Inland Utopia - Latest Comments

Re: Reflections on the Future

John E. Bredehoft (Empoprises) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:39:10 -0000

Don't go to England. They have really bad teeth.

Re: My Lament of an Instructor

Mkmk — Fri, 23 Dec 2011 13:12:42 -0000

Learn how to write. "I would of" !!!! WTF.

Re: Bob Dutton out polls Mike Morrell

mmunson — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 02:18:34 -0000

It might be, but Id like to see one by Adam Probolsky to get an independent measurement. I may have an animus against Morrell, but Dutton has done a better job compared to prior State Senate Minority leaders.

Re: Bob Dutton out polls Mike Morrell

Hkmiller618 — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:53:49 -0000

Wasn't this the poll that he paid for? I read the bulletin article that said there were two polls one that had Dutton higher was paid for by Dutton and evidently 'unavailable'. The other one was independent and had Mike Morrell up 13 % with likely voters. It also had Morrell and Dutton's name recognition dead even, where has Bob Dutton been this whole time, hanging out with bureaucrats in Sacramento I guess.

Re: Regulate and Legalize Marijuana in California

Brandt Hardin — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 14:21:46 -0000

Marijuana is the safest drug with actual benefits for the
user as opposed to alcohol which is dangerous, causes addiction, birth defects,
and affects literally every organ in the body.
Groups are organizing all over the country to speak their minds on
reforming pot laws. I drew up a very
cool poster featuring Uncle Willie Nelson and The Teapot Party for the cause
which you can check out on my artist’s blog at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot... Drop in and let me know what you think!

Re: Taxing Services, No Thank You

California Car Repair — Wed, 23 Nov 2011 02:14:01 -0000

Only a few blogger would discuss this
subject the way you do.

Re: A Costly Election Day

John E. Bredehoft (Empoprises) — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 18:02:04 -0000

This is the first election which I unintentionally missed. I knew the election was coming, but somehow the date slipped past me.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

Jolie — Sun, 06 Nov 2011 01:11:15 -0000

Deport all illegal aliens and let only a very very few in legally.

Re: Super Wal-Mart in Ontario, California? Yes, Please

mmunson — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 14:25:53 -0000

Problem is they will likely shut down the Upland store and move the employees to the Ontario store so there would not be a signifgant addition of jobs. Maybe temporarily to build the store.

Re: Super Wal-Mart in Ontario, California? Yes, Please

Zemanville — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 22:02:07 -0000

This would make jobs for us people in need

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

Cosmic Ray — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 01:14:12 -0000

You are no different than a bank robber! You are a criminal who is in violation of a federal law. To say anything different is sugar coating a lie. Just because you deny the the truth doesn't make it right. You Are Wrong. Go back home and then return to this country legally.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

Raymond L. Franklin — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 01:04:00 -0000

I agree whole heaartedly with the sentiments expressed here regarding AB131. The people this country illegaly are not only undocumented, they are criminals. Calling them undocumented immigrants is a misnomer. They are criminals who have committed a federal crime. To call them anything else and to give them legitemacy is a travesty.
The state of California is broke. We cannot afford to subsidize criminals. We need to repeal AB131.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

ger ='[ — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 13:05:16 -0000

mmunson, i agree on the hypocrisy. southern Mexicans are notoriously against immigration from central and south america. they use the same rhetoric of "they took our jobs!" they treat immigrants like crap. i'm not arguing against that. but i am not part of the Mexican government. i have no say in what they do. i am an undocumented American student who can barely speak Spanish, and is still called unamerican. who has paid for most of his education out of his own pocket, and been told he's selfish all the way through. who pays taxes and is still being told he's a leech in the system. so again, i would like to respectfully voice that i am offended by being likened to
a local bank robber.. my parents pay taxes, i pay taxes, my friends pay
taxes. we are giving to the bank, is what i'm saying.. asking for a
fraction of our investment back is not asking for charity, i feel. it's
asking for what is (less than) fair.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

mmunson — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 10:36:13 -0000

Well, we are mandated to educate those from K-12 grade due to Plyer v. Doe. However I would support a statement in Chinese and Spanish stating that we are mandated to educate you, but its strongly encouraged for you and your family to apply for legal papers or go home. I just find it hypocritical that Mexico can close their borders, but the left and Mexico wants us to have open borders. Its not just the undocumented, we should protect our borders from the drug lords as well. How about the Guatemalans who want their education in the Mexico schools or work in Mexican companies?

