Search This Blog

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Holy Organic Cow Milk - It's Illegal?

I am going to track down Ralson farms here in Ventura County and see if this can possibly be true.

California Governor Debate With ALL THREE Candidates





PS My daughter says my excessive use of fonts makes me look like an insane person. I apologize for this, but I am screaming now...California - wake up and watch the debate with all 3 candidates - don't be stupid, at least know what your choices are!

Election 1978 - 75% Voter Turnout?

Ukiah Daily Journal 
Ukiah, Mendocino County, California - Tuesday, June 6, 1978 - 32 Pages - 2 Sections 15 Cents
How Now Brown Candidate?

Assuming the large voter turnout indicates Prop. 13 will be approved overwhelmingly, we then must assume the elected officials will consider it a bonafide mandate. 

At least those officials who sincerely crave re-election, that is. 

Gov. Brown, who started with "there'll be no taxpayer revolt," ended his unsuccessful anti-Prop. 13 campaign with "we'll learn to live with it." 

At a dinner party Sunday evening, a friend offered "give Gov. Brown two weeks and he'll have us convinced he authored Prop. 13." 

Hopefully, Prop. 13 will accomplish what should have been standard procedure, in public budget-making circles for years. 

Each year our cities, counties and state governments should be required to start at ground zero and prepare sensible budgets. 

Each line item should have to be justified by the department head responsible. 

Do we really need all the services now being offered? Is it possible to economize our governments? Just because we have $6,000 left over in a school budget, do we really need that extra audio visual center? No one uses it, but the money had to be spent. 

Successful businesses go through the ordeal of preparing detailed budgets each year. They do not just slap 10 percent on last year's figures and hope things will somehow work out. 

The nation is keying on today's Prop. 13 vote. It probably will sweep from coast to coast. 

And isn't it better to have a ballot box revolution rather than what will follow if this monstrous bureaucracy isn't curbed?

1979 - That's No Nut That's Jerry Brown - Wait I Take That Back

Bedford Gazette, January 15, 1979

June 1978 Nation's Eyes On California - November 2010 Not So Much

Then and Now - The Same Yet Very Different

If you read the editorial from 1978 which I posted below, some of the problems we were having back then are again problems we are facing today. We have a state budget which has grown out of control - it increased by 80% in 4 years under Governor Brown, taxes are increasing and people are losing their homes.

Back in 1978, people were losing their homes because property taxes were linked to the assessed value of your home, and California real estate was booming, and real estate prices were rising. A house you could afford was quickly becoming a house you could no longer afford to pay taxes on, and when you don't pay your property taxes, the government forecloses and takes your home. This time around they are using middle men, called banks, because the government doesn't want to be the bad guy, and it is being done on a national scale.

But I seem to remember that the government is buying up all of those "troubled assets" from the banks, and is using the Fed to inject freshly printed paper money into those banks. When this all settles down, the government will own your house.

Back in 1978 this was not the case. Proposition 13 came to our rescue - and we were able to beat back the bureaucrats for a decade or so. Then we stopped paying attention again in the 1990s and whatd'ya know - the size of our government ballooned out of control and the pensions are back with a vengeance.

But there is no Proposition 13 on the ballot in 2010. In fact, there is a proposition designed to gut the laws put on the books to protect the taxpayers. Proposition 25 - dressed up in costume as a bid to punish politicians for not passing a state budget on time by withholding their pay. In the fine print it says they can raise taxes with 51% instead of 66.67% of the vote in the California legislature. Which do you think they will choose in a tough budget year? Their own incomes or yours?

But that isn't even the worst of it. Proposition 23 is the closest thing we have to a Proposition 13 - yet it won't even make things better, it will just keep them from getting worse, much worse, and it is failing in the polls. Proposition 23 puts a muzzle on AB-32, which will eventually be remembered as the Coup de Grace of California. It has to be the stupidest, worst timed piece of legislation that I have witnessed in my lifetime - even if it is wildly successful in its implementation - we will get nothing good out of it.

If you think I don't care about the environment, consider this. I used cloth diapers on both my children. I washed them in a washing machine (with a sanitary setting) - but hung them up to dry on a clothesline. I did this to reduce the amount of garbage being sent to landfills and conserve electricity. During this time, we did not own a car - we relied 100% on public transportation and bikes to get around. I did the grocery shopping by bus, at first with my daughter in a stroller and pregnant with my son, then then my son in the stroller and my 2-year-old daughter by my side. I hung the grocery bags from the stroller handles and put them in the little net.

My husband rode his bike to work, year round, through rain, snow, heat - you name it. We did this for two years. Then we bought a car, one car for the two of us - a VW. I still did most everything by bike, but had the option of using the car for larger shopping trips. We got along fine with our one car for the next two years.

Our governor by contrast commutes to work by jet. He is also one of the people responsible for AB-32. Not because he cares about the environment, but because he cares about everybody thinking he cares about the environment.

As a result of all this, I am voting for Chelene Nightingale for Governor of California. She is relatively unknown to Californians so you may think voting for her is too risky. To that I say, risky with at least the chance of a positive outcome is better than certain destruction.

I usually like to post the dead Kennedy's "California Ueber alles", on a post like this. But it is not appropriate. I must wait until they write their next ballad entitled "California RIP."


OK, Couldn't resist...this is kinda cute....

If that didn't put you in a rebellious mood, how about a little Sid?

Don't be a MOOOOOO cow, get mad, get up - get rid of the velvet and denim police. =) and don't forget to have a nice day.

I'm Governor Jerry Brown - 1978 California (Government) Ueber Alles

Governor Brown said if voters approve Proposition 13 he will cut government services and lay off employees rather than raise other taxes.

Brown told a group of fire chiefs last week, "I ran on a pledge not to raise state taxes and I'm not going to do it." From the first statement it is obvious that Brown believes he is a dictator and not answerable to the people who voted for him and pay his wages.

The second statement, as you should know, is a pledge he has already broken. When he assumed office the budget was $10 billion. This year it is $18 billion, an increase of 80 percent in just four years.

Co-incidently, while he was making his threats to the fire chiefs, the Los Angles Fire Fighters Association was directed by their union to oppose Proposition 13, but instead voted by a margin of 2-1 to favor Proposition 13. They said they had been threatened with the closing of 36 fire stations and other things.

