|
a
running commentary by our trusted california contributors...
|
CRO
Blog archive index
|
|
The
Bear Flag
League
|
|
[2/28/06
Tuesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Convention Observations: Conservatives
prevailed in San Jose at the state’s Republican Party
convention this weekend, re-asserting that we are a party
of conservative principles. And Governor Schwarzenegger
won by showing to independents that he is not a tool of
the Republican Party, although he is closer to the Republicans
than any other candidate running for Governor. I do not
know when it dawned on the Governor’s friends that
they could win the public relations battle while losing
on the policy issues, but when they did figure this out,
it permitted a good outcome for all.
My media
rule still is in force. If you want to get on television or
be quoted prominently, then be available to say something negative
about fellow Republicans. Those like Senator McClintock, who
said while he does disagree with Schwarzenegger at times he
still wholeheartedly supports the Governor, received almost
no press coverage. His thoughtful comments and clear statement
of Republican principles should have been the lead in every
convention news story, but he refused to play the negative
game. [Leonard
Blog]
[2/27/06
Monday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
The "New" Republican Party Sacto
Dan reports...
Resolution # 9 came up
for debate. Chairman Duff Sundheim recognized three speakers
in favor, and three against. Each speaker made their pitch:
- The supporters are
saying the resolution represents core Republican values.
- The opponents are
saying the resolution is about spanking the Governor and
if it passes, the Governor cannot win re-election.
Then the vote:
- The nays have it,
the resolution is defeated.
- The Republican party
is following Governor Schwarzenegger and Tom McClintock to
the left.
Is this the end of the
Republican party that can't win because it abandoned its principles
as red-meat conservatives say, or is this a new Republican
party that recognizes the realities of politics in California,
and wants to run to win with more mainstream support as the
moderates say?
My response...
This is the "new" Republican
Party, the one that understands you have to win elections before
you can drive, create and lead with legislation.
The best chance for a McClintock
Gubernatorial race is for Arnold to win...with Tom...and
then McClintock can run as the elected Lt. Governor. Lose
Arnold, lose Tom and lose the state, simple as that.
The future for the GOP
is "center-right", say it with me: "center-right" is 80% of
the core of the GOP. Get 80% and then we can move toward the
90%. I doubt we'll ever see 100% of the conservative ideology
in California's future - too far gone, especially when it comes
to issues like abortion.
Ask State
Senator Tom McClintock, "Let
us also remember Reagan's wise words that 'anyone who is
with you 80 percent of the time is your 80 percent friend,
not your 20 percent enemy,'" McClintock said. "I don't agree
with my wife on absolutely everything, but I still love her,
and I don't agree with the governor on everything, but I
still support him."
For example, we have
a State Constitutional Right for abortion in this state (because
of a weak Democrat Gray Davis victory over a very conservative
candidate, Bill Simon). Even if the US Supreme's revoke
Roe v. Wade (and they should), they will leave it
up to the individual state(s). At that, abortion is still legal
in California.
Best placed to deal
with abortion in California - the church.
Rather than Evangelicals
running stupid "Global Warming" ads and agenda, they should
be meeting people on life/cultural and eternal issues like
abortion, marriage and moral issues.
For the "party", it is "center-right"...for
the church is it "conservative core and cultural war for righteousness"...one
is a vote, the other a moral righteousness.
I have no faith in politics,
just a vote...my faith rests in God and His message and
instruction. All of the religious, cultural and ultra-conservative,
single issue "knuckle draggers" need to embrace the difference,
and the new direction of the party.
I'm NOT saying that
religious ideals are outside of the GOP, actually I'm stating
the opposite!
We can can still have
our core, moral and cultural (Constitutional) beliefs,
but the "single issue", "knuckle dragging",
all or nothing "100-percenters" need to
get on the bus for statewide victories. It's is their ideology
and agenda that keeps voters home on election day, and solidifies
the leftward direction of this state. "Brick by brick I say".
Yes, the majority of
the GOP "big tent" still represents 'God and Country',
but the problem is that state's registered voters do not.
Win elections, legislate from a position of morality...and
we can get the job done. Any questions, see State Senator Tom
McClintock [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[2/24/06
Friday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Hypocrisy or Hippocrates The
California Medical Association has weighed in on the
execution of convicted murderer Michael Morales. Apparently
the CMA regards as unethical the practice of a physician
making sure that Morales is unconscious before the heart-stopping
drugs are administered. The issue is whether or not Morales
will ever feel any pain. His victim, by the way, felt
a lot of pain as she was beaten, strangled, raped, and
stabbed. Yet this same Assocation argues that it is ethical
and pain-free to starve to death a person to who is in
a coma or to kill a late-term baby shortly before it
is ready to be born. Maybe the California Medical Association
needs a mind-numbing drug so they can handle this hypocrisy. [Leonard
Blog]
[2/23/06
Thursday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
Patrick Dorinson, Former Dem, Now GOP Voice I
had Patrick Dorinson as my guest in-studio yesterday at
KTKZ. Patrick is the 'new' Communications Director for
the California Republican Party. The best part, he is a
former Al Gore and Bill Clinton campaign handler, as well
as a Clinton Administration member.
A former Democrat offering
the communication for the California GOP? That's right, he
changed his voter registration three years back during the
recall, and now he states that he is fully committed in getting
Republicans elected to statewide seats in the Golden State.
Look for portions of
the "audio interview" to be posted here soon. You can hear
for yourself the new Party Voice (formerly Stutzman/Hanretty)
of the GOP Machine.
I've received numerous
emails expressing some polarizing opinions. People either
like the guy, or they hate the guy. He knew it would go this
way, so he's not surprised.
Here's an example from
a listener (and Sacto
Dan Blog comment box) today:
Ex Gore, Clinton,
Davis supporter AND a former DEMO?? Please...get real.
This guy is sellout. Why, did he suddenly FIND HIMSELF
and go with being a Repub?? Cause of our views and morals?
Or, cause he jumped to the bandwagon?
IF, he was a staunch
anything, he'd kept to his own party, and fought to purge
it from the lefty whackjobs that currently infest the Demo's.
Jumping ship to the R side means squat. Given what I've
seen written on Aarons blog site, this guys nothing more
than a Political hack, RINO, trying to buffalo the voters
into believing he's " pure Repub " at heart, and he's PAID
to sell the R message. Crap. All this done by Ahnold to
boot.
Since last year, I've said loud and proud: LAME DUCK GOV.
You're now watching
a silent civil war within the Repub party in California.
How those so called, LEADERS want to proceed, is one thing,
but GIVING us this garbage dressed like a Conservative,
is crap. You might be making NICE NICE within your " elite " ranks,
but you're only pissing us off at the VOTER ranks.
Repubs this year
in Cali, are going to take a huge ' bite in their collective
Arse ' by this blatant/secretive move to appease the Demo's.
Come election time,
we'll see: Either you'll be correct and voters will turn
out, or I'll be right, and you'll see voter backlash. I
don't buy this guy nor his answers for anything.
I guess the person commenting
would have told Ronald Reagan to stay in the Democrat Party
too. More evidence of the 'stupid party' at work in this mega-state.
If you ask my opinion
after meeting Patrick this morning for the first time officially,
He is 'not' a staunch conservative. He is a 'center-right'
Republican at best. But he is serious about his political journey,
a journey that has him now facing the heat, fielded the calls
and answered every one honestly and clearly.
At this point, I don't
know how well he will do over the long haul - he's in a very,
very precarious spot - especially heading into this weekend's
contentious convention.
Yet, what if he is really
serious and sincere (one can't tell after one meeting, and
he told me such in the studio this morning). I love his attitude, "listen
to me, watch me work to get these GOP members elected and judge
me for the work that I do." Who can complain about those
standards?
Should we refuse someone's
talents and contribution because they 'used to be a high ranking'
Democrat? I thought Republicans were in the business of
debate and dialogue to convince more and more Democrats to
return to the love of the country and our liberty, independence
and the common cause keeping this great land healthy for the
generations to come.
Now we refuse members
because "they used to be Democrats"? With this narrow
minded thinking, state Republican leaders should
rush legislation for new a political health care package
that provides heavy doses of Viagra for GOP Senior males
so we can have 'hope' of challenge the liberal majority
in this state by generational dominance.
What ever happened to winning hearts
and minds?
Patrick is a 'growing'
Republican. He left the Clinton Administration when Clinton
left the reservation once he got inside of the White House.
Dorinson worked at the ISO during the energy crisis, and experienced
Gray Davis during the state's crisis. That's where he learned
that the GOP members were the only individuals willing to problem
solve.
He then tunred his efforts
to work on the recall, this is where he rubbed elbows
with GOP members in 'common battle' for the first time - he
like what he saw and what he learned. He changed his votre
registration, decided to vote for Bush, Arnold and for
the GOP ballot over the past three years.
He is happy to be welcomed
into the "big tent", and ready to roll up his sleeves to get
statewide GOP members elected.
I may be wrong, but I
thought the recipe to winning elections was (1) registering
more party voters, (2) getting them out to vote on election
day, (3) and getting them to support and work to elect Republican
candidates and ideals. (75% with me, not against me!)
Maybe I was wrong...maybe
we like being the "loser party" in California.
My conclusion: "give
Patrick a chance", he has the attitude that he wants to prove
himself by producing, not spinning rhetoric. I welcome a disgruntled
former Democrat to the effort. I still remember my personal
phone call from my 92 year-old, life long Democrat of
a wonderful grandfather..."Eric, your party has convinced
me that Bush is the guy for the times. My party has discouraged
me, so much so, that all of my years of effort and contributions
I see as a waist of time.
Grandpa
is still kicking, and voting to this day...one-by-one I say. [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[2/22/06
Wednesday]
[Bill
Morrow - State
Senator, columnist]
12:05 am [permalink]
The Terri Winchell Murder and the "Save
Morales" cabal: Terri Winchell was a vivacious
17-year-old young woman in 1981 when she was brutally murdered.
Her murderer is due to be executed later this month and
in my opinion it cannot happen a moment too soon. But as
usual when an evil person is about to face man’s
punishment for his crime, there are people clamoring about
his redemption and remorse and pleading for his life.
To those
people, I ask you to pause and consider Terri.
No amount
of remorse and no variety of his excuses can change what he
did to Terri. And lest you feel pity for him or question his
guilt, please recall these facts: Morales tried to choke Terri
with a belt, but it broke so he hit her in the head with a
hammer. Her skull had more than 23 hammer indentations. He
dragged her body face-down across a street, raped her, and
stabbed her four times in the chest, leaving her in a vineyard,
naked from the waist down and her shirt pulled up over her
chest. Terri’s blood was found in Morales’s car.
The murder weapons were found at his home. He had blood on
his person. Yet, the media coverage is focusing on the lack
of credibility of one witness who was in jail with Morales.
Instead, let's focus on the overwhelming body of evidence of
his guilt and on the victim of his evil, Terri.
[2/21/06
Tuesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Wanted:
Heath Care Directive Guidance I was given an advanced
health care directive by my new doctor. As I read the form
it does not lend itself to a sanctity of life perspective.
The form can be found by looking at California
Probate Code 4701
For example
it lumps under agent authority that my agent can make all care
decisions including nutrition and hydration unless I specify
in advance what not to do. Since I am unable to anticipate
all of the possibilities it gives an impossible either-or situation.
I looked on-line and found a Catholic site in North Dakota
which offers much better language which I assume would work
legally in California but I am not certain. This can be found here:
I am looking
for on-line advice for Californians who respect life and see
the difference between extraordinary means to prolong life
and so-called health care steps to hasten death. If you have
a suggestion, please email me at bill.leonard@billleonard.org [Leonard
Blog]
[2/20/06
Monday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Bureaucracy Run Wild A recent
edition of State Taxes Notes provides a clear insight into
the mindset of the California Franchise Tax Board. Even
though a District Court of Appeal ruled against them and
even though the Board itself decided not to appeal the
adverse ruling, the staff of the FTB continue to state
that the Court misunderstood the law. What arrogance! According
to this story, the FTB auditors are still auditing taxpayers
the old way, but in a nod to fairness, they are to notify
taxpayers of their rights to appeal to the Board of Equalization.
So, the California government is going to charge some taxpayers
with more taxes than a high court says that they owe and
is going to force them to undergo a lengthy appeals process
to ask for what the court has said is already theirs. When
is the FTB going to recognize that they are not above the
law? [Leonard
Blog]
[2/17/06
Friday]
[John
Eastman Prof Law/Chapman & Claremont
Institute] 5:09
am [permalink]
Ninth Circuit hears Boy Scouts Appeal The
Ninth Circuit heard oral argument in Boy Scouts v. Barnes-Wallace
yesterday, a case involving a suit by the ACLU against
the City of San Diego for leasing land to the Boy Scouts
to run a summer camp. Judge Napolean Jones found that the
lease violated the Establishment Clause because the Boy
Scouts requires its members to acknowledge a duty to God--despite
the fact that the Boy Scouts have spent a lot more in improvements
to the land than the value of the lease, and despite the
fact that the land is actually open to the public on a
first-come basis, and despite the fact that the City has
more than a hundred other similar leases with every imaginable
kind of organiztion, including the Jewish Community Center
and the Girl Scouts, and despite the fact that the Preamble
of the California Constitution also acknowledges a duty
to God.
The Ninth
Circuit panel was chaird by Judge Kleinfeld, who honed in on
the fact that the City was not providing a benefit to the Boy
Scouts, but that the Boy Scouts was instead providing a benefit
to the City--so no Establishment Clause violation even if the
Boy Scouts is a church! Senior Judge Canby, who was appointed
by President Carter, was troubled by the fact that the ACLU
plaintiffs had never even sought to use the facilities--so
did not have standing even to bring the suit. The ACLU's lawyer
contended that they were offended by having to see Boy Scouts
in uniform on public land!! Finally, even Clinton appointee
Marsha Berzon seemed to be having trouble with the lower court's
decision, as she recognized that it would invalidate the lease
with the Jewish Community Center as well.
We filed
an amicus
brief in the case, in support of the Boy Scouts (of
course). And I participated in a post-argument
press conference, which is available via streaming
video.
Let's hope
the Ninth Circuit rejects the ACLU's radical attack on one
of the premier, good-citizen-forming organizations in the land.
If not, we'll be prepared to help push the matter to the Supreme
Court when the time comes.
[2/15/06
Wednesday]
[Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
More
Move America Forward Concern Got
an email Monday night from my previous posting...
Eric,
I have been on
MAF's e-mail list for a long time. When Howard announced
he was running for Congress, I suddenly started receiving
e-mails and updates from his campaign, even though I never
signed up for them. They continue to this day. So it appears
that MAF either gave or sold their e-mail list to Howard.
Nice racket...campaign
donations going to MAF for non-profit, fund stunts and chairman
endorsements, or...MAF "donated" the email list to Kaloogian,
which means non-profits collecting cash (material) and using
it to support a former founder in a congressional race.
Isn't this the race to replace "Duke" Cunningham?
Hmm.
From another political campaign
and contender for the 50th Congressional...
"This is typical Kaloogian
sleaze. If he did not pay fair market value to MAF for
the list, then they are breaking the law."
Not my words here, but members
of the Republican Party. [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[2/14/06
Tuesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
LAO:
$68 Billion Infrastructure Bonds to Cost $144 Billion I
am grateful to Assemblyman Bill Maze for submitting a letter to Elizabeth Hill,
the Legislative Analyst. The letter requested the Analyst to provide General
Fund revenue and expenditure growth over the next ten years, and the cost of
financing the Governor’s proposed infrastructure bonds. I have posted the
Analyst’s response here:
The Analyst puts the total cost of the Governor’s proposed infrastructure
bonds ($68 billion worth) -- assuming an average 5.75 percent interest rate repaid
over thirty years -- at about $144 billion. The Analyst pegs the annual debt
service under this plan at a whopping $4.8 billion dollars per year.
As I have
written elsewhere, it makes much more sense to devote the money
we would pay in debt service and simply apply that money every
year for infrastructure, thus gaining $78 billion over ten
years ($144 minus $68) in investments in highways, hospitals,
and high priority projects. An even more conservative proposal
would be Assemblyman McCarthy’s bill that would set aside
one percent of the General Fund for infrastructure spending
on an ongoing basis. This would get over $1 billion the first
year, and grow as expenditures grow.
I applaud
the Governor for boldly addressing our state’s infrastructure
needs. He has also indicated he is willing to consider other
approaches.
Governor, I say let’s start now, and let’s pay for it now as well. [Leonard
Blog]
[2/13/06
Monday]
Eric
Hogue - radio talk show host KTKZ -
Sacramento] 12:01 am [permalink]
California Republican Convention War Some
days I feel like a lone voice crying in the wilderness, then you read
a 'common mind' with 'common reasoning' for the California Republican
Party.
Friend, and
blogger, John
Fleischman has penned a column that relates the sediments
that I've tried to convey in the blog for the past two years.
Like
many FR (Flash Report Blog) readers, I endorsed and supported
Arnold Schwarzenegger for Governor. I can tell you
that as a very conservative person, I struggled with the
decision when I made it, as a strong social conservative. Still,
at the end of the day, watching Gray Davis preside over
a pay-to-play economic death spiral for California, and
hearing the fervor and emphatic pledges from Schwarzenegger
to be a fiscal conservative, I was sold. A lot of
us who worked hard to qualify the recall felt that the "Terminator" embodied
the spirit of our recall.
Read the entire
column, especially if you are a delegate to the GOP Convention
later this month. [Hogue Blog -
email: onair@ktkz.com]
[2/10/06
Friday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
Partisan Games
and Bad Laws For the past few years, both parties in Sacramento have
been wrangling
over how to deal with each other’s hot button issues. Each side tries to
position itself to blame the other as soft on crime or for higher taxes. What
all of these machinations made me think of was a significant historical event
that occurred last week: the ratification of the 16th amendment to the U.S. constitution
that established the federal income
tax.
Income and
other direct taxes had been rejected by the Constitution’s
authors, but an income tax was instituted during the Civil
War. That tax was abandoned in 1872, but when Democrats took
power in 1892, they instituted another income tax. Two Supreme
Court cases in 1895 determined that the latest version of the
income tax was unconstitutional. Historian W. Cleon Skousen
explains that in the following decade, “There was great
social unrest and the idea of a tax to soak the rich”‚ began
to take root among liberals in both major parties. Several
times the Democrats introduced bills to provide a tax on higher
incomes but each time the conservative branch of the Republican
party killed it in the Senate. The Democrats used this as evidence
that the Republicans were the “party of the rich‚…”
Texas Democrat
Senator Joseph Bailey introduced an income tax bill with the
intention of embarrassing Republicans by putting them on record
as opposing it. His trick backfired when the liberal wing of
the Republican party supported his bill. President William
Howard Taft and conservative Republican leaders scrambled for
a strategy in light of the split within the GOP. They, too,
devised a tricky tactic: come out in support of an income tax,
but only in the form of an amendment to the Constitution and
only if the Democrats supported reducing unpopular tariffs,
which drove up the price of goods. Thus, the income tax amendment
got out of Congress and was sent to the states. State legislatures
were pressed to approve it to lower the pesky tariffs, which
affected most people whereas the proposed income tax was only
going to a small percentage of the wealthiest Americans. Of
course, those wealthiest Americans anticipated the burden that
would be theirs alone and lobbied for the creation of tax-exemption
charitable foundations, where they put their wealth (e.g.,
Andrew Carnegie).
Thus, the
income tax was foisted upon us a result of the parties seeking
to embarrass each other, the use of catchy slogans to sway
the public, and the public’s belief that new taxes were
acceptable as long as they were applied to other people. Those
dynamics are still in play today and they can lead to laws
that do not accomplish their intended goals, effect people
they were not intended to, and make both parties look foolish. [Leonard
Blog]
[2/9/06
Thursday]
[Carol
Platt Liebau - editorial
director CaliforniaRepublic.org] 12:03 am [permalink]
Dressing
for "Success" Government
employees in California are disgruntled because
a dress code has been put in place.
Imagine the outrage: Employees of San Bernadino County are no longer being
permitted to wear sweatpants to work! And come-hither heels are being banned.
The outrage! The persecution!
More examples of the oppression include banning overalls, sports team gear
and shirts that bare bellybuttons. According to the piece, "Tattoos that can't
be covered by clothing must be covered by other means. Pierced ears and earrings
for both sexes are allowed."
Who in their right mind could object to this? When at work, dress professionally.
What people want to do on their own time is their own business; what they do
on taxpayer time is the taxpayers' business -- and there's nothing wrong with
expecting people to dress (and behave) appropriately. [Liebau
Blog]
[2/8/06
Wednesday]
[Bill
Leonard, contributor,
Member CA Board of Equalization] 12:03 am [permalink]
The
Victim was Terri Winchell: Terri
Winchell was a vivacious 17-year-old young woman in 1981. She was brutally murdered.
Her murderer is due to be executed later this month and it cannot happen a moment
too soon. But as usual when an evil person is about to face man‚s punishment
for his crime, there are people clamoring about his redemption and remorse and
pleading for his life. To those people, I ask you to pause and consider Terri.
No amount of remorse and no variety of his excuses can change what he did to
Terri. And lest you feel pity for him or question his guilt, please recall these
facts: Morales tried to choke Terri with a belt, but it broke so he hit her in
the head with a hammer. Her skull had more than 23 hammer indentations. He dragged
her body face-down across a street, raped her, and stabbed her four times in
the chest, leaving her in a vineyard, naked from the waist down and her shirt
pulled up over her breasts. Terri‚s blood was found in Morales‚s
car. The murder weapons were found at his home. He had blood on his person. Yet,
the media coverage is focusing on the lack of credibility of one witness who
was in jail with Morales. Instead, let's focus on the overwhelming body of evidence
of his guilt and on the victim of his evil, Terri. [Leonard
Blog]
[Found
in the ebag-from reader Elliot
Schroeder] 12:01 am [permalink]
A New Court Not Judges: The judiciary is the
best example of social politics gone awry. Bush hurt California in this
respect. We had a fairly conservative state supreme court here which is
why liberals would always go to the liberal federal 9th circuit to overturn
California laws. BUT, now Bush took one of our conservative supreme court
justices and there is no way Arnold can get a conservative back on there.
But this
brings up another point. The GOP was all excited to get an
opening on the bench and opposing "activist judges." They
are merely putting activist conservative judges, just going
for the machine's switches and not smashing the machine. A
long time ago, especially when Rehnquist was there, they could
of passed legislation limiting Judicial Review to only 'review'
and not interpret. And that review should be based on the 10th
Amendment: is it legal for the federal govt to do it or is
it a state issue?
[2/7/06
Tuesday]
[Carol
Platt Liebau - editorial
director CaliforniaRepublic.org] 12:03 am [permalink]
LA
Times Spinning the Economic News Brent
Bozell points out that both ABC and CBS ignored the
fact that the unemployment rate has fallen to its lowest
level since July of 2001. Even more egregious was the LA
Times' coverage: "Falling
Jobless Rate Boosts Wages but Fuels Concern on Prices and
Profits." There's always a "concern" when it comes to the
Bush economy, isn't there? And the jump headline eliminated
the positive reference to wage increases . . .
Interestingly, the Times piece begins as follows:
A strong job report Friday helped revive a troubling theme prominent during
the economic boom of the late 1990s: What's good for workers may not necessarily
be good for investors and monetary policymakers.
Yes, I remember hearing so much about that "troubling theme" from the
LA Times during the heyday of the late '90's boom. [Liebau
Blog]
[2/6/06
Monday]
[Carol
Platt Liebau - editorial
director CaliforniaRepublic.org] 12:03 am [permalink]
Insulting Underlying
Assumption Gregory
Rodriguez has some very interesting -- and well-aimed -- criticism
of the DNC for having Mayor Villaraigosa deliver a response to the State
of the Union
Address in Spanish.
He's right: The decision reflects some insulting underlying assumptions. [Liebau
Blog]
[2/3/06
Thursday]
[Tim
Leslie - State Assemblyman, columnist]
12:03 am [permalink]
Doolittle It is no secret that the local media does not like Congressman
John Doolittle. As a result, the Jack Abramoff scandal has been a godsend.
Because Abramoff and Doolittle were friends, Abramoff's troubles have given
the Sacramento Bee, the Auburn Journal, KCRA and others a perfect opportunity
to deal in "guilt by association."
Without evidence
of a single miss-step, the Congressman has been negatively
portrayed on a regular basis. They detail his comings and goings,
but have yet to reveal any inappropriate actions.
What is the
media after? It appears the primary effort is to smear the
Congressman in time for his re-election campaign. While they
can't find anything wrong, they can at least cover him with
miss-trust and innuendo. After all, it is well know that the
answers never catch up with the allegations. In this case it
is even more insidious, as there are not even any allegations
to refute.
John Doolittle
has done a wonderful job representing our area. He has been
known for his honesty and integrity. He is even better known
for his commitment to conservative principles. Unfortunately,
he is not known for a warm and fuzzy personality. This makes
it easier for his detractors to attack him, and they take full
advantage of it.
At some point
it might be worth noting that the Congressman's growing seniority
in the House of Representatives, and his leadership responsibilities
are of great benefit to our region. His voice and position
have brought substantial additional resources to Placer, Sacramento
and El Dorado Counties.
I know John
on a personal basis and have full confidence in him. Until
someone can show that he has actually done anything wrong,
I am proud to stand by his side in the face of these unfair
attacks.
It is time
for us to say "Thank You" to John Doolittle. I certainly
anticipate his representation for many years to come.
[2/1/06
Wednesday]
[Thomas
Del Beccaro columnist]
12:02
am [permalink]
The
State of Intrigue Arnold, Perata, Nunez and Villaraigosa -
In this upside down world we call California politics,
few things are what they seem, but always full of intrigue.
The
Protagonists.
Arnold. Our
maverick Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has charted a new course
politically. He has proposed an ambitious infrastructure program
paid for by bonds. There are few precedents in history for
such a high stakes proposal during an election year and so
2006 promises to be interesting if not nail-biting - but that
is not the half of it.
Don
Perata & Fabian
Nunez. On the Democrats' side, Senate Majority Leader
Don Perata (East Bay/9th District) and Assembly Speaker Fabian
Nunez (46th Dist/Los Angeles) are having the time of their
life.
Each are majority leaders presiding over caucuses with wide margins over their
Republican counter-parts. But even that is not the half of it.
To the contrary,
both Perata and Nunez enjoy perhaps an unprecedented relationship
with the Governor of the opposing Party.
Indeed, in numerous and important instances, Perata and Nunez have negotiated
directly with the Governor without the presence of their Republican counterparts.
Such access and influence is rare and appreciated by both men.
Perhaps even
more significant than their relationship with Arnold is their
lack of fondness for Steve Westly and Phil Angelides – the
Democrat front-runners for governor. In fact, it is no secret
that neither candidate is a favorite of the other Dems in Sacramento.
Antonio
R. Villaraigosa. The new Mayor of Los Angeles is young
and has an enormous opportunity to reshape California politics.
Beyond being the Mayor of the 2nd largest city in the United
States, and the potential for success that that brings, Villaraigosa
is young, attractive and Latino. You do the math.
If Villaraigosa
succeeds, then there is but no question that he would be the
leading Democrat candidate in the future for Governor.
Something
his good friend Fabian Nunez would love to see.
The
Intrigue.
Therein lies
all the elements. Perata and Nunez like working with Arnold – some
would even say they are getting what they want as a matter
of policy already. They are not fond of Westly or Angelides
and – and this is important – if either is elected
over Arnold – then the power of Perata and Nunez is diminished
significantly. Instead of being the face of the Party and the
media draws that they are, they would have to take a back seat
to either of two men with whom they do not have a close relationship.
On the other
hand, if Arnold is reelected, they maintain power for four
more years – and in 2010 – their good friend Villaraigosa
would be the front-runner for Governor. Oh, and by the way,
did I mention that Arnold has spoken well of Villaraigosa?
Oliver Stone
movie or California politics? You decide..
Go to CRO
Blog January 2006
Go to CRO
Blog archive index
|
