Three California states a tad closer?

First, this from

Plan to divide California into 3 new states clears first hurdle

A plan to split California into three separate states has cleared its first hurdle. Supporters are set to begin collecting signatures to qualify for next year’s ballot.

The plan is being funded by Bay Area tech billionaire Tim Draper, who previously funded a similar proposal back in 2014 to divide the state up into sections.

That plan failed.

Draper argues that citizens would be better served by three smaller state governments, rather than one large one.

The three-way split goes like this: Northern California would include the Bay Area all the way to the Oregon border, Southern California would begin in Fresno and cover most of the southern state.

A new California would begin in Los Angeles county and cover most of the coastal areas.

Initially, on its face, a good idea or not?

Also, from

3 Californias? Billionaire’s Plan to Split California into 3 Separate States Clears First Hurdle

by Riya Bhattacharjee

The proposal would split the Golden State into three: Northern California, Southern California and a new California

Remember that widely-joked about plan to break California up into six states that died before making it to the ballot for the 2016 state elections? It’s been reincarnated – by the same billionaire who flouted the original plan – but this time, except for six states, the proposal is to split the Golden State into three: Northern California, Southern California and a new California.

The proposal has cleared its first hurdle, and its proponent, billionaire bitcoin enthusiast Timothy Draper, can now begin collecting signatures to qualify for next year’s ballot.

There’s only one problem.

Draper doesn’t understand the total dynamics.

The state “California” would have to expand because the following counties would demand relief from association with “Northern California.” Meaning: Northern California is too far to the right for them.

Santa Cruz, San Mateo, San Francisco, Marin, Sonoma, Napa and Mendocino counties would all insist they be admitted into the mostly-coastal state of “California.” Trust me on this. And I would gladly let them do so.

Leftists don’t realize — should they decide to actually push the issue — that these divisions are pure political and not geophysical (I don’t know necessarily why I’m showing all my cards now but, hell, I am).

Because, should these lines (with my revisions) be drawn, California and Southern California would be primarily without water. They would lack agricultural status. They would lack resources. Northern California wouldn’t care in the slightest.

Conservatives would flock to Northern California. Leftists would be drawn to the primarily coastal California. And Mexicans would soon demographically blow out Southern California.

Southern California is desert and more desert.

California would be beautiful but packed with an even more massive striation of massively-wealthy “haves” vs lowly “have nots.” Just look at San Francisco if you want a picture of street pissing and defecation. Let’s remember that Leftists in Fornicalia want to remove dams, as insane as that may be.

Northern California would have the resources including the bulk of the producing Sierra Nevada mountain range, cooler temperatures, forests, lakes, reservoirs, and the ability to create even more and greater water projects. In California, water and resources are king. All else subsumes.

Most folks outside California are saying “bring it on.”

I too, with my iteration, am saying “bring it on.”

Let’s just SEE if that social experiment would be truly viable.



California wants a law about “fake news”

And no, I am not kidding.

As California’s debt explodes, businesses flee, illegals drain and trash the state and are encouraged to vote illegally, as San Francisco is turned into a piss-and-shite-filled excrement dump and Los Angeles borders on bankruptcy due to its policies and the lawsuits filed against it (wait, I thought LA was Leftist Central and violated no one’s rights), Sacramento decides that this issue demands its immediate and pointed focus.

From the

California lawmakers propose bills to teach students to identify ‘fake news’

by Alan Yuhas in San Francisco

The bills aim to teach high school students how to detect misleading, fabricated or inaccurate reports in the wake of the 2016 US election

Two California lawmakers have proposed bills to fight “fake news” by teaching high school students how to detect misleading, fabricated or inaccurate reports in the waves of information flooding into their daily lives.

“The rise of fake and misleading news is deeply concerning,” Dodd said in a statement. “Even more concerning is the lack of education provided to ensure people can distinguish what is fact and what’s not.”

“By giving students the proper tools to analyze the media they consume, we can empower them to make informed decisions,” he added.

But wait; let’s hearken back to this incredibly insightful and correct quote by Josef Stalin.

Because, after all, who determines an election? Who decides whom is insane? Who decides what is fake news?

Tessa Jolls, president of the nonprofit and nonpartisan Center for Media Literacy, said that such measures were long overdue. “Now that powers have shifted, with citizens as producers [of information], people are suddenly saying, ‘Oh wow, this is something we need.’”

Well just hold on there, cowgirl. Perhaps you ought to go back and evaluate the origin of “fake news,” why and when the meme was created. And who determines “fake news.”

