FEATURED
California Lawmakers Passes 400% Gas Tax Increase then Give Themselves FREE Gasoline and Cars!
By Max Jackson | Jul 31, 2017
JERRY BROWN HAS SIGNED A TAX INCREASE TAKING THE PRICE-BASED EXCISE GAS TAX FROM $.10 A GALLON TO $.50 A GALLON, BUT BROWN AND HIS ULTRA LIBERAL LEGISLATURE DOES NOT PAY ONE CENT FOR THE GASOLINE THAT THEY USE! THEY ACTUALLY GET FREE GAS!
They gave it to themselves in 2008, so the crazy gas tax they just passed does not effect them!
Details on the gas tax increase (below):
Existing: The base excise tax is 18 cents a gallon. A price-based excise tax is currently set at 9.8 cents a gallon, for a total rate of 27.8 cents a gallon.
Nov. 1, 2017: The base excise tax will increase to 30 cents a gallon.
July 1, 2019: The price-based excise tax will reset to 17.3 cents a gallon, about half-a-cent more than the rate the Brown administration projects will be in effect by then anyway.
The 47.3-cent combined excise tax in effect July 1, 2019 will be adjusted for inflation beginning July 1, 2020.
CALIFORNIA IS UNIQUE IN GIVING LEGISLATORS FREE REIN ON TRANSPORTATION SPENDING, ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES. IN MOST OTHER STATES, LAWMAKERS MUST SUBMIT THE SAME KIND OF MILEAGE-EXPENSE FORMS USED BY COMPANIES TO REIMBURSE EMPLOYEES FOR THEIR BUSINESS TRAVEL.
“You have to prove what you’re using it for,” said Morgan Cullin, a Denver-based researcher for the bipartisan national organization.
On top of free gas, California lawmakers also get state-issued vehicles, another perk that most states avoid.
California is in debt $1.3 Trillion. That means every citizen in California is in debt almost $33,000. That is, unless you just move out!!! This represents a significant debt burden even by international standards.
Not included are billions of dollars in deferred maintenance and upgrades to California’s infrastructure. To the extent California’s government has not maintained investment in infrastructure maintenance, it has passed this cost on to future generations who will have to issue additional debt to pay for this expense.
SO SACRAMENTO IS WORKING HARD TO FIND EVERY WAY IT CAN TO FIND MORE MONEY TO SPEND!
Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law billions of dollars in higher fuel taxes and vehicle fees. The state will have an estimated $52billion more money to help cover the state’s transportation needs for the next decade. But we know it will not be spent well. There is always a TON of waste fraud and abuse in Sacramento spending. Like free gas and cars for the lawmakers!
The gas tax increase sets ambitious goals. By the end of 2027, it says at least 98 percent of state highway pavement should be in good or fair condition. EXCUSE ME? I have lived with California roads most of my life and that is just an outright lie!
California voters will get to weigh in on another part of the package: a constitutional amendment supporters say will keep lawmakers from diverting the money to other purposes. I GUARANTEE that will never pass!
CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS ARE FAMOUS FOR PASSING LAWS THAT THEY EXEMPT THEMSELVES FROM.
They voted 28-8 to exempt themselves from the gun-control laws that apply to the rest of the California.
You think maybe this will cause Californians to rise up? NOPE! It happened 6 years ago and since California has passed a plethora of other gun laws…that only apply to citizens.
In fact, Sacramento has put out so many new gun laws in recent years that liberal Governor ‘Moonbeam’ has vetoed half of them.
RED SKELTON SAID SO ELOQUENTLY IN HIS COMMENTARY ON THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
And to the Republic — A Republic: a sovereign state in which power is invested into the representatives chosen by the people to govern; and the government is the people; and it’s from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people.
California has it backwards, they are running with the method of “from the leaders to the people”
That is why I joined the 5 Million people who have fled California within the last decade.
You can take me out of Texas in a pine box, and even then I will be kicking and screaming!
Read more: https://ihavethetruth.com/2017/07/3...mselves-free-gasoline-and-cars/#ixzz4oVnRDI3h
California Lawmakers Passes 400% Gas Tax Increase then Give Themselves FREE Gasoline and Cars!
