Not a post about Jerry McNerney

So today Mrs. Zhid had to go to the hospital for hand surgery and I broke my embargo on doctor visits due to severe pain and pissing blood...Mrs. Zhid's surgery went well and the doctor thinks I have kidney stones and a kidney infection, and gave me some antibiotics to stop the blood from ruining my award winning piss.


Given that I needed something to take my mind of the frailty of the human body, I went to pick up my new shotgun today. As you may recall, I bought a Browning Citori Lightning over/under 12 gauge about two weeks ago. And here is the shotgun that Affe calls "Clitori":

A view of the engraving...(not a very good picture, but click to enlarge)



And here's a full length view...




And how could you ask for anything more classic than a 12 gauge over/under and a Chocolate Lab whose ears perk up when you say "find the bird!" (set in a house in a country club...)




I also a fiberoptic bead on Clitori, one from Easy Hit.
I believe that Affe and I will go bust some clays this weekend to test out the new shotgun and hopefully I'll be able to take it out in the field for some pheasant hunting this fall.

Moving on...

While I have plenty to say about Jerry McNerney, it's all a variation of the things I've already said. So, to spare my readers the drudgery of having to wade through posts that are nothing more than variations on a theme, there will be no more posts about Jerry McNerney unless there is news that is noteworthy.

In other words, I won't be giving the "it's the 444th day of Jerry McNerney failing to protect the local environment" countdown.

My issues with McNerney can be lumped into two categories-

First, he was elected as the environmentalist candidate, yet he has done nothing to protect the local open and ag space from urban sprawl;

Second, his district is primarily moderate to conservative, and he is playing a dangerous game with sucking up to and being one of the Pelosi gang and her San Francisco liberal supporters. If McNerney wants to be re-elected, he'll have to remember that his district believes that the second amendment to the constitution speaks of individual, not collective, rights, and we expect these rights to be protected. We also support a strong defense and the war on terror and don't believe that taxation is the cure to all that ails the country.

And with that reminder, the McNerney theme will be put into hibernation until there is new news or an election looming.

Now, back to discussing why Diane Feinstein is an ignorant cunt....

An admission, and Jerry speaks!

The admission: The first post I penned about Jerry McNerney contained a misstatement. In that post I said that I wrote a letter to Jerry McNerney. The truth is that I didn't write the letter that was described. The letter was actually written by one of my neighbors. We share an interest in local issues and were chatting a few weeks ago when he told me that he wrote to McNerney. He showed me a copy of the letter and I liked what he wrote. In fact, I told him he should start a blog and make the letter an open letter to McNerney.

My neighbor, however, is a bit of a technophobe and didn't want to bother with learning how to start a blog. He told me that if I wanted to post the letter I was free to do that, and I should not attribute the letter to him. So that's what I did.

Anyway, when I got home from work today my neighbor left a copy of the letter he received from McNerney today, as a response to his original letter. My neighbor's note for me was "A lot of writing, not a lot of substance, pretty much what I expected."

I'll summarize what McNerney said...he admitted that he had influence over local land use issues. He mentioned the Farm Protection Program, something I wasn't aware of, which functions similar to the Marin Land Trust, where farmers sell development rights to a trust and continue to work the land, thus protecting the land from development. Apparently, this program is set to expire this year (according to Jerry) and Jerry said he intends to vote for reauthorization of the program. That's a good thing, but it's not the type of influence over local land use issues that we are concerned with.

Jerry also mentioned that there are efforts in Congress to restore a fund called the Land and Water Conservation Fund that provides federal matching funds to local governments for parks and the like. Nice again, but totally missing the point of the letter.

He ends with a comment about BART and a promise to keep my neighbor's letter in mind when talking to local leaders.

So, in sum, Jerry totally punted. If this were a test, he'd get a D.

There was virtually no substance to Jerry's letter. What we expected him to do, if he truly cared about protecting the local open and ag lands, was to state that he would begin contacting local leaders to find out what was going on in the area and then he'd come up with a plan to address the issues.

He didn't even come close.

What is McNerney's agenda?

On my way home from work today I was driving down the Tassajara Valley (the road between Danville and Dublin) and enjoying the view of the open fields, horses, cattle and late spring change in scenery when I noticed a coyote in one of the pastures, feeding on what appeared to be a rabbit.

I quickly blackberry'd an email to affe to tell him of this sight (if you remember the scene from Cast Away when Tom Hanks discovers fire, that's a good approximation). He responded with the following:

It's MacNerney feasting on the remains of Contra Costa's open space!

(his spelling error, not mine, but for a funny take on spelling errors, see this, from NRO, via Instapundit)

That got me to thinking...in response to the numerous calls for him to do something to save the last bits of open space in this area, McNerney has done nothing but send his shills out to claim he has no power over local development. He doesn't say he thinks that there is a threat to the open space and he doesn't promise to do whatever he can. Instead, he ducks the issue entirely.

Why, I'm thinking, would a guy who ran on a platform of saving the environment be so blase about preserving the little bit of open space and ag land we have left?

Then I thought about the last time I took issue with politicians about development and it all became clear.

The last time I had this issue was in Oakland when the city government was sitting on its hands (actually, they were rubber stamping new development and being paid off by developers, according to some) as the hills were being paved over.

