Bob Filners Links to Democratic Socialists of America

Like many Congressional Progressive Caucus members, Bob Filner has ties to Democratic Socialists of America.

DSA “Single Payer” pressure In 1993 San Diego Democratic Socialists of America members were active in waging a campaign to convince the area Congresspeople, Lynn Schenk and Bob Filner, to co-sponsor the McDermott-Conyers bill for a single-payer health care system.[11]2000 DSA convention

From a Spring 2000 Democratic Left editorial;[12]

DSA honored independent socialist Congressperson Bernie Sanders of Vermont at our last convention banquet, and we have always raised significant funds nationally for his electoral campaigns. At the same time, we were pleased to have Democratic Congressperson and Progressive Caucus member Bob Filner of San Diego introduce Sanders at the convention…2004 DSA support

In 2004 San Diego Democratic Socialists of America supported Filner’s successful Congressional race.[13]

Meanwhile, San Diego DSAers are involved in progressive Democrat Bob Filner’s 51st CD reelection race.

In Democratic Socialists of America‘s Democratic Left Winter 2004/2005, Theresa Alt wrote;[14]

We reported on the candidates that DSAers were supporting in the last issue of Democratic Left. How did they do?
In San Diego, longtime progressive Congressman Bob Filner won handily. Third-party candidate Lawrence Rockwood got 3.3% in his protest run against a centrist. And the San Diego mayoral race got really interesting…2006 DSA support

DSA supported Filner again in 2006.[15]

San Diego DSA produced an email recommendation sheet for the membership covering all races and propositions on the November ballot, a popular tradition of the local that people ask for as elections approach. Activist members there went precinct walking for Representative Bob Filner. They also worked hard for statewide Proposition 1C, a large bond issue for affordable housing, which passed.2008 DSA event

In 2008 Bob Filner attended a San Diego DSA function organized for City Council candidate Stephen Whitburn[16]

SD-DSA held a forum with about 20 participants on “DSA, the Left, and the Presidential Election.” They organized a fundraising event in April for City Council candidate Stephen Whitburn, which was attended by Congressman Bob Filner and raised about $1000.[17]Donated office to DSA phone bankers
Congressman Filner, signing DSA Pledge for Economic Justice

Congressman Filner, signing DSA Pledge for Economic Justice

On Saturday, August 10 1996, over 300 people attended the San Diego Hearing on Economic Insecurity, “a forum intended to hammer home to a message to our elected officials that working America is hurting and to demand that government take corrective action.”

For two hours, a panel that included Congressman Bob Filner (D), California Assemblywoman Denise Ducheny, and five candidates who may soon hold seats in Congress and the California Assembly listened while a steady stream of local people told their stories. Testimony came from workers, seniors, welfare mothers, men and women seeking work and students soon to join … “

The Hearing, involved groups such as the Gray Panthers, the ultra radical National Lawyers GuildWelfare Warriors and labor unions, but was initiated as a project of San Diego Democratic Socialists of America.

However the main work in organizing and publicizing the hearing was carried out by DSA members…San Diego DSA realized that an effort of this magnitude needed a full time paid organizer. We were fortunate to be able to hire Stephanie Jennings, a veteran supporter and organizer of progressive action…. Stephanie kept in close touch with Boston DSA, with Alan Charney and Michele Rossi and DSA national office, with Chris Riddiough in our Washington DC office and with Tim ParksEric Vega and Duane Campbell in other California chapters.

Bob Filner even donated his campaign office to DSA phone bankers, soliciting support for the event;

Conressman Bob Filner donated the use of his campaign office for a week of nightly phone banking by DSA volunteers…[18]

Congressman Filner signed the Pledge for Economic Justice.[19]Supporting DSA friend’s Bill

According to Chicago Democratic Socialists of America‘s New Ground No. 135, March/April 2011];[20]

The need for Federal action should be obvious. To that end, DSA supports H.R. 870, The Humphrey-Hawkins 21st Century Full Employment and Training Act, introduced into the House of Representatives by John Conyers, U.S. Representative from Detroit, and friend of DSA. This bill introduces several strategies to generate jobs, including the establishment of a National Full Employment Trust Fund to create employment opportunities for the unemployed, financed (budget-neutral) by a tax on securities transactions. Introduced by Representative John Conyers, Jr. (MI-14) on March 2nd, the bill recently gained its 6th cosponsor, Bob Filner (CA-51). In Illinois, Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-2) is a co-sponsor.
Credit Key Wiki

A Graphic Question: Where Are the Jobs?