By Max Jackson | Jul 31, 2017
JERRY BROWN HAS SIGNED A TAX INCREASE TAKING THE PRICE-BASED EXCISE GAS TAX FROM $.10 A GALLON TO $.50 A GALLON, BUT BROWN AND HIS ULTRA LIBERAL LEGISLATURE DOES NOT PAY ONE CENT FOR THE GASOLINE THAT THEY USE! THEY ACTUALLY GET FREE GAS!
They gave it to themselves in 2008, so the crazy gas tax they just passed does not effect them!
Details on the gas tax increase (below):
Existing: The base excise tax is 18 cents a gallon. A price-based excise tax is currently set at 9.8 cents a gallon, for a total rate of 27.8 cents a gallon.
Nov. 1, 2017: The base excise tax will increase to 30 cents a gallon.
July 1, 2019: The price-based excise tax will reset to 17.3 cents a gallon, about half-a-cent more than the rate the Brown administration projects will be in effect by then anyway.
The 47.3-cent combined excise tax in effect July 1, 2019 will be adjusted for inflation beginning July 1, 2020.
CALIFORNIA IS UNIQUE IN GIVING LEGISLATORS FREE REIN ON TRANSPORTATION SPENDING, ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURES. IN MOST OTHER STATES, LAWMAKERS MUST SUBMIT THE SAME KIND OF MILEAGE-EXPENSE FORMS USED BY COMPANIES TO REIMBURSE EMPLOYEES FOR THEIR BUSINESS TRAVEL.
“You have to prove what you’re using it for,” said Morgan Cullin, a Denver-based researcher for the bipartisan national organization.
On top of free gas, California lawmakers also get state-issued vehicles, another perk that most states avoid.
California is in debt $1.3 Trillion. That means every citizen in California is in debt almost $33,000. That is, unless you just move out!!! This represents a significant debt burden even by international standards.
Not included are billions of dollars in deferred maintenance and upgrades to California’s infrastructure. To the extent California’s government has not maintained investment in infrastructure maintenance, it has passed this cost on to future generations who will have to issue additional debt to pay for this expense.
SO SACRAMENTO IS WORKING HARD TO FIND EVERY WAY IT CAN TO FIND MORE MONEY TO SPEND!
Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law billions of dollars in higher fuel taxes and vehicle fees. The state will have an estimated $52billion more money to help cover the state’s transportation needs for the next decade. But we know it will not be spent well. There is always a TON of waste fraud and abuse in Sacramento spending. Like free gas and cars for the lawmakers!
California voters will get to weigh in on another part of the package: a constitutional amendment supporters say will keep lawmakers from diverting the money to other purposes. I GUARANTEE that will never pass!
CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS ARE FAMOUS FOR PASSING LAWS THAT THEY EXEMPT THEMSELVES FROM.
They voted 28-8 to exempt themselves from the gun-control laws that apply to the rest of the California.
You think maybe this will cause Californians to rise up? NOPE! It happened 6 years ago and since California has passed a plethora of other gun laws…that only apply to citizens.
In fact, Sacramento has put out so many new gun laws in recent years that liberal Governor ‘Moonbeam’ has vetoed half of them.
RED SKELTON SAID SO ELOQUENTLY IN HIS COMMENTARY ON THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
And to the Republic — A Republic: a sovereign state in which power is invested into the representatives chosen by the people to govern; and the government is the people; and it’s from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people.
California has it backwards, they are running with the method of “from the leaders to the people”
That is why I joined the 5 Million people who have fled California within the last decade.
You can take me out of Texas in a pine box, and even then I will be kicking and screaming!
Read more: https://ihavethetruth.com/2017/07/3...mselves-free-gasoline-and-cars/#ixzz4oVnRDI3h
[ If there was ever any doubt that liberals are fascists in disguise ]
[h=1]California Bill: 1 Year in Jail for Using Wrong Transgender Pronoun[/h]
AP Photo/Elaine Thompson, File
by JOEL B. POLLAK17 Aug 20171,419
[h=2]A new bill being considered by the California State Senate would punish people who “willfully and repeatedly” refuse “to use a transgender resident’s preferred name or pronouns” in a public health, retirement or housing institution.[/h]The bill, SB 219, was proposed by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco). It includes several other provisions that require a health facility, for example, to honor the gender identity of a patient, meaning that the patient must be admitted to a room that comports with his or her chosen gender; allowed to use whatever bathroom he or she wants to use; and wear whatever clothing or cosmetics he or she decides to wear. It has gone through several amendments.
