Charlie Brown has been down on his luck before. But he’s never been targeted by an entire state. What insane dictator could possibly hate the lovable Peanuts character? Kim Jong-Un? No, Governor Brown.
Good grief!
Governor Jerry Brown, who despite having slightly more hair than Charlie, is much less popular than Schultz’s beloved creation. And Brown (the one who makes small children cry) is at the top of an insane leftist political system so out of touch with reality that it makes Snoopy’s fantasies seem down to earth.
The blockheaded Brown signed into law Assembly Bill 1887. It wasn’t the craziest thing to come out of the California legislature. That would be the time that the California Senate passed a universal health care bill costing $400 billion a year with no way to pay for it. That’s a tricky proposition since California’s budget is over $100 billion. Foiled again! By 2 + 2 = 4 and the notorious right-wing bias of mathematics.
Still Assembly Bill 1887, by Assemblyman Evan Low, who represents Silicon Valley causing it to be dubbed the “Silicon Curtain”, led directly to banning travel to Kentucky because of Charlie Brown.
The “Silicon Curtain” travel ban was also backed by Nancy Pelosi and the ACLU.
Governor Brown can travel to the People’s Republic of China with its forced abortions and death camps. But a California official can’t travel to Kentucky because he might encounter a Charlie Brown Christmas.
Why do Pelosi, Low, Brown and the ACLU hate Charlie Brown? Maybe their miserable childhoods made them into the miserable adults they are today. And the transformation of California from a democracy into a banana republic run by loony lefties leads to lots of bills with unintended consequences.
Assembly Bill 1887 was passed to ban travel to “anti-gay” states. How did Charlie Brown turn anti-gay?
The story begins with “A Charlie Brown Christmas” when the W.R. Castle Elementary School in Johnson County, Kentucky deleted Linus reading passages from the New Testament. The ACLU took an anti-Charlie position. The Charlie Brown Bill was introduced to protect the religious freedom of students in Kentucky schools. The ACLU again objected. The bill passed over furious Democrat opposition.
Lefty publications dubbed it an anti-gay bill even though there was no mention of homosexuality anywhere in it. Then California included Kentucky on its list of banned states along with Texas, Alabama, South Dakota, North Carolina, Kansas, Mississippi and Tennessee. That’s eight states compromising some 70 million people whom California officials aren’t allowed to visit.
A quarter of the United States of America now officially has California cooties.
The state-funded travel ban was a lunatic proposition when it merely targeted states over gay rights. But it’s escalated to targeting states with various religious freedom measures.
13 more states have religious freedom laws on the books of the kind that California would object to. At that rate, the People’s Republic of California will be boycotting 21 states and 150 million people.
That’s half the country.
The only two border states that California can still feel safely comfortable with are Oregon and Mexico. Not New Mexico, Mexico.
Good grief, indeed.
The travel bans don’t just affect politicians like Brown and Becerra, but the University of California. It means football, basketball and other sports teams will have trouble competing outside California. Becerra is “mulling” over whether the ban applies to coaches traveling to games in banned states.
The last time this happened, Soviet athletes were being preventing from competing overseas because they might defect to the free world. Is Governor Brown afraid that California football players, like California businesses, will defect to Texas if they’re allowed to leave the Silicon Curtain?
California is becoming a banana republic with lavish mansions and sports cars, but no personal freedom. Its masters live in terror that its public officials might visit a free state where they can experience an unexpurgated Charlie Brown Christmas or take their groceries home in a plastic bag.
Becerra and Brown are building Berlin Walls against a quarter of the country. And if they insist on outlawing any state with religious freedom, it will quickly become half the country. In China, Governor Brown insisted that California was a nation state that could make its own foreign policy. And declare war on the other states that reject his radical secessionist agenda.
The great irony of this latest assault on freedom is that Evan Low was formerly the Mayor of Campbell: the site of the Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins free speech case. But freedom has been foiled.
“The ACLU is proud to stand with our partners and Attorney General Becerra, and do our part to make freedom and justice a reality,” declared the Organizing Director of the ACLU of Northern California.
And how better to make freedom a reality than with travel bans to prevent Californians from experiencing what real freedom is?
These travel bans are cutting off California from America in absurd and illegal ways.
