When asked what Congress should focus on, CA43 District voters stated growing the economy and Health Care.  25% of Republicans, 29% of Democrats and 23% of Independents want Congress to focus on growing the economy.  31% of Democrats and 25% of Independents want Congress to work on health care reform.  Republicans want Congress to concentrate on tax reform, restraining government spending and reducing deficits after policies growing the economy.

Missouri vs. California voters on Objectives

Higher percentages of Missouri voters want Congress to emphasize economic growth compared to California voters.  Both Independents and Republicans want Congress to work on reducing the budget and deficit.  Whereas Democrats want more health care after policies designed to grow the economy.  Among California voters, 24% of Republicans and 16% of Independents want tax reform compared to 18% of Missouri Republicans and 16.5% of Missouri Independents.

Missouri voters across the board see economic growth as their top concern.  The major difference among Missouri voters is that Independents and Republicans want Congress to restrain spending and deficits as their number two objective.  Instead, Democrats want Congress to work on health care reform.

California Independents like their Democratic counterparts want Congress to work on health care along with growing the economy.  However, Missouri Independents follow the Republican lead on tax reform and restraining spending and deficits.

Wisconsin vs California voters

Wisconsin voters like voters in Missouri want Congress to grow the economy as their number one objective.  However, Republicans and Independents also want Congress to work on healthcare and restraining budget spending as their number two objective.  Meanwhile Democrats want Congress to follow up on health care behind growing the economy.  This is similar to what California voters want.  Wisconsin Independents follow Republicans but CA43 Independents follow the lead of California Democrats.

Montana vs. California Voters

In Montana, 41% of Republican and 29% of Independents favor Congress growing the economy, along with 26% of Montana Democrats.  Montana Democrats, just like their California Democrats, prefer Congress to work on Health care followed by growing the economy.  Montana Independents agree with Republicans.  Congress should focus on restraining the budget after growing the economy.  However, Independents equally feel that Congress should work on health care.

Conclusion – CA43

In Conclusion, California voters want economic growth.  But, they want Congress to continue work on health care reform.  In our poll, California voters were asked whether they wanted a plan which allows them to keep their doctor and their plan plus buy inexpensive plan.  70% said yes!  65% of Democrats, 65% of Independents and 82% of Republicans want more choices in health care and in buying a plan that costs less.  These are both weaknesses with Obamacare.  If a candidate understands that many aspects of the Republican’s plan are popular, a candidate can promote a more flexible health care than Obamacare not just as a strategy for health care but also part of an overall strategy of promoting economic growth with a health care plan that cost less and allows voters to keep their own money.

Heath care reforms should Include the right to keep your plan and your doctor and buy a less expensive plan across state lines

Another issue that can be used as part of a strategy to growing the economy is education reform.  In the same poll, education choice is popular with voters in CA43.  This could lead to reforms that a candidate can take advantage of in promoting a growth oriented campaign.  School choice benefits many minorities, allowing their children to attend better schools and aiding in future job prospects.

Should parents should have right to choose schools for their children?

California voters want a growing economy.  However, they differ from voters in Montana, Wisconsin and Missouri.  In CA43 Independents follow the lead of Democrats in wanting health care reform.  While many Independents in Red States carried by Trump want emphasized growing the economy along with tax reforms and restraining budget.

The post What Do CA43 Voters Want? Part Two appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

As all of you know, I’m thinking of running for Congress in CA43 against Maxine Waters.  Approximately 50% of the voters in that district are Hispanic.  And, accordingly, a large portion of the small businesses in that district are probably Hispanic owned.  What, if anything, has Maxine Waters done to help them?  My guess is nothing.

The Regulatory State

Maxine Waters believes in the regulatory state.  The only thing regulations do is harm small businessmen.  In fact, many businesses never get off the ground because of regulations.  How do we stop this?  We create an Alianza Pare El Progreso in the Hispanic Community.  We listen to the people in the community and find out exactly what they need changed.  Their answers will give us the answers we need to fix the problem.

Hispanic businessmen understand big government and its spider web of regulations make it difficult for them to survive. I have friends who were shocked when a budget to open a restaurant went from approximately $250,000 to $750,000 almost entirely because of regulations. This is cost probative to most small business owners. And, it directly effects employment in working class communities.  After all, small business drives the economy.

Progress stops this web from making life difficult for those in the business world.  Many Hispanic business leaders are the same as Caucasian and African Americans.  They have the same dreams for their family and community.  And, the Federal Government does nothing to help them achieve these dreams.  The Federal Government succeeds in only stifling them by making operation of a business almost impossible.

So far, the Trump Administration has eliminated myriads of regulations in the business world.  As you know, on his first day in office, he signed an Executive Order requiring the cancellation of two regulations for every new one enacted.  Well, so far, he’s actually achieved a 16-1 ratio.  That’s pretty good, but it is just not enough.

Taxes

Some people, mostly Democrats, believe tax breaks do not create jobs and put money into the economy.  The facts prove otherwise.  Indeed, tax breaks are one of the strongest drivers of the economy.  Allowing people to keep more of their hard-earned money vastly moves the economy, increases and improves jobs and does far more for citizens than increased spending.  Kennedy and Reagan both knew this and acted accordingly.

Democrats argue tax cuts only benefit the wealthy.  That is incorrect.  A tax cut is just that:  A tax cut.  It benefits all, especially business owners.  And, it benefits the economy in the following ways:

• If the wealthy have more cash available, they will put it back into business and create jobs; and,
• For the middle class, it creates more available cash to drive the economy. It also, helps small business owner have an opportunity to succeed.

This is simple math.  But, Democrats, especially liberal Democrats like Maxine Waters, believe that taxing more and spending more is the answer.  This does not help Hispanic, or for that matter any business owner.

Alianza Para El Progreso

It’s time for Congress to help the Hispanic business owner.  The answers are quite clear.  We need an Alianza Para El Progreso for a new age.  President Kennedy had the right idea 55 years ago.  But, instead of concentrating on the problems of the United Sates Hispanic Community, he spent all his time working with the problems of Hispanic Countries.  He did not help those trying to achieve the American Dream here.

That is what we need now.  We need to concentrate on Hispanics in America; specifically Hispanic business owners.  If we do, we will create much prosperity in that community.  And, what does more prosperity do?  It creates a stronger middle class.  And, that is what we need to bring this community into mainstream America.

After 25 years, of Maxine Waters, what have they got to lose?