“Fake news” didn’t exist when NBC, ABC, CBS and other “mainstream media” sites were historically lying their arses off to the American public. They were and are what I term the American Media Maggots, for obvious reasons.

Fake rape stories on any number of occasions, AMM? Cars that tip over, AMM? Dan Rather lying about George Bush? Hundreds of false discrimination stories? Rick Jones? Sharmeka Moffitt? Reza Aslan? Tahera Ahmad? Anti-gay tip receipt? Duke University? Michael Nifong? Oberlin KKK hoax? Tawana Brawley? Grand Valley State University black chick? Rolling Stone magazine? Joseph Baken? CAIR’s staged videos? CNN interviewing their own cameraman, claiming it was an anti-Trump protester on Don Lemon? “Trumpers violent” when it was in fact Leftists who burned, hit, stabbed, cut, destroyed property around the US? HRC having a “98% chance of winning”?

Buzzfeed? CNN?

The “Fourth Estate” exists only as, now, a PR firm for Leftists and Demorats. We’re on to you. You are in fact naked.

How shallow be thy memory, American Media Maggots. Where an anti-conservative meme exists, you jump on it and provide vast amounts of time, headline space and copy inches. Because you have an anti-conservative theme to catch.

More importantly, just who fact checks the “fact checkers”? Were you, my dear readers, cognizant that the staff of is comprised primarily of Leftists? Would you even remotely be shocked? What about Facebook?

Facebook routinely buried conservative news and topics from trending on the site and artificially made liberal topics part of the national discussion, former Facebook employees admitted last May. TheDC previously reported that the former Facebook trending news team was filled by liberals. It has since automated the Trending Topics section of its page.

Jolls makes an admirable statement:

“What we want is skepticism, not cynicism,” she said. “Cynicism is when you don’t believe anything. Skepticism is when you have discernment, judgment you can rely on.”

In a vacuum, the quote is sensible. In reality, I go back to my Josef Stalin quote.

Just who determines what is what?

In Fornicalia, come on.

I think you know that answer.

I say: go ahead. Prove to me you’re not insane.

By what standards?

Ultimately: who creates and holds those standards?

Fornicalia is as impartial as a Chinese judge at the Beijing Olympics.



California propositions: how BZ voted and how YOU should vote

bz-in-occupied-fornicalia-behind-enemy-lines-1024x543I happen to live in what I call Occupied Fornicalia, behind enemy lines.

It wasn’t my choice; it just happened. Just as with the truism that “I didn’t leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me.” Hence the fence and all.

Now that I’ve vented for a moment, please allow me to focus on something of a “localized” issue despite the fact that primarily I tend to accent posts of a more generalized, national nature.

But this post is critical for Californians. Trust me: critical.

I make it now for those who are either filling out their absentee ballots and for those who are about to step into a voting booth in less than two weeks.

california-flag-populaceThat is to say, addressing California propositions on the ballot for the coming Tuesday, November 8th.

I can summarize things this way: vote NO on EVERY proposition except:

  • YES on Proposition 53;
  • YES on Proposition 54;
  • YES on Proposition 66.

Remember: 535466.  Vote yes. All others vote NO.

535466.  Vote yes. All others vote NO.

That said, let’s examine each proposition with a bit more detail. Tom McClintock and I vary on only a few of them.

Prop 51: NO
Right. Let’s just add $1,400 to your debt with one swipe of a vote. Sound borrowing be damned. Our children will pay off these “educational” bonds. They will not benefit from them.

Prop 52: NO
This is essentially a tax extension for Medi-Cal. Hospitals like it because it passes taxes to the patient, not them. It’s a permanent tax on sick folks.

Prop 53: YES
This is a public vote for revenue bonds. General obligation bonds are repaid from the state’s general fund; revenue bonds are repaid by users of a project (e.g. tolls to repay a bridge bond).  This measure requires revenue bonds over $2 billion to be approved by voters, and is backed by taxpayer groups across the state. This is called accountability for your tax dollars. Uh, yeah.

Prop 54: YES
This primarily says: “read the damned bill first before you vote on it.” How could anyone disagree? This forbids the legislature from voting on a bill until it has been in print for 72 hours and available to both legislators and the public to read.  It stops the dangerous practice of having to “pass a bill so we know what’s in it.”  Duh.

Prop 55: NO
In 2012, Californians made a mistake in approving the highest personal income tax rate anywhere in the country on the “very wealthy people” who make over $250,000 a year.  It is due to be phased out in 2018.  This proposition would make it permanent.  What’s wrong with soaking the rich?  For openers, a lot of these “very wealthy people” aren’t wealthy and they aren’t even people.  They’re struggling small businesses filing under Subchapter S.  The really rich folks just re-arrange their schedules so they’re not legal residents and don’t pay the tax.  As Arthur Laffer has often said, “There’s nothing in the world more portable than money and rich people.” Bingo. Thank you.

