Schwarzenegger Cuts Billions of Dollars In Spending

“the people have spoken”

Sounds familiar? On May 19th, California held the Special Election on how the California government should mandate its budget problems. Before the election, and even right now, California is expecting 20billion dollars budget shortfall. Governor Schwarzenegger warned California that he would cut billions of dollars in public spending if California voters don't pass the budget propositions.

Now, after only one out of 6 propositions has passed, Governor Schwarzenegger began to cut California's public spending. The cuts will hit the hardest in public schools, poor children and disabled people of California, and California state workers. The total cut of spending is estimated to be around 2 billion dollars.

If all the propositions have passed, the shortfall would have been estimated to be around 15 billion dollars instead of 20billion dollars. Even though there would have been a large budget shortfall, it would have been better than nothing.

But again, the people of California has decided to not pass the propositions.
“the people have spoken”


source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/31/us/31calif.html?hp

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By Taka Laka:

Alright, even though I am a liberal resident of California, and I personally approve Governor Schwarzenegger. Whether you are Democrats or Republicans, the budget cuts are unavoidable.

Other Californian might argue that California should raise its tax rates instead of cutting public funds. If that is an argument, why didn't people vote "yes" on every propositions during the Special Election? One of the prop specifically stated that it will extends the temporary tax hike in California for additional two years.

Only suggestion that I have for Governor Schwarzenegger is to actually look into how each program is using its money. Currently, major portion of California budget is going toward the education. The education program is definitely important; however, the government should look into how the money is spent in public schools. Only required materials for public school is books, teachers, and some administrators. Currently, our school is spending millions of dollars towards junk like LCD monitors for what god knows, digital school board display, random ugly statue, and etc. Most of these stuffs costs millions of dollars of tax payers money. For this reason, if there are 1,000 schools spending millions dollars on craps, the total will add up to billions.

California has Silicon Valley and Hollywood. This budget shortfall shouldn't be this bad.

Republicans Attack Sotomayor On Race

The Republicans have begun their attack on Sotomayor in attempt to block her nomination for U.S. Supreme Court Justice. They try to convince the American public that the race or ethnicity should not be part of the process for nomination.

A Texas Republican, Senator John Cornyn argued that,

“The American ideal is that justice should be colorblind...” -John Cornyn

“As we see people like Barack Obama achieve the highest office in the land and Judge Sotomayor’s own nomination to the highest court, I think it is harder and harder to see the justifications for race-conscious decisions across the board.” - John Cornyn


In other words, the Senator is persuading the American people that the judicial nomination is different from the General Election. The race may be part of criteria for executive and legislative branch; however, the race should not be Judicial branch since the judge must be bias free toward any races.

Republicans are also concerned about the Sotomayor's long record as a liberal activist. But they haven't argued about that point yet.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/30/us/politics/30affirm.html?hp

previous posts on Sotomayor:

Obama Nominates Sotomayor
Sotomayor Expects Opposition
Abortion Right Activists Skeptical of Sotomayor

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By Taka Laka:

Again and again, why are Republicans attacking Sotomayor based on her race? They are right that the Supreme Court Justice shouldn't be voted based on race, but their attack strategy means nothing in politics. For this reason, Republicans are only assuring the public who already opposes Sotomayor nomination.

Meanwhile, their arguments are doing nothing to persuading the supporters of Sotomayor's nomination. In fact, the Republicans arguments will be questioned by its opponent because majority of American History shows that the Supreme Court Justice was biased towards the other race, and most of them were Whites. Hence, the arguments make the Republicans a hypocrite in the general public eyes.

Yes, the actions from the past shouldn't be used as arguments because the world is different now. But in general, the Americans will look into the past and they will be persuaded by it.

Like I have been saying, the Republicans need to move away from their old political strategy. Well, I don't want them to use the dirty strategy that they have been using in the last 2 General Elections.

Anyway, after looking into her judicial records, I believe Sotomayor is qualified as Supreme Court Justice. I am still little skeptical about her, but her overall records are fairly strong. After all, someone has to balance out Justice Robert.

Abortion Right Activists Annoyed By Sotomayor

Judge Sotomayor has received skepticism from liberal activists days after President Barack Obama nominated her for U.S. Supreme Court Justice. The skepticism toward Sotomayor grew from her judicial records toward abortion rights. According to the activists, there are numbers of court cases where Sotomayor took stand against abortions. Hence, the activists are worried about whether the decision of Roe vs Wade will be upheld or not.

In addition, the evidence of Sotomayor's stance against abortion can be drawn from her criticism toward China enhancing forced abortion for population control. Furthermore, the skepticism grew from her cultural background too since Latinos are largest anti-abortion group in Democratic Party.




