Gary North versus Barbara Alby

Barbara Alby 1946 – 2012

Gary North wrote in 1983 that Christians are not ready to lead.

The second point is: American Christians have not thought about these matters for well over a century-not since the era immediately preceding the Civil War. They are not ready to lead. They are not ready to “throw out the humanists” and replace them in every area of life, from the police force to the physics laboratory.

At this point in the first Reagan term, North’s words were thought by most to be non-sense. Clearly Conservatives were in political ascendancy and we believed that we had a real opportunity to return our nation to its Christian roots and away from the Liberal folly of the 1960’s & 70’s. We were on the verge of overturning Roe v Wade; fixing the Supreme Court; abolishing the Dept of Energy and Education; defunding the NEA; and building the economy. The “Pax Americana” was laid-out as “a shining city on a hill” for the entire world to emulate.

Looking back over the last 30 years, it is clear that North was right and we were wrong. I would like to take a few minutes to talk about what failed and why. I won’t address every issue but I want to zero in on some aspects of why Evangelicals have failed in the political arena. The California Republican Assembly would be a great case study for a poly sci or theology doctoral candidate’s dissertation. What follows below is a thumbnail sketch for some areas of examination.

After Ronald Reagan left office, it was clear to many Conservatives that George Bush was not their best choice as a successor. Conservatives hoped for an alternative to Bush; some favored Jack Kemp while others supported Pat Robertson. Robertson’s base was mostly Evangelical, Dispensational, Pre-millennial Protestants. Robertson was able to mobilize much the same demographic group that was the base of Falwell’s Moral Majority.

Religious/Political movements like Robertson (and later Gary Bower) often established campaign organizations that later morphed into other political movements once the campaign was concluded. One such group in California that was left from the Robertson campaign included Barbara Alby.

Alby had been head of a group in the 1980’s called “Women’s Lobby.” Alby used this group to educate and energize women from evangelical churches and get them involved in state and local politics. Women’s Lobby was targeted at issues like abortion and education.

Thru the Robertson campaign and her experiences with Women’s Lobby, Alby saw firsthand the defects in the political process and the weakness of the Republican Party. She and likeminded individuals decided that they needed to capture the Republican Party of California. Their chosen vehicle to reshape Republican policy in California was thru the California Republican Assembly.

In 1988 (or 1987), Alby engineered a hostile takeover of the Sacramento-Sierra Republican Assembly. When this happened there were five active CRA chapters in Sacramento County; American River, Capital, Cosumnes, River City, and Sacramento-Sierra. (Sac-Sierra RA eventually became the Sacramento Republican Assembly.)

SSRA had a requirement that members must join 30 days before the December organizational meeting in order to be allowed to vote. Alby showed-up at the final SRA meeting prior to the election of officers with several hundred membership applications and dues checks in hand.

Just imagine how this looked to the existing membership of SSRA. They have been doing their work for local candidates and at the last minute some stranger shows-up with several hundred applications and dues from people that have never attended a single meeting. Most of these new members had never been involved in the Party prior to giving Alby a check. At the election, they ousted the existing leadership and elected their own slate of officers.

This hostile take-over was appealed and upheld by the State Board. This resulted in the existing members leaving en mass and forming the Republicans of River City. Joining with others booted out of CRA by other evangelical takeovers elsewhere in California, the California Congress of Republicans was formed in 1989.

Once Evangelicals took over CRA, they began consolidating power and setting their sights on taking over as many county central committees as possible. Controlling central committees was a vital step in taking over the California Republican Party. Once Alby & company controlled the CRP, they exited CRA and set it adrift. Alby went from nothing to control of the CRP and her own seat in the California Assembly in a decade. Her first slate of CRA approved candidates for CRP officers was elected in 1991.

Due to the way that Alby & company operated, they insured that anyone perceived to be a threat to their power was eliminated from the organizations that they controlled. Their tactics could be characterized as “scorched earth” power politics. Alby used evangelical terms and beliefs to portray her struggle as good versus evil. Most of her followers believed they were claiming these political institutions for God and his Kingdom. Those that were driven from CRA and later CRP were evil and needed to accept the Alby agenda or leave. The result of such thinking is not spreading the Gospel or displaying God’s Love but simply a justification for an “ends justifies the means” type of power politics.

