go out to these states, but they are really suffering,” he continued. “The economy is not doing well for them. These are not shareholders, these are not people who have a cushion. If they get fired or one check doesn’t work, they could lose their homes, they could lose their cars. And we are very sympathetic towards them as a country. Watch, because I think that’s going to be the focus going forward.”

It seems to me that while Kamala Harris will appeal to those without a paycheck and to the coastal elites, I agree with Luntz that J.D.Vance will appeal to those living from paycheck to paycheck.

7/29/24
californiacontrarian.com