The Law of the Land in La La Land

By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio

This is the time of the year when states…all of them…introduce new legislative proposals, hoping, often times beyond hope, that such proposals will, indeed, become the laws of their respective states.

Some of the new proposals make sense, but, a vast majority are just plain stupid.

When it comes to stupid…

You can’t fix it, but you can sure find it in California.

Yes…that bastion of left coast liberalism, California, is perhaps the nation’s leader in butt-stupid laws every year, and this year is certainly no exception. Before we get into what may well be this year’s bone-crushingly stupid law proposals from the land of fruits, nuts and flakes…perhaps we should first have a look at what they’re trying to top.

Back in 2017…

Liberals in California took on one of the most flagrant abuses of…something…known to man, and a situation that absolutely screamed out for government intervention.

Bovine flatulence.

It seems that dairy farmers in California were letting their happy cows get away with…farting…and it had to stop.

Lacking the incentive, dairy farmers did nothing on their own to plug the problem…so…the government stepped in and laid down the law.

Never mind that 53 California dairy farmers went hooves up, going bankrupt, shutting down or MOOving to more fart-friendly states…California’s anti-fart laws are still on the books.

California’s socialist elite collective made it law that, should you be a dairy farmer, henceforth you must either…CAPTURE YOUR COW’S FARTS…or pay a hefty fine. CARB (CA Air Resources Board) even offered this fine solution for compliance with the law…

Just stick a tube up the butts of your cows, and into their digestive systems, with which the malodorous emanations would be diverted from the air…and into a backpack.

Naturally, the solution fails to make clear whether it is the cow in question, or the dairy farmer in question that is supposed to be wearing the fart collection backpack, but one assumes it is the cow, and for that matter, the solution also fails to make clear exactly what is to be done with a backpack full of farts once said backpack as reached full capacity…that, one supposes, was beside the point.

The point was…cull the farts, collect them, or pay the piper.

I know it’s going to take quite a bit to blow away the California cow fart law…but California is always up for the challenge, and this year, they have introduced a couple of doozies for your consideration.


Ian Calderon is California’s majority leader in their lower House, and this year he has introduced a bill, hoping it becomes law, that makes it a crime for any waiter, in any restaurant, to offer…unsolicited…a straw through which that restaurant’s patron could sip a drink.

Under the proposal, any waiter who serves a drink with an unrequested straw in it would face up to 6 months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.

That’s not an “either or” thing…that’s BOTH…a $1000 fine AND 6 months behind bars.

According to Calderon…”We need to create awareness around the issue of one-time use plastic straws and its detrimental effects on our landfills, waterways, and oceans.”

One might think that Calderon might be alone on his island of straws, but this is California we’re talking about…and he’s not. It seems that there are several cities in the state of fart-free cows that have already enacted “straws by request” laws, and not to be left out of this leftist plot to fine and jail waiters and waitresses, the L.A. Times has penned an Op-Ed in its favor…stating that aside from landfill issues…and I’m NOT making this up…”repetitive sucking may cause or exacerbate wrinkles on the lips or around the mouth.”

Isn’t that exactly why God invented Botox?

This new straw law begs the question…how many straws are ending up in landfills, water ways and in the ocean anyway? Naturally, Calderon has an answer for that pressing question…about 500 million plastic straws every day. And from where, exactly, does that number come from? Ahhh…it comes from the National Park Service…which got the number from…Eco-Cycle, a recycling company which states that IT got the number from…one Milo Cress…who got it from…phone surveys he conducted of straw manufacturers in 2011, when he was just 9 years old.

So…how accurate is the 500 million plastic straws a day figure?

Well…in 2011…there were about 312 million people living in the United States…that’s 312 million men, women and children…so…for that 500 million plastic straws per day figure was correct…every man, woman and child in America would have had have used 1.6 plastic straws per day with which to suck their drinks, causing wrinkles on the lips and around the mouth.

So, the numbers are likely using common core math, as liberals are want to do, but rather than just outlawing plastic straws altogether in California…one has to suspect that, should this become law, thousands of undercover California Bureau of Investigation agents will be employed to order drinks all over California, every day, for the expressed purpose of sending hapless waiters and waitresses to prison, to sit there on the “Group W Bench” with all the mother rapers. father stabbers, and father rapers!

Look, nobody likes seeing a soda straw up the nose of a sea turtle…so…why not just make it illegal for waiters and waitresses to serve a drink with a straw in it to a sea turtle, and be done with it?

Now as dumb as that law seems…there is perhaps one even more butt stupid being proposed in California this year…

A proposal from assemblyman Rob Bonta, a liberal from Oakland, would allow people who fear they are at risk of suicide to…anonymously and confidentially…submit their names to the state office that conducts background checks for firearm purchases…in order to prevent themselves from purchasing a gun.

Okay…let’s just take this on a step at a time…first of all…how many people, even in California, would submit their names to a state agency because they fear that they, themselves, might commit suicide? I’m guessing very few, but the reasoning behind this portion of the proposal is…obtuse…at best. It seems that there is some study out there that cites a figure of 57 percent, for Californians who commit suicide within one week of buying a gun…so…if you’re a Californian…who is planning to shoot yourself…you would have the option of putting your name on a list of people to whom the state of California would not allow to buy a gun.

Now, it seems to me, that if you are already in that mind frame…planning to shoot yourself…you’d be unlikely to do anything to prevent yourself from buying a gun. Pretty much, I’d think you’d bypass the option…buy the gun…and then you’d take one last suck through a plastic straw and squeeze the trigger.

But…that’s not where this proposed law ends…far from it in fact…

If the feeling passes…once you decide that living in a plastic straw free society…or after doing your time in the big house for giving a plastic straw to a customer, learning your lesson and once again feeling like life is worth living…through a process involving a court hearing, (that would be a hearing in a liberal California court, in front of a liberal California judge) a person may have their name removed from the list…if they can PROVE they no longer intend to shoot themselves with a gun.

That’s correct…in order to have your 2nd Amendment rights restored…you would have to PROVE that you no longer INTEND…to kill yourself with a gun.

YOURSELF…not somebody else…you would have to PROVE you no longer INTEND to kill…YOURSELF.

How exactly does one prove that they do not intend to do something?

You can’t…which means that this proposed law is nothing more than a way for California liberals to get you to give up your 2nd Amendment rights…forever…not to mention the fact that it will, no doubt, lead to the unintended consequence of more Californians buying toasters due to the lack of a law which would force one to prove, in a California court, that one has no intention of using their newly purchased kitchen alliance…in the bathtub…with a plastic straw in their mouth.

I swear to God, the sign on the state border should say…

“Welcome to California…We’re dumber than a backpack full of cow farts.”

Copyright © 2018 Craig Andresen /

Please read and share Diane Sori’s latest Op-Ed regarding The Case of the Dueling Memos by CLICKING HERE!!


Today, Tuesday, February 13th, from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss the case of the dueling memos; possible stupid new California laws; and important news of the day.

Hope you can tune in at:

Views: 16


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Karma Miller on February 14, 2018 at 9:07am




Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.


Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service