The post Alianza Para El Progreso appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

And then, after a successful Calexit, when California gets touched by North Korea, now within range of NK ICBM, is Governor Brown, whose silence on this issue is a dereliction of duty.  Is he going to join NATO and pray to God California is treated by NATO better than they treated the Ukraine?  Would Governor Brown have turned his back on President Abraham Lincolns’ Union?  It sure seems that way!  How sad, unpatriotic, disloyal and ignorant.  But, then this is the “tolerant” vision of the “intolerant” radical insane progressives.

The statistical conservative political advantages for the nation without California are staggering.  And the money saved by Calexit could go to paying down the national debt.

California has two (2) Democratic Senators, and fifty three (53) Representatives in the United States House of Representatives.   The House of Representatives has four hundred and thirty-five (435) seats.  California’s representation there contains thirty nine (39) Democrats and fourteen (14) Republicans.

It takes 270 or more electoral college votes to win a presidential election.  The biggest states California (55), New York (31), Texas (34), and Florida (29) have the most impact on the result of the presidential election. Two of these are deep blue.  One is a swing state (Florida).  From an electoral point of view, it would almost be a miracle for Republicans and conservatives if California, Illinois and New York, left the the United States of America.  Calexit, please succeed.

There is no rational scenario where the Democrats would ever allow this to happen.  It would most likely result in the “righting” of the American divisiveness, and then Americas’ Civil War II.

As much as the duplicitous Governor seeks Federal funds for a disastrous state financial policy, for the repair of Oroville Dam and for illegal alien entitlements, he is infected with a profound witlessness of the difference between “equal outcome and equal opportunity” for citizens versus illegal immigrants.  How would he provide for the “National Security” for the sovereign nation of California?  He can’t even solve California’s pending legacy debt disaster.

California continues accepting massive Federal support for police, educational programs and socials grants for immigration issues.  All of this while the state defies the Federal Government with its Sanctuary City/State idiocy, elevating the “excuses and victimization” of Union cessation, of illegal immigrant dispensations over “citizen rights and privileges.”  The governor is aimless when it comes to “charity begins at home.”  And, “home” is America and her citizens!!

As a snap shot in time, for California to leave the Union it would present a huge downside for America’s Democrats in terms of political power, federal appropriations, and an incredible gift to Conservatives.  Without California, Trumps’ win would have been a more pronounced crushing landside.  Leave it to radical progressive liberals to entertain political cannibalism and suicide.

California, in specific, is on the verge of bankruptcy, similar to Illinois.  Without existing Federal help, subsidies, grants and entitlements, it would expand its deconstruction and inevitably collapse with Illinois into bankruptcy.  “Could Illinois be the first state to file for bankruptcy?”

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/could-illinois-be-the-first-state-to-file-for-bankruptcy/

California is a cautionary tale for taxpayers in the rest of the country.  So please, Calexit, secede.

Over the seven-year period, 2009 to 2016, the study by Spectrum Location Solutions estimates that 9,000 businesses dis-invested in California.  Some relocated completely while other kept their headquarters here.  They targeted out-of-state locations for expansion.  Just research Apple Inc.’s, intellectual assets in Palo Alto, manufacturing in China (FoxCom) and a corporate shill in Nevada and profits offshore.

About 5 million Californians left between 2004 and 2013.  Roughly 3.9 million people came here from other states during that period.  The net population loss is more than 1 million. The trend resulted in a net loss of about $26 billion in annual income.

California’s burdens are an unsustainable and unfunded liability.  It is a trillion dollar government pension system.  At the end of the day under California law, the taxpayers and Federal government are asked to bail out and subsidize the budget shortfall.  Please, Calexit, secede!

California-has a debt of $340 billion.  It is in economic collapse.  While tax revenue increases, policies to kill off the state are in place and beginning to take effect.

In 2012, the Federal Government mandated that, on January 1, 2014, all government pension plans must adopt the same stringent accounting methods used by private plans.  This will cause chaos in government and public sector pension plans, as they are unsustainable.  CalPERS/CalSTRS and other government pension plans refused to report the unfunded liabilities!  Nearly 6,000 Retired Illinois Teachers Made Six-Figure Pensions in 2014.

The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power plan has $11 billion in unfunded liabilities.  These liabilities are shored up by the ability of the system to raise water rates.

The University of California pension plan has an unfunded liability of $21 billion.  Since the mid-2000’s, one third of every dollar in tuition increases goes not to education, but the pension system; to keep that money flowing to retired professors.  Even the ridiculous tuition, the lottery commitment, is squandered by Browns’ Madoff-ism.

Currently the cities of Los Angeles and San Francisco allocate 23 percent of their budget to their pension systems.

A study released in 2012 by the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research found that, for the city of Los Angeles, “Pension costs increased from 8.5 percent of total city expenditures in 1999 to 13.7 percent in 2011.” For fiscal year 2011-12, estimated pension costs climbed to “15.4 percent of city expenditures.”  By 2014-15, the city had hit 23 percent, just like San Francisco.  That is a fatal blow for cities with massive pothole problems, deficits and entitlement social services expenditures.

The biggest problem for California is the CalPERS system.  California Healthline wrote in May 2014 that “CalSTRS still has a $73.7 billion unfunded liability.  CalPERS includes $64.6 billion in liabilities.”  That figure, however, is not even close to the truth.  “There are several ways to view the size of the issue at the state level.  California carries the largest “unfunded liability” in total dollars at $754 billion.  Illinois at $331.6 billion and New York with $307.9 billion follow it.”

“Unfunded liability” means the party responsible for paying it pays it out of current income or by borrowing.  The risk of an unfunded liability is that a payee may not receive that for which he/she is entitled if the payer goes through a difficult financial period.

In total, government pension systems have $4.7 TRILLION in unfunded liabilities.  As the stock market goes up, it is therefore, easier to finance this debt.  When the market goes down, it is impossible without either cutting benefits or taxpayers subsidies.  California “proudly” carries one trillion of this debt.  The last time the stock market crashed, the California legislature tried to get tax payers to subsidize the losses in CalPERS.

How does this happen?  One bill passed in Sacramento in 1999, with the support of Democrats and Republicans, changed the financial equations for government pension systems.  Since then, it has been a death spiral for pensions in California.  This was SB 400.  The San Diego Union-Tribune said this of the bill in May 2007:

“Even in a state capital dominated by public employee unions, passage of such a massive pension spike would have been impossible had CalPERS put an honest price tag on its cost. Instead, the agency’s evaluation of how much of the spike would be borne by taxpayers assumed that CalPERS would enjoy record stock market returns forever and ever. Lawmakers were told the annual tab would range from $379 million to $466 million over the next decade.