Lest you think I exaggerate this claim, let me share a summary of a telephone conversation that I had with Greg Hardcastle. Hardcastle was Alby’s right-hand man and was not only President of her CRA chapter but later served as Statewide President of CRA from 1993-95. Some context is necessary before I can get to the substance of his phone call.

If you recall earlier, I had mentioned that Sacramento County had five CRA chapters when Alby first got involved with CRA in the late 1980’s. By the time of my involvement with CRA in 1989, Barbara’s chapter—Sacramento-Sierra Republican Assembly—had a membership approaching 700 members. American River and Capital stopped meeting by the early 1990’s. During the same period, River City and Cosumnes, surrenders their CRA charters. Alby’s chapter was the only active Republican Assembly in Sacramento County and the largest in the State.

In 1991, Alby took the dormant charters for American River & Capital Republican Assemblies and funneled people from her club and Operation Rescue into these paper clubs. These clubs were allies of Barbara and intended to give her superior numbers of delegates at conventions. John Stoos was President of the Capital RA. Jim Uli was President of American River. Jim’s wife was Treasurer. I was Secretary and Donna Worley was Vice-President. American River began meeting and had a regular attendance that was about 50 people a meeting. The attendance was close to the numbers that Alby was drawing but American River had one tenth the membership.

Later that year, a vacancy occurred in the 5th Assembly District when Tim Leslie moved from the Assembly to the Senate. This district was in the Roseville Area and included portions of Sacramento County. A young man named Mark Baughman entered the race. Baughman had been working for John Doolittle. He was able to receive the endorsement of every sitting Republican in the State Legislature. Alby had been rumored to be interested in running but when asked by Legislative members, she had denied any interest. A week before the end of the filing period, Alby finally jumped into the race. Governor Pete Wilson then recruited B.T. Collins to counter Alby. Collins filed the necessary paperwork after the deadline and had to get a favorable judge to let him on the ballot. CRA and Wilson hated each other and Wilson had his chance for some payback to Alby.

So the set-up was this, a special election in a Republican district with two Conservatives and one moderate (Liberal) on the ballot. As a newcomer, Alby needed the CRA endorsement to breakout beyond the evangelical community and make herself legitimate in the eyes of rank and file Republicans.

Candidate endorsement in CRA is via a special endorsing convention. In this case each club in the district was allowed two delegates. Candidates need a 2/3 vote to be endorsed. In her mind, Alby thought this was a slam-dunk; at least until they did a headcount. As it turned out, Baughman had support in Placer County and Alby in Sacramento. The swing chapter was American River. Two officers in American River wanted Baughman and the other two were solidly for Alby. The two of us that supported Baughman, favored a split decision with one vote for each which would result in no endorsement. The Alby forces would not stand for this.

Mark had declared early and had asked for my support. David Knowles was an Assemblyman that I knew and respected. He supported Mark because he was a good family man, a conservative and unlike Barbara he could get along with others that believed differently than he did. I agreed with David’s opinion.

A few days before this endorsing convention, Greg Hardcastle called me. The conversation lasted 45 minutes. He started off asking me why I was supporting Mark and not Barbara. Hardcastle then brought-up the fact that Baughman was LDS (a Mormon) and then he went on to tell me that it was God’s will that Barbara win this election. Baughman was not a Christian and thus did not deserve my support. Furthermore, he told me that if I did not support Barbara that upon his authority as an ordained minister in the Assembly of God denomination that I could not consider myself a Christian. I was deceived and my soul was in peril. I needed to reflect upon my life and relationship with God and get right with Him. Barbara was God’s candidate. Who was I to disobey God? Once it was established that I would not change my endorsement and was thus in danger of Hell, the call ended.

I have never been as verbally abused by anyone as I was during that phone call. I held my ground but was miserable for the experience. Not even Barbara herself could name one issue that she could foresee where she and Baughman would vote differently. Mark simply went to the wrong church.

