Democrats Attack McCain Even Though They Blocked Reform Efforts He Sought To Help Fix The Financial Markets

Obama’s Congressional Allies Have Been Attacking Sen. John McCain For Engaging In Negotiations On Legislation To Stabilize Financial Markets:

“In Interviews After The Meeting, Obama Pointed A Finger At His Rival For The Faltering Talks…” (Michael D. Shear and Jonathan Weisman, “Debate Still In Limbo As Democrats Blame McCain For Interrupting Process,” The Washington Post, 9/26/08)

Obama Suggested The Negotiations Were Damaged By Presidential Politics. “Obama suggested the talks were damaged by politics. ‘When you start injecting presidential politics into delicate negotiations you can actually create more problems rather than less,’ Obama said on CNN.” (Alison Vekshin and James Rowley, “House Republicans Undercut Bush On Rescue, Slow Talks,” Bloomberg News, 9/26/08)

But McCain Has Led Efforts To Reform Financial Markets:

The Washington Post: “[W]hen It Comes To Regulating Financial Institutions And Corporate Misconduct, Mr. McCain’s Record Is More In Keeping With His Current Rhetoric.” (Editorial, ”’Always For Less Regulation?’” The Washington Post, 9/19/08)

John McCain Urged Action More Than Two Years Ago, Co-Sponsoring Legislation To Reform Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Warning: “If Congress Does Not Act, American Taxpayers Will Continue To Be Exposed To The Enormous Risk That Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Pose To The Housing Market, The Overall Financial System, And The Economy As A Whole.” McCain: “I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.” (Office Of U.S. Senator John McCain, “McCain Statement On Co-Sponsorship Of The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act Of 2005,” Press Release, 5/26/06)

In 2002, McCain Called For Greater Oversight Of Financial Markets Following Accounting Scandals. “In the aftermath of the Enron collapse and other accounting scandals, he was a leader, with Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), in pushing to require that companies treat stock options granted to employees as expenses on their balance sheets. ‘I have long opposed unnecessary regulation of business activity, mindful that the heavy hand of government can discourage innovation,’ he wrote in a July 2002 op-ed in the New York Times. ‘But in the current climate only a restoration of the system of checks and balances that once protected the American investor - and that has seriously deteriorated over the past 10 years - can restore the confidence that makes financial markets work.’” (Editorial, ”’Always For Less Regulation?’” The Washington Post, 9/19/08)

McCain Led The Charge To Remove Former SEC Chairman Harvey Pitt. “Mr. McCain was an early voice calling for the resignation of Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Harvey Pitt, charging that he ‘seems to prefer industry self-policing to necessary lawmaking. Government’s demands for corporate accountability are only credible if government executives are held accountable as well.’” (Editorial, ”’Always For Less Regulation?’” The Washington Post, 9/19/08)

And Obama Ally Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) Blocked Multiple Attempts At Reforming Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac Spanning Back To 1992:

“[Frank’s] Record Is Close To Perfect As A Stalwart Opponent Of Reforming The Two Companies, Going Back More Than A Decade. The First Concerted Push To Rein In Fan And Fred In Congress Came As Far Back As 1992, And Mr. Frank Was Right There, Standing Athwart. But Things Really Picked Up This Decade, And Barney Was There At Every Turn.” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“Two Years Later, Mr. Frank Was At It Again. ‘I Do Not Regard Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac As Problems,’ He Said In Response To Another Reform Push. And Then: ‘I Regard Them As Great Assets.’” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“A Month Later, Freddie Mac’s Multibillion-Dollar Accounting Scandal Broke Into The Open. But Mr. Frank Was Sanguine. ‘I Do Not Think We Are Facing Any Kind Of A Crisis,’ He Said At The Time.” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“Three Months Later He Repeated The Claim That Fannie And Freddie Posed No ‘Threat To The Treasury.’ Even Suggesting That Heresy, He Added, Could Become ‘A Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.’” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

“In April 2004, Fannie Announced A Multibillion-Dollar Financial ‘Misstatement’ Of Its Own. Mr. Frank Was Back For The Defense. Fannie And Freddie Posed No Risk To Taxpayers, He Said, Adding That ‘I Think Wall Street Will Get Over It’ If The Two Collapsed.” (Editorial, “Fannie Mae’s Patron Saint,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/10/08)

Obama Ally Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) Led Efforts To Block Reform Of Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac, After Receiving A Sweetheart Deal On Loans For His Own Houses:

Obama Joined Sen. Dodd – Both Top Recipients Of Fannie And Freddie Contributions – In Opposing Reform Measures And Weakening Existing Regulations. “During this period, Sen. Richard Shelby led a small group of legislators favoring reform, including fellow Republican Sens. John Sununu, Chuck Hagel and Elizabeth Dole. Meanwhile, Dodd - who along with Democratic Sens. John Kerry, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were the top four recipients of Fannie and Freddie campaign contributions from 1988 to 2008 - actively opposed such measures and further weakened existing regulation.” (Al Hubbard and Noam Neusner, Op-Ed, “Where Was Sen. Dodd?” The Washington Post, 9/12/08)

Dodd Called On The Regulator For Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac To Lift Portfolio Caps. “Both Schumer and Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., the chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, have called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s regulator to lift the portfolio caps. They argue that allowing the two firms to buy more mortgages, at least temporarily, would inject much needed liquidity into the market and calm the financial markets.” (Michael R. Crittenden, “Schumer Will Seek To Lift Cap On Mortgage Portfolios Of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,” Congressional Quarterly Today, 8/16/07)

In 2003, Dodd, Chairman Of The Senate Banking Committee, Received Preferential Loans From Countrywide Financial On His Two Homes Which Saved Him $75,000. “Senators Christopher Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut and chairman of the Banking Committee, and Kent Conrad, Democrat from North Dakota, chairman of the Budget Committee and a member of the Finance Committee, refinanced properties through Countrywide’s ‘V.I.P.’ program in 2003 and 2004, according to company documents and emails and a former employee familiar with the loans. ... Senator Dodd received two loans in 2003 through Countrywide’s V.I.P. program. He borrowed $506,000 to refinance his Washington townhouse, and $275,042 to refinance a home in East Haddam, Connecticut. Countrywide wai ved three-eighths of a point, or about $2,000, on the first loan, and one-fourth of a point, about $700, on the second, according to internal documents. Both loans were for 30 years, with the first five years at a fixed rate. The interest rate on the loans, originally pegged at 4.875%, was reduced to 4.25% on the Washington home and 4.5% on the Connecticut property by the time the loans were funded. The lower rates save the senator about $58,000 on his Washington residence over the life of the loan, and $17,000 on the Connecticut home.” (Daniel Golden, “Countrywide’s Many ‘Friends,’” Portfolio, 6/12/08)

Obama Ally Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Has Been A “Leading Voice For [Financial] Deregulation,” Led Efforts To Block Reform Of Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac, And Was Instrumental In The Collapse Of Bank IndyMac:

Until The Current Financial Crisis, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) “Had Been A Leading Voice For Deregulation,” Supporting Repeal Of Great-Depression Era Regulations, Re-Examining Corporate Oversight Laws, And Opposing Reducing Taxpayer Risks Associated With Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac. “Until the current credit crisis, Mr. Schumer had been a leading voice for deregulation: He ha s championed the repeal of a Great Depression-era law that prohibited commercial banks from underwriting securities; he has written an opinion piece calling for the Sarbanes-Oxley Act to be ‘re-examined,’ and he has opposed a bill that sought to reduce taxpayer risk in the event of a housing market slowdown by requiring Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to sell their entire investment portfolios of about $1.5 trillion worth of mortgage assets.” (Joseph Goldstein, “Pro-Deregulation Schumer Scores Bush For Lack of Regulation,” The New York Sun, 9/22/08)

Schumer Called On The Regulator For Fannie Mae And Freddie Mac To Lift Portfolio Caps. “Both Schumer and Christopher J. Dodd, D-Conn., the chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, have called on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s regulator to lift the portfolio caps. They argue that allowing the two firms to buy more mortgages, at least temporarily, would inject much needed liquidity into the market and calm the financial markets.” (Michael R. Crittenden, “Schumer Will Seek To Lift Cap On Mortgage Portfolios Of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac,” Congressional Quarterly Today, 8/16/07)

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…

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.)

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.”

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

$8 a gallon Gas or a big fat Oil Derrick?

The two huge issues in the fall election -

Gay Marriage and Gas Prices.

The Democrats are amazing me – it is starting to look like 2006. Except this time it isn’t Republicans and spending, it is Democrats and Oil Drilling / Refinery Construction.

Anyone who thinks that real America is not going to react to the Dems selling themselves out to the Enviros has another thing coming.

Gay Marriage – I have already been accused of spreading hate for quoting scripture and pointing out that Homosexuals are advancing their agenda at the expense of religious freedom.

Some choices are wrong – the Democrats are going to stand up for $8 a gallon Gas and Gay Marriage. America is going to stand against that.

If you have any questions – let’s put commercials up showing Gay Marriage ceremonies and see how those play in swing states.