I made many attempts to get our local concilmember, Jane Brunner, to manage the development and even provided suggestions on how to balance the needs, but she did about as much as McNerney has done with the current issue.

After I left Oakland as a result of the city's failure to protect the environment I found out what was really happening. I'm told that the city received far too much money from the developers and the taxes that resulted from new homes so they did whatever they could do to ignore complaints regarding development until there were very few buildable lots left. Then, and only then, did they acknowledge the problem and promise to do something about it (and to this day, they are still dragging their feet).

The problem was, of course, that the horse had left the barn and they were still trying to figure out where the barndoor was. Almost all of the open space had been developed or approved for development by that time, so any action the city took to preserve the environment would be illusory. There was no environment left to preserve. This made sense for them, because at that point the developers had gorged themselves in the hills and there wasn't much left for them to develop, so they wouldn't be angry at the new rules limiting development.

This is what I think McNerney is up to. He'll ignore the issue for as long as possible, allowing as many new developments to be approved and undertaken (and anyone who lives in this area can tell you that the pace of development has accellerated). Then, once all the open space and ag land has been developed or approved for development, Jerry will speak out in favor of preserving open space and ag land.

The problem will be, of course, that there will be nothing left.

For Jerry, though, it will be a victory, as he will not piss off the developers (who probably are contributing to him) and he can say, in time for the next election, that he stood up to the developers and tried to get the local leaders to stop the sprawl.

It's really not very clever of him, but it's obvious that it is what he's doing.

The unspoken

Chip Johnson, who covers Oakland for the San Francisco Chronicle, had a column today about crime in the Zhid's old neighborhood.

This Zhid used to live near the Lakeshore district in Oakland (on the other side of Lake Merritt, towards Grand Avenue, for those wondering) and it was never really as crime free as Chip claims it was.

My car was broken into several times and the Zhid and Mrs. Zhid (who was simply Zhid girlfriend at the time) ended up in the middle of a gunfight between two rival gangs (ok, it wasn't the middle of the gunfight...one car full of thugs was chasing another car of thugs and they exchanged shots on the corner as the Zhid and Mrs. Zhid were walking on the street). It wasn't epidemic levels of crime but it was about as much crime as you'd see anywhere outside of the ghetto. And the Lakeshore district is NOT upscale, as Chip claims. It may be upscale compared to the slums of Oakland, but it's not upscale in any other measure.

Nonetheless, Chip's story is interesting for what it doesn't say. It does say that there has been a serious increase in armed robberies and other violence in the area and that the Oakland Police Department simply can't send more cops to the area, as they don't have enough cops as it is. The telling line from the story is this:

And while people living in other cities might expect police to blanket the area with extra officers, Oakland residents know better. There are too many criminals and too few officers -- and the community is going to have to deal with crime.

It's not fair and it's probably not right, but it's a reality.

I'm not a fan of Chip's but he hit the nail on the head with that line. The City of Oakland is quick to tax, slow to provide basic services, and they simply won't provide basic police services to the Lakeshore district.

So what's a Lakeshore resident to do? Check out the list of things mentioned in the story:

Relying on strength in numbers -- as well as whistles, cell phones and flashlights -- they plan to discourage would-be thieves of the notion that their neighborhood is an easy mark.

What is missing...what is unspoken...

Could it be...FIREARMS?

I wonder what would have a quicker and more positive effect on crime...having residents of the Lakeshore district blow whistles and shine flashlights as they're being robbed or having the Lakeshore residents actually defend themselves with firearms.

This is SUCH an Oakland story. They are so afraid of the second amendment and the legitimate use of firearms (cause, you know, if people used firearms to defend themselves it may send the wrong message about how evil guns are) that they'd rather be victims.

As far as I'm concerned, they deserve victimhood.

When I lived in that area I ALWAYS carried a gun. I had my S&W 6904 9mm in either a jacket pocket or a belt holster and I luckily never had to use it. But even back then, when the area was "safe" (according to Chip), there was ample reason to be armed. When the police of the liberal shangri-la known as Oakland refuse to provide basic safety services it becomes necessary for individuals to provide for their own defense.

And you know what? When someone does get killed in one of the robberies, the liberal morons of Oakland will scream for...take a guess...gun control.

[And as an aside, and on the theme of how the Democrats are so bad at providing for basic needs, Jerry McNerney has STILL done nothing to protect the environment. What a horrible failure he's been as a Representative. I'm closer than ever to becoming an "Anyone but McNerney voter]

Oakland's Lakeshore district becoming a magnet for criminals
Chip Johnson

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Oakland's Lakeshore Avenue district, with its well-kept streets and mom-and-pop stores and restaurants, has escaped much of the city's crime woes in recent years. But not anymore.

The neighborhood and popular business district near Lake Merritt has become a favored target of armed thieves and bandits. Residents are angry or scared -- and one of them decided to take matters into her own hands last week.

Diane Whitten, 50, a nurse and mother of two, hit the gas and used her car to hem in a man who broke into a car in the shopping district last week, right before her eyes. He got away when a delivery truck moved, giving him room to drive off.

Whitten knows her action was unwise and potentially dangerous, but said her frustration took over.