The day of the endorsing convention, all four officers of American River met at the endorsing convention. Jim Uli had been persuaded by Barbara’s forces to make his wife the other delegate to the endorsing convention. You need to understand that when Jim was made President of American River by Barbara that he knew nothing about politics. He lived in Sacramento and didn’t even know the Mayor’s name let alone anything about the Assembly or Senate. Donna was the brains and backbone of the club and was responsible for the growth of the club. Jim was nothing more than the master of ceremonies at our meetings. For Jim to assert that he had the right to make this decision unilaterally was nothing short of mutiny. If anyone deserved to be a delegate it was Donna.

Wayne Johnson and John Stoos were overseeing the endorsing convention. Both were elders in the same church and were very politically connected. They were very big Alby supporters. Donna and I appealed to them in an effort to get Jim to change his mind. Stoos and Johnson said it was the President’s choice and we had no right to interfere. We had no one to appeal to.

Hardcastle, Johnson and Stoos had played political hardball with our little CRA chapter and then forgot we ever existed. Donna and I left the meeting and Barbara had her endorsement; Baughman subsequently dropped-out of the race. Alby lost the race against Collins but was eventually elected to the seat after Collins died in office two years later. Shortly after this event, American River RA ceased to exist and its territory was taken over by Sac-Sierra. I left CRA for several years before getting involved in the Yolo County Chapter. (The demise of Yolo County RA is documented elsewhere on this blog site.)

My point in telling this story is that Alby brought an “ends justify the means” philosophy to CRA. Power politics, paper clubs, elimination of potential rivals, manipulation of Bylaws, and litmus tests for purity have been the hallmarks of CRA since Alby joined in the late 1980’s. The disciples that she brought with her have emulated her example.

CRA has a history of vastly overstating their numbers. In its heyday CRA claimed to have over 100,000 members. Jon Fleischman was CRA president from 1995-97. Recently on his website Flash Report, he claimed during his term as President that CRA membership was 20,000. This is history revisionism and utter nonsense. I have friends that served on the CRA Publications Committee during this time and their numbers were that CRA had a paid membership of 4K with a newsletter circulation of 5K.

As best as I can determine, when Alby got involved the membership was likely around 7,000. When she had consolidated her control of CRP and kicked CRA to the curb in the mid 1990’s, paid membership in CRA was 3,500 to 4,000. Currently, statewide membership is less than 2,000 dues paying members.

Barbara Alby’s club, Sacramento-Sierra Republican Assembly, went from a peak of 700 members in the early 1990’s to less than 15 a decade later.

Lest you think that is a fluke, look at the CRP (California Republican Party). When Alby first got control of the CRP, the Party controlled the Assembly, had a sizable representation in the Senate and Republicans held several statewide offices. Virtually every chairman of the Party since 2000 has been the endorsed CRA candidate. (Prior to this time CRP had a tradition that the Vice-Chair would succeed the Chair & many of these VP contests were difficult fights for CRA forces.) Since Alby left the Assembly and Republican Politics in 1998, the CRP has imploded. By the time of her death in 2012, Democrats controlled every statewide constitutional office, the governorship and has super majorities in the Assembly and Senate.

Every political organization that Alby ran diminished soon after she released her grip on it. Women’s Lobby is defunct, CRA is irrelevant and CRP has faded away to insignificance. Because of the paradigm of good versus evil, Alby could not build coalitions and agree to disagree with occasional allies. Alby’s legacy is to dismantle not build.

Because she bayoneted the “farm team,” no leaders were mentored to grow the organizations that she was involved in. Power and control were the levers to advance her causes. Her “scorched earth” policies created dysfunctional institutions and tended to attract equally dysfunctional people in leadership. If Alby had trained leaders to manage the institutions with which she was involved and grow them in a healthy way, she would have been celebrated as the Republican Margaret Thatcher. Instead, we as Evangelical Christians are worse off than before we hitched our political wagons to Alby and her fellow travelers.

