This isn't exactly news but it does show how much of a drag He has become to the Republican brand.
From the Sacramento Bee
By Kevin Yamamura - kyamamura@sacbee.com
Published 12:00 am PDT Saturday, July 19, 2008
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A3
President Bush's disapproval rating in California has reached the highest mark for a president since the Field Poll began tracking White House numbers in 1961, according to its latest survey released Friday.
Less than a quarter of California voters – 24 percent – said they approve of Bush's job performance, compared with 71 percent who said they disapprove.
The latter mark is higher than Nixon's 70 percent disapproval rating in August 1974, the same month he resigned from office after his role in the Watergate scandal was revealed.
Only 18 percent of voters said they approve of Bush's handling of the economy, a drop from 24 percent who said the same in May. Voter appraisal of Bush's handling of the Iraq war has remained steady at 28 percent approval, compared with 27 percent in May.
"What's driving this particular poll down are the significantly lower ratings he's getting on the economy," said Field Poll Director Mark DiCamillo. "His Iraq ratings seem to have stabilized. I would consider those to have bottomed out."
More Republicans approve of Bush than disapprove, by a 54 percent to 38 percent margin. But the poll found that 90 percent of Democrats and 83 percent of independent voters disapprove of Bush.
Three-quarters of voters also believe the nation is headed on the wrong track, while 15 percent said it is going in the right direction, and 10 percent had no opinion. That is the gloomiest voter outlook since July 1992, when the state was mired in recession.
The Field Poll did not ask voters their feelings about Congress during its July survey.
In May, 30 percent approved of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, compared with 39 percent who disapproved. In December, 30 percent approved of Congress, while 56 percent disapproved.
"Institutional measures, whether it's Congress or the state Legislature, are often lower when things aren't going well because there isn't any one personality underpinning the institution," DiCamillo said. "The institution itself is often seen as not doing its job if the economy falls on hard times."
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
PRIDE and Republicans
With Sanders in support of gay marriage, where does that place Goldsmith, Boling, and Thalimier?
Anyone know?
And will it affect their races?
Your thoughts...
Anyone know?
And will it affect their races?
Your thoughts...
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
FPPC: DeMaio Violated Political Reform Act
This just came across my inbox from the Party:
San Diego City Councilmember-elect Carl DeMaio ran on a pledge to bring transparency to City Hall, but even before he finished filing as a candidate he was trying to hide information from the public, according to California’s political reform agency.
DeMaio was warned by the Fair Political Practices Commission last week that his Statement of Economic Interests fails to disclose required information about the clients of the consulting companies he owned until 2007.
He has until July 28 to come clean with the public about his clients at the Performance Institute and American Strategic Management Institute or face fines amounting to $5,000 for each violation of the Political Reform Act.
Officeholders and candidates for public office in the State of California are required to complete a Statement of Economic Interests, known as Form 700, so that the public is made fully aware of its representatives’ business interests before they’re elected to office. DeMaio’s statement currently does not include such information.
DeMaio’s Performance Institute made millions of dollars as a federal contractor, according to www.fedspending.org, a website that tracks U.S. government contract spending. His American Strategic Management Institute is a for-profit business that provides consulting to private companies. He reported selling both companies to Thompson Publishing Group, Inc. just before he began his bid for the City Council seat.
“Carl DeMaio’s failure to comply with this rule while he ran for City Council District 5 conflicts with his stated commitment to open government,” said Jess Durfee, Chair of the San Diego County Democratic Party.
“It is ironic that Mr. DeMaio ran for office on a platform of making government more transparent when in fact he was violating open government laws by failing to disclose his own financial interests,” Durfee said. “If Mr. DeMaio were truly interested in open government, he would have told the public who his clients were.”
But DeMaio, a Republican, never claimed ownership in either business in his Form 700. Instead, he reported that he was the sole proprietor of an entity named “Carl DeMaio” and that both companies merely did business with “Carl DeMaio.”
“It is clear that Carl DeMaio is not being forthright with the public,” the Democratic Chair said. “He needs to come clean with the people of San Diego before we can trust he will have the public interest in mind when he becomes a councilmember.”
In light of DeMaio’s web of financial interests, Durfee further called on him to pledge that he will not conduct any private business with government contractors while holding public office.
San Diego City Councilmember-elect Carl DeMaio ran on a pledge to bring transparency to City Hall, but even before he finished filing as a candidate he was trying to hide information from the public, according to California’s political reform agency.
DeMaio was warned by the Fair Political Practices Commission last week that his Statement of Economic Interests fails to disclose required information about the clients of the consulting companies he owned until 2007.
He has until July 28 to come clean with the public about his clients at the Performance Institute and American Strategic Management Institute or face fines amounting to $5,000 for each violation of the Political Reform Act.