"I don't care if he had rammed my car -- I wasn't moving," Whitten told neighbors at a community meeting last week where they shared testimonials and got to know each other.

In March, more than a half-dozen businesses on Lakeshore Avenue were robbed, including two heists at Arizmendi, a popular bakery co-op. A month later, armed street robberies started cropping up in the neighborhood -- seven in a month.

And if it wasn't clear that something was amiss, the three robberies in a two-hour period on the night before Mother's Day were a convincing blow. Brazen, hooded bandits robbed a pedestrian on Mandana Avenue, struck another one an hour later on Perkins Street in nearby Adams Point, and yet another less than an hour later on Grand Avenue. The victims were out walking their dogs or coming from a movie, community leaders and police say.

"We're seeing a phenomenon of criminals venturing into new areas and we want to nip it in the bud and send a message that this is not a hospitable place to commit robberies," said City Councilwoman Pat Kernighan, who organized Thursday's meeting at the request of the Grand Lake Neighborhood Crime Prevention Council.

Police Lt. Ed Tracey, who commands the district that includes Lakeshore and Grand avenues, told a crowd of more than 100 people that criminal crews being driven out of East Oakland by an ongoing police crackdown there are venturing into other areas of the city.

Tracey said a sustained effort to clean up a crime-ridden section of 23rd Avenue has resulted in a wave of new crime during the last 18 months in middle-class and upscale neighborhoods and retail districts that had been relatively crime-free.

Tracey said he has no doubt about the link.

"We have been putting a lot of pressure on 23rd Avenue, and just like the cops, the bad guys talk with each other," Tracey said. "They are looking for easy access, people with cash on hand ... when the cops aren't around because we're in the Highland neighborhood, or in San Antonio (district) handling another call. When that happens, it creates a gap in service and they're taking advantage of it."

That's exactly what happened to the shopkeepers: After the first robbery, there were as many as a half-dozen more in the next two weeks.

Tracey also told residents that while the Mother's Day-eve crime spree was carried out by the same assailants, several other groups are looking to target streets with unwary residents and shopkeepers.

Police have also identified a troubling new trend: Some of the young suspects are users of the drug ecstasy.

"They have told us in interviews that it gives them a level of bravado they don't usually have," Tracey said.

And while people living in other cities might expect police to blanket the area with extra officers, Oakland residents know better. There are too many criminals and too few officers -- and the community is going to have to deal with crime.

It's not fair and it's probably not right, but it's a reality.

On Lakeshore Avenue, store operators and residents are bound and determined. Led by the Arizmendi co-op, business operators have taken stock of their security measures. Some are changing lighting.

At last week's community meeting, people talked about counter-measures such as collectively paying for private security patrols in the area. Such groups patrol neighborhoods regularly but do not confront suspects.

In the meantime, Jana Hardy, chair of the neighborhood crime watch group, hopes residents will form walking groups of a half-dozen or more people who are out on the streets during hours when crimes have occurred.

Relying on strength in numbers -- as well as whistles, cell phones and flashlights -- they plan to discourage would-be thieves of the notion that their neighborhood is an easy mark.

"Instead of walking around the lake for your exercise, we want to walk around the hills in our own neighborhood," Hardy said. "We don't want to just sit and talk and complain about crime in our neighborhood. We're going to do something about it -- nonviolent of course."

She added: "I won't let anyone have me afraid to come out of my house."

Taking a break from Jerry

Affe and I went over to the local gun shop (the one that Affe has a beef with) to check out some over/under shotguns. I've been meaning to replace my very old Mossberg 500 Big Five special (bought in 1984 for $150 and used for many hunting seasons). It's not that the Mossberg 500 failed; quite the contrary, it is as reliable as it was in the first term of Ronald Reagan.

However, over the years it's been banged up quite a bit (I don't even have a front bead on it anymore thanks to an unfortunate incident with shoving the barrel into a gopher hole) and I'm interested in shooting skeet and trap as well as getting back to duck and pheasant hunting.

So rather than get another pump shotgun or even a semi auto, I went for the classic over/under. There is no substitute for quality workmanship and over/unders are excellent examples of this.

I did some research over the past few weeks and narrowed the list down to a Browning Citori (either 525 or Lightning) and the Ruger Red Label. After handling the Red Label I quickly checked it off the list. It was heavy, didn't sit well in my hands and the barrel didn't swing as smoothly as I wanted.

The Citori Lightning Feather was the exact opposite, but it was too expensive. The regular lightning was just right.

So in 10 days, I'll have to find room in my gun safe for this



I hope that I can get some hunting done before Jerry McNerney allows the last bit of waterfowl habitat in the area to be developed.

If McNerney's Shills Are Any Reflection...

If the comments left by McNerney's shills on this blog are any indication, we don't have to wait to know whether McNerney is capable of being anything other than "the candidate who isn't Pombo."

McNerney's shills have done a very unimpressive job of stating their boss's case; rather, they have weakly regurgitated his tired, old talking points from his Hollywood and SF liberal backed ambush of Pombo. I understand why they have to do this. First, McNerney hasn't done anything since he was elected and second, his shills aren't the brightest of the lot.