Not even close. The stock market came back to earth, and the taxpayer tab skyrocketed. This fiscal year, taxpayers had to fork over $2.67 billion to cover the pension shortfall. Next year, the tab will hit a new record: $2.75 billion.” The Trump stock market bubble makes things look so much better, tenuously supported by the fiat money of the Federal Reserve QE1, QE2 and QE3, under a collapsing Middle Class. Does anyone understand this?

California tried to fix this mess.  Governor Brown passed pension reform a couple of years ago.  Today, the legislature rolled back most of the reforms, however.  San Jose and San Diego voters passed pension reform by almost a 70-30 margin.  Since the passage, however, the unions have gone to court and had important parts of the reforms, approved by voters, thrown out.  Both cities are once again looking at bankruptcy due to pension costs and obligations.

The solution is bankruptcy like Orange Country in 1994, Citron’s Chapter 9 Bankruptcy, and the City of Bell “Rizzo” scandal.  Because of the 2008 financial crisis in July 2012 Stockton became the largest city in U.S. history to file bankruptcy.  Detroit surpassed it in July 2013.  Soon it will be San Diego where in 2010 the huge deficits that now plagues San Diego and its taxpayers amounts to $7 billion back then, what now? Both Los Angeles and San Francisco are not far behind?  Calexit, please happen!

What has happened since Pete Wilson and Ronald Reagan?  It is radical insane progressivism.

However, regarding national security, California would be wise to study the breakup of the Soviet Union and the aggression by Russia against the Ukraine (Crimea).   In 1994, the Ukraine agreed to destroy its nuclear weapons.  On December 5, 1994 the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, Britain and the United States signed the Budapest Memorandum, to provide Ukraine with security assurances in connection with its accession to the NPT as a non-nuclear state, and to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.  Will California then, like Europe, come on bended knees demanding the umbrella of NATO.  The codes of American nuclear weapons, stationed in California, are not safe in the hands of radical progressives.  Are California leaders that stupid?

So, please encourage Calexit.  Instead, it must embrace radical financial conservatism, or become a ward of the nation.  Else-wise this is pseudo socialism and we are rapidly running out of other people’s money.

This is an aberration at the fringes on democracy, a solidly entrenched “Fourth Estate.” At just, how many levels?

Accordingly, the DNC cannot allow this to happen and survive.  But, please, please, Calexit mus succeed!

America yearns for the return from radical insane progressivism to JFK liberalism which is surprisingly compatible with Ronald Reagan conservatism.

The post Calexit a Blessing Denied appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

Compared to the Nation

Americas Majority Foundation conducted a series of polls, including two nationally, on voters views after the 2016 election.  Among the issues reviewed were whether voters feel increasing government spending and deficits helps or hurts the economy as well as their economic prospects.  Does growth in the private sector also aid in in their economic prosperity?  Additionally, we asked whether politicians should emphasize job creation and economic growth.

In the last few weeks, we asked voters in CA43 similar questions.  We came back with:  How are these voters represented by one of the leading leftists in America?  We compared Maxine Waters to voters nationwide, as well as voters in three states carried by Donald Trump:  Missouri, Montana and Wisconsin.

Americas Majority Foundation used two separate polling companies to handle the national polls, Voice Broadcasting and Cyngal.  Additionally, we used Voice Broadcasting to poll CA43 and the individual states.

In our post-election polls, we found a majority of voters, regardless of Party, view increased government spending will hurt the economy.  Cyngal pollsters found that only 8% of Republicans, 26.5% of Democrats and 17% of Independents view increased government spending as helping.  Voice Broadcasting also found 7% of Republicans, 26.5% of Democrats and 14% of Independents view government spending helps.

In CA43, 16% of Republicans, 37% of Democrats and 24% of Independents view increased government spending helps the economy.  67% of Republicans and 48% of Independents told pollsters increased government spending and deficits hurts the overall economy and their opportunity to succeed.  Whereas only 32% of Democrats agree with Republicans and independents on this.  The plurality of voters (46%) view government spending as hurting the economy compared to 26.5% who say it helps.  Voters in this district are less likely to view increased government spending as hurting the economy compared to national polls of voters.  However, they still view Keynesian economic theories with suspicion.

Does government spending and deficits help or hurt the economy?

When asked if government policies should emphasize Economic growth over inequality, voters in our nationwide poll prefer policies emphasizing economic growth over inequality between the top percent and the rest of the nation.  This is true, also, among voters in CA43.  There 67% of Republicans, 59% of Democrats and 48% of Independents favor policywhich stresses economic growth and job creation over inequality.  While more Republicans and Independents favor economic growth in our national polls compared to Republicans and Independents in CA43, the number of Democratic voters in CA43 are similar in both national polls.  That is 54% in Cyngal and 57% in Voice Broadcasting.  Overall, voters are more interested in growing their opportunity to succeed as opposed to engaging in the politics of envy.

Should Government emphasize Economic Growth or Inequality?

We then asked voters whether they believe increasing growth in the private sector helps their chance of success.  Our voters in CA43 accordingly, understand and agree with this.  66% of Republicans, 44% of Democrats and 54% of Independents agree.  However, only 9% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats and 17% of Independents disagree that increasing private sector growth helps them economically.

Republicans and Independents in our national polls are more supportive than Republicans and Independents in CA43.  However, not by much.  Cyngal has 70% of Republicans and 61% of Independents as seeing private sector growth helping Americans move up.  Voice Broadcasting has 76% of Republicans and 65% of Independents viewing private sector growth as helping overall prosperity.  This compares however, to 66% of Republicans and 54% of Independents in CA43.  57% of Democrats as reported by Cyngal and 48% as reported by Voice Broadcasting compared to 44% Democrats in CA43 view increasing private sector growth as beneficial.

Does growth in the Private Sector help your Ability to Succeed?

CA43 voters show that even in one of the most liberal districts in the country free market ideas are more popular than you would imagine.  There Democrats outnumber Republicans 4 to 1 in party registration.  Additionally, minorities representing 80% of the district.

This is the first part in a four part series.