Prop 56: NO
Good God, another tobacco tax that just gets schluffed off into the CA general fund? Are you Fornicalia voters really this stupid? Apparently yes, you are, according to your Leftist rulers. Excessive taxation increases the incentives for black markets. Permanent spending programs are being funded with a declining revenue – and eventually taxpayers will end up funding the difference. Hello? You? Me? You  imbeciles — shall I remind you — are the dimwits who voted for the “train to nowhere.” Hey, it’s not “your” money anyway, right? Except that, yes, you ignorant morons, it is. Taxes? Hello? Oh yeah. Except taxes on the illegal.

Prop 57: NO
Not just NO, but HELL NO. This is “clever” beyond belief. It is Leftists wanting to minimize the definition of a “violent crime” so that those who have committed — wait for it — manslaughter and rape can be considered “non-violent.” This is Jerry Brown’s — who has onset dementia (go ahead and ask Jerry Brown what day it is) according to people who work around him — latest measure purporting to release only non-violent felons from prison.  But as the law works, this would include rapists, child molesters, gang-bangers, arsonists and human traffickers to name a few – and not to mention violent criminals who plea-bargained to lesser crimes. What in the holy hell?

To my mind this is the most craven, disgusting and abominable proposition suggested in the history of this state.

Let me make something clear: whilst Jerry Brown and Leftists throughout the state make their finest attempt to kick criminal felons out of prison — actually trying to keep violent felons out of the system in the first place — simultaneously they are the first to restrict your First and Second Amendment freedoms. You, the law-abiding, legal, tax-paying citizen. The politicians of this state have their own well-armed personnel as escorts — but you do not. The CHP protects the primary politicians. The Sgt At Arms protects other appointees in Fornicalia. That’s because they matter and you do not. You need to be disarmed for your own good. But wait; there’s another proposition (63) coming to address that specific issue. Might it go well for you? Likely not.

Perhaps you might ask: how’s that Proposition 47 and AB 109 working out for you right now? Property and violent crimes skyrocketing? Perish the word. Clearly it’s time — like Virginia’s Terry McAuliffe — to let felons vote here in Fornicalia. I wonder how they’d vote? Demorat, perchance?

Prop 58: NO
In 1998, California voters passed Proposition 227, which forbade the practice of segregating Spanish-speaking children and teaching them in Spanish-only classes (a practice with the Orwellian title, “bi-lingual education.”). It didn’t work. It wasn’t enabled in reality. The measure would stop this vital assimilation program and return classrooms to Spanish-only instruction. Goodbye English, hello Spanish. NO.

Prop 59: NO
That damned First Amendment has simply got to go. Right? This proposition calls on elected officials to overturn the Citizens United decision and in so doing repeal the First Amendment.  Most of our elected officials are leftists who are doing so anyway.  I‘m not and I won’t. Remember: Leftists abhor free speech. Unless it is theirs.

Prop 60: NO
Here we have condoms and porn. Excuse my bias, but it isn’t about “porn.” This is about the minutiae of a controlling state government. Expect that “Little Lending Libraries” will be targeted next. Oh wait. They already are.

Prop 61: NO
Price controls for drugs sound great, right? Except that price controls always sound good in theory – but in practice they always create shortages of whatever commodity is being controlled. Calling common sense. What occurs with shortages? Oh, right. Prices skyrocket. On top of insurance costs.

Prop 62: NO
Let’s eliminate the death penalty, shall we? Makes sense, right? Uh, no. Here is the sum total of the Leftist ballot measures on crime: release dangerous felons from our prisons (Prop. 57), disarm law-abiding citizens (Prop. 63) and provide old-age retirement plans for murderers (Prop 62).  Yes, California’s liberals really are out of their minds. Insanity rules. Next question?

Prop 63: NO
This measure requires a PERMIT from the state of Fornicalia to purchase ammunition within its realm. In other words, the time and background check required for a firearm would equate to the time and background checks required for ammunition purchases.

The Heller decision infuriated Leftists, Obama and Hillary Clinton. This is the first step – requiring a permit (renewable every four years) to purchase ammunition, accompanied by fees and background checks (of people who have already passed background checks to purchase their firearm in the first place).

