Harry Sidhu has surprised everyone at this debate! Clear commanding speeches and heart - reaching answers by Harry to make him a strong, confident candidate for the Senate seat.
I think scale has been tipping in favor of Harry in this race......shining future is in horizon for Councilman Harry Sidhu.

Are you watching the same videos as everyone else?

Videos..Anyone can edit videos for the person of their choice. I was at the debate and Harry was great. He gave Mimi a run for her money..Harry is for real.He gave answers and will make a great Senator for the 33rd Senatorial District.

After watching the beginning YouTube video segment posted, Sidhu supporter videos showup. Bonus viewing of support for Sidhu.

Anyone can edit videos for the person of their choice.

I think you need to get fitted for a new tin foil hat, Irv. I haven't edited anything out.

Less rah-rah and more realism in your commentary, and readers might actually take you seriously.

My whole family, most of my girlfriends and myself we all support Harry Sidhu, even though last time Mimi Walters received my vote. Not this year.

Mimi Walters is just too week as a candidate.

I believe Harry Sidhu will fight for me and he will defend my interests.

He has a clean record, he is a dedicated and honest strong leader.

Harry Sidhu was brilliant in these debates. He is my candidate for California State Senate.

Harry Sidhu was brilliant in these debates.

Oh my God. You are insane. Or an crack. Or on payroll.

Harry was barely articulate. Mimi mopped the floor with him. Even if Mimi hired an illegal immigrant for yard work -- who cares? Who in Orange County hasn't?

I've been neutral, but these ultra-stupid pro-Harry posts are so ridiculous I'm drifting to Mimi.

TO YEAR RIGHT

I'm definitely not on a payroll. However, it is pretty clear that you are. Neutral my cheeks...

Your comments reveal you real face - obviously it is OK for Mimi Walters and her paid supporters to break the law. Next time you do that, be sure to ask a law endorsement officer what he thinks about that.

Do we really want this kind of representatives in our Senate?? I don't, my husband doesn't. But let's ask around, shall we?

Besides, if you have to be rude and obnoxious while attempting to defend your point, which as a matter of fact you do not have any grounds for - just shows us all how desperate poor Mimi's team gets, and proves that I was so right moving away from her towards a candidate that I can trust.

I think Mimi's paid staffers are working in over time again!
If you can't read the compliments on your opponent in a civilized manner, your campaign is in trouble.
Mimi's under-qualified campaign workers need to be demoted.

Give me a break. Student/Barbara comes here and trashes talks Mimi, but now I'm the bad guy for giving a realistic opinion on how the candidates did?

I have no relationship with Mimi's campaign. I think either one would vote the same in the Senate. But you're comments are so ridiculously fawning it makes me cringe. And I'm sure most other readers have the same reaction.

So keep it up. You're just helping Mimi.

Bottom line is Walters has a strong competitor in Sidhu. This race is far from over and one to keep watching.

Yeah right from Laguna Niguel, You are wrong!
If comments from the readers supporting Harry makes you cringe and it drfts you to Mimi ...... I can't help you with that.

All we are saying is that Harry Sidhu has many supporters and he will be our good Senator once he dominates this primary.

After watching this video, any thought that Harry is ready for prime time is now lost. He seems to have a huge ego, but that is all.

This guy is just another self-funder being taken to the cleaners by his advisors.

There's no question Sidhu is a smart business man, and as a business owner, knows what it's like to be in the trenches. I would like to give him my vote, because I think to pick Mimi is to get the same thing.

Sidhu seems more passionate for fighting for small businesses, and as I small business owner, I feel very downtrodden by my state right now. Schwarzenegger has sold us down the river.

I agree, Harry's background makes him the better candidate at this point.

I want someone someone who has a track record of working hard to get the chance of going to Sacramento.

Harry does have a lot of business experience, and that certainly influences my vote, besides, after meeting both candidates Harry is certainly more approachable.

Spurned pay hike quietly pocketed
Seven lawmakers who initially refused raise later took it.

By Jim Sanders - Sacramento Bee Capitol Bureau

Sunday, November 26, 2006
Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A1

Seven of the 19 California lawmakers who rejected a nearly $12,000 pay increase last year quietly changed their mind after the spotlight shifted, state records show.