The immigration issue is one of the few issues that I am hard core on the right wing.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

ger =] — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 19:58:47 -0000

also, just read your bio. i too, am a fan of the Final Fantasy franchise!
although, i steered clear of the MMO's, it was a struggle weaning off WoW O.O

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

ger =] — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 19:49:14 -0000

couldn't agree more.
and only a progressive immigration reform could alleviate the struggle that thousands of undocumented Americans are facing.
people with BA's MA' s and Ph. D's are working in low skill jobs because they cannot practice their field without a social security number, and again, they are paying taxes...
so i'd like to respectfully voice that i am offended by being likened to a local bank robber.. my parents pay taxes, i pay taxes, my friends pay taxes. we are giving to the bank, is what i'm saying.. asking for a fraction of our investment back is not asking for charity, i feel. it's asking for what is (less than) fair.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

mmunson — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 19:01:34 -0000

The big issue is even if we pay to subsidize the undocumented's education further with cal grants then how will they utilize the education when they can not even get employed due to e-verify.

Re: Dream Act Part Two, We Can Not Afford AB 131

ger =] — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 18:40:23 -0000

yos, my parents have been paying taxes to the state since they came to this country (yes, undocumented people pay taxes, we have to). as undocumented immigrants they cannot apply for many of the state and federal programs that their taxes pay for. by being able to apply for financial aide, i am not 'seizing funds from legal residents'. if that were the case, then i could be argued that 'legal residents' are seizing money from undocumented immigrants for their education.
doesn't make sense.

Re: No Shot No School

John E. Bredehoft (Empoprises) — Sat, 13 Aug 2011 12:17:11 -0000

Note that you are not required to have a shot for school. You are required to have PROOF of a shot for school. If your paperwork is lost, you're out of luck.

Re: I Still Oppose the National Popular Vote

mvy — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:43:22 -0000

The population of the top five cities (New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Houston and Philadelphia)
is only 6% of the population of the United States and the population of the top 50 cities (going as obscurely far down as Arlington, TX) is only 19% of the population of the United States.
Suburbs and exurbs often vote Republican.

Evidence as to how a nationwide presidential campaign would be run, can be found by examining the way presidential candidates campaign to win the electoral votes of closely divided battleground states, such as in Ohio and Florida, under the state-by-state winner-take-all methods. The big cities in those battleground states do not receive all the attention, much less control the outcome. Cleveland and Miami certainly did not receive all the attention or control the outcome in Ohio and Florida in 2000 and 2004.

Because every vote is equal inside Ohio or Florida, presidential candidates avidly seek out voters in small, medium, and large towns. The itineraries of presidential candidates in battleground states (and their allocation of other campaign resources in battleground states) reflect the political reality that every gubernatorial or senatorial candidate in Ohio and Florida already knows–namely that when every vote is equal, the campaign must be run in every part of the state.

Even in California state-wide elections, candidates for governor or U.S. Senate don't campaign
just in Los Angeles and San Francisco, and those places don't control the outcome (otherwise California wouldn't have recently had Republican governors Reagan, Dukemejian, Wilson, and Schwarzenegger). A vote in rural Alpine county is just an important as a vote in Los Angeles. If Los Angeles cannot control statewide elections in California, it can hardly control a
nationwide election.

In fact, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland together cannot control a statewide election in California.

Similarly, Republicans dominate Texas politics without carrying big cities such as Dallas and Houston.