Brown's cavalier attitude is reflected in that of the legislature and the Shasta County Board of Supervisors.

The legislature has passed a bill, signed by Brown, that eliminates the business oppresive inventory tax - but written into the law is the stipulation that it will self-destruct if Proposition 13 passes. It has been admitted by many members of the legislature that this is blackmail - designed to prod the business sector into opposing Proposition 13.

And we thought they had sunk as low as they could get before but this is a new low.

But why would our Board of Supervisors, our legislature and our governor use the peoples' money to try to defeat the peoples' bill?

There must be something threatening their livelihood in the effects of Proposition 13 that caused them to completely destroy their integrity and chance of re-election by their actions.

It could only be one thing. A politicians proliferation of government and its insidious destruction of government is for one purpose - to perpetrate himself in office.

And, how better to do this than to make more people beholden by hiring them, putting them on welfare, state paid abortions and the like, and opening the taxpayers purse strings to any and all dogooder's suggestions.

This has alienated government from the people with the result that we are now adversaries. Young Brown's bitter threatening statements, the members of the legislature, the members of the school administration, the members of the boards of supervisors and others that are predicting the end of the world if Proposition 13 passes are really telling us they are not capable of administering our business within our ability to pay.

You see, they have never had to administer within a budget and therefore do not know how. Heretofore, they have set their own budgets then set the tax rates to conform to those budgets and without any taxpayers restraints they have steadily increased the number of government jobs which require more tax monies with the benefits there from largely accruing to them in the form of job insurance.

To apprise you of now many votes our politicians bought with our tax money in 1977, Brown's Unemployment Development Department reported state and local government hired 58,900 new employees in 1977. That can be multiplied by the number of voters in each family which would result in that many votes from their benefactors.

That's why those in office stay in office. The fact that they are bankrupting the country is secondary - - their main concern is to secure their own employment and generous pensions. It might well be that without those pensions they voted themselves the politicians wouldn't be so handy with spending the public's money because even they can see downstream to the oppressive taxes they would have to pay when they are a part of the private sector.

Police Magazine reports, "the accumulated pension debt for all federal, state and local jurisdictions taken together is said to exceed $5 trillion - an amount equal to the federal budget for the next 20 years at it's current level." (It also equals the entire worth of everything in the country.) California taxpayers are $24 billion in debt for pensions promised teachers, policemen and other public employees. Reportedly, Governor Brown will receive $47,000 per year pension when he retires this year for only four years in office.

According to the U.S. Ceasus Bureau, California, with 10 percent of the country's population and a third in size, provided 15.68 percent of all property taxes paid in the United States in the 1975-76 fiscal year. Of the $57 billion paid in that fiscal year, $8.9 billion was paid by Californians.

Saying it another way, schools, cities, counties, and special district, together in California, collected an average of $415.23 from every citizen in the 1975-76 period. In the other 49 states the average was $248.87 per capita. Californians have achieved the dubious honor of being nearly 67 percent above the rest of the people in this country that pay property taxes.

These figures were supplied on the 1975-76 fiscal year and are nearly two years old, so we can assume it has gotten worse.

Proposition 13 is more than a mere attempt to seek property tax relief - it is in fact an effort by the citizens to regain control of their destiny by reminding those on the public payroll that they are servants, not the masters of the people.

If passed, Proposition 13 may require public employees to live within the constraints of the peoples' ability to pay. It also has been envisioned as leading to a national initiative in its image.

It has long been my belief that when we pay more than half our earnings in taxes that we will have a change of kind of government.

Recently, Gerald Ford said that if taxes continue to rise at their present rate our form of government will change by year 2,000. The country and the world's attention will be focused on California June 6 and what we do here. We can prove to them that our form of government, although somewhat indisposed, will survive and immerge with a new strength. Source: INTER MOUNTAIN NEWS MAY 25, 1978 - Burney, California

Happy Halloween...Pretty Scary, Isn't It?


Does Anybody Know Martin Sheen's Home Telephone Number?

I just had the pleasure of hearing his voice at 9:20 on a Sunday morning and I would like to return the favor.


Wednesday, October 27, 2010




October 27, 2010

Palmdale, California: Eighteen months ago, a phone conversation open the flood gates to what has now become a tidal wave of support for Chelene Nightingale, American Independent/Constitution Party and Tea Party supported - candidate for Governor of California in 2010.  Amid this groundswell are those who have questioned Chelene’s resolve.  And where they should not.

We never listened to the critics who declared ‘you cannot win’ or ‘you are dividing the vote.’  Our team continued on with faith, courage, and patriotic determination.  And now, there are growing list of endorsements and supporters who are saying ‘You CAN win!’  Let me be perfectly clear… WE WILL NOT QUIT THIS RACE!, says Nightingale.

With support for Meg quickly falling away and the undecided vote gaining ground, the split vote argument now leans in a whole new direction.  The Nightingale Campaign has begun asking supporters of Meg Whitman not to ignore the writing on the wall and join with a TRUE conservative!  One who is not trying to buy the state or the vote.  The people of California are not for sale!

Chelene now enjoys a litany of endorsements, front-page headlines, interviews on highly-rated radio and television programs, and much more.  Her endorsements include such big names as Sheriff Joe Arpaio, Sheriff Richard Mack, Tom Tancredo and the Chairman of the Christian Coalition of California.  Her support of Prop 23, Prop 187, turning back on our water in the central valley, placing California Military on the border, and a strong stance towards removing the shackles on California business, puts her in lock-step with the conservative movement.

Anyone who knows me will tell you that I am fierce when it comes to the protection of this state and citizen’s rights at all levels.  This isn’t about me.  And it’s not about Meg or Jerry.  It’s about California.  If you want someone in the Governor’s seat who TRULY has no ties to special interests, I’m your candidate!


Amen. We can do it California, we really can. Governor Nightingale. Try THAT on for size.


The Sick, Cruel Joke Of The Billionaire Boys

I would like to request that Bill Gates, James Cameron, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Robert Redford, Al Gore, George Soros and any other self-proclaimed billionaire do-gooder contribute $100,000,000 each of their own money to a trust fund which can be used to support those people who lose their jobs as a result of AB-32, California's Global Warming Final Solutions Act.

If nobody loses their job due to AB-32, then every last penny of your money will be returned to you. This is only fair, since you are funding and publicly supporting the NO On 23 campaign. I ask that you agree to this before people vote on November 2nd.