However, some Conservatives and Republicans disagree with the activists since even the most radical feminists can oppose forced abortion. Also, the public needs to be aware about the possibility of her being "stealth judge", where Judge Souter was one of them. Judge Souter, who was appointed by the first George W. Bush, believed to be Conservatives who opposed abortion. However, Souter became a swing voter who upheld Roe vs Wade landmark decision. Hence, Sotomayor might be in same category.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28abortion.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hpw

---------------------------------------------------------------

Comment by Taka Laka:

I will admit, I thought Sotomayor will not face any major opposition except from Republican Party, but I was wrong. I probably should have been skeptical toward Sotomayor during my first post about Sotomayor's nomination after she said.

“our experiences as women and people of color affect our decisions.” - Sotomayor

“I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.” - Sotomayor

Now, just read Sotomayor's quotes, there are possibility that she has her own bias towards some issue, especially the social issues like abortion and gay marriage.

However, we also have to keep in mind that Sotomayor is not campaigning for the General Election. Sotomayor was nominated to become Supreme Court Justice. For this reason, Sotomayor might have been showing off her personality aside from her professional life as a judge. Also, I wouldn't be surprised if Sotomayor doesn't know any political strategy on what people can say on media.

For President Obama, like I said in previous posts on Sotomayor, I am certainly unsure on why he chose Sotomayor as a nominee. If Sotomayor is indeed, against abortion, there are high chance that some Senators from Democratic Party will side with Republicans. Which means if Sotomayor's nomination get blocked by the Senates, the vote will hurt the Democrats in the next election since they might lose Latinos support. For this reason, again, I am not sure whether President Obama nominated Sotomayor to gain support from Latinos and make it historical, or he actually made a decision through series of interviews.

Boies and Olson Challenge Prop 8

A day after California Supreme Court upheld Prop 8, David Boies and Theodore B. Olson, two prominent lawyers that fought against each other during Bush vs Gore 2000 General Election. Boies represented Al Gore, and Olson represented George Bush. Even though these individuals disagreed in many issues, Boies and Olson agreed that Prop 8 was unconstitutional.

Olson stated,

"[gay marriage] is not something that is a partisan issue. This is something that is a civil rights issue.” (nytimes.com)

In other words, the opposition to Prop 8 is not about being conservative or liberal. Overturning the Prop 8 is about giving equality to same-sex couples, and equality is fundamental rights for every citizen given by the American constitution.

Hence, Olson and Boies filed the lawsuit at Federal Court on behalf of this one same-sex couple. Neither Olson or Boies had personal connection to same-sex couples. However, both individuals were emotionally moved by the story of same-sex couple who are not able to get married after California has passed Prop 8. Reacting to the story, Olson stated,

“If you look into the eyes and hearts of people who are gay and talk to them about this issue, that reinforces in the most powerful way possible the fact that these individuals deserve to be treated equally,” (nytimes.com)

For this reason, Olson and Boies is planning to bring the issue to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Many gay right activists might be thrilled by Olson and Boies intervention, but some are rather annoyed mostly because of the timing of the lawsuits. Currently, the U.S. Supreme Court is leaning toward Conservative. Therefore, there is a high chance that Supreme Court might ban same-sex marriage across the America.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/28marriage.html?hp

Related Posts:

• California Court Upheld Prop 8
• New Hampshire Legalizes Gay Marriage
• Cheney Reveals His View On Gay Marriage

Get Involved:

• Overturn Prop 8 Campaign
• Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance
  

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By Taka Laka:
This news was totally a surprise to me. As I stated before on article about California Court upholding ban on gay marriage, the best way to overturn Prop 8 is to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. But I did not expect the movement to happen this quickly. As a supporter for a same-sex marriage, I will hope the best for Boies and Olson.

But like the campaign strategist for same-sex marriage stated, the timing of the lawsuit is concerning me too. If the issue goes all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, and if Boies and Olson loses the case, it will take decades for the activists to undo all the changes.

Either way, we will probably witness the nation wide battle for the same-sex marriage earlier than we have expected.

Sotomayor Expects Opposition To Her Nomination

Just as expected, Judge Sotomayor will face political opposition from Republican Party.

Yesterday, Sotomayor got nominated by President Barack Obama to become first latina Supreme Court's Justice. Most of the Democrats and some Republicans were thrilled with her nomination. However, the good portion of Republican Party opposes her nomination because they claim that Sotomayor is a liberal activist who is pushing for a liberal agenda. Also, her political views on abortion and gun laws are major concerns for those who oppose her nomination.