Washington, Feb 16 – Tomorrow, February 17, 2012, will be exactly 3 years since President Obama signed his infamous stimulus package into law. It was a plan designed to create jobs by growing the size of government, and its record has not been good.

where are the jobs chart

(Click Image for High Resolution Version)
(Click Here for Image Optimized for Printing in Landscape Mode)

Democrats said their costly plan ($1.2 trillion, including interest) would “save or create” up to 4 million jobs and bring the unemployment rate down to about 6% today. The unemployment rate has not fallen below 8% at any point in the last 36 months. Furthermore, the official unemployment rate does not actually count unemployed people who have given up looking for work.

The above chart shows the “labor force participation rate.” This statistic represents the share of working-age Americans who are either employed or unemployed but looking for work. It is not a pretty picture. Only 63.7% of working-age Americans are currently in the workforce – the lowest in almost 29 years!

To put it another way, 36.3% of working-age Americans do not have a job and are not even looking.

After 3 years of failure, it’s time to try something that will work. Let’s ramp up energy production. Let’s cut away government red tape that slows down job creation. And let’s design a new tax code that is simpler, flatter, and fairer. Let’s pass the Jobs Through Growth Act, and create jobs by growing the economy – not the government. 

Congressman Jim Jordan is Chairman of the Republican Study Committee (RSC).

Print version of this document

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

Think the contraception decision was bad? Wait until bureaucrats start telling your insurer which cancer screenings to cover.


Offended by President Obama’s decision to force health insurers to pay for contraception and surgical sterilization? It gets worse: In the future, thanks to ObamaCare, the government will issue such health edicts on a routine basis—and largely insulated from public view. This goes beyond contraception to cancer screenings, the use of common drugs like aspirin, and much more.

Under ObamaCare, a single committee—the United States Preventative Services Task Force—is empowered to evaluate preventive health services and decide which will be covered by health-insurance plans.

The task force already rates services with letter grades of “A” through “D” (or “I,” if it has “insufficient evidence” to make a rating). But under ObamaCare, services rated “A” or “B”—such as colon cancer screening for adults aged 50-75—must be covered by health plans in full, without any co-pays. Many services that get “Cs” and “Ds”—such as screening for ovarian or testicular cancer—could get nixed from coverage entirely.

That’s because mandating coverage for all the “A” and “B” services will be very costly. In 2000, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the marginal cost of similar state insurance mandates was 5%-10% of total claims. Other estimates put the cost of mandates as high as 20% of premiums.

Read more here


What does a Trillion dollars look like???

Monday, January 23, 2012

What does a Trillion dollars look like

How much is our National Debt in Trillions?

Obama’s Calculated Deception


By on 2.1.12 @ 6:08AM

He thinks you’re really stupid. But Paul Ryan has his number.


Calculated deception as a central public manipulation strategy practiced by President Obama involves the President taking advantage of what he thinks the average person doesn’t know and won’t be told by a compliant media. Such calculated deception was central to last week’s State of the Union Address. That address is useful only as an outline of the President’s reelection strategy.

A powerful practical answer will come at the end of March in the form of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s 2013 budget proposal, which will be passed by the Republican-controlled House. That budget, which all the Republicans will run on, and the President’s State of the Union Address will frame the 2012 election debate.

He Thinks You’re Stupid

The Obama SOTU exhibited again Obama’s core “progressive” conviction that the average American is hopelessly stupid. Obama bemoans America as “a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by.” You may identify with that statement, as it correctly applies to Obama’s America today. But not to Reagan’s America, or my America.

As Henry R. Nau explained in the January 26 Wall Street Journal, “the U.S. grew by more than 3% per year [in real terms] from 1980 to 2007, and created more than 50 million new jobs, massively expanding a middle class of working women, African-Americans and legal as well as illegal immigrants. Per capita income increased by 65%, and household income went up substantially in all income categories.”

But Obama continued last week, “Long before the recession, jobs and manufacturing began leaving our shores.” Mr. Obama, let me introduce you to Mr. Nau, who, unlike you, is a real professor. The 25-year Reagan boom from 1982 to 2007 added 50 million jobs. The recession began in December, 2007, and it is your policies that have prevented America from recovering from it.

read more here:

Romney’s Cheap and Empty Win

Romney’s Cheap and Empty Win

The GOP is signing its own political death warrant by backing him.