Becerra’s assault on Kentucky is actually in violation of the text of AB 1887 which requires sanctions on states that affirmatively take action to authorize discrimination against homosexuals. The Charlie Brown Law does no such thing. The Kentucky ban is a violation of the law that it’s based on.
But banana republics don’t have laws. They have whims.
"Our country has made great strides in dismantling prejudicial laws that have deprived too many of our fellow Americans of their precious rights. Sadly, that is not the case in all parts of our nation," Becerra has said.
It’s certainly not the case in California where recall elections are being suppressed, freedom of speech is met with violence and prejudicial laws impose a Silicon Curtain to cut off California from the free world.
Not to mention, a Charlie Brown Christmas.
In the spring of ’46, Winston Churchill visited Fulton, Missouri where he warned that, “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.”
From Sacramento to San Francisco, from Los Angeles to San Diego, a silicon curtain has descended across California. There’s no room for religious or political freedom under that curtain.
And Missouri has also come under fire from the ACLU over its religious freedom. It may not be long before the location of Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech becomes the latest target of the Silicon Curtain.
Today Texas and Kentucky, tomorrow Missouri. And, before long, the rest of America.
And then the People’s Republic of California can get to work building its light rail to Cuba or North Korea. Both of which are the only other places on earth to have banned the Peanuts gang.
We always knew that the California left hated America. But who would have believed that even its hateful fanatics, steam coming out of their ears and foam from their mouths, could hate Charlie?
You’re a bad man, Governor Brown.
Good grief!
 |
| Art by Bosch Fawstin |
The blockheaded Brown signed into law Assembly Bill 1887. It wasn’t the craziest thing to come out of the California legislature. That would be the time that the California Senate passed a universal health care bill costing $400 billion a year with no way to pay for it. That’s a tricky proposition since California’s budget is over $100 billion. Foiled again! By 2 + 2 = 4 and the notorious right-wing bias of mathematics.
Still Assembly Bill 1887, by Assemblyman Evan Low, who represents Silicon Valley causing it to be dubbed the “Silicon Curtain”, led directly to banning travel to Kentucky because of Charlie Brown.
The “Silicon Curtain” travel ban was also backed by Nancy Pelosi and the ACLU.
Governor Brown can travel to the People’s Republic of China with its forced abortions and death camps. But a California official can’t travel to Kentucky because he might encounter a Charlie Brown Christmas.
Why do Pelosi, Low, Brown and the ACLU hate Charlie Brown? Maybe their miserable childhoods made them into the miserable adults they are today. And the transformation of California from a democracy into a banana republic run by loony lefties leads to lots of bills with unintended consequences.
Assembly Bill 1887 was passed to ban travel to “anti-gay” states. How did Charlie Brown turn anti-gay?
The story begins with “A Charlie Brown Christmas” when the W.R. Castle Elementary School in Johnson County, Kentucky deleted Linus reading passages from the New Testament. The ACLU took an anti-Charlie position. The Charlie Brown Bill was introduced to protect the religious freedom of students in Kentucky schools. The ACLU again objected. The bill passed over furious Democrat opposition.
Lefty publications dubbed it an anti-gay bill even though there was no mention of homosexuality anywhere in it. Then California included Kentucky on its list of banned states along with Texas, Alabama, South Dakota, North Carolina, Kansas, Mississippi and Tennessee. That’s eight states compromising some 70 million people whom California officials aren’t allowed to visit.
A quarter of the United States of America now officially has California cooties.
The state-funded travel ban was a lunatic proposition when it merely targeted states over gay rights. But it’s escalated to targeting states with various religious freedom measures.
13 more states have religious freedom laws on the books of the kind that California would object to. At that rate, the People’s Republic of California will be boycotting 21 states and 150 million people.
That’s half the country.
The only two border states that California can still feel safely comfortable with are Oregon and Mexico. Not New Mexico, Mexico.
Good grief, indeed.
The travel bans don’t just affect politicians like Brown and Becerra, but the University of California. It means football, basketball and other sports teams will have trouble competing outside California. Becerra is “mulling” over whether the ban applies to coaches traveling to games in banned states.
The last time this happened, Soviet athletes were being preventing from competing overseas because they might defect to the free world. Is Governor Brown afraid that California football players, like California businesses, will defect to Texas if they’re allowed to leave the Silicon Curtain?
