Every time I read any newspaper I still get to see the leftwing biases of those who "pick" the news. Same goes for the choices for columns. The Sacramento Bee is a shrinking paper yet they don't seem to understand why. Same for Time Magazine and Newsweek (actually sold for one dollar!). Even the New York Times is unaware of why it publishes barely enough newsprint to cover the parakeets cage bottom. Of course the success of FOX News and talk radio aired with conservative talkers is not thought of by the "mainstream" news organizations as anything but a nuisance and without concern. Amazing! The nation is and always has been, divided ideologically. Left and right. But conservatives have always had the short stick in the press.
Unfortunately for the nation, the people coming out of colleges with a journalism degree are inculcated with leftwing drivel without the balance of right-wing drivel. So all lefty bias all the time. FOX and conservative radio have tried to balance all that. But it is still overwhelming leftwing. FOX has tapped into the inherent conservative person and with their balance they have prospered. They know there must be two sides.
In newspapers and TV the leftwing thinks a single paragraph on the back page of a article is balance. I learned a long time ago not to get upset when a article included my quotes below the fold and/or on the back page. No rebuttals from me made the story. Usually, simply a few words of derision and unnamed quoters attacking me or any conservative. And all these lefty papers and TV channels have refused the change to balance and fairness. And they are headed to oblivion. I recall the SacBee on Sunday as a thick paper with lots of ads. Now their stock is about a dollar! Still they publish leftwing crapola and their Editorial pages are liberal drivel, no balance.
The best example of this is "global warming". Or is it "climate change"? Maybe "climate disruption"? Well, whatever the leftwing propaganda says it is I guess. Hell, a person trying to print public a contrary view in the LA Times is banned! Now we see what a liberal thinks about free speech and press don't we. And why are there no scientists included in the articles who may think "climate disruption" by man-made activities is not provable? Even our local newspaper does this exclusionary action. They run these articles about sea levels rising, CO2 increases and any other ridiculous thing they allow some "scientist" to discuss, yet disallow the scientists who disagree off the pages.
Today's Union has a press release on fracking. The release is now using GOD and religion as a foil for the fracking business! Is there no interest in how ridiculous this is? Come on now, if someone on the other side said GOD is for fracking, the person would warrant a full article of derision. But not the leftwing. Anything they say, no matter how stupid and vapid, is newsworthy. The right is Pooh-Poohed and sent to the mental institution.
Then I read the US Supreme Court has refused to hear a case brought by private business in Seattle regarding the $15 minimum wage law. I thought the courts were there to hear any and all cases that was why they exist! But somehow they "decide" to not hear something as important as this? I ask them to stop being such a "elite" monarchy of laws and start hearing these cases. They also decided a couple of weeks ago not to hear the lawsuits of states against Colorado and its marijuana laws. Now I thought the SCOTUS existed to decide these things. Of course they decided long ago in Marbury v Madison that their duty was to decide the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress and signed by the President. Well, now they decide whether to "hear" a challenge and punt those to difficult it appears., They should resign and let others with spines take their place.
I always wondered where the Federal government found the right to homogenize America? I thought America was only in existence as enumerated in the Constitution. Somehow, the SCOTUS has bastardized the Tenth Amendment and used the Commerce Clause to make the fifty states into a blenderized amalgam of "sameness". That was never the intention, in fact the Forefathers who wrote the documents warned against it. Each state was required to have a "Republican" form of government and not mush else. Yet somehow the states cannot even determine how it elects a dogcatcher anymore. Though the US government elections are legal to elect a Senator statewide and all are equal, the SCOTUS decided that does not apply to states in their internal elections. California is a mess electorally and could be fixed by applying the same rules for counties as the SCOTUS allows for the Federal Senator elections. But they decided to not allow that. No explanation except "one man one vote". I say leave that to the states.
In our little county we have a couple of Supervisor election that will be decided June 7. I perused the contribution and expenditures of District One candidates. Looks like outside interests are trying to get Heidi Hall elected to our BOS. Most of her money is from elsewhere as are her expenditures. Isn't it interesting the left, which Mrs. Hall represents, has always complained when a candidate they opposed used outside the county sources? They were called "bought and paid for" and yet here we see her spending a lot on Green Dog Campaigns from San Rafael? Here is the link.
So who are they? Are they a left wing socialist based organization? Why would Hall spend all that money with them? Are there no local people who could do the same jobs and the money would help our people? Inquiring minds want to know. Then there are those "Democracy.com" expenditures. Their website was down as I write this. Who and what do they promote? Leftwing socialism like Elizabeth (I am a Indian) Warren?
Not much in common with a rural county? And her income stream is heavy with outside donations. Now why would she accept all that money from people and groups that do not reside here? Isn't that a liberal whine on money? I am sure Hall is all about trying to overturn Citizens United. So why the out of county money? Strawser, her opponent, seems to be getting his money from locals. He won't be beholden to those "special interests" as Hall will be. What do they want here anyway? But Hall did not even live in the District One boundaries I am told. She relocated to run. Isn't that her complaint against Tom McClintock? So if true would that be a disqualifier in her own terms?
HERE is Hall's
HERE is Strawser's
Radical extremist of the liberal persuasion, Steven Frisch, past tax cheat and failed businessman, contributed $400 to Heidi Hall. I would recommend she send it back since anything tied to him would be embarrassing. She also paid Jim Hurley a local radical extremist, $343 for who knows what. Along with many Sacramento based businesses she seems to prefer out of county. Why should she be trusted to care about local businesses? Does she also shop down the hill? Even her Treasurer is listed as from Sacramento. Can't find a local she can trust? Or keep things under the table away from scrutiny? Seems she also shares a contributor with the last name of Bodine with the District Two candidate, Harris. Are they teaming up?
If you want to see what I consider a attempted takeover of Nevada County by outsiders, read Heidi Hall's forms. Why are people like Steve Eubanks donating so much? Is there a deal with the Forest Service in the works? I recommend the people of Nevada County's First District look carefully at Hall and her intentions for the county. Using her own leftwing positions on money in politics and the recipients of that money's purpose, how can we trust her in her quest to run one fifth of our county? Is she bought and paid for by out of county companies and other contributors? Why do those contributors want to own a piece of a local politician? Inquiring minds want to know.
Strawser, who I have never met, seems to be a much better fit for the First District. He has actually lived in it for most of his years. He owns a business and has been involved in Civic duties for many years. He has a broad base of support since he was a democrat until he chose to go Indie lately. Of course it is a non partisan office so I think he showed his bravery to actually be non-partisan. Hall is a dyed in the wool, government (EPA, State Water Board) employee apparently. So choose carefully you voters. Do you want a successful local businessman or a federal/State bureaucrat outsider as your representative?
HERE is the Ballotpedia bio on Hall. It should scare every business person and landowner in District One. So read it all. Also, there is a whisper that she is for placing meters on private wells. If that is untrue it would be a plus for her to say it is not so. But for now rumors are rampant.
Lastly, Congressman Doug LaMalfa deserves our votes. He is doing a fine job for the District. And he beat Heidi Hall and her extremist position in the last Congressional race. And quite handily.
I did a column on the Hillary Hodge whimsies on relocating to Nevada County. I read her latest and I think mu interest in her writings have lost my interest. Sounds a lot like a ongoing soap opera. Not very interesting, but I hope she mends her ways and gives the community some interesting musings. So far, not so much.