Prop 64: NO
Here, in terms of marijuana legislation, Tom McClintock votes yes. I stridently disagree. As a recently-retired peace officer of 41 years here in Fornicalia, why haven’t the DUI stats been checked of both Washington and Colorado? The collision rates? The death rates in traffic accidents? Hello? Going up. New and facile ways to craft a FST — or not? The persons and children overdosed on THC? Does the word “gateway” mean anything? Tom, you got it way wrong on this one, buddy. Please check how the marijuana laws are currently negatively affecting people in Colorado and Washington, sir. All this does is make not only people but government beg like doggies for their own piece of the lucrative cash pie. That’s not what government should be about.

Prop 65: NO
Grocery bags. Those terrible, terrible grocery bags. What to do? The law was part of a corrupt bargain that imposes these charges on grocery store customers and lets the grocery stores keep the revenue as extra profit. What part of NO does the average American Taxpayer not understand?

Prop 66: YES
This is a pro-death penalty measure sponsored by law enforcement and victims’ organizations that streamlines California’s death penalty and puts it back in play.  The overwhelming preponderance of evidence is that a death penalty, consistently applied, suppresses the murder rate and saves innocent lives.  And it has a guaranteed ZERO rate of recidivism. Guess what? Once convicted, twice shy.

Prop 67: NO
Your nanny state strikes once again. Tom sums it up wonderfully: A yes vote means no more disposable plastic bags at the grocery store (with certain exceptions for meat and other perishable items, and paper bags will cost you 10-cents each).  A NO vote means much more than just preserving this one little convenience – it means repudiating the nanny state that California has become.  Voting this down means saving yourself from the aggravation of cans rolling around in your car.  But saying no to the nannies?  Priceless.

And with that, ladies and gentlemen, exists my recommendations for Fornicalia’s propositions.

Thanks to Tom McClintock for his original thoughts.



Governor Brown ISN’T serious about water

Brown & The DroughtFirst: STOP THE SCAM-TRAM.

That’s how you solve Fornicalia’s drought.

Governor Brown, the poseur, had his fleet of security personnel trundle him up to the Sierra Nevada Mountains today, BZ’s back yard, for a photo op that proved without doubt he isn’t serious about Fornicalia’s water shortage in the face of its drought.

He wasn’t serious when he was governor in the 70s, and he isn’t serious now.

Brown had the opportunity to support and promote, for one thing, the Auburn Dam above the Sacramento Valley.  But he killed that project along with all others because he didn’t believe in funding infrastructure.

I find it so ironic that the man who killed dams and all other public projects (including vital additional highways) is finding himself in the hotseat regarding Fornicalia’s drought.

But his “solution” is no solution and proves he couldn’t care less about the state, much less the people who live here.  You know: Fornicalia, the COASTAL state.  The state with the ocean right next to its border.

The LA Times has decided it must continue to fellate Governor Brown, with its story here:

Brown orders California’s first mandatory water restrictions: ‘It’s a different world’

by Chris Megerian and Matt Stevens

Governor Jerry Brown, standing on a patch of brown grass in the Sierra Nevada that is usually covered with several feet of snow at this time of year, on Wednesday announced the first mandatory water restrictions in California history.

Brown ordered the California Water Resources Control Board to implement mandatory restrictions to reduce water usage by 25%. The water savings are expected to amount to 1.5 million acre-feet of water over the next nine months.

The article then goes on to describe a number of “water saving measures” that are akin to sitting in a chair and masturbating for all the good they will, overall, do.  The “measures” address nothing long-term.  The idiots amongst the media and ignorant Fornicalia residents applaud Brown.  What a strategic thinker!  The state’s growing illegal Mexican population can’t read and can’t understand English anyway.  Perfect for a conniving Demorat governor like Brown, where the state is 99.9% blue.  There are perhaps 75 Conservatives in Fornicalia.  Me and my Representative Tom McClintock in the 4th.  And trust me when I say I’ll Tweet him a copy of this post.

In other words, these “measures” won’t do much of anything to defray the crisis state of Fornicalia now and in the future.  Because Fornicalia alternates between floods and droughts.  There are few stable times in between.  “Crisis” is more normal than normal.

With that in mind, Governor Brown has embraced and wants to enable with every fiber of his being the Scam Tram — his “legacy” — despite it’s first work being “unspectacular.”

In fact, Brown’s Scam Tram will cost, at this point, over $68 BILLION DOLLARS through the next 16 years.  That is a conservative figure.  Approved in November of 2008, Proposition 1A, it allocated $9.95 BILLION DOLLARS for the project.  To say that this figure has expanded would insult even the retarded amongst my readers.