The post What Do Voters in CA43 Want? appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

The current size of the House of Representatives does not make sense.  If you are a member of the House, you now represent almost 750,000 Constituents.  This is more than three times as many people as when the size of the House was fixed.  In my opinion, it is under representation.  No one person can know a district this large.  It’s impossible.  Accordingly, the House of Representatives is too small.  The people deserve better representation and this is one way to achieve that end.

The only real question will be how large?  Where does it make sense and when does the House get too large?  These are the same reasons as in 1911.  At that time, people believed that 435 was enough forever.  It was a fair compromise then.  It stopped the immense growth of the chamber.  These same arguments exist today.  However, it is just ridiculous and must be dealt with appropriately.

The British House of Commons and German Bundestag are both over 600 members.  The population of these countries is minute compared to our size.  Maybe, 600 is a fair number.  In fact, in my prior article, I addressed this possibility.  Now, however, even at 600, you would still be representing more than 500,000 people.  In the UK, a member of the House of Commons represents about 100,000.  Do you see the disparity?  Is this fair representation?  I don’t think so.

Accordingly, I would like to float this proposal.  We should increase the size of the House of Representatives to 1,000 members.  I know this would more than double its size and there is very little change of this ever happening.  However, at this number, a Representative would only be answerable to 325,000 people.  That’s still too much, but it’s better than the current situation.

A good compromise is somewhere in the middle.  However, Congress will determine that later.

The post Is the House of Representatives Too Small? appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

Jack Kerouac was a contradiction.  He was a writer who along with others from the Beat Generation provided an inspiration to the 1960’s counter culture with his writings on sex, drugs and jazz.  However, he was also a writer who rejected much of the political agenda of the left as he abhored communism.  In the end, he still remained loyal to Catholicism, a Catholicism synergistic with outside influences just as Buddhism.  (Certainly not a Catholicism that this Pope would approve).

On the Road

On the Road was the novel that gained Kerouac notoriety.  It relayed the story of his journey across America.  An autobiography wrapped in a novel, Jack Kerouac bases the story on travels with Neal Cassidy from 1947 to 1950.  Kerouac, through his alter ego Sal Paradise, narrates the viewing of America’s under belly.  It occurs in a decade in which much of America is viewed as men in grey flannel suits.  Sal Paradise and his friend Dean Moriarty view America post World War II as they view the development of a new America.  Influenced by his band of friends, and the introduction to Dean Moriarty, Paradise observes, “began the part of my life you could call my life on the road.”

When Dean Moriarty arrived in New York, he met Carlo Marx (based on Allen Ginsberg), Sal’s closet friend.  In meeting of a “holy con-man with the shining mind (Dean) and the sorrowful poetic con-man with the dark mind that is Carlo Marx.”  Carlo and Dean chat about friendship and adventure.  Sal’s thoughts turn to the road as he anticipates the many characters he will meet, to find his own adventure.

The first trip begins in 1947 as Sal’s friend, Remi Boncoeur, invites him to San Francisco with possibility of traveling the world via ship.  With 50 dollars in his pocket, he takes off to view America and finally arrived in San Francisco.  However, he ends up with a job as a night watchman for a camp housing merchant marines with Remi.  His own lack of commitment plus a falling out with Remi force Sal to move on.  His immaturity shows up as he met Hispanic woman named Terry who ran away from her husband.  They become one for a brief moment lasting two weeks.

For fifteen days, they are inseparable as Sal spends time with her family in a migrant camp.  While the agrarian lifestyle appeals to Sal, the monetary reality sets in as Sal decides to leave again.  He was not willing to share Terry’s poverty.  Off he goes, where he meets up with Dean in Denver.

Sal and Dean began their own journey together. Dean’s own background includes spending time in prison for stealing cars and being the son of an alcoholic father.  Sal views Moriarty as a heroic figure, totally different from what he has known in the past.  His friend, Carlo Marx, is a poet so Dean is different from his friends.  There appears a free nature not tied to any social demands.  In the beginning, Dean is heroic.  But as the novel proceeds, Dean shows decline or Sal matures, depending how you view it.  In the beginning, the road represents freedom but soon, it represents disappointment.

The road begins to disillusion Sal and he reviews his past trips in a cynical light as his companions are from the lower classes.  Sal realizes that Dean, who he considered a hero early in the book, is a man with faults.  Dean abandoned his wife and child along with past lovers.  Sal explains after one confrontation, “Where once Dean would have talked his way out, he now fell silent…He was beat.”

Sal goes for broke with one last journey through the Mexican countryside.  He ends up in Mexico City along with Dean and a hanger-on from Denver.  The Mexican trip provides some of the memorable portions of the book.  The reader is introduced to marijuana through the underside of Mexican culture.  This included a vivid trip to a bordello offering mambo music and underage prostitutes.

By the time, Sal reaches Mexico, he has dysentery.  Dean leaves Sal ill, feverish and hallucinating.  Sal notes, “When I got better I realized what a rat he was, but then I had to understand the impossible complexity of his life, how he had to leave me there, sick to get on with his wives and woes.”

The novel ends in New York when Dean comes back to arrange for Sal and his girlfriend to move to San Francisco.  The meeting went awry and Dean returns to California alone.  In the end, we see Sal sitting on a pier, looking West, while reminiscing on God, America, crying children.  He realizes that “Nobody knows what’s going to happen to anybody besides the forlorn of growing old.”  His last thought is “I think of Dean Moriarty, I even think of Old Dean Moriarty the father we never found, I think of Dean Moriarty.”

The Dharma Bums

This book was followed by The Dharma Bums, which represents Jack Kerouac’s attempt to synergize Buddhism with his Catholicism.  Like On the Road, this book is based on events in Kerouac’s life.  The main characters are Ray Smith (based on Kerouac and the narrator) and Japhy Ryder (based on the poet and essayist Gary Snyder).  Kerouac tries to combine a relationship with the outdoors, of hiking and hitchhiking through the West, with the city life featuring Jazz, poetry readings and parties featuring booze and drugs.

After arriving from one of his hitchhiking trips, Smith and Ryder joined by Henry Morley, climb the Matterhorn Peak in California.  Smith struggles to keep up with Ryder as they climb toward the top.  But, Smith couldn’t travel the last 100 yards.  However, he is inspired to spend the following year as a fire lookout for the United States Forest Service on Desolation Peak.