California is becoming a banana republic with lavish mansions and sports cars, but no personal freedom. Its masters live in terror that its public officials might visit a free state where they can experience an unexpurgated Charlie Brown Christmas or take their groceries home in a plastic bag.
Becerra and Brown are building Berlin Walls against a quarter of the country. And if they insist on outlawing any state with religious freedom, it will quickly become half the country. In China, Governor Brown insisted that California was a nation state that could make its own foreign policy. And declare war on the other states that reject his radical secessionist agenda.
The great irony of this latest assault on freedom is that Evan Low was formerly the Mayor of Campbell: the site of the Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins free speech case. But freedom has been foiled.
“The ACLU is proud to stand with our partners and Attorney General Becerra, and do our part to make freedom and justice a reality,” declared the Organizing Director of the ACLU of Northern California.
And how better to make freedom a reality than with travel bans to prevent Californians from experiencing what real freedom is?
These travel bans are cutting off California from America in absurd and illegal ways.
Becerra’s assault on Kentucky is actually in violation of the text of AB 1887 which requires sanctions on states that affirmatively take action to authorize discrimination against homosexuals. The Charlie Brown Law does no such thing. The Kentucky ban is a violation of the law that it’s based on.
But banana republics don’t have laws. They have whims.
"Our country has made great strides in dismantling prejudicial laws that have deprived too many of our fellow Americans of their precious rights. Sadly, that is not the case in all parts of our nation," Becerra has said.
It’s certainly not the case in California where recall elections are being suppressed, freedom of speech is met with violence and prejudicial laws impose a Silicon Curtain to cut off California from the free world.
Not to mention, a Charlie Brown Christmas.
In the spring of ’46, Winston Churchill visited Fulton, Missouri where he warned that, “From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic an iron curtain has descended across the Continent.”
From Sacramento to San Francisco, from Los Angeles to San Diego, a silicon curtain has descended across California. There’s no room for religious or political freedom under that curtain.
And Missouri has also come under fire from the ACLU over its religious freedom. It may not be long before the location of Churchill’s Iron Curtain speech becomes the latest target of the Silicon Curtain.
Today Texas and Kentucky, tomorrow Missouri. And, before long, the rest of America.
And then the People’s Republic of California can get to work building its light rail to Cuba or North Korea. Both of which are the only other places on earth to have banned the Peanuts gang.
We always knew that the California left hated America. But who would have believed that even its hateful fanatics, steam coming out of their ears and foam from their mouths, could hate Charlie?
You’re a bad man, Governor Brown.
Comments
True, Peanuts has become a target of the left in California. I noticed that some years ago. The left doesn't seem to like the values displayed in Peanuts.
ReplyDeleteThis is how the Left celebrates diversity -- by making sure there is none.
ReplyDeleteDaniel, you've given me, a Californian, cause for introspection. The "virtue-based" state ban is symptomatic of far deeper ills. You don't have to be a State to be banned here. Think you are OK with your relatives, neighbors, co-workers? Of course, you don't sport a red MAGA ballcap. But if you "fail" to own Apple electronics, Volvo/Prius with Hillary, GreenPeace, CoExist stickers, eyebrows will raise.
ReplyDeleteYour transition to leper will be managed smoothly and discreetly. You won't know what happened and none of your former "friends" will owe you the least explanation. After all, how could you have presumed to share their virtuous company? A difference of opinion is evil. No discussion, no excuse.
These relationships are mostly toast; fortunately good people can be found anywhere. Good hunting!
Charlie
What's hard for me to understand is how a big state like California can have so many mentally handicapped people who vote in these insane radical leftists! Hoping it's not so, just maybe voter fraud? You gotta laugh or cry - a world gone mad.
ReplyDeletePolitics is down stream from culture and has been for the past 50 years. We as a NATION haven't elected many government officials that could be classified "Best and Brightest" from either party in quite a while. Once upon a time the quality of an idea could be tested by it's ability to stand scrutiny from experts and public discussion. Now legislation is drawn up in the dark (see both Democrat and Republican health care bills)and passed with the gullibility of the American public to swallow it based solely on greed, tribal loyalty and zeitgeist of the times. No thought of the consequences or how this will be paid for on the part of either the legislators nor the public. Oh the politicians will get paid but it will be from lobbyist and unions that this legislation benefits. No discussion needed to shout down any opposing bias views. But then that is how POPULISM works......instant gratification! Yet remarkably these grifters still find a need to ask Conservatives why we believe in upholding long tested truths and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI have a brilliant idea. Why don't we give California back to Mexico?
