Author: Californiacontrarian

The latest I read is that the Palisades fire was possibly caused by fireworks! Note that the top four causes of wildfires do not include fireworks, but I suppose that anything is possible even though July 4th is about six months hence from the start of the Palisades fire.
[FYI: the top four causes of wildfires include electrical, arson, lightning, and campfires.] At this point even though an electrical cause is suspected in the Altadena fire, I have not read that an electrical cause is suspected in the Palisades fire. There was no lightning at that time, and thus we ate left with arson, campfires, and … fireworks.
Meanwhile news broke that three recent brush fires in the San Diego, California area started in homeless encampments. The San Diego Metro Arson Strike Team (MAST) confirmed this news to NBC 7 on Thursday,1/30/25. That news is believable since on last Halloween another San Diego fire near San Diego State University was caused by a campfire in a homeless encampment.
Let me get this straight. Four out of four recent San Diego fires started in homeless encampments, but ninety miles to the north the Palisades fire was apparently started by … fireworks!
Hmmm!

2/4/25

A survey recently taken on immigration enforcement revealed some interesting nuances with regard to deportation of certain groups of illegals.
The online survey was conducted Jan. 29–30, with a total of 54,144 respondents.
Here are a few sample questions for you to answer yourselves.
Answer …Yes/ Conditional yes/ No

1. Should babies born to illegal immigrants be granted U.S. citizenship as a birthright?

2. Should illegal immigrants who have lived in the U.S. for more than 10 years and are well-integrated be deported?

3. Should illegal immigrants fleeing war or persecution be deported?

4. Should illegal immigrants who are otherwise law-abiding be deported?

5. Should illegal immigrants reliant on public assistance programs be deported?

6. Should illegal immigrants with U.S. citizen children be deported?

Answers from the survey:
1. 86.85% yes.
2. 42%/18%/40%
3. 37%/-/48%
4. 63%/29%/6%
5. 88%/9%/1%
6. 57%/34/3%

The survey basically reveals strong support for deporting illegal immigrants, particularly those flagged as security threats or reliant on public assistance.
However, the results also highlight divisions over how immigration policy should address those with long-term ties to the United States, visa overstayers, and employment.
While a majority backs mass deportation, a sizable contingent favors a more nuanced approach, reflecting the ongoing debate over how best to balance enforcement with economic and humanitarian considerations.

Me?
I have a soft heart for illegals with extenuating circumstances, but am adamant that any who end up staying are not granted immediate citizenship and can never vote.
2/3/25

A lot of what initially follows is taken from my blog of over two years ago, 1/13/23:
“Most reasonable and rational individuals will agree that murder is wrong. Other than in self-defense, murder cannot be justified. It doesn’t matter what the age of the victim is. It doesn’t matter if the victim is an adult or a child, murder is wrong and cannot be tolerated by a society. If you do not agree with that you might as well stop reading and go back into your cave.

Note that here I am not talking about abortion, but rather, the killing of an out of the womb human being.
From Fox News and Life News from earlier in the week, “House Republicans have introduced new legislation that would stop infanticide and protect babies who survive abortion. This is a similar measure to one that pro-abortion former Speaker Nancy Pelosi blocked 80 times when she ran the House. It would also penalize doctors who allow such infants to die or who intentionally kill a newborn following a failed abortion. The Born-Alive Act ensures that infants born alive after an attempted abortion receive the same protection of law and degree of care as any newborn (Life News). Family Research Council: After four years of trying to force a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, Republicans are finally in a position to hold one themselves. The House is scheduled to vote on Wednesday, 1/11/23.”
Back on 1/11/23 the House passed this bill with the support of 219 Republicans and one Democrat. It subsequently didn’t pass in the Senate.

From Townhall:
“On 1/22/25 all 47 Democratic senators voted against moving forward with Sens. James Lankford’s (R-OK) and Jim Banks’ (R-IN) bill, the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. The vote was 52-47, with the bill falling short of the necessary 60 votes. Such commonsense legislation would merely protect babies born alive from failed abortions by ensuring they received medical care. Republicans have repeatedly tried to get such a bill passed, only to face opposition from vehemently pro-abortion Democrats, who often lie and mislead about the bill.
The bill quite clearly lays out how babies born alive are persons deserving of equal legal protections, and that they must receive medical care. “If an abortion results in the live birth of an infant, the infant is a legal person for all purposes under the laws of the United States, and entitled to all the protections of such laws,” the bill states in its findings. “Any infant born alive after an abortion or within a hospital, clinic, or other facility has the same claim to the protection of the law that would arise for any newborn.”

To me the more basic question is, “When does a fetus have “life”… when does a fetus become a human being?”
How long should it take to identify “life”?
The Democrats in the Senate seem to think that being born does not identify “life”!
These Senators are despicable! Murder is not okay!