This brings us to the current situation in CRA. Celeste Greig, Steve Frank, Bill Cardoza and a few others are the last relics of the Alby revolution. This generation must pass away before CRA will have a chance to heal and regroup. My concern is that Steve Frank would rather go out in a blaze of glory yelling “Allah Akbar” than hand what is left over to a new generation of leaders.

Gary North has been vindicated and I feel poorer knowing that he was right.
American Christians … are not ready to lead”—Tactics of Christian Resistance 1983

Obama’s Token Trip to Israel

Barack Obama is visiting the Middle East this week. This is his victory lap after destabilizing the region by supporting the “Arab Spring”.

The “Arab Spring” is where these Islamic countries traded secular dictators for Sharia Law. These new governments are more hostile to the United States, Israel, and Christian minorities.

The only thing you won’t see this week is a photo of Obama bowing to any Israeli leader. Clearly the President has nothing but contempt for our best friend in the region. Meanwhile, Syria is using chemical weapons on its own people and Iran is assembling nuclear weapons. As usual, Obama does nothing.

Rand Paul Civics Lesson

Rand Paul thanks for the leadership and proving that all the backbone in the Republican Party resides in the Freshman office holders. No further proof of term limits should be needed.

Maybe there is a Mr. Smith in Washington. This was a proud day in America.

Will this filibuster begin a turn in public policy or be a flash in the darkness the illuminates nothing?

Paul challenged the claim by the Attorney General that the President can play judge, jury, and executioner within our borders by using drones to kill our citizens as he sees fit. If this is allowed to happen then the Constitution is dead. Dictatorship—by whatever name—has replaced the old order and we are all slaves to the State.

GOP Senators Surrender

Today I read on Politico the following headline: Senate GOP ponders ceding power to President Obama http://www.politico.com/story/2013/02/senate-gop-ponders-shifting-power-to-obama-88149.html#ixzz2M7AMG1TP

OK so what is next? Let’s just disband the Senate—it hasn’t done its job for many years anyway—and just let the President decide what’s best for us? In the eyes of many, the Constitution is clearly an obstacle to good governance. Look at a few examples of where the Constitution is wrong and thus being ignored by the ruling class:

• The Senate hasn’t passed a budget in four years as they are required to do by the Constitution but nobody seems to have noticed.
• Gun ownership is clearly a threat to the peace and safety of the government and must be curtailed.
• The Supreme Court ruled that there are no limits to the taxing authority of the government. (See ObamaCare Ruling last year.)
• The needs of the government supersede religious liberty. You can believe anything you want as long as it stays out of the public square and doesn’t influence how you live your life—or conduct your business.
• Convicted prisoners must be released without serving their sentences because incarceration is cruel and unusual punishment.
• Yesterday Obama released thousands of illegal aliens—many arrested on criminal charges—because he wanted to save the taxpayers some money.

Rome had Caesar and a Senate; a dictator and puppet legislature. It seems that we are close to adopting this model as our government as well. Obama ignores the Legislative branch and rules via Executive Orders. Is it really that different? If challenged he can always hide behind the Supreme Court.

My conclusion is that divine judgment is upon us and our people prefer tyranny and evil to freedom when given a choice.

American Conservatives-The Stupid Party since before 1897

This paragraph is one of many gems that I have found reading a collection of essays on Tactics of Christian Resistance assembled by Gary North in 1983. The paradigm of the evil party and the stupid party has been at work long before William F Buckley Jr. was born.

In 1897, Robert L. Dabney described Yankee Conservatism thusly:

This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is to-day one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will to-morrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard, indeed, to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. It always-when about to enter a protest-very blandly informs the wild beast whose path it essays to stop, that its “bark is worse than its bite,” and that it only means to save its manners by enacting its decent role of resistance. The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it “in wind,” and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy from having nothing to whip. No doubt, after a few years, when women’s suffrage shall have become an accomplished fact, conservatism will tacitly admit it into its creed, and thenceforward plume itself upon its wise firmness in opposing with similar weapons the extreme of baby suffrage; and when that too shall have been won, it will be heard declaring that the integrity of the American Constitution requires at least the refusal of suffrage to asses. There it will assume, with great dignity, its final position.
1. Robert L. Dabney, Discussions, Vol. 4 (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Publishers, [1897] 1979), p. 496.

As quoted in essay The Fundamental Biblical Tactic For Resisting Tyranny by Louis DeBoer, p 16.

Disarming Citizens is Tyranny

This month’s lesson in government intrusion seems to be aimed at infringing the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Amendment II

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

As you can see, the Second Amendment never mentions hunting or sport shooting. The right to bear arms is clearly for military purposes. It is to protect our State and nation from threats. This was a purposeful Amendment to prevent a specific violation of rights that the British had committed upon the Colonies prior to the Revolution.

Furthermore, the Army of the United States was envisioned by the Founders as a defensive force. The Founders wanted to avoid the political entrapments and intrigue so common in the European States of the period. The modern American Military with an offensive force and the capability to “project power anywhere in the world” is the opposite of what was intended by the Framers of the Constitution.

The history of the Amendment was to ensure that citizens could protect themselves against tyranny and foreign aggressors. Or as the standard oath of office phrases it’ “I , _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; …
• Protection from Foreign enemies is a pledge to protect our territory from attack.
• Protection from Domestic enemies is a pledge to defend citizens from the tyranny of the government; State or Federal.

Our dilemma is what to do when office holders have broken their oath and become the tyrants? This scenario was not envisioned by the Framers—at least not as part of their draft of the Constitution.

This leaves us with the right of civil disobedience and the doctrine of the lesser magistrate. These are helpful but the question remains; at what point do we stop submitting to the authority of our government? When does our road to serfdom necessitate a “line in the sand” that requires a response?

The question is further complicated by the fact that the politicians are no more corrupt that our fellow citizens. Do you actually believe that if someone “did a Tom Clancy” that the new leaders would be better than our current crop? I think it might actually result in a worse government and less freedom.

The Second Amendment is the only tool we have to insure that the rights that we have from God are not denied by the State. As long as politicians can’t disarm the population then we have hope that they will acknowledge limits to their power.

Thoughts on Barbara Alby’s Legacy

Barbara Alby died earlier this month. Most people do not know who she was but her imprint was large upon California politics. She was an activist for pro-life and family values, a radio talk show host before Rush Limbaugh was a household name, and a member of the California Assembly. Her biggest claim to fame was authoring legislation known as “Megan’s Law”.

However, it can be argued that she and her cohorts that took over the California Republican Assembly and later the California Republican Party in the early 1990s are largely responsible for the demise of the State Republican Party and the fact that Democrats won a 2/3 majority in the last election before her death.

I was with her in those early days of the 1990s and was an eye witness to much that in retrospect I think was done improperly. Before offering my analysis I wish to say that I have been involved to varying degrees in “grassroots politics” for several decades. I have a degree in Government from California State University in Sacramento. I worked in and around the Capitol during my college years. Willie Brown was speaker when I had my first experience under “The Dome” working for then Senator John Doolittle. I also worked for the Sacramento Union when Joseph Farah was trying to make it into a conservative alternative to the Sacramento Bee. In short, I was at ground zero when Barbara and her army of evangelical Christians were taking over. I was one of them and viewed myself as a loyal soldier to the cause.

Barbara—like most Christians—viewed the world in very black and white terms. Much of Christianity views the world in such categories and usually rightly so. We are saved, those outside the church are “the Lost”. We believe in Heaven and Hell; Good and Evil; right and wrong. However, when you bring such a view into the political arena this worldview can become a pretext for “scorched earth tactics”. Unlike the Christian belief of loving the Hell out of someone, in the political world vilification is easier than persuasion and gets faster results.

I think this is what happened with Barbara and her followers. In CRA and later in the CRP, we found it easier the run people out than we did to persuade them that our views and values were better because they rested on the Truth of Christianity and better reflected Western values. It was easier to play Power politics in the same way we perceived that our opponents did.