Officeholders and candidates for public office in the State of California are required to complete a Statement of Economic Interests, known as Form 700, so that the public is made fully aware of its representatives’ business interests before they’re elected to office. DeMaio’s statement currently does not include such information.
DeMaio’s Performance Institute made millions of dollars as a federal contractor, according to www.fedspending.org, a website that tracks U.S. government contract spending. His American Strategic Management Institute is a for-profit business that provides consulting to private companies. He reported selling both companies to Thompson Publishing Group, Inc. just before he began his bid for the City Council seat.
“Carl DeMaio’s failure to comply with this rule while he ran for City Council District 5 conflicts with his stated commitment to open government,” said Jess Durfee, Chair of the San Diego County Democratic Party.
“It is ironic that Mr. DeMaio ran for office on a platform of making government more transparent when in fact he was violating open government laws by failing to disclose his own financial interests,” Durfee said. “If Mr. DeMaio were truly interested in open government, he would have told the public who his clients were.”
But DeMaio, a Republican, never claimed ownership in either business in his Form 700. Instead, he reported that he was the sole proprietor of an entity named “Carl DeMaio” and that both companies merely did business with “Carl DeMaio.”
“It is clear that Carl DeMaio is not being forthright with the public,” the Democratic Chair said. “He needs to come clean with the people of San Diego before we can trust he will have the public interest in mind when he becomes a councilmember.”
In light of DeMaio’s web of financial interests, Durfee further called on him to pledge that he will not conduct any private business with government contractors while holding public office.
Free Speech and the Blogosphere
So on the front page of the Business Day section of today's New York Times, a great story about balancing the law and blog posting. What is really interesting is that there seems to be a political bent to the specific blog that was targeted by the New York City's DA in attempting to find the IP addresses of anon posters criticizing Republican lawmakers and posting news reports about investigations that supported their criticism.
Luckily, the subpoena was withdrawn after “The district attorney was not aware that a subpoena was sent nor was he aware of the content of the comments, until after the subpoena was sent. The district attorney reviewed the matter, determined that a subpoena was not necessary at this time, and directed that it be withdrawn.”
But this story should give every blogger and those who publish blogs pause. We are a progressive blog but we don't try to stifle people in the expression their positions as long as it is done in a manner that is more or less in line with common decorum. I think we have only banned one comment in the time this blog has been up, which is a testament to our readers and our posters. However, if government entities begin issuing subpoenas to investigate posters just because they express their opinions anonymously how can real discussion take place? I would like to think that bloggers on both sides of the spectrum share this common thread of being able to express one's political views without fear of retribution from that politician or political entity. That is entirely anathema to what this country stands for. I mean wouldn't you be less inclined to share your opinions on say Jerry Sanders, Donna Frye or any other elected if they could find out who you are? Don't we have rights?
What do you think?
Luckily, the subpoena was withdrawn after “The district attorney was not aware that a subpoena was sent nor was he aware of the content of the comments, until after the subpoena was sent. The district attorney reviewed the matter, determined that a subpoena was not necessary at this time, and directed that it be withdrawn.”
But this story should give every blogger and those who publish blogs pause. We are a progressive blog but we don't try to stifle people in the expression their positions as long as it is done in a manner that is more or less in line with common decorum. I think we have only banned one comment in the time this blog has been up, which is a testament to our readers and our posters. However, if government entities begin issuing subpoenas to investigate posters just because they express their opinions anonymously how can real discussion take place? I would like to think that bloggers on both sides of the spectrum share this common thread of being able to express one's political views without fear of retribution from that politician or political entity. That is entirely anathema to what this country stands for. I mean wouldn't you be less inclined to share your opinions on say Jerry Sanders, Donna Frye or any other elected if they could find out who you are? Don't we have rights?
What do you think?
Friday, July 11, 2008
Some Republicans are Freer than Others
It appears that the freedom-loving Republican Central Committee has an issue with members who attempt to express their freedoms.
According to the San Diego Reader’s City Lights section this week, there were a series of slate mailers put out to advertise candidates running for positions on the Republican Central Committee. Thing was, the people selected for ballot placement were those most likely not to challenge Chairman Tony Krvaric.
According to Joe Deegan of the San Diego Reader:
Krvaric did not reply to my phone message asking if he were behind the Central Committee lists on the slate mailers. Members of the committee’s executive board haven’t confessed to anything either, according to Laura Sumrall, who thinks her close association with Steve Francis made them “a little cautious” of targeting her completely. (She opposed the committee on its endorsement of Jerry Sanders over Francis for mayor of San Diego.) “But the discussion of the Central Committee lists happened in a silent meeting the executive board members will all deny,” Sumrall tells me. “We have a mole who was sitting in the meeting outraged but kept his mouth shut and told us about it later. And a couple of them have slipped and said, ‘But, you know, you can’t have people on the committee who cause trouble and aren’t willing to work together.’ ”
And this:
“There are a few people,” according to Cowlishaw, “who would like to control everything, including Tony Krvaric. They want to have no dissent, no confusion about what they want done. They want everybody to get along and have the same idea and be on the same page. I can understand that to a certain degree, but there has to be some discussion. I am vocal in my opinions, though mostly outside of meetings. But I don’t think my views were anti anything.”