You should have no problem doing this, because as you say, AB-32 is not a job killer. I will feel much better because there will be help available to those who need it, in the (unlikely) event that you are wrong. This will give the public all the more confidence in proceeding with the very worthy goal of saving our environment.

I look forward to reading your expeditiously issued press releases affirming that such a trust fund has been set up.

Thank you for your speedy attention to this matter.

Yours in green,


Note: I have emailed Bill Gates, Al Gore, and James Cameron (via the LA Times comment section on a story about the 2 Avatar sequels) Arnold Schwarzenegger via Govenor's office, Robert Redford via The Sundance Institute and George Soros via his website. I am sure we will be hearing from them all shortly.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Smart Green Thoughts

Smart Green Thoughts
By The Retro Housewife

It occurs to me as I sit here at my desk pouring through these fascinating regulatory documents on my own time, sadly neglected and forgotten by seemingly every dirty Big Oil Company on the planet (Big Housewife not yet having established itself in the vernacular of the rabid progressive movement) that there is another thing that is really bad for the environment.
is bad for the environment.
Think about it.
WAR is messy, stuff gets spilled. Bad Stuff. Good Stuff, even Sticky Stuff. 
What is one thing you need after a war? Soap. Lots of Soap. Strong stinky soap.
All the things the Air Resources Board wants to have less of.
The first thing we should do to save the environment in California is not have a war.

This would also set a good example for the rest of the world who will then say:
"Look at California over there not having a war and protecting the environment."

I heard a quote on the radio awhile back.

It went something like this:

A society is three meals away from a revolution. 
(Like, missed meals)

Unemployment +

Like, Do You See What I Am Saying?


YES ON Prop 23 Stops California Cap-and-Trade

Dear Fellow Californians,

I implore you to read the text of AB-32 yourselves, and more importantly, the AB 32 Scoping Plan before you reject Proposition 23.  The California economy is in a very fragile condition; implementing a Cap-and-Trade program will be devastating to California businesses. According to the scoping plan:
Consistent with AB 32, ARB must adopt the cap-and-trade regulation by January 1, 2011, and the program itself must begin in 2012. 
An entity called the Air Resources Board will have dictatorial power over every business in the state and will be able to effectively put any business out of business. This is absolute insanity. It doesn't even do anything to reduce air pollution! Please, read it for yourself! For whatever reason, the news outlets, the movie stars are lying to the public or are to lazy to look into what they are supporting before they toss money into the ring.


California Resident since Age 1.5 and fearful for the future.

PS, Chelene Nightingale for governor - she'll stop this horrendous law - she holds the radical belief that people should come before fish.

Some Documentation For Your Perusal

JAMES N. GOLDSTENE Executive Officer California Air Resources Board
Note: Points 1,2 below are regulations which fall outside of AB-32 under a different regulatory law, I am listing them here because AB-32 comes into play in the form of an additional restriction to any alternate product formulations business tries to bring their products into compliance. This restriction says that the new products can't have a Global Warming Potential (GWP) Factor greater than 150.
    In developing this regulatory proposal, ARB staff evaluated the potential economic impacts on representative private persons and businesses. The Executive Officer has initially determined that there will be a potential cost impact on private persons or businesses directly affected as a result of the proposed regulatory action. As explained in the ISOR, the proposed amendments may have a significant adverse economic impact on some individual businesses but the overall statewide impacts are not expected to be significant. (RH Comment : Say people who will not lose their jobs over these regulations)
  2. Health and Safety Code section 41712(b) requires that the Board adopt consumer product regulations that are “technologically feasible.” Technological feasibility is a different concept than "commercial feasibility," and does not take into account the cost of reformulating a product. We believe that a proposed limit is technologically feasible if it meets at least one of the following criteria: (1) the limit is already being met by at least one product within the same category, or (2) the limit can reasonably be expected to be met in the time frame provided through additional development efforts. RH Comment : This standard of technologically feasible will likely mean that at least some companies will go out of business because it will be too costly for them to achieve the higher technical standard. Some may say this is a good thing as they are the worst polluters, and in a booming economy, I might agree, however, we have 22% unemployment at the moment.

60 Minutes - California Has 22% Under + Unemployment

Who is Tom Steyer? Tom Steyer donated $5,000,000 to defeat Prop. 23. Out of the goodness of his heart? Dunno. But here is his company:  Farallon Capital Management Company - here is one viewpoint on Tom Steyer.

Update November 13th, 2010: Poor Goldman Sachs, they thought they would make so much money off of Cap-and-Tax - But the exchange in Chicago just closed...The Crash Of The Climate Exchange - But wait! California is starting Cap-and-Tax January 1, 2011! What a co-inky-dink that is! It's not like our own Barbara Boxer was one of the ones trying to monetize the Global Warming Scam... If we had a free press in this country, they might do a bit of research into whether Goldman Sachs is going to profit from CaliCap'nTax!

I Endorse Chelene Nightingale For California Governor

It is not too late for California, though it might be after 4 years of Jerry Brown. They didn't call him Moon Beam because of his firm grasp of reality. He is beholden to the unions, the same unions that have bankrupted the state with pensions fit for kings.

Chelene Nightingale is the common sense candidate. She knows what needs to be done to save this state from a fate like Greece (where 1/3 of the population is employed by the government). I am endorsing her because she is the only candidate who has the guts to say what needs to be done. We are not in a temporary slump, we are in a continuous downward spiral.

If Proposition 23 fails, we will go into free fall. Chelene Nightingale understands this, and will get rid of AB-32 altogether. Why anybody thinks putting the reigns of this economy in the hands of an unelected panel of people nobody has ever heard of will help anything is beyond me. Yet that is what AB-32 does - it gives control to the Air Resources Board - Which describes its duties as follows:

The Scoping Plan, approved by the ARB Board December 12, 2008, provides the outline for actions to reduce California’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.  The Scoping Plan now requires the Air Resources Board (ARB or Board) and other state agencies to adopt regulations and other initiatives reducing GHGs.
The Next Chapters (graphic to the right), shows where we are in the process.  ARB has already adopted a number of “early action” measures required by the Scoping Plan, and is now working on the Plan’s other measures.   The majority of this work must be completed by December 31, 2010, with most regulations and other initiatives adopted by the start of 2011.  This means more than 20 additional Scoping Plan measures will be adopted by ARB in 2009 and 2010.  The goal is reducing GHGs to 1990 levels by 2020. After that, California’s goal is a reduction of 80 percent from 1990 levels by 2050. 
Interagency Coordination For an effort as broad as the Scoping Plan, interagency coordination will be critical, especially since many programs cut across sectors and agency responsibilities.  The Climate Action Team comprised of State agencies and chaired by Cal/EPA Secretary Linda Adams has been re-organized to focus on implementation, with lead groups providing regular updates to the Climate Action Team on the status of measure development.  

