On Friday afternoon I took my mother out to lunch at the Pizza Hut next to CSU Stanislaus. It was about 12:30 p.m. and the place was dead. Perhaps there was one person in there.
We ordered a medium pizza for us, one salad and drink. The clerk explained that with tax and a “service fee,” the amount came to $26.39. I asked what a “service fee” was. No lie – he explained it was for the high cost of doing business in California. “Is that okay?” he asked. I replied, “Well, I understand that California is no friend of business but I’ve never heard of a ‘service fee.’ ”
I thought it was an odd concept but quickly figured out that it had to Pizza Hut’s way of informing the public how detrimental state policies are to businesses. And carry it to its logical conclusion and since it’s Democrats who control California, it’s the Democrat Party which is no friend of business, big or small.
I told the clerk that it was strange that I was being asked to pay a special fee of $1.49 to help a business offset the ridiculous costs of doing business of California rather than just have them quietly roll that price into the cost of a pizza. He just smiled.
While I loathe California’s anti-business climate, I appreciate Pizza Hut’s approach. People must realize how Sacramento is gouging California residents to death – this time by sticking a gun to the head of the business owner and telling them to rob the customer.
I think the fact that that Pizza Hut was dead on a Friday afternoon explains all you need to know.
We now know we have a Gov. Newsom to continue making life hell for Californians while they had a chance for Gov. John Cox to save California from more of the same.
But alas the voters of the state have once again made a very, very, very bad choice. After all, they elected Jerry Brown over businesswoman Meg Whitman eight years ago. It was a no-brainer who would have made California pro-business.
* * * * *
I think CNN should just change its name to the ATN, or Anti-Trump Network. That’s all they do.
And yes, their pre-election anti-Trump coverage was an uncomfortable display as I tried to eat my California tax weighted pizza at that Pizza Hut.
* * * * *
Every time I get attacked on Facebook, I smile and think of the words of Winston Churchill: “You have enemies? Good. It means you’ve stood up for something in your life.”
* * * * *
We really live in a screwed up society.
Comes this incredulous statement from CNN’s Don Lemon: “So we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them.”
In case you don’t know, Lemon is African-American.
Because of the white bashing that is occurring in our country – and in response to Lemon’s anti-white racist comments – students at American River College posted an innocuous sign reading, “It’s okay to be white.”
Who would disagree with the statement that it’s okay to be the color you are, whether white, black, Asian, Latino or whatever? After all, none of us can change our skin color and we all just want to be accepted for the content of our character. But apparently the college administrators disagreed and had the signs removed.
“We quickly addressed the situation, called the campus police and made sure we had those removed,” Dean of Student Services Joshua Moon Johnson told KCRA-TV.
I can understand removing hateful or inflammatory comments but why is the message, “It’s okay to be white,” be considered hateful, especially days after a CNN talking head suggests that white people are “the biggest terror threat in this country”? Is the college saying that it’s not okay to be Caucasian? This is not a statement of white militancy. What it is, however, is the Left shutting down free speech. What’s new?
* * * * *
There was an interesting headline in that liberal rag across the river which read: “San Francisco leaders hate Trump enough they voted to limit the city’s water than do this.” It’s very telling that the Bee even acknowledged that the Left is engaged in “hate.”
What the uber-libs on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors did was passing a resolution in support the State Water Resources Control Board’s water grab. Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face. You guessed it – San Francisco’s enlightened leaders want to flush more of their own water (14 percent) just to get back at Trump and Rep. Jeff Denham. They suggest that us wanting to keep our water for our farms is cloaked in “cloud of climate change denial and anti-science populism.” SF leaders – who wouldn’t know a rutabaga or corn stalk if it hit them in the face – originally worded the resolution to say opponents of the Bay-Delta Plan have, get this, “transcended the realm of rational, environmental discourse toward a political and populist, anti-conservation rally cry, fueled by the strategic lobbying of a federal Republican administration aiming to destabilize California’s status as a Democratic stronghold.”
The author of the insane resolution, SF Supervisor Aaron Peskin (does he smoke pot?), said the board had to realize that the “health of our region is at stake.” I sure hope he didn’t say that after gorging himself on a healthy diet of fruits, vegetables, nuts and milk products produced here in this part of the world that depends on water to feed liberals like him.
* * * * *
Sometimes even I wonder how out of touch the national media has become.
Most people know that a large caravan of people from Honduras is headed to our border, intending to crash it and gain illegal entry. Some of those very invaders could wind up here in California, hoping Gavin Newsom will dole out the freebies. The very reason Trump was elected president is because Americans are tired of gate crashers and footing the bill for their diapers and food and rent and education and, well you get it.
