[Rushtalk] Alert: The California 3-State Split is a Massive Liberal Trojan Horse

Tom Matiska tom.matiska at att.net
Sun Apr 29 11:28:31 MDT 2018

I would not be the least bit surprised if the left's grip on California is gone in a blink.   Simply triple the state's $400B budget with an $800B single payer plan,  give unlimited bennies to "dreamers" who don't pay taxes, be the crash test dummy for green energy while adding a tax on electric cars to penalize them for not paying gas taxes,  drive employers to other states, and top it off with a high speed train through an earthquake zone, ....etc       The left's political utopia in California can be gone quicker than you can say Gray Davis      Tom 

    On Sunday, April 29, 2018 9:37 AM, Dennis Putnam <dap1 at bellsouth.net> wrote:

  Neither will the other but I can have pleasant dreams, can't I?
 On 4/28/2018 7:29 PM, Stephen Frye wrote:
#yiv7016030624 #yiv7016030624 -- _filtered #yiv7016030624 {panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv7016030624 {font-family:Calibri;panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv7016030624 {panose-1:2 15 3 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} _filtered #yiv7016030624 {font-family:Consolas;panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}#yiv7016030624 #yiv7016030624 p.yiv7016030624MsoNormal, #yiv7016030624 li.yiv7016030624MsoNormal, #yiv7016030624 div.yiv7016030624MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:black;}#yiv7016030624 h3 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:13.5pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:black;}#yiv7016030624 a:link, #yiv7016030624 span.yiv7016030624MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7016030624 a:visited, #yiv7016030624 span.yiv7016030624MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:purple;text-decoration:underline;}#yiv7016030624 pre {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:10.0pt;color:black;}#yiv7016030624 p.yiv7016030624msonormal0, #yiv7016030624 li.yiv7016030624msonormal0, #yiv7016030624 div.yiv7016030624msonormal0 {margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:11.0pt;font-family:sans-serif;color:black;}#yiv7016030624 span.yiv7016030624Heading3Char {font-family:sans-serif;color:#1F3763;}#yiv7016030624 span.yiv7016030624EmailStyle19 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv7016030624 span.yiv7016030624HTMLPreformattedChar {font-family:Consolas;color:black;}#yiv7016030624 span.yiv7016030624EmailStyle22 {font-family:sans-serif;color:windowtext;}#yiv7016030624 .yiv7016030624MsoChpDefault {font-size:10.0pt;} _filtered #yiv7016030624 {margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}#yiv7016030624 div.yiv7016030624WordSection1 {}#yiv7016030624  Won’t happen.      From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com <rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com> On Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
 Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2018 1:41 PM
 To: rushtalk at csdco.com
 Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Alert: The California 3-State Split is a Massive Liberal Trojan Horse       I'd prefer secession myself.
 On 4/28/2018 11:46 AM, Stephen Frye wrote:  
 Won’t happen.     From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com <rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com> On Behalf Of Steven Laib
 Sent: Friday, April 27, 2018 6:31 PM
 To: Rushtalk Discussion List <rushtalk at csdco.com>
 Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] Alert: The California 3-State Split is a Massive Liberal Trojan Horse      Exactly what my examination of the proposal suggested.    The big cities would dominate the three states giving California three times the representation in the Senate as it has now.  It would have a disastrous effect on the balance of power in WDC.     
 On Apr 26, 2018, at 1:29 PM, Carl Spitzer {C Juno} <cwsiv at juno.com> wrote:  
      Alert: The California 3-State Split is a Massive Liberal Trojan Horse 
 By  Cillian Zeal 
 April 16, 2018 at 9:56am
 Share on Facebook362  Tweet  Email  Email Print If you follow politics, you’ve probably heard by now about the proposed California referendum that could split the Golden State into three states.
 The  measure, proposed by billionaire Tim Draper, isn’t necessarily new. Draper’s forces had previously tried to get a measure to split California into multiple states onto the ballots in 2014 and 2016, but didn’t get enough signatures.
 This year, roughly 600,000 signatures were collected, easily surpassing the 365,880 needed to put a referendum to a statewide vote.
 The proposal would split California into three states: California, which would encompass Los Angeles, Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties and have 12.3 million residents; Southern California, which would include Fresno, Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego and Tulare counties and a population of 13.9 million people; and Northern California, which would include the rest of the state’s 40 counties, including San Francisco and Silicon Valley, and count 13.3 million individuals among its numbers.