There are numerous other examples of Republicans who won races for governor and U.S. Senator in other states that have big cities (e.g., New York, Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Massachusetts) without ever carrying the big cities of their respective states. It is certainly true that the biggest cities in those states typically vote Democratic. However, the suburbs, exurbs, small towns, and rural parts of the states often voted Republican. If big cities controlled the outcome of elections, the governors and U.S. Senators would be Democratic in virtually every state with a significant city.

Re: I Still Oppose the National Popular Vote

mvy — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:41:09 -0000

2/3rds of the states and people have been just spectators to the presidential elections. That's more than 85 million voters.

Policies important to the citizens of ‘flyover’ states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.

States have the responsibility and power to make their voters relevant in every presidential election.

Unable to agree on any particular method, the Founding Fathers left the choice of method for selecting presidential electors exclusively to the states by adopting the language contained in section 1 of Article II of the U.S. Constitution-- "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors . . ." The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly characterized the authority of the state legislatures over the manner of awarding their electoral votes as "plenary" and "exclusive."

The National Popular Vote bill is a state-based approach. It preserves the Electoral College and state control of elections. It changes the way electoral votes are awarded in the Electoral College.

State election laws are not identical now nor is there anything in the National Popular Vote compact that would force them to become identical. The U.S. Constitution specifically permits diversity of election laws among the states because it explicitly gives the states control over the conduct of presidential elections.

The powers of state governments are neither increased nor decreased based on whether presidential electors are selected along the state boundary lines, along district lines (as has been the case recently in Maine and Nebraska), or national lines (as with the National Popular Vote).

Re: I Still Oppose the National Popular Vote

mvy — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:32:39 -0000

Any state that enacts the proportional approach on its own would reduce its own influence. This was the most telling argument that caused Colorado voters to agree with Republican Governor Owens and to reject this proposal in November 2004 by a two-to-one margin.

If the proportional approach were implemented by a state, on its own,, it would have to allocate its electoral votes in whole numbers. If a current battleground state were to change its winner-take-all statute to a proportional method for awarding electoral votes, presidential candidates would pay less attention to that state because only one electoral vote would probably be at stake in the state.

If the whole-number proportional approach had been in use throughout the country in the nation’s closest recent presidential election (2000), it would not have awarded the most electoral votes to the candidate receiving the most popular votes nationwide. Instead, the result would have been a tie of 269–269 in the electoral vote, even though Al Gore led by 537,179 popular votes across the nation. The presidential election would have been thrown into Congress to decide and resulted in the election of the second-place candidate in terms of the national popular vote.

A system in which electoral votes are divided proportionally by state would not accurately reflect the nationwide popular vote and would not makeevery vote equal. It would penalize states, such as Montana, that have only one U.S. Representative even though it has almost three times more population than other small states with one congressman.

It would penalize fast-growing states that do not receive any increase in their number of electoral votes until after the next federal census. It would penalize states with high voter turnout (e.g., Utah, Oregon).

Moreover, the fractional proportional allocation approach does not assureelection of the winner of the nationwide popular vote. In 2000, for example, it would have resulted in the election of the second-place candidate.

A national popular vote is the way to make every person's vote equal and guarantee that the candidate who gets the most votes in all 50 states becomes President.

Re: I Still Oppose the National Popular Vote

mvy — Wed, 10 Aug 2011 20:28:54 -0000

The current state-by-state winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes maximizes the incentive and opportunity for fraud. A very few people can change the national outcome by changing a small number of votes in one closely divided battleground state. With the current system all of a state's electoral votes are awarded to the candidate who receives a bare plurality of the votes in each state. The sheer magnitude of the national popular vote number, compared to individual state vote totals, is much more robust against manipulation.

Senator Birch Bayh (D-Indiana) summed up the concerns about possible fraud in a nationwide popular election for President in a Senate speech by saying in 1979, "one of the things we can do to limit fraud is to limit the benefits to be gained by fraud. Under a direct popular vote system, one fraudulent vote wins one vote in the return. In the electoral college system, one fraudulent vote could mean 45 electoral votes, 28 electoral votes."