Use your head, California. AB-32 was passed in 2006 - 4 years ago, and they haven't even completed the list of regulations they are going to impose. Do you really think that is going to create jobs? LOOK FOR YOURSELF AT THE SCOPING PLAN.


The AB 32 Scoping Plan identifies a cap-and-trade program as one of the main strategies California will employ to reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that cause climate change. This program will help put California on the path to meet its goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020, and ultimately achieving an 80% reduction from 1990 levels by 2050. Under cap-and-trade, an overall limit on GHG emissions from capped sectors will be established by the cap-and-trade program and facilities subject to the cap will be able to trade permits (allowances) to emit GHGs.
The California Air Resources Board (ARB) will work with stakeholders to design a California cap-and-trade program that is enforceable and meets the requirements of AB 32, including the need to consider any potential impacts on disproportionately impacted communities. Consistent with AB 32, ARB must adopt the cap-and-trade regulation by January 1, 2011, and the program itself must begin in 2012.  

If you want to have a job, keep your business or just plain earn a living in the state of California, then join me in voting for Chelene Nightingale for California Governor this November 2nd, the year we decide the fate of California, 2010.


Saturday, October 23, 2010


We offer evidence that legalized abortion has contributed signiŽcantly to recent crime reductions. Crime began to fall roughly eighteen years after abortion legalization. The Žve states that allowed abortion in 1970 experienced declines earlier than the rest of the nation, which legalized in 1973 with Roe v. Wade. States with high abortion rates in the 1970s and 1980s experienced greater crime reductions in the 1990s. In high abortion states, only arrests of those born after abortion legalization fall relative to low abortion states. Legalized abortion appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime.


"Do You Know How Many Posters There Are On Campus For Columbia Eggs And Sperm? People Are Willing To Pay $8K To 30K" My East Coast Spy
Smart Green Thoughts
By The Retro Housewife

At this point I would also like to point out that we can really, really help the environment WAY more than AB-32 if we all kill ourselves and then properly dispose of our bodies. There ought to be a proposition.


Proposition 23 - What do These No On 23 Supporters Have In Common?

Arnold Schwarzenegger, George Shultz, Robert Redford, Bill Gates, James Cameron, Leonardo Di Caprio and Al Gore have all weighed in to oppose California's Proposition 23, a November ballot initiative. Now comes the uber-endorsement for the No on 23 campaign: President Obama. 
What they all have in common is that they are all very, very rich and do not have to worry about losing their jobs when this monster of a law AB-32 takes effect. They can all pat themselves on the back and congratulate themselves on the green fuzzies they will surely win at this years NIMBY awards. Yes, the memory of the NIMBY king, Ted Kennedy, lives on.

Can you see Al Gore Salivating over the prospects of making billions of dollars from the CAP AND TRADE component in AB-32? The rest of the country is not stupid enough to allow that on the federal level, but Californians are! I can almost hear the pooh poohs emanating from the grand gardens of the Montecito Mansions as they plot their campaigns against ALL THAT MAKES NOISE OR HAS THE POTENTIAL TO DISTURB THEIR VIEW.

  1. Heavy-Duty (Tractor-Trailer) Greenhouse Gas Regulation - The regulation applies primarily to owners of 53-foot or longer box-type trailers, including both dry-van and refrigerated-van trailers, and the owners of heavy-duty tractors that pull them on California highways. These owners are responsible for replacing or retrofitting their affected vehicles with compliant aerodynamic technologies and low rolling resistance tires. All owners regardless of where their vehicles are registered must comply with the regulation when they operate their affected vehicles on California highways. (INCREASE IN THE COST OF TRANSPORTING GOODS WITHIN CALIFORNIA ==>> HIGHER PRICES)
  2. Reporting your GHG Emissions - Oh boy.
  3. Who is supporting the NO On 23 Campaign? - Maybe some reporter would like to call this company and ask who the client is:
  4. The No On 23 Groups all have nice sounding names, but reveal little about who is behind them. I don't know whether oil companies are supporting 23 or not, but YOU do not know who wants it gone.
  5. tbc

Friday, October 22, 2010

League of Women Voters An Embarrassment To Women - Change Your Name!

Dear League Of Women Voters,

I would like to request that your organization refrain from using the all encompassing, unmodified "women" in your name, as it is intentionally misleading and carries with it the implication that your organization represents the views of the entire female gender.

I can assure you it does not. Furthermore, given your hostility towards this great country of ours, it is clear that your organisation represents only the views of a disgruntled minority of the extreme left who seek to debase and eventually obliterate every last vestige of patriotic display, while ridiculing the very things that most American women hold dear.

I call on you to adopt a new name for your organisation that more properly reflects your membership, and which will not cause the rest of us to cringe in shame.


How about, "League Of Bitchy Women" ?

LA Times Continues To Ignore Black Church Set Afire By Illegal Alien

Follow-Up: June 7, 2011Feds Accuse Gang Of Targeting Blacks In Calif City - A Latino gang conspired to rid a Southern California city of its black residents through intimidation, threats and violence dating back to the early 1990s to exert its influence and show its loyalty to the Mexican Mafia prison gang, according to a federal racketeering indictment unsealed Tuesday.  (You don't say!)

When I started hearing talk of "racial cleansing" taking place in Los Angeles, I found it hard to believe. Conventional wisdom says that all "people of color" are created equal in they eyes of the propaganda rags such as the LA Times. So when I got an email from my friend Ted Hayes, lamenting that the Messed Up Media was ignoring the August arson attack, I figured he must be exaggerating.

So I started doing various searches on Google and the LA Times looking for anything on Church of Greater Works, Pastor Edwards, arson, Ricardo Aguilar Martinez the illegal alien who set fire to the church while around 40 people were inside.