ReplyDeleteNo, really. I am serious. Instead of wishing that the Big One - with all its deadly consequences - "take care" of the People's Republic of California, let's just return the dump to Mexico. Mexicans never cease to tell us we stole it from them.
Think about it. The lachrymose stories about poor illegals being so discriminated agains would go away as illegals would cease to be illegals. Californians, who absolutely HATE America, would be delivered of the mortifying burden of calling themselves American, of the racist American flag, and the racist Constitution.
We could finally get rid of Hollywood. Mexicans would learn to drink good wine instead of that revolting pulque they imbibe (see how generous I am?). And jus think how much money the USA would save just on welfare. And that's just for starters. The possibilities are endless.
Of course, the question is, would Mexico really want The Dump back once she has to support them herself instead of America footing the bill?
Looks as if the inmates are running the asylum ...
ReplyDeleteCalifornia is rapidly becoming the American Scandinavia, though warmer. Wait for the whole pack with its half-consensual sex or if you prefer, not Eurocentric sex (formerly known as rape). Hey, check your white feminist privilege, you TERF
ReplyDeleteDaniel, you forgot to include Gov. Moonbeam's visit to Russia to set up an embassy, oh wait, a trade mission. That's it, a trade mission from the Republic of California, oh wait, he meant the state of California.
ReplyDeleteThe PDRK (People's Democratic Republic of Kalifornia) will probably not get off the ground once they figure out they will not get any more federal funds to pay for the train to nowhere, Medi-Cal, Section 8 and similar things. Then there is the VA system. Most of our military bases have been dismantled already, so the remainder could be rented to the Chinese or Russians. Oh wait, Long Beach Naval Base is already run by the Chinese.
Wow, what do you know. Maybe by taxing more, renting out the military bases, adding more toll lanes and bridges, charging taxpayers for each mile they drive each year, raising registration and gas taxes, they might fund a whole new country! Of course, the borders will be open so that anyone from anywhere can move here and get all sorts of benefits. Including voting! Yay!
I wonder, will they put up a wall to keep taxpayers and taxpaying companies in, or will they simply confiscate your assets should a person want to leave?
i'm from utah ... is there someway utah can be put on the list that californians cannot visit ?
ReplyDelete"I have a brilliant idea. Why don't we give California back to Mexico?"
ReplyDeleteclorinda,
the myth is that mexico owned california.
it did not.
spain owned california.
My guess is many inland and northern california counties would be willing to vote to leave the state and form a new state. It would pretty much be all northern counties, farm counties, and all eastern counties. I would love to see that movement begin.
ReplyDelete"The myth is that mexico owned california.
ReplyDeleteit did not.
spain owned california."
Tell that to Mexicans.
Gray man:
ReplyDelete"The myth is that mexico owned california.
it did not.
spain owned california"
Boy, you need badly a course or two in history. Maybe it won't help, but here it goes: California was just a part of the very large territory (1.4 million square kilometers) that Mexico ceded to the U.S. government in the Guadalupe-Hidalgo treaty of 1848. Mexico had been an independent nation since 1821, when Spain finally recognized the independence of its former colony in a war that has begun 11 years earlier in 1810. The "Mexican Cession" as the theft of 1/3 of the Mexican territory by the U.S. government is known, occured only 12 years after another huge part of the Mexican territory of Texas was carved out of Mexico and "joined" the U.S. in 1838 after the incompetent and coward Mexican then-president Antonio Lopea de Santa Anna was captured and held captive by Texan forces led by Sam Houston at the battle of San Jacinto.
So, in a nutshell, Mexico DID own California, as it did the present-day states of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and parts of other states such as Colorado, Utah and Nevada. Mexico, together with all those lands now part of the U.S. plus all of Central America, had been what wa known then as the "Virreinato de la Nueva España", a most important colony of the Spanish Empire for the best part of three centuries.
Post a Comment