For the next few days, the opponents to Sotomayor's nomination will search for any dispute records that she has to prevent the nomination. So far, the opponent can point out her "reverse racism" attitude where she might be biased toward whites. The one incident is when Sotomayor struck down white firefighter's claim of reverse discrimination. No one knows the detail of the ruling yet, but some finds the ruling to be awkward. In addition, they will try to find any information regarding to her tax records or any federal dispute.

Even if Republican shows efforts to stop the nomination, they are still in disadvantage due to their low numbers of seating. Democrats have nearly 60 seats in Senates where Republicans have about 40. Hence, there is a high chance that Sotomayor may win the nomination without the Republican's support. Even among the Republicans, some supports the nomination of Sotomayor. For this reason, the opponents have to convince it fellow Republicans first.

On other hand, the supporters of Sotomayor's nomination is keeping quite so she will maintain her spotlight in media.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/us/politics/28web-court.html?hp

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Taka Laka's Comment:
I am not surprised by the opposition, but seriously, the Republicans need to come up with better strategy to win the support. Yes, searching for her tax record may help to hurt her image as a justice, but it barely means anything. This is not a general election where politicians need to convince general populations through political propaganda or false ads. Only possible way to block her nomination is to convince the Democratic Senators.

Also, I read the article that said Republicans will bring full out opposition to Sotomayor. First of all, what kind of strategists will go head to head against with the opponents with advantage in numbers and supports? In fact, their opposition may well hurt the chance to win the upcoming General Election because the latinos will have an impression that Republicans doesn't like them. President Obama can just state that he nominated the first latina Supreme Court's Justice. Even worse, if the Republicans loses the battle, they have will have an impression of weak party.

I repetitively stated that Republican Party needs to change their political approach and strategy.

California Supreme Court Upheld Prop 8

It's been almost half a year since the gay right activists filed a lawsuit against Proposition 8 after the proposition passed with majority votes.

Today, California Supreme Courts upheld the ban on gay marriage stating that same-sex couples still have voter approved domestic partnerships that allows them to have equal rights as heterosexual couples. But the courts allows the married couple before initiative taken in are allowed to keep their marital status since the Proposition did not state anything about repealing the married status. The decision was made with 6-1 voters in the court. However, the decision did not end the political battle.

There was immediate reactions to the court's decision. The supporters of gay marriage rallied and marched across San Francisco streets to protest the courts decision. During the rally, some protesters got arrested by police for blocking the streets. However, compare to many rallies, this protests were rather clam since many people were probably expected the court to not overturn the Proposition.

On other hand, the supporter of Prop 8 was thrilled with the courts decision because the California's marriage is now "protected".

According to many critics, this proposition will be hard to overturn, but the opposition still has a chance to overturn the proposition, even though it is going to be a long shot.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/27marriage.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

Related Post

• New Hampshire Legalizes Gay Marriage
• Bush vs Gore Lawyers Challenge Prop 8
• Cheney Reveals His View On Gay Marriage

Get Involved:

• Overturn Prop 8 Campaign
• Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance
  

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Taka Laka's Comment:
In the case of gay marriage, you either support or oppose it. In my case, I've been a big supporter of gay marriage. The constitution specifically states that "all man are created equal". Not all animals or aliens. In other words, everyone should be allowed to get married with a "loved one".

For the counter argument against the polygamy debates, why are we worried about polygamy when we are just broadening the definition of marriage between the loved one? "loved one", a noun, a single which means no one is allowed to have multiple partners.

However, just to be fair, the supporter of proposition has their own cases that makes sense to me. Obviously, they have their own religious belief against homosexuality and the fear of God's punishments if they allow same-sex marriage. In other word, Prop 8 was designed so the Christian community will vote "yes" on Prop 8.

If anyone should be blamed, it is probably California's legislatures for not reviewing Prop 8 thoroughly.

Obama Nomiates Sotomayor as a Supreme Court's Justice

For the first time in our nation's history, Hispanic judge might get appointed to the high court. After careful review, President Obama has chosen Judge Sotomayor as a Supreme Court's Justice. The President calls her qualifying and fair, and other Senates said that the diversity in the U.S. Supreme Court is important.

The nomination is indeed historical, but there will be unlikely any shift in power since the previous Jusice, Souter, because even though Souter was nominated by the first George W Bush, he was leaning more toward the Democarts.




Sotomayor grew up in comfortable household, but she also went through hardship as a child when her father died when she was 9 years old. After the death, her mother took care of her until she graduated high school. Later on, she went to Princeton University to study laws.