Hendrik Hertzberg wrote: "To steal the closest popular-vote election in American history, you'd have to steal more than a hundred thousand votes . . .To steal the closest electoral-vote election
in American history, you'd have to steal around 500 votes, all in one state. .

For a national popular vote election to be as easy to switch as 2000, it would have to be two hundred times closer than the 1960 election--and, in popular-vote terms, forty times closer than 2000 itself.

Which, I ask you, is an easier mark for vote-stealers, the status quo or N.P.V.[National Popular Vote]? Which offers thieves a better shot at success for a smaller effort?"

Re: Decline to Sign SB 48 Repeal

Beholdhowgood — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:13:08 -0000

When you single out individuals for special treatment, THAT fights against equality. Traditional values advocates for liberty for all children. No one wants to see students going to jail or murdered but the aberant. The way children are raised encourages children towards hatred or sincere concern for others. Yes, there are aberant behaving individuals in all of society for which we all need to pray.Suicidal students don't get that way overnight from just a few cruel remarks. Teach your children to not be offended at everything they hear.All students need to learn to not say cruel things to one another and that should be enforced in school and with aberant parents. But it is not necessary that all lifestyles be accepted just because.
I believe such legislation as the AB 48 as being not positive, because it singles out non-traditional sexual "orientation" in connection with positive contributions. Certainly, most don't care to know such information no matter which way one is "orientated." Besides, many come to recognize the
positive benefits of traditional marriages, families, etc. and change....it would be difficult to keep the textbooks updated and clearly is not necessary in the first place. Raise a child correctly and the textbooks/school personnel won't have the need for such corrections. I'm not familiar with Scott Lively. Michele Bachmann is right on! Administrators have enough on their hands. I haven't noticed any "sitting on their hands." The problem with "an affirming school house" is that you're not going to find all people who accept all lifestyles nor should they, but are fair to accept students of all orientations. I would never teach my child to "feel part of the crowd".....this is a dangerous concept. What is right is right, and what is wrong is wrong. I teach my children to seek out righteousness, goodness, and truth. BTW, it is found in the Bible. Yes, the academics is where the focus should be, except in the areas where truth is not taught, such as evolution.....etc. Have you checked out the statistics on HIV among the heterosexual vs. homosexual community? There is a significant difference. I agree with you regarding Sharia law.

Re: Decline to Sign SB 48 Repeal

mmunson — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:37:35 -0000

I disagree with you, because your side fights against equality. Your side can be just as vile as Dan Savage (1). Traditional values advocates are actually standing against students. I do not believe that they are horrible accusations, because most of your fellow travelers such as Scott Lively would like to see the community jailed or killed off. A policy of removing all LGBT positive legislation in the school house will lead to disastrous effects like to what happened in Anoka school district where it lies in Michelle Bachmann's home town where over seven students have killed themselves in the last two years.
Yes, the statement is accurate, I may of struck down the satan's children line but Brad and Karen would like to see school administrators sit on their hands when kids who are not heterosexual or cisgendered get abused from fellow students or staff from the school where Karen England sued to get the California Student Civil Rights Act repealed, but judges ended up saying stop wasting our time. Problem is the words your side speaks does not lead towards the same respect, kids in conservative school districts receive abuse daily from the venom you guys pull out such as Seth Walsh who hanged himself because he could not endure the torment that is spread to the youth to give out to the non-conformers. If we have an affirming school house, then students will least likely drop out and feel part of the crowd and have good psychological health WHERE THEY CAN FOCUS ON CORE ACADEMICS. Although I would prefer SB 48 to be amended for it to be for grades 7-12 for LGBT historical figures, this bill is a good thing. It helps tell the youth that are LGBT that you are not alone and you can do great things, and for our straight friends that LGBT people are not monsters and are just as worthy as themselves. I thought we had "free will". And I think being LGBT is not unhealthy, its just unhealthy because of the condemnation that your side ferments on the youth of America. Honestly, I don't want dominionism just as much as I do not want Sharia law governing our nation. And I will fight against both movements.1) quote from Renew America's Michael Bresciani http://www.rightwingwatch.org/...