Between their trip to the Matterhorn Peak and Smith’s trip to Desolation Peak, we see one more contrast between the solitude of the outdoors and city life.  We witness drunken three day parties and a suicide.  The book features the debut of Allen Ginsberg’s presentation “Howl.”  (In the book Ginsberg is Alvah Goldbook and the poem is called Wail).

The central character is Japhy, whose penchant for the simple life and has a willingness to share what little he has with others.  Japhy Ryder’s own life style is moving to his own conclusion as he prepares to go to Japan to live in a Buddhist monastery.  The final scenes show Kerouac viewing the peaceful images of Desolation Peak as he contemplates all around him.

The Dharma Bum foreshadows the consciousness probing of the 60’s featuring Timothy Leary’s “tune out” and Ken Kesey.  On the Road influenced a new generation of writers including the gonzo journalism of Hunter Thompson.  Thompson’s writings feature his own journeys through the under side of American life often accompanied by drug induced observations.

Was Jack Kerouac a Conservative?

Jack Kerouac’s own life had no peace as drugs and alcohol took its toll shortening his life.  He died at 47.  Some would be puzzled to find the writer, who explored the under side of life and often experimented with drugs and a libertine sexual lifestyle, was a closet conservative.  Kerouac’s own writing was a conflict between social convention and outright rebellion.  Many from the beat generation are not so conflicted.  They felt comfortable with the 60’s youth rebellion.  But not Kerouac.

Kerouac as a writer possessed similar traits to writer and Professor Camille Paglia, whose book Sexual Personae showed similar conflicts.  Ms. Paglia had always been willing to be open about her gay lifestyle, atheism and leftist politics.  However, she often kept her cultural Catholicism in the closet.  Kerouac never truly condemned his Catholic roots or his belief in America even while rebelling.  This conflict is what made his writing intriguing.  For, in On The Road, his attraction to Dean Moriarty waned as he saw the damage that Moriarty left behind.  In the end, confronta Dean’s own selfishness.  Could he truly follow Dean?

The Dharma Bums shows another example of this conflict as Kerouac searches for greater meaning in life.  He is not quite ready to abandon Christianity while believing in Buddhism.  He attempts to reconcile the two beliefs as he looks for the one unifying God that unites us all.  What Kerouac shows as Paglia shows as well is the concept of cultural Catholicism.  This term represents how many lapsed Catholic abandon the mother Church but still live the aspect of that belief.  They do not truly abandon the Church altogether.

Jack Kerouac was simply too much of an individual to be enticed by the political left any more than he was enticed by communism or Marxism.  These beliefs have their own conformity.

The 60’s rebellion turned into political correctness and limited speech on various colleges.  Certain thoughts are taught as truth.  The rest is superstition.  The left today is more conformist in thought and behavior than many of the Beat Generation felt the establishment was in the 1950’s.  Kerouac’s simple rebellion could be reflected in the views of Bull Lee who wishes for an America in the late 19^th century and early 20^th century.  Back then, there were no drug laws and the wild west still existed where a person could move in total freedom.  Kerouac’s rebellion was a libertarian rebellion against a more constraining America.  He did not view the alternative to America leading to more freedom.

The beat generation brought a new set of ideas and styles that impacted many writers in the 60’s and even today.  Jack Kerouac rebelled, not just against the establishment but against many of his fellow beat generation persona.  On The Road shows the seeds of that divide between Kerouac and his fellow beat writers.  The Dharma Bums follows up on that conflict between the beat scene and the look for something bigger.  In the end, Kerouac simply could not find what he wanted in the Beat generation or his many trips.  Today, he is forgotten by many of this generation.  But, maybe it is time for them to rediscover him.

The post On the Road: The Conflict of Jack Kerouac appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

They all say “God Bless America.”  Our currency says “In God We Trust.”  There are several depictions of Moses and the 10 Commandments in the artistic embellishment of the Supreme Court building.  Does anyone still go to church?

In the 1930s the culture war centered around the Catholic Church and America.  They were aligned with Nazism against Communism.  Enter reality and the ground coalition of WWII ended up the Allies against the Axis, the Church with The Reichskonkordat a treaty negotiated between the Vatican and the then emergent Nazi Germany.

In the 2000s we find the Catholic Church and the Fourth State America allied with radical progressivism, collectivism, globalism, and black liberation theology, against Judeo-Christian ideology.  Too many outliers are searching for legitimacy.

The Achilles heel of great institutions must be addressed if they are to survive.  Germany did not implode.  It was defeated.  Angela Merkel is now drowning in compromise.  Every battle, every war, every revolution, and every great institution has survived or ended on the unemotional battleground, ethically and materially, of Darwinism, social or individual, and the “survival of the fittest.”

There are so many good people.  It is a tragedy that only a few evil men can have such a great impact on civilization.  It is also noteworthy to repeat the wisdom of Lord Acton:

“Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”

This is why, in America, the final decision is left to the people.  They are not infallible.  Their strength is in “let the meek inherit the earth.”  It is Judeo-Christian philosophy that embraces the goal of love thy enemy.  That, in itself, is the only honorable, principled basis for a psychological basis for peace.

Carl Bernstein has said, “The difference between Watergate and now, one of the big differences is that we are in the midst of a cold civil war “within” this country, a political and cultural civil war.”

Well, don’t look now but the world is in a continuum of civil war, an oxymoron, from moderate democratic chaos to extreme religious jihad.  Socialism; again, raises its ugly head in Venezuela and the Vatican.

History is repeating itself.  Is this not reminiscent of when German Nationalism turned into Nazism, shockingly embraced by Joseph Kennedy.  The Vatican then supported Nazism with its anti-Semitism in the Churches’ and its cowardly phobia of Communism?  This nightmare begot Concordat  between the Holy See and the German Reich in 1933.  The establishment, wherever it exists, now fears populism!

Today, in America, is it not simply secularism versus our Judeo-Christian Culture?  Is there not a thread here that speaks to the need of religion-less spirituality?  Is there not a simple separation of church and state in a nation where freedom of religion is in peaceful co-existence with the state?

Why is there a “Statue of Liberty” and no “Statue of Freedom?”  Liberty is the state of being free.  Freedom is the power of self-determination.  Without liberty, there is no freedom!  Without spirituality, there is no America!

And we worry that President Trump has a performance template through which his people must pass.  It is a simple management principle, “management by objective, achievement by results,” Peter Drucker.