As expected, there were Conservatives and Republicans opposition to her nomination claiming that her judge is based on her liberal activist belief. But they have little hope to block her nomination since Democrats have near 60 seats in Senates. In addition, moderate Republican like Olympia J. Snowe of Maine is enthusiastic about Sotomayor's nomination. Hence, the Republicans also need to work on to persuade their own party member to block the nomination even before persuading the Democrats.

Sources and picture : http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/27/us/politics/27court.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp

-------------------------------------------------------------------

TAKA LAKA's Comment:
The nomination is indeed, historical; however, there is one thing that bothers me. Does President Obama choosing Sotomayor because of her qualification, or is he preparing himself for the next Presidential Election to win the Hispanic voters? Or maybe he is trying to do both at same time. Since I haven't looked into Sotomayor's background and political belief, I can't really tell if she is qualified or not, but she is definitely in bystander's position to get both Democrats and Republican's voters.

On other hand, the Republicans need to step themselves up. But they are still going with their old political tactics to attack the nominee's personal life. The last time they did that against President Obama in the General Election for his connection with William Ayers, they miserably failed. They need to realize that time has changed. With this Internet based society, people are caring less about the nominee's personal life.

This Guy Never Gets Boring

This is just a clip that I stumbled across.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Obviously some people wouldn't find this clip as funny, but at same time, this shows us how the American culture. After all, the U.S. is one of the few nations that allow people to bash each other politically to each other or to the government.

Thanks to the first Amendment.

Personally, I prefer Colbert Report or Daily Show since I am liberal.
What is your guys' favorite political shows?

North Korea Conducts Nuclear Test

Again, North Korea has conducted another nuclear test on their land threaten to destabilize the entire North Eastern Asia. Even North Korea's biggest trading partner, China, was opposed to their idea of testing nuclear technology.

Even though North Korea claim that the test was successful, many scientists are skeptical about the claim because the size of explosion was fairly small for today's standard. Their guess is that the explosion was about same size as an atomic bomb dropped into Nagasaki and Hiroshima. They estimated the blast's size by reading the level of ground shake made by the nuclear blast. The current nuclear test is conducted underground to reduce the spill of radioactive materials.

As usual, the United Nation has set up the emergency meeting to decided whether to impose stricter sanctions against North Korea for violating the United Nation Resolution for the second time. During the Bush Administration, the United States relation with North Korea has worsened after the former President Bush named them as part of Axis of Evil. Currently, Obama Administration is attempting to begin the diplomacy with North Korea again, but so far, they see little hope that the diplomacy will succeed.

source and credit: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/26/world/asia/26nuke.html?_r=1&hp

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
TAKA LAKA's comment:
Alright, this news shouldn't surprise that many people. We hear about how North Korea is threatening the United States and the rest of the world all the time. The nuclear program in North Korea is threatening, but their military power is far a world threat. Even though North Korea has estimate of 2million foot soldiers, their weapons are outdated. Some of the reports claim that North Korea is still using F-4 fighter jet, which is almost outdated by 40 years. In order to become a strong military nation, one nation needs strong leadership, resources, and economy. North might have strong leadership, but they don't have resources nor economy. We need to be cautious of North Korea, but media is overstating the issue, just like swine flu.

Related Posts:

• North Korea Detains Two American Journalists
• What if North Korea Launches a Missile Toward Hawaii
  

Alliances Made In Middle East

Since the U.S. led invasion to Afgahnistan began after the attack of 9-11, Taliban has aggressively expanded its power from Afgahnistan to Pakistan regions. After committing to series of efforts to stop the Tabilan from expanding, the leaders of both nation turned to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran.

The decision to rely on Iran was made because the problem with Islamic Extremists can be dealt better with the people from the Middle East itself, not the Western nations. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed that he wanted to help out these two nations; however, the interaction from the United States has created the set back to the efforts to stop Taliban.

Using this moment as an opportunity, President Barack Obama decideds to begin diplomatic talk with Iran again. The President hasn't decided when yet, but he is looking into the time during the election in Iran.

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/world/middleeast/25iran.html?hp
---------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Taka Laka:
Just like everyone else, I am very skeptical about whether this alliance would actually work, or even worse, I am not sure if the alliance would last. However, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pointed one good point. The U.S. interaction in middle east has created series of problem. The concept of democracy sounds great to us, but that never means our political system would work on other nations. Yet, that never means that we cannot interact with these nations. Us, as a nation, needs to be careful and give respect to these nation's culture and history when serious political actions such as war.

Collin Powell critisizes both Cheney and Obama

After the separate speech has been made by President Obama and former vice president Dick Cheney, Collin Powell came out to media criticizing both leaders.

