Blogger’s Note: Something never sat well with me about Charlie’s grandstanding regarding charitable donations – especially since he is doing it to get attention. It would be another thing if it was disclosed what Charlie’s real intentions for doing this were.

As I have asserted for weeks – Charlie is a hard-core anti-war activist and he has the credentials to prove it. I believe that Charlie’s “Charitable” actions are to either cover a guilty conscience or to try and decieve the voters about his real motives.

In either event – there is a passage of scripture that applies – especially since Charlie claims faith on his website:

Matthew 6: 1-4

1. Be careful not to parade your uprightness in public to attract attention; otherwise you will lose all reward from your father in heaven. 2 So when you give alms, do not have it trumpeted before you; this is what the hypocrites do in the synagogues (Roseville, Grass Valley et. al.)and in the streets to win human admiration. In truth I tell you, they have had their reward. 3. But when you give alms, your left hand must not know what your right is doing; 4 your almsgiving must be secret, and your Father who sees all that is done in secret will reward you.

Blogger’s Endnote: These were the words of Jesus delivering one of many sermons he delivered while on earth. These words are timely and important today, right here in Placer County.

“Deeds not Words”

Sen. Tom McClintock’s campaign has issued Democrat opponent Charlie Brown a list of six actions he needs to take in order to let the voters of the Fourth Congressional District know where he stands on the issues. Charlie has been accused of trying to be all things to all people by attempting to distance himself from the liberal Democrat positions he has taken on offshore drilling, amnesty for illegal aliens and higher taxes.

When McClintock’s campaign distributed a direct mail piece to voters over the Labor Day weekend that highlighted the positions of the two candidates on these issues, including gay marriage, the Brown campaign went into a tizzy. Apparently they have never seen their record compared before. The Brown campaign called the mailer “rife with fabrications” and is telling reporters that Charlie hasn’t taken liberal Democrat positions on the issues. While Charlie says he has not taken liberal Democrat positions on the issues, deeds will show the public exactly where he stands.

As a public service, the McClintock campaign has produced a list of actions Charlie can take to set the record straight. We will also help him draft the letters and fill out the forms (we just happen to have an extra copy of the no new tax pledge) so he can quickly get his views on the record:

1. Join with Tom McClintock and send a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi asking to reconvene Congress and vote on an energy plan for America that includes increased oil exploration and production offshore California and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

2. Sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.

3. SUPPORT Citizens Against Government Waste Earmark Reform Pledge and oppose boondoggle spending.

4. Say NO to Amnesty for illegal aliens, period. No means No, even in Spanish. Comprende?

5. Sign the endorsement list to support Proposition 8 which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. You don’t need to sit on the fence with this one. A simple but clear statement of support will suffice.

6. Admit you made a mistake by participating in the hanging of a soldier in effigy, and apologize for wearing your uniform at this event.

As an extra item, why not drop your ACLU membership and join the NRA instead!

Deeds not words. By taking these actions Charlie Brown can prove to the voters of the Fourth Congressional District that he’s not a liberal Democrat.

I can’t make this stuff up folks. Many on the right affectionally refer to liberals like Charlie Brown as communists. Barbara Lee IS a communist. What’s worse, she was also a member of the Black Panthers – a racist, militant organization from the 1960’s

However, less known is Lee’s service on the national coordinating committee of the “Committees of Correspondence,” an organization that splintered from the Communist Party USA in 1991. Angela Davis, her good friend, the three-time Communist Party candidate for vice president of the United States, served by her side. Take a look here

In addition, Barbara lee was the lone vote against action in Afghanistan. She was one of five that voted against bombing Iraq for non-compliance with UN sanctions. She was the only member of congress to vote against going into Yugoslavia to help abate the genocide. Take a look at this article for an interview with Barbara Lee.

Charlie’s support of the effigy and anti-war action seems to mesh well with Lee’s history. But, why would someone whose campaign is dependent upon patriotism allow a known communist to headline a fundraiser? The fact that Charlie’s Angels in the Sacramento Bee and the Auburn Journal don’t care is no suprise – they’d rather rail on Sarah Palin’s daughter.

Barbara Lee was connected with one of the founders of the Black Panthers (Bobby Seale) as well:

U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, a student at Mills College at the time, was typical of the people drawn to the Panthers. “They were committed to changing the system that gave rise to racism and oppression,” said Lee, who volunteered in the Panthers’ community learning center and worked on Seale’s mayoral campaign.

“For me, their 10 points are still very relevant today. When they went to Sacramento, it was a testament to their commitment to social and economic justice.” “Take a look at this for more”: http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/Black-Panthers-Led8oct06.htm

The Black Pathers burst into the assembly chambers armed to the teeth to demonstrate their committment to social and economic justice in 1967.

Charlie Brown oughta do his homework before having another fundriaser

Blogger’s Note – The interesting thing is that the Brown campaign has called leading Border advocates racists, avoiding addressing the issue alltogether. Exception: Brown endorsed the massive proposed anmesty bill from a few years ago that public outcry killed. Closing time, Charlie – what are you going to do?

State Sen. Tom McClintock spoke to a gathering of Minutemen from the Sacramento region on the steps of the State Capitol Tuesday.

In town for their annual ‘Lobby Day,’ the Minutemen make visits to lawmakers to raise awareness on issues stemming from illegal immigration. This year, one of the topics is crimes caused by illegal aliens. One high-profiled example is the murder case involving Edwin Ramos, a native of El Salvador who is charged with three counts of murder. Tony Bologna and his two sons, Michael and Matthew, who were on the way back from a family gathering, when they were brutally murdered following a traffic incident with Ramos in San Francisco’s Excelsior district.

According to news accounts in the San Francisco Chronicle, “San Francisco’s political establishment has long prided itself on providing a haven for illegal immigrants. Mayor Gavin Newsom even launched a taxpayer-funded $83,000 ” public awareness campaign” earlier this year assuring illegal immigrants that the “sanctuary city” by the bay was in their court. And indeed it is. Under the city’s 1989 voter-approved sanctuary ordinance, police officers and other city employees are prohibited from inquiring into immigration status. In addition, the city will not direct municipal funds or employees towards assisting federal immigration enforcement, unless such assistance is required by federal or state law or a warrant.”

In his speech Tuesday, Sen. McClintock suggested that all federal aid to so-called “sanctuary cities” be cut off beginning with the city and county of San Francisco. “A local government that actively works to undermine our nation’s security and sovereignty has no claim to our nation’s resources and support.”

“The Minutemen have become our nation’s neighborhood watch, and I want to commend all of the law abiding, concerned Americans who have volunteered their own time and their own resources at enormous personal risk in order to assist the border patrol by peacefully reporting illegal incursions of our border,” McClintock said.

The following are the remarks delivered by Sen. Tom McClintock.

The Minutemen have become our nation’s neighborhood watch, and I want to commend all of the law abiding, concerned Americans who have volunteered their own time and their own resources at enormous personal risk in order to assist the border patrol by peacefully reporting illegal incursions of our border.

Our nation was built upon LEGAL immigration – the orderly process by which immigrants come to our country in order to become Americans – and they do so by acquiring a common language, a common culture, and a common appreciation of American constitutional principles and American legal traditions.

Illegal immigration undermines that process of legal immigration that makes our nation of immigrants possible.

We should never forget that there are hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants who, right now, are obeying our laws, waiting in line and doing everything our nation asks of them to do, while millions of illegal immigrants cut in line in front of them.

Last year, together, we defeated the amnesty bill in Congress that would have legalized and legitimized the presence of up to 20 million illegal aliens within our borders. It would have excused them from obeying the same laws as every legal immigrant who has respected our nation’s sovereignty.

We fought the leadership of both parties in Congress and we won.

Now, it is time to press for enforcement of our existing laws.

There is nothing radical to insist that we do so. Every other nation in the world has immigration laws. The only difference is that every other nation in the world actually nforces them.

The supporters of last year’s amnesty bill never were able to explain what exactly is wrong with our current immigration laws – except that they’re not being enforced.

Indeed, a prerequisite for any future immigration laws is first to demonstrate a concerted determination to enforce our current ones.

We can start by expediting completion of the 700 miles of the border fence that Congress authorized last year, and that the Bush administration has dawdled on ever since. According to Congressman Duncan Hunter, who coauthored the “Secure Fence Act,” just ten miles of security fencing in San Diego reduced that county’s crime rate dramatically. Imagine what 700 miles would do.

Second, hundreds of armed incursions by Mexican military units in support of drug runners have been documented in recent years and we need to beef up our military presence on the border. Even the limited deployment of a few hundred unarmed National Guard troops last year had a significant impact on those sections that they patrolled.

Third, the government must at least demonstrate a determined, sustained effort to deport those illegal aliens it actually encounters through law enforcement or social service agencies. No immigration law is going to be taken seriously if illegal aliens can receive government-funded benefits while the government cheerfully ignores the fact that they’re not legally entitled to be here in the first place.

Fourth, sanctions against employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants need to be just as rigorously enforced as all of our other labor laws. There is no excuse for those who would shortchange American citizens and legal immigrants in order to employ those who violate our nation’s sovereignty.

If our state and federal labor agencies can audit every scrap of employment minutia down to lunch and bathroom breaks, they should certainly be able to determine the legal residency requirements that were supposed to be the cornerstone of the 1986 immigration act.

Fifth, we should cut off all federal aid to so-called “sanctuary cities” beginning with the city and county of San Francisco. A local government that actively works to undermine our nation’s security and sovereignty has no claim to our nation’s resources and support.

These modest steps toward enforcing existing law would not only stop the immediate demand on services that is overwhelming our schools, our hospitals and our prisons, it would also produce the voluntary departure of that portion of the illegal population drawn here by public handouts and the underground economy.

Citizenship should be reserved for those who obey our laws – starting with our immigration laws – as hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants are doing right now to fulfill their dream of becoming loyal Americans.

And together, these steps – which require nothing more than the faithful enforcement of existing law—would preserve our nation as a melting pot for many future generations of legal immigrants from around the world who sincerely seek to become Americans and “to secure the blessings of liberty” to themselves and their posterity.

Entire Column

Judicial matters: Wonder when we’re going to get some local comment on a very recent decision handed down from the Ninth Appellate.

The ruling came in Lands Council v McNair where the justices, sitting en banc, unanimously ruled to limit judicial oversight in forest remediation projects. The decision also grants federal wilderness managers much more leeway in implementing such projects.

Naturally, the so-called environmentalists will appeal this decision, but allow me to point out a judicial fact.

In the history of the Ninth Circuit, it has never heard — much less overturned — an appeal to one of its own unanimous en-banc (all of the justices sitting) decision.

Blogger’s Comments – It is about dammed time a court recognized that the Sierra Club has been suing for years advocating a hand’s off forest policy whose disastrous results were borne out in this years’ unbelievable wildfire season.

Hat tip to Jim Ruffalo – oh, and he actually provided some balance to the AJ’s pimping for Jennifer Montgomery – writing: Burning questions: And while we’re on the subject of elected offices, allow me to request that one and all keep an eye out for Jennifer Montgomery, the other candidate for the District 5 Supervisorial seat.

For weeks now, she’s been promising me a sit-down interview session, but even when we’re in the same room — as was the case a few weeks ago at Meddlers — she somehow disappears when the pen and notebook appear.

Even her top handler, Rob Haswell, as been working hard to get us together.

But being the political junkie that I am, I fully understand the rigors of waging political warfare. Even in the best of times, one loses all track of time.

I’m sure she’s not ducking me and remain just as convinced that she really wants to answer the hard questions. For example, I’d love to query her as to where she really stands on the question of opening burning.

Does she want to ban any open flame in the foothills, as she told the League of Women Voters, or is she foresquare for a property owner’s right to torch trash and slash, as she was quoted in the Aug. 19 Sierra Sun?

Such confusion can easily be sorted out by means of a quick interview, and I’m sure she’ll get back to me. Probably no later than that crucial first week of December. ...

Blogger’s Note – Jennifer Montgomery is vigorously supported by the Sierra Club.

Joanne Neft and Emil John Vodonick. Now, I refer to Emil as the crooked attorney… the Auburn Journal and it’s soft-on-crime editor whitewashed Emil’s $53,000 financial misdeed as “forgetting to pay a fee for a client”. If only Sarah Palin’s daughter was so lucky… I digress as the “businessman”-turned-editor of the Auburn Journal (now there’s something worth focusing on) is also one of Charlie’s Angels as well.

Emil John Vodonick has been quite open in his disdain for both John Doolittle and now for Tom McClintock. He is reported to have told Nevada County GOP volunteers, “I hate McClintock’s guts”. I guess Vodonick has a kindred spirit in Neft.

The amazing thing is that noted liberal Republicans like the Holmes Brothers (Jim, Placer County Supervisor and Auburn Councilmember Mike) are on board with McClintock.

Let’s take a second look at the leader of Republicans for Brown:

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. (Weygant is staying nice and quiet even though he is rumored to be supporting Montgomery for Supervisor)

Joanne Neft has never given a dime to the Placer County Republican Party in the entire time I have been involved with it. (She may have bought a ticket to one Lincoln Day dinner)

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 + “Emil the Lawyer” 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 is a fraud, Vodonick is a fraud. The only thing that could round out Charlie’s Angels properly is a Communist.

The Crooked Attorney
The Disgruntled General
The Surrender / Gay Rights Activist
The Congresswoman who buys stock, then votes to subsidize that company
The Drug Dealer
The RINO’s
The Luddites
... who’s next?

“Sure I could have joined the NRA or given up my ACLU membership. It may have appealed to some people here but that’s not who I am.” – Charlie Brown from a Blue America interview before getting endorsed again for 2008 election cycle.

SB 375 is a Sierra Club endorsed brainchild of Darrell Steinberg. Like most issues, Charlie Brown has yet to take a stand – but Charlie’s Friends Jennifer Montgomery and the Sierra Club love this Bill.

SB 375 would centralize planning, basically screwing over Suburbs in an effort to force development back to city centers. What is sinister is that SB 375 could allow School Bond money to be taken away from districts as well. That’s correct, even if Measure Q passes – SB 375 could allow the State to raid the bond money because of how it is written.

While Brown chides McClintock for not doing his job – McClintock did his job, setting Steinberg and others who are promoting this partial birth abortion of land-use on fire. Not bad for a SoCal politician that doesn’t know where Placer County is… huh?

SB 375 – Steinberg
Urban Cores

Mr. President:

The Orange County Register summed up this bill very accurately when it asked, “Want to live in a condo by the train tracks?”

Some people do, and they’re welcome to. But most people – particularly those with families – want a yard for their kids to play in; they want a lawn and a garden; they want a little distance between themselves and their neighbor.

And in a free society, people have that choice. Those who want to live in a condo by the train tracks can do so and those who want to live in a quiet, tree-shaded neighborhood can do so.

And government once respected these individual choices and provided the infrastructure to accommodate them.

What rankles the left is that most people prefer the quiet, tree-shaded neighborhood. That’s why they move to the suburbs – so that they can enjoy what the left now scoffs at – what we used to call “the American dream.”

Under this legislation, the “American Dream” of raising your kids with a back-yard and swing-set and a barbecue and a little elbow-room is to be replaced with something the liberals are calling the “Preferred Growth Scenario.”

And let’s be clear on what they mean by “Preferred Growth Scenario.” It isn’t about your preferences for your own life. They’re talking about their preferences for your own life. And for your family’s life.

They prefer that you move into dense urban cores – and they are prepared to manipulate public policy and misuse government authority to force you to do so.

What is this brave new world? It is very precisely defined by this politburo edict as a density of 20 families per acre living a half-mile from a busy transit corridor. (That’s roughly three and a half times the population density of San Francisco).

If you comply, you’ll be rewarded with streamlined regulations that are otherwise stifling development and a cornucopia of tax revenues taken from those who don’t choose this Brave New Preferred Growth Scenario.

This says to the millions of Californians who have rejected this lifestyle: “Tough. We know what’s better for you and your family than you do.”

This says to the millions of voters who have supported one bond measure after another: “Tough. You are not going to receive the proceeds of your taxes unless you conform to this Brave New Preferred Growth Scenario. The money that you thought you had voted for highway construction under this bill will instead be used for so-called transit villages, or more accurately, dense condominiums next to a train track.”

I’m curious to find out how many of the elitists who vote for this measure have actually made that choice for their own families. I suspect very few.

This bill is the ultimate victory of bureaucratic central planning over individual freedom of choice. Apparently, the sponsors believe that it worked so well in the old Soviet Union that we ought to give it a try here.

Mark me down as skeptical.

I have wondered since the celebrated incident between retired military officers Mike Holmes and Charlie Brown about Charlie Brown’s obsession regarding promoting his military service.

Charlie is having General Wesley Clark come to Roseville to help promote his campaign through a drive to support the troops.

We know that General Wesley Clark was recruited to screw up the 2004 primary by the Clintons and has been a top Liberal Democrat advisor for several years. Charlie apparently served under Clark in the gulf war.

Since Charlie has made his military service the primacy of his campaign, the recent revelations of Charlie’s anti-war activity have to be weighing heavily in his mind.

Is Wes Clark coming to Roseville to help Charlie obfuscate his anti-war activity? Brown has been remiss to address the issue of the effigy – his lack of a response suggests that claims of his anti-war activity including those reported by the Bee in 2006 are indeed true.

When you read what left-wing blog Blue America says about Charlie – this section attributed to Charlie Brown jumps out at you: “I asked Charlie to put himself in the shoes of a freshman congressman and tell us what he would be doing about the war now. One thing he said was that he would have signed on as a cosponsor to Jack Murtha’s re-deployment resolution (not one of the non-binding symbolic things). Only 9 freshmen have signed on as co-sponsors to either Murtha’s or Woolsey’s proposals, the first of which aiming to end escalation and the second of which aiming to end the war.” (Murtha’s proposal meshes with Brad Sherman and Barbara Lee’s public stance of pulling out of Iraq within 90 days a.k.a. surrender)

Charlie would like to be a cosponsor of the Murtha bill because he thinks Murtha’s credibility and impeccable military credentials make it clear that he supports the troops, just not the way the Bush Regime is misusing them.

General Wesley Clark has his own words of wisdom to add to the mix when he completely degrades John McCain’s military service: “I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.” – General Wesley Clark, Obama Advisor and Surrogate, June 29, 2008.

I might show up to Brown’s shindig and ask him what exactly he meant with those words: “General Clark – I was curious to know weather serving 5+ years as a POW or flying and aborting a helicopter mission represented a higher level of Vietnam era service?”. The real answer is any Republican military service means nothing to these people.

Charlie Brown is assembling an all-star team: Charlie’s Angels. The Drug Dealer, the Crooked Lawyer, the Congresswoman who buys stock in companies she votes to subsidize, the Anti-War/Gay Rights activist, Blue America and the Disgruntled General. I can hardly wait to see who else is on-line to join that cast.

Not a whole lot of Moderates in that coalition. Maybe we should forget about the effigy and ask Charlie to take the first step: “I admitted that I was powerless over the 4th Congressional District – the my life has become un-managable”.

Auburn Journal Editor Deric Rothe has decided to continue using his newspaper to promote the candidacy of Charlie Brown.

As you may remember – Rothe and the Journal were a broken record against John Doolittle. Recently, the AJ was the ONLY local media outlet to run a since-debunked story that Tood Stenhouse shopped around the whole region about no drilling going on off of the Coast of Florida. (ICYMI – yesterday on this Blog, a story was posted citing people in Florida complaining about seeing Chinese Oil rigs off of their coast)

Now the Auburn Journal has decided to tell us how they think the debates should go down.

The Journal writes one of the most disingenuous lines ever seen in a newspaper, “Instead of trying to fix the format for their own benefits, the candidates should instead do the honorable thing and treat each other, and the voters, with respect.”

Rothe must have relapsed – or he is demonstrating his clear bias in support of Brown. Rothe knows damn good and well that the short-controlled format that Rothe suggests is exactly what the Brown team is going for.

Does Rothe know what team Brown does – that Charlie can not be exposed to lengthy answers to questions? Two minute answers as Rothe suggests are nothing more than glorified soundbytes.

Why has Charlie Brown decided to hide behind Deric Rothe? Rothe’s track record is abysmal, his past notwithstanding.

Why is Brown seeking to avoid an open debate with questions between candidates? What is Brown trying to hide from? Is Brown unsure of all the carefully worded positions on his website?

Notes to Deric Rothe:

You wrote “both McClintock and Brown are Patriotic Americans” – why didn’t you follow up asking for Brown to confirm or deny his anti-war activism? Why didn’t you follow up regarding hyperbolic attacks against Tom McClintock over the Veteran’s issue. Your sentence was an all too simple whitewashing of a critical issue in this campaign.

You wrote: “untrue accusations such as Brown supports the Man Boy Love Association or that McClintock doesn’t know where Placer County is located are an insult to voters’ intelligence” – again, you have whitewashed Brown’s membership in the ACLU which he reaffirmed to a very liberal group called Blue America.

Brown’s crowd has sought to tar and feather the CRA – using the behavior of some of its’ members to project onto McClintock. Since the ACLU fights against Megan’s Law, Jessica’s Law and defends pedophiles in court – an ACLU membership just does not look good at all.

Rothe finishes his screed by saying that Abortion and Gay Marriage are not important issues. Rothe not only shows his abject bias – but he also demonstrates that foundational core concepts of society are not important to him. Those would be the sanctity of life and the societal foundation of marriage.

Rothe says he hopes that the Congressional election will rise above the muck and mire – both Rothe has chosen a side and slung mud of his own.

WWCBD? Who is supporting Charlie Brown’s campaign… how do they affect Charlie’s decisions? You can glean important details about what someone would do in the office once elected.

I figured it would be a healthy project to look into Charlie’s Angels – you know, the Convicted Felon Editor of the Auburn Journal, Nancy Pelosi, the crooked Lawyer (Vodonick) and now his most recent fundraiser Brad Sherman.

Sherman is a long-time Congressman who has distinguished himself for his Gay Rights advocacy. He is regarded as a Hard-Core Liberal by The Vote Match Quiz – a Project of www.ontheissues.org.

Sherman is a strong supporter of the impeachment of President Bush and supports immediate surrender (withdrawal) in Iraq within 90 days.

Sherman also favors a Department of Peace and Nonviolence as a cabinet-level office. Sherman was rated 89% by SANE

These stances on issues would suggest that Charlie Brown’s anti-war activity meshes well with Brad Sherman’s stances on the issues.

Sherman is rated 100% by the HRC – Human Rights Campaign, the largest GLBT organization in America. Sherman has been honored by that organization for his work to promote the normalization of Homosexuality.

Sherman was a leader in an effort to stop a Constitutional amendment defining Marriage as one man and one woman.

I could go on and on, but like Charlie Brown, Sherman is a member of the ACLU earning a 73% score from the ACLU, amongst the highest in Congress.

I wish I could have been a fly on the wall at that fundraiser Sherman held for Charlie Brown. I am sure Charlie’s comments in opposition to drilling were only the tip of the Iceberg.

There is another important point to look at – the Blue Dog website does not have anything about Charlie Brown on it and Charlie does not mention a Blue Dog Democrat endorsement. Charlie has not had Blue Dogs, Moderates or Conservative organizations assist him with fund-raising.

Charlie’s Angels – a window into the campaign ethics of Charlie Brown.

All this talk over renewable energy hits an interesting crossroads.

Tax Credits are scheduled to expire at the end of this year for investments in Renewable energy sources.

Nancy Pelosi has enacted a policy of no spending cuts at all meaning when there is a tax cut or an extension of a tax cut / credit etc that is to expire… it has to be offset with a tax increase somewhere else.

Complicating matters is the group of Blue Dog Democrats who are deficit hawks who apparently have not figured out that budget cuts are another way to go.

Last year – the Alternative Minimum Tax relief bill was delayed into December because of the above issues.

WWCBD? Would Charlie advocate for spending cuts? Would Charlie join his fellow liberals in allowing R&D credits to expire because they don’t want to cut social welfare programs? Would Charlie stand up to Nancy Pelosi?

Tom McClintock will advocate for smaller government and spending cuts – he has proven it for 22 years.

This is a link to an article about how Wind and Solar development R&D tax credits are set to expire…

It doesn’t stop there: Pelosi has even more trouble when it comes to Wind Power.

Pelosi has taken thousands from “Green Energy” companies and seems to be pushing continued subsidies for this form of power. T. Boone Pickens – cited by many luddites as a Texas Oil Man who has seen the light, stands to gain millions from Government subsidies on Wind Power.

Pelosi has also bought large amounts of stock in companies whose existence is dependent upon Government subsidies… Charlie Brown would have come unscrewed if Doolittle had done the same thing.

WWCBD? Will he join with Pelosi and stick his hand out for campaign cash from those looking for government subsidies?

Take a look at this expose on the Wind Boondogle – no wonder why tax credits are set to expire, God forbid they stop Government subsidies.

So here you go Charlie – do you support Government subsidized power generation from an unstable medium? Will you stand up and ask why Pelosi has her fingers in the cookie jar? Tax Credits? Spending Cuts?

From Robyn Nordell
To: CRA Friends

Conservative Leaders React Positively to Gov Sarah Palin, McCain’s V.P. Choice!

Dr. James Dobson:
McCain’s Choice of Palin ‘Outstanding’

Dr. Dobson will further discuss McCain’s pick tonight at 9 p.m. ET on Fox News Channel’s Hannity & Colmes.

Press Release

FRC Action’s Tony Perkins:
Gov. Palin – a Pro-Family, Pro-Life Champion

Read More

Gary Bauer: Choice of Sarah Palin
for GOP Vice-President ‘Historic and Energizing’

“I believe we now have the most pro-life ticket in history running on the most pro-life platform in history.”

Read More

“More Pro-Life Reaction to John McCain
Picking Abortion Opponent Sarah Palin”

See Full Article

by Steven Ertelt, LifeNews.com Editor
August 29, 2008

Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission: “Governor Palin is a vice-presidential selection which shows that John McCain at the age of 72 today is still able to think outside the box. Governor Palin will delight the Republican base. She is pro-life. It appears that Senator Obama played it safe in picking Senator Biden and Senator McCain made the bold and unconventional choice in picking Governor Palin.”

Americans United for Life president Charmaine Yoest: “With this bold and inspired selection, Sen. McCain has verified his stated commitment to assembling a truly pro-life administration. The Republican ticket stands in stark contrast to the stridently pro-abortion ticket put forth by the Democratic party. You can be sure the vice presidential selections will have far-reaching ramifications in this race.”

Wendy Wright, president of Concerned Women for America: “Governor Palin will change the dynamics of the entire presidential race. Her admirable record of confronting corruption and living her pro-life convictions shows she is a doer, not just a talker. Sarah Palin will make history as a vice presidential candidate – and not simply because she’s a woman, but because she’s a woman of substance and character.”

Mat Staver, pro-life attorney and founder of Liberty Council – “Absolutely brilliant choice. John McCain could not have chosen a better vice-presidential nominee that Gov. Palin. She is attractive, articulate, conservative, pro-family, pro-life, and pro-marriage. John McCain hit this one out of the ballpark. She is very pro-life. She has a Down Syndrome child. She’s committed to pro-life. She understands the commitment to the sanctity of human life.”

Jill Stanek, the nurse who exposed live birth abortions: “Governor Sarah Palin is a welcome addition to the McCain Republican ticket. I could not be more pleased that he has chosen a pro-life woman as his running mate. McCain/Palin offers a complete contrast to the Obama/Biden ticket and provides a solid background on all family issues. With Governor Sarah Palin on the Republican ticket, it looks like Obama’s abortion problem just got a whole lot bigger.”

U.S. Senator Jim DeMint, a pro-lifer from South Carolina: “Sarah Palin is an exciting choice by Senator McCain. She completes a strong ticket that will bring a real record of change and reform to Washington. She is a strong defender of traditional family values, with an unquestioned commitment to protect life.”

Christian Coalition of America president Roberta Combs: “Governor Sarah Palin is a bold choice for Vice President who is a courageous advocate for unborn children. I congratulate Senator McCain for his outstanding selection for his vice presidential running mate.”

Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council: “Senator McCain made an outstanding pick from the choices that were on the table. Sarah Palin clearly addresses the issues so many conservatives are concerned about. It balances out the ticket. She’s also really a checkmate for the Democratic Party because folks who were looking to make history for Barack Obama can make history by voting for John McCain in seeing the first woman elected to the vice-presidency. It was a very strategic move by John McCain.”

Obama campaigns on a platform of Change and he gave us Joe Biden (a Washington insider)

So leave it to McCain to give us someone we have to google.

Obama just got worked – it is the GOP ticket with diversity, experience and change.

The polls prove it, too

Sarah Palin:

Gov. Sarah Palin: A Biography
Anchorage Daily News

By Tom Kizzia

Sarah Palin was a hockey mom, small-town mayor and rising young Republican star in Alaska in 2003 when she ran afoul of her party’s establishment over ethics reform and was cast into the political wilderness.

But she came charging back as an ethics crusader to win the governor’s office in 2006 (including a landslide primary victory over the incumbent Republican governor) and has remained one of the most popular local politicians in America even as she continued to take on such powerful figures as the oil companies and the leaders of her own state party.

Palin, 44, has been the Joan of Arc of Alaska politics, charging into battle against long odds on such big local issues as oil taxes and construction of a natural gas pipeline only to see her opposition crumble. Days after her 2006 primary victory, an FBI investigation into political corruption involving the oil industry and Republican legislators burst into view with surprise raids of legislative offices. As criminal indictments and convictions followed, Palin’s outsider status helped her maintain consistently sky-high approval ratings.

She was born in Idaho and came to Alaska when she was 3 months old. She grew up in the town of Wasilla, a now-sprawling small town an hour north of Anchorage, where her father, Chuck Heath, was a teacher and coach. One of her most formative experiences, she has said, was helping to lead her high school basketball team to the 1982 state championship. Palin played point guard and got the nickname from her teammates of Sarah Barracuda.

Palin went on to study journalism and political science in college, graduating form the University of Idaho in 1987. Along the way she competed in the Miss Alaska contest after being chosen Miss Wasilla 1984. In the Wasilla contest, she played the flute and won the title of Miss Congeniality.

She grew up hunting with her father, whose living room wall is densely populated with trophies and antlers. Her favorite meal, she said during her gubernatorial race, is moose meat stew after a day of snowmachining.

She eloped in 1988 with her high school sweetheart, Todd Palin, who expands the family biography considerably. He is a commercial fisherman, an oil field worker, a member of the United Steelworkers and an Alaska Native. Todd’s grandmother grew up in a traditional Yup’ik Eskimo house in Bristol Bay and accompanied Sarah in her race for governor as she sought support from Alaska Native voters. Sarah Palin has joined her family fishing a commercial setnet site on the Nushagak River in Bristol Bay every summer.

Todd Palin has worked 20 years on Alaska’s North Slope for BP, where he has continued to work as a production operator. He is also a four-time winner of the Iron Dog snowmachine race from Anchorage to Nome and back along the Iditarod Trail. After Sarah was elected governor, Todd has remained in the background as “first dude,” an expression his wife sometimes uses.

Sarah Palin made her way into local politics on the City Council in 1992 and then ran for mayor as an agent of change.

Palin finished a strong second in the 2002 primary for lieutenant governor and was being groomed by the party for higher office when she ran afoul of state Republican Party chairman Randy Ruederich. They both had seats on the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, appointed by Gov. Frank Murkowski, the Republican she would later depose. She accused Ruederich of political chicanery and eventually resigned in frustration…..

She later took on Murkowski’s attorney general in a conflict-of-interest scandal that forced his resignation. And when state Sen. Ben Stevens, the son of U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens, was caught making a dismissive remark about the Wasilla area, Palin appeared in a rebuttal ad wearing a “Valley Trash” T-shirt.

In 2006, she knocked off Murkowski and then Democratic former Gov. Tony Knowles in a campaign that drew on grassroots support, relying on neighbors and friends for staff rather than veterans of big-time campaigns.

She had strong support from social conservatives and often speaks of her religious faith. The Palins have five children, including their first-born, Track, who enlisted in the Army on Sept. 11, 2007. Track Palin is 18 and stationed at Fort Wainwright with the Stryker Brigade. His mother said he is preparing for a deployment to Iraq. They also have three daughters: Bristol, Willow and Piper.

The newest member of the family, a son, Trig, was born four months ago after a pregnancy that Palin managed to keep secret for seven months. Trig was born with Down syndrome, which the Palins had discovered through testing.

The ongoing corruption scandal in the Legislature over influence of the former oil field services company Veco helped Palin force change in the Juneau state capitol. That scandal has spread to include Alaska’s two longtime powers in Congress, Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young. Palin has kept distance between herself and those Republican icons and backed ethics reform measures that passed the Legislature.

Senator Sam Aanestad, a conservative and someone whose district takes in a massive amount of the areas that burned earlier – had a few things to say about fire protection. Sam Aanestad was there when the Luddites crashed a fire summit – deriding it as a meeting to benefit “big timber”.

Senator Aanestad sees the problem clearly and provides an excellent thesis into the problem of wildfires as posted by the Sacramento Bee

Meantime – Charlie Brown left the fire summit before the Sierra Club showed up to crash it. The Sierra Club has endorsed Brown – suggesting that Brown’s departure was conflict avoidance.

Would Charlie Brown stand up to the Sierra Club in favor of fire protection? Given how he changes his tune at out-of-district fund-raisers, I submit that the answer is no. The Campaign ethics of Charlie Brown

Anyone who claims that wildfires are much smaller now than they were before comprehensive fire-suppression policies were enacted after World War II obviously didn’t set foot in Northern California this summer and didn’t talk to old-timers who say this fire season is the worst they’ve ever experienced.

If he had set foot in my district, or anywhere in California for that matter, he would have found a pattern of thousands of fires caused by lightning strikes that charred well over 1 million acres, destroyed hundreds upon hundreds of homes, took the lives of 15 people and cost California taxpayers well over $1 billion to fight.

But some people are blinded by the same smoke and ash that stung the eyes and burned the throats of hundreds of thousands of my constituents and other Californians who suffered miserably at the hands of catastrophic wildfires this summer. In short, they will never open their eyes to the true reality and catastrophic wildfire threat facing California today.

I strongly support the management of our precious forests to save what we have left for future generations. And I clearly understand that there are those who are opposed to the removal of one dead leaf or pine needle from the forest floors. We can both cite studies, good and bad, to reflect our viewpoints.

But catastrophic wildfire doesn’t listen to studies. In the words of Stephen Pyne, a professor in the School of Life Sciences at Arizona State University, “Fire isn’t listening. It doesn’t feel our pain. It doesn’t care – really, really doesn’t care. It understands a language of wind, drought, woods, grass, brush and terrain, and it will ignore anything stated otherwise.”

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger understands this threat. It’s why he created the California-Nevada Tahoe Fire Basin Commission following the devastating Angora fire that destroyed hundreds of homes. The final report delivered by this commission, and the recommendations approved by the governor, prove that thinning of the forests can and does prevent catastrophic wildfire.

The report found that fuel reduction treatments that had taken place on Tahoe Basin lands since 1995 had a dramatic impact in stopping the Angora fire. The report states that “parcels that had been treated exhibited modified fire behavior, including reduced ember production, and reduced heat and smoke allowing firefighters to be more effective. …

“Treated parcels also served as fuel breaks, allowing firefighters to safely protect structures and slowing fire spread. Eyewitness accounts, firefighter interviews and post-fire on-site inspections indicated a significant reduction in fire intensity when fire entered treated urban lots.”

Allowing private timber interests to do what they do best, clean and thin our valued forest lands, isn’t a unique or radical idea. It had been standard accepted procedure in forestry management up until about 30 years ago, until concerns about endangered species and clear-cutting led to a new policy called “hands off.” The forests were to remain untouched by human hand, and for the most part, they have been.

Although the intentions behind this policy were good, the results have been devastating. It’s often said that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and these “hands off” and “let it burn” policies led to thousands of acres of forestlands filled with dead and dying trees, undergrowth and other fuels.

It should come as no surprise to anyone that a simple spark was all it took to ignite the worst summer of wildfires witnessed in modern history. As a result, this so-called “environmentally friendly” policy has left us with fouled streams, unhealthy air, burned wildlife and a forest landscape that resembles the moon.

I challenge the Sierra Club or any other group committed to the preservation of our valuable forests to realize the damage caused by current forestry management policies. How many more burned homes, lost forests and emergency room visits do we need? Pointing fingers won’t save our forests from destruction. We both share common goals. Let’s find a common solution.

The only response from the Charlie Brown campaign was to post a link to a Washington Post cheap shot about Sarah Palin.

Apparently, Brown prefers Joe Biden and his racial slurs + plagiarized speeches – the Ethics of Charlie Brown, I guess.

I think it is ironic that Brown Pounded Doolittle about ethics and Brown is catching himself in one lie and distortion after another. (Such as purporting to be a supporter of Gun rights, but waiting 4 days to comment on supreme court decision and saying that getting an NRA membership is not him on Blue America’s blog)

Of Further irony is that the Brownies whine like babies whenever Brown’s anti-war record is exposed saying how dare you question his military record. I guess I could say the same thing to Brown and the Democrat Party about why they are trying to smear this Woman – I thought the Democrat Party was the party of Women? The Ethics of Charlie Brown.

Beldar Blog completely crushed the MSM attempts to try and pin a scandal on Palin. This is why the MSM is obsessively talking about the risks and inexperience.

(I thought people wanted change, right?)

Beldar Wrote:

I’m republishing as a post in its own right what I wrote in a comment on July 21 on my post describing Gov. Sarah Palin as the “Most popular politician in the country” — which she indeed is among her own constituents in Alaska, and, I predict, will soon become around the rest of the nation.

Commenter Sam D had written: “Folks..you need to go to www.andrewhalcro.com to see what our Governor Palin has been up to. Her political career is all but over. She has been caught in many lies in the last few days. Read for yourself.” Here’s what I wrote in response (reprinted here with minor editing but without blockquoting; most links in original):

Andrew Halcro, who runs a rental-car business, is a colorful crank who placed a distant third in the gubernatorial election that Palin won. He’s devoted his life since then to trying to discredit her; her constituents see through it.

I take it you’re referring to the possibility that she and members of her family may somehow acted improperly — through a complaint she filed before she was governor and through later expressions of disapproval and concern when she was briefing the head of her gubernatorial security detail — in the firing of the boss of an Alaska state trooper, Mike Wooten, who was previously married to Palin’s sister. (Wooten’s been married and divorced four times, in fact.) In response to the complaint, Wooten was found in 2005 to have shot a moose illegally and to have used his Taser on his own ten-year-old stepson, “just to show him what it would feel like to be Tasered.” (To work up a righteous furor over this, the Left will be obliged to pivot from its stance in the Andrew Meyer Tasering incident at the John Kerry speech in Florida last year, and to instead wear “Please Tase Me, Dad!” tee-shirts.) The trooper apparently was also photographed by the governor’s husband while riding a snowmobile while off work on a worker’s compensation claim for a supposed back injury, and the governor has reported that he’s made death threats against her and her father.

The trooper’s boss who Palin later replaced when she became governor, Walt Monegan, had reduced Wooten’s suspension without pay from ten days to down to five. But Wooten is in fact still on the force, a time bomb continuing to tick away. Palin has denied that there is any connection between Wooten’s status and her replacement of Monegan, however, whose position was an appointed one that serves “at the pleasure” of the governor. (Monegan was offered a different position, which he refused.)

Yeah, I’ve been following that story in the Alaska press, but I previously chose not to dignify Halcro with a mention here, much less a link to his blog. Nevertheless, if that’s the best opposition research anyone can come up with for Sarah Barracuda, I’d say that’s a pretty good sign she can pass the McCain team’s, and the American public’s, vetting too.

I don’t know whether there was an even subconscious connection between Wooten’s misdeeds and Monagen’s dismissal, but I’ve written before that Sarah Palin is popular in Alaska despite having some sharp elbows. Her victims include some Republican politicians who are now doing well-deserved prison time for influence peddling. The fact is that some people deserve a sharp blow from a sharp elbow. Sometimes those who enable and cover up for such people also deserve a sharp blow from a sharp elbow. So bring me someone with a Palin-elbow-shaped bruise who clearly didn’t deserve it, and then you might have something interesting.

Halcro, by contrast, has invested himself in promoting a child-abusing bully with a proved record of misusing deadly firearms to break the law while an officer of the law — which I think tells you all you need to know about Halcro too.

A few pithy paragraphs I’d missed from the Alaska press about Trooper Wooten (bold-face mine):

“The record clearly indicates a serious and concentrated pattern of unacceptable and at times, illegal activity occurring over a lengthy period, which establishes a course of conduct totally at odds with the ethics of our profession,” Col. Julia Grimes, then head of Alaska State Troopers, wrote in March 1, 2006, letter suspending Wooten for 10 days. After the union protested it, the suspension was reduced to five days.

Troopers eventually investigated 13 issues and found four in which Wooten violated policy or broke the law or both:

Wooten used a Taser on his stepson.

He illegally shot a moose.

He drank beer in his patrol car on one occasion.

He told others his father-in-law [Palin’s father] would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce.

Beyond the investigation sparked by the family, trooper commanders saw cause to discipline or give written instructions to correct Wooten seven times since he joined the force, according to Grimes’ letter to Wooten.

Gov. Palin has welcomed and cooperated fully with a legislative investigation that Halcro’s hyperbole has ginned up. Ultimately, this is one of those non-scandals that is actually likely to end up improving the reputation of its target, since most of us would probably share the Palin family’s concerns about Trooper Wooten. The only question I have is: Why is that miscreant still wearing a badge?

Look forward to seeing tons of Kool-Aid drinkers at the NRC convention being treated with kid gloves. Remember, these protesters are usually anarchists, luddites and communists.

These are the people who chain themselves to the gates of power plants, bomb Hummer dealerships, torch developments and the like. They have to commit property damage before the police do anything – however in Denver, the latest chapter in the heavy-handed tactics against pro-life groups occurred.

WWCBD? Would Charlie stand up to Nancy Pelosi and the abortion mills to fight for these girl’s rights?

Watch this u tube video

WHO ARE THESE GIRLS?

DENVER, Aug. 28 /Christian Newswire/—On Wednesday, August 27, police officers brutally arrested two teenage girls, ages 15 and 17, near Senator Obama’s Denver hotel. The young women, Julia Giacopuzzi and Jayne White, were writing messages in sidewalk chalk on the public sidewalk when the police officers rushed in and violently arrested the girls without warning or provocation.

The girls are members of the pro-life youth organization Survivors, and were in Denver during the Democratic National Convention to call attention to Senator Barack Obama’s pro- abortion position as part of A Prayer for Change.

Throughout the DNC, the youth of Survivors were using sidewalk chalk throughout the city of Denver with the permission of City Attorney David Fine and Denver Deputy Chief of Police John Lamb. It was understood by the young women that sidewalk chalk was an accepted medium, and they were given no warning by the police before being cuffed and dragged away.

WWCBD? We know that Charlie is an abortion-rights supporter. While Brown has avoided any public statements on this issue like most other issues, his website is pretty clear.

From the Brown website: “Charlie supports existing law governing a woman’s right to control her own reproductive health care choices. He believes that promoting a culture of life means helping to reduce the number of abortions, through greater access to health care information, counseling, and other preventive services.”

Since the Democrats took control of congress in 2006 – funding for abstinence programs has been all but eliminated and the faith based charity initiative has been gutted. This means that Charlie will again have to take a stand against Pelosi if he is serious about his statements on his website.

Are you noticing a theme? It is called campaign ethics. Brown is walking a tightrope – he is wedged between his own campaign statements and the policies of Pelosi and the Dem leadership.

It does not stop there – you should listen to Brown speak at those fund-raisers he attends.

Blogger’s Notes: Ohhhh Charlie, this has got to hurt.

Ose Endorsement Highlights McClintock’s Campaign Mailer

Former Congressman Doug Ose spent six million dollars to win the Republican nomination in the 4th Congressional District only to lose State Senator Tom McClintock. The day after the election, Ose called McClintock to congratulate and endorse. Now, McClintock is highlighting the Ose endorsement in the first of many direct mail pieces that voters will receive.

“When it comes to the issues that matter to us, there’s simply no comparison between our candidates for Congress. That’s why I support Tom McClintock,” states Doug Ose. The mailer is a two-sided comparison piece that highlights the positions and issues of McClintock and Democrat Charlie Brown. The issues highlighted are energy, taxes and spending, illegal immigration and gay marriage.

McClintock spokesman Stan Devereux said, “Congressman Doug Ose is a fierce competitor and we appreciate having his support as we work together to defeat Charlie Brown. This mailer is the first comparison piece highlighting the positions of Tom McClintock and Charlie Brown. It’s crystal clear that Charlie Brown is liberal and very partisan.”

As evidence, Devereux listed the issues highlighted in the mailer.

McClintock signed the “No New Taxes” pledge and insists that Congress pass a real balanced budget where we live within our means. McClintock challenged Brown to outline his opposition to raising taxes. Brown called on California lawmakers to approve a state budget that includes tax increases.

“The no tax pledge is so important. And that’s why Charlie Brown’s insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling – and why it’s important to understand what it would do to our economy,” said McClintock.

On energy, McClintock recently challenged Brown to join him in a bipartisan approach and ask Speaker Nancy Pelosi to end her vacation and reconvene Congress for a vote on an energy plan. Brown has refused to buck Nancy Pelsoi given that his first vote in Congress would be to elect her House speaker. McClintock wants to end the moratorium on tapping America ’s vast oil reserves offshore and in Alaska . Taking a strong partisan position, Charlie Brown opposes drilling for new oil remaining

On immigration, McClintock supports completing the border wall and deploying our armed forces along the US-Mexico border to stop the flow of illegal aliens into our nation. McClintock also opposes amnesty and opposes giving illegal aliens benefits like social security, in-state college tuition and driver’s licenses. Charlie Brown supports amnesty for illegal aliens.

On social issues, McClintock strongly supports Proposition 8, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Charlie Brown supports Gay Marriage and opposes Proposition 8.

Devereux said, “The McClintock campaign believes that Charlie Brown is a Nancy Pelosi tax and spend liberal. Charlie Brown is unable to take one position and stick to it. He is trying to be all things to all people. The Voters of the 4th congressional district need want to know how Charlie Brown would vote if he was elected to Congress.”

“You can’t call yourself a conservative Democrat, support liberal positions on issues and raise money with the help of liberals like Brad Sherman and Barbara Lee,” Devereux said. “What’s the old saying about if it walks like a duck…?”

Blogger’s Notes – Turnabout is fair play, Democrats tout their own service and denegrate that of Republicans. How’s that for partisan politics. I have been waiting 5 days now for Charlie Brown to either set me on fire or admit his anti-war activity. This article from Veteran’s for Freedom has some jewels in it FROM DEMOCRATS. Maybe Charlie Brown should take their advice?

We all recently celebrated the 232nd birthday of this great nation, we as veterans have a duty and solemn responsibility to honor all of those who have worn or are currently wearing the uniform of the United States of America. Among the millions who share this common bond, 31 Presidents have had the honor and privilege of serving in our Armed Forces.

Today, as sacred guardians of our constitution, we are shocked that United States Senators and trusted loyal advisors to presidential candidates think that being a veteran and fighting for America is NOT a qualification to be President.

If service to one’s country in armed combat is not a qualification to be Commander in Chief, what is?

For several months now we have observed the irresponsible judgment of some of Senator Obama’s most trusted and loyal advisors as they have unfairly attacked the notion that a veteran is not qualified to serve as President.

Here are several examples of this poor judgment by Obama’s supporters and advisors:

“I don’t think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.” – General Wesley Clark, Obama Advisor and Surrogate, June 29, 2008.

Blogger’s note – what does Clark think about Helicopter pilots who returned home after aborting a mission? (And leaving Marines behind)

”... I think that the notion that the members of the Senate who were in the ground forces or who were ashore in Vietnam have a very different view of Vietnam and the cost that you described than John McCain does because he was in isolation essentially for many of those year…So I think … to some extent his national security experience in that regard is sadly limited….” – Rand Beers, Obama Foreign Policy Advisor, June 30, 2008.

“Everything is looked at from his life experiences, from always having been in the military, and I think that can be pretty dangerous…it’s one thing to have been drafted and served, but another thing when you come from generations of military people and that’s just how you’re steeped, how you’ve learned, how you’ve grown up.” – Senator Tom Harkin, May 16, 2008.

Blogger’s Notes – Brown’s fellow Democrat rips on families with a military heritage – look at Brown’s website… one could conclude that Harkin ripped on Brown, too.

“McCain should calm down”...”on using military service”... – Senator Jim Webb, Obama Supporter, July 1, 2008.

Blogger’s Notes: Charlie – are you listening? Webb is a veteran, too!

Please donate today. We need the support of Americans like you to help us fight against this blatant bias against veterans

Vets for Freedom PAC has endorsed several candidates running for the United States Congress or Senate, most who have worn the uniform, all who strongly believe in the mission of our organization, as well as our nation’s efforts in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Global War on Terror and we need your help to make sure they are elected.

All of these men have either worn the uniform or understand what is at stake in the Global War on Terrorism, and will fight for victory if elected to Congress. You can see the full list of supported candidates on the Vets for Freedom PAC website.

Please visit the Vets for Freedom PAC website, and help us elect these candidates and others like them.

Blogger’s Note – the fundraising solicitation was left in this post to verify authenticity of the email from Veterans for Freedom.

The second ever Bill Martin award for lunacy in government goes to the proponents of Measure Q.

As not reported in the Auburn Journal

They sued the Placer CRA – actually the Placer County Clerk’s office because they accepted our ballot argument against the Colfax school district’s school tax measure.

The Colfax argument in favor was replete with the same platitudes any school tax measure is full of – but the kicker is that the Placer CRA got mobilized to submit arguments against every local tax measure on the ballot.

The folks in the Colfax Unified School District wasted taxpayer money to SUE US over people who signed the argument against this tax. That’s correct – we need you to tax yourselves to pay for more whatever, but we are going to use money we say we don’t have to fight to get this tax passed.

After having a San Francisco law firm serve us with papers – apparently, the district decided against proceeding with their lawsuit.

A copy of the dismissal is posted here

The Colfax Unified School District has earned the second ever Bill Martin Award for Lunacy in Government – the first ever given to someone not named Bill Martin.

McClintock Challenges Brown to Take the No Tax Pledge!
McClintock Says “I Will Not Raise Taxes”

State Senator Tom McClintock’s Democratic opponent, Charlie Brown, who has never been involved in state budget negotiations, last week distributed an email demanding passage of the budget now pending in the State Legislature. McClintock delivered a response to Nevada County Republicans in a speech Saturday in Grass Valley .

“Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California . I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period,” McClintock said. “And, that is something the people of this district can take to the bank.”

While McClintock is a candidate in California ’s Fourth Congressional District, he has not stopped fulfilling the duties of his day job. McClintock is one of the 15 Senate Republicans holding the line in the debate over California ’s state budget. The current state budget proposal that Charlie Brown demands be passed includes more than $5 billion of new taxes that will boost California ’s sales tax to nearly 10 percent. McClintock said the state budget proposal contains the second biggest tax increase in the history of California .

“It will cost an average family some $550 of additional taxes at a time when they’re struggling to pay their electricity bill, their gasoline bill and a tax burden that is already one of the highest in the nation,” McClintock said. “That shouldn’t surprise us. Charlie has already proposed an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies. There’s only one problem with that. Oil companies don’t pay oil company taxes. We consumers pay oil company taxes as they pass them along to us as higher prices.”

McClintock said it comes as no surprise that Charlie Brown refuses to take the “No Tax Pledge” to protect the people of the 4th Congressional District from the massive tax increases that the Pelosi Congress is already preparing to unleash.

McClintock said that the Pelosi and her colleagues have refused to make the Bush tax cuts permanent – and they have refused to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. He said their refusal to do so makes those tax increases automatic.

“That’s why the election is so important. That’s why the no tax pledge is so important. And that’s why Charlie Brown’s insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling – and why it’s important to understand what it would do to our economy,” McClintock said.

The full text of the speech follows:

Nevada County Republican Central Committee Barbecue

Grass Valley, California

August 23, 2008

A funny thing is happening on the way to the Obama coronation. Americans are waking up and asking some basic questions, like:

Does anyone seriously believe our health care is going to be improved by handing it over to the same people who run the DMV and the Post Office?

Does anyone seriously believe that a House leadership that places William Jefferson on the Homeland Security Committee after he was caught with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer has the best interests of our nation at heart?

Does anyone seriously believe that socialism will work any better in America than it did in the Soviet Union ?

Nobody here does – and fewer and fewer people across the country do either as they begin taking a closer look.

And once they began asking those questions, the political tide began turning in our favor. Just since the energy debate began in Washington last month, the Rasmussen poll has tracked a five point shift toward Congressional Republicans. Last week, John McCain pulled even with Obama for the first time in the Gallup poll.

Another thing is happening: Americans are awakening to the fact that the Luddite Left of the Democratic Party has been blocking development of America’s vast energy resources and we’ve had enough.

Last month, my friend Charlie Brown announced that he was marching in lock step with Nancy Pelosi by opposing opening the 97 percent of our offshore and 94 percent of our onshore land that is currently off-limits to American oil production. At a time when our families are struggling to afford a tank of gas, we have more than 800 billion barrels of American oil under American land that is off-limits to American production. That’s three time the known petroleum in Saudi Arabia and enough oil to meet American needs for the next century.

But that’s just part of the damage they’ve done to American energy independence. We Californians are already paying the highest electricity rates in the continental United States – and the utilities have just filed for another rate increase.

The cleanest and cheapest possible way to produce electricity is from our dams. Hydroelectricity costs about 1 1/2 cents per kilowatt-hour (compared to 28-cents for solar energy). At 1 ½ cents per kilowatt-hour, your average household electricity bill should come to about $90 – per year.

Meanwhile, water rationing now threatens our region although we have the most abundant water resources in the nation.

And yet, a short distance from here is the site of the Auburn Dam. The footing was carved for that dam more than 30 years ago, but it was suspended because of opposition from people like Charlie Brown.

The Auburn Dam would generate 800 megawatts of the cleanest and cheapest electricity on the planet – enough for nearly a million families. And it would conserve 2.3 million acre feet of water – enough for more than two million families. And all this at a time when we can’t guarantee enough electricity to keep your air conditioner running or enough water to keep your lawn green.

And yet Charlie Brown has vowed to block the development of this vital local resource that promises both cheap electricity and abundant water for the people of this region.

Ronald Reagan was right: Government is not the solution to these problems – government has been the cause of these problems.

And this week Charlie Brown sent out an e-mail to supporters demanding that I vote for the state budget. Ladies and gentlemen, that state budget contains the second biggest tax increase in the history of California . It will cost an average family some $550 of additional taxes at a time when they’re struggling to pay their electricity bill, their gasoline bill and a tax burden that is already one of the highest in the nation.

That shouldn’t surprise us. Charlie has already proposed an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies. There’s only one problem with that. Oil companies don’t pay oil company taxes. WE CONSUMERS pay oil company taxes as they pass them along to us as higher prices.

An $18 billion tax increase at the federal level is nearly $200 of additional taxes an average family will pay at the pump.

So it should also come as no surprise that Charlie refuses to take the “No Tax Pledge” to protect the people of the 4th Congressional District from the massive tax increases that the Pelosi Congress is already preparing to unleash.

They have refused to make the Bush tax cuts permanent – and they have refused to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. And it is important to understand that their refusal to do so makes those tax increases automatic. If they just sit there and do nothing those tax increases will take effect. They are already set in motion.

That’s why the election is so important. That’s why the no tax pledge is so important. And that’s why Charlie Brown’s insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling – and why it’s important to understand what it would do to our economy.

The current state budget proposal that he demands be passed includes more than $5 billion of new taxes that will boost California ’s sales tax to nearly 10 percent.

The last time we did this was in 1991, when Pete Wilson increased the California sales tax to almost 9 percent.

The first thing that happened is that retail sales in California fell faster in the next quarter than they had fallen in the previous thirty years. Remember that 2/3 of economic growth depends on consumer spending – and a sales tax strikes at the heart of our economy.

And that’s exactly the next thing that happened. The tax increases of 1991 sent California into an economic nose-dive. The new taxes produced only a fraction of the new revenue that had been promised, and then produced two consecutive years of billion-dollar-a-year declines in state revenues as our economy imploded.

And that was at a time when the rest of the country was heading into an economic boom – imagine the damage that will be done to our economy at a time when the nation’s economy is faltering and our own unemployment rate is running frighteningly ahead of the national unemployment rate!

At least people can escape bad energy and tax policy in Sacramento by moving out of California . Where can we go to escape bad energy and tax policy in Washington D.C. ?

So here is my response to Charlie Brown: Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California. I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period. And that is something the people of this district can take to the bank.

A year ago, Sam Aanestad and I and several other Senate Republicans warned that the state budget was dangerously out of balance and that we were running out of time to fix it. We offered billions of dollars of spending reductions that would have prevented this fiscal meltdown. Where was Charlie Brown then? I know where his fellow Democrats were: they were crisscrossing the state assuring everyone that the budget was not only balanced but included the biggest budget reserve in the state’s history!

Here’s the good news: Americans are paying attention and they understand what’s at stake. And I’m not just talking about Republicans. Our voter ID calls in this Congressional race now indicate that we’re bringing in one in five Democrats who reject the Pelosi-Brown obstructionism on energy and who don’t share their exuberance for higher taxes.

I am confident that this district is now poised to send a clear and powerful message to Nancy Pelosi and her minions just 73 days from now: We want our country back. We want our Constitution back. We want our freedom back. We want our energy independence back. We have had it with your high taxes, your bloated bureaucracies, your empty promises and your endless obstruction of every attempt by American enterprise to restore American abundance and prosperity.

Ladies and gentlemen, what has happened to our country has happened on our generation’s watch, and it is our generation’s responsibility – and our generation’s destiny—to set things right.

And when history looks back upon this period, I believe it will record that just when it looked like our American rights might be consumed by the bureaucratic state, this generation of Americans rose to the defense of our liberties and when we were done, we had produced a new era of American freedom, prosperity and energy independence and abundance for generations to come.

Have you noticed that the Charlie Brown campaign has changed-up their tactics from calling McClintock’s acceptance of Per-Diem payments a Felony (crime) to saying it is something he shouldn’t be doing?

They also purport to understand Tom McClintock’s finances so well that they can render a judgement as to weather he can afford to maintain two residences on just his salary. If McClintock was greedy, he’d work in the private sector… he’d make way more there!

Information has come to this blogger that a Woman from Sun City Lincoln, one of the strongest areas of support for Brown in 2006, sent a letter to the Attorney General’s office.

The sudden change by the Brown team tells me that they were involved in the request for information.

Take a look at the attached letter…

The letter makes a huge point – it says that a sitting member does not need to maintain a residence in their district once elected. This is why I see the “A46” car parked on American River Drive. Amazingly, that is the residence of Fabian Nunez. So, the argument that millions was spent on making doesn’t hold water.

In addition – the letter is signed by two very well known liberals. John Waldie’s father was a very liberal Congressman from the bay area.

When you read the letter – you can rapidly ascertain that the letter writer was alleging legal impropriety against Tom McClintock.

The attempt by the Brown team to gain a campaign issue went up in smoke.

Sorry Charlie! Maybe you will campaign on issues now?

Sorry Charlie!

ENERGY. A new Quinnipiac poll> out this morning indicates overwhelming public support for House Republicans’ “all of the above” energy solutions. For starters, by 62 – 32 percent, Americans favor drilling for oil in currently protected offshore areas. While Republicans back offshore drilling 82 – 12 percent, Democrats back it 50 – 43 percent and independent voters say drill 60 – 36 percent. Additionally, the poll – which surveyed 1,547 likely voters nationwide, with a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percentage points – finds:

• 56 – 35 percent in favor of building new nuclear plants;

• 51 – 42 percent back drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge;

• 87 – 10 percent back government funds for renewable energy such as wind and solar power;

• 78 – 18 percent for mandating higher mileage standards for cars.

Also a must-read this morning, the lead editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal> examines leading Democrats’ recent shifts on offshore drilling: “It took a few months, and more than a few polls, but Democrats have concluded that they’ve lost the debate against more oil-and-gas drilling. The surrender became official on Saturday, when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced that even she was ready to ‘consider opening portions’ of the Outer Continental Shelf to oil exploration.” The Journal urges caution about Democrats’ true intentions, and says: “The Democratic choice is between sticking with an anticarbon theology that opposes all new drilling, or siding with American consumers who want more energy supplies so they don’t have to pay $4 for gas and blow their family budget to keep the lights on. We’ll soon find out whether Democrats have found religion on drilling, or if they’re merely doing an election-year incantation.”

Blogger’s Note – Why hope that Pelosi will actually allow a vote… Why hope that Charlie Brown will do the right thing? Tom McClintock is a known quantity on these issues. Charlie Brown has been tied at the hip to Nancy Pelosi and this issue is taking him and his party down the oil well.

Sorry Charlie – The Voters are going to Drill You

These clips are from a radio interview Brown did on a Susanville, CA Radio Station KSUE 1240am a few weeks ago.

They demonstrate the problems Charlie Brown will have in a debate – first off, listen to his communication style. It will put people to sleep.

Javascript and Flash must be
enabled and installed to play this audio file.

Clip one – “Not my energy plan” Really? Then this proves that Brown is parroting Nancy Pelosi. Any doubt is removed when he cites a drop in Oil prices without stating that the reason was the fact that Bush is going to let a drilling moratorium expire.

Javascript and Flash must be
enabled and installed to play this audio file.

Clip two – “I don’t care what Obama does…” either Brown is being disengenuous or he is annoying his base. Then – he gets back on his talking points, parroting the Oil Companies are sitting on their leases (which is a lie, they will lose them under existing law if not used).

He then goes back to the American Can’t argument saying that nothing will happen for 10 years.

Then he says, “drilling is taking our eye off the ball” Nice soundbyte – are they sure they want to debate. That soundbyte is great fodder for radio ads!

Javascript and Flash must be
enabled and installed to play this audio file.

Clip three – circular logic, that will work great in a debate… not.

Javascript and Flash must be
enabled and installed to play this audio file.

Clip four – says government needs to drive priuses. Nice feel good deflection from the real issue. I guess Charlie has a politician streak after all.

These clips illustrate the extreme risk debates pose to Charlie Brown. It is the opinion of this blogger that Brown is pushing for debates because he is the challenger and his campaign is starting to slip.

A major website has changed the race from “toss-up” to “likely Republican”, by-passing the “leans Republican” level.

My prediction – debates will occur in some form and the Colonel will get overrun by the General.

OBM Machine = Obama-Brown-Montgomery

Check out Barak Obama’s Comments on his ‘faith’

Hmmm… the Auburn Journal has made sure that everyone knows that Bruce Kranz is a Republican with ties to (gasp) John Doolittle… (What Republican in Placer County is not tied to John Doolittle, even Ted Gaines is!)

One only need to take a cursory look back at some recent history to see that Jennifer Montgomery is an accomplished political activist. Good for her – she is just on the wrong team.

However – the stories I am linking to are from the Sierra Sun, not the Auburn Journal. Why is the Auburn Journal behind the rest of the local media with their coverage of Montgomery’s Democrat Party ties?

Monty talks about supporting Charlie Brown in a letter 10/30/2006

Monty and ‘Republican’ Joanne Neft were at a fund-riaser for Charlie Brown 10/05/2007

Monty found her way into the local Media again, Pro-Obama locals prepare for convention

Of interest in today’s Obama Convention article is this excerpt – “Convincing Nevadans to vote Democratic may not be as difficult as years past if the swing state follows a trend that has transpired in what was once a predominately Republican Placer County, said Rob Haswell, campaign manager for Fifth District supervisor challenger Jennifer Montgomery.

“There has been a resurgence in Democratic activity in Placer County,” Haswell said. “The number of people registering Democratic in the first quarter of this year was pretty astounding for the Republican-dominated county.”

Earlier this month, nearly 200 onlookers attended the reopening of the Democratic Party headquarters in Auburn, which hadn’t opened its doors in nearly a decade, said Haswell, whose vote is driven by Obama’s economic and environmental concepts.

In the first quarter of 2008, more people registered as Democrats in Placer County than any other affiliation, pushing Republican registration below 50 percent for the first time in a decade, according to a Placer County Democratic Party press release.

“It’s going to be a historic year in many ways,” Haswell said. “I think this county and this country are ready to embrace Obama’s message of change.”

Blogger’s Notes – The Placer GOP has out-registered every other County in California for New Republicans.

Haswell and his friends are in for a rude surprise. Placer County is ready for change – and change is what they are getting, an activist Central Committee willing to stand up and take on the establishment when they endorsed Tom McClintock, and energized Central Committee that is crushing the rest of the state in registration.

Placer County will keep continuing the economic progress of Placer County by re-electing Bruce Kranz.

Why is Montgomery qualified to be supervisor? All I have heard is her supporters making absurd comments and opposing fire summits…

Click here to read about the Sordid past of Auburn Journal Editor Deric Rothe – his Felony Conviction for drug trafficking

Remember Steven Kubby?

He was extradited from Canada to the USA when he ran to avoid prosecution for Narcotics production. (at least Rothe stuck around)

Before and after Rothe had his civil rights restored from his prior Drug Trafficking conviction – the Auburn Journal took up the cause of Stephen Kubby.

In 2003, Kubby’s felony conviction was reinstated as reported by the Auburn Journal

There was a follow-up story trumpeting Kubby’s plight as he applied for refugee status in Canada

And another in 2006 when his ‘stay’ in Canada was about to run out

And this is basically a commentary printed in the AJ taking Kubby’s sid