Personally, I would go further and say that human life begins when the fetus has a heartbeat.
2/1/25

Over the last week or so I watched two Republicans put down, err, … the demolish two liberal questioners harping on the J6 pardons.
First it was President Trump, and then it was Marjorie Taylor Greene.
From Townhall:
President Donald Trump, during a press conference, expertly clapped back at an NBC News reporter during a testy exchange over his decision to pardon nearly 1,500 of the individuals who were convicted of crimes related to the riot at the United States Capitol building in 2021.
NBC’s Peter Alexander brought up the pardons, noting that Trump “has long said that you back the blue” and asking if he is “sending the message that assaulting officers is okay, with these pardons.”
Trump replied, “No, the opposite,” and explained that he is releasing two Washington, D.C. police officers who were imprisoned for five years after arresting an illegal immigrant. “I am the friend of police. More than any president that’s ever been in this office,” the president said.
The reporter attempted to interject again, but Trump stopped him, saying, “Listen to me for a second. Stop interrupting. They’ve served years in jail. If you look at the American public, the American public is tired of it.”
The president continued, arguing that murderers tend to get away with their crimes and reiterated that “we pardoned people that were treated unbelievably poorly” and said the authorities “are still looking for them, but they’re not looking for the murderers, the people that are killing everybody.”

Strong work, DJT!

From RedState:
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) gave a masterclass in handling members of the biased media when a reporter tried to question her about President Donald Trump’s decision to pardon the J6ers.
Inside the Capitol building, a reporter asked Greene if she planned to give tours of the building to J6ers who were pardoned.
The lawmaker shot back, “Is this all you’re really talking about is the J6ers that have been pardoned?”
Greene continued, asking, “Are you going to talk about the Biden family that got pardoned?
The reporter responded, “I haven’t.”
The lawmaker pressed the reporter, “What about the rapers and killers and murderers that Joe Biden pardoned? There’s tons of them. Is that a focus at all?”
The lawmaker further stated that she hopes the J6ers “go live their lives and can reassemble something back together because they have suffered enough.”

Strong work, MTG!

1/31/25

This past week has been somewhat like a game of ping-pong with a lot of back and forth … tit-for-tat.
On 1/20/25 President Trump signed an executive order reversing Biden’s executive order that reversed Trump’s executive order, a dizzying back and forth, with the ultimate result being that the U.S.A. shredded its W.H.O. membership card.
Note that the United States is the largest contributor to the World Health Organization (WHO). In 2022–2023, the U.S. contributed $1.28 billion to the WHO’s budget.
“A penny saved …”

Also Trump stopped the security for Mike Pompeo and Trump’s former Iran envoy Brian Hook.
From C &C:
“It is widely believed that, while he was CIA Director, Pompeo sabotaged Trump’s attempt to declassify the Crossfire Hurricane binder, which would have completely exonerated the President.”
Tit-for-tat?
According to CBS, in August 2023, the Biden Administration canceled security protection for Trump’s former National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien, who at that time was facing credible and continuing death threats from Iran for his role in the strike on Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. Various Congressmen begged Biden to reconsider, but O’Brien never got his security back.
?Tit-for-tat?
CBS reported that security for just Pompeo and Hook costs two million dollars a month ..$24 M per year.
How much additionally saved by stopping security for Fauci?
“Another penny saved …”
1/28/25

“There are as many opinions as there are people: each has his own view,” said Terence (185–159 BC), a Roman playwright

Last week after Trump’s inauguration I went to lunch with a friend who says that he is a Republican, but who had his own views. Almost immediately after sitting down, he started bemoaning the fact that President Trump was signing “way too many” executive orders in the first few days. I thought to myself … “you ain’t seen nothin’ yet.” Indeed, I was right as the signing of multiple executive orders has continued on those things that President Trump campaigned on and promised to implement. There are no surprises here; the surprise is the speed at which he is accomplishing what he promised. I would guess that at some point that I will probably not agree with one, or even perhaps a few of these executive orders.

At present, my favorites include his “One Flag Policy,” and the DEI abolishment.
From the Free Beacon:
The Trump State Department implemented a landmark “One Flag Policy” policy on Monday, barring U.S. outposts at home and abroad from flying any other flag but the Stars and Stripes.
From the Epoch Times:
President Donald Trump’s latest executive action will cut off federal funding to any learning institutions that mandate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) provisions or hire contractors that engage in such practices.
The executive order says that any schools that receive federal money will be issued guidance for complying with this mandate within 120 days.

