Chuck DeVore appeared last night on FOXNews with Glenn Beck talking about the role of government and his race for the U.S. Senate. While reiterating his policy of not endorsing candidates, Beck declared: “You intrigue me.” Beck had Assemblyman DeVore on the program for two segments (they will play sequentially):
Early on the in the program Glenn listed the litany of liberal interest groups who have given Chuck DeVore a failing grade for his hundreds of votes in the California State Assembly. As he went down the list he handed Chuck his jar of jelly beans, a bottle of water, and even the infamous red phone. Chuck intoned: “I don’t want the red phone” to which Beck chuckled: “They never call…”
Beck seem unabashed sharing his affinity for the Assemblyman especially as Chuck related his feelings about the history of the progressive movement.
Bottom line: Chuck DeVore is indeed the tea party candidate and, as George Will declared on Sunday, will be the Republican nominee.
Senator Barbara Boxer is at it again. Whenever she disagrees with someone, her first instinct is to show them disrespect. Whether Boxer’s dealing with former Secretary of State Condi Rice, Gen. Petraeus, BG Walsh, Harry Alford of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, or Michael Steele, Chairman of the Republican National Committee, you can be sure that her condescending manner will show through — or is she just mean? Another video brought to you by the DeVore for California campaign:
Over the course of the past few weeks it has become obvious that President Obama distrusts those who serve us the most in our communities. It’s time for real change in Washington.
What is it about liberals and the military? Why are liberals uncomfortable with the military? Why do some liberals apparently despise our military? Is it because the armed services remind them that not every international dispute can be solved with soothing words uttered by a diplomat? Is it because they view military expenditures as taking money away from greater health and welfare spending?
The latest liberal-military confrontation occurred in a hearing room on Capitol Hill on June 16, 2009 when Brigadier General Michael Walsh called California’s junior senator “Ma’am” – a perfectly acceptable sign of military respect to both a U.S. Senator or a senior female officer. What happened next was remarkable. Barbara Boxer immediately dressed down the general officer, saying, “I had a… You know… do me a favor, could you say ‘Senator’ instead of ‘Ma’am’ – it’s just a thing, I worked so hard to get that title so I’d appreciate it, yes thank you.”
According to the U.S. Army’s own guide to protocol, Members of the U.S. Senate should be verbally addressed as “Sir,” “Ma’am” or “Senator.” So, General Walsh was simply following longstanding tradition.
Ironically, when addressing senior officers, with the exception of generals whom most junior officers and enlisted personnel will call “General,” the most respectful form of address is “Sir” or “Ma’am” with use of the actual rank in address being reserved oftentimes in situations when the senior officer has not yet earned respect from an enlisted person, as in “Yes, Lieutenant!” as opposed to “Yes, Ma’am!”
Of course, this wasn’t Barbara Boxer’s first confrontation with the U.S. military – not by a long shot. Boxer cut her political teeth on the anti-Vietnam war protests around the Bay Area back in the day and never really changed her outlook on the uniformed defenders of the Constitution of the United States. Who can forget her confrontation with American hero Gen. David Petraeus back in 2007 when she called him a liar and then wrote a now laughable blog for the Huffington Post on September 14, 2007 which she headlined, “General Petraeus, Take Off the Rose-Colored Glasses” calling for an immediate end (read: “defeat”) to the war in Iraq.
Perhaps it’s time for the Barbara Boxer to have a new title: “Ex-Senator.”
Mr. DeVore (R.-Irvine) represents about 500,000 people in Orange County California. He retired as a lieutenant colonel after 24-years of service in the Army National Guard and is a candidate for U.S. Senate in 2010 against Barbara Boxer. visit: http://chuckdevore.com
California lawmakers are struggling to spin the results of the May 19 special election, fearful of the possibility that the voters may have just fired the first shot of the next great tax revolt.
I was on NPR with Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) the day after the election as he labored to claim that the Tuesday vote was all about frustrated voters, worried about their jobs who simply want the legislature to do its job and not pass the buck to them. He rejected my contention that the vote was an anti-tax vote.
But election-eve polls tell a different story, with California voters seeing themselves as over-taxed and very desirous of cuts in state spending. Polls are nice, but actual votes are better. While Prop. 1A lost by almost 32 points, it lost in fiscally conservative Orange County by almost 53 points while, in the early returns, it was passing in only one of California’s 58 counties: San Francisco. In the end, the most liberal California county, San Francisco, was the kindest to Prop. 1A, turning it down by barely more than six points. A 50-point spread in votes between Orange County and San Francisco County cannot be explained away by Sen. Steinberg’s attempt at damage control.