That's right, 40 people inside. I can't find a peep about it in the LA Times. Why is that? Because this was a HATE CRIME committed by an illegal alien against blacks in Los Angeles, and this is not an isolated incident. Now that I have my eyes and ears open, I have heard blacks talking about being pushed out of LA, crimes against blacks committed by illegal aliens being ignored by the authorities and the press (I met two ladies in Arizona who were working to get Jamiel's Law on the ballot again, who told a heartbreaking story of their fight to get justice for this boy gunned down a block from his house by an illegal alien.)

So, LA Times, care to comment on why you have completely ignored this story? Could it be that it reveals a little too much about the Conquistadores, and how they usurped blacks' civil rights legacy for their own benefit?

Your staff seems very concerned about Islamophobia in far away corners of the country, but not at all about the racial cleansing occurring in your own back yard. Why is that?

Mexican/American War Not Over - On (Sir, perhaps articles like these have something to do with Homeland Security paying you a visit...if that is true)
Illegal Aliens Canvasing for votes in Washington - Votes for Democrats that is - because Democrats represent non-citizens in our government?
Juan Williams Is Fired From NPR - There's a budget cut that's a no-brainer! NPR Funding Buh Bye - Mr Williams, Bill O'Reilly is right - we do like you.
I have emailed Barbara Boxer on more than one occasion, asking her how she can ignore this type of rhetoric and subversive action occurring in California. She has never bothered to answer. Instead, she persists in voting for every grab attempt and giveaway for illegal aliens and the furtherance of the Reconquista movement. There is an active movement to "take back the nation of Aztlan" led by some of the worst racists I have ever heard, who make no attempt to hide their hatred of whites and blacks and Jews and... Is it because they also have this extreme leftist agenda that she continues to allow the flood of Aztlan supporters into our country? I don't know, it doesn't make sense to me. I have a hard time believing that anybody can hate this country so much that they betray the people who elect them to this extent, but her voting record says otherwise.

The members of the Baca family are not the only politicians in office who are sympathetic to this movement. As one of the Baca's says in the video, the future of Aztlan will be decided by the children of the invading army of supporters of Aztlan, "depending on how they are treated". Since I can only assume that the expectations of how they wish to be treated will be similar to what they are now, does this mean Spanish is to become the dominant language, and special rights and privileges are to be granted to "the rightful owners" of my homeland?

I have watched as more and more Mexicans cross the border and settle in California. 20 years ago it was a different story; there was more of a willingness to become American, and I knew plenty of Gonzales's and Rojas's who were just as Americanized as the Stevenson's, Smiths and Reilly's. This has now changed. Yet have you heard one of our "representatives" in government address this issue of Aztlan? I certainly can't seem to get an answer out of them, and now the blacks are being pushed out of Los Angeles.

Their fate will soon be mine, and yours. We share the same destiny.


Tuesday, October 19, 2010

I Was Here - And Heard Reverend Wayne Perryman Give This Speech

Just a little reminder that skin color should not be what unites or divides us. I would much, much rather hang out with Reverend Wayne Perryman than the obnoxious white lady you hear in the background heckling continuously, trying to drown out the Reverend as he speaks. (She later started screaming "Black Nazi".)

A union bussed these people in from Los Angeles solely for the purpose of this disruption, (which continued, unabated for at least 4 or 5 hours). I could tell, because all of a sudden it was quitting time, and the protesters marched off and were gone. The only other time I have seen that  type of behavior was at the Denver Airport, where I and my daughter ended up spending two nights trying to go from the West Coast to the East Coast flying with United Airlines.

On both evenings, promptly at 10:00, every single United Airlines employee would disappear, leaving a line of at least 150 - 200 stranded travelers to fend for themselves. Our trip was not supposed to take 2 days, that is how long it takes with United Airlines, because of the union. Needless to say, I will never, ever fly on United Airlines again, and I will also oppose unions every chance I get, because their behavior is so over the top rude, counterproductive and inhuman, I have come to regard them as a force of evil.

But Reverend Perryman is an excellent speaker and presents a view of the state of things that you will never hear in the Messed Up Media.

And if you don't think our Media is Messed Up, you are not paying attention.

It took me awhile to first see, then believe, then get angry... but as much as I did not want it to be true, it is.


PS Don't fall for the race baiting. Remember, we share the same destiny. By we I mean Americans.

Housecleaning Item: Bill Ayers And Bernardine Dohrn - Justice For All

Bernadine Dohrn has a message for you:

There is a little matter of a pipe bomb murder in San Francisco...she says now "it is preposterous" - perhaps she forgot about telling people to "guard their children" around the same time, and the whole pipe-bomb slipped her mind as well. Maybe the students she teaches at  the Leftist Terrorist Employment Center aka Northwestern University can get her to do a lecture on building pipe-bombs.

Weather Underground terrorist group co-founder Bernardine Dohrn responded to allegations her husband, co-founder William Ayers, recalled her placing a pipe bomb outside a San Francisco Police Department building Feb. 16, 1970.
The shrapnel from the bomb's explosion killed Sgt. Brian V. McDonnell. Another officer, Robert Fogarty, was wounded in the face and legs and was left partially blind.

Unpunished Terrorist Bernadine Dohrn
“Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!” Bernardine Dohrn On The Manson Family Murder of Sharon Tate, Clinical Associate Professor of Law Director, Children and Family Justice Center
November 8th, 1970 - Picture of This Professor at Northwestern University - Formerly on the FBI's Top 10 most wanted list.

Unpunished Terrorist Bill Ayers
 All told, Ayers and Weatherman were responsible for 30 bombings aimed at destroying the defense and security infrastructures of the U.S.  "I don't regret setting bombs," said Ayers in 2001, "I feel we didn't do enough." Bill Ayers, Professor at University of Illinois at Chicago 

It is testimony to the sick, sad, sorry state of this country's higher education system that these two vermin have been given positions in academia. They both deserve the same fate as Timothy McVeigh, who distinguishes himself from these two only in that he (McVeigh) was competent.

It is unconscionable that these two violent terrorists, and traitors to their country escape justice. It is up to GenX to make sure that justice is served.


Timothy McVeigh: Motive: Retaliation for the Waco Siege, Ruby Ridge, other government raids, the Turner Diaries, as well as general U.S. foreign policy Crimes: Use of a weapon of mass destruction, Conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, Destruction with the use of explosives, 8 counts of first-degree murder, Penalty: Death by lethal injection.