Your favorites and mine are probably not the same as each of us has our own view.
1/24/25

During a Mar-a-Lago conference then president-elect Donald Trump told reporters “The Panama Canal is vital to our country.” Trump also said he wouldn’t rule out using military force to take back control of the canal.
As background:
The United States built the canal over a decade in the early 1900s as a way to connect the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, finishing the project in 1914.
Washington relinquished control of the waterway to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999, under a treaty signed in 1977 by then-President Jimmy Carter.
The 1977 deal consists of two treaties: the Treaty Concerning the Permanent Neutrality and Operation of the Panama Canal, also known as the Neutrality Treaty, and the Panama Canal Treaty.
The Neutrality Treaty stipulates that the United States may use its military force to protect the Panama Canal from any threat to its neutrality, essentially allowing the United States to perpetually use the waterway.

“American ships are being severely overcharged and not treated fairly in any way, shape, or form, and that includes the United States Navy,” Trump said during his inaugural address in Washington on Jan. 20. “And above all, China is operating the Panama Canal.”

If, indeed, China, is now significantly influencing the running and the control of the canal, then that would appear to violate the Neutrality Treaty. … Hmmm!
At this point I suspect that Trump’s statements on the Panama Canal are commensurate of how he views the Art of the Deal.
Panama’s President José Raúl Mulino responded to Trump’s comments on Jan. 20, saying the canal belongs to Panama and will remain Panamanian territory.
However, I am not so sure that the Central American nation’s leader is willing to bet that Trump is bluffing!
“No presence of any nation in the world interferes with our administration,” Mulino wrote.
I guess we’ll see to which country the canal is vital.

1/23/25

It’s amazing to me that at the last minute Joe Biden issued pardons to many who have not been convicted of anything. In fact a lot of these last minute pardons were issued to individuals who have not even been charged with anything!

To me the only logical conclusion is that these now pardoned individuals are guilty … perhaps even guilty of things have haven’t even been yet discovered. If one is pardoned then that individual is obviously guilty. Why would an innocent individual be pardoned?

President Biden pardoned his siblings just minutes before leaving office on Monday. The pardon applies to James Biden, Sara Jones Biden, Valerie Biden Owens, John Owens, and Francis Biden, the White House announced. What “crimes” were these individuals pardoned for?

Biden issued another wave of pre-emptive pardons earlier Monday morning, those going to Dr. Anthony Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley and people associated with the House select committee investigation into January 6. What “crimes” were these individuals pardoned for?

In my mind the pardoning of the above noted individuals is a clear admission of their guilt, and even a person of diminished capacity, like ex-President Biden, realizes this.

In my mind these Biden pardons have made a mockery of the entire Presidential pardoning procedure, and President Trump should review the entire process after he pardons those individuals who were actually convicted of dubious crimes especially those involved with J6.

I do not pretend to be judge or even a lawyer, but how is it possible to pardon individuals for “crimes” that they haven’t even been accused of? Nonsense!
1/22/25

President-elect Donald Trump has nominated a bunch of strong individuals to be in his cabinet, and right away in the confirmation hearings various Democrat Senators started going after some nominees with innuendo and a bunch of “gotcha questions.”
From my perspective it became obvious almost right away that the Trump nominees were the smart folks and some of the Senate Democrats who were asking the questions were like what the cat dragged in! After the first few days of questions the main issue appeared to be … “which of the questioning Democrat Senators was the dumbest!” Granted my take may be biased, but my vote goes to Mazie Hirono from Hawaii. FYI: Megyn Kelly chose the new Senator from Michigan, Elissa Slotkin, for the worst of the worst. Of course Pocahontas from Massachusetts was right up there as expected! Others have picked Senators Tim Kaine from Virginia. So many to choose from!

The toughest sells — former Democrats Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard, to serve as secretary of health and human services and director of national intelligence, respectively, and Kash Patel for director of the FBI — haven’t yet had confirmation hearings.

Be that as it may, the important takeaway from the questions hurled at the nominees by the various above noted yo-yo Senators is … “Is any Republican Senator going to want to be identified as the one who sided with the likes of Hirono, Kaine, Warren, or Slotkin?
Going out on a limb … I am going to predict that all of Trump’s nominees will be confirmed.
1/21/25

As most of you are aware Sunday is the day I write about either a hero or someone that we can admire. This week my choice is
Altadena’s Pete Villari, who returned during the fire, only to see that the back of his house was on fire. He grabbed a garden hose and a ladder and was able put that fire out.
Shortly thereafter he saw that a fence behind a neighbor’s house on his cul-de-sac was also on fire and he was also able to put that fire out also.
Subsequently he noted that fire had crept into the eaves of the house of another neighbor, George. Pete Villari put that fire out also. Then he noted that the backyard fence at Eleanor’s house was also on fire and he was successful at dousing that fence fire of his other neighbor.
All told the eight houses on that Altadena cul-de sac were saved in large part due to Pete Villari’s ten heroic hours. In addition later in that same evening he was able to disburse potential looters who were suspiciously eyeing the empty houses on his cul-de-sac.
Indeed Pete Villari is a true modern day hero!
1/19/25