“The Catholic Church is a boat on the verge of capsizing,” said Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.  This is the man who threw in the towel as Pope.  He was seemly overwhelmed by the Vatican Clerical Sexual Abuse Scandal, actively, stealth denial, apologies without meaning, and passively attacking, both “Spotlight” – the true story of how the Boston Globe uncovered the massive scandal of child molestation and cover-up within the local Catholic Archdiocese, shaking the entire Catholic Church to its core.  “Vatican rocked:  Police raid drug-fueled gay orgy at cardinal’s apartment”- the palace of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (or Holy Office) June 2017, and then there was the screed on American Conservatives.

Are these people, the college of cardinals, the other princes of the church, not just another form of religious “establishment”, a comparable reason for Martin Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses, also called the “Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences.”  That is, today we have, another swamp in need of draining?

At the very least these are “good people” (sic) who will do nothing.  That is evil.  While “Spotlight” exposed up to 9% of clerical pedophile in Boston, one must be curious if this is not global.  Is it not also about Pope’s Francis’ reign in Argentina, a reputation as a social justice warrior, where there has been a suppression of what must have been this moral infection, ignored.

Moral statistics are universal, almost ignored, and yet seldom lie.  This is the argument of that Hippie Priest Father Richard Sipe, if one is tolerant of another “truth.”  The documentation of http://www.bishop-accountability.org/ is so overwhelming, to deny, one must suspend the obvious, civil and tort documentation, and Vatican defrocking.  This evil is not the sole province of the Catholic Church.  This infections’ virility in cultures is inversely proportional to women’s rights.

Alexis de Tocqueville was to American Democracy as Detrick Bonhoeffer was to religion-less spirituality.  He had a world view that resisted the global establishment “spin.”  The clinch of secular globalism.

Alexis Charles Henri Clérel, Viscount de Tocqueville was a French diplomat, political scientist, and historian.  He was best known for his works “Democracy in America” and “The Old Regime and the Revolution.”

“Recently, in a peculiar, rambling essay, papal adviser Father Antonio Spadaro SJ has caricatured white southern evangelicals as well as conservative American Catholics as ignorant, theocratic, Manichean (a major religious movement that was founded by the Iranian prophet Mani), war-mongering fanatics anxiously awaiting the apocalypse.”  Sounds exactly like the democratic militarized decritum.

“Papal Advisers Bash American Christians in Bigoted Screed.”

The deeper one gets into the Roman Curia and specifically the Princes of the Church, with structural and managerial similarities to the handling of the Clerical Sexual Abuse scandal, denial and distraction, are often puerile, bigoted and tendentious, confusing the political and religious realms in an almost undeniable and partisan screed.

There is a strange parallel to America’s new civil war, Bernstein’s civil war, the secularization of a Judeo-Christian nation…..and why we left Britain.

It is the secular who particularly through modernization and rationalization, demand religion loses its authority in all aspects of social life and governance.  The Church was wrong when it backed a literal interpretation of the Old Testament, justified the Inquisition and embraced the Nazis.  Islam is wrong in its embrace of Jihad and a literal embrace of the Koran.

Conservative Christians, a curious claim, or attack, by the Vatican, are ultimately driven by “parenthetically” “clinging to their guns and bibles,” “a desire to affect public norms when subjected to religious morals….advancing a theocratic state.  The landscape of religious America is complex, not selectively and exclusively guided by either the Tora, or the Tanakh, or the Koran, or the Old Testament or the New Testament, whichever or whatever is suitable.

The Roman Curia is currently an infected establishment, markedly similar to the Democratic and Conservative-lite “establishment.”  It is not ready for prime time!  Only Judeo-Christianity says:

“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.”

The concept of “Judeo-Christian values” in an ethical sense, is an assimilation of Judaism and Christianity.  It is a Judeo-Christian scheme of morals.”  It has become part of the “American civil mystic” since the 1940s.

Many feel there is a nexus, a great similarity with the aberrations in the social structure of politics and the transcendental.  What is being discussed here is not religion, but Detrick Bonhoeffer’s’ “religion-less” spirituality.  Hopefully this is the milquetoast transcendent universes that can even include atheists.

Most cultures just “drip” with the transcendent “pro-forma” of morality….standards by which we live, in Obama’s words, “ever evolving.”  When cultures have aberrations, those aberrations can almost always be traced to a radical secular or progressive influenced deconstruction of the preternatural…a compromise of principles….anti-Gandhi.

Amazingly the Church is a great help in understanding the progress or decline of Judeo-Christianity.  It simplifies to “give unto your God the things that are Gods.’  Give unto your Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.  When a Church leans toward Inquisition, or Jihad, then the culture is off its ethereal rails.

It was that Frenchman Alexis de Tocqueville, perhaps the greatest commentator on religion in America of all time, who in the first half of the 19th century marveled at the unique role that the ethereal played in the young United States.  Spirituality in American society and its vibrant and permanent interaction with politics and public morality is the foundation of our culture.

Tocqueville believed that religion was to be the source of America’s “greatness.”  He said, as he searched for answers:

“I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers – and it was not there . . . in her fertile fields and boundless forests and it was not there . . . in her rich mines and her vast world commerce – and it was not there . . . in her democratic Congress and her matchless Constitution – and it was not there.  Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power.”

“America is great because she is good.  And, if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.”

Thus to apologize for America’s fallibility is to get lost in the imperfections of a noble humanity.

Tocqueville argues from the close interaction between moral principles and religious faith, and the need for a virtuous citizenry in a democratic state for spiritual governance…..not theocratic ideologies!

“Lovers of liberty,” he said, “should hasten to call the metaphysical to their aid, for they must know that one cannot establish the reign of liberty without that of mores, and mores cannot be firmly founded without beliefs.”

The American Founders intentionally created a secular state, not out of hostility toward religion, but out of respect for it.  And, because they understood spirituality can be lived authentically only under conditions of freedom.

National heroes and champions respond to “winning” and “having the backs” of their comrades and their country.  “Duty, honor and country” says it all and we salute you.  But there is no clear objective in politics, as it addresses an abstractly contrived political landscape.  Machiavellian politics is beyond the “all is fair in politics and war”, which does not square with the “ends justify the means.”

Some even wonder if McCain was so insulted by Trumps groundless political taunt “He’s a war hero ’cause he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, OK?”  “Perhaps he’s a war hero, but right now he’s said some very bad things about a lot of people”…..was not his vote on “skinny ObamaCare Repeal” just silly revenge.  Is it not clear the Republican Establishment” does not support, even abhors, Trump populism?