Bill Ayers: Motive: Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents. Crimes: In his 2001 book Fugitive Days, Ayers recounts his life as a Sixties radical and boasts that he “participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.” Penalty: Faculty member at UIC.

Would be Mass Murderer Cathy Wilkerson - Incompetence (hers) saved the victims from their date with her pipe bomb. She and some of her terrorist friends were making pipe bombs in the basement of one of daddy's Greenwich Village flats. Although 2 of her little buddies were blown to smithereens, and they intended on killing many more people, she spent a total of 11 months in jail. Isn't that special? 
Cathy Wilkerson: "On the morning of March 6, 1970, there was an explosion in the sub-basement of a townhouse owned by Wilkerson’s father, located at 18 West 11th Street in Greenwich Village. The blast killed three people, but Wilkerson and Kathy Boudin were helped from the rubble and they immediately went underground.. The townhouse was being used by the Weather Underground to make bombs, in particular a nail bomb that was to be used against soldiers and their dates at a non-commissioned officer's dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey that night."  Source  Comment by RH: Ms. Wilkerson ultimately spent a whole 11 months in jail for "dynamite possession" - what I would like to know, is why she was not charged with conspiracy to commit murder, and is there a statute of limitations on this, and can we still get her on this charge? This monster was going to blow up soldiers and their dates - and now she is an "educator" in the New York public school system. Are they out of their bloody minds?

This mega twit, who has never actually done anything in life other than visit communists, blow up a few of her friends and bitch and complain, is now spreading her incompetence unabated. Is it a wonder that this country is such a mess?

Looking Into The Global Warming Final Solutions Act

  1. Consistent with AB 32, ARB must adopt the cap-and-trade regulation by January 1, 2011, and the program itself must begin in 2012. 
  2. Instead of calling it "Global Warming" it is now being referred to as "Climate Change" - I assume to avoid embarrassment when the planet starts to get colder.
  3. Just read through a 5 page regulation on checking one's tire pressure.
  4. Cap-and-Trade regulation alone is 132 pages long.
  5. At least they gave some thought to how bankruptcies of covered entities would affect...the goals of the ARB:
    Discussion of Concept – Addressing Bankruptcy of Covered Entities 
    Compliance entities could emit GHGs and then declare bankruptcy or otherwise cease operation before fulfilling their surrender obligations at the end of the compliance period. Any compliance instrument that an entity owns at the time of bankruptcy could be included in their collection of assets for bankruptcy proceedings, thereby prohibiting claims by ARB. Under this scenario, this form of default would threaten ARB’s ability to meet the cap. 
    To address this, ARB is evaluating two policy options which involve modifying the timing of surrender calculations contained in Section 95960. Neither option reduces the probability of bankruptcy occurring, but instead serves to reduce the magnitude of any potential default. 
    Option 1: Require covered entities to cover a portion of their annually-reported emissions by retiring compliance instruments at specific periodic intervals. 
    ARB could hedge against possible bankruptcies while minimizing the loss of flexibility to covered entities by requiring them to cover a percentage of their reported emissions at intervals during the compliance period. This “partial true-up” reduces the magnitude of any default of the surrender obligation.

If there are any businesses left in California a year or two after this gets implemented, we should all get down on our knees and pray, because we will have witnessed a miracle. It seems to me that this is the stupidest, most self-destructive fiasco I have ever seen.  The whole theory of human caused global warming will turn out to be false, of that I am pretty much certain.

If you think that all scientists are in agreement on this, you are mistaken. You only hear about the ones who are towing the party line. Just a week ago, a UCSB professor publicly resigned from the American Physical Society out of disgust at their role in perpetrating the "biggest scam in the history of mankind". I read about this in foreign newspapers from Norway, the UK, Australia and India. Not one US newspaper reported this story.

I have read and heard reports of scientists essentially being coerced or bribed into supporting the Global Warming scam. If they do not, they watch their grant money dry up and their careers start to stagnate. On the other hand, grant money seems to be readily available to do "research" on global warming.

Think about your dealings with the DMV. Ever had an experience that took 5 times longer than it should have? Now imagine that sort of inefficiency and indifference applied to every area of the California economy, and ultimately your daily life.

This would be really funny to watch if I didn't live here. 

They say that Disney fabricated the notion that lemmings willingly throw themselves off cliffs. I have another interpretation of the lemming suicides - it was metaphorical and prophetic of our current insistence to do absolutely everything under the sun to catapult our society back to the stone age.

If you have an ounce of sense in your head, you will vote yes on Prop 23.

Going to bed now. Nite Nite.


Update February 27, 2011: California's Cap and Trade Slush Fund (California State Assemblyman Dan Logue)

 Dear Friends and Colleagues
Those that know me, know that I have long been an outspoken opponent of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), California's so-called "Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006." Of course, the folks that originally forced this broad-sweeping policy upon us have, by and large, abandoned the "Global Warming" scare tactics and have settled on "Global Climate Change" as their new scare buzzword. 
Out of concern for the destruction that I knew AB 32 would have on our economy, in 2010 I authored Proposition 23 to suspend the implementation of AB 32 and index it to California's unemployment rate. Unfortunately, Prop. 23 did not pass. Now as we begin to see the provisions of AB 32 implemented, the California Air Resources Board has established the nation's first and only Cap and Trade system, whereby billions of dollars will be extracted from the private sector. 
The first response of Sacramento liberals has been to seek to tap those resources, but not for environmental clean-up, mitigation or compliance, as promised. Rather, they are seeking to hijack the Cap and Trade funds in order to back-fill a $500 Million hole in the State General Fund. They have also floated the idea of raiding about $1 Billion from it to bail out California's boondoggle high-speed rail project, which you may recall has an estimated price tag of $100 Billion. This confirmed our worst fears - that AB 32 and Cap and Trade will be used as a Slush Fund for Sacramento's pet projects. 
Fortunately, this past week California's independent non-partisan Legislative Analyst notified the big spenders that use of Cap and Trade funds will be very limited without a two-thirds vote of the Legislature. However, the big spenders have not given up and won't - not when there's tax dollars available for the taking.