Further, the Scam Tram won’t reach its claimed speed of 200 mph at all; at this point, with its promised stops, it won’t much exceed the FRA common passenger speed of 79 mph mandated by most common passenger diesel-electric locomotives via their gearing.

Anyone think that $68 BILLION DOLLARS somehow equates to an approved-by-the-voters $9.95 BILLION DOLLARS?

Oddly enough, I do not.  It — call me crazy — sounds to me like some kind of scam.  Perhaps even a Scam Tram.

At this point, let’s ask an obvious and an equally-political question: what takes priority?  Solving a long-time state-wide drought issue, or providing a rail project that guarantees nothing in terms of water provisions?

Governor Brown, you have a quandary.  Fund the Scam Tram or fund the obvious: water infrastructure projects to include desalination plants dotted from the north to the south on your coast.

One DS plant is being built in San Diego, funded far before you appeared on the scene.

Desalination16,000 desalination plants operate world-wide.

Saudi Arabia has many of them.

Each US Navy ship has a desalination plant on board.

To Governor Brown: you can’t find it within yourself to prioritize water before a lame-assed go-nowhere Scam Tram?



One man who speaks the truth about Fornicalia: Tom McClintock and the drought

Top Five Gubernatorial Candidates Debate In SacramentoFrom

McClintock on CA Drought: ‘We Are Being Governed by People Who Are Out of Their Minds’

by Joel B. Pollak

WASHINGTON, DC — Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) warns that California’s water crisis will continue until there are major changes in state government, and until Republicans win the U.S. Senate. 

“We are being governed by people who are out of their minds,” McClintock said, referring to the inability of state and federal authorities to manage California’s water supply.

“Droughts are inevitable–they are nature’s fault. Water shortages are our fault,” he said. 

And I couldn’t agree more with Representative McClintock.

In fact, it was Governor Jerry Brown’s problem first in the 70s, which he purposely chose to ignore.  Via schadenfreude, it is now his issue to handle in his doting hypocrisy.

Speaking to Breitbart News in his Capitol Hill office, McClintock outlined what he believes would be necessary to prevent future shortages: resuming construction on existing dam projects, some of which were abandoned during Gov. Jerry Brown’s first administration in the 1970s.

The Auburn Dam project, for example, would create a reservoir two-and-a-half times the size of the ailing Folsom Lake, he said. In addition, McClintock suggested raising the height of the Shasta Dam from the current 600 feet to 800 feet, as originally designed. That, he said, would add nine million acre-feet to its existing storage capacity–double its present volume.

Precisely the issue I raised in the post prior to this.  Jerry Brown had his chance to solve the issue before it became the massive problem it is now.  And he roundly refused.

McClintock also criticized Brown’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta tunnel project, which will cost billions but would offer no water storage capacity and no hydroelectric power. He noted that state water projects in the mid-twentieth century spent comparable amounts in current dollars, yet also included storage and generated electricity, and paid for themselves over time.

“It’s only in the last several decades that the state has issued general bonds for these projects, which leave taxpayers on the hook. It’s insane,” McClintock said. 

I can only concur, Congressman.  It is in fact insane.  All that cash to be spent with no electrical generation included.  At least Brown and Leftists are nothing but consistent.

Environmentalists have opposed the construction of new dams, partly because of habitat and scenery destroyed by reservoirs, and because of the physical obstacle dams often pose to annual fish migrations.

There you go.  The veritable Crux of the Biscuit.  Lefitsts and Enviros clearly value fish and scenery over humanity.

Yet McClintock sees dams as a critical part of addressing California’s chronic water shortages. He and his Republican colleagues have also passed several measures aimed at changing the distribution of water to favor struggling Central Valley farmers, and he intends to hold hearings to investigate the release of large amounts of water from existing dams just before winter.

Allow me now, at this point, to illuminate some additional Leftist hypocrisy, if you will.

Jerry Brown solicits more illegal aliens into Fornicalia, but refuses to expand the necessary infrastructure for water and power.

Jerry Brown has thrown Fornicalia’s political power and wherewithal into electric cars, but he refuses to see the obvious: just where will we acquire the electricity necessary to recharge this massive fleet of change?

There are NO electrical generation stations “in the works” now in Fornicalia.

On the current system, with hot days, the CalISO can’t even find sufficient power to forestall brownouts, much less expand power to potential hundreds-of-thousands of electric vehicles.

Fornicalia has, simply, One Party Political Power.  People have historically had to flee from those kinds of governments around the world.

It is alive and well in Fornicalia.

Which is why I shall leave this state when I retire.  It is about to go straight to Hell and I shall not be complicit in that ride.