 Mitt Romney’s plastic and philosophically vapid campaign secured an easy victory in Florida on Tuesday night. Sunshine state GOP voters swallowed his “electability” argument whole, according to the exit polls.

 It appears that country club Republicans have succeeded again in duping the GOP electorate into crowning a “centrist” Republican. Never mind that “centrist” Republicans rarely win the center. They usually lose the center while sapping the spirit of the party’s conservative base.

Out of Bob Dole’s and John McCain’s tattered Big Tent steps another “reformed” RINO, Mitt Romney, who will receive, should he win the nomination, a similar thumping from the Democrats.

 If “electability” is the goal, why don’t the politically correct plutocrats of the GOP just call for a one-party state? That way they could win every time.

 The “electability” argument is bankrupt on both philosophical and practical grounds. It destroys the party’s soul and guarantees defeat.

 But let’s say that he is “electable,” for the sake of argument. Who cares? The purpose of politics in a republic is not simply to win but to win on sound principles. A party that pursues victory by scrapping or sidelining its platform will have no truth left with which to govern once it does.

read more here:

Most Effective Tool Used to Sell Socialism to Americans?


Written on February 1, 2012 by David L. Goetsch

One of the most effective, albeit hypocritical, tools used by the left to “sell” socialism to the American public is false compassionAided and abetted by the media, the left claims to be more compassionate toward the so-called victims in society—a message that plays well to Americans encouraged by trial lawyers and government bureaucrats to view themselves as victims.  However, the truth is that conservatives are significantly more compassionate in giving to the needy than are liberals.  For example, conservatives give a much higher percentage of their personal income to charity than do liberals.  For a complete accounting of this fact—a fact that is little known because liberal journalists keep it under wraps—see Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism (New York: Basic Books, 2006) by Arthur C. Brooks.  What Brooks demonstrates in his book is that liberals are generous with the money of other people, but stingy with their own, and that the attitudes of liberals toward the needy are condescending, paternal, and opportunistic (i.e. if liberals can create a broad base of people who are dependent on the government they can ensure a broad base of support in elections).

In fact, with the assistance of the media and trial lawyers liberals have turned victimhood into one of America’s most prospering industries.  Unfortunately, the so-called compassion of the left is the type that gives in to the alcoholic who begs for a drink or the addict who pleads for a fix.  Giving might stop the tears for the moment, but it will just make the addiction worse in the long run.  The unavoidable result of this advocacy of victimhood is the encouragement of dependence and entitlement.  The more that people view themselves as entitled victims, the more dependent they become.  The more dependent citizens become, the faster America slides downhill toward socialism.

The rest of the story at Patriot update:

Getting Nowhere, Very Fast — on High-speed Rail

Getting Nowhere, Very Fast — on High-speed Rail

 Written by Thomas Sowell
 Tuesday, 31 January 2012 09:49

California has a huge state debt and Washington has a huge national debt. But that does not discourage either Governor Jerry Brown or President Barack Obama from wanting to launch a very costly high-speed rail system.

Most of us might be a little skittish about spending money if we were teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. But the beauty of politics is that it is all other people’s money, including among those other people generations yet unborn.

The high-speed rail system proposed for California has been envisioned as a model for similar systems elsewhere in the United States. A recent story in the San Francisco Chronicle used the high-speed rail system in Spain as an analogy for California.

Spain is about the same size as California, and has a similar population density — and population density is the key to the economic viability of mass transportation, from subways to high-speed rail.

It so happens that I have ridden on Spain’s high-speed rail system. It was very nice, especially since I did not have to pay the full costs, which were subsidized by the Spanish taxpayers.

While the Spanish government has been subsidizing the passengers on its high-speed rail system, the European Union has been subsidizing the Spanish government. Someone once said that government is the illusion that we can all live off somebody else. Spain’s high-speed rail system is not even covering its operating costs, never mind the enormous costs of setting up the system in the first place. One reason is that half the seats are empty in the high-speed trains in Spain.

That is what happens when you don’t have the population density required for passengers to cover the operating costs. You would need the hordes of Genghis Khan riding the high-speed rail system to cover the additional costs of the rails and the trains.

