ROFLMAO!!!

You forgot to mention the ceremonial Kool-Aid toast after the vote!

218-217!? You mean everyone was there? That's rare!

Turning the Red County site into a local version of "Onion news" might be fun, but I am not sure what good it does for the campaign.

Jeff, I can assure you that Senator McClintock would be a NO vote on the current version of the farm bill [even though Bob would attack him for abandoning school children who need those lunches]. He would also support President Bush by upholding his promised veto.

Can you give us assurances that Doug Ose would do the same? This is a real issue with a real bill to consider.

John

Are you saying that there are not real bills to undermine the war effort, or as McClintock might refer to it, ending the unconstitutional use of force?

As to the Farm bill, I am not a campaign spokesperson for Doug Ose, so I can't answer questions like that. Are you an official spokesperson for Tom McClintock when you "assure" me of his positions?

Jeff,

This is the advantage in supporting a real conservative: Senator McClintock would be a NO vote on this farm bill and would uphold the veto! You can call one of the "official" people on the campaign to confirm this, but you know I am right.

I think I know why you can't speak for Mr. Ose nor will you check with the campaign so you can give an "official" answer...
You would not like the answer he would give!

As to military funding, the Senator's position is that we should WIN engagements that we undertake: This is going to be a BIG issue in the fall: Senator McClintock will argue that we need to WIN in Iraq and then bring our troops home. Charlie want wants to quit and come home defeated.

John

How does one win an unconstitutional war?

As far me calling Doug Ose, I have a job and clients and trying to serve them. I can spend 15 seconds on a blog response, but that is what I have time for.

As a voter in the 4th Congressional District, I am quite comfortable with my choice to vote for Doug.

"As a voter in the 4th Congressional District, I am quite comfortable with my choice to vote for Doug."

(BTW - have a good time tomorrow night ;-))

They say immitation is the highest form of flattery! I just wanted to take a moment to share how deeply moved I am that you chose to immitate the theme of my posting the CFG's email regarding another disaster of a Farm Bill.

Bush might actually Veto this one...

Yes, he might, just like he had to or would have vetoed a couple of stupid end the war now items that Congress passed this year.

Jeff,

I would say that Desert Storm was certainly an "unconstitutional war" that was won! Sadly Vietnam was one that was lost and should not have been.

John

I wish I had time today to pursue that line of logic you just posted. Unbelievable!

Re: John's 9:52 a.m. post

"Charlie want wants to quit and come home defeated."

To that I say B.S.

Below is a long extract from a news article Jeff posted this morning from the Oroville Mercury-Register:

Quote
Brown says the No. 1 issues are national and state security, and he is the only District 4 candidate with a military background. The public, he said, has grown disillusioned with politicians making decisions on war and national security when they don't have military experience or training.

Having served in an intelligence capacity in the Iraq theater during the 1990s, Brown has said Iraq was an unnecessary war, but the troops and commanders have done an excellent job.

"The politicians and policy-makers have failed America in Iraq — not our military," Brown said.

Brown said we can't just pull out of Iraq immediately, but the war has to be managed better.

Only a change in policy can give the troops, diplomats, Iraqi politicians and regional stakeholders a workable framework and time-line for peace and security, Brown said. This requires leaders with military experience. In the military, people are trained to take action, rather than just talking and hiring consultants to do studies, he said.

Policy changes would include making the Iraqi government and military increasingly more responsible for state security, and letting them know the U.S isn't going to stay forever.
Unquote

I have to stick up for Charlie Brown on this one. I have met him and asked him about the war. He like all of us want to bring the troops home. I do not believe he wants to cut and run like Senator Obama or Hillary Clinton. If George Bush would of given the military the full authority to win this war, it would of been over a long time ago. Shades of Vietnam. When you have these thugs shooting at our soldiers from a mosque and our soldiers have to be careful that we don't damage the mosque is a joke. A 500 pound bombed dropped from an F-16 would fix that problem in about 3 seconds.

I think Charlie and his family know a little bit about what it means to fight in a war. Charlie will be open to liberal attacks (even though he is a moderate) this fall. If you continue to attack him on the war, we will loose. What has either Ose or McClintock done to really help the troops? Not a thing.

Bob:

Since the entire basis of our management of the military is civilian control of the armed forces, I strongly disagree with politicians like Charlie Brown who say that only elected officials with military experience should be making decisions about the military and national security.

There is no doubt that military experience is a plus, but it is not the be all and end all.

And before any complaints are filed, I did serve in the military, and proudly so. I did so AFTER my civilian career was underway, so it was just that service was important to me.

You could replace 'McClintock' with 'Terbolizard' in this message and I'd approve (but I'd grumble about the media misquoting some of it out of context). However- honestly- I think Tom would continue to fund the war effort.

From the Mountain Democrat review of the LWV candidate forum in Placerville last week- a debate that including four GOP candidates and a Democrat:

QUOTE

"Only one candidate, Terbolizard, said he would vote not to continue the war in Iraq, citing the war’s drain on the economy and the toll taken