Dr. Drew's MAGA Voter Guide for California 2018

California Statewide Ballot Propositions 

Proposition 1:
BOND for specified housing assistance programs.
Dr. Drew says NO. 

Proposition 2: 

BOND for housing of homeless with mental illness.

Dr. Drew says YES.

Proposition 3:
BOND for water supply, wildlife and groundwater sustainability.
Dr. Drew says NO.

Proposition 4:
BOND for children’s health care hospital improvements.
Dr. Drew says NO.

Proposition 5:
Transfers of property tax base to replacement property.
Dr. Drew says YES.

Proposition 6:
Gas Tax Repeal - Repeals 2017 road repair and transportation tax increase.
Dr. Drew says YES.

Proposition 7: 

Allows legislature to adopt yearlong daylight saving time.
Dr. Drew says YES.

Proposition 8:
Regulates outpatient kidney dialysis clinic charges.
Dr. Drew says NO.

Proposition 10:
Expands local governments’ authority to enact rent control.
Dr. Drew says NO.

Proposition 11:
Requires private-sector EMT/paramedics to be on call during work breaks.
Dr. Drew says YES.

Proposition 12:
New standards for confinement of farm animals.
Dr. Drew says NO.

California State Office Recommendations

GOVERNOR: JOHN COX

LT GOVERNOR: no recommendation; musings instead...

Obviously both of the candidates are leftist Democrats. Ed Hernandez, however, might the slightly better choice.

SECRETARY OF STATE: MARK MEUSER

CONTROLLER: KONSTANTINOS RODITIS

TREASURER: GREG CONLON

ATTORNEY GENERAL: JUDGE STEVEN BAILEY

INSURANCE COMMISSIONER: STEVE POIZNER 

SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION: MARSHALL TUCK

Tuck is open to charter schools.

U.S. SENATOR: No recommendation; musings instead...

Feinstein is somewhat more moderate. The 85-year old Sen. Feinstein is clearly already out of it mentally as the Kavanaugh hearing demonstrated. For example, she didn't even understand the meaning of Sen. Flake's last minute deal. Strategically, an old, worn-out Democrat dog is better than a young Democrat puppy.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Dr. Drew's CA Voter Guide: A Tea Party Activist Reviews CA Ballot Propositions



Dr. Drew Hangs Out At
Southern California Beach

I thought it would be helpful to list my take on the California state-wide ballot measures. These were very confusing and took time to sort through. In general, I am proceeding along the lines that less is more and that it is probably a good idea to have fewer new laws than more new laws. (I am borrowing a lot of this information from the Orange County Register, even though I am saying "No" more frequently than they suggest...)

Proposition 30 - NO

Tax Hike: It is a silly idea to raise taxes right now. It is a better idea to cut the pay of government employees and trim back our bloated California government.

Proposition 31 - NO

2-Year Budget: Just creates a new layer of local government.

Proposition 32 - YES

Union Funds: This is the most important measure on the ballot and the only one I feel really strongly about voting yes on. It would prohibit union contributions to state and local candidates. It would also impose a ban on automatic paycheck deductions for political purposes by unions. Public employee unions are killing us and this is one of the few ways for us to fight back.

Proposition 33 - NO

Insurance: I just do not understand how this helps consumers and I think it is probably better for the legislature to figure this one out.

Proposition 34 - NO

Death Penalty: If you vote yes on this one, then California would no longer have a death penalty. I think we are all better off when these bad guys are no longer alive. At the very least, it keeps liberals from the future from freeing these people to hurt still more innocent victims.

Proposition 35 - NO

Sex Trafficking: Looks like it just adds more complexity to the existing law. As I said, I am in the mood of seeing government do less and less.

Proposition 36 - NO

Three Strikes Law: This would weaken the state's 18 year-old three strikes law. Frankly, I do not think there should be any crime at all. I do not understand how it helps us to allow these folks to roam free, terrorizing their law abiding neighbors. If you cannot avoid harming other people - in big or minor ways - then I do not want you on the streets.

Proposition 37 - NO

Food Labeling: This looks like an issue that would be better handled by the marketplace. If you do not want to eat genetically modified food, then I think there are providers out there to meet your needs.

Proposition 38 - NO

Tax Hike: Again, just another trick to raise revenue to pay the inflated, unfair salaries of unionized government employees.

Proposition 39 - NO

Tax Hike: This would eliminate the option for companies with headquarters out of state to choose the least-burden some formula for paying their California taxes. Just looks like more anti-business hate from the state.

Proposition 40 - YES

Redistricting: I just do not see any major advantages coming out of changing the existing rules or districts. This looks like more unnecessary instability. A "No" vote would reject the new state senate districts drawn by the Citizens Redistricting Committee.

My simple advice is to only vote YES on 32 and pretty much ignore everything else.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist. He applies his skills as a grant writing consultant in the Southern Calfornia area. His website is at the following link: http://drdrewguaranteedgrants.com/about-us/

Rush Limbaugh Reports: John Drew Dated "Regina" One of Obama's Composite Women

I was pleased to run across the bit of tape where Rush Limbaugh called public attention to my story about dating the real Marxist Regina for two years and my additional comments regarding young Obama's ideological extremism.



As far as I can tell, Rush was genuinely pleased by this bit of news even though he was not surprised to learn young Obama held to Marxist socialist beliefs. I was startled at the calls and e-mails I got after Rush mentioned my story on the air. This went out to about 20 million listeners.

Apparently, Rush had read through, or scanned, my recent article in American Thinker on how my white college era girlfriend, Caroline Boss, became the black Regina in Obama's Dreams from My Father. Here's the actual transcript right off of Rush's website.

RUSH: There's also a guy out now, John Drew, I forget where this is. I've got somewhere in the stack. Apparently this guy dated one of the composite women in Obama's book. The woman named Regina, this guy dated her for two years. And according to this guy, Regina was not black. She wasn't from the south side of Chicago. She was white. They were all left-wing radicals. They spent their summers in San Francisco. Obama, at Occidental College, was a Marxist. This is this guy's writing. We finally found a friend of Obama's from back then. Now, this is not gonna get a wide berth, but it's out there. I don't care about the labels, communist this, we don't even need 'em. Obama is now telling us who he is. And I must admit, there's a bit of rejoicing going on with me, El Rushbo.

This, my friends, is something that I've been confident in knowing since Obama was a Senator. It's not hard. Like I said, you don't even need a high school diploma. All you have to do is understand who modern liberals are and what they are, what they want to do. After that it's easy. The hardest part is admitting that there are people like that amongst us in positions of power with so many friends. But it ought not be. The more people that could come to grips with that, the farther along we would be.

Of course, what Rush may not have realized is that I have been trying to get my story to his attention for about four years now - ever since I first realized that I had valuable insight into the real Barack Obama. Ironically, I discovered that my take on young Obama's ideological extremism was also a topic of discussion on the Sean Hannity radio program featuring Paul Kengor and his new book, The Communist - Frank Marshall Davis: The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mentor.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist. He applies his skills as a grant writing consultant in the Southern Calfornia area. His website is at the following link: http://drdrewguaranteedgrants.com/about-us/

Door-to-Door with Dr. Drew: Regretting I Only Have One Life to Give to New Republican Party

As you may know, I have been walking precincts today in support of U.S. Senate candidate Orly Taitz and U.S. congressional candidate John Webb. I've done this in Massachusetts and California in the past. I may be getting too old for it now.

The first thing I noticed is how dangerous it is to walk unfamiliar streets. The initial day out, I was walking with my friend Dave Duringer who is a great gun rights trust attorney and an insightful observer of conservative politics. I almost tripped and fell three times. Dave kept me from falling head first down a steep flight of three steps outside a home in Mission Viejo. He kindly blamed my glasses and eye sight. I know I'm just out of practice and talking too much.

After about three hours of it, we quit and joined the rest of our Tea Party team for lunch and cold water. It was only when I got home I realized I was suffering from symptoms of heat exhaustion.

The second thing I noticed is one of the most consistent finding in political science. Most voters are not as up-to-speed on politics and political news as those of us who make it our business to study politics.

As far as I can tell, no one we met during these walks had ever heard of John C. Drew, Ph.D. or even knew about my report on meeting the young Marxist socialist extremist Barack Obama. It is extremely easy to over-estimate how well people know you or recognize your name. Building name identification, in any area, takes time and money. The situation, in my case, is so bad that I once introduced myself to a person who did not realize I had delivered a speech - with him in the audience - a month earlier. As they say, people need to hear a message about eight times before it finally sinks in. It is humbling to realize the truth of this observation applies to me just like everyone else.

More comically, I have been introduced to others as John Drew and then mobbed with affection when I was reintroduced as Augustine25. (I'm not joking.)

On the positive side, I had forgotten how charming and friendly 95% of the people are when you ring their doorbell and ask for their vote.

Tricia and I went out walking precincts yesterday and today. (I think Dave has given up on me.) I'm a sort of nervous, nerdy type, but people listened to my spiel and offered us water and encouragement. I was startled by how many people thanked me for running for office. Tricia, of course, is a natural campaigner. As a young girl she used to visit gay bars in Laguna Beach to distribute Christian literature. She is cheerful, upbeat, and never forgets to ask for the homeowner's voter.


Campaign flyer for Orly
Taitz, John Webb, John Drew
and Dave Duringer.

 It was also encouraging to see how people maintain their homes. The Republicans we visited have lovingly assembled wonderful gardens with fountains and scuptures. As a group, we Republicans love our cars, trucks and RVs. We skipped the independent voters and Democrats. I think campaigns do that because they do not want timid volunteers turned off by angry, hostile Democrats who slam the door in your face simply because you are a Christian - something that happened to Dave, but not me.

I'm thinking now that we are wrong to only go after Republican households. Right now the Republican brand is damaged in CA and we are probably leaving many Tea Party types without literature and contact simply because they are not registered Republicans. My recommendation is to target neighborhoods with Republican majority voters...but to visit every house. We need to be building our new anti-Marxist anti-Obama party. Visiting only Republicans may turn out our people, but it doesn't build the party or let folks on the fence know we need them and that we are listening to their concerns.

Finally, I had forgotten how much I fear dogs. When I was campaigning for the state assembly in MA, I remember I stopped at a farm house and was immediately surrounded by a pack of five barking dogs. I was approaching each suburban landscape as if a similar feeding frenzy might erupt once again.

I can see why it would be smart for Tea Party constitutional conservatives to raise money and do targetted direct mail. I'm willing to give my life to build a new Republican party, but I only have one life to give.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Dr. Drew's True Confessions: The Conversion Story of a Repentant Ex-Marxist

I grew up poor and I thought it was unfair for me to be held back simply because of the mistakes of my parents. It drove me nuts, for example, to think that kids less intelligent, hard-working, and moral than me enjoyed vacations in Europe while I lived in a home with raw sewage in the backyard. I thought Marxist socialism would give young people in similar situations a more equal opportunity to enjoy the good things in life.

In retrospect, however, I didn't have anyone in my life to explain compound interest, or how to write a business plan, or how to apply computer technology to the most interesting questions. I think if my family had been part of a contemporary Christian church, then I would have had my questions answered and I would have made better decisions.

I got a track scholarship to attend Occidental College in Los Angeles. All the folks around me at Oxy seemed to think the best thing on earth that you could do with your life was to become a college professor. So I went with the program. I got a scholarship to attend graduate school where I got to study with the some of the best professors in the nation in American government and public policy.

My commitment to Marxist socialist thought, however, gradually came to an end by the summer of 1982 when I began to notice that there was a larger spiritual world which did not fit the materialistic atheist models of modern social science. It was a world of intuition, coincidence, and syncronicity which Marxism saw as only an illusion used to lubricate the workings of capitalist exploitation. I also figured out that my empathy for others was not a weakness...it was an extremely useful tool for generating guesses about how the world really worked.

As I became more spiritual I also started to have an unusual amount of success intellectually and academically. My thinking, writing, and observations knit together and I started to attract positive attention with my research on the causes and timing of welfare programs in the U.S.

In my case, I remember where I was the exact moment I realized I no longer believed in the ideals of Communism: I was walking through the basement of McGraw Hall at Cornell University in September 1983. I had just finished an argument with my radical thesis advisor. As I recall I began to believe that the problems associated with child abuse and neglect might be easily fixed through the use of European-style visiting nurse program. As best I can recall, my thesis advisor saw child abuse as a larger problem caused by the necessity to invest in the reproduction of social capital under conditions in which children were mistakenly seen as elements of private property as part of the larger cultural and legal structures which maintain the reproduction of oppressive class conflict. The solution to child abuse, in his model, would involve paying attention to much greater issues involving the distribution of power and wealth in a modern industrialized society. (Or something like that...) Whatever the details of that argument, I remember the encounter left me thinking he was ideologically blinded and alarmingly out-of-touch with reality.

In my research, I had inadvertantly discovered a bizarre failing in modern political science. I was able to show that much of what we consider our modern America - schools, parks, Boy Scout and Girl Scout programs, and aid for families with dependent children - was largely a consequence of the earlier effort to enforce child labor laws. I know this sounds completely obvious...but the social science development literature of the 1960s and 1970s had been written without any reference to the role of child labor law enforcement as a key step in the modernization process.

Based on my historical research, I disconfirmed the Marxist hypothesis that welfare programs arose out of class struggle. My research showed they arose as an unintended consequence of the completely independent prior decision to stop child labor.

I ended up teaching at Williams College in MA, the nation's top rated liberal arts college. I won an award from the American Political Science Association for my thesis. It is now published in book form.

Today, I'm married. I'm proud that I attend a Baptist Church that overlooks the Pacific Ocean. I have my own management consulting business. Right at this moment, I'm struggling to get up to speed on this new social networking technology...and I'm excited that it provides a way to get around the mainstream media.
 
John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Romney Rises to Occasion in First Debate with Perry

The most important thing I noticed is that Romney is looking better than ever based on what I saw at the latest MSNBC Republican Primary debate with Brian Williams and some dorky guy from Politico - John F. Harris, Editor-in-Chief. (Really, it is not fair to put Harris on the same stages as Brian Williams. It's like watching a high school ballerina perform next to someone from American Ballet Theatre.)

The debate started off with a quick round of back and forth between Gov. Romney and Gov. Perry and Romney clearly demonstrated that years of experience in national debates pays off. Romney had clearly anticipated Perry's answers and responses and created a level-headed, common-sense image that made Perry look awkward and overpowered. Romney also looked more rested. Perry looked as if he had been up all night fighting those fires in TX himself.

As a reporter, I would say that the key exchange took place after Gov. Perry attacked Gov. Romney's record of job creation in Massachusetts. In a Reaganesque moment, Romney to interjected "listen, wait a second" as the moderators tried to move on, Here, Romney played his cards well by getting a break for himself early in the debate. Moreover, his comments had a grain of truth.

"States are different," Romney said. "Texas is a great state. Texas has zero income tax. Texas has a right to work state, a Republican legislature, a Republican Supreme Court. Texas has a lot of oil and gas in the ground. Those are wonderful things, but Governor Perry doesn't believe that he created those things. If he tried to say that, well, it would be like Al Gore saying he invented the Internet."

What got my attention is how natural, trustworthy and earnest Romney looked as he delivered those lines. In contrast, Perry looked overly aggressive and wooden as he released the line that "Michael Dukakis created jobs three times faster than you did, Mitt."


Romney took the punch and then shot back: "Well, as a matter of fact, George Bush and his predecessor created jobs at a faster rate than you did, Governor."


"That's not correct," said Perry.


"Yes, that is correct," said Romney.


In all this rapid fire exchange, the inexperienced John F. Harris of Politico looked overwhelmed. Meanwhile, the experienced MSNBC moderator Brian Williams, drew on his vast television comfort level to quip: "Nice to see everybody came prepared for tonight's conversation."

As far as I could tell, the above exchange highlighted the considerable value of previous experience with presidential primary level debating. It is not a natural talent. It is an acquired skill that gets better with practice. Accordingly, my prediction is that Perry stumbled a little tonight, because of his inexperience in debates, and that Romney probably made himself some new friends and supporters. Perry is a steep challenge to Romney and Romney rose to the challege. In reaction to this debate, I'm expecting Perry to stall a little and to Romney to flip up quite a bit.

All in all, however, I'm still supporting Gov. Perry. Nevertheless, I think Romney had a good answer for how his investment career created net jobs for Americans. I know this was an issue with Carly Fiorina in the last CA Senate campaign whose business expertise came off as almost hostile to the needs of workers. I'm also sensitive to the fact that polls show Romney clearly beating Obama. I like that Perry is okay suggesting Obama is a "liar." He is. I also appreciated Romney's new strength and decisiveness. Since I last paid attention to Romney, it appears he is getting a better message that makes sense by suggesting Obama is a nice guy, "who doesn't have a clue" about how to turn around the economy. I think Romney's comments about Obama being a pay phone guy in a smart phone world are quite compelling and remind us that Obama is not that smart and hasn't produced results the American people expect. If anything, Obama is the rigid unchanging ideologue who doesn't seem normal, while Romney looks like the sort of flexible guy who can learn from mistakes and produce positive results.

As a political scientist, I'm reminded of how much appearances matter in presidential debates. In the future, Gov. Perry should work harder at the debates. He needs to be more rested and relaxed ahead of time - no matter what is happening with his workload as an active TX governor. I'm also reminded at the extent to which success in debates is simply a matter of practice, rehearsal, and experience.

Finally, as someone who knew the young Marxist Obama, I was gratified to see Speaker Newt Gingrich come straightout and criticize bureaucratic socialism. I'm going a rally for Gov. Perry in Newport Beach tomorrow a.m. If I get a chance to say hello to Gov. Perry face-to-face, I'll share the same news I shared with Speaker Gingrich: the Obama I knew was a radical revolutionary looking to overthrow the U.S. capitalist system. In this context, however, I was proud to see Gingrich lash out at the mainstream media for seeking to divide Republicans and distract attention from Obama's dangerous weaknesses and failed economic policies. The mainstream media ignored my warnings about Obama's commitment and ties to Marxist socialist thought in 2008. They do not deserve any protection from the Republican candidates given the misery they inflicted on the U.S. by not fully vetting Obama in early 2008 or fully researching him in the summer of 2008. I expect that anti-Obama activists will also benefit - as has Gov. Romney - from increased experience at the national level.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Dr. Drew Inquires: Who Down Graded the USA's Credit Rating at S&P

The primary credit analyst who authored the downgrade report was Nikola G Swann, CFA, FRM, Toronto according to the cover page of the S&P report.  See, http://www.standardandpoors.com/home/en/us  Nevertheless, Swann is simply an observer carefully watching our U.S. train wreck under the Obama administration.  Swann is simply recording the disaster of the Obama administration much the same way that someone would track the Titanic heading toward an obvious, well-known iceberg.



The decision to downgrade the U.S. for the first time in U.S. history was based on the failure of the U.S. to make reasonable progress in terms of the transparent and objective criteria originally outlined by S&P on June 30, 2011.  See, http://www.cotizalia.com/archivos/cz/201107059430062011.pdf  In their sovereign credit analysis, S&P indicates that they look at the following variables:

• Institutional effectiveness and political risks, reflected in the political score.
• Economic structure and growth prospects, reflected in the economic score.
• External liquidity and international investment position, reflected in the external score.
• Fiscal performance and flexibility, as well as debt burden, reflected in the fiscal score.
• Monetary flexibility, reflected in the monetary score.

By all accounts, the key factor that changed dramatically over the last year was the political score which included an assessment of

• The effectiveness, stability, and predictability of the sovereign's policymaking and political institutions (primary factor).
• The transparency and accountability of institutions, data, and processes, as well as the coverage and reliability of statistical information (secondary factor).
• The government's payment culture (potential adjustment factor).
• The potential effect of external organizations on policy setting (potential adjustment factor).

These factors were chosen, in part, because the political score captures the factors listed above, in a manner which is uncorrelated with any particular political system.

Quite simply, the inability of the Obama administration to pull together a deal until the very last moment provided S&P with the evidence it needed to determine that we were relatively less likely - compared to our peer countries including Canada, France, Germany and the U.K. - to resolve this crisis in the face of mounting pressures. 

As S&P states: "A new political consensus might (or might not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S. population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand (see "Global Aging 2011: In The U.S., Going Gray Will Likely Cost Even More Green, Now," June 21, 2011)." (Research Update: United States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered To 'AA+' On Political Risks And Rising Debt Burden; Outlook Negative, pp. 3-4.)

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Dr. Drew Marvels at the Wonder of A Cheap Seat

I could not function as a author, speaker and consultant without investing in travel and business entertainment. In my case, I have discovered that no one wants to pay to hear from me here in Laguna Niguel, CA.  Get me out-of-state, however, and I'm a star.  I'm the grant writing expert from Laguna Niguel.  As you can see, Tricia and I recently combined business with pleasure by visiting the Grand Ole Opry during a trip to Nashville, TN.

Accordingly, I'm a big fan of the website http://www.acheapseat.com/. They have access to an amazing range of venues and they offer tickets at attractive prices. Tricia and I are big fans of Jerry Seinfeld and my nephew absolutely adores Jeff Dunham.  Tickets to both acts are available through http://www.acheapseat.com/.

For example, there are great deals out there now on tickets at your favorite venues to see your favorite artists including Wachovia Arena Tickets, Chicago Theatre Tickets, Los Angeles Lakers Tickets, Jeff Dunham Tickets, and Jerry Seinfeld Tickets. 
When Tricia and I need to entertain clients (or ourselves) we turn to http://www.acheapseat.com/  After all, we have always enjoyed meeting new people and seeing all the entertainment the world has to offer us.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Fear No Default: Dr. Drew Comments on John Lott, Jr.'s Seven Myths About the Debt Ceiling

I used to teach political economy at Williams College and it sort of annoys me when we allow Democrats to say silly, obviously false things about the workings of the U.S. economy and the state of knowledge we have about politics and economics.  Nevertheless, I ran across a great article by John Lott, Jr. who is an economist and author of the revised edition of "More Guns, Less Crime" (University of Chicago Press, 2010).

I thought it might be fun to repeat his take on these seven myths that he asserts the Obama administration is pushing on the American people and add my own comments:

1) Not increasing the debt ceiling means the U.S. government will default on its debt. This is probably the biggest lie that almost all other claims arise from. Default occurs if the government stops paying interest on the money that it owes. Not increasing the debt ceiling only means that the government can't borrow more money and that spending is limited to the revenue the government brings in. And, with interest payments on the debt making up less than a ninth of revenue, there is no reason for any risk of insolvency. Time after time, congress and the president have failed to agree on a debt ceiling increase and still there has been no default. Examples include: December 1973, March 1979, November 1983, December 1985, August 1987, November 1995, December 1995 to January 1996, and September 2007. Indeed, this really shouldn't even be a point of debate. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution requires that the debt payments come first before any other spending.

Dr. Drew adds: Obama is trained as a Constitutional scholar.  We can be sure that he is aware of this portion of the 14th Amendment and that he can rightfully be expected to abide by it.

2) Until the debt ceiling is raised, uncertainty over the payment of U.S. debts will create chaos in financial markets. Given that the Constitution mandates U.S. debts be paid before any other spending and that sufficient money will be available to cover our interest payments, the only uncertainty arises from Obama's actions. Will he try not to pay the interest? Even a delay of a day in paying this interest will create a default. Court action could eventually force Obama to follow the Constitution but a default would have already occurred. But there is a simple way to end this uncertainty: have the president declare now that he will indeed follow the Constitution and make those payments. Failure to increase the debt ceiling clearly doesn't mean default. During one three week period at the end of 1996 and the beginning of 1996, some of the government shutdown when a similar battle over the debt ceiling occurred, but there was no default. President Clinton used the revenues that were coming in to pay the interest on the debt.

Dr. Drew adds: Even if Obama chooses to default, it will be easy for Republicans to blame his excessive spending and poor priorities as the cause of the default.  I knew the young Obama and I've studied the contemporary Obama.  I suggest he holds tightly to John Rawl's A Theory of Justice and that the reason we are in this crisis is that Obama does not want to give up his long-standing hatred of the rich or his desire to redistribute income.  He has never explained how, if at all, he dropped the commitment to Marxist thought I observed in him when he was a sophomore at Occidental College.  See, my article, Meeting Young Obama in American Thinker, February 24, 2011. 


3) Obama doesn't know if there is money to send off Social Security checks on August 3. The president knows very well how much revenue will be available to send out checks on August 3. Indeed, enough money will be available to not only pay the interest, but to also cover all Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and children's health insurance, defense, federal law enforcement and immigration, all veterans benefits, Response to natural disasters. Terrifying elderly people who are dependent on their Social Security checks may make good politics, but it is unconscionable. Yet, these scare tactics aren't really very surprising. The Democrats behaved no differently when they ran television ads bizarrely depicting Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) as pushing an old lady in a wheel chair off a cliff.

Dr. Drew adds: If my take on Obama is correct, then he will - reflexively - seek to defend those aspects of redistribution which he thinks are most widely supported by the American people, whether or not these aspects of redistribution are really in play for not.

4) Mortgage interest rates will rise dramatically if the debt ceiling isn't increased. Not true. Indeed, the opposite is more likely, for not raising the debt ceiling stops the government borrowing more money. Less borrowing by the government could lower mortgage rates as there would be more lending available for potential homeowners. The interest rate paid by the government might go down for a second reason. Just as banks charge individuals a lower interest rate for those who have less debt compared to their incomes, the same is true for governments.

Dr. Drew adds: One of the main reasons the stimulus package failed us is that it sucked up resources that would be better spent and more efficiently spent by by private sector.  Freeing up that capital and keeping it in the private sector would help turn around the economy. 

5) Time is Running Out on Debt Deal, and it must be done immediately. Despite Obama’s insistence that a deal be completed by July 15 and Geithner’s claim that a deal had to be reached by July 22, as already noted, there have been many times over the last few decades where negotiations have extended past when the debt limit has been reached. The longest delay lasted three weeks. Besides claiming that there will be a default, no explanation has been offered for why the debate is any different this time.

Possibly all these claims of urgency are part of some grand strategy to scare people, but that strategy depends on voters not knowing what is necessary for a default to occur.

Dr. Drew adds: I don't feel any sense of urgency about this myself.  My sense of urgency is based on the idea that big government is dangerous and that Obama is using his executive power to grow it.  If Obama were more honest about his past and more honest about his future intentions for us, then I'd feel safer with him as president.  For now, however, I'm deeply afraid he is taking us in the wrong direction.  Now is the time to use all the tools in our power to fight big government.  The last time the government got shut down, we enjoyed substantial economic prosperity later on.

6) If government spending is cut, there will be a depression. Obama promised that a "temporary" increase in government spending would "stimulate" the economy, but he is now telling us that we can't cut that "temporary" increase -- that we are stuck with it.

If Obama's program -- including a 28 percent spending hike since 2008 and more than $4 trillion in deficits -- worked so well, why has our unemployment rate risen more than elsewhere? The European Union, Canada, South America, Japan, and Australia have all had smaller increases in unemployment compared to the U.S. after Obama's "stimulus." We have also had these shutdowns before and the numbers don’t show any negative impact on unemployment or GDP. Figures for the longest shutdowns during the fourth quarter of 1995 and the first quarter of 1996 are available here.

Dr. Drew adds: This one is just plain silly. Based on what we know about monetary policy it is physically impossible to ever have another Great Depression. Moreover, Burton Folsom's book, Raw Deal, teaches us how FDR made the Great Depression worse through frightening off business owners and investors.

7) The value of the dollar will plummet. Again, the supposed collapse occurs when we default. But there won't be any default. In addition, less government borrowing means lower future taxes, thus making the U.S. a more attractive place to invest. More foreign investment will actually cause the dollar to rise.

Dr. Drew adds: The value of the dollar is based on our political culture, economic power and military strength.  Clipping Obama's spending wings will provide great benefits to us and to all the people that want to invest in the safety and security we provide to them and ourselves.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Great Moments in History: Dr. Drew Meets Andrew Breitbart

It was a wonderful day yesterday.  I got a chance to meet Andrew Breitbart and thank him for his heroic efforts to defend our country against the evil, creepy extremists on the left who have taken over the Democrat party.  Breitbart was speaking at a special Mike Munzing Conservative Happy Hour in Newport Beach, CA on June 9, 2011. 

For me, one of the themes of the day is that we need to be soldiers, citizen soldiers willing to give our lives to protect freedom and liberty in the face of the hostility and lies pushed by the mainstream media and elected officials like Rep. Anthony Weiner.  In the process of exposing Weiner as a liar and a perverted freak, Breitbart endured the absurd accusation that he was the one who had "hacked" Weiner's Twitter account. 

This was not my first time interacting with Andrew Breitbart.  His Breitbart TV was among the very first to bring to light my face-to-face impression of young Obama's commitment to extremist Marxist ideology.  See, http://www.breitbart.tv/the-b-cast-interview-was-obama-a-committed-marxist-in-college/  

This was a great event organized by congressional candidate, Mike Munzing.  Here's a picture of Mike Munzing and Andrew Breitbart together. 

The most important point I took away from Breitbart's talk is that we can smile and we can have fun as we work to defeat the Marxist socialist left.  We do not have to be all serious as we tear apart the dangerous leftwing network which has come to dominate our schools, our mainstream media and our frightening Big Government.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Enjoying Life - Inexpensively: Dr. Drew Discovers the Wonder of A Cheap Seat

I have just discovered A Cheap Seat and I'm impressed with what I have found on their site.  One of the secrets of my success as a speaker, trainer and consultant is that Tricia and I are always looking our for the least expensive tickets.  We do not find the need to pay the highest possible price to get what we need out of an event or entertainment experience.  In the above video, you can witness some of the fun I had with an inexpensive visit to the thermal image display at the Anchorage Museum in Anchorage, Alaska.

A Cheap Seat gives you access to incredible deals on entertainment around the country at http://www.acheapseat.com/.  They are a professional ticket broker. They negotiate great prices on tickets and pass the savings on to us. Moreover, they will advise you on your entertainment opportunities.

For example, their website gives you access to a satisfying range of entertainment opportunities including Pittsburgh Steelers Tickets, David Copperfield Tickets, Adele Tickets, Sesame Street Live Tickets and New York Jets Tickets.  Check out their website and I think you, and your thermal image, will be very happy with the results.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

New YouTube Video Pulls Together Obama's Lies About Dreams From My Father

There is a great new video out there that sums up the research regarding Bill Ayer's role in writing Dreams from My Father, President Obama's first published book. 

As someone who knew the real, young Barack Obama, I have always thought there was a big gap between the lazy, sloppy-thinking, average intellect I met through friends at Occidental College between 1980 and 1981 and the rabid, aggressive guy who cannot be comfortable around white people presented in Obama's first book. 

For my quick review of Jack Cashill's book, Deconstructing Obama, click here.  I bought a copy of Deconstructing Obama.  It should be required reading in any class on contemporary politics.  I was amazed to learn that in Christopher Andersen's book, Barack and Michelle: Portrait of An American Marriage, Andersen reported that Michelle Obama was the person who encouraged Barack Obama to turn to Bill Ayers for help when he got behind in writing Dreams from My Father.

The bottom line, for me, is that we have a President who has led us into a terrible economy which left my wife looking for a new job for over two years.  Obama is an intellectual lightweight who does not understand that his policies are frightening off investors and leading the U.S. into a frightening future of poverty and intensified social conflict.

The young Obama I knew was a devoted Marxist socialist, surrounded by other revolutionary Marxist socialists who were expecting a coming revolution along the lines of what happened in Russia or China.  It was never a stretch for me to imagine that the radical extremist I knew at Occidental College would be a good fit with American's number one unrepentant terrorist - Bill Ayers.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Dr. Drew on the Good Life in Anchorage, Alaska

It was difficult for me to walk around Anchorage, Alaska this week without thinking of Gov. Sarah Palin.  To me, Alaska appeared to be a state relatively unharmed by modern liberalism.  There was, for example, no sales tax in the City of Anchorage.  It was a welcome bit of freedom to find out that a $10 set of batteries only cost me $10.  I had an opportunity to tour what was supposed to be the poorest part of Anchorage - the famous Mountain View neighborhood.  It looked quiet and peaceful.  Children were playing in the streets.  It reminded me of the real poverty - moral and spiritual - that keeps parts of Detroit and Los Angeles stacked with empty lots and hopeless fears. 

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Censored Again: Dr. Drew Banned by 1kthomas and Liberal Fascists at Ephblog

EphBlog has no official connection to Williams College. 

Here is a great exchange that was apparently censored by one of the folks over at http://www.ephblog.com/  I imagine that the Dr. Drew fans paying attention to that site will be curious to see what information is currently being censored.  It starts with one of the editors, 1kenthomas, adding his "Potential Hate Speech" warning to the speech I gave this week at the Capistrano Republican Women Federated on April 20, 2011.  I thought my former students at Williams College and others would be interested to see it.  This is where the fun begins. 

71. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

===== POTENTIAL HATE SPEECH / FRINGE / TROLL WARNING =====

Here’s the YouTube video showing my recent speech on young Obama’s extremist revolutionary perspective at the San Juan Capistrano Republican Women Federated meeting on April 20, 2011. See, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81bhSQo_44E&feature=BFp&list=WL61A573845C692CF3&index=1 If I was still teaching political science at Williams College, then I think this YouTube would be quite exciting to the undergrad students.

===== END WARNING =================[93kwt]===

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 2:20 pm

72. kthomas says:

@John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

The biblical names index shows both “Stanley” (as per ‘Stanleigh’) and “Anne” as historical gendered female, though “Stanley” (per Stanly) has been primarily used for males in the 20th century. Otherwise, you’re engaged in a witch hunt and I’m not going to condescend to treat that witch hunt as anything but what it is.

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 2:58 pm

73.frank uible says:

You careerist, type A, over-achievers, when are you going to learn that lazy is good?

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 3:45 pm

74. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

=== WARNING: FRINGE IDEAS, POTENTIALLY RELIGIOUS HATE SPEECH ===========

LOL Really, I don’t know how anyone can take left seriously any more. :-) I’ve never really been attacked for “potential hate speech” before. LOL. (I’m laughing so hard I have tears in my eyes right now.) For the video tape of my recent speech, along with my commentary, please see http://anonymouspoliticalscientist.blogspot.com/2010/08/no-more-keys-for-you-president-junks.html

Also, notice the applause for my wife and for her bravery in getting out the truth about young Obama’s extremist ideology at 11:00 minutes into the YouTube video.

=== END WARNING =================[93kwt]==

Synopsis: “Closet Muslim” meme

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 9:27 pm

75. kthomas says:

WRT John C. Drew,

I’m not attacking anyone. Various individuals have expressed concerns about your postings, and I’m merely applying the best descriptive label I can to let people sort, at this point.

By ‘potential,’ I mean that your postings may potentially be considered hate speech, as I understand the articulation of that (admittedly questionable) term.

There are, of course, twenty-some other odd editors here, any of whom who can choose (wiki-style) to contradict me.

Otherwise, John, I don’t intent to deny you a forum at this point, but in my book, you look like a loon and quack like a loon, and are being treated as such :)

Reply April 21st, 2011 at 9:37 pm

76. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

@ #75 kthomas

Please… I’ve never even heard of “potential hate speech” before and your even sillier “potential religious hate speech” label is really causing me to split my sides with laughter.

The last time I looked, my Republican friends took over the U.S. House of Representatives. My take on Obama has appeared in at least four major publications since 2011.

As you may know, I’m a published author, and award-winning political scientist and a former Williams professor. I’m also a contributor at American Thinker and David Horowitz’s News Real Blog Site. I think it is fair to say that your silliness marks you as part of the cutting edge of what normal people think of as “liberal fascism.” See, http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

[NOTE: Edited to remove editorial bolds / misuse of blockquote / bad behavior by JCD. --93kwt]

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:21 am

77. whileback says:

a neocon goes into a bar and says ‘i want 15 shots of your best whisky’. so the bartender lines them up and the neocon starts pounding them down.

the bartender says ‘whoa, slow down’. the neocon says ‘you’d drink this fast too if you had what i’ve got’. the bartender says ‘what do you have?’ the neocon says ‘a dollar’.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:24 am

78. kthomas says:

@John C. Drew, Ph.D.:

You’re not an editor on EphBlog. I don’t care who or what you are anywhere else, but you’re just a passer-by here– we’re not equals in this forum in terms of privileges and you need to learn and play by our rules.

Don’t do what you just did. Got it?

ReplyApril 22nd, 2011 at 12:28 am

79. kthomas says:

@whileback:

Thanks. Now I’ve had a laugh :)

Back to dealing with the AWS outage caused by SkyNet.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:37 am

80. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

=== WARNING: PARODY OF LIBERAL SILLINESS – REALLY VERY FUNNY…LIKE MONTY PYTHON===

Please… kthomas. You are over the top silly right now.

It makes me grin to think that your ego is so fragile and that you think my comments regarding President Obama’s ideology and cultural background are so important that they demand that you take righteous action – right way – to prevent me from making fun of your silliness through imitating your use of bold and blockquote features of this website. Please… LOL

I can’t believe you have time for this sort of controlling, plainly aberrant behavior.

I wish someone from FOX News was watching this exchange right now. Your implied threat of your mysterious status as a high ranking government official is particularly bizarre.

It is a good example of why giving liberals just a little, itty bit of power rapidly turns them into scary, even dangerous people. You are behaving like a liberal fascist. I can’t believe, for example, that you are making up two new categories in the field of “potential” hate speech simply because you are too lazy to defend your outright censorship of my comments.

You should read A Conflict of Visions by Thomas Sowell. FYI: I’m also an appointed member of the Orange County Republican Central Committee. I’m sure that an extremely important diplomat – like you – certainly understands the meaning of “appointed” when it comes to credibility in the real world.
=== END WARNING ===

Synopsis: “POTENTIALLY BEAUTIFUL EXAMPLE OF LIBERAL FACSISM” Meme

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:58 am

81. kthomas says:

I have moved a(nother) comment by JCD to “pending” status, largely without reading it. JCD seems to want to engage in a flame war or something. The comment will be restored by tomorrow unless another editor sees fit.

I plan to change any other incendiary comments from JCD tonight to “pending”, without further notice.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 1:01 am

82. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

=== WARNING: LIBERALS CAUSE UNCONTROLLABLE LAUGHTER ===
One of the cool things about this blog site is that it provides a lot of us with ammunition for the upcoming Presidential campaign regarding how dangerous it is to have liberals in power. They are, quite frankly, a threat to freedom of speech. My wife and I have been willing to give our lives – and to risk our business – to get the word out about my face-to-face observations of young Barack Obama’s extremist Marxist ideology. I thought kthomas’s invention of two new categories of “potential” hate speech – as a tool to discredit me in public – was over the top silly tonight.
=== END WARNING: John Clayton Drew, Ph.D. ===

Synopsis: “CAN’T TAKE A PUNCH” Meme
Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 1:47 am

83. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

=== WARNING: DR. DREW EXPLAINS HOW LIBERALS ARE GETTING SNIPPY UNDER PRESSURE ===

Like kthomas, President Obama is also getting “snippy” under the stress of Democrat party failure. See, http://www.ketknbc.com/news/president-obama-gets-snippy

=== THIS CONCLUDES YOUR SNIPPY LIBERAL WARNING ===

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 2:49 am

84. frank uible says:

Book burning – sieg heil!

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 6:43 am

85. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

As they say, liberal fascism is alive and well…complete with demeaning others and censoring it’s independent and conservative opponents. On my Anonymous Political Scientist blog site, liberals can post their work without interference. Then, conservative ideology teaches me the value of freedom of speech. Snippy people are dangerous…if they are given just a little bit of power.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:52 am

86. frank uible says:

Ya wohl, mein Fuhrer!

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:26 pm

87. kthomas says:

Ya nerozumim nemetzcy, dobje pritelkine.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:28 pm

88. kthomas says:

Dear John C. Drew,

I have given you a wide leeway in face of objections of others, and in fact in the face of PO-ing a great deal of others on this forum.

Any restrictions you face are not content-based but based on the quality and nature of the material you post, and the behaviors you engage in.

In particular, you posted links to your “work” which suggests that Barack Obama’s mother is … something dark, shall we say… because one of her names is, in your rather uninformed opinion, typically “male.”

If that’s not “demeaning others” (for non-substantive reasons), I don’t know what is.

I did not censor this piece of material, but I did mark it in a way that our visitors might identify clearly, as, among other things, outside our norm.

That seems fair to me, though since we are a collectively edited site, other editors are free to express objections or take contrary actions.

You then began to engage in a childish game of tit-for-tat. Well, we’re not going to play such games, if for no other reason than I am not amused by them.

I hope this provides some explanation, insomuch as I am not seeking your understanding or consent. This is likely to be the final explanation you receive.

K

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 12:51 pm

89.frank uible says:

Rest easy Williams basketball fans. Mike Maker has been overlooked by Princeton in its search for a new head basketball coach.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 7:16 pm

90. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

#88 kthomas

I’m sorry, but your last comment has caused me to think that you are seriously mentally ill. If you persist in this behavior, I’m going to put you in the same classification as “jeffz” – someone it is not fair for me to argue with…

To any normal person, naming your daughter “Stanley” is a sign of dysfunction in a household. As one of the few political scientists in the nation who has also taught courses on child abuse and neglect, I think you are dangerously out of touch with reality if you sincerely believe my comments on this aberrant, deviant behavior by Obama’s grandparents is, in any way, hate speech.

===WARNING HARSH WORDS FROM DR. DREW==FYI: There is no such thing as “potential” hate speech.===DR. DREW’S HARSH WORDS ARE NOW OVER===

Your suggestion that centuries ago some girls were named “Stanley” strikes me as plainly silly and beside the point. I wish you had been in one of my child abuse and neglect classes while I taught through the political science department at Williams in the mid-1980s. You would better understand the implications of Dunham’s cruel decision to name their daughter after her father without regard for the damage this would do to her life and her mental health.

As far as I can tell, all the comments that you have blocked from me are focused on making fun of your silly, snippy behavior last night. In these posts, I’m ripping up your pretentious, self-importance and the sheer nonsense that your cloak in politically correct jargon. What a joke! You don’t even post here under your own name. I feel sorry for the people around you who put up with you snippy behavior and what we used to call – at Opera Pacific – ‘queening out.”

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 8:58 pm

91. kthomas says:

I have quaranteened another comment by our favorite Ph.Dud. No further notice of quaranteened comments from this source will be given tonight.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 9:23 pm

92. frank uible says:

Why are EphBlog editors necessary or desirable?

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:10 pm

93. kthomas says:

@frank uible:

Roughly, and not wanting to go into it: it’s like a ship, it’s how 99 out of 100 successful forums work, and thus, is how the whole software package (admittedly not “best in breed”) is set up. Or: the entire history of online forums says moderation is necessary, lack of moderation leads to pit-dom.

Our particular form, is of course not ideal, but it’s how we run.

You may best understand JCD’s current status as “twerp.”

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:13 pm

94.frank uible says:

I hold no brief for Drew (that’s his job), but I believe that I’m perfectly capable of self-editing any unedited thing which might appear on EphBlog as I believe most other EphBloggers are.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:35 pm

95. frank uible says:

unedited.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 10:38 pm

96. whileback says:

there are way worse ones than this one as far as censorship goes.

Reply April 22nd, 2011 at 11:24 pm

97. John C. Drew, Ph.D. says:

===WARNING HARSH WORDS FROM DR. DREW==FYI: It’s not cool, in America, to pretend to be an aristocrat.===DR. DREW’S HARSH WORDS ARE NOW OVER===

I’m really amazed at kthomas’s behavior. I think when, if ever, my comments are released, objective NYT reporters will be amazed at this example of pure liberal childishness.

What is particularly funny to me right now is kthomas’s aristrocratic language – reminding me that I’m not his equal on this forum :-) – or the really funny, “I’m not amused” comments. LOL This is a perfect example of everything people find frightening about liberals.

I’m grateful that I have my own website and my own access to the public through American Thinker and David Horowitz’s News Real Blog Site. This is a bizarre episode in my life. I give a well-received speech to one of the top Republican organizations in the nation and enjoy tremendous applause. Here, however, the exact same talk is given the bizarre label of “potential” hate speech. This is a fitting reminder of how sick, mentally ill and dangerous liberals have become to freedom of speech. In the current political climate, liberals are increasingly dangerous to the cause of liberty.

===WARNING MORE HARSH WORDS FROM DR. DREW==FYI: There is no such thing as “potential” hate speech.===DR. DREW’S HARSH WORDS ARE NOW OVER===

Sadly, in a divided nation, the real "hate speech" is the censorship and hostility directed at young, white, male and female conservative students.  As this censored exchange demonstrates, there is little sense of humor, or reality, among the liberals like Kenneth Thomas who think they know better than the rest of us what is the right course for our nation.  Standing up to these bullies is becoming an important part of protecting our freedom and liberty. 

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Video: Why Obama's Past is More Important Than His Future

I want to thank O.C. congressional candidate, Mike Munzing, for taking out time to record my recent speech at the San Juan Capistrano Republican Women Federated meeting on April 20, 2011. 



I think this is a pretty good start at explaining the path that lead Obama and I to become Marxist socialists in 1980, the minor role I played in persuading him that there was not going to be any Communist revolution in the U.S., the straight line of ideological consistency passing from Frank Marshall Davis, me, Bill Ayers, Rev. Wright and Alice Palmer, and the dangers posed to our nation by an Obama second term, a second term that would give him the opportunity to stack the Supreme Court with people who would bend the Constitution to facilitate his Marxist socialist perspective. 

One of the sweet ironies surrounding my speech is that, on this same day, President Barack Obama spoke at a "town hall" at Facebook headquarters, with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg in Palo Alto, California. Palo Alto is within minutes of where he and I first met in Portola Valley in the fall of 1980.

Read more: Obama Ends Quarter on Low Note

By the way, please check out the nice applause line for Tricia - for her bravery - in helping me get this message out at about 11:00 minutes into the video.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Listening to My Old Hart High Graduation Speech: Little Did I Know I Would Be Hammered By Affirmative Action

I've got a little bit of audio showing what I was like as a public speaker back in 1975.  I think it is sad that the vibrant, awkward, sensitive young man revealed in the speech would go on to face a huge number of racial and ethnic barriers to success simply because he was a young Armenian-American and not the member of a more politically powerful minority group.

This should bring back some warm memories from over 35 years ago.  Especially for members of the graduating class of Hart High and their relatives in attendance.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Wow! Loveline's Dr. Drew Pinsky is Now on HLN: Thoughts from the Real Dr. Drew

As I switch channels between FOX News and MSNBC I'm finding my eyes fixing on my own name on television: Dr. Drew.  The reason is not because my story about young Obama's Marxist ideology has hit the mainstream media, it is because Dr. Drew Pinsky has a new show on HLN. 

Accordingly, I have an odd story to tell about how Dr. Drew Pinsky started referring to himself as Dr. Drew and not Dr. Pinsky back when he was a co-host of the seedy Loveline radio talk show here in Southern California.  As you may know, Loveline went national in 1995.  The television version was launched on MTV in 1996 where it was hosted by Dr. Pinsky and Adam Carolla. 

Above all, I think it is time to claim my status not only as the "real" Dr. Drew, but as the "first" Dr. Drew.

The whole "Dr. Drew" concept started when I was running for office in my home town of Santa Clarita between 1990 and 1992.  I bought billboard space to promote the Dr. Drew name.  I knew it was considered tacky to call myself Dr. Drew, but no one else in the race could make that claim, I liked the alliteration, and as a poor white guy with no money - it was all I had to appeal to the voter's best interests. 

My memory is that these billboards seemed to have a tangible impact on the culture around me even as they did me next to no good at all in securing a spot as an elected official representing the interests of my home town. 

In the worst consequence, some of the kids at Canyon HS - where my brother taught biology - started scratching the name DREW into the surfaces of their school lockers and using the name DREW as a bizarre form of graffitti.  In an era where gangs were starting to mark-up my hometown, it was ironic to see the DREW name competing with street gangs. 

I can report with certainty that Dr. Drew Pinsky was near enough to me in terms of geography and politics to perhaps benefit from the modest "Dr. Drew" visibility campaign taking place in Santa Clarita, CA.  Pinsky, after all, was born in near by Pasadena, California.

He is a year younger than me.  He majored in biology at Amherst College and graduated in 1980.  He came back to CA to earned his M.D. at USC's School of Medicine in 1984.  He later became chief resident at Huntington Memorial Hospital in Pasadena before moving into private practice.

Loveline began in 1983 as a Sunday night dating and relationships segment on Los Angeles radio station KROQ.  As Loveline developed the show began referring to him informally as "Dr. Drew".  I don't have the timing exactly right, but my memory is that I didn't start hearing anything about a "Dr. Drew" on the radio until after my modest media buys in the Santa Clarita area.  The timing for me being the original Dr. Drew seems about right since it was only in February 1992 that Loveline expanded from Sunday nights to five nights a week.

Around the same time, I noticed a second Dr. Drew imitator, in the form of the rapper, Dr. Dre.  As you may know, Dr. Dre made solo debut, The Chronic, in 1992 and and released it under Death Row Records.  He became one of the best-selling American performing artists of 1993. My story is that I never noticed anyone combining Dr. with the words Dre or Drew until after my little media campaign hit the Southern California area. 

I'm not 100% sure, but I've always thought that Dr. Pinsky stumbled on the seeming popularity of the Dr. Drew advertising campaign and realized it was a useful way to build a brand identity without having to associate his own "Pinsky" name with a sleazy, sex-talk radio show.  Now, however, I think people are more likely to mistake me for him than the other way around.  Nevertheless, I think I have a case for saying that I was the first to promote the Dr. Drew name in the media markets he and I shared in the early 1990s. 

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Dr. Drew Reacts to New Barack Obama Ad: Hey Marxist! Where Are the Jobs?

It was kind of creepy to watch the young white guy praising President Obama. I don't think this young guy understands what it is like to apply for a number of teaching jobs and to keep coming in second to the minority candidate because of affirmative action. It's painful to get ready for those interviews, know you are the strongest candidate, and then end up living in poverty, without health insurance simply because you are a poor white guy and not a member of a wealthy, privileged, politically protected minority group.

I knew the young Obama. I can verify that he was an ideological extremist in 1980.  My story has appeared in Michael Savage's Trickle Up Poverty, Paul Kengor's Dupes, Stanley Kurtz's Radical-In-Chief and Jack Cashill's Deconstructing Obama.

I don't think any older white guy should "trust and respect" Obama until Obama comes clean about his long-standing commitment to extremist revolutionary philosophy. Obama should, at the very least, explain his ties to the extremist Midwest Academy.

My wife has been looking for a new job since March 2009. It is difficult to even write about the financial pain we have suffered as a consequence of the low unemployment associated with the Obama stimulus package. I pray that the American people wake up to this disaster and take the actions they need to take to return our country to fairness and prosperity.

Here's my GOTV video.

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Barack Obama and the Legacy of Frank Marshall Davis: A Note From Dr. Drew to Davis's Son, Mark Davis

John Drew with David Horowitz

at a special event for the Freedom

Center.

I think it might be valuable to place on the public record my most recent comments to Mark Davis, the son of Obama's famous mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. Pictured here, me and one of my favorite people, David Horowitz.

Dear Mark:

I think you are missing the forest for the trees right now. Your argument seems to be missing the big picture. Stalin died in 1953. You father was interested in the Communist party beginning in 1931 and was officially a member of the Communist party long before Stalin's death.

If your father's famous friend, Paul Robeson, knew about - and helped cover up - Stalin's atrocities, then I don't think it is unreasonable to assume Frank Marshall Davis was also totally aware of Stalin's murderous ways - at least by 1953.

As I understand it. Never once did your father complain about Stalin's behavior as a mass murderer. In fact, your father praised Stalin's views on Christianity and praised the Red Army.

I've never heard that your father apologized for supporting Hilter during the Hitler-Stalin pact. Your father sounds like a very scary, very dangerous person to me.

I think Tidwell made a big mistake by not using all the information available in your father's FBI file. I think Tidwell made a mistake when he underestimated the significance of your father's long standing interest in the Communist Party USA, a party which lives in infamy because of the way it ended up supporting both Hitler and Stalin - two of the worse mass murderers of the last century.

Unfortunately, your father's devotion to Marxism and the Communist Party USA, as revealed by Tidwell in a letter from your father to a friend, helps us understand why your father was so closely tied to some of the most extremist ideologues of the last century.

Your father's ideology - and distaste for Christianity - meant that he did not have the moral compass needed to stand up and fight child pornography or the  evil of either the Nazi or Communist parties. It is frightening for me to realize that the president of the United States would choose as his mentor a fellow who was on the wrong side of both our fight against Hitler in WWII and the USSR during The Cold War.

I think it is a real stretch for you to suggest that your father was a normal, wholesome, average American who should be honored at the same level as Martin Luther King. In my view, your father's decision to publish his fantasies about child rape sort of disqualify him from MLK status. I'm also thinking your father is unworthy of MLK status because of his decisions to side with some of our most cruel enemies during some of the great conflicts of the past.

Sincerely, John

John C. Drew, Ph.D. is an award-winning political scientist.

Checking Out Thumbtack as a Tool for Advertising Grant Writing Services

The picture above is a montage of all the different Saturn Five launches.  I like referring to the Saturn Five because it reminds me of the considerable challenge of launching your first grant proposal.  All in all, I guess it is easy to distract me with a new website or technology.  Nevertheless, I enjoy learning about these new bells and whistles and sharing the results with our clients and participants in our workshops.  In this case, Thumbtack provides a free way of advertising your grant writing consulting services.  I'll let you know if this takes off.