The results over time were catastrophic. The California Republican Assembly went from a statewide membership of tens of thousands to less than 2,400 today. The CRA lost most of its membership; many soured on politics and went home. Some fought the Conservative/Christian CRA and lost; some that remained active in the political world formed the California Congress of Republicans in the 1990s while in a more recent battle, Karen England and her gang tried to form the Conservative Republicans of California. Both have smaller memberships than CRA and all are struggling to maintain their existence.

Most people that Barbara brought into the political world behaved in similar fashion to her example and experienced similar results. Besides vanquishing her enemies, she also vanquished the “farm team”. Democrats groom their underlings for succession while Republicans engage them in mortal combat. As a result, when Barbara and her team jumped to the California Republican Party, no one left in CRA was able to maintain the momentum and energy Barbara brought to the organization.

CRA has been hemorrhaging members and influence ever since. Her once formidable Sacramento-Sierra Republican Assembly chapter went from a peak of 700 members under her leadership to less than 20 in ten years. Currently they are doing well if they maintain 25 members. Alby quit the CRA many years ago but many assumed she was with still part of the organization.

In like manner, the California Republican Party was captured by Barbara Alby and company. Alby controlled not only the CRA but many county central committees and then took control of the CRP. They owned the California GOP for a number of years.

The CRA’s chief Republican opponent during this period was liberal Republican Pete Wilson. Much of the disagreement with Wilson was on social policy. Wilson was not only pro-abortion but was an advocate for more government funding and constitutional protections for abortion rights. Wilson also would appoint Democrats over equally qualified Republicans to posts in State government. All of this just riled-up Conservatives in the Party. While all this was happening, Wilson very publicly called the conservatives in his party “Fucking Irrelevant.” Conservatives called Wilson, “Diane Feinstein in drag.”

A few years after capturing the California GOP, Alby began running for State Assembly. Once she was elected, her grip on the CRP was released as she went on to other things. A succession of chairmen took the reins of the GOP that pretended to be card carrying CRA members until they were elected and then they took off the sheep’s clothing and ran things as the RINOs that they were. In later years, Alby ran unsuccessfully for both Congress and the Board of Equalization.

The differences between the CRP factions still remain to this day; although the CRA has in fact become irrelevant as Wilson looked-for the irony is that Wilson is equally irrelevant. Wilson’s camp was making a good living off of the political process before Alby and company came along and upset the proverbial applecart. After a while, most evangelical conservatives left and the liberal Republicans re-took their place as GOP leaders.

My complaint with this whole process is not just with the tone and tactics employed by Evangelicals (including myself) but something harder to quantify. Namely, how does the fact that I am a Christian affect how I should treat others in politics or other “secular” areas?

What I am advocating is that we as Christians need a different paradigm to bring to the public square. When we copy what others are doing then we have ceded the moral high ground and lowered ourselves to engaging in the same political games everyone else utilizes. When Christians embrace the power religion of the State then they have compromised their biblical values and the authority of Scripture.

I will offer one recent example to illustrate my point, numerous similar ones would not be hard to find.
A few years ago, a group of conservatives in Sacramento County that were part of Barbara’s old CRA chapter, got together and decided to take over the Sacramento County Republican Central Committee (again). They even created a political action committee for the purpose called “Support the Platform” (STP). STP solicited CRA members for contributions. A friend and I gave generously to the cause. That year, many of the slate were elected; enough that the coalition that we made was able to take control of the Central Committee. Once in office, the woman that we elected as chair started going her own way. She refused any suggestions to offer one or two board positions to folks from “the other side”. Only her most trusted friends or folks that would do her bidding were given any responsibility. Before long she was tripling the SCRP dues—she had refused to pay any amount of dues when she was in the minority on the committee since she argued that forcing elected officials to pay dues was illegal—and after a time she decreed that only dues paying members would be allowed to vote. She and her faction adopted San Diego style bylaws which removed all power from the membership and vested it in the governing board and did a bunch of other things to enhance her power.