Collin Powell, who identify himself as Republican and a former secretary of states, supports Mr. Obama's idea to close Guantanamo prison. Even before Mr. Obama came into the office as the President, Mr. Powell urged previous Bush Administration to close down Gitmo because he believed that the prison is surviving no purpose other than endangering American's Safety by luring the terrorists. However, Collin Powell also criticized Mr. Obama for not having a solid plan on how to close Gitmo and the detainees.

On other hand, Mr. Powell criticized Dick Cheney for leading the Republican Party to more far left. Since Mr. Bush took over the office, the Republican Party has moved from center right toward right away. In other words, the party has been moving away from the general public. Hence, Mr. Powell urged the party to reconnect with the general public to regain their political ground against the Democrats.

source and picture by:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/25/us/25talkshows.html?_r=1&hp

Just like how many major corporates around the world is restructuring their business to regain their ground on economy, the Republican Party should do the same. Their ideas on economy and social issues are respectable; however, the same strategy wouldn't work recursively for decades. As the time goes by, the political approach must be adjusted too.

Gates takes Obama's Side

After about hour and half of speeches given by Dick Cheney and Barack Obama, the secretary of defense, Robert Gate has taken the President's side on the issue of Guantanamo's Prison. The logic behind Gates' support for the President is that the prison at Guantanamo is sparkling anger among the terrorists toward the United States. Hence, the prison is endangering Americans more than protecting them. ( http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/us/politics/22obama.html?hpw )

This could means several thing, but I will only point out of them. Robert Gates' support for Obama shows how divided the White House was among the cabinets. After all, the government has appointed new generals for Iraq Wars, possibly because the general themselves were against the Iraq War. Dick Cheney needs to receive support from other big name in order to keep himself in spotlight. The prominent Republican, Collin Powell, also supports the President.

Obama vs Cheney

Today, two of prominent politicians, President Obama and former Vice President Cheney, have given a speech on shutting down the controversial Guantanamo Prison that holds 100's of suspected terrorists. The issue on whether to shut down the Guantanamo has became a national debate since the Washington's decision will affects the U.S.'s national security. Both side claims that their decision is or was the best interests for American people. The fundamental difference is that Obama is shutting down Guantanamo to gain international supports to fight against terrorist since much of the European nations backed off from supporting the U.S.'s effort to fight against terrorism in the middle east. On other hand, Cheney disagreed with Obama's logic behind the closing because Obama has unclear plan on what to do with the Guantanamo's prisons. Both leaders have spoken well about their stands; however, both of them have also shown their weak spots.

As usual, Mr. Obama used his public speaking skill to persuade the general public that the U.S. should take better moral ground to fight against the terrorism. During the campaign for general election in 2008, President Obama has consistently promised the voters that he will shut down Guantanamo within a year; however, Obama's plan to shut down the Guantanamo was rejected by congress due to the lack of planning. This rejection, did indeed damaged Obama's image as a strong leader. Learning from the mistake, he was more clear about his plan on shutting down the facility by informing public that all the suspected terrorists in Guantanamo will be sent to the Federal Prisons, where no prison has ever escaped. He also informed the public that there are many suspected terrorists in the Federal Prison. Furthermore, Mr.Obama criticized the previous administration for using interrogation techniques at Guantanamo because the practice has swayed the international supports away from the United States; hence, it lowered the over all security of the United States, even though there were no terrorists attacks on American soil after 9-11.

However, Mr.Obama had his own flaw in his speech. For those who are critical, the president raised more questions than actually answering the problems. Since the politics is about winning people's support, there must be large body of people who still feel insecure about closing the Guantanamo.

Since medias have been airing Obama's speech every week or so, Cheney's speech sounded more interesting because he was a powerful figure in white house. Also, his less appearance in media has made public wonder why the Cheney became such a powerful figure.

Mr. Cheney's speech contained more concrete detail than Mr.Obama. He constantly pointed out that there were more terrorists attack on American soils on 90's than current time; hence, the Guantanamo Prison has protected the American people from other possible attacks after 9-11. Mr. Cheney's speech was solid, but his speech made me focus on Mr. Cheney's personality.

After hiding from media for many years, former Vice President Dick Cheney seemed to be a lot more powerful now than he was before. No one will be surprises if Cheney becomes Republican's Al Gore since Cheney's endorsements will be a key to any future Republican candidates to win the upcoming elections.

Both speakers have spoken well today, but in the term of political battle, it was draw. But next few years will be interesting to watch Obama's plan to secure America and improve the economy. While Obama is busy with his job, the public should keep their eyes on Cheney because he will become one of the biggest Republican figure in the next few years or months.