(snip)

Others who turned down the 12 percent raise but later requested it were Assembly members Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Niguel; Todd Spitzer, R-Orange;

(snip)

Ted Costa, executive director of People's Advocate, a political watchdog group that launched the recall drive against former Gov. Gray Davis, said he's not surprised that politicians would try to score points with voters by rejecting a pay increase -- then rescinding their request months later.

"It's par for the course," Costa said. "It makes people skeptical, and it hurts (legislators) when it comes to trust."

But Tim Hodson, executive director of the Center for California Studies at California State University , Sacramento , said legislators deserve their salary of $110,880 per year -- rising by 2 percent next month -- in a state with 36 million people, an incredibly complex economy and "work hours that even a junior member of a law firm would not find acceptable," he said.

"It's certainly a demanding job, and we shouldn't treat legislators like somebody flipping burgers at McDonald's who doesn't expect to stay on the job more than a few weeks," he said.

(snip)

Many state bureaucrats earn far more than legislators: More than 3,700 full-time state employees earned more than $110,880 as of March 2006.

Salaries of legislators and statewide elected officials are set by an independent commission whose members are appointed by the governor.

The 2005 pay hike of nearly $12,000 for legislators took effect last Dec. 1, marking the first boost in seven years.

The salary increase came while the state was fighting a multibillion-dollar budget deficit, the Legislature's approval rating was plummeting and an election year loomed.

All 19 legislators who initially turned down the pay hike were running for re-election or for other state offices this year.

Lawmakers were not entitled to retroactive pay after opting for a smaller salary, said Russell Lopez, spokesman for state Controller Steve Westly.

Twenty Assembly and 19 Senate members were not on this year's ballot -- and all quickly accepted the $1,000-a-month raise.

(Snip)

De La Torre and Spitzer said they initially turned down the raise because it came in midterm. They felt obligated to serve under the pay scale in effect when voters elected them to office, they said.

"My reasoning was quite simple," De La Torre said. "It's a two-year job and you get paid a certain salary for those two years."

De La Torre restored his pay after the Nov. 7 general election, at which he received only token opposition, and Spitzer accepted full salary after the June 6 primary, in which he ran unopposed.

"I made it very clear when I refused (the raise) that I would accept it if I became the Republican nominee," Spitzer said. "I made it very clear what I was going to do. I made a promise and I kept it."

Plescia had his salary increased April 17 and Walters on June 29, records show. Neither returned a call seeking comment.

Sacramento-area Assemblymen Roger Niello, R-Fair Oaks, and Alan Nakanishi, R-Lodi, were among 12 legislators who balked at the 2005 pay increase and still receive the lower $99,000 salary.

Niello, like De La Torre and Spitzer, said he objected to a mid-term pay hike. He plans to accept the higher pay scale approved by the independent commission now that he has been re-elected, he said.

Nakanishi said he will continue to work at the reduced rate.

"We still have a budget deficit; we still have a health insurance crisis," he said. "My mantra is that government should be more efficient. It would be very difficult for me to accept the money."

Rejection of the 2005 pay increase will become moot Dec. 4. Legislative salaries automatically will rise to $113,097, a 2 percent jump, unless a lawmaker asks to be exempted.

Thus far, only one of the 120 legislators has notified the state that she won't accept the new pay hike: Assemblywoman Nicole Parra, a Hanford Democrat who narrowly won re-election after one of the state's most contentious Assembly races.

Nakanishi said that he, too, plans to reject the salary increase.

RAISING ISSUES

The following is a list of legislators who rejected the 12 percent pay hike, totaling $11,880, that took effect in December 2005. Legislators who later accepted the raise are in bold, with the date of the raise in parenthesis:

ASSEMBLY
(snip)

Todd Spitzer, R-Orange (June 26)

Mimi Walters, R-Laguna Niguel (June 29)

(snip)
Source: State controller's office

Barbara from Laguna Niguel:

Maybe you're new to commenting here, so I'll give a first and last warning: don't post unsubstantiated allegations about people.

If, as I suspect, you have some connection to Harry Sidhu's campaign, you are certainly doing him no favors with your comments.

Perhaps you can square the claim Harry is a fighter for small business when Harry supports the SOAR initiative, which restricts the rights of property owners in the Resort Area in Anaheim, which would force them to live under a different set of rules than Anaheim property owners outside the Resort District, and subject their property rights to a de facto veto by the city's most powerful interest, Disneyland?