In just over two years, she turned an elected body into a member’s only club that did things her way or else. The Republicans of Sacramento County that actually voted for these folks were never notified or invited to any meetings. They were purposely not given any opportunity to interact with the representatives that they had elected. All actions of this body are conducted in secret. In fact new faces were not welcomed except by invitation and they were not allowed to be part of the group unless they were willing to pay $100 in annual dues. While this farce was happening, the STP PAC ran candidates against my friend and I even thought we had contributed a substantial amount of money for the PAC in previous cycle—about ¼ of their total expenditures. That was our reward for challenging this march to tyranny.

I could go on but I have chronicled their exploits in other parts of my blog. The point is that once elected, the chair not only ran things in an even more authoritarian way than any previous leader in living memory but she took more power than her predecessors with barely a murmur of dissent. Those in her camp that were willing to call her out were steamrolled, pushed aside and ignored. (If this reminds you of President Obama’s attitude toward the constraints of the Constitution then you are starting to see my point.)

Clearly Christians in the public square have yet to figure-out that their faith should cause them to act differently. It is too easy for them to adopt the tactics of “the world” and follow the example of pagans and humanists. R.J. Rushdoony was a frequent teacher at the Central Committee chair’s old church and would roll over in his grave if he knew about such behavior. She was taught better than that; however, maybe that is why she now attends a different church.

Sadly, I doubt anyone will learn from examining Barbara’s record. I think the short comings of her generation of evangelical Christians set the stage for situation in which we find ourselves now. It appears that the Tea Party movement is following the same failed trajectory that Barbara and other evangelicals have blazed in the past. Truly “there is nothing new under the sun”. Where Barbara walked was much fire and heat but Light was a much rarer commodity.

I had hoped to have lunch with Barbara one day and talk with her about my feelings; but that will never happen now and in the life to come it won’t matter. Someday I will see her again and by then both of us will know exactly what parts we were given during our time on earth.

One final note, I am still waiting for apologies from Barbara’s lieutenants Johnson, Stoos and especially Hardcastle but it’s been over twenty years since I have seen or spoken to any of them. I’m sure they just scraped me off the bottom of their shoes and went on to their next political objective. Gentlemen I proudly bear the scares you left but I have not forgotten the tactics deployed against me. I vowed not to be silent when I see them deployed against others.

Mark Steyn Summarizes 2012 Election

Reality doesn’t need to get a majority. Reality can get 2% of the vote, and it will still trump everything else. And America’s rendezvous with reality is coming, and that doesn’t matter how many attack ads you make about Big Bird or binders or anything else.—Mark Steyn on Hugh Hewitt radio program 11/08/2012

http://www.hughhewitt.com/transcripts.aspx?id=060cec14-a4e2-4d02-8325-ceb4d3fad482

Wild Election Prediction: Romney by 5:30 Pacific

Ok, I have been feeling this way for about three weeks but since nobody has put this in print—at least that I have seen—I want to be the first to blog that it will be clear that Romney has won before the polls close in California. I expect that the main stream media will be throwing in the towel by 5:30 pm on Election Day. This will be the earliest call since Jimmy Carter was spanked by Ronald Reagan. This will result in a few close races in California going our way. At stake may be the 2/3 majority being denied to California Democrats and the fate of Prop 30 & 32.

Aaron Park’s Opposition to Prop 32 and Charles Munger

“Money is the root of all evil” goes the old saying. When it comes to politics in California, the biggest player and advocate of evil on the Republican side of the aisle is Charles Munger. Munger has decided to spend much of his vast fortune in an attempt to remake the California Republican Party as the Democrat Light Party. Munger clearly hates Conservatives—especially social ones—and wants the state GOP to be a secular group that embraces the power of government. He is for California what George Soros has been for Democrats on the national stage. If you look at Munger’s spending, it is clear that his main enemy is Conservative Republicans. Given the choice of defeating Democrats or Conservatives in his own party, he will fund the moderate Republican over the Conservative every time. He frequently avoids opportunities to defeat Democrats in seats that could be won by Republicans.