As proof of this, let me summarize what McNerney's shills have come here to argue. They say that my criticism of McNerney's lack of action to prevent urban sprawl and environmental destruction by developers in the district is inappropriate, as McNerney, as a member of Congress, has no power over local affairs.

As you'll see in my responses to these comments, the shills are remarkably uninformed about the way politics work in this country. Federal politicians wield enormous influence over local matters. The source of their power is their control of federal spending. All of the projects in a district (and there is a huge number in any district) that involve federal spending are sources of local influence for members of Congress.

It's as if McNerney's shills have never heard of "pork" in Congress, something the Democrats feast on. Could McNerney's shills REALLY be this uninformed?

To wit, if McNerney truly cared about the destruction of the environment in his district he'd have meetings with each of the local leaders and inform them while they have a right to approve whatever development they want, if they ever expect to see him advocate for their federally funded projects they should not approve new developments on undeveloped land.

Furthermore, the federal politician has influence over the various federal agencies that are involved in the day to day life of a local government (think: EPA) and a federal politician who wanted to send a message to the locals would have ample opportunity to do so.

What McNerney's shills are doing by claiming that a federal politician has no influence (and the shill even made the claim that McNerney is only one man and one man has no power in Congress) is directly contradicting the foundation of their attack on Pombo. Remember, folks, that McNerney's shills brought in money and people from across the country to attack Pombo, claiming this one man (Pombo) was so evil and had such a horrible impact on the environment that he must be taken out.

Funny, isn't it, that they now defend McNerney's neglect of environmental matters by arguing that he is only one man and one man in Congress has no power? Just read the local papers, see how Pelosi is catering to McNerney to get him good press, and tell us how little influence McNerney has...

If his shills are the best that McNerney can muster then he really is a pathetic candidate, one who can't do a thing to live up to his campaign promises and one who surrounds himself with ineptitude.

And most important, please note throughout the comments that McNerney's shills have not once expressed any interest in working to save the environment. They are simply out there to bash anyone who would dare question McNerney and ignore the real issues. This is a bad sign, as I had recently published a post stating I could see myself voting for McNerney if he lived up to his promises. His response was to launch attacks and engage in defensive and obfuscating rhetoric.

The clock is now ticking faster than ever. Guy Houston, Dean Andal and a host of others can be just as dismissive of the environment as McNerney.

Who is Dean Andal and Is He The Cure for McNerneyitis?

From Wednesday's SFGate:

Former GOP legislator Dean Andal to challenge Rep. McNerney

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

(05-16) 18:26 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --


Former GOP assemblyman Dean Andal announced Wednesday his candidacy for Congress against Democratic Rep. Jerry McNerney in California's 11th District where Republicans suffered an unexpected upset in November.


GOP leaders are eager to retake the Republican-leaning district that straddles the Central Valley and eastern San Francisco Bay area. The district had been represented by Republican Richard Pombo of Tracy, the powerful chairman of the House Resources Committee before his surprise loss to McNerney, a political neophyte.


Andal, a Stockton resident who also previously served on the Board of Equalization, was the first to formally announce his candidacy against McNerney but others also are looking at the seat. Ken Spain, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, touted Andal's candidacy as "a very big recruitment success."


In his announcement statement Andal went immediately on the attack, accusing McNerney of voting for "the largest federal tax hike history."


"This election is about restoring trust in Congress and holding it accountable for its treatment of American taxpayers," Andal said.


McNerney spokesman Andy Stone [I'm not going to give McNerney's pr hack a free plug here-Ed.]

Who is Andal and is he the best candidate to replace McNerney?

Assuming that Jerry does as I expect he'll do (which is to sell out to Pelosi and the San Francisco liberals who bankrolled his ambush of Pombo), I'm ready for a change already.

I didn't realize that McNerney has already foisted a huge tax increase on us, in addition to his failure to protect the environment.

So far we're seeing McNerney adopt the liberal party line faithfully...he's ignoring the environment and raising taxes. At least with Pombo we had lower taxes.

I'll have to find out who Andal is and whether he's better than McNerney, but the opening salvo in the fight to get rid of Pelosi's puppet has been fired.

This wouldn't suprise me at all

From the Washington Post:

Hamas accused Israel and Fatah of working in tandem against the Islamic movement, which won January 2006 parliamentary elections.

In a statement issued late Friday, Hamas accused the Preventive Security Service, a branch controlled by Fatah, of collaborating with "multiple foreign governments."

The statement said Fatah agents were passing on "dangerous information" about the location and operations of the "Palestinian resistance," shorthand for Hamas' military wing.

From the Jerusalem Post:

Israel has considered giving military support to Fatah in its power struggle with Hamas, the Daily Telegraph reported on its Web site Saturday morning.

According to the report, even though Fatah was closely connected to Palestinian terorists with a long record of attacks against Israel, Israel was beginning to embrace the movement as a means of foiling Hamas.

Hamas and Fatah should be allowed a duel to the death (hopefully, mutual and simultaneous), but if that can't be done, then bolstering Fatah against Hamas is a safe bet. It goes along with the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" theory of Middle East relations.

I, however, think that the game Hamas plays, where it sends rockets into Israel when it needs a distraction from its own failures, is one that Israel should not play.