And this:
But things happened a bit differently with the recent mailers. Printed at their bottom, a note stated that an asterisk next to the names of the candidates meant the candidate had paid to be on the slate. All the candidates for the Republican Central Committee had the asterisks. But Sumrall says she didn’t pay a dime to appear on any slate. “So I called the number on the mailer that had my name, and I got a recording,” she says. “It did not identify a business. It just said to leave my name and number, which I did. I also asked why I was on the slate and who paid for it. Nobody ever returned my call, though I called twice.”
Records at the office of the San Diego County Registrar of Voters suggest what happened. Between January 1 and May 17, an organization called Citizens for a Better San Diego County took $18,300 in contributions, including $8300 from Atlas Hotels and $5000 from Thomas Sudberry. (Sudberry is currently petitioning the City of San Diego to build Quarry Falls, a massive condominium development in Mission Valley.) Citizens for a Better San Diego County, whose treasurer is Seventh District candidate for San Diego City Council April Boling, then made payments to five groups for “slate mailers to support SD Co Republican Central Committee candidates.” Family, Faith and Freedom Association and California Taxpayer Protection Voter Guide each received $2500. Citizens for Good Government received $2100, California Voter Guide, $2875, and Official Non-Partisan Voter Guide, $3000.
I’ll give the Democratic Central Committee this; It may be a chaotic and entertaining free for all but at least contrary opinions are expressed.
I guess freedom of dissent is not the Republican way, but buying a Central Committee is.
According to the San Diego Reader’s City Lights section this week, there were a series of slate mailers put out to advertise candidates running for positions on the Republican Central Committee. Thing was, the people selected for ballot placement were those most likely not to challenge Chairman Tony Krvaric.
According to Joe Deegan of the San Diego Reader:
Krvaric did not reply to my phone message asking if he were behind the Central Committee lists on the slate mailers. Members of the committee’s executive board haven’t confessed to anything either, according to Laura Sumrall, who thinks her close association with Steve Francis made them “a little cautious” of targeting her completely. (She opposed the committee on its endorsement of Jerry Sanders over Francis for mayor of San Diego.) “But the discussion of the Central Committee lists happened in a silent meeting the executive board members will all deny,” Sumrall tells me. “We have a mole who was sitting in the meeting outraged but kept his mouth shut and told us about it later. And a couple of them have slipped and said, ‘But, you know, you can’t have people on the committee who cause trouble and aren’t willing to work together.’ ”
And this:
“There are a few people,” according to Cowlishaw, “who would like to control everything, including Tony Krvaric. They want to have no dissent, no confusion about what they want done. They want everybody to get along and have the same idea and be on the same page. I can understand that to a certain degree, but there has to be some discussion. I am vocal in my opinions, though mostly outside of meetings. But I don’t think my views were anti anything.”
And this:
But things happened a bit differently with the recent mailers. Printed at their bottom, a note stated that an asterisk next to the names of the candidates meant the candidate had paid to be on the slate. All the candidates for the Republican Central Committee had the asterisks. But Sumrall says she didn’t pay a dime to appear on any slate. “So I called the number on the mailer that had my name, and I got a recording,” she says. “It did not identify a business. It just said to leave my name and number, which I did. I also asked why I was on the slate and who paid for it. Nobody ever returned my call, though I called twice.”
Records at the office of the San Diego County Registrar of Voters suggest what happened. Between January 1 and May 17, an organization called Citizens for a Better San Diego County took $18,300 in contributions, including $8300 from Atlas Hotels and $5000 from Thomas Sudberry. (Sudberry is currently petitioning the City of San Diego to build Quarry Falls, a massive condominium development in Mission Valley.) Citizens for a Better San Diego County, whose treasurer is Seventh District candidate for San Diego City Council April Boling, then made payments to five groups for “slate mailers to support SD Co Republican Central Committee candidates.” Family, Faith and Freedom Association and California Taxpayer Protection Voter Guide each received $2500. Citizens for Good Government received $2100, California Voter Guide, $2875, and Official Non-Partisan Voter Guide, $3000.
I’ll give the Democratic Central Committee this; It may be a chaotic and entertaining free for all but at least contrary opinions are expressed.
I guess freedom of dissent is not the Republican way, but buying a Central Committee is.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Democrats endorse Aguirre
My understanding was that the vote for the endorsement had one nay and all the rest aye.
From today's UT:
SAN DIEGO – Incumbent City Attorney Michael Aguirre won the overwhelming endorsement of the county Democratic Party last night and said afterward that he was eager to ramp up his re-election campaign.