The Democrats are now hard Progressive.  The infection framed by the likes of the radical Maxine Waters.  “It’s Time for Maxine Waters to Disappear” and the political fecklessness of a real warrior and national hero John McCain.  His vote killed ObamaCare reform for now.  Alas good men are fallible, most great men are bad (“Lord Acton”).

It’s Time for Maxine Waters to Disappear

The Republican Party is now progressive lite.  It is unable to deliver on eight years of promises.  It is with the great “sadness of possibility” that America is on the cusp of a “Transformation,” away from big and bold ideas, a conservative identity, too afraid, timid and spineless to venture out from the status quo.

We are experiencing a deconstruction of “repeal and replace,” traditional values, freedom, liberty, principled capitalism, less regulation, constraints on government interference, and moving away from free market solutions.

The Church has an entrenched left wing establishment.  There is an embedded bureaucracy even at the Vatican .  The concept of which was captured very, very well by Sidney Powell in her book “Licensed To Lie.”  The book is a frightening perspective on social justice corrupted.  Imagine this within the Ecclesiastical Court of Vatican City State.  It has become a permanent part of our political culture, lying has!  This is the clerical establishments’ self-immunity in their oath to “do nothing that harms the Church”….extended to “do nothing to harm the establishment.”  And there is this aberration within the Congress of these United States. These are the complexities of a secular and clerical “establishment”.

All too many of the cheers and jeers today in Congress are not for the advancement of the Peoples business but rather a salute to the bastardy ego of individual self-advancement.  The country voted and it was not for the perpetuation of the “establishment!”

The electorate or a global catastrophe is the only thing that can re-unite America as it was after Pearl Harbor 12/7/41 and then again on 9/12/2001.  Is it time?  Is history demanding that trigger?

The once compatible JFK Conservatives and Ronald Reagan Democrats have morphed into a radical progressive elite that explains what is happening at the echelons of the fourth estate.

The Republicans off the reservation on ObamaCare should be dealt with by the electorate.  The Democratic constituency should be thinned.  It should be culled back from progressivism, if necessary, to the JFK liberal/conservative complementarianism.

There is a great danger of a transformation from the America of Tocqueville to that of radical progressivism of Sal Alinsky; to that of the Father Antonio Spadaro SJ’s version of an alt-Christianity.

As our moral and political leaders fail us, as human fallibility demands, remember:

“Americans” “do not hesitate to bring moral arguments rooted in Biblical faith into their public discourse.”

And regardless of the imperfections of religion,

“The safeguard of morality is religion,” he concludes, “and morality is the best security of law and the surest pledge of freedom.” Tocqueville

The post Tocqueville, Vatican and Christianity in America appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

Hector Bywater was a journalist with foresight.  He foresaw the coming conflict between Japan and the United States in the Pacific.  In his book, The Great Pacific War: A History of the American-Japanese Campaign of 1931-33, Bywater used an unusual method to make his point; he created a fictional historical account of an imaginable war between Japan and the United States.  The real war that would occur sixteen years after publication of his book resembled the fictional account in an eerily similar fashion.

The book has weaknesses.  Much of them are related to the time period when it was written.  The world was a totally different place than it would be just a decade and half later.  The world in 1925 still saw the British as the leading world power.  The fledgling Weimar Republic ran Germany.   The Bolsheviks were still consolidating their power in Russia.  Japan was one of the world’s leading naval powers.  The United States retreated behind isolationist policy.  So Bywater’s own vision in 1925 deleted the German factor from his calculations.  However, he understood the Japanese potential and comprehended Japanese geo-political moves.  Bywater’s expertise was in naval technology.  His book detailed the naval strategy under consideration by both sides.  He anticipated moves and counter-moves which proved prophetically similar to the real strategy used by both sides in the Pacific War later.

Bywater understood Japan’s weakness was that they had very few natural resources.  Her policies after World War I were to make Japan no longer dependent upon other countries.  This policy of autarky could only occur through military campaigns.  Japanese intervention in China was in part to acquire resources needed to build industry.  In Bywaters’ novel, a military autocracy controlled Japan.  He described these men thusly:  “…feudal spirits still burn beneath a veneer of Western Civilization.”  This certainly represented the real life autocrats and military chieftains who would lead Japan into war.

The goal of the original Washington Naval Conference in 1921 was to limit the building of capital ships.  The ratio decided up appeared to favor both the United States and Great Britain.  The reality was that the ratio actually favored Japan since their navy resided primary in the Pacific.  Alertnatively, both Great Britain and the United States had two oceans to protect.

To show his point more forcefully, Bywater depicts the Japanese damaging the Panama Canal with a “suicide passenger ship” exploding in the Canal Zone.  While no one could actually prove the passenger ship explosion was not accidental, Bywater’s point was that the timing made it suspicious.  This foreshadowed later acts of suicide attacks by Japanese pilots at the end of the Second World War.  Bywater detailed an unorthodox war within a conventional war.  With the Canal damaged; the American Atlantic fleet had to go around Cape Horn to reach the Pacific.

The advantage resided with the Japanese.  The United States had to fight with the fleet available in the Pacific arena at the beginning of the war with no reinforcements immediately available.  At the beginning of World War II, the Japanese had a similar advantage as their Navy was more powerful in the Pacific. The US failed to build up its military after World War I.  The weakened American Navy had to fight a war on two oceans.  The Atlantic fleet fought the battle of the Atlantic as German submarines threatened shipping lanes and the ability of the United States to supply Great Britain and its own forces in Europe.

In Bywater’s novel, the Japanese attack American-held Guam as well as the Philippines.  This crippled the US Navy’s ability to counterattack.  In the real war, the Japanese used similar strategies.  Bywater’s novel detailed a combination of air and naval battles that would be similar to the real thing.  He even concluded his book with an American air raid over Toyko at the end of his fictional war.  The only difference was that his fictional raid was a peaceful demonstration to the Japanese that they could no longer win the war.  In real live, the Americans ended the war with two atomic bombs.

By using the novel format, Bywater attempted to reach a larger audience.  Other authors, such as Michael Crichton have done this.  Crichton detailed the scientific debate on global warming using this technique.  The novel approach allows authors some leeway to detail important ideas while being entertaining at the same time.  In Bywater’s day, novels had the potential to reach a larger audience.