I would rather see Hamas shoot the rockets and Israel say "we will deal with the remains of Hamas after their civil war is concluded, but we will not bail them out by providing a response that will allow them to focus on us, rather than killing each other."

Is Jerry McNerney a Surrender Monkey?

From today's SFGate:

'Surrender monkeys' protest Pelosi's stance on war

The "surrender monkeys" that waved white flags with protesters today outside the district office of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco turned out not to be monkeys at all, a city official said.

The two were actually chimpanzees, and they were in the city illegally, said Kat Brown, deputy director of San Francisco's Department of Animal Care and Control.

The chimpanzees -- "April" and "Jake" -- were part of a protest organized by the conservative group Move America Forward, which opposes Pelosi's support for measures that protest organizers say undercut the mission of the troops in Iraq.

"Surrender monkeys" also appeared outside Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's district offices in Las Vegas and Carson City.

In San Francisco, Jake the chimpanzee waved a white flag bearing the phrase, "Surrender is not an option." April wore what appeared to be a beret and held aloft a white flag."

And here's the part that Jerry McNerney should pay attention to-



Note the caption, Jerry:

'Surrender monkeys' protest Pelosi's stance on war
Sherry Perussina of Danville holds a photo of her son, Michael, 21, who is preparing to return to Iraq for a second tour. Chronicle photo by Michael Macor

Let me connect the dots...a protest against Pelosi's attempt to deliver victory to our enemies and one of YOUR constituents is part of the protest.

Remember, Jerry, the people in your district are not the San Francisco liberals who adore Pelosi and who bankrolled your campaign.

If you side with Pelosi and undermine our war effort, your voters, like Sherry Perussina, will remember what you did.

Ignore the San Francisco liberals and attend to your constituents, Jerry. We support the war on terror.

UPDATE

Though this chart is making its way among the popular blogs, I thought I'd add it in here too as a further point about the war. It's well known that the Democrats care more about defeating Bush and the GOP than about defeating Islamic terror (which is why the Democrats, from the start of the war, wanted to declare it a lost cause and defeat), and they often try to compare this war to Vietnam (another war during which the Democrats cared more about defeating the President than defeating the enemy), so this chart is a great way to wade through the lies of the Democrats and see how the two wars actually compare.

The liberals like Pelosi who claim that we are in a quagmire are utterly wrong and if McNerney sides with them we will have no choice but to vote him out of office.

Wiping my nose

When Affe read the post, below, he told me that he thought the post came close to "finger-wagging snottiness."

Because Affe is usually quite astute with his observations, I will take this opportunity to clarify the point of the post.

I was not trying to be snotty nor was I trying to wag any fingers. I was, instead, trying to clearly point out that McNerney's ability to be re-elected depends on how well he serves his constituents, not how much money he raises or how many Hollywood celebrities or San Francisco politicians he gets in his corner.

My point was to point out that a large number of McNerney's constituents are conservatives who generally vote Republican but who have no problem crossing party lines for the right candidate.

As a result, McNerney has a very good chance of getting our votes if he resists the pull of the Pelosi liberals. The one thing we can't accept is having a San Francisco liberal as our representative. We value our second amendment rights, many of us are either military vets or have family in the military and we support the war on terror and don't appreciate the way the Democrats are willing to declare defeat just so they can have an issue for the 2008 election.

Thus, the Pelosi/San Francisco liberal approach doesn't get our votes.

With that said, we do appreciate that Pombo was a disaster for the environment and would be thrilled to see McNerney make positive movement on this front. A good part of our environmental concerns relate to our local areas, and in particular, the unchecked development that is destroying the open space and semi-rural character of the area. While McNerney's supporters have tried to claim (in comments to this blog) that McNerney has no control over local development, the truth is that he does. He can use federal spending in the district as a carrot or stick on local governments.

The problem is, so far we haven't seen McNerney voice any concern over development in his district. He certainly has the right to make public statements and those public statements, along with the pursestring powers he has, would go a long way in pushing back at the local government that is not protecting the environment.

I hope this has provided some context for the prior post and taken the snotty, finger wagging tone down a notch.

The bottom line is that we would be thrilled to vote for McNerney but only if he remembers who his voters are and resists the temptation to drift left.

Anyone but McNerney

One of the comments to a recent post about Jerry McNerney was particularly insightful. The commenter (using the name "McNerney sucks") said

McNerney hasn't done a damn thing. This is a classic story of ugly politics. Pombo pissed off the hollywood liberals and they took this total no-name bumpkin, McNerney, whose only redeeming feature (for them) was that he was enough of a tool that he'd be their front man to elect ABP (Anyone But Pombo).

So McNerney was the fungible candidate that the liberals used as a proxy to Pombo. Once Pombo was defeated, the puppetmasters dropped their strings and the incompetent McNerney is now a placeholder in Congress...he does nothing other than keep Pombo out.

McNerney could be a blow up doll and he'd accomplish exactly the same as he's done so far...taking up a seat that used to be Republican.

If you think McNerney consists of any substance before those cool environmental slogans, you're a bigger fool than McNerney.

The "Anyone But Pombo" point is exactly what happened. In fact, the SF Chronicle ran a story yesterday (what a coincidence...McNerney sees this blog starting to open his kimono and he immediately enrolls his liberal media puppets to counter what is being said) that makes it clear what McNerney is about.