 For conservatives entranced by the  possibility of Calexit, proposed after President Donald Trump’s victory in 2016, the idea of splitting California up for better representation might seem like a good idea.
 You shouldn’t buy it, though. As  Red State notes, it’s nothing more than the ultimate gerrymander designed to increase the liberal stranglehold on the Golden State.
 It’s worth noting that no matter what California voters do at the polls this November, it’s unlikely the measure would pass, at least for now. In Article 4, Section 3 of the Constitution, it states that “no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.”
 The Trump administration will veto such a split, for reasons to be laid out later. That means it would need two-thirds of both houses of Congress to override the veto, something that clearly won’t happen. If the Democrats controlled both houses and the presidency, however, this plan would be on the fast track to recognition, were Californians to vote for it. 
 Draper and his allies have tried to paint the California split as mostly a vote to change California’s broken state politics. There’s no indication it would do that. It would, however, affect national politics in a huge way.
 What’s now California, which has two senators like any other state, would instead get six — and it’s unlikely that any of them would be conservative.
 “Of those six senators, the four senators from Northern California and (new) California would be uber-progressive communists in perpetuity,” Red State notes.
 “In addition, it is not guaranteed that Southern California would have even one conservative senator, and most probably have two RINO’s along the same lines of Arizona or Mississippi, or even split  like Florida. And with the current balance in the Senate, adding two more progressive senators to the mix, along with the worst-case scenario of one conservative + one RINO, would present a chill on the current structure that would make it near-impossible to get anything done from even a moderate-right stance, and help propel the anti-American legislation that would nail the coffin into any legislative relief.”
 Then there’s the House. Red State estimates Southern California would get 20 seats in the reapportionment, with 19 seats for Northern California and 17 seats for California classic.
 RELATED:  ‘Body of Evidence’ Emerging Tying Lynch, Comey Together in Massive Scandal
 There’s a catch to this, as usual: “California is made up of districts that are currently near-100% Democrat-controlled districts, while Northern California currently has about 70% Democrat-controlled districts,” Red State notes. “However, with the new states able to control their district configuration, it would make it more likely that Northern California is going to gerrymander the sprawling conservative population into fewer districts, ensuring that progressives control 16 or 17 of the 19 seats.”
 Furthermore, Minnesota, Texas and Washington would end up losing seats under this plan. Two of those three states — Minnesota and Washington — would likely gerrymander their districts so the GOP would lose a seat, resulting in a likely cumulative loss of one seat.
 And that’s all a best-case scenario, assuming that Southern California (or whatever it decides to rename itself after the split, should it happen; the  San Francisco Chronicle notes the new states would be able to vote on a name for themselves) remains conservative. That’s far from certain, particularly  given immigration patterns.
 There are a  number of other issues posed by this split, from apportioning the state’s ginormous debt and pension responsibilities to deciding how water rights are doled out. However, the biggest issue should be the fact this is one giant gerrymander, little more than a naked attempt to throw the balance of Congress in the favor of the Democrats.
 Again, it’s worth noting what I previously stated: Unless the Democrats get both houses of Congress in November and Trump refuses to veto this — all three of which are unlikely to happen together — any change to California isn’t going to happen.
 However, that’s not to say it won’t appear at a later date, particularly if there’s a Democrat in office. So if you ever needed a reason to keep conservatives in office, this blatant power grab ought to do it.
 How To "Remove" Dark Spots
 Gundry MD
 Rushtalk mailing list
 Rushtalk at csdco.com
  _______________________________________________ Rushtalk mailing list Rushtalk at csdco.com http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk 
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com
Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20180429/75796274/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list