Bywater’s writings have major points that need to be considered today.  The first is the United States was a Pacific power as opposed to just European.  In the 1920s, much of American diplomatic thinking looked east to Europe.  While World War I fixated a whole generation of diplomats upon the European continent, the war was a global one with implications beyond Europe.

For Americans, the Spanish-American War turned America into a world power that extended to the Pacific.  The war, as short as it was, was fought not just in Cuba, but also outside Manila.  And most Americans today remain ignorant of the nearly four-year insurgency in the Philippines that cost more American lives than the actual war which garnered the possession in the first place.

The debate in the 2004 election centered on our relations with France and Germany which were damaged as a result of the Iraq War.  This shows today’s diplomatic fixation with Europe nearly a century after the First World War.  The is a failure of many diplomats and politicians to see the world anew.  Bywater did see the world through a different lens by imagining the possibility of a major Pacific war between Japan and the United States.

The present administration set in motion the development of new alliances and the realization the world has changed.  Europe is presently in decline, in particular the older portion of Western Europe.  It is Asia that is in ascendancy.  India and China are prepared for bigger roles in the world.

Bywater began to prepare Americans for a new world that included an alliance with Great Britain, another great naval power.  In the early part of the 20th century, Great Britain faced various options including a closer relation with the United States to maintain its own power.  Both countries were natural sea powers with a similar heritage.  This formed the basis of a special relationship that’s still in effect today.

Another point Bywater remind us of is to “think outside the square.”  Today, much of the world remains in flux.  Much foreign policy establishments ignore the possibility of the present war on terror and the rise of the Islamic fundamentalist war against western modernity.  One of the few intellectuals who saw the possibility was Samuel Huntington.  His book, Clash of Civilizations, details the possibility of western conflicts with Islamic fundamentalists and China.

China’s threat against Taiwan and her challenging of American power in the Pacific through building islands is similar to Japanese moves between the two World Wars.  Japan, using bases grabbed from Germany in the First World War, began to design a strategic plan to confront their most likely opponent – the United States.

China’s build-up of her navy and air force, as well as threats against Taiwan, represent similar movements.  This is not to say a Chinese-American conflict is inevitable.  However, it is a possibility which can’t be denied by American policymakers.  Nor can these same policymakers ignore that Iran’s manufacture of their version of an atomic bomb will change the balance of power in the Middle East.  This is something the Obama administration failed to consider.

Hector Bywater was one of those unique journalists who saw a world different from his colleagues and designed a scenario that proved prophetic.  There was a similar debate in the ’20s and the ’30s about America’s role in the world.  When Woodrow Wilson’s vision of a League of Nations was defeated, an old fashioned isolationism replaced it.  Voices in the wilderness in both the United States and England were ignored.

General Billy Mitchell warned the American military that air power would trump naval power in sea warfare.  He was court martial as a result.  Many diplomats, including former Secretary of the Navy Franklin Roosevelt, rejected Bywater’s thesis since the distances would make such a war unwinnable.  Not only did Bywater believe this war was probable, he also thought it was winnable.  Meanwhile, Winston Churchill risked his political fortunes to warn his fellow British of the coming German threat.  They ignored until too late.

Bywater correctly assumed American industrial power would prove decisive.  The use of the military strategy of island-hopping would allow the United States to gain the upper hand.  Where Bywater made a serious mistake was to assume that both sides would be equally harmed by war.  After the Second World War, Japan lay prostrate and the United States became one of two super powers.

Diplomats are affected by their past.  This narrows the worldview of those responsible for designing new policy.  Many of the diplomats from Bywater’s day remembered the carnage that destroyed an entire generation in the trenches of France.  They didn’t want to see a repeat of this.  However, they were blind to the threats that faced them in both the Pacific and Europe.T

The post The Futurists Of The Early 20th century appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

We all knew this before the election.  He is who he is.  He is never going to change.  Anyone who thought otherwise was just being optimistic at best, stupid at worst.  No elegance in the oval office or in international relations is going to change the man.

Everyone loved that President Obama was cool.  As you can see, that did us a lot of good.  His legacy is eight years of nothing that will survive the current president.  As for foreign affairs, most of it is already going to the trash bin of history.  So, who cares how cool he was.

This goes also for the Presidents before him.  Their personalities and behavior mean nothing.  I don’t care about how they acted in public.  I only care about results.  And, this is why I accordingly, support President Trump.  It is also why I don’t care about his tweeting.  None of that matters to me.  If he gets the job done, then he is worth another four years in office.

So, let’s stop complaining about his behavior.  Lets also stop complaining about his tweeting.  And, for God’s sake, let’s forget about Russia.  I say, let President Trump’s personality run amok.  If he continues to do the work of the people, I’m happy.  If you disagree with his politics and policies, then complain about them.  That’s fair game.  But, if you are going to keep arguing about his personality, you’re going to lose my attention, and, additionally, the attention of a large portion of the voting populace.

I know this article is coming across as a rant.  Well, tough!  That’s exactly what it truly is.

The post President Trump’s Personality appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.

So for the past two months, I’ve been thinking about it 24 hours a day.  I’ve discussed it with family and friends.  I’ve discussed it with religious leaders.  And, I’ve prayed about it.  Yes, I prayed.  Because without the power of God, there is nothing I can do on my own.

After making the decision to seriously consider this, the next thought was what to run for and who to run against.  I know Dianne Feinstein is running in 2018, in addition to all of Congress.  A first time politician running for Senate is not feasible.  I took that option off the table.  Well, as Maxine Waters became more and more over the top, my decision became clear.  I had to challenge Congresswomen Waters.  She must be replaced.  In fact, she goes more over the rails every days.  Just yesterday, she held a rally in New Hampshire and not would even allow press to attend it.  What is she got to hiding?  Why is she being so secretive?

She is in a vendetta against President Trump.  She wants him impeached.  There is no rational explanation for this whatsoever.  In fact, no one I know can understand where this is coming from.  Is it simply because she wants to run for president in 2020.  There is no other explanation.

So, now, I Frank DeMartini, must make the decision.  And, I will be seriously considering it for the next three weeks.  I will test the waters so to speak.  In the next few days, I will start a Crowdpac page to determine whether I will be able to raise funds.  I will continue talking to family and friends.  The final decision will come from two people:  My wife and God!

Keep watching for further developments.  And, keep me in your prayers that I get the correct guidance.

The post Frank DeMartini on Running for Congress appeared first on A Hollywood Republican.