“We'll soon be announcing our campaign consultants and our campaign manager and I'll be going door-to-door,” Aguirre said. “We're also setting up 50 coffees throughout the city, and we'll be carrying out a very vigorous campaign.”
Aguirre, a Democrat, faces San Diego Superior Court Judge Jan Goldsmith, a Republican, in the Nov. 4 election. While the race is ostensibly nonpartisan, party support can be helpful to candidates through mailers to party members and other assistance.
Aguirre finished second to Goldsmith on June 3 in a five-person race that included two other Democrats, including City Council President Scott Peters. The county Democratic Party did not endorse anyone in that race because it did not reach a consensus about which of the candidates was most electable, said party chairman Jess Durfee.
In November, however, “we're supporting Aguirre 100 percent,” he said.
Aguirre has been a polarizing figure at City Hall as he has frequently clashed with Mayor Jerry Sanders and the City Council on issues of the deficit-plagued employee pension fund and the role of the city attorney.
All the while, Aguirre has declared himself the city attorney for the people of San Diego – a posture that resonated with some in attendance at last night's meeting at the State of California Building downtown.
“I don't know of anybody who has stuck his neck out as much as Michael Aguirre,” said Mary Christian-Heising, a longtime Democrat. “Let's get behind the Democrat who has stood for us.”
How much the party will spend on campaign materials has not been decided.
“We haven't developed our plans for candidate support at this point for the fall campaign,” Durfee said. “We'll assess that as we look at our resources.”
Aguirre may need all the help he can get. He was elected in 2004 by a slim margin – 50.4 percent to 49.6 percent – over Leslie Devaney.
From today's UT:
SAN DIEGO – Incumbent City Attorney Michael Aguirre won the overwhelming endorsement of the county Democratic Party last night and said afterward that he was eager to ramp up his re-election campaign.
“We'll soon be announcing our campaign consultants and our campaign manager and I'll be going door-to-door,” Aguirre said. “We're also setting up 50 coffees throughout the city, and we'll be carrying out a very vigorous campaign.”
Aguirre, a Democrat, faces San Diego Superior Court Judge Jan Goldsmith, a Republican, in the Nov. 4 election. While the race is ostensibly nonpartisan, party support can be helpful to candidates through mailers to party members and other assistance.
Aguirre finished second to Goldsmith on June 3 in a five-person race that included two other Democrats, including City Council President Scott Peters. The county Democratic Party did not endorse anyone in that race because it did not reach a consensus about which of the candidates was most electable, said party chairman Jess Durfee.
In November, however, “we're supporting Aguirre 100 percent,” he said.
Aguirre has been a polarizing figure at City Hall as he has frequently clashed with Mayor Jerry Sanders and the City Council on issues of the deficit-plagued employee pension fund and the role of the city attorney.
All the while, Aguirre has declared himself the city attorney for the people of San Diego – a posture that resonated with some in attendance at last night's meeting at the State of California Building downtown.
“I don't know of anybody who has stuck his neck out as much as Michael Aguirre,” said Mary Christian-Heising, a longtime Democrat. “Let's get behind the Democrat who has stood for us.”
How much the party will spend on campaign materials has not been decided.
“We haven't developed our plans for candidate support at this point for the fall campaign,” Durfee said. “We'll assess that as we look at our resources.”
Aguirre may need all the help he can get. He was elected in 2004 by a slim margin – 50.4 percent to 49.6 percent – over Leslie Devaney.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Help Strengthen Living Wage Enforcement in San Diego
The Center on Policy Initiatives has been on the forefront of pushing legislation that benefit all San Diegans. They were the principle movers on the Living Wage Ordinance that passed in 2005 and now are pushing for a strengthening of the Ordinance to include strict penalties for non-compliance and an enforcement provision that will safeguard compliance would prevent stuff like this and would ensure that the contractors aren't skimming off the fat of taxpayer dollars and stealing from the City. Please help CPI by contacting the City Council in urging them to support this effort. Click here to find out more! It's time to put some real teeth on this policy that is helping San Diegans out of poverty.
Bonnie D wants 3rd Term
So Bonnie Dumanis has decided not to run for Attorney General and instead focus on reelection in 2010. I guess partisan witch hunts don't play well outside of San Diego County. Also I guess vowing not to turn the D.A.'s office into a political office and then backtracking and endorsing in almost every race, thereby turning it into more of a political operation then one of the public trust doesn't play either. So know the question becomes will she waltz in the office like she did in 2006 or will someone challenge her in 2010?
Any ideas on who?
Any ideas on who?
Thursday, July 3, 2008
San Diegans Asked to Boycott Coca-Cola Products Starting this Fourth of July Weekend
As Fourth of July fireworks, barbeques and pool parties heat up, employees of San Diego County’s two Coca-Cola bottling facilities have asked San Diegans to forego Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Sprite and other Coca-Cola beverages because of the company’s anti-union conduct.