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Dear Patriot

Dear Patriot,
If ever there were a time that you felt like you had to do something to save California, that time is now.  In two short weeks the fate of our state’s future will be decided.  Since Prop 14 passed in June, this is the last state election in which the citizens of California can elect a candidate from the party of their choice.
Please help us elect Chelene Nightingale on November 2nd, lest the voice of California’s most active and politically educated citizens – YOUR VOICE – will effectively disappear into the vortex of party politics under the reign of another progressive statist governor.
Some of you have contributed to the campaign already, of which you are commended and humbly appreciated for helping us to purchase a week of radio spots on the most listened-to talk radio station in the most highly populated city, Los Angeles.  Those will begin to air next Tuesday.  We need your help to pay for the second week!

DONATE - After this election, you will not have a chance to vote for any candidate you want in the main election. There will only be two names on the ballot for California Governor - write-ins won't count..


Thoughts On Prop. 14

I just went and took a little look-see at this Prop. 14 bill that we passed. ("We" is being generous, as I did not vote for this.) The interesting thing about this little proposition is that it simply states "The top two candidates" will proceed to the general election. There is no minimum hurdle any of the candidates must overcome, meaning that we could end up with candidates who received only a very few number of votes.

Suppose every registered voter in the State of California decided to run for governor. Assume they also run off to the polls to vote for themselves, except for my mother who runs off and votes for me. I could be one of the two candidates running for governor in the general election, having received only two votes because my mother loves me more than your mother loves you.

My opponent might turn out to be a fellow named Cat Brando because Harvey Wallbanger mistakenly thought he was at Santa Anita filling out his bet sheet.

OK, so I am being silly, but one strategy could be to flood the candidate pool in the primary election (thereby lowering the number of votes it will take to achieve top 2 status).

How about this: Say there is a well-know democrat or republican politician named Fred Jones. I am from the opposing party, and I have the bright idea to track down as many Fred Joneses as I can find and bribe them to run for governor. Since there will be no official party candidate, each one of the Fred Joneses I find can put "Democrat" or "Republican" after their name on the ballot.

My guess is that they are not allowed to make a note next to the well-know Fred Jones telling voters that "this is the Fred Jones you want" or "This is the well-known Fred Jones". So maybe we wind up with "Fred Jones, High School Drop Out and Mama's Boy" as one of our two candidates. Of course, nobody in politics would ever do anything that sneaky just to get their guy into power.

Open Candidate Disclosure. At the time they file to run for public office, all candidates shall have the choice to declare a party preference. The preference chosen shall accompany the candidate’s name on both the primary and general election ballots. The names of candidates who choose not to declare a party preference shall be accompanied by the designation “No Party Preference” on both the primary and general election ballots. Selection of a party preference by a candidate for state or congressional office shall not constitute or imply endorsement of the candidate by the party designated, and no candidate for that office shall be deemed the official candidate of any party by virtue of his or her selection in the primary. 

What the new law does NOT say: Candidates must tell the truth when designating a party preference on the ballot or have the approval of said party to call one's self a candidate with a preference for the party, so in areas which are full of voting members of one party or another, perhaps all of the candidates might quickly learn to prefer that party.

Read Our New Law Here: Proposition 14 Full Text

Thursday, October 14, 2010

Out Walking For...

Today I dragged my sister out and the two of us joined two other ladies I met at Tea and we walked for candidates who have common sense and thus far seem to be immune to the mass suicide bug which has plagued our current set of politicians.

We quickly learned the spiel, today we were walking for Tom Watson who is running against "I live in Montecito and my world is just spiffydoodle" Lois Capps for the privilege of representing the citizens of California's 23rd Congressional District aka the Ribbon Of Shame. Our script went something like this.

"Hello, we are walking for Tom Watson who is running for congress. Tom is a fiscal conservative and believes Congress is broken." 
Then we hand them a brochure which compares Tom Watson to Lois Capps on the key issues and ask them to read it before they vote... then we say: 
"We would like to have your vote on November 2nd."

Mostly a pretty uneventful afternoon, I must say. One lady answered the door and listened up to the part about fiscal conservative then emphatically proclaimed that she is "Not A Fiscal Conservative". My sister and I spent the next 20 minutes trying to figure out why anyone would say such a thing...

Her two early-teens were standing at the door (most likely staring at my purple hair and wondering what kind of wacko was trying to talk to her mother about the need to maintain prudent finances) and all I could think of was,

"Just how can you justify that to your kids standing next to you?"

I mean, political ideology aside, these debts we are racking up will have to be paid back. That's just how it works. I really wonder if that mother understands that she basically just said,

"my two children standing here will start working in 10 years or so, they will be happy to pay back whatever I spend..."


PS... For the record, my kids are going to complain bitterly about being burdened by mountains of debt...


Monday, October 11, 2010

HOA Power Trips - Baby Boomers Embrace Their Inner Tyrant

I rarely open the letters from our Home Owner's Association (HOA); it is far too aggravating and tends to send my blood pressure through the roof. This morning, however, I did and was reminded again of why it is not a good idea to do so. If I had to do it all over again, I would never, ever buy a house with an HOA.

We should have known better, it's not like we didn't get a copy of the 60+ page CC&Rs when we bought the house, it's just that we never dreamed that anybody in their right mind would get it into their heads to actually enforce them down to the tiniest detail. The CC&Rs that came with our neighborhood are boilerplate and were written to cover just about everything under the sun, plus a few things which occur under the suns of the neighboring galaxies.

Our neighborhood is for the most part well kept and quiet, however if one were to judge based on the monthly flurry of admonishments and warning letters that we homeowners receive, you would most likely conclude that we are not unlike the frat house in National Lampoon's Animal House. These are coupled with all those little scoldings printed in the newsletter which are cynically called "helpful tips".

The board is composed entirely of members of the baby boomer generation who seem to be dissatisfied with their lives, perhaps not having achieved the greatness that they had expected or the status and wealth to which they feel entitled. Whatever the reason may be, now that they have attained this little bit of power they are hell-bent on exercising this power to its fullest extent. They derive great satisfaction out of their ability to micro-manage the daily lives of their neighbors, never failing to overlook the slightest infraction of those horrid CC&Rs - except of course when the CC&Rs are not to their own liking.