The story is here.

It is, of course, a total puff piece, making McNerney look like a good guy, though anyone who reads between the lines can see that the story can't get around the fact that McNerney has done nothing and has failed in his promises to be an environmental saviour. The article had to focus on how Jerry loves math and how Jerry has coffee with voters. The article was silent, however, on all of the things that Jerry has done to protect the environment (which, if I have to remind you, was Jerry's point of attack on Pombo). Why? Because Jerry hasn't done a thing to protect the environment.

The part that really annoyed me is this line:

But he's also keeping a wary eye on the active Republican effort to unseat him. Like other freshmen, he's raising money by the bushel and carefully calculating his votes.

Listen to me, Jerry-if you want to be re-elected, focus on doing what you promised to do, focus on realizing that your district is NOT liberal San Francisco, and you'll get the votes you need. Spend your time, instead, catering to the liberals in San Francisco, and you'll be shown the door for sure. We moderate conservatives of your district are willing to cross party lines but we aren't willing to abandon our core issues-support for the military and war on terror, support for 2nd amendment rights being at the top of the list.

The Chronicle article had this nugget:

The vote shows the challenge for McNerney in trying to satisfy Bay Area liberals and online activists -- who were the backbone of his campaign -- while keeping a voting record in line with his slightly Republican-tilting district.

First of all, the district is not "slightly Republican-tilting." The Chronicle has an urban bias and tries to ignore the reality that the vast majority of the district is either ag or semi rural, and those in the more suburban parts like Danville and Pleasanton are solid conservatives. Only the very small part of the district that is closer to the Oakland/Berkeley area is anything but conservative Republican.

Pay close attention to that, Jerry. While liberal interlopers from outside of your district may have helped you ambush Pombo, your constitutents are NOT liberals. We are conservatives and we care about the environment.

There is a HUGE difference between being what some would call a "green Republican" and being a San Francisco liberal.

This part of the Chronicle story is right on point:

"Jerry McNerney got swept up in the Democratic wave (last year). He also benefited from the relentless attacks by environmental groups against the incumbent," said Ken Spain, a spokesman for the group. "But every day he steps on the floor of the House of Representatives, he is proving once again he's out of step with the district."

We want you to protect our open space from development but we support the war, we want a strong national policy against terrorism and we do NOT want any more restrictions on our constitutional right to arms.

If you want people like me to support you, Jerry, you will be very careful about how close you get to Pelosi, Feinstein and the other liberals in Congress. If you adopt their rabid anti-gun policies or go lockstep with them in undermining our defense against Islamic terror, you will lose the next election.

We are perfectly willing to cross party lines to vote for a reasonable guy who balances some of the more moderate Democrat policies with the core beliefs of conservatism, but if you cater to the outsiders who bankrolled you, we will vote you out of office.

So get to work, Jerry, on protecting the environment in your district. Oppose the liberal attack on the second amendment. Don't undermine the war effort. If you do these things, you will be a lot closer to getting our vote than if you just cater to your liberal puppetmasters who can't vote for you.

Remember, Jerry, Kos and the hollywood liberals can't vote for you. I, and my neighbors, are your constituents. Take care of your voters, Jerry. Listen to US, not THEM.

Oh, and an update, since Affe has commented. Affe's got a new blog up. Visit it. The Zhid and Affe are the voters in McNerney's district...The Kos Kids are not.

Unlike McNerney, I do what I can to be green...

In last week's NY Times there was an article about growing your own vegetables. The article was quite good and it linked to a source for plans to an above ground vegetable garden that intrigued me.

As the times said (and here's the link to the plans):

It’s not complicated; just a series of trimming this, and sawing that, and drilling holes here and there. Directions for the self-watering container can be found at hgic.umd.edu, under online publications, on container vegetable gardening.

So I went to Home Dept yesterday morning to buy the parts for this garden "tray" (that's the best way to describe it...it looks like a bookcase without a back, laid on its side, with screens for a bottom (rather than a solid bottom, to allow for drainage) and legs that allow you to stand upright as you tend the garden).

I returned home at about noon yesterday with this...

And in a few hours, I had turned it into this...

Alas, my drill's battery died, so I had to wait until this morning to finish the legs (which I added wheels to, for easier movement). Within an hour, it was completed, resulting in this..



I will see how this works out. I much prefer to grow my own vegetables and hope that this tray will make that an easy process. In addition, since it's above ground, I should have no problems with gophers, moles, slugs and the common garden vermin (well, I bet they get in there, but it will be tougher).

And as I was out in the yard, I noticed how well my grapes are doing. Click on the picture below to see the lovely immature grapes forming on the grapevine I planted three years ago. This one has wound its way nicely up the arbor and will have grapes hanging down in a few months. How nice it is to be away from Oakland...



UPDATE, later in the day...

I couldn't resist, so I went back out to Home Depot to get the growing medium, some weed barrier cloth (I just think that the screen and hardware cloth won't be sufficient in these warm months and want to put another layer of something in the bottom to hold in the moisture for a bit, while still allowing drainage) and some packets of various lettuce seeds (mesclun, butter lettuce and a mix of lettuces) and finalized the garden. The seeds have been planted and I covered the top with a deer netting to keep the birds away while the seeds germinate. Here's the finished product:

Is Jerry McNerney Worse than Pombo?