Munger’s win/loss record has not been that great in Assembly and Senate races but he has done better at the ballot initiatives. He is largely responsible for the top two primary in California. He is also one of the backers behind Prop 32. Given the mischief that can be traced to Munger, Aaron Park is rightly suspicious of Prop 32.  Park wrote recently on his blog, “Passing Prop 32 would effectively eliminate the free speech of labor unions and corporations – thereby enabling powerful individuals with deep pockets to buy elections with no counterweight.” http://www.rightondaily.com/tag/no-on-prop-32/

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Park. While I am no fan of Munger, I must say that the public employee unions in California are a greater threat to liberty than Munger. I will attempt to explain some of my reasons for holding this position.
In the book of Samuel, after David killed Goliath the people shouted “Saul has killed his thousands and David his tens of thousands”.  As I see it, Munger has spent his millions and the public employee unions their hundreds of millions. Recently the Sacramento Bee ran an article that unions representing state employees collects 10.5 million dollars a month in dues. The largest public employee union is the California Teachers Association and they collect more. It is likely that public employee unions in California are collecting over $25 million per month in taxpayer funds. Supposedly only a fraction of this amount is spent on political activity. Advocacy to members and lobbying in Sacramento do not count as political activity in the union world. Much of this political advocacy is instead called member communications. When they tell members or legislators how to vote, in my world that is political activity.

Doing the math for union influence in California goes like this. Public employee unions in our state are collecting more than $25 million dollars a month in dues. Elections are on a two year cycle; so 24 months times $25 million per month is $600 million per election cycle. Is it any wonder that these unions own everything in the state?

If Prop 32 passes, Unions would be crippled but not shutdown. Unions claim that only one to two percent of the dues collected go to political purposes. We all know this is a lie. By parsing the words, unions do not count most of their political activity as political activity. Instead they call it member communications. Lobbying legislation is also not counted as political activity. If this initiative passes unions would be forced to open their books to show members and taxpayers where all the public money goes that they have collected. This transparency is the last thing that they want but it will be the logical result of passage. Also folks like me that have money forcibly take out of our checks even though we don’t belong to the union will finally have the choice not to fund people and causes that they find morally objectionable.
California’s Prop 32 is Wisconsin light. While 85 percent of Wisconsin folks opted out of compulsory union dues for political purposes, I think the number in California that choose to remain in the system will be much higher. The funding of PACs and 527s will not be affected by this initiative.

A second line of argument against Park’s claim and in favor of 32 is that in the wake of the top two primary, party identification of candidates is not as important. This is especially true with the Republicans. The state party is broke and has been for many years. Their endorsement is almost meaningless. They have no money to help candidates or spend on their behalf. They are just a pass thru organization to funnel money to candidates by exploiting loopholes in existing campaign contribution laws. Nothing on our side of the aisle will change much.

If Munger wants to be king of the hill in our party so what? I can’t imagine a more inefficient use of money in California politics. Republicans are on the verge of going below the status of even being called the loyal opposition. We are functionally irrelevant to the political process. Elected officials in the party will only help Munger as long as the money flows. We have a name for folks like that … and you thought that was only legal in Nevada? At this stage in the decline of the Republican Party, donors will get more bang for their buck in supporting ballot measures than candidates. In the initiative arena, Munger has lots of company; he is not a lone actor as Park makes it sound.

Proverbs 13:22 promises that “the sinner’s wealth is laid up for the righteous”. How this works is a mystery but I know that God is in charge of this world and is bringing his will to pass. He is using folks like Soros and Munger for his purposes. Mostly this purpose appears to be judgment for not obeying Him. If you look at Munger’s spending it is clear to me that his problem is not with Conservatives it is ultimately with God. I have comfort in the fact that he will fail at anything he does that is not for the glory of God.

Being a Conservative Republican in California is much like wandering in the wilderness for forty years without Moses to guide us. All we are left with is griping, complaining and fighting amongst ourselves. I don’t think much will change for the better until the current generation (i.e. baby-boomers) have gone to their eternal reward. As long as a majority of people look to government to provide their needs, our future will be filled with more tyranny and less liberty. If passage of Prop 32 can slow the trip down the road to serfdom then I count that a small victory and worth my vote.