Earlier this week, more than 600 drivers and warehouse employees at Coca-Cola Enterprises’ San Diego and Oceanside bottling plants went on strike to protest the company’s unfair practices. Last year, employees at the Oceanside facility voted to become members of Teamsters Local 683, yet the company has been unwilling to negotiate a contract that is comparable to those in other parts of Southern California.
“Coca Cola Enterprises wants to treat its Oceanside workers as second-class citizens,” Teamsters Local 683 Secretary-Treasurer Shannon R. Silva said. “They want to drag down the standard of living for Oceanside workers. These workers deserve parity with other Coke employees in Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles County.”
The San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council is asking that its 120,000 members and all other San Diegans observe this boycott until Coca-Cola agrees to settle a contract that will provide equality for their employees in Oceanside.
“Unfortunately Coca-Cola has gone from asking San Diegans to ‘Have a Coke and a smile,’ to ‘Have a Coke, less rights, lower pay and fewer benefits,’” Labor Council Secretary-Treasurer Lorena Gonzalez said. “We will not stand by and watch as Coke tries to destroy quality middle-class jobs in our community.”
Coca-Cola products include: Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Fanta, Dr. Pepper, Fresca, Sprite, Minute Maid, Dasani Water, Squirt, Rockstar and Canada Dry, among others.
Earlier this week, more than 600 drivers and warehouse employees at Coca-Cola Enterprises’ San Diego and Oceanside bottling plants went on strike to protest the company’s unfair practices. Last year, employees at the Oceanside facility voted to become members of Teamsters Local 683, yet the company has been unwilling to negotiate a contract that is comparable to those in other parts of Southern California.
“Coca Cola Enterprises wants to treat its Oceanside workers as second-class citizens,” Teamsters Local 683 Secretary-Treasurer Shannon R. Silva said. “They want to drag down the standard of living for Oceanside workers. These workers deserve parity with other Coke employees in Orange, San Diego and Los Angeles County.”
The San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council is asking that its 120,000 members and all other San Diegans observe this boycott until Coca-Cola agrees to settle a contract that will provide equality for their employees in Oceanside.
“Unfortunately Coca-Cola has gone from asking San Diegans to ‘Have a Coke and a smile,’ to ‘Have a Coke, less rights, lower pay and fewer benefits,’” Labor Council Secretary-Treasurer Lorena Gonzalez said. “We will not stand by and watch as Coke tries to destroy quality middle-class jobs in our community.”
Coca-Cola products include: Coca-Cola, Diet Coke, Fanta, Dr. Pepper, Fresca, Sprite, Minute Maid, Dasani Water, Squirt, Rockstar and Canada Dry, among others.
Uptown Throwdown!
So now that the general election is upon us let's look at one of the more interesting local races to come around in a while outside of the City Attorney's race. I'm talking of course between the throwdown between Todd Gloria and Stephen Whitburn for District 3. The reason why this is interesting is that who ever wins might become the premier locally elected city Democrat. I mean after all it's possible that one of these guys might run for Mayor or State Assembly in a few years. But it also going to be very contentious as both candidates have very similar positions on choice, marriage equality, equal rights and essentially share the same progressive values. Looking at the money side, if one checks the San Diego City Clerk's office you'll see that as of 5/17/08 Whitburn raised $114,730.66 and Gloria raised $61,788.00 and during that same fundraising period from 3/18/08 to May 17th Stephen raised $8,000 more than Todd. While impressive, $73,000 of that roughly $114,000 were loans so in essence they've raised the same money. Also, both have an impressive list of endorsements. Stephen has Rep. Bob Filner and Donna Frye. While Todd has Rep. Susan Davis (his boss), Francine Busby and the rest of the Democrats on the council with the exception of Toni Atkins and Scott Peters. So like all races that have candidates with similar positions, it's all about perception and minutia.
Todd has been presenting himself as public safety choice that understands the problems of crime since he himself lives in City Heights, a low income neighborhood that has yet to be revitalized like Hillcrest and many sections of North Park. He has been presenting himself as someone who understands that the needs of the city can't just be met by the city alone but with building partnerships with community stake holders like local business and community groups to continue the revitalization of D3 and push it to the El Cajon Blvd corridor and City Heights while maintaining the atmosphere of those neighborhoods.
Steven has been presenting himself as the real Democratic choice and wants to be the voice of the district and ensure that special interests do not run the table. He styles himself as a continuation of the activist model City Councilperson like Donna Frye. Someone whose door is always open to his community and won't be bullied into making compromises that may negatively impact the district.
Now personally, I think both are compelling and are great candidates and I don't envy those that have to choose between these great candidates. But, like many intra party fights. Sometimes they get ugly quick.