I received a number of comments and emails to my post, below, where I made reference to my disappointment with Jerry McNerney, who replaced Richard Pombo as my Congressional Representative. A number of the comments and emails made the claim that McNerney is actually worse than Pombo. The theory on that one is that Pombo never claimed to be a friend of the environment, while McNerney ran on that platform. So when McNerney turns his back on the environment and allows the developers to destroy the last remaining bits of open space (as he has done), the effect on voters is far worse, as they not only lose the environment, they get lied to by their representative.

I can't argue with that theory, as I haven't seen McNerney do anything to save the area from destruction by developers. In fact, it seems to have become MORE active since he went to D.C.

On that point, I agree 100% with those who say that McNerney is worse than Pombo.

McNerney is turning out to be a total fraud.

Because Affe Begged For Me To Post This...

I'll never understand how Affe's brain works (other than best with a rock slammed against its bone covering), but he begged me to post this picture, which he somehow believes is a picture of the Zhid with the Zhid's M1A rifle. I guess Affe thinks that he (Affe) took the picture. I don't know. But since Affe has asked so many times, I'll post the picture.



On other topics, I thought that this post from the Volokh Conspiracy was so damn good that I'll post a copy of it here. Professor Volokh makes the exact argument I've made many times in the past (though he fleshes it out a bit more) when people (especially those in the Bay Area, who have an amazing capacity for refusing to listen to a logical argument that goes against what they WANT to be true) say that guns should be regulated like cars. Read the entire post.

Why Not Regulate Guns Like Cars? A recent discussion I had prompted me to revisit this topic (which I last discussed on-blog five years ago). There are lots of interesting, plausible arguments in the gun control debates — and some that seem appealing but on close viewing prove to be just plain unsound.

One of the latter kind is "Why not regulate guns like cars?" The implicit argument here is "Why not require licenses, registration, tests, and so on for gun possession?" See, for instance, Chicago's Million Moms March on Mother's Day, PR Newswire, Apr. 27, 2000, quoting Million March organizer Donna Dees-Thomases as saying "We want Congress to create a meaningful gun policy in this country that treats guns like cars"; Partnership for Prevention's New Report to Congress Recommends Gun Owner Licensing and Gun Registration, U.S. Newswire, Mar. 24, 2000, quoting Handgun Control, Inc. president Michael Barnes as saying "For years now, we have been calling on Congress to treat guns like cars by a system of licensing and registration."

This argument is odd because cars are basically regulated as follows (I rely below on California law, but to my knowledge the rules are similar throughout the country):

(1) No federal licensing or registration.

(2) Any person may use a car on his own private property without any license or registration. See, e.g., California Vehicle Code §§ 360, 12500 (driver's license required for driving on "highways," defined as places that are "publicly maintained and open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel"); California Vehicle Code § 4000 (same as to registration).

(3) Any adult may get a license to use a car in public places by passing a fairly simple test that virtually everyone can pass.

This is pretty much how many gun rights advocates would like to see guns regulated, and is in fact pretty close to the dominant model in the 40 states that now allow pretty much any law-abiding adult to get a license to carry a concealed weapon: No need to register or get a license to have a gun at home, and a simple, routine test through which any law-abiding citizen can get a state license to carry a gun in public.

Gun control advocates would in reality prefer a much more onerous system of regulations for guns than for cars. Of course, one can certainly argue that guns should be regulated more heavily than cars; thoughtful gun control advocates do indeed do this. But then one should candidly admit that one is demanding specially burdensome regulation for guns — and not claim to be "merely asking that guns be regulated like cars."

Incidentally, I don't claim any great originality on these points: Others have made them before me, see, e.g., David Kopel's Taking It to the Streets, Reason, Nov. 1999. But some things are worth repeating.

餞別、母および父

(The title is "Bon Voyage, Mom and Dad" in Japanese)

In about three hours, the Zhid father and mother are leaving for a vacation to Japan. This shouldn't be blogworthy, but the destination is a bit noteworthy.

Sure, lots of Americans visit Japan. Not all of them, however, are making a return trip, 61 years after having been there at the end of WWII.

The Zhid father was part of the US Army of Occupation under General Douglas MacArthur in 1946, stationed near Tokyo. The Zhid father was so impressed with MacArthur that he gave the Zhid an English name in honor of him (a luxury afforded by the Zhid's Hebrew name being the primary name for honor purposes).

It's an interesting story, in fact, to hear the Zhid father speak of Japan. At the time, most Americans considered the Japanese to be an evil people and one would think that the US Army occupying Japan would have led to widespread mistreatment of Japanese civilians and many uncivil acts against the population.

I think that the Zhid father went over with the same attitude as described above, but it didn't take him long to not only become disabused of the stereotypes but to actually develop deep respect for the Japanese.

From the early days of his duty in Japan until today, the Zhid father respects the Japanese more than he respects any other people. I'm not exactly sure what caused this (it could have been some of the Japanese girls in the Ginza, but that is something I don't want to know about), but the Zhid father always said that he'd like to go back to Japan one day to see how the country turned out.