Gov. Schwarzenegger and the four legislative leaders, the “Big Five,” put this special election together with only Sacramento interests in mind, thinking the public sector unions that might be afraid of even a modest budget restraint tool would be bought off by the prospects of higher taxes. It mostly worked, with some unions enthusiastically supporting Prop. 1A and only a few opposed. But the Big Five forgot the most important special interest: the voters.
In spite of spending $26 million to bully and warn Californians into approving the five propositions, with opponents only marshalling $4 million, every budget-related proposition lost with the strongest showing a pitiful 37.4 percent “yes” vote for proposition 1B, a measure heavily backed by the powerful California Teachers Association union.
California now faces a $21.3 billion deficit over 15 months, with general fund revenues projected to be about $86 billion in 2009-10, down from $102.6 billion in 2007. Democrats face an interesting dilemma. They can do one of three things:
• Do they reform government, trimming unpopular expenses, such as the state’s bloated welfare rolls with California spending three times the national average on welfare due to our overly loose rules regarding work requirements and aid to illegal immigrant families?
• Do they slash and burn popular programs such as education and law enforcement?
• Do they try another end-run on the state constitution, enacting billions in new taxes with a simple majority vote by simply declaring them to be “fees”?
Based on my discussions with Democrat lawmakers, I do not expect any attempt at meaningful spending reform. Rather, dramatic reductions in popular programs such as K-12 education and law enforcement seem more likely, with the Democrats in the mood to tell the voters: “These painful cuts are the result of you voters voting against higher taxes.” If the public sector employee unions mobilize against this move, then the final outcome may well be another massive tax hike masquerading under the legal fig leaf of “fees.”
Either outcome would likely see California voters, recently mobilized under the banner of more than 50 tea parties in April (I had the honor addressing the tea parties in Pasadena and Modesto), organizing to make 2010 a repeat of the historic 1978 election by qualifying new tax and spending limitations for the ballot. Were that to occur, it would shake the foundation of the political establishment from the Pacific to the Atlantic.
Observers of California politics know that I opposed the budget deal that led to this special election. I stood up to my own party leadership, and I resigned as Assembly Minority Whip rather than support a deeply flawed deal — the only Assembly Republican to pay a political price for doing so. Though vindicated by events, I take no pleasure in the knowledge. Our beloved state is on the precipice, and whether it pulls back or plunges over is now in the hands of the men and women who brought it there.
California State Assemblyman Chuck DeVore resigned today as Chief Republican Whip due to his opposition to a massive tax increase deal brokered by Republican legislative leaders. DeVore said, “The St. Valentine’s Day deal to raise taxes on hardworking Californians will neither close the budget deficit nor control spending. I believe leadership thinks they are doing the right thing – but I cannot be a party to this agreement as I believe it will harm California.”
Excerpts of DeVore’s letter to Assembly Republican Leader Mike Villines follow:
“…the recent agreement you negotiated to increase taxes in exchange for a spending limit will not likely accomplish the twin aims of deficit reduction and budget control that you seek.
“This proposed agreement also strikes at the heart of our longtime opposition to tax increases. Excessive taxation both harms the economy and robs hardworking Californians of a portion of their liberty. Placing our Caucus squarely in line with tax increases also demoralizes our supporters – people who were counting on us to hold the line.
“For these reasons, I believe it is appropriate for me to resign as Chief Republican Whip, effective immediately. I can no longer participate as a leader on a team that is preparing to make a fundamental mistake of colossal proportions. For the sake of California I hope I am wrong – however, I fear I am right and that this tax increase and budget deal will result in more harm to the Golden State than good.”
Yesterday’s awful vote on Timothy Geithner aptly demonstrates that Washington has lost its bearings. For this purpose I’ve created a new calculator to show you just how your taxes will work moving foward. It’s pretty straight forward:
Erick Erickson: I thought it was a joke, but it appears the TSA really is going to give an exemption to muslims from full body scanners at airports. #rsrh
** In lieu of flowers for @chuckdevore and @dianedevore ’s wedding anniversary tomorrow, contribute here: http://bit.ly/8aZNU6 **
**
Bill S 
Moe Lane
Dan McLaughlin
Erick Brockway
Erick Erickson
Aaron Gardner