CBN News notes: “Fines for repeat offenders could be as high as $1,000 and a jail term of up to a year.”
CBN also reports the testimony of the California Family Council’s Greg Burt:
[h=1]California Bill: 1 Year in Jail for Using Wrong Transgender Pronoun[/h]
1106
6
by JOEL B. POLLAK17 Aug 20171,419
[h=2]A new bill being considered by the California State Senate would punish people who “willfully and repeatedly” refuse “to use a transgender resident’s preferred name or pronouns” in a public health, retirement or housing institution.[/h]The bill, SB 219, was proposed by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco). It includes several other provisions that require a health facility, for example, to honor the gender identity of a patient, meaning that the patient must be admitted to a room that comports with his or her chosen gender; allowed to use whatever bathroom he or she wants to use; and wear whatever clothing or cosmetics he or she decides to wear. It has gone through several amendments.
CBN News notes: “Fines for repeat offenders could be as high as $1,000 and a jail term of up to a year.”
CBN also reports the testimony of the California Family Council’s Greg Burt:
advertisement
How can you believe in free speech, but think the government can compel people to use certain pronouns when talking to others? … This is not tolerance. This is not love. This is not mutual respect. True tolerance tolerates people with different views. We need to treat each other with respect, but respect is a two-way street. It is not respectful to threaten people with punishment for having sincerely held beliefs that differ from your own.
California Democrats have also taken up the transgender cause as part of their “resistance” to President Donald Trump. In February, when the Trump administration reversed an Obama administration directive on transgender bathrooms in public schools, thus allowing states and local communities to set their own policies again, California protestedvigorously in favor of the idea that the federal government should impose a uniform standard everywhere as a matter of civil rights.
[ MAGA bitches ]
[h=1]Federal Judge Tosses Sanctuary City Case Against Trump Administration[/h] August 22, 2017 By Seth Connell
The city of Richmond, California, which sits just north of Oakland, filed suit against the Trump administration due to its order cracking down on sanctuary cities.
The order, one of the first signed by the President in January, is designed to “direct executive departments and agencies (agencies) to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States.”
Section 2 of the order sets out the policy:
The city of Richmond filed suit, claiming that the city has been called a sanctuary city, and the jurisdiction contains a large Hispanic population; they claimed that the order would cause them harm. However, as Judge William H. Orrick stated in the court’s opinion, that fact did not grant the city the legal standing to file suit because the city did not show what exactly the harm would be, the Washington Examiner is reporting.
At the request of the Trump administration, he has dismissed Richmond’s case, the main reason being a lack of controversy of part of the city.
“Despite having no real-world friction with ICE or the defendants over its policies, Richmond argues that it is likely to face enforcement under the executive order because it has been called a sanctuary city and because it has a large Latino population,” Orrick wrote. “Neither of those arguments is persuasive.
This ruling is not one that reinforces the Trump administration’s order though; this is a ruling that dealt with the issue of standing. As Orrick noted, the challenges from San Francisco and Santa Clara are still proceeding. He recommended that Richmond could file briefs in those cases, but that there was no standing for the city’s own suit.
The merits of sanctuary city policies are still being debated in the courts. Given that the aforementioned cases will be taking place in California federal courts, it is likely that the courts will side with the cities on the subject of harboring illegal aliens.
That, in spite of the fact that criminal illegal aliens for whom ICE has filed detainer requests are often released back onto the streets, only to commit horrific crimes.
Not all illegal aliens are bloodthirsty criminals, of course; but known violent criminals have been released by these localities in spite of countless cases where criminal illegals commit crimes that could have otherwise been prevented.
[h=1]Federal Judge Tosses Sanctuary City Case Against Trump Administration[/h] August 22, 2017 By Seth Connell
The city of Richmond, California, which sits just north of Oakland, filed suit against the Trump administration due to its order cracking down on sanctuary cities.
The order, one of the first signed by the President in January, is designed to “direct executive departments and agencies (agencies) to employ all lawful means to enforce the immigration laws of the United States.”
Section 2 of the order sets out the policy:
(a) Ensure the faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States, including the INA, against all removable aliens, consistent with Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution and section 3331 of title 5, United States Code;
(b) Make use of all available systems and resources to ensure the efficient and faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States;
(c) Ensure that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law;
(d) Ensure that aliens ordered removed from the United States are promptly removed; and
(e) Support victims, and the families of victims, of crimes committed by removable aliens.
Several cities in California, San Francisco and Santa Clara, are already filing suit against the order. Those cities have made their intentions loud and clear: they will be sanctuary cities for illegal aliens, and they will fight it at all costs (that will be paid by tax dollars, of course).(b) Make use of all available systems and resources to ensure the efficient and faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States;
(c) Ensure that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law;
(d) Ensure that aliens ordered removed from the United States are promptly removed; and
(e) Support victims, and the families of victims, of crimes committed by removable aliens.
The city of Richmond filed suit, claiming that the city has been called a sanctuary city, and the jurisdiction contains a large Hispanic population; they claimed that the order would cause them harm. However, as Judge William H. Orrick stated in the court’s opinion, that fact did not grant the city the legal standing to file suit because the city did not show what exactly the harm would be, the Washington Examiner is reporting.
At the request of the Trump administration, he has dismissed Richmond’s case, the main reason being a lack of controversy of part of the city.
“Despite having no real-world friction with ICE or the defendants over its policies, Richmond argues that it is likely to face enforcement under the executive order because it has been called a sanctuary city and because it has a large Latino population,” Orrick wrote. “Neither of those arguments is persuasive.
This ruling is not one that reinforces the Trump administration’s order though; this is a ruling that dealt with the issue of standing. As Orrick noted, the challenges from San Francisco and Santa Clara are still proceeding. He recommended that Richmond could file briefs in those cases, but that there was no standing for the city’s own suit.
The merits of sanctuary city policies are still being debated in the courts. Given that the aforementioned cases will be taking place in California federal courts, it is likely that the courts will side with the cities on the subject of harboring illegal aliens.
That, in spite of the fact that criminal illegal aliens for whom ICE has filed detainer requests are often released back onto the streets, only to commit horrific crimes.
Not all illegal aliens are bloodthirsty criminals, of course; but known violent criminals have been released by these localities in spite of countless cases where criminal illegals commit crimes that could have otherwise been prevented.
Poll: Majority of California Democrats don’t support free speech
JOHN SEXTON Sep 13, 2017 1:01 PM
“Freedom of speech is good, but it all depends on what you’re speaking about.”
hno:
JOHN SEXTON Sep 13, 2017 1:01 PM
“Freedom of speech is good, but it all depends on what you’re speaking about.”
hno:
California lawmaker wants to ban gas car sales after 2040
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article176030626.html
Thanks to 'progressives' California will soon be as habitable as Mars.
:neenee:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article176030626.html
Thanks to 'progressives' California will soon be as habitable as Mars.
:neenee:
[h=1]California student steals 'MAGA' hat, pleads for wearer to be punished in bizarre rant[/h]By Greg Norman, Fox News
Edith Macias, an ethnic studies student at the University of California, Riverside, took protest to a fellow student wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat.
President Trump’s popular “Make America Great Again” hats promote “laws and legislation that literally kill and murder in the masses, people of color,” a California college student is heard saying in a bizarre viral video rant where she pleads to campus staff to ban the student from wearing the red cap.
**WARNING: Videos below contain explicit language**
Edith Macias posted a Facebook video Wednesday showing her snatching the hat off of Matthew Vitale’s head during a meeting of student organizations at University of California, Riverside. The ensuing footage Vitale films of Macias arguing with him and staff in the school’s student life office shows workers with stunned looks on their faces as the scene unfolds in front of them. The video has more than 2 million views.
“Man, f--- your laws,” Macias snaps back.
“I have a freedom of speech to wear this hat,” Vitale later says.
“Your f---ing freedom of speech is genocide, homeboy! Is that what you are trying to represent?” she replies.
TRUMP SPEAKS WITH COWBOYS OWNER AFTER PROTEST: 'PLAYERS WILL STAND FOR COUNTRY'
Vitale said in a video posted after the incident that he was attending an annual school-organized meeting where leaders of student groups listen to presentations about combating hazing and sexual harassment. A self-described Trump supporter, Vitale adds that he usually wears the “Make America America Great Again” on campus and sometimes gets looks from other students, but was startled when Macias, whom he says he never met, yanked off his hat and sprinted out of the classroom.
The calm and collected staff at the school’s student life offices managed to take the hat away from Macias and return it to Vitale, but not before Macias is caught on video protesting their actions.
Macias says at one point in the exchange that she would like to burn the hat. In another heated moment, Vitale tells Macias to leave the country if she doesn’t like it.
“What do you mean? I was born here….where the f—- am I gonna go?” Macias says.
“Go to Mexico, go wherever the hell you want,” Vitale responds.
“You don’t know s—- about me! What do you mean Mexico?” Macias fires back.
MELANIA TRUMP FIRES BACK AT LIBRARIAN WHO REJECTED GIFT OF DR. SEUSS BOOKS AS 'RACIST'
A campus staff member then intervenes, trying to diffuse the situation and offering Macias a space where she can file her grievances to campus officials: “Let’s calm down a little bit, we can talk as a trio here."
The viral video ends after one of the employees gives the hat back to Vitale.
“Oh my God, you’re going to keep letting him wear it? That just shows how the f--- UCR is and the education system. It’s geared to benefit white people, white people, not me,” Macias says as she protests the move and accuses the staff of not being neutral.
“In the premises of the university I deal with microaggressions on the daily, as do other people of color and you have people out there wearing hats like those, y’all don’t say s—- about it,” she adds. “Make America Great Again? Really? Lynches, mass genocides, mass deportations. Constant killings, and y’all are just gonna shut the f—- up?”
“I don’t want to talk to none of y’all” Macias says as she's met at the door by men who appear to be campus police officers.
Edith Macias, an ethnic studies student at the University of California, Riverside, took protest to a fellow student wearing a "Make America Great Again" hat.
President Trump’s popular “Make America Great Again” hats promote “laws and legislation that literally kill and murder in the masses, people of color,” a California college student is heard saying in a bizarre viral video rant where she pleads to campus staff to ban the student from wearing the red cap.
**WARNING: Videos below contain explicit language**
Edith Macias posted a Facebook video Wednesday showing her snatching the hat off of Matthew Vitale’s head during a meeting of student organizations at University of California, Riverside. The ensuing footage Vitale films of Macias arguing with him and staff in the school’s student life office shows workers with stunned looks on their faces as the scene unfolds in front of them. The video has more than 2 million views.
“This is mine. You do not get to take other people’s property that is legally theirs in this county,” Vitale, a member of the school’s College Republicans club, sternly tells Macias.“Man, f--- your laws,” Macias snaps back.
“I have a freedom of speech to wear this hat,” Vitale later says.
“Your f---ing freedom of speech is genocide, homeboy! Is that what you are trying to represent?” she replies.
TRUMP SPEAKS WITH COWBOYS OWNER AFTER PROTEST: 'PLAYERS WILL STAND FOR COUNTRY'
Vitale said in a video posted after the incident that he was attending an annual school-organized meeting where leaders of student groups listen to presentations about combating hazing and sexual harassment. A self-described Trump supporter, Vitale adds that he usually wears the “Make America America Great Again” on campus and sometimes gets looks from other students, but was startled when Macias, whom he says he never met, yanked off his hat and sprinted out of the classroom.
The calm and collected staff at the school’s student life offices managed to take the hat away from Macias and return it to Vitale, but not before Macias is caught on video protesting their actions.
“F--- your f—-ing freedom of speech, boy,” Macias says to Vitale. “Your freedom of speech is literally killing a lot of people out there. That’s what it is. Because you’re out there wearing hats like these that promote laws and legislations that literally kill and murder in the masses, people of color.”Macias says at one point in the exchange that she would like to burn the hat. In another heated moment, Vitale tells Macias to leave the country if she doesn’t like it.
“What do you mean? I was born here….where the f—- am I gonna go?” Macias says.
“Go to Mexico, go wherever the hell you want,” Vitale responds.
“You don’t know s—- about me! What do you mean Mexico?” Macias fires back.
MELANIA TRUMP FIRES BACK AT LIBRARIAN WHO REJECTED GIFT OF DR. SEUSS BOOKS AS 'RACIST'
A campus staff member then intervenes, trying to diffuse the situation and offering Macias a space where she can file her grievances to campus officials: “Let’s calm down a little bit, we can talk as a trio here."
The viral video ends after one of the employees gives the hat back to Vitale.
“Oh my God, you’re going to keep letting him wear it? That just shows how the f--- UCR is and the education system. It’s geared to benefit white people, white people, not me,” Macias says as she protests the move and accuses the staff of not being neutral.
“In the premises of the university I deal with microaggressions on the daily, as do other people of color and you have people out there wearing hats like those, y’all don’t say s—- about it,” she adds. “Make America Great Again? Really? Lynches, mass genocides, mass deportations. Constant killings, and y’all are just gonna shut the f—- up?”
“I don’t want to talk to none of y’all” Macias says as she's met at the door by men who appear to be campus police officers.
[h=1]California Hepatitis A Outbreak on Verge of Statewide Epidemic[/h]
Gregory Bull / Associated Press
by CHRISS W. STREET8 Oct 2017Newport Beach, CA2,802
[h=2]The California hepatitis A outbreak is on the verge of reaching statewide epidemic status, as cases have spread through homeless tent cities from San Diego north to Sacramento.[/h]California health officials have reported that at least 569 people have been infected with the hepatitis A liver disease and 17 have died since a San Diego County outbreak was first identified in November. Cases have migrated north to homeless populations in Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, San Francisco and Sacramento over the last 11 months.
Although local and state authorities have tried to underplay the risks and severity of the outbreak, the most recent annual totals for cases of hepatitis A in the United States was 1,390 in 2015, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC). California only reported 179 cases during the same year.
The highly-contagious hepatitis A outbreak may have taken root because of the City of San Diego’s efforts in the run-up to Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game held at Petco Park in July 2016 to push the homeless, and the rampant drug and prostitution trade among them, out of the downtown tourist venues. Those effort included locking public bathrooms and essentially relocating the homeless to the congested tent city encampments that stretch for blocks east of downtown near freeway onramps.
Another explanation may be the city’s decision to ban plastic bags, which deprived homeless people of an alternative means of disposing of human waste when bathrooms were not available.
The last major hepatitis A outbreak was 900 cases and 8 deaths in Pennsylvania in 2003. The infected suffer flulike symptoms and jaundice, but the disease can progress to death. Since 1998, national hepatitis A incidence rates had been “progressively lower each year” due to the development of a “safe and effective hepatitis A vaccines in 1995–1996.”
California homeless advocates have been successful across the state in forcing cities to accept the homeless living in large tent communities on public property. The advocates refer to anti-homeless ordinances as the modern-day equivalent to post-slavery Jim Crow and Depression era anti-Okie laws that allowed police to disperse people deemed “undesirable” after dark.
The City of San Diego was forced to sign the Spencer Settlement in 2006, which forbids its Police Department from enforcing the city’s “Illegal Lodging Enforcement Guidelines” between the hours of 9 pm to 5:30 am.
California, with 115,738 homeless, now accounts for about 21 percent of America’s total homeless population. Due to legal settlements against vagrancy laws, about 72.3 percent of California’s homeless are unsheltered, usually living in tent cities.
California public health officials are desperately scrambling to offer vaccine injections to the homeless, but many in the population are under legal warrants and do everything possible to avoid being identified.
An epidemiologist with the Division of Viral Hepatitis at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Monique Foster, told the Los Angeles Times that California’s hepatitis A outbreak will persist, despite prevention: “It’s not unusual for them to last quite some time — usually over a year, one to two years.”
17954
by CHRISS W. STREET8 Oct 2017Newport Beach, CA2,802
[h=2]The California hepatitis A outbreak is on the verge of reaching statewide epidemic status, as cases have spread through homeless tent cities from San Diego north to Sacramento.[/h]California health officials have reported that at least 569 people have been infected with the hepatitis A liver disease and 17 have died since a San Diego County outbreak was first identified in November. Cases have migrated north to homeless populations in Los Angeles, Santa Cruz, San Francisco and Sacramento over the last 11 months.
Although local and state authorities have tried to underplay the risks and severity of the outbreak, the most recent annual totals for cases of hepatitis A in the United States was 1,390 in 2015, according to the Center for Disease Control (CDC). California only reported 179 cases during the same year.
The highly-contagious hepatitis A outbreak may have taken root because of the City of San Diego’s efforts in the run-up to Major League Baseball’s All-Star Game held at Petco Park in July 2016 to push the homeless, and the rampant drug and prostitution trade among them, out of the downtown tourist venues. Those effort included locking public bathrooms and essentially relocating the homeless to the congested tent city encampments that stretch for blocks east of downtown near freeway onramps.
Another explanation may be the city’s decision to ban plastic bags, which deprived homeless people of an alternative means of disposing of human waste when bathrooms were not available.
The last major hepatitis A outbreak was 900 cases and 8 deaths in Pennsylvania in 2003. The infected suffer flulike symptoms and jaundice, but the disease can progress to death. Since 1998, national hepatitis A incidence rates had been “progressively lower each year” due to the development of a “safe and effective hepatitis A vaccines in 1995–1996.”
California homeless advocates have been successful across the state in forcing cities to accept the homeless living in large tent communities on public property. The advocates refer to anti-homeless ordinances as the modern-day equivalent to post-slavery Jim Crow and Depression era anti-Okie laws that allowed police to disperse people deemed “undesirable” after dark.
The City of San Diego was forced to sign the Spencer Settlement in 2006, which forbids its Police Department from enforcing the city’s “Illegal Lodging Enforcement Guidelines” between the hours of 9 pm to 5:30 am.
California, with 115,738 homeless, now accounts for about 21 percent of America’s total homeless population. Due to legal settlements against vagrancy laws, about 72.3 percent of California’s homeless are unsheltered, usually living in tent cities.
California public health officials are desperately scrambling to offer vaccine injections to the homeless, but many in the population are under legal warrants and do everything possible to avoid being identified.
An epidemiologist with the Division of Viral Hepatitis at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Monique Foster, told the Los Angeles Times that California’s hepatitis A outbreak will persist, despite prevention: “It’s not unusual for them to last quite some time — usually over a year, one to two years.”
[ Does this surprise anyone? You couldn't pay me enough to live in that shithole ]
[h=1]Great News. California Makes It Almost Legal To Knowingly Give Others HIV/AIDS[/h]Posted at 2:00 pm on October 8, 2017 by streiff
Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/20...nowingly-give-others-hivaids/#disqus-comments
Do you have HIV/AIDS. Does celibacy or condom use really keep you from the sexual fulfillment that was rightfully yours but you were deterred by the thought of a long prison term? Well, fear no more. California says if you want to give someone else a chronic and possibly fatal disease without telling them, knock yourself out.
TRENDING[h=4]The First Wives Club: Ivana Trump Dishes on Her Continued Influence with the President[/h]Susan Wright
Let’s be clear on this. Recklessly giving someone else a venereal disease is against the law in virtually the entire nation. This include syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, as well as HIV. California criminalizes refusal to take tuberculosis medicine.
The management of HIV/AIDS has long been an outlier in how public health authorities deal with infectious diseases. Because the main carriers of HIV are a protected class in the view of the secular left, that is, sexually promiscuous homosexual men, there has been a fight, from the beginning to not treat HIV as something special. Historically, outbreaks of STDs and other infectious diseases have been managed by contact tracing, testing, and, if necessary, court ordered treatment. HIV was a case where people tried to convince us that this was an epidemic (epidemics, by definition, have to be easy to spread) when, in fact, the disease was spread mainly through high risk behavior, that is, unprotected anal sex and intravenous drug use, and, at the same time, refused to use tried and true methods of controlling an infectious disease. This kind of gutlessness caused a lot of death and injury and the new California law will cause even more.