Stephen supporters keep talking about how Todd isn't progressive and is in the pocket of developers. While Todd supporters feel that Stephen is condoning some of the questionable statements made by his hardcore supporters and isn't ready for prime time.
Also the November election is a totally different animal than the primary as first-time voters and voters that only vote in Presidential elections come out. These voters might receive a mailer with Stephen and Donna (by the way, during each of her runs for Mayor, her strongest support was in D3) and vote his way. Or Todd might try the Obama act. Trying to bring together DTS's and moderate Republicans to his coalition, painting himself as someone who will listen to them and take their concerns to account.
So my thoughts? Like I said both are great and would be a wonderful addition to the Council. But looking at the landscape of the new City Council and we are going to need a counterweight to incoming D5 Councilperson Carl DeMaio. This guy is smart, ambitious and brazen. I mean one day he's taking orders from the powers that be and then the next he's hugging Donna Frye talking about how he's all about reform. This guy is already laying the groundwork to take on Kevin Faulconer for the Mayorship and we are going to need some that can keep this guy in check and match him toe for toe. I personally think that if look through that prism, Todd is that guy to keep tabs on DeMaio and would be the perfect counterweight to check him.
But then again those are my two cents.
Penny for your thoughts?
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
SAVE THE DATE: Peak Oil Film & Discussion
Peak Oil Film & DiscussionTuesday, July 29th
Featuring: Award-winning film Energy Crossroads (2007)
Special Guest: Debbie Cook
Huntington Beach Mayor and Candidate for Congress
Film begins at 7:00pm / Discussion follows at 8:00pm
Joyce Beers Community Center
3900 Vermont St. (in Hillcrest Trader Joe's shopping center)
Think Gas at $4.50 is Expensive?
Most oil industry geologists and analysts predict that within a few years, world oil production will reach a peak and then begin an irreversible decline, as huge decades-old oil fields are depleted. This is likely to significantly increase the price of everything produced from or transported using oil, including gasoline, plastic, chemicals, and food. Join Progressive San Diego and Huntington Beach Mayor Debbie Cook for a movie and discussion about peak oil, its impacts on our sprawling region, and what San Diego can do to mitigate its effects.
Debbie Cook is the Mayor of Huntington Beach, California; is an attorney and environmental activist; and is currently running for U.S. Congress in California's 46th district. She serves on the boards of directors of the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO-USA) and the Post Carbon Institute, and has spoken internationally about what local governments can do in response to the imminent peak in world oil production.
http://www.debbiecookforcongres
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Eyes on the Prize.
The Prize, of course, is the 50th Congressional District. Nick Leibham, the Democratic nominee, has been aggressive in his quest to unseat Brian Bilbray. Bilbray, as you recall, won in a close election fight against Francine Busby in 2006 after the resignation of Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Yet thanks to the soft economy and general sour mood of the electorate against Republicans. Leibham has been chipping away at Bilbray, raising money and his profile. So much so that the D trip has jumped in with radio ads targeting 13 Congressional Districts including the 50th reminding voters about his support of big oil. So, have a listen and give your thoughts.
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Jan Goldsmith at the San Diego Democratic Club
Last week it was reported in this blog that Mike Aguirre got the Dem Club nod but it did not mention that Jan was also there to plead for a no endorsement. Thanks to an old bylaw, Jan, a former Republican Leader in the State Assembly, could address the largely progressive and most effective Democratic party club in the county. Now to say this was weird is to understate it. I mean here's a guy who spent his entire political career trying to dismantle everything the Dem Club supports and is founded upon. He been on the record against marriage equality. He's endorsed by the San Diego Minutemen, who aren't exactly agents of tolerance with people of color. So this guy , that has questionable supporters at best, is talking to the Dem Club. A club that has carried the banner of inclusion and tolerance since its founding. What's next? Shrub joins The Climate Project and begins to crusade against Climate Change.
Your thoughts?
Your thoughts?
John & Cindy McCain failed to their property taxes for 4 years
According to Newsweek:
UPDATE:
Is anyone surprised that there has been no mention of La Jolla property issue in the local media. I cannot help to believe that if the issue was about a Democratic presidential candidate, the UT would be all over the issue.
San Diego County officials, it turns out, have been sending out tax notices on the La Jolla property, an oceanfront condo, for four years without receiving a response. County records show the bills, which were mailed to a Phoenix address associated with Mrs. McCain's trust, were returned by the post office. According to a McCain campaign aide, who requested anonymity when discussing a private matter, an elderly aunt of Mrs. McCain's lives in the condo, and the bank that manages the trust has not been receiving tax bills on the property. Shortly after NEWSWEEK inquired about the matter, the McCain aide e-mailed a receipt dated Friday, June 27, confirming payment by the trust to San Diego County in the amount of $6,744.42. County officials say the trust still owes an additional $1,742 for this year, an amount that is overdue and will go into default July 1. Told of the outstanding $1,742, the aide said: "The trust has paid all bills shown owing as of today and will pay all other bills due." [Link]Now, I know when you're an heiress to a beer fortune and you have properties all over the country, sometimes it is hard to keep track of all those different property tax bills that you receive. And I can see how sometimes you might forget paying one of them for 4 years or so.