So what happens when Defense Secretary Jim Mattis goes before a gaggle of reporters? He’s asked if the president’s threat of a military presence on the border to stop them was a “political stunt” before the election. Protecting national sovereignty a “political stunt”? It was really a preposterous question. He is after all, the secretary of defense. The border needs defending from foreign invaders. It’s very sad the Washington media just doesn’t get it.
* * * * *
I received a last-minute mailing from a group that is named Center for Voter Information, which should be renamed the Center for Voter Misinformation. The address was 915 L Street in Sacramento. It looks innocent enough but is actually a shill for the Democrat party.
According to its website, the Center for Voter Information is “a nonpartisan organization that works to provide even-handed and unbiased information about candidates and their positions on issues.” Really?
Hold on.
The piece said, and I quote: “The Center for Voter Information works to provide information about candidates to voters like you across the country. This year, we asked voters in your congressional district what they would like to know about candidates for Congress in the general election being held on Nov. 6.”
The fact that the group completely glossed over any mention of water storage or what to do with all the millions who broke U.S. immigration law to be here as perhaps the top issues in the 10th Congressional District makes me very suspicious indeed.
It then goes on to highlight only three points, all of which are issues they raise as important.
But it’s the wording of their issues that made me very suspicious:
“Coverage for pre-existing conditions” – it says Harder is for, Denham against. Not true.
This comes from a May 2017 statement from Denham on the passage of HR 1628, the American Health Care Act. “The American Health Care Act, as amended, is a good first step toward putting control over personal healthcare choices back into the hands of individuals – not the federal government – while ensuring important protections remain in place for those with pre-existing conditions and in high risk pools.”
“Medicaid cuts” – Harder no, Denham yes. Again, not true.
Denham and Rep. David Valadao introduced a bill to field-test the best Medicaid reimbursement strategies, with the goal of incentivizing more physicians to operate in areas with a high population of Medicaid enrollees, like the Valley. He faults California’s low Medicaid reimbursement rates as only exacerbating the Central Valley’s existing doctor shortage.”
Denham also noted that Obamacare’s massive Medicaid expansion extended more care for able-bodied adults above poverty compared to those below poverty. At the time Denham pointed out that “When you couple that inequity with a shrinking pool of providers accepting Medicaid, it is clear that those most vulnerable are receiving uneven treatment under the ACA. Our plan will return Medicaid to its core purpose: to be a stable safety net for low-income children, pregnant women, parents of dependent children, the elderly and individuals with disability.”
This one got me: “Millionaire tax cuts.” Again, says Harder is against and Denham for. Let’s be clear, the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted by Trump and Congress was mostly a partisan vote. What it does is offer tax cuts for all tax filers with the exception of the very bottom, which hardly pays any taxes anyway.
For a family of four earning the median income, the changes will equate to an extra $2,000 in their pockets – at least until 2025.
Taxpayers who itemize in states with high tax rates like California may pay more because of the cuts to the deductions for state and local taxes. That means U.S. taxpayers were previously subsidizing the taxpayers in higher taxing states like California and New York – something I think we’d all agree is not fair. It was Trump’s way to get states to reduce their taxes.
Understand that the Trump tax bill was intended not to reward the rich but to spur the economy. And it definitely has caused the U.S. economy to expand.
We are living in the second longest period of economic growth since World War II. If this recovery is sustained into 2019, it will be longer than run up to the dot-com boom.
The law retains the current structure of seven individual income tax brackets, but in most cases it lowers the rates: the top rate falls from 39.6% to 37%, while the 33% bracket falls to 32%, the 28% bracket to 24%, the 25% bracket to 22%, and the 15% bracket to 12%. The lowest bracket remains at 10%, and the 35% bracket is also unchanged. The income bands that the new rates apply to are lower, compared to 2018 brackets under current law, for the five highest brackets.
Lest you think that the rich are ripping anyone off, consider that in 2014 the top-earning 1 percent of Americans paid nearly half of the federal income taxes, while the bottom 80 percent of Americans paid 15 percent of all federal income taxes in 2014. The bottom 60 percent are expected to pay less than 2 percent of federal income taxes.
So tell me again how rich (let’s call them successful) people have gotten away from anything?
Back to the so-called Center for Voter Information. According to the website opensecrets.org, the center is a liberal organization that spent $92,718 in dark money against California Republicans, including Denham.
So much for non-partisan.
Voters, please be smarter when voting.
How do you feel about this? Let Jeff know at jeffb@cerescourier.com