I'm sure he's going to be shocked, as the last time he was there Hiroshima and Nagasaki were radioactive, smoldering holes in the ground and Tokyo was about as close to stone age as a modern city could get. Zhid father often speaks of the vehicles the Japanese were using, which were standard autos and trucks that had been converted to run on wood burning motors. He also tells stories of how the Japanese were so short on all basic supplies that they would line up (in perfect lines, of course) at the US military bases and wait patiently for the US soldiers to bring out the food garbage, which the Japanese would take for survival purposes (imagine sacks of potato peels, bones, bread crumbs, etc.)

Going back to Tokyo 61 years later will certainly be a significant point in the Zhid father's life and I expect that it will be a source of great reflection for him.

And it's also a point of great reflection in the context of modern times. We're currently an occupying power and, in fact, the Zhid brother has been part of that occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan (though he's much older than the Zhid father was at the corresponding time). While Japan didn't have the "insurgency" we're dealing with now, and I doubt that in 61 years the Zhid brother will be alive to make a trip to Baghdad or Kabul, it is something to think about. 61 years ago Japan was a ruined, radioactive nation. I think the Zhid father will see a country that has gone from ruin to world class.

The difference, of course, is the people. The Japanese are obviously a different culture than the Arabs and they don't have the history of self destructive behavior. Even so, for those who think that war and occupation are permanent evils, the Zhid father is about to go back to the future to see how wrong that notion is.

WHAT THE FUCK IS TAKING SO LONG???

Please indulge the Zhid as he vents...though there are many things to write about these days, I've been busy at work and I think I've hit most of the major points on issues already. Oh, wait...there is one thing. In the last election, Jerry McNerney, a Democrat, beat Richard Pombo, a Republican (and one of the most villified politicians in the local area) for the House Representative position in my district. I voted for Pombo, but I do have a very strong preference for anyone who will protect open space and preserve the environment (meaning, stopping urban sprawl and keeping development in check).

So a few weeks ago I sent an email to McNerney's office asking if he'd be willing to listen to a complaint about a local issue. I was happy to receive a phone call from his office a few days later. I told his assistant that I hesitated to waste time writing to politicians, as I usually get worthless form responses. He said that I should send the letter to his office and Representative McNerney would respond.

So I wrote. I wrote asking him to intervene in local matters to stop the destruction of open space in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, to find a way to slow development, respect urban limit lines, preserve agricultural land and generally put the brakes on the rape of the land here.

Two weeks later and I have not heard a word.

McNerney, I'm watching you. I told McNerney that if he responded in good faith and had some actions to back up his big promises on the environment, he'd convert me to a McNerney voter. Otherwise, I'd consider him just another big talking, no action fraud of a politician.

So far, it looks like he's just another fraud of a Democrat, claiming to care about the environment but doing nothing to protect it. And thus, I see no reason to vote for Democrat candidates, representing a party that will weaken our defense, raise our taxes and take away or rights (especially our rights to keep and bear arms).

Give me a reason to vote Democrat, you retards.

And now, the vent...

Almost TWO months ago I ordered a 2007 model Santa Cruz Heckler, to replace my aging Jamis Dakar. I was told that the bike would be ready to ship in about a month from the date of order.

TWO months later, no bike. FUCK FUCK COCKSUCKING SHITFACES, SEND ME MY BIKE!



UPDATE...

Santa Cruz now says...maybe by mid June. ARGH. But in other news...affe's back to blogging!

Aujourd'hui nous nous tenons en tant qu'un dans la guerre contre la terreur islamique, mes amis français.

Pardon my French, but this Zhid says that there has been a monumental event in world affairs. The French have elected a new President and he's an...well, let's just let the Washington Post describe him:

An unabashed admirer of America, Sarkozy, 52, had a special message for the United States, which has had troubled relations with France under President Jacques Chirac, who led international opposition to the U.S. war in Iraq.

Let's get in the Delorean and go back to the elections in Spain and then the most recent federal elections in the US. In each case, anti-war candidates won and the American media, in particular my beloved NY Times, proclaimed that the election was an important reflection of how unpopular the war against Islamic terror was and how the Bush administration was destroying the standing of the US.

Ok, so let's assume the Times was right. Now that of all people THE FRENCH have turned their backs on the appeasement crowd (i.e., the NY Times and the left) and have elected a man who admires the US, who doesn't believe that radical Islam should be coddled and who has pledged to reverse the left wing policies in France do we know get a NY Times editorial stating that the war on Islamic terror has turned the tide in our favor, that the Bush administration has received a mandate in the international forum from the toughest crowd around (French voters) and the war on Islamic terror was the right strategy?

While we're waiting for that editorial, I will tip my cap to the French voters and congratulate them for taking a firm stand against the failed policies of appeasement and the left wing embrace of our enemies.

If you like taking surveys...

" Please take my blog reader survey! ">

Quagmire in Iraq

If news reports are to be trusted this morning, it appears that the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Ayyab Al Masri, has been killed. This marks the second time in less than a year that Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq has been killed (Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed by U.S. forces in June 2006).

Two leaders taken out in less than 12 months.

Gee, sounds like Al Qaeda got mired in a quagmire in Iraq.

I wonder how long before the NY Times editors proclaim that Iraq is unwinnable for al Qaeda?