UPDATE:
Is anyone surprised that there has been no mention of La Jolla property issue in the local media. I cannot help to believe that if the issue was about a Democratic presidential candidate, the UT would be all over the issue.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Mike Aguirre wins SDDC Endorsement
In what turned out to be a rather long and contentious meeting tonight, the San Diego Democratic Club endorsed incumbent Mike Aguirre for City Attorney. The meeting went on for over two hours, and during the discussion period became heated as some members of the club accused each other of making personal attacks upon each other. In the end, there were enough votes for Aguirre to secure the club's endorsement.
Now with the SDDC endorsement, Mike Aguirre will seek the Democratic Central Committee endorsement scheduled for July 8th. An endorsement he has failed twice before to secure.
Now with the SDDC endorsement, Mike Aguirre will seek the Democratic Central Committee endorsement scheduled for July 8th. An endorsement he has failed twice before to secure.
Philly Boy Has Bad Money Sense
With the June election behind us lets look towards the November Election. Since the media is not talking about it, then I guess someone should at least remind people about the why Phil "Philly Boy" Thalheimer can't win in November.
We don't have to go back very far, just remember the infamous San Diego Union-Tribune story, besides the other ones listed below. Much of these are from his own words and why residents of District 1 should NOT vote for him:
1) Early on he invested all his money on margin, sold short and lost it all, plus another $30,000
- He said, "I didn't realize you could lose more than you had"
2) His first job as an orderly was tough for him, because he had a hard time relating to youth and
after two years his boss told him he was not empathetic and should find another job
3) He worked for the controversial San Diego Data Processing Center
4) He left his job with the City of San Diego over people skills
- He said, “I never liked working for other people,”
- Also quoted as saying,, “As much time as I spent in local government, I never felt like I fit.”
- Now Philly Boy wants to come back to city government
5) He lucked out with being able to run the Flight Training International, even despite himself.
- Even with in his own words he called his business plan, "flawed"
6) In his previous candidate statement he says, "Phil Thalheimer will use business skills to clean
up the financial mess," he said, "refused to accept one dime of developer money," and "I have not and will not take one penny of developer/lobbyist campaign contributions."
- Is his business sense something we can afford?
- Now that he found wealth as developer he is okay with their money.
- Looking through his reports, I now see plenty of developer & lobbyist money.
7) Flip flops on the Regents bridge
8) He spent over $1,000,000 of his own personal money on his last losing city council campaign.
- It seems he really didn't learn from his other past investment losses.
Sadly, the Voice of San Diego reported Philly Boy's company, Flight Training International is being investigated by the Federal Aviation Administration. People will be watching the results of the investigations.
We don't have to go back very far, just remember the infamous San Diego Union-Tribune story, besides the other ones listed below. Much of these are from his own words and why residents of District 1 should NOT vote for him:
1) Early on he invested all his money on margin, sold short and lost it all, plus another $30,000
- He said, "I didn't realize you could lose more than you had"
2) His first job as an orderly was tough for him, because he had a hard time relating to youth and
after two years his boss told him he was not empathetic and should find another job
3) He worked for the controversial San Diego Data Processing Center
4) He left his job with the City of San Diego over people skills
- He said, “I never liked working for other people,”
- Also quoted as saying,, “As much time as I spent in local government, I never felt like I fit.”
- Now Philly Boy wants to come back to city government
5) He lucked out with being able to run the Flight Training International, even despite himself.
- Even with in his own words he called his business plan, "flawed"
6) In his previous candidate statement he says, "Phil Thalheimer will use business skills to clean
up the financial mess," he said, "refused to accept one dime of developer money," and "I have not and will not take one penny of developer/lobbyist campaign contributions."
- Is his business sense something we can afford?
- Now that he found wealth as developer he is okay with their money.
- Looking through his reports, I now see plenty of developer & lobbyist money.
7) Flip flops on the Regents bridge
8) He spent over $1,000,000 of his own personal money on his last losing city council campaign.
- It seems he really didn't learn from his other past investment losses.
Sadly, the Voice of San Diego reported Philly Boy's company, Flight Training International is being investigated by the Federal Aviation Administration. People will be watching the results of the investigations.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Ben Hueso Happened
Disclosure: I work for the Courage Campaign which has worked on the Blackwater issue, but these opinions are my own.
Earlier this week, I asked What the Hell happened in San Diego in the June 3 election. I explored a particularly underwhelming electoral performance and noted that there was a massive failure of leadership from the city's elected Democrats (active and retired). Councilmember Donna Frye supported GOP mayoral challenger Steve Francis and Council President Scott Peters ran against the Democratic incumbent City Attorney Mike Aguirre. Incidentally, both Francis and Peters failed to make it to the November runoff.