An economics professor at the University of Barcelona says that Spain “has not recovered one single euro from the infrastructure investment.”  Read More:


Jerry Brown: C’mon, California’s High Speed Rail Will Be Way Cheaper Than $100 Billion

By Doug Powers  •  January 30, 2012 10:35 PM

**Written by Doug Powers

Late last year it was reported that California’s high speed rail project wouldn’t be completed for 22 years and would end up costing about $100 billion, which is three times the initial estimate. The project received over $2 billion from the stimulus.

Gov. Jerry Brown now says the cost won’t be nearly that much, because somehow carbon fees levied on businesses (some of which would no doubt flee the state) will fund a good portion of the construction:

“It’s not going to be $100 billion,” the Democratic governor said on ABC 7′s Eyewitness Newsmakers program. “That’s way off.”

Brown’s remarks come as his administration prepares revisions to the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s latest business plan. Brown is trying to push the project through an increasingly skeptical Legislature following a series of critical reports.

“Phase 1, I’m trying to redesign it in a way that in and of itself will be justified by the state investment,” Brown said. “We do have other sources of money: For example, cap-and-trade, which is this measure where you make people who produce greenhouse gasses pay certain fees – that will be a source of funding going forward for the high speed rail.”

Brown said, “It’s going to be a lot cheaper than people are saying.”

Wait a minute. So if industry stops spewing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere right now (thereby of course saving the planet from global warming) there won’t be enough cap/trade money for the government to build the latest bankruptcy-inducing glimmer in Joe Biden’s eye? I’ve yet to hear a more convincing argument for going green.

Not unlike the government taxing tobacco and using some of the money to pay for SCHIP, the “green” movement has developed a Catch-22 dependence the very things they seek to eliminate. So keep those smokestacks spewing filth and pay those carbon fees, California industry, because Moonbeam has a “green” rail system to pay for so the planet can be saved from global warming!

At least it helps explain recent decisions like this.

I’m amazed by a bureaucratic mindset that believes forcing a portion of the price tag of a bloated project onto select areas of the private sector will lower the cost to the government, and therefore the taxpayers.

Take it away, Governor:

**Written by Doug Powers

Prospect of gay SD mayor greeted with shrug

LGBT activist says it’s a sign of “great progression” of voters


Carl demaio

The chatter thus far in the mayor’s race — focused on pensions, civic projects and budget woes — is drowning out the fact that the winner could make San Diego one of a few major U.S. cities with an openly gay mayor.

Two high-profile candidates — City Councilman Carl DeMaio and District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis — are gay Republicans who, if elected, would represent the culmination of an LGBT movement that emerged in the 1970s from the then-declining neighborhood of Hillcrest.

The possibility that the region’s most visible political figure could be a homosexual has been met with a collective shrug from San Diegans during the campaign, illustrating how much attitudes have changed as more and more gay politicians rose to prominence over the past two decades.

“It’s a great progression by voters in San Diego,” said Delores Jacobs, chief executive of The San Diego Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Center. “It’s a great story to talk about the ways that the politics of the past are no longer acceptable. It doesn’t mean they don’t occasionally happen in different corners with using sexual orientation in one way or another subtly, but it’s not the body politic’s fight. The fight is over other values and other issues for the city.”


Read the rest at the UT:

Pension initiative headed for June ballot (The UT)

An initiative that would eliminate guaranteed pensions for most new city hires and replace them with a 401(k)-style plan is officially headed for the June 5 ballot.

The City Council voted 7-1 Monday to place the “Comprehensive Pension Reform” initiative on the ballot in response to a petition filed on its behalf that was signed by nearly 116,000 of the city’s registered voters. Councilwoman Marti Emerald, who is opposed to the measure, said she voted against the move because it would cost less money if it was on the November ballot.

The initiative was crafted by Mayor Jerry Sanders and City Council members Carl DeMaio and Kevin Faulconer who led a nearly six-month-long effort to gather enough signatures to trigger a public vote. It eliminates pensions for all new city hires except police officers and proposes a five-year salary freeze for current workers, among other things.

The measure faces two challenges which could derail its path to the June election. Labor unions have filed a complaint with the state Public Employment Relations Board accusing Sanders of unfair labor practices and a City Hall gadfly sued the city because he believes it isn’t an amendment to the city charter as supporters say. Decisions are expected soon in both cases.

Read more here: