In Today's Old Gray Lady, AKA The New York Times(www.nytimes.com) a front page article incredulosly said that there is a surprising jump in tax revenues and that it will, infact, lead to a trimming of the federal deficit. What is amazing is that it is even news that tax cuts=higher revenue. The reason there is a deficit in the first place is the massive increase in federal spending, some of which can be blamed on the Bush Administration directly, but not most of it.
During the 1980's, liberals led by such rags as the New York Times, raked President Reagan passed not only tax cuts but tax reform that led from the top tax rate of 70 percent down to 36 percent. What the Times and much of the MSM in that time would never address is that the  spending in the federal government was never really cut. All that was ever done was the rate of increase was slowed down. Not ONE program or section of the federal government, such as the Department of Education, was eliminated. It is possible that if Mr. Reagan had a Republican congress and actually was able to eliminate programs and whole departments that were instituted to please special interest groups, there would have not been a deficit when Mr. Reagan left office. It is always easy to do what President Clinton did-raise taxes. It is what led to the Republicans taking over congress in 1994.
If there was not the War Against Terror and a slew of natural calamities, Hurricane Katrina leading the way on the nature front, Mr. Bush would be able to do what Mr. Reagan could not. Cut the size of the federal government. but what is clear is that tax cuts and economic growth bring tax revenue to the government at all levels. Thus, the Times is right to site that increasing tax revenues will lead to a cut in the deficit. But, they could not leave well enough alone.
Of course they say, as fact, that the run up in taxes this year is because the past five years were so bad. No attribution, but they do site a comment from Thomas S. Khan, staff director for the Democrats on the House Budget Committee.
What will lower the deficit will be to do two things. Nominate conservative Republicans for congress and the senate and vote them into office. Despite the problems the current congress has been in, adding more will be a help to the president and will also help in getting correct immigration reform and to win the War Against Terror.
It is amazing that the New York Times, a private, free-enterprise company, does not get basic economics 101. But this is, after all, the same newspaper that heaped praise of the Soviet leader Josef Stalin in 1936 and has never ran a correction for that.

Despite what you will read, watch and heat in the MSM, the Republican party in California may poised to make serious gains in the seven constitutionally elected offices and possibly make small gains in the state senate and assembly.
Before one dismisses this as wishful thinking, consider that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will win reelection possibly by a landslide because his opponent, Democrat Phil Angelides is so condescending and shallow that his top campaign aide, California Democratic party hack Bob Mullholand compared Gov. Schwarzenegger to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il(www.drudgereport.com).
For Lietentant Governor, the Republican candidate is party stalwart state Sen. Tom McClintock. In his bid for governor during the recall campaign against Gray Davis(from here on referred to as the Gray Era), he made a respectable third place showing and his Reagan-like platform was put out for all to see. Infact, he was seen as the most principled candidate in the race. After two close failed races for state wide office, this third time should be the charm. He is running against the Insurance Commissioner, John Garamendi. Sen. McClintock should win this one but it may be close.
For Secretary of State, look for the incumbent, Bruce McPherson to win election outright. He was appointed by Gov. Schwarzenegger to replaced the disgraced Democrat, Kevin Shelly who resigned under corruption charges. This may also be a potential landslide.
The most interesting race will be for Attorney General. The Dems have nominated former Gov Moonbeam himself, current Oakland mayor Jerry Brown. His stance against the death penalty is well known. He claims that as AG, he will be able to fight death penalty appeals despite his personal opposition to the death penalty. It, like many other Roman Catholics convoluted positions on abortion will cloud the race. The Republicans have nominated state Senator Chuck Poochigian. This may be a close race and the former governor's past may come back to haunt him. I say to look for the GOP to pull out a very close race.
The three other constitutional offices that look like the Democrats will keep. The Controller, Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner should stay in the hands in the Dems. One area that could be a fifty-fifty chance of GOP gains is the state assembly. Maybe two to three seats. It may not seem like much, but it will help rein in spendthrift Democrats come budget time. I do not think that there will any gains in the state senate but even one seat will be a good thing.
Now, while the national MSM is fixated on national polls and the like, California is an example of the Republican strategy of keeping focus on local races. A large Republican turnout in California will do everything to help the Republicans in all races. And before any Republican says that they can not vote for Gov. Schwarzenegger because he is too moderate, remember the alternative is worse. We will have a huge tax hike and more socialist inititives than ever under a Gov. Angelides.
Oh, and if you think that I am just wishfully thinking, Gov. Schwarzenegger already has as much as  a seven-point lead in some polls. If Mr. Angelides thinks that having aides make moronic anti-Arnold statements on pandering to gay activists saying he will sign legislation legalizing same sex marriage when he can not, constitutionally with overturning Prop 22, that lead will grow.
Go GOP in Cali!!

On Thursday, two state supreme courts in New York and Georgia got it right, finally, on the subject of gay "marriage." deciding that in New York's case the legislature must change the law and in Georgia that the people had the right to define marriage in their state constitution.
It is clearly a major victory for forces that I support that say that if this is an issue that has widespread popular support, the gay and lesbian lobby must take the right route and go through state legislatures or the ballot innititive process.
As the New York Post (www.nypost.com) editorialized in Friday's edition that the decision from the state court of appeal said that any change to the Domestic Relations Law must come from the state legislature. I could not agree more.
As columnist John Poderetz ( www.nypost.com) also in the same edition pointed out, the major changes of the civil rights movement came after the one court decision, 1954's Brown vs. Board of Education, that rightfully said separate but equal education was unconstitutional. The 1964 Civil Rights Act, The 1965 Voting Rights Act and the 1968 Fair Housing Act passed both houses of congress and were signed into law by then President Lyndon Johnson.
In the Georgia case, it was concerning a constitutional amendment to the constitution passed by 76 percent of voters in 2004 that defined marriage between one man and one woman. Opponents tried to say that more than one question was asked on this issue and according to Georgia law, a ballot innititive can only ask one question. While a lower court judge did say that was the case, the state supreme court unanimously said  that was not the case and upheld the law as written and passed by the voters.
The reality is that whether one supports or opposes or has no strong feelings on the subject, the two courts said that the people, not judges, must make changes to the law. The court's only role is to decide the constitutionality of said law.
In California, an attempt to pass legislation legalizing same sex marriage failed because it was an election year ploy to embarrass Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. He vetoed it, rightfully, because in this case the issue is being decided in the court system.
Gay right advocates may have to accept that the most Americans are willing to go, outside of Massachusetts, is patchwork civil unions and liberal domestic partnership laws.
America is not ready to redefine marriage just to make one group feel "accepted" because, despite of the promise that it will not, other groups will seek their own definition of marriage and that will lead to chaos.
The courts in New York and Georgia have taken a step back and said to the state legislatures to stand up and make the change if they want to.

As an Episcopalian, it is painful to watch my denomination schism right before my eyes.
As the radicals seem to be on cruise control with the election of Presiding Bishop Katherine Schori, a neophyte at best, heretic at worst, as many as 10 dioceses are pleading with the Archbishop of Canterbury, The Most Right Reverend Rowan Williams, for alternate oversight.
Some of the reasons are varied from three dioceses that do not recognize ordained women to the priesthood to those upset over the ordination of Bishop Gene Robinson, the first not only openly gay man but one living with another man. Some are just upset at the drift of the Episcopal Church away from anything that resembles traditional Christanity.
What has always set the Episcopal Church apart from others was that it was the middle way. In between the Roman Church and protestants. High Church to Low Church. A lot of room for people who are borderline fundamentalists to out right heretics like the former Bishop of Newark, New Jersey, John Shelby Spong. It appears that the heretical faction is running the show, but it may not be for long.
There are a lot of real middle of the roaders that are tired of seeing the church drift into being a lap dog for the liberal wing of the Democratic party. So, what do we do?
We confront those who want to take the Church away from Christianity. We need to be aggressive in involvement in our local parish and diocese. Remember, it took roughly 40 years to see the Episcopal Church go from the beloved 1928 Book of Common Prayer to "In Christ, By Christ, With Christ" instead of Father, Son and Holy Ghost(Spirit). We can not be denied our place in our parish and diocese. We must stand up for Jesus Christ, the Son of God, not our "Mother" as Presiding Bishop-elect Schori referred to our Lord and Savior. We must embark on renewal. We don't want to go on a witch hunt and root out liberals. We must find common ground and where we can not, do not.
The Church is a human institution, flawed and with many disticnt persons and personalities. I do believe that simply finding a comfortable church or seeking outside oversight actually gives in the the liberals. Smart parishes should simply not give money to the diocese or national church and focus on bringing the Gospel of Jesus Christ to their communites.
For those of us that love the Episcopal Church and what it CAN be, do not give up. Get ready and go to battle for the Lord. It is time to make the liberals uncomfortable and have to defend where they want to take the Church.

According to FOX News, the long range Taepodong2 missile that failed 35 seconds in flight on the Forth of July was heading for Hawaii. That is troubling news and leads to what do we do on this score.
It is time to seriously think about several options including a naval blockade of North Korea.
Now, there is an out for North Korea as they do have a long border with Red China and a very small one with Russia. But the time for diplomacy, or giving in as the Clinton administration did is over.
Rightfully, President Bush labeled North Korea as one of the "Axis of Evil" nations and he was not wrong. Dictator Kim Jung Il is manical and leading the first Communist dynasty ever. He took power after his father, Kim il Sung died. And there are reports, unsubstantiated of course, that Kim Jung Il is grooming his son to someday take power. There must not be a strong women's movement in North Korea.
But that aside, a navel blockade may not do much but it would be a powerful symbol that if necessary, the United States will go in alone. We are already seeing that the "United Nations" is an impotent body that can not bring itself to even condemn these provocative actions.
We have been told by both parties foreign policy establishments that we must be patient and even hold one on one talks with the Red Koreans. No, we can not and the six-party talks are not going to do it either.
The way to deal with enemies like this is to remember the words of President Ronald Reagan,
"Peace Through Strength" and "Trust But Verify."
It is that approach that will bring the Red Koreans to their senses or not. Do they want to keep their nation starving and risk real rebelion? I do not think so, but we need to find out now, not later when they are testing nuclear weapons that will reach well beyond Hawaii.
It is time to confront them in the most real strong way possible that is not all out military action. It is time for a showdown

 Despite the protestations of the left-wing loser, Mexican voters stayed rightward and elected PAN candidate Felipe Calderon as the new president and the PAN has the majority, not absolute, in both houses of the Mexican congress.
It appears that Sr. Calderon did not read the Hugh Hewitt tome "If Its Not Close, They Can't Cheat" as this election is as close as it gets and leading PRD candidate Sr. Lopez Obrador to threaten mass protests. Only .56 percent or 236,004 votes separated the top two. The PRI candidate, Sr. Madrazo only pulled 22.27 or 9,301,081 votes, a humiliating third place.
This is good for the United States, but Sr. Calderon must take a different approach than soon to be ex-presidente Vicente Fox to his countrymen illegally entering the United States.
Sr. Calderon must revitalize and end the socialistic polices that have made Mexico an economic basketcase. They should be the richest country in the region with their vast oil reserves, but with a government controlled gas company, PEMEX, corruption reins and if you think that things are bad here with our gas companies, this makes ours look great!
It will take Sr. Calderon time, but the one area we must keep pressure is for him and the new government to stop dumping people in this country through illegal immigration. It is a national security issue for both countries.
We need to have a friendly government in Mexico and with the election of Felipe Calderon, that will continue

Many of you may have read my views on rightviewfromtheleftcoast.blogspot.com and I am glad I have an opportunity to reach an even larger audience. I will infact post on both to reach the most people. This is the best chance to get conservative views to the widest possible audience. Thanks again!