Then yesterday it happened again. Councilmember Ben Hueso, who in May was rallying to Block Blackwater in his council district, announced his endorsement of Republican city attorney candidate Jan Goldsmith. This is particularly notable because Goldsmith's opponent is incumbent Mike Aguirre. Aguirre has been a champion for the city in the fight to force Blackwater's permits into public hearing at a time when a number of other city leaders have...attended a rally and then thrown up their hands.
If Jan Goldsmith as City Attorney would go to bat over Blackwater or any other number of issues that might be uncomfortable for the Mayor or inconvenient for the City Council, I would be absolutely flabbergasted. The campaign, like every other challenge to Aguirre this year, has been centered around a promise to sit down and shut up. The last thing this city needs is another elected official who doesn't have the necessary combination of power and motivation to force important issues.
As the UT newsblog notes, Hueso and Aguirre have never exactly been close. And Aguirre has taken a lot of flack throughout his term as City Attorney for his rabid pursuit of Mayor Jerry Sanders for all manner of scandal- real or imagined. But as Councilmember Hueso well knows because he's at the meetings, the City Council hasn't exactly put on a clinic when it comes to keeping mayoral power checked by the legislative branch. Fighting the good fight has consistently taken a back seat over the past two and a half years to misguided "pragmatism" that largely allowed Mayor Sanders to get anything he wanted.
So what we're left with is Ben Hueso surveying this scene- Mayor Sanders re-elected to a second term with what CW will term a convincing mandate (it's not, the turnout was too low to carry a mandate) and a City Council that will likely go from a narrow Democratic advantage to an even split, further neutering a body that had given itself over to the inevitability of the Strong Mayor government- and deciding that the best thing for the city is that the single dissonant voice of any weight in the city government should be replaced by, as the UT put it,
If the Democratic Party in San Diego is ever going to be able to capitalize on the tremendous infrastructure building being done at the precinct and street-corner level, leading Democrats need to stop undercutting both their party and basic points of fundamental governance at every opportunity.
What happened in San Diego? Ben Hueso and destructive politics like this happened.
Cross posted at Calitics
Earlier this week, I asked What the Hell happened in San Diego in the June 3 election. I explored a particularly underwhelming electoral performance and noted that there was a massive failure of leadership from the city's elected Democrats (active and retired). Councilmember Donna Frye supported GOP mayoral challenger Steve Francis and Council President Scott Peters ran against the Democratic incumbent City Attorney Mike Aguirre. Incidentally, both Francis and Peters failed to make it to the November runoff.
Then yesterday it happened again. Councilmember Ben Hueso, who in May was rallying to Block Blackwater in his council district, announced his endorsement of Republican city attorney candidate Jan Goldsmith. This is particularly notable because Goldsmith's opponent is incumbent Mike Aguirre. Aguirre has been a champion for the city in the fight to force Blackwater's permits into public hearing at a time when a number of other city leaders have...attended a rally and then thrown up their hands.
If Jan Goldsmith as City Attorney would go to bat over Blackwater or any other number of issues that might be uncomfortable for the Mayor or inconvenient for the City Council, I would be absolutely flabbergasted. The campaign, like every other challenge to Aguirre this year, has been centered around a promise to sit down and shut up. The last thing this city needs is another elected official who doesn't have the necessary combination of power and motivation to force important issues.
As the UT newsblog notes, Hueso and Aguirre have never exactly been close. And Aguirre has taken a lot of flack throughout his term as City Attorney for his rabid pursuit of Mayor Jerry Sanders for all manner of scandal- real or imagined. But as Councilmember Hueso well knows because he's at the meetings, the City Council hasn't exactly put on a clinic when it comes to keeping mayoral power checked by the legislative branch. Fighting the good fight has consistently taken a back seat over the past two and a half years to misguided "pragmatism" that largely allowed Mayor Sanders to get anything he wanted.
So what we're left with is Ben Hueso surveying this scene- Mayor Sanders re-elected to a second term with what CW will term a convincing mandate (it's not, the turnout was too low to carry a mandate) and a City Council that will likely go from a narrow Democratic advantage to an even split, further neutering a body that had given itself over to the inevitability of the Strong Mayor government- and deciding that the best thing for the city is that the single dissonant voice of any weight in the city government should be replaced by, as the UT put it,
Hueso said the city attorney's political persuasion is less important to him than getting "the best legal advice."
If the Democratic Party in San Diego is ever going to be able to capitalize on the tremendous infrastructure building being done at the precinct and street-corner level, leading Democrats need to stop undercutting both their party and basic points of fundamental governance at every opportunity.
What happened in San Diego? Ben Hueso and destructive politics like this happened.
Cross posted at Calitics
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)