We feel so ill at ease in our neighborhood, that we no longer leave the house during the day, except by car to leave. I wait until midnight or later to check the mail or walk the dogs. Otherwise there is the chance that I will have to endure the shrieks of the President of the HOA who lives two doors up as she lists off my family's CC&R violations at the top of her lungs. Barring an encounter with the wicked witch of the HOA, just appearing outside brings the risk that one of the other venerable board members will be reminded of our existence which will result in my family becoming the focus of their scrutiny for a time - which usually results in a flurry of letters and a fine or two.

But back to the content of the newsletter. At the end of the newsletter there is usually a list of houses that are behind in their dues (they used to list them by address but have since stopped  this) - and the actions the board is taking against them. This has, up until now, been limited to recording liens against the properties of the offenders, but this morning I read that they are planning on taking the next step and foreclosing on the properties.

So anybody who is struggling already and is living in fear of bank foreclosure, now must worry about the HOA forcing their home into foreclosure over delinquent HOA dues which can range from a few hundred to a couple thousand at the most. Yes, the HOA has this power over you, and they can't wait to use it here in my neighborhood. We are not in danger of this because I always pay our dues, but I can't help getting aggravated on behalf of one or more of my unlucky neighbors who may soon be losing their home because some very small people are intoxicated with their new found power.


Sunday, October 10, 2010

Retired UCSB Professor Calls Global Warming A Scam - How's Your Norwegian?

The reason I ask how your Norwegian skills are is that if you want to read about what this retired professor of physics has to say on the topic of global warming, you will have to go to - a Norwegian news site to find out what this American physicist has to say. As yet, not one US newspaper has picked up this story. I wonder why that is?

Not only is this an American scientist, Harold Lewis is Professor Emeritus at the University Of California, Santa Barbara - the same California that is about to commit economic suicide by becoming the first state in the US and most likely the world, to forcibly limit those terrible greenhouse gases.

You might think any one of those venerable and obviously unbiased news organisations would be interested in exposing this scam...

That they are getting scooped by the little Retro Housewife blog is an indication of the corruption of our national media as well.


How Does This Affect Me, Registered Voter?

Prop. 23 will postpone AB32 - The Global Warming Final Solutions Act from taking effect in the foreseeable future. I am going to vote YES ON 23

Gubernatorial Candidates Positions:

Chelene Nightingale: - I nabbed this banner from Nightingale for Governor website:
Which countries do the most for the environment? Rich countries with the resources to protect our environment, or poor countries with high unemployment? I would like to live in a happy, peppy place...

Not this downer place ==>>
Is Poverty Really The Best Way To Help The Environment As Jerry Brown And Meg Whitman seem to think it is?

Jerry Brown: Against Prop. 23
Meg Whitman: Against Prop. 23 - Though she says she wants to get rid of the AB 32 law altogether... but since we know she lies, who can really say?

California passed a global warming law back in 2006, when no one was paying attention, that is going to cut greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels over the next decade. How will it do this? Every company doing business in California which emits these gases will have to spend money on technology upgrades so that they emit less of them. Now, you know darn well this is not going to be free; it will cost each company real money...that is certain.

What is not certain, is whether there is really any reason to do this at all. I am all for a cleaner environment, but the corruption involving the issue of global warming is so rampant, it will probably turn out that the considerable pain we are about to inflict upon ourselves does absolutely nothing for the environment.

The science is not incontrovertible by any means. Incontrovertible seems to be only the suppression of the arguments and evidence against the theory of man-made global warming, and the persecution of those who attempted to engage in genuine debate. My own view is that we have no way of knowing whether we humans have any effect whatsoever, since the scientific community is apparently completely corrupt. Basing any sort of policy on the purported causes and effects of global warming is just plain foolish.

Watch As The Left Tries to Discredit Dr. Harold Lewis
  1. Blog Slam From "Hugh Mann" - Lots of name calling and accusations - no facts
Newspapers Where This Is Reported 
  4. Rush Limbaugh - I guess this helps explain why people listen to him...
Other Scientists Not Freaking Out About Global Warming
Richard Linzen, MIT
SPECIAL OFFER! GET a FREE, GENUINE, MIT Lecture from REAL MIT Professor!!! Most people pay THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS for the chance to listen to MIT PROFESSORS - BUT NOW, I am offering you a special, limited time only offer! (Just hit the play button below...hee hee hee) 

What is a Climate Change Denial-ist or CLIMATE-DENIER?
  • This is a curious epithet to apply to somebody questioning a particular scientific finding, especially when the entire scientific process is defined by scientists presenting various theories and hypothesises  to their colleagues in the form of papers or lectures which can then be scrutinized, reproduced, refuted and/or hopefully referenced (the scientific community's equivalent of the Google back link).
  •  Calling somebody a denier, or denialist serves the agenda of silencing debate and puts the person's credibility in the spotlight and in question, just as calling a somebody a racist for pointing out the unlawfulness of sneaking across the border into the United States is an attempt to disparage the person's character instead of being forced to defend a losing position. (Laws are clearly being broken, to argue otherwise is futile.)
  • Religious aspect of "denial" - Peter denied Jesus, a rather famous episode from the Bible. The use of the term denier is an indication that the speaker has elevated the topic climate change to one which they approach with religious fervor, if not fanaticism. Scientific debate is never over, done, closed to discussion. It stagnates, perhaps, until a new paradigm emerges and begins to run its course. What the person is actually saying is, "I do not want any further discussion on this topic, as I am very concerned that new findings will conflict with my own agenda". Therefore the only logical response, in my opinion, is to pose the question: "How are you planning on making climate change work for you?"
  • Al Gore for example, does not advertise the fact that he and Goldman Sachs (co-inky-dink?) stand to make billions if not trillions from their investment in setting up the Chicago Cap and Trade Exchange. He can't just come out and say,  "Hey guuuuyyyyysss, I want to be richer than Bill Gaaaaateeees so hurry up and pass the Cap and Trade bill!" - I think even liberals might find that hard to stomach. So poor Al has to come up with elaborate tales of woe-to-thou-should-you-not-heed-my-warning. One starts to pity him somewhat when one considers what a dullard he is, and how hard he must be working to weave his tall tales. Until one learns that Al's company is incorporated in the UK, most likely because, get this, foreign companies in the UK are subject only to a flat tax of £50,000, regardless of their actual income. Not such a DODO after all, eh? No need to worry about the pesky IRS wanting a slice of the pie.