Earlier, I blogged about Taumas Colliver – he of the Placer County is Ruled by White, Male Republicans and the crazy anon blogger talking about Occupied Placer County. Well, the all-star team just added another to their roster.

Who is Joanne Neft?

Joanne Neft purports to be a lifelong Republican. She is purported to be a close associate of Liberal Republican Supervisor Robert Weygant.

Joanne Neft has never given a dime to the Placer County Republican Party in the entire time I have been involved with it.

Neft wrote Liberal Democrat Jennifer Montgomery a $1500 check, as reported on Montgomery’s 6/30 form 460.

Neft wrote Charlie Brown a check for $1,627 in 2006.

Now Republican Joanne Neft is up to her old tricks. After supporting and lending her name to the attempted recall of two Republican members of Sierra College’s Board of Trustees – she is a “leader” in the Save Sierra College effort to elect Liberal Democrat activists to that board.

In 2002, Neft was part of the Placer County Republican Congress slate of Liberal Republicans that formed to attempt the takeover of the Central Committee. They were also active in supporting John Doolittle’s primary opponent, Bill Kirby. This was pre-Abramoff – Doolittle won with 78% of the vote.

Neft is involved with the Sierra Club and like organizations.

In 2002, Neft authored the John Doolittle coloring book – that may have been a violation of Campaign Finance Laws, but nevertheless was replete with attacks against John for supporting Hunters, Gun Rights, Development and Tax Cuts.

In 2006, Neft was part of Now-Democrat former Congressman Pete McCloskey’s effort to weaken John Doolittle in the primary called “Revolt of the Elders”. Again, their mailer was replete with Environmentalist attacks.

Neft has never endorsed or supported Bruce Kranz, she supported Liberal Democrat Rex Bloomfield.

Neft has never endorsed or supported Ted Gaines in the time I have been active.

Neft has never endorsed or supported John Doolittle – and I won’t hold my breath waiting for her to support McClintock either.

Now – Save Sierra College is bragging about Bi-partisan support of “Community Activists”…

Neft has a right to her opinions. As a Republican activist, I have a right to call her a fraud. She certainly fits the mold of the OBM Machine.

Save Sierra College (From What!?) Update – how Sierra College turned 50 Acres into a $100,000 per year obligation.

Enter Roger Yohe – disgraced former WPUSD School District superintendent and his colleague / long time friend Kevin Ramirez.

Save Sierra College was formed to avenge the “retirement” of Kevin Ramirez – the former President of Sierra College.

As posted a couple of weeks ago – the WPUSD is embroiled in a financial mess because they followed Yohe’s vision into the Abyss. The Sierra College Board “retired” Ramirez before his megalomania could wreck the same havoc on Sierra College.

As Detailed Earlier – Yohe’s WPUSD Maladies and Kevin Ramirez’s vision of creating the same mess have startling parallels.

Apparently, those seeking to avenge Ramirez want to return to those days again.

In the 2003-2004 time period, a deal was struck between Kevin Ramirez, Roger Yohe and the City of Lincoln for a Lincoln Library.

Sierra College owned 72 acres in Lincoln – (Where Barbara Vineyard’s Taj Mahal Campus was to have been built if Measure E had passed) they sold 45 acres and ceded a few more acres to facilitate the development of a library. In sum, 50 acres were sold and the entire proceeds of the sale were poured into the construction of the library.

What did Sierra College get? A bill in perpetuity for $100,000 a year for the operation of the library.

Now the College has 20 useless acres, a satellite campus will need three times that. Ramirez must have envisioned a 24 story skyscraper like the Auburn “Tribe” is going to build on Industrial Blvd.

With current “Save Sierra College” boosters on his rubber-stamp board Ramirez got this plan adopted. Barbara Vineyard and Bill Martin associate Dave Creek sat on that board, now they are advocating that saving Sierra College is returning to the Ramirez era of fiscal mismanagement.

Bill Martin for that matter is advocating a ½ Billion Dollar Bond (I guess a 32-40 Story building in Lincoln?) and Barbara Vineyard is fond of saying that Scott Leslie and Aaron Klein are the reason why Sierra College will never get a bond passed again.

Roger Yohe – he led Western Placer into the Abyss, in 2005 he said, “Kevin Ramirez is the best superintendent I have ever worked with!”

Save Sierra College. Re-Elect Scott Leslie and Aaron Klein.

Please Contact the Members of the Senate Appropriations Committee Today!

Three anti-gun bills have been placed in the suspense file due to cost constraints, however they could possibly be resurrected during a special Senate Appropriations Committee hearing scheduled for tomorrow, Thursday, August 7.

Assembly Bill 2062 would require an individual to possess a license to purchase ammunition, require vendors to keep a detailed record of the transaction, and simply ban mail or internet ammunition orders.

Assembly Bill 2235 would ban the sale of handguns other than “owner-authorized (or “smart”) handguns”—that is, handguns with a permanent, programmable biometric feature that renders the firearm useless unless activated by an authorized user.

Assembly Bill 2948 would prohibit the sale of firearms and ammunition on the property or inside the buildings that comprise the Cow Palace.

Please contact the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee and respectfully urge them to oppose these anti-freedom measures. Contact information for the Senate Appropriations Committee is below.

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE:

State Senator Tom Torlakson (Chair)
Phone: (916) 651-4007
Fax: (916) 445-2527

State Senator Dave Cox (Vice Chair)
Phone: (916) 651-4001
Fax: (916) 324-2680

State Senator Samuel Aanestad
Phone: (916) 651-4004
Fax: (916) 445-7750

State Senator Roy Ashburn
Phone: (916) 651-4018
Fax: (916) 322-3304

State Senator Gilbert Cedillo
Phone: (916) 651-4022
Fax: (916) 327-8817

State Senator Ellen Corbett
Phone: (916) 651-4010
Fax: (916) 327-2433

State Senator Robert Dutton
Phone: (916) 651-4031
Fax: (916) 327-2272

State Senator Dean Florez
Phone: (916) 651-4016
Fax: (916) 327-5989

State Senator Sheila Kuehl
Phone: (916) 651-4023
Fax: (916) 324-4823
senator.kuehl@sen.ca.gov

State Senator Jenny Oropeza
Phone: (916) 651-4028
Fax: (916) 323-6056

State Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas
Phone: (916) 651-4026
Fax: (916) 445-8899

State Senator George Runner
Phone: (916) 651-4017
Fax: (916) 445-4662

State Senator Joe Simitian
Phone: (916) 651-4011
Fax: (916) 323-4529

State Senator Mark Wyland
Phone: (916) 651-4038
Fax: (916) 446-7382

State Senator Leland Yee
Phone: (916) 651-4008
Fax: (916) 327-2186

Sorry Charlie!

SOURCE: Rasmussen Reports – Number of Democrats in US Declines in July

MORE BAD NEWS FOR CHARLIE BROWN

Number of Democrats in US Declines in July

Over the weekend, the Charlie Brown camp learned that John McCain has pulled even with Barack Obama in national polls and that McCain is attracting conservative Democrats. The second round of bad news from Rasmussen Reports involves registration and party identification. People are beginning to defect from the Democrat Party.

In the 4th CD, the Democrats have hemorrhaged 4% registration. This is amazing considering that Arnold bankrupt the California Republican Party getting his bonds passed in 2006.

During July, the number of Americans who consider themselves to be Democrats fell two percentage points to 39.2%. That’s the first time since January that the number of Democrats has fallen below 41% (see history from January 2004 to present).

Link to raw data

While the number of Democrats declined, there was virtually no change in the number of Republicans. In July, 31.6% said they were Republicans, the fourth straight month that number has been between 31.4% and 31.6%.

The Democrats now have a 7.6 percentage point advantage over the Republicans, down from a 9.5 percentage point advantage in June and 10.1 percentage points in May.

Rasmussen Reports tracks this information based upon telephone interviews with approximately 15,000 adults per month and has been doing so since November 2002.

Among men, 34% are Democrats, 33% Republican. Forty-four percent (44%) of women are Democrats, and just 30% claim the GOP as their party.

Forty-one percent (41%) of government employees are Democrats while 31% are Republicans. Among entrepreneurs, 36% are Republican, 34% Democrat. Those who work for someone else in the private sector lean Democratic by a 38% to 31% margin.

In January and February, while Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were in the early stages of the battle for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, the number of Americans who considered themselves to be Democrats surged to record highs.

In 2004, the Democrats began the year with a 2.3 percentage point edge over the GOP. That grew to 4.0 points by March before moving in the Republican direction for the rest of the year. By Election Day in 2004, the edge for Democrats was a mere 1.6 percentage points.
In 2006, the Democrats began the year with just a 1.6 percentage point advantage. That grew to 6.1 percentage points by November.

These results are based upon tracking surveys of 15,000 adults per month. The margin of sampling error for the sample is less than one percentage point, with a 95% level of confidence. Please keep in mind that figures reported in this article are for all adults, not Likely Voters.

In order for Charlie Brown to win the 4th congressional seat, a lot of things have to go his way. A new opponent, lower than expected party registration numbers, gasoline prices driving more people to re-think offshore drilling and success in Iraq is making life difficult for ol’ Charlie.

Sorry Charlie.

This is an informative piece from the Sierra Club – who has endorsed Jennifer Montgomery (whose letters to the editor oppose development and tell tourists to go home…) and the Sierra Club Endorsed Charlie Brown in 2006.

OBM Machine = Obama / Brown / Montgomery

From the Chair: by Marilyn Jasper

Link to Web Page (Click on the “From the Chair” button to find the source of this post.)

Blogger’s Note: Marilyn Jasper is Presidnet of the Mother Lode Sierra Club – The “Placer Group” (commune) are active in the Montgomery for Supervisor / Brown for Congress campaigns.

SO VERY NICE: Our heartfelt thanks to volunteers that helped at the Confluence Festival. Kathy Randazzo, Kathy and Phil Weber, Carol and Chris Love, and Terry Davis warmly greeted the steady flow of folks to our booth. Also, a huge thanks goes to Krista Norieka for all her work on the Chapter’s Awards Party at Claire Tappaan Lodge—what a success that was! Kudos are in order to Caroline Hickson and Millee Livingston who also work steadily behind the scenes.

NOT SO NICE: In our effort to protect the environment and save precious ecological landscapes from destruction, we’ve heard more than one elected representative state that “private property rights” must be upheld. They proclaim that landowners should be “made whole” and suffer no economic losses.

Blogger’s Note: Translation – take their land for eco-mitigation and don’t give them a dime. Nice.

The fallacy of “private property rights” has been carved into our psyches as if it’s a commandment. Ownership rights have turned into property rights and are morphing toward profit rights. From opposing laws and ordinances that govern the use of property, proponents of private property rights now seem to want profit guarantees as well.

Example: You have a right to buy shares of stock, to have private ownership rights in publicly traded companies. You know a good buy when you see one, so you make a major investment. However, if the stock market slips, if values decline, or if the company goes bankrupt, are your speculative losses insured? If you buy land in a speculative venture, does the government provide a FLSIC (Federal Land Speculation Insurance Corporation) as it does for bank deposits?

Blogger’s Note – This is an absurd argument, it sounds a lot like the you can’t support the war unless you have served argument

The right to own property has taken a turn toward a sanctimonious right to an increase in economic “value.” With incredible stealth and duplicity, the concept of private property rights has promoted a subtle “government guarantee” façade with elected officials seemingly afraid to buck land speculators and/or make decisions that are in the public good. Land speculators and developers have done a great job in duping the public with beliefs that their profit margins somehow trump sustainable-life issues, environmental values, and future costs to communities. As elected officials eagerly embrace the profit motive and spin the “private property rights” mantra, they become de facto brokers for speculators even though there is no public mandate to do so.

(Blogger’s Note: Translation – We need more government regulation, stop enterpreneurship – Montgomery for Supervisor.)

We, the public, have been sold a bill of goods as well—that we can do nothing. Wrong. We can do a great deal, but we need to roll up our sleeves and work to right this travesty. We need to take back the right to make land use decisions based on what’s good for communities and future generations and not be blinded or hamstrung by profit propaganda.

Last, even if we buy into the pseudo private property rights concept, look at whose property rights are really being damaged. When new developments diminish air quality, create nightmarish traffic jams, pollute our water sources, and/or bring wildlife to the brink of extinction, haven’t we also lost our right to enjoy our property, to live healthy lives? Speculators complain loudly at any hint of jeopardizing their bottom line; we should be protesting even louder because our basic lifestyle rights have been compromised. To tweak words attributed to the producer of “Sicko,” There is no room for the concept of profits when all life depends upon a healthy environment.

(Blogger’s Note – It is amazing that they whine about pollution and traffic jams when they advocated for making traffic worse in King’s Beach and worsening pollution with idling cars. Also further note the contempt for development and growth… people wonder why California’s Government is so screwed up, these Sierra Club Types run large parts of it.)

Three signs we are winning the argument on energy

First, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her anti-energy allies in the House skipped town without even scheduling a vote on The American Energy Act – the kind of common sense, “all of the above” energy strategy Americans favor.

Then MoveOn.org sent a desperate email to their supporters asking for money to air an ad to slow the momentum of the movement for America to develop more American energy now.

And Senator Obama, who until late last week opposed offshore drilling, said he would now favor offshore drilling as part of a comprehensive energy strategy for America.

But we all know that after a retreat, the opposition will try to regroup. It’s time to double our efforts to prevent that from happening.

To block a vote on energy, Nancy Pelosi tried cutting the power in the House

Pro-energy House Republicans are doing just that this week, refusing to let Nancy Pelosi and her anti-energy allies get away with ducking the energy issue.

On Friday morning, Nancy Pelosi suddenly and without warning, adjourned the House of Representatives. She knew how badly the anti-energy left was losing the argument over energy and knew she couldn’t allow a full day of discussion about the American Energy Act to take place in front of the C-Span cameras and press. So she called the vote to adjourn, and when House Republicans refused to leave, Nancy Pelosi ordered the microphones and lights in the House be turned off.

Think about this: In order to block a vote on energy for America, Nancy Pelosi tried to cut off power to the House of Representatives.

But Boehner and pro-energy representatives remembered where power really comes from

However, Rep. John Boehner and many other pro-energy representatives have refused to allow Nancy Pelosi to duck the energy issue. They know that Congress derives its power from the American people. Speaker Pelosi can’t order that power supply shut off.

They’re still in Washington this week, making speeches on the House floor to visitors and press…

Here’s a flavor of the House Republicans historic uprising:

“We are the light of the world, we are the leaders of the free world. But when we depend on foreign energy we cannot be as strong of a leader as we should and can be.” – Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA)

“You need to let your congressman know that he or she works for you, not the Speaker of the House.” – Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-IL)

“Here’s a letter from the Gardner family in Texas. They can’t afford to both go on vacation and send their son to Boy Scout camp. They can’t afford it. If the Gardners can’t, then neither should Pelosi and the Congress!” – Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)

“Common sense is not very common in Washington, D.C… Why aren’t we using all the resources that we Americans can bring to the table?... We need to use our American ingenuity to solve these problems…We will get it done if there’s a vote on this floor.” – Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA):

And perhaps most importantly, House Minority Leader John Boehner yesterday promised to keep up this pressure throughout the month of August:

“The only way we’re ever going to bring her to heel and allow a vote is for us to continue to put pressure on her. And so it’s 25 Members we had in Congress today, led by Tom Price and Mike Pence. It’s Members all over the country doing their townhall meetings, doing their rotary clubs, they’re all talking about it. And we’re going to keep talking about it until we get our vote.” – John Boehner, OH

Finally, and most importantly, write your representative to let them know you want them back in session to pass an energy bill and to applaud Boehner’s leadership. Call talk radio as well. Nancy Pelosi may have turned off the lights in the House, but that doesn’t mean we can’t turn on the heat in response.

MoveOn.org Admits the Obvious: The Pro Energy Coalition is Winning the Argument

Nancy Pelosi is not the only member of the anti-energy left looking desperate.

In an urgent email sent to their members last week, the far Left activist group wrote about the national debate over how to best lower gas and energy prices, “Here’s the truth: Right now, progressives are losing this argument.”

They’re right. We are winning and the Left is losing the argument over our country’s energy future because Americans know that thirty years of their policies has led to the current mess.

For decades, anti-energy, left-wing politicians have advocated higher prices and less energy. They were going to save the environment by punishing Americans into driving less and driving smaller cars. They favor a policy of no oil and gas exploration, no use of coal, and no development of nuclear power.

The result has been that over the last three decades, America has relied more and more on foreign oil rather than American oil, and our nation’s power grid has been stretched thin because litigation and regulation has made it so difficult to build new sources of electricity.

The American people can see this, so they’re rejecting the Left’s philosophy of less energy and inconvenience in favor of a pro-investment, pro-creativity, pro-production, and pro-conservation energy coalition.

MoveOn.org Fails Einstein’s Test of Insanity

You’d think this much would be obvious to the Left, but the email they sent to their supporters and the advertisement they want to run is filled with the same discredited arguments about American energy production that the American people have rejected over this summer.

It claims not only that more American energy, including opening up additional areas to oil and natural gas development, would have no immediate effect on gas prices, but that even in the long term, more American oil and gas on the market is only a “gimmick.”

Someone should remind MoveOn.org that Einstein’s definition of insanity was “doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.”

Not only does MoveOn.org still think that the Left’s same, misguided energy scarcity policies are good for America, despite the obvious; they also think that the American people are going to continue to buy their arguments.

That’s just crazy, and you don’t have to be a Nobel Prize winning physicist to know it.

That’s why we can be confident in our solutions and our answers to their faulty arguments. Check out our Facts Sheet at American Solutions for rebuttals to the anti-energy left’s most common arguments.

Oh, and just for fun, check out Jay Leno’s take on why the Left’s phony “it will take 10 years” argument holds no water. Watch here.

This summer, as you talk with your friends and neighbors about high gas prices, don’t let the anti-energy left get away with using the same discredited arguments, and don’t let them shirk the responsibility they bear for putting us in the energy crisis today.

The Obama Opportunity: the President Should Call Congress Back Into Session

Finally, in another sign that we are winning the argument over America’s energy future, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has indicated he would support offshore drilling as part of a larger energy strategy.

This is amazing progress considering it was just a few months ago that Senator Obama was not only opposed to more American oil production, he repeatedly voted to keep America ignorant of our own offshore energy resources. (Check out this excellent article at PowerlineBlog.com for more.)

This is real progress. It’s also a real opportunity.

President Bush has the power to call the Congress back into session, but so far he’s said he has no plans to do so. It’s up to us to change his mind. There should be no confusion as to where Nancy Pelosi and her anti-energy allies on the left stand when it comes to a common sense energy strategy the American people want. You can call the White House at 202-456-1111 to encourage the President.

In addition, we should call our Congressmen and ask them to call on the President to bring them back into session. And if your Congressman isn’t one of those staying in Washington to protest Nancy Pelosi adjourning without passing an energy bill, make sure if you see him or her in your district to ask why they are on vacation instead of working to lower gas prices.

Second, Senator McCain should challenge Senator Obama to work with him to create and pass an energy bill in the Senate before the election that includes opening up more areas to oil and natural gas development (including offshore and in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)) as part of a larger, comprehensive energy policy that also includes conservation efforts, nuclear power (Obama has indicated he would support building more plants under the right conditions), and incentives for new technologies.

Then, the question for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will then be simple: with their party’s nominee for President supporting more American oil production and the American people overwhelmingly supporting it as well, will they still oppose a common-sense energy policy that uses all of our American energy resources?

Another Question for Nancy Pelosi, This Time on Immigration

Finally, the news that the suspect of a brutal murder in San Francisco is a known illegal immigrant begs the question whether or not Nancy Pelosi will pass Einstein’s insanity test with regard to her support of sanctuary city policies.

Edwin Ramos had twice been convicted on felony charges as a juvenile, and his status as an illegal immigrant was known. Yet he was released from jail nearly three months before these recent slayings, protected from the country’s immigration policies because of San Francisco’s sanctuary policy.

As I wrote last year when a known illegal immigrant shot four students, killing three, it is simply beyond belief that cities would knowingly shield felons and suspected felons from the country’s immigration laws. Now, in San Francisco – Nancy Pelosi’s district – the tragic results speak for themselves.

This horrible story comes at the same time that the Center for Immigration Studies announced that increased enforcement on the US/Mexico border has decreased the number of illegal immigrants in the country by 1.3 million. Furthermore, their study concludes that the decline of the illegal population was at least seven times larger than the number of actual people removed by the government in the last ten months. This means that most of the decline is due to people here illegally leaving voluntarily as a result of the enforcement.

The evidence is clear: enforcement works; sanctuary policies don’t.

Will Nancy Pelosi (not to mention the rest of the Left) finally back the enforcement of our country’s laws or will they continue to cling to policies that don’t work and expect a different result?

Written by Newt Gingrich

The Kool-Aid Award goes to the OBM Machine – (Obama / Brown / Montgomery) How stupid do they think voters are! We all knew that the Obama Energy Plan was a fraud!

This E-mail was sent out to Placer County Democrats by the local Sierra Club Chapter

If you are concerned about Sen Obama’s position on offshore drilling, you must read the statement below from the Sierra Club.

The sender wrote the following preface:

Some Obama supporters have been concerned about the Senator’s recent statements concerning offshore oil drilling. Below is a Sierra Club memo to Club staff and volunteers explaining the Senator’s positions on energy. If you think it would be of value to circulate it to your Dem list, please feel free to do so.

To: Field and activists
FR: David Willett and Athan Manuel
RE: Update on offshore drilling and Obama

Last Friday, Senator Obama released a statement concerning proposed legislation from a bipartisan group of Senators that includes opening some areas to off-shore driling. He also made comments to the Palm Beach Post that some have interpreted as going further than the written statement in
support for drilling. Finally, Obama is giving a major speech in Michigan today on his energy policy. Some in the media are attempting to portray a major shift in Obama’s policies, but a closer look reveals that his statements were consistent with his existing policy. The biggest shift Obama is making today is calling for the opening of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve—something Nancy Pelosi has been calling for for weeks and which
the Sierra Club has supported.

Key points for reference On Obama’s Energy Plan.

Senator Obama has strong positions and an excellent record on energy and environmental issues. His new plan released today prioritizes efforts that will benefit working families instead of the outdated fossil fuel industries. Like the Sierra Club, Senator Obama supports creating millions of jobs by investing in the cleanest technologies to meet our energy needs and stimulate our economy. Senator Obama’s mix of short and long term measures includes key goals like a windfall profits tax on Big Oil to pay for immediate consumer relief, a comprehensive and science-based plan for tackling global warming, increased fuel economy standards, a renewable energy standard, and more energy efficiency.

Senator McCain’s Energy Policy instead focuses on the wrong priorities. Instead of helping move America off oil, expanding our energy options or investing in a clean energy future that will create jobs our nation desperately needs, John McCain is offering more of the same policies that have devastated our economy but which are demanded by Big Oil who has given McCain more than $2 million. McCain’s plans won’t give consumers relief, but they will mean more profits for the oil companies and a third term for Bush energy policies that have benefitted the wealthy and powerful special interests and left ordinary families behind.

On Drilling:

1. As the Palm Beach Post points out, there was no new position or change in policy in Senator Obama’s statements about the legislative proposal, “Obama has always said that he supports expanded drilling in existing open
areas, which include offshore areas. His campaign figures there are 68 million acres currently open that are not being drilled on by oil companies. He opposes lifting the moratorium on drilling in the outer continental shelf.” In his speech today, Obama said specifically, “We should invest in the technology that can help us recover more from existing oil fields, and speed up the process of recovering oil and gas resources in shale formations in Montana and North Dakota; Texas and Arkansas and in
parts of the West and Central Gulf of Mexico.”

2. While open to drilling in existing areas, Obama actually prioritizes ending Big Oil’s tax breaks, while investing in fuel-effient cars and wind, solar and biofuels. He also states, “I remain skeptical that new offshore drilling will bring down gas prices in the short-term or significantly reduce our oil dependence in the long-term, though I do welcome the establishment of a process that will allow us to make future drilling
decisions based on science and fact.”

3. Obama’s energy plan does include some drilling, specifically the 68 million acre “use it or lose it” proposal that has already been outlined in Congress and defeated by Republicans. His speech also discussed increased production in the Western and Central Gulf of Mexico where drilling already occurs. And there is also discussion in his plan of production of oil and gas from shale. The Sierra Club Board of Directors has created a task force to develop Sierra Club’s position on fracturing on shale for gas production.

4. As both Barack Obama and T Boone Pickens have said, we can’t drill our way out of this problem. Drilling our coasts would do nothing to reduce gas prices for the average American family—it would only line the coffers of the oil industry, which raked in more than $50 billion in profits in just the past three months alone. More offshore drilling is not a short-term fix. It would take at least a decade to bring new leases into production, and twenty years for them to reach peak production. With less than 3 percent of the world’s oil reserves, the oil would amount to a drop in the bucket on the world market and would have a negligible effect on gas prices, if any at all.

*Statement from Friday available from www.barackobama.com
Chicago, IL – Below is a Statement from Senator Barack Obama on the ‘Gang of Ten Bipartisan Energy Plan’ to Reduce Gas Prices and Break our Addiction to Foreign Oil:

“For too long, partisan gridlock and special interest influence has blocked progress on some of the most urgent challenges facing the American people, and that is especially true when it comes to our energy crisis. That is why I welcome today’s bipartisan effort as an important step in the process of reducing our dangerous dependence on foreign oil, and why I look forward to September’s bipartisan energy summit.

“Today’s announcement includes many of the policies I’ve been fighting for during my time in the Senate and over the course of this campaign. It would repeal tax breaks for oil companies so that we can invest billions in fuel-efficient cars, help our automakers re-tool, and make a genuine commitment to renewable sources of energy like wind power, solar power, and the next generation of clean, affordable biofuels.

“Like all compromises, it also includes steps that I haven’t always supported. I remain skeptical that new offshore drilling will bring down gas prices in the short-term or significantly reduce our oil dependence in the long-term, though I do welcome the establishment of a process that will allow us to make future drilling decisions based on science and fact.

“But I’ve always believed that finding consensus will be essential to solving our energy crisis, and today’s package represents a good faith effort at a new bipartisan beginning. In the coming days, I’ll be laying out additional steps I believe we must take to bring down gas prices for good and truly free ourselves from our dependence on foreign oil.”

Politico ran this story

California Democrat Nancy Pelosi may be trying to save the planet — but the rank and file in her party increasingly are just trying to save their political hides when it comes to gas prices as Republicans apply more and more rhetorical muscle.

But what looks like intraparty tension on the surface is part of an intentional strategy in which Pelosi takes the heat on energy policy, while behind the scenes she’s encouraging vulnerable Democrats to express their independence if it helps them politically, according to Democratic aides on and off Capitol Hill.

Blogger’s Note – There you have it, Democrats are using drilling as a prop and don’t really intend to do anything about Gas Prices. WWCBD?

Pelosi’s gambit rests on one big assumption: that Democrats will own Washington after the election and will be able to craft a sweeping energy policy that is heavy on conservation and fuel alternatives while allowing for some new oil drilling. Democrats see no need to make major concessions on energy policy with a party poised to lose seats in both chambers in just three months — even if recess-averse Republicans continue to pound away on the issue.

Blogger’s Note – I thought the Democrats were the party of the little guy, I guess not. Why do the right thing for America today when you think you will control tomorrow?

“The reality is we will have a new president in three months, and what Bush and the Republicans are trying to do amounts to a land grab for the oil companies,” said one senior House Democratic aide involved with party strategy. “I don’t think we have to give in at all pre-election — we have many more options postelection.”

It’s a reality that Rep. Nick J. Rahall (D-W.Va.) personally delivered to President Bush recently.

Rahall spent more than an hour last week talking to the president about energy. Bush spent the entire flight aboard Air Force One, and much of a subsequent limousine ride, grilling the West Virginia Democrat about legislative solutions to the high price of gasoline, Rahall said last week.

So, does the president think Congress can get anything done this year?

“No,” Rahall replied in a short interview with Politico. “He’s realistic about it.”

Asked if Congress will produce a comprehensive energy bill in September before Congress adjourns again for elections, Rahall replied, “This year? No.”

Instead, the chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources believes Democrats are all about 2009.

“We’ve laid the groundwork this year,” Rahall said.

Democratic House aides say the energy agenda has been carefully gamed out in strategy sessions, and Pelosi always intended to take heat on gas prices while tacitly encouraging more vulnerable Democrats to publicly disagree with her and show their independence.

Freshman Democrats like Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania and Don Cazayoux of Louisiana have taken her up on the offer.

Blogger’s Note: They are both sitting in Republican seats. Are you taking notes Charlie? When is the spin going to start?

Altmire has said a drilling vote “will happen,” while Cazayoux, hoping to hang on to his seat in a conservative Baton Rouge-area district, on Friday sent a letter to Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) demanding a vote on more domestic oil exploration.

“There will be a vote,” said Altmire, who faces a rematch with former GOP Rep. Melissa Hart this fall in the Pittsburgh suburbs.

Indeed, Congress must vote before Sept. 30 to renew the annual moratorium; otherwise, it will lapse on its own, giving states the right to decide whether private companies can search for potential drilling sites three miles offshore.

“My view is that if we have a vote, let’s make it a rational policy,” said Altmire, whose district includes viable coal and nuclear industries. “We can’t let Republicans hold this issue hostage because of one vote.”

Cazayoux, in his letter, says “the current debate seems to be bogged down in partisan one-upmanship.”

To some extent, House Republicans seem to be playing right along with the strategy, taking Pelosi’s name in vain dozens of times during their rebel House sessions over the past few days and making her the villain who won’t allow oil drilling votes.

“It’s grossly unfair to the Democrats who want a vote,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). “[Pelosi] needs to cut that out.”

The Senate has also gone with a run-out-the-clock strategy, with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) calling for a bipartisan energy summit but promising no major energy votes. Reid embraced the drilling and conservation proposals of the bipartisan Senate “Gang of 10” last week, but he made further commitment on the energy debate.

Reid, like Pelosi, is expecting to have a much stronger governing majority in the Senate next year, so he has little incentive to give in to Republicans on energy policy as long as he thinks it won’t hurt Democrats.

Even as they face heat from constituents during the August break, Democrats say they aren’t going to cave in to popular pressure.

“We feel pretty comfortable with where we are,” said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.), who is close to the Democratic leadership. “This is a not a new issue. This just didn’t happen today. We’ve been working on this for months.”

Democratic insiders said that Pelosi and other party leaders were “not rattled” by the GOP floor rebellion, and at this point, it’s not clear if the Democrats will even pay a price on energy. State-level polling conducted by Democrats suggests that voters still view President Bush and the GOP as the incumbent power in Washington, and Democratic strategists believe any anti-incumbent wave would hurt Republicans more than Democrats.

Blogger’s Note – Translation, screw America because we think Republicans are taking the fall here.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, one of the leaders of the rogue GOP House session, said he realizes that Democrats are “in a four-corners stall right now,” and admits that “it gets more challenging” for Republicans if they lose more seats in Congress.

Democrats are also comforted somewhat by the fact that crude oil prices have gone down more than 10 percent from their summer highs, and if the U.S. economy enters a recession, prices may fall further due to slackening demand.

“There is no crisis on our side of the aisle,” a top House Democratic leadership aide said. “We have a plan, and we will stick to it.”

Blogger’s Note – Translation, America, Bend Over. Charlie Brown for Congress…

Is Brown really a moderate? He is now to the left of Obama on Energy Policy.

Obama has flip-flopped in a spectacular way, even the most liberal of Democrats realize that they need several more years of brainwashing the American People into getting out of their cars.

There simply is not enough Nickel-Cadmium to stripmine out of the Forests of Canada to make Priuses, and people hate public transportation for a number of reasons.

Now – Obama is admitting that for the forseeable future – Drilling is the Answer. WWCBD? Is Charlie going to flip-flop? McClintock doesn’t have to worry – he has and will continue to support drilling.

Sorry Charlie – Obama just left you behind as the candidate of $8 a gallon gas.

Further proof of values by polling data – the AP article about the Obamessiah’s Energy revelation.

P.S. Ever notice how pictures of Obama make him look like a preacher with his arms up?

This was posted by PCRA Member Mark Klang on his own blog and is re-posted here.

Conservative Betrayed Blog

Lets set the players:

Senator Barack Obama – Liberal Democrat and the Democratic Presidential Nominee.

Rocklin School Board

Greg Daley – Registered Republican but votes as a Democrat.

Steve Paul – Registered Republican but votes as a Democrat.

Todd Lowell – Registered Republican but votes as a Democrat.

Wendy Lang – Registered Decline to State but votes as a Democrat.

Camille Maben – Registered Democrat and votes as a liberal Democrat.

The Rocklin School Board has a majority of registered Republicans but they have more in common with Senator Obama on education.

Senator Obama does not believe in school choice. He does not support charter schools. The teacher’s union supports him. Senator Obama believes that the teacher’s union knows what is best for your children. Obama and the teacher’s union believe they are smarter than you when it comes to educating your children. This is exactly how the Rocklin School Board thinks. The President of the Rocklin School Board, the uneducated Steve Paul, will tell you he knows what is best for your children. He thinks he is smarter than every parent in Rocklin. Over the last 2 elections, the teacher’s union has donated over $20,000 to the current members of the Rocklin School Board. The teacher’s union does not donate money to school boards to represent your children. They donate money to school boards to push their liberal agenda.

While most of RUSD schools do a good job, some parents still want the choice of which school they want their children to attend. Some parents prefer to send their children to a school outside of Rocklin. If a parent wants to send their child to a school outside Rocklin, they must get permission from the Rocklin School Board. That is called an inter-district transfer. Approximately 2 years ago I attended a school board meeting when a mother got up in front of the Rocklin School Board requesting that her daughter be able to attend a school in Roseville. The mother was nearly in tears because that night the Rocklin School Board did not approve her transfer. Greg Daley told the mother “we are bound by our own rules.” I would like to inform Mr. Daley that he and the other board members came up with those rules. How does Mr. Daley and the other board members know which school was better for that mother’s daughter? THEY DO NOT.

Today, the RUSD conducts inter-district transfer appeals in closed session. They are afraid to let the public know what is really going on. During their July 16th meeting they turned down an inter-district transfer request. We will never know why because they are hiding behind their closed session policies. I would assume they told the parents, do not worry, we know what is best for your children.

The Rocklin School Board does not support charter schools. Their comments at the public hearing last month, regarding the Western Sierra Collegiate Academy’s second attempt for a charter, demonstrated that they think they are smarter than you when it comes to educating your children. Support for the charter comes from both Republican and Democratic leaders. Congressional candidates Tom McClintock and Charlie Brown support the charter. Assemblyman Ted Gaines supports the charter. It is a shame the Rocklin School Board and the Rocklin City Council opposes school choice. Not one member of the Rocklin City Council would stand up for school choice. Let’s not forget that Councilman Scott Yuill is an advisor to the Western Sierra Collegiate Academy. If you ever wanted to see an example of an empty suit, Mr. Yuill is it. How could anyone with any type of character volunteer to be an advisor to the charter but never speak up in public to show his support?

Note to the Western Sierra Collegiate Academy, you are losing credibility by keeping Mr. Yuill on your advisory committee. I would like to see the Western Sierra Collegiate Academy show some backbone and dump this resume builder.

Camille Maben, and Greg Daley have pulled their papers to run for re-election this November. I recommend you attend a school board meeting between before November. Ask these 2 board members if they know the names of your children. One must assume they would know their names because they will tell you they know what is best for them. During the 2006 election these 2 board members accepted money from the teacher’s union. Ask them if they support the union, or support your children. By their votes on the board, they march to the tune of the teacher’s union.

Mark Klang
Conservative Republican

Looks like we are going to have 8 candidates filing for Rocklin City Council.

If I was handicapping that race, I’d say the incumbents look pretty good – however, George Magnusen may have seriously hurt himself endorsing Liberal Democrat Elaine Rowen.

Dan Dafoe – Democrat Activist is the most recent to pull Rocklin Papers. There appear to be two little to unknown Republicans in the race as well.

Sierra College Simmons seat – someone from Whitney Ranch looks to have pulled papers. Word is that he is supported by the incumbents on the Rocklin City Council. Magnusen must have missed that memo.

There look to be two other contestants besides Elaine Rowen – Rowen is a liberal Democrat Activists being supported by Liberals like Joanne Neft, Bill Martin (the masterminde of Save Sierra College (from what!?)) and Barbara Vineyard.

Don’t look now, but JoAnne Neft is starting a “Republicans for Brown group” – no suprise there. I have a post coming out about her and the Placer County Raging RINO’s.

Aaron Klein – whose endorsement of Tom Cosgorve was a major victory (Cosgrove was a vociferous critic of Klein’s in the past) – is going to draw an opponent as well. The opponent appears to be an associate of Cheryl Maki. Maki is the former Mayor of Auburn, while she is personally Conservative, she does not like Aaron Klein very much.

Scott Tim Leslie will run unopposed.

Roseville City Council looks like Allard, Garcia (incumbents) along with Sam Cannon, Pauline Rocucci (recognize that name?) and liberal Democrat Activist Rene Aguilera.

We could be seeing a redux of what Aguilera did to Rocky Rockholm in 2006 – running to split the vote in an attempt to help Rocucci.

30% of Conservative Democrats Say They’ll Vote for McCain

Two years ago, Democrat Charlie Brown lost to a wounded incumbent Republican in California ’s Fourth Congressional District. Now, making another run for the seat he believes is his to lose, Brown faces tougher competition in Sen. Tom McClintock, the darling of Ronald Reagan conservatives. Brown will not be able to benefit from Republican in-fighting in 2008 like he did in 2006 as well.

The well-known and highly popular McClintock, clearly conservative, has a libertarian streak that is attractive even to some Democrats. Remember the 2003 recall race for Governor? McClintock was the candidate deemed by more than one media outlet as the most qualified to be Governor. The Los Angeles Times said “some Democrats have praised McClintock for having a firm set of convictions that he’s able to present clearly to voters.”

Articulate and steady, McClintock’s appeal across party lines is not the only reason why he will be the next Congressman to represent the sprawling Fourth Congressional District. Voter registration in the district already favors Republicans, and especially a conservative Republican. In short, McClintock is a good conservative candidate in a good conservative district.

If that wasn’t enough evidence to spell trouble for Charlie Brown, the recent Rasmussen Report should be. There are increasing concerns about Democrat nominee Barack Obama’s chances to hang on to conservative Democrats. Clearly, Obama is the most liberal candidate the Democrat Party has fielded in more than three decades. And, he is the candidate who opposed the once well-oiled Clinton machine.

Obama likely will win California although Republicans have their best chance since 1988 to put the state in the GOP column. But not all of California ’s 58 counties will support Obama. Eight of the nine counties of the Fourth CD will be won by McCain, with Sacramento a toss-up and that’s the dilemma for Charlie Brown. Unlike Democrat candidates running in the neighboring congressional districts of the 3rd and the 11th, Charlie Brown is not just swimming against the tide, but against very strong GOP presidential undercurrents.

The recent Rasmussen Report on Obama details the trouble ahead for Charlie Brown:

Thirty percent (30 percent) of conservative Democrats say they’re voting for John McCain. Data from Rasmussen Reports also shows McCain picking up support from 19 percent of White Democrats and 15 percent of Democrats over the age of 50. These results are from national telephone survey interviews conducted with 14,000 Likely Voters during the two weeks ending July 24. The sample includes 5,074 Democratic voters. (Rasmussen uses robo-calls)

The data shows that 43 percent of Democrats consider themselves politically liberal, 37percent say they’re moderate, and 18 percent are conservative.

Forty-one percent (41 percent) of conservative Democrats have a favorable opinion of John McCain. Sixty-seven percent (67 percent) say the same about Obama.

Among liberal Democrats, just 23 percent have a positive opinion about McCain, but 90 percent give Obama favorable reviews.

Obama is supported by 78 percent of Democrats overall, a figure that includes 62 percent of conservative Democrats. He leads 84 percent to 13 percent among Democrats under 30. But, among those over 65, Obama earns just 74 percent of the vote while McCain is preferred by 16 percent of Democratic senior citizens. It is interesting to note that just 2 percent of Democrats under 30 hold back from selecting either Obama or McCain. That number grows to 9 percent among Democrats over 65.

This means that despite the certain coronation of Barak Obama, Charlie Brown is in trouble. Charlie Brown can’t run the same campaign this time around, and he is already trying to hide his liberal philosophy (see also his energy ‘plan’). In the end, Charlie Brown will go home defeated, a victim of his own party’s liberalism.

Sorry Charlie! These are national numbers, and they are going to be way worse here in the 4th CD.

I had a look at Montgomery’s campaign filing from the 6/30 cutoff and a few more names popped out…

George Beland – Former D-3 Supervisor

Jan Christofferson – Former County Executive Officer that was replaced by current CEO Tom Miller

Terry Davis – Staff Conservation Coordinator for the Sierra Club Mother Load Chapter (notice Montgomery listed him as a self-employed landscaper) http://motherlode.sierraclub.org/committee.html

Blogger’s note: I sure got a kick out of Terry Davis being listed as a self-employed landscaper. I need to fix my front and back yards. I should ask him for a bid.

Steve Kastan – Former D-5 Supervisor Rex Bloomfield’s Field Representative for the Tahoe area

Dave Mackenroth – Former Candidate for D-3 Supervisor

Don Malberg ( I think he’s the husband of Patricia Malberg who ran against Congressman Doolittle in the early 90’s)

Alex Mourelatos – Owner of property in the Tahoe area who wants to develop a housing project in Tahoe Vista

JoAnne Neft – Former Manager – Placer County Agricultural Marketing Program.

Blogger’s Note: JoAnne Neft is part of the group trying to oust Republicans from local office. Neft is a life-long Republican who will be the subject of an entire post later

Bill Newsom – Father of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom

Placer Public Employees PAC ($7,000)

GD (Dean) Prigmore – Former Deputy Planning Director under Fred Yeager

Take Back Red CA – http://www.takebackredcalifornia.org ( Take Back Red California (TBRC) is a grassroots coalition that connects northern California Democrats in urban counties with northern California Democratic activists working in rural counties especially on a local level.)

VOICE – A Homosexual advocacy group with a PAC out of San Francisco.

John Foster – North Lake Tahoe Democratic Club

Tina Thomas – She is a CEQA attorney long known for her contract relation with Angelo Tskapolous. Angelo Tskapolous might as well be the executive director of the California Democrat Party.

Add in a host of Democratic clubs – and you have the unmistakable pattern of the Democrats throwing all their eggs into the Montgomery Basket. I also believe that Liberal Democrat activist Elaine Rowen is their number two priority as they try to work with RINO’s Barbara Vineyard, JoAnne Neft (there she is again) and Bill Martin to take control of Sierra College.

Please further note the money she raised from Bay Area Liberals on her previous filing as well.

One glaring omission – Pete McCloskey must have forgotten to write her another check as he did not appear on this report.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I know that Charlie’s guy with only 143 days experience is the most qualified for President because he stands for change. (to what!?)

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would and anyone who dares try to earn more should be taxed at a higher rate than me.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe white people need to spend their time at the back of the bus and pay with interest for the past that they had nothing to do with. (Mrs. Obama is a Princeton Graduate, Right?)

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe three or four pointy headed elitist liberals need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit some fringe kooks who would NEVER get their agendas past the voters.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe that paying $4.00 a gallon or more is no reason to drill for the mountain of oil we are sitting on in THIS country. We wouldn’t want to have to move a couple
of polar bears now would we?

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
when we pull out of Iraq , I trust that the bad guys will stop what they’re doing because they now think we’re good people.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I like it when Al Qaeda has the same rights as American citizens. I want to see the ACLU run the Justice system because separation of Church and society is paramount.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I don’t want a stimulus check to spend. Let the government spend it for me.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
Freedom of speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I’m going to marry my dog. (unless PETA objects, then we will go back to the same court again)

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
It’s important that we keep all death row inmates alive.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I don’t want to eat poison food and drink dirty water. We all know Republicans love
that stuff. Ever wonder why the most left wing country in the World ( China ) is the
most polluted?

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe that when the terrorists don’t have to hide from us over there and as a result come over here I don’t want to have any guns in the house to fight them off with.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe that churches should only be allowed for political speeches by liberals and democrats and the ACLU should sue any church making right-wing statements.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe that business should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the employees.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe that I don’t want Doctors who were at the top of their classes to operate on me. I want a government employee who makes $50k a year and couldn’t hack it as a contractor or an engineer to do it like the DMV.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I believe that people who can’t tell us if it will rain on Friday CAN tell us that the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Prius.

I’m voting for Charlie Brown because…
I REALLY believe there is no bias at Mountain Democrat or the Auburn Journal

The Party will oppose local tax increases, bonds, & spending measures

Roseville CA August 1, 2008—-The Placer County Republican Party Central Committee voted to OPPOSE these local ballot measures:

Measure M Los Rios Community College District Bond
Measure N Center Unified School District Bond
Measure P Placer Hills Fire District Gann Limit Waiver
Measure Q Colfax Elementary School District Bond
Measure R Placer County Board of Supervisors Pay Increase
Measure S County Counsel Elimination of At Will Employment
Measure T Alta Dutch Flat Parcel Tax
Measure U Tahoe Truckee Unified School District Bond

The Central Committee also made endorsements for the statewide ballot measures that will appear on the general election ballot:

Proposition 1 – NO High-Speed Rail Bond
Proposition 2 – NO Farm Animal Treatment Mandates
Proposition 3 – NO Children’s Hospital Bond
Proposition 4 – YES Child & Teen Safety and Stop Predators Act (Sarah’s Law)
Proposition 5 – NO Drug Offender Early Release
Proposition 6 – NO Safe Neighborhoods Act
Proposition 7 – NO Alternative Energy Mandates
Proposition 8 – YES Protect Marriage
Proposition 9 – YES Crime Victims’ Bill of Rights
Proposition 10 – NO Alternative Energy Bond
Proposition 11 – YES Voters’ First (Independent Redistricting Commission)
Proposition 12 – YES Veterans Home Loan Bond (Revenue Bond)

“Polls show that the Placer County Republican Party endorsement is the most important and most persuasive endorsement a campaign can receive in Placer County,” said Tom Hudson, the Chairman of the Placer County Republican Central Committee. “Our Committee members and volunteers research the issues, attend hearings, meet with officeholders, and listen to both sides before making recommendations on ballot measures. People know that we understand the issues before we take a stand, so our endorsements are widely respected.”

“These endorsements are a public service by the Placer County Republican Party,” said Jerry Simmons, the Endorsements Committee Chairman. “Unlike slate cards and political action committees that sell their endorsements to the highest bidder, the Party endorsements are based on Republican principles, not petty politics. We have not received any funding from these campaigns.”

With these endorsements, the Placer County Republican Party intends to send the clear message to our hard-working local elected officials that we expect local governments to live within their means after several years of record-breaking budget increases at the local level. The last thing we need now are tax increases, whether in the form of parcel taxes, bonds, or exemptions from the Gann Limit,” said Hudson.

“We respect our county supervisors, but we fear that the 60% pay increase they have proposed for themselves will attract the wrong sort of candidates for that position. We want part-time public servants and community activists on the Board of Supervisors, not career politicians in search of a full-time pay-check for part-time work. Supervisor Bruce Kranz did the right thing by opposing this salary increase.”

(Blogger’s Note – Kirk Uhler vociferously opposed measure “R”. The tapes of the BOS meeting will show as such, he and Bruce were the 2 vote minority opposed to Measure “R”)

The Placer County Republican Party works aggressively to assist all of the campaigns of the ballot measures and candidates that it has endorsed, with direct mail, telephone calls, and precinct walks to Republican households. Over the past decade, Placer County voters have agreed with Placer County Republican Party endorsements more than 85% of the time.

Additional Contacts for this story:
Jerry Simmons, Endorsements Committee Chairman:
Tom Hudson, Placer County Republican Party Chairman:

You have read it here first – Tom McClintock and Doug Ose held a conference call with 8,000 participants.

The significance is that the 8,000 participants were all identified as being from the “Non-McClintock” universe in the Primary.

These Primary voters that supported candidates other than McClintock heard a message that was unmistakable – A unified GOP in the 4th Congressional District headed into the General Election showdown with Charlie Brown.

The call itself featured some remarkable quotes – Of Ose, McClintock said, “by far you were the toughest opponent I have ever faced” (out of 14 primaries), McClintock continued, “and now you’re the most gracious!”

McClintock made sure that the callers understood the significance of the collaboration of the Republican team in the General election declaring, “I am so pleased to have Doug’s support, Doug is helping us unify the party and ensure that the 4th Congressional District remains in Republican hands.”

McClintock told the audience – “This district is the battlefield for determining weather Democrats can hold a long-term majority in Congress.”

Doug Ose praised Tom McClintock for continuing the fight to lower gasoline prices by expanding domestic supplies.

Callers had chances to ask questions which focused on Water, Energy and Forest Management.

McClintock re-affirmed support for the Auburn Dam – critical for flood protection and water storage as the region is running short on both.

McClintock’s vision stands in stark contrast to the Charlie Brown Energy plan. (Hailed on left-wing blogs as a clone of the Reid-Pelosi Energy Plan)

Ose reminded the audience that since the Democrats gained control of Congress, Gasoline has gone from $2.15 to $4.50 a gallon in California.

The conclusion as pointed – Charlie Brown would do nothing more that support the failed policies of Nancy Pelosi.

Remember when the primary rolled out an attack written by Ventura County Liberal Republicans against Tom McClintock? These same Liberal Republicans are now attacking Tony Strickland (after they attacked Audra Strickland). Their credibility as Republicans is shot, but that won’t stop the Charlie Brown slime machine from giving it a shot again.

There is a new group called “Moderate Republicans for Jackson” – This is Moderate Republicans for Hanna-Beth Jackson…

She is the perennial loser to Tom McClintock and Tony Strickland down in Ventura County. She is running for the seat McClintock is vacating – that Strickland is ruinning for.

I was and am widely expecting the Kool-Aid flow to include rehashing all of the “Republicans” from Ventura County talking about what a Bad person / leader / baby shaker / veteran hater / insensitive / conservative / principled Republican Tom McClintock.

Please note that cheif amongst these Frauds is Bob Larkin who has the distinction of opposing Audra Strickland, Tom McClintock and Tony Strickland in prmiaries.

What’s the difference between these frauds and Placer County’s Moderate Republicans? The Holmes Brothers and Robert Weygant are all on board with their nominee.

If the Colonel attempts to roll these “Republicans” from Ventura County out as a campaign arrow – one only need to point back to lefty blog Calitics to see what their real agenda is.

Sorry Charlie!

Link to Blog Post

Excerpt: “The group includes many prominent names in political circles including former State Senator Cathie Wright; former executive Director of the Ventura County Taxpayers Association Jere Robings; past Ventura County Republican Central Committee Chair Bob Larkin; retired Mayor of Moorpark John Lane; Judy Mikels, former Chairperson of the Ventura County Board of Supervisors; John Walker, President of the Ventura Unified School District Board of Education and Velma Lomax, Ventura Unified School District Board member.”

Recognize the names? They attacked McClintock repeatedly during several primaries.

File this under the category of Why? Second, file this as the latest installment of the Auburn Journal Rampage update…

(Note – the campaign release from Save Sierra College was sent to me Via Rob Haswell, Democrat Consultant / Activist / Dem Central Committee Member / Opponent to Ted Gaines for Assembly / Jennifer Montgomery’s Campaign Manager)

First off, one of Aaron Klein’s staunchest critics and advocates of the recall – Lincoln Councilmember Tom Cosgrove has Endorsed Aaron Klein for re-election.

Now why would Tom Cosgrove reverse course and support Klein after participating in a failed attempt to recall him? Why have Democrat, Independent and Republican electeds flocked to Klein’s endorsement list as fast as they did to Doug Ose?

Led by former Grand Jury Member Bill Martin – the Save Sierra College (from What!?) group has announced that Sierra College is still reeling from wounds inflicted by the termination of Kevin Ramirez.

They cite a campaign against Liberal Supervisor Robert Weygant as another such wound.

Please tell me that Save Sierra College (from what!?) is about more than revenge…

What the Auburn Journal ignored when they became the lightening rod for the recall is that Bill Martin – then of the Grand Jury, who wrote the report trashing Aaron Klein, is a long time friend of Dave Creek.

Creek was a Sierra College Trustee before giving way to Bill Martin. Creek was also responsible for the sweetheart deals that Kevin Ramirez received.

Creek and Barbara Vineyard – both part of the Save Sierra College (from what!?) group led the recall effort and are both endorsing the candidacy of Liberal Democrat Activist Elaine Rowen. (Rowen is past President of Placer County Democrat Women…)

I guess Rowen can help heal the wounds by voting to put another, this time 1/2 Billion dollar bond like Measure “E” on the ballot? (That’s what Bill Martin wants)Leave us not forget that Vineyard’s Taj Mahal Campus would have been built by the same contractor now being sued for two school disasters in Lincoln.

Also, had measure “E” passed, Sierra College would be broken under the weight of paying for maintenance of those facilites – especially in light of declining enrollment.

Bill Martin’s Solution? He was the one vote against adopting a balanced budget policy on the Board. This is in stark contrast to the multiple years of effective fiscal management leading to a $2 Million surplus the current budget enjoys.

Of final note, and the most concerning item are the Republicans on the list of supporters of this Save Sierra College (from what!?) effort. I don’t get it – budget surpluses are a Republican value.

I don’t get it – one of the primary complaints is a ratio of part-time-staff to full-time-staff being number 62 out of 62… even as Bill Martin votes against adding new part time staff consistently.

So, what do we need to Save Sierra College from again?

Meanwhile – the Auburn Journal was slient while Bill Martin issued his kangaroo Grand Jury report aided and abetted by another Grand Juror who ultimately became his campaign manager. Again, the AJ said nothing about the connections between Creek, Ramirez and Martin.

(Blogger’s Note – Placer GOP Chairman Tom Hudson has a rancheria – that may soon be designated as English Indian land – on Baseline Road, one of the busiest arteries in Placer County… the Gov’t Bureaucrat Brownies must not like the sign very much…)

Dear (List of people deleted),

My wife got a call from Scott Sparks with Placer County Code Enforcement who said that my 4×6 McClintock for Congress sign violates some county ordinance. I believe he was referring to Section 17.54.190 (“Off-premises signs”), but I need to call him back to confirm the problem. If you are interested, you can check the county codes at http://qcode.us/codes/placercounty/ You’ll notice that there are different rules for different types of signs, which is precisely the sort of content-based speech discrimination that the U.S. Supreme Court has so often overturned (e.g., they can ban all signs, but they cannot ban “Election Campaign Signs” while allowing “Agricultural Sales Signs”).

The Code Enforcement Nazi said that someone had complained about my sign, saying that it should have been removed “after” the election (which has not occurred yet).

Since my sign is on one of the busiest roads in the entire county (Base Line Road, which connects Roseville and Rocklin to Highway 99), with more than 9,000 cars passing the sign each day, I suspect that the Charlie Brown folks would love to have this sign taken down. The sign sits on my own private property, so I do not plan to oblige them by taking it down, at least not until John McCain repeals the rest of the First Amendment (not to mention Article I, Section 2 of the California Constitution).

Please let me know if you have heard about similar demands about other signs in the county. If there is a coordinated effort to force property owners to take down McClintock signs, this might be a good campaign issue. And it might be worth a lawsuit by me or some third party to enforce the U.S. Constitution that Charlie Brown swore to uphold and defend… Given the minimum penalties in state law for civil rights violations, this could be an expensive lawsuit for the county to lose.

Tom Hudson, Chairman
Placer County Republican Party
Work: (916) 445-3986
Home: (916) 991-9400
Cell: (916) 833-8948
Fax: (916) 991-9300

Sorry Charlie!

In a clear sign that the Brown Campaign is trying desperately to make noise… they have been on an obsessive tirade over the exploratory committees from 2006 that McClintock still has open.

Basically, they have switched from regular strength Kool-Aid to the Kevorkian department: According to reliable sources, the Charlie Brown congressional campaign is pitching reporters on a bogus story that Tom McClintock is not really interested in Congress but looking to run for the Board of Equalization in 2010.

The evidence? McClintock has an old campaign account from last year still open! EE-gads! If this is the best that ex-pilot Charlie Brown has to offer, he’d better radio for a clean-up crew and some runway foam. Someone needs to call Lungren, Andal and Issa and tell them to close their state accounts while they are at it.

First, rumors last year had a termed-out Senator McClintock looking at a BOE seat…(Y-A-W-N). In March, however, after John Doolittle announced he was retiring from Congress, McClintock jumped into one of the most expensive GOP primary battles ever against a well-funded former Congressman. McClintock raised more than $1.5 million against his opponent’s $6.2 million and still won by 15 points. You’d have to be insane or narcissistic to the point of a padded cell with finger-paints to walk into a $6.2 million meat grinder + the entire establishment minus a few brave souls endorsing the Millionaire Liberal.

Second, I confirmed that since McClintock announced his intentions for Congress, his campaign has returned all contributions made to the BOE account. That’s $7,700 of checks returned. If a contribution goes to an office location, it gets returned. However, contributions mailed directly to the bank get processed automatically. It takes a little longer, but all of the contributions after March 4th will end up returned.

Third, McClintock can’t use more than $1,000 of his state campaign funds to run for Congress, the maximum amount allowed by law.

Fourth, many candidates keep campaign accounts active, primarily to assist other candidates seeking state office. Former Republican Leader Jim Brulte has more than a million dollars in a campaign account, rolling it over every election cycle.

Democrats have played up Charlie Brown’s ability to talk issues. Now, this is the best the guy can do?

Last week, it was a letter to the editor written by a White Male Communist complaining that White Male Republicans run Placer County.

This week, it is a blog – Called Sundahai39 on Politics:

Their Opinions are so well thought out, I decided I’d share them with you:

Defeating Placer County Supervisor Bruce Kranz, Aaron Klein and Scott Leslie and Tom McClintock Will Liberate Occupied Placer County

Freedom from neo-conservatism and international corporate tyranny is now possible if we act decisively. We must look at reality straight on: Republicans are pressuring Governor Schwarznegger to roll back emission laws; McCain pledges to continue Bush’s scorched earth environmental policies and his march toward American Empire. They together have temporarily divided the US from the world.

Locally, we may begin by rejecting Bruce Kranz, the epitome of all that is bad in local government, a puppet of developers and their suppliers. His attempts to undermine Placer Legacy, to turn Meadow Vista over to a gravel company, his complicity in the blocking of Homewood Ski Resort being sold to the Forest Service for the peoples’ benefit, his appointment of Michelle Ollar-Burris to the County Planning Commission combine to show his contempt for us.

With their records of self-service and assassination of Kevin Ramirez, Aaron Klein’s and Scott Leslie’s bids for re-election to the Sierra College Board are laughable.

Blogger’s Note – What’s laughable is the cover-up of what Ramirez cost the taxpayers, and the Conflicts of Interest in the 2005 Grand Jury report that spurred the recall attempt.

John Doolittle has sulked off in disgrace opening the door for carpetbagger Tim McClintock to seek his job at the peoples’ expense.

These people care not about our home. Nothing they have ever done has helped the people; reject them

Blogger’s Note – Are we sure this blogger doesn’t work for the Auburn Journal? There are absolutely no facts in this post – editor material.

And then there’s this one -

Kranz serves Kranz. The general public is aware of Kranz accepting large donations from developers, appointing Michelle Ollar-Burris to the Planning Commission, favoring a gravel company over the people of Meadow Vista, blocking the Homewood Ski Resort sale to the Forest Service and redirecting it to private developers, and his clearing the trail to develop Royal Gorge Ski Resort.

Blogger’s Note – in the minds of the left, there is no due process for Ollar-Burris or Doolittle, they are guilty… throw them into the gulag

Kranz intimidates Placer County employees. Talking to several Placer County employees who obviously wish to remain anonymous, I have learned county workers fear retaliation from Kranz if their decisions or findings do not favor the person Kranz is currently piloting through the process. Workers feel intimidated, feel pressure to “go along” as opposed to doing what is right and proper. Kranz uses favoritism to bully workers into giving him and his “clients” what they want.

Kranz always tips the tables in his favor. When Kranz is involved, there is never a level playing field because if workers do not do what he wishes, he will find a willing worker, but never forgets the one who would not do his bidding. Policies are manipulated to suit individuals, and decisions are rendered unevenly in Kranz’ favor.

Blogger’s Note – If this was true, then why is King’s Beach going 3 lanes instead of four?

When Kranz is involved, fear is palpable among workers. With layoffs imminent in Placer County, fear of retaliation makes Kranz even more threatening because workers who do not go along fear reprisal.

People would be shocked to learn what type of vehicle demanded Placer County supply him for 24/7 use with a County credit card.

Kranz is like George W. Bush because favoritism always trumps policy.

Kranz is not an administrator so much as a manipulator, an intimidator, a person who ought never to be a Placer County Supervisor.

Blogger’s Note – the Agenda pops out, this is another Moonbat that sees McCain, Bush and Doolittle in the eyes of Kranz. Call an exorcist! WAIT! An exorcist would violate separation of church and state.

And of course, this blogger is anonymous… Cute. Team Montgomery, can you feel the passion?

Link to blog for attribution

I wonder if they offer drive-thru service in the nanny state.

LOS ANGELES (AP) – The Los Angeles City Council has approved a one-year moratorium on new fast-food restaurants in a low-income area of the city.

The moratorium unanimously approved Tuesday is a bid to attract restaurants that offer healthier food choices to residents in a 32-square-mile area of South Los Angeles.

Councilwoman Jan Perry says residents at five public meetings expressed concern with the proliferation of fast-food outlets in the community plagued by above-average rates of obesity.

Nearly three-quarters of the restaurants in South L.A. are fast-food outlets. That’s a higher percentage than other parts of the city but the restaurant industry says the moratorium won’t help bring in alternatives.

LINK

12/23/2004 Letter

(Notice how the Yellow Elephants are back…)

Are you happy?

So far 19 dead in this week’s attack on the mess tent in Iraq. What a terrific Christmas present for their families. And what does our President have to say about this? According to the Associated Press, “President Bush said the explosion should not derail the elections and that he hoped relatives of those killed know that their loved ones died in ‘a vital mission for peace.’”

There is now an opening for any Truckee Bush voters in Iraq – 19 openings to be specific (actually 1,325 since the start of the war). Or better yet, I nominate the Bush twins to go serve in Bush’s “vital mission for peace.”

You got what you voted for. Are you happy?

Jennifer Montgomery

Soda Springs

So, here you have it – Jennifer Montgomery celebrating the death of Soldiers to make political points.

In addition, she shows a lack of creativity, trotting out the Nancy Pelosi Yellow-Elepahnt argument. (You can’t support the war unless your son is serving, you have served or are serving, etc…)

Next, she uses their death as a entree into explaining why people should vote Democrat instead. That is sick and extreme…

Now, she is running for Supervisor – for what reason? When you read the above, you have to wonder what her purpose for becoming a supervisor will be.

So much for the concept of “Non-Partisan Office”...

Look at this

The link to the walk flyer is at the bottom of the post I made on the Red County Placer Blog.

Colonel Klink is digging deep – blaming McClintock for High Gas Prices.

I had a little something to say to the editor of my local papers:

Recently, the Charlie Brown campaign were walking precincts with tremendously misleading flyers…

They tacitly blame Tom McClintock for $4+ a Gallon Gas.

Brown’s own energy plan he released was hailed by left-wing blog Calitics as being a carbon copy of Nancy (no-drill) Pelosi’s!!!

On his website and walk pieces are statements referring to the ‘Mess in Iraq’ as well – apparently, Brown’s campaign staff missed the AP wire late Saturday. “US now winning Iraq war that seemed lost”

Brown has thrown in with Pelosi and the enviros whose policies have prevented construction, drilling and infastructure.

Now that the “Surge” that Brown and his MoveOn.org friends crucified when they coined General “Betray-Us” is working, Brown has a problem:

Brown violated his own pledges for ethics and post-partisanship - making fallacious charges and cloning Nancy Pelosi’s energy Plan.

Aaron F. Park

Roseville

Maybe we could liken the Brownies to a group of Sgt. Schultz’s “Ve know nuting”.

Maybe there is a reason why the Brownies are reticent to go on the record on any issue:

Calitics, a renowned Lefty Blog… basically the Daily Joke (Kos) of CA… had a few things to say about the Brown energy plan release:

(The context of the post is that it is a list of Democrat targeted house races for 2008. McClintock after getting hammered by 6.2 million of Ose’s assassinations is apparently in for some more smearing before he gets to D.C.)

REPUBLICAN SEATS

I’m going to do four tiers in setting apart the top seats where we have challenges to Republican incumbents.

First Tier

1. CA-04. Last month: 1. Open seat. Dem. challenger: Charlie Brown. Repub. challenger: Tom McClintock. PVI #: R+11. % Dem turnout in Feb. primary: 44.7. DCCC targeted. Tom McClintock actually raised quite a bit of money in the second quarter, but it all got plowed into the divisive primary with Doug Ose. Plus, he was able to go above individual spending caps because of the “Millionaire’s Amendment,” which was recently ruled unconstitutional, putting constitutional literalist McClintock in a bind over what to do with that money. We’ve seen real awkwardness from McClintock over how to handle disgraced incumbent John Doolittle, with shows of support and rejections happening on alternate days. Meanwhile, Charlie Brown is humming along. He has a 6-1 cash on hand advantage, and he’ll also be the recipient of some ad love from the DCCC. His courageous stand against the FISA bill, outreach to parts of the district harmed by wildfires, and the release of a good energy plan which stresses tax credits for alternative energy and government fleets going renewable (and opposing opening up new lands for offshore drilling, in line with the “Use It Or Lose It” plan from Speaker Pelosi). Brown was beloved at Netroots Nation and looks good in polling. This is obviously our biggest-priority pickup.

Brown: raised $355K, $675K CoHMcClintock: raised $1.27m, $117 CoH

Hmmm – Brown = Pelosi. I say COME GET SOME.

This is where Jeff Flint’s coverage of Brown’s energy plan was lacking… I knew I smelled a rat and found it courtesy of Calitics.

For attribution, the Calitics Post is linked here

Don’t look now, but Lungren is finding himself in the cross-hairs as well!

BAGHDAD – The United States is now winning the war that two years ago seemed lost. Limited, sometimes sharp fighting and periodic terrorist bombings in Iraq are likely to continue, possibly for years. But the Iraqi government and the U.S. now are able to shift focus from mainly combat to mainly building the fragile beginnings of peace — a transition that many found almost unthinkable as recently as one year ago.

Despite the occasional bursts of violence, Iraq has reached the point where the insurgents, who once controlled whole cities, no longer have the clout to threaten the viability of the central government.

That does not mean the war has ended or that U.S. troops have no role in Iraq. It means the combat phase finally is ending, years past the time when President Bush optimistically declared it had. The new phase focuses on training the Iraqi army and police, restraining the flow of illicit weaponry from Iran, supporting closer links between Baghdad and local governments, pushing the integration of former insurgents into legitimate government jobs and assisting in rebuilding the economy.

Scattered battles go on, especially against al-Qaida holdouts north of Baghdad. But organized resistance, with the steady drumbeat of bombings, kidnappings, assassinations and ambushes that once rocked the capital daily, has all but ceased.

This amounts to more than a lull in the violence. It reflects a fundamental shift in the outlook for the Sunni minority, which held power under Saddam Hussein. They launched the insurgency five years ago. They now are either sidelined or have switched sides to cooperate with the Americans in return for money and political support.

Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, told The Associated Press this past week there are early indications that senior leaders of al-Qaida may be considering shifting their main focus from Iraq to the war in Afghanistan.

Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, told the AP on Thursday that the insurgency as a whole has withered to the point where it is no longer a threat to Iraq’s future.

“Very clearly, the insurgency is in no position to overthrow the government or, really, even to challenge it,” Crocker said. “It’s actually almost in no position to try to confront it. By and large, what’s left of the insurgency is just trying to hang on.”

Shiite militias, notably the Mahdi Army of radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, have lost their power bases in Baghdad, Basra and other major cities. An important step was the routing of Shiite extremists in the Sadr City slums of eastern Baghdad this spring — now a quiet though not fully secure district.

Al-Sadr and top lieutenants are now in Iran. Still talking of a comeback, they are facing major obstacles, including a loss of support among a Shiite population weary of war and no longer as terrified of Sunni extremists as they were two years ago.

Despite the favorable signs, U.S. commanders are leery of proclaiming victory or promising that the calm will last.

The premature declaration by the Bush administration of “Mission Accomplished” in May 2003 convinced commanders that the best public relations strategy is to promise little, and couple all good news with the warning that “security is fragile” and that the improvements, while encouraging, are “not irreversible.”

Iraq still faces a mountain of problems: sectarian rivalries, power struggles within the Sunni and Shiite communities, Kurdish-Arab tensions, corruption. Any one of those could rekindle widespread fighting.

But the underlying dynamics in Iraqi society that blew up the U.S. military’s hopes for an early exit, shortly after the fall of Baghdad in April 2003, have changed in important ways in recent months.

Systematic sectarian killings have all but ended in the capital, in large part because of tight security and a strategy of walling off neighborhoods purged of minorities in 2006.

That has helped establish a sense of normalcy in the streets of the capital. People are expressing a new confidence in their own