It is really difficult to see how allowing the transmission of HIV/AIDS is a victory for public health. For that matter, I don’t see how encouraging people who know they have a potentially fatal infectious disease to expose other without their consent is something to boast about But, then again, this is California and I don’t live there. If you do, the late comedian Bob Hope had some great advice:
[h=1]Great News. California Makes It Almost Legal To Knowingly Give Others HIV/AIDS[/h]Posted at 2:00 pm on October 8, 2017 by streiff
Share On Facebook
Share On Twitter
https://www.redstate.com/streiff/20...nowingly-give-others-hivaids/#disqus-comments
Do you have HIV/AIDS. Does celibacy or condom use really keep you from the sexual fulfillment that was rightfully yours but you were deterred by the thought of a long prison term? Well, fear no more. California says if you want to give someone else a chronic and possibly fatal disease without telling them, knock yourself out.
Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill Friday that lowers from a felony to a misdemeanor the crime of knowingly exposing a sexual partner to HIV without disclosing the infection.
The measure also applies to those who give blood without telling the blood bank that they are HIV-positive.
Modern medicine allows those with HIV to live longer lives and nearly eliminates the possibility of transmission, according to state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), authors of the bill.
“Today California took a major step toward treating HIV as a public health issue, instead of treating people living with HIV as criminals,” Wiener said in a statement. “HIV should be treated like all other serious infectious diseases, and that’s what SB 239 does.”
Who else could say this with as much authority as a San Francisco Democrat named Wiener?The measure also applies to those who give blood without telling the blood bank that they are HIV-positive.
Modern medicine allows those with HIV to live longer lives and nearly eliminates the possibility of transmission, according to state Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and Assemblyman Todd Gloria (D-San Diego), authors of the bill.
“Today California took a major step toward treating HIV as a public health issue, instead of treating people living with HIV as criminals,” Wiener said in a statement. “HIV should be treated like all other serious infectious diseases, and that’s what SB 239 does.”
TRENDING[h=4]The First Wives Club: Ivana Trump Dishes on Her Continued Influence with the President[/h]Susan Wright
Let’s be clear on this. Recklessly giving someone else a venereal disease is against the law in virtually the entire nation. This include syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, as well as HIV. California criminalizes refusal to take tuberculosis medicine.
The management of HIV/AIDS has long been an outlier in how public health authorities deal with infectious diseases. Because the main carriers of HIV are a protected class in the view of the secular left, that is, sexually promiscuous homosexual men, there has been a fight, from the beginning to not treat HIV as something special. Historically, outbreaks of STDs and other infectious diseases have been managed by contact tracing, testing, and, if necessary, court ordered treatment. HIV was a case where people tried to convince us that this was an epidemic (epidemics, by definition, have to be easy to spread) when, in fact, the disease was spread mainly through high risk behavior, that is, unprotected anal sex and intravenous drug use, and, at the same time, refused to use tried and true methods of controlling an infectious disease. This kind of gutlessness caused a lot of death and injury and the new California law will cause even more.
It is really difficult to see how allowing the transmission of HIV/AIDS is a victory for public health. For that matter, I don’t see how encouraging people who know they have a potentially fatal infectious disease to expose other without their consent is something to boast about But, then again, this is California and I don’t live there. If you do, the late comedian Bob Hope had some great advice:
“I’ve just flown in from California, where they’ve made homosexuality legal. I thought I’d get out before they make it compulsory.”
CORRECTION. In the original post I erroneously said that California had made giving HIV/AIDS legal, actually, they have made it a misdemeanor, sort of like a spitting on the sidewalk or jaywalking. I’ve changed the headline to correct my error.
[h=1]SHOCKING VIDEO: California Under Gov. Jerry Brown Destroyed… Homeless Camps Explode Across State[/h] https://bb4sp.com/ca-jerry-brown-homeless-camp-explosion/
People making middle class incomes are now living in their cars because housing has become too expensive. The sad thing is that a lot of those people will leave the state and vote for the same policies they're fleeing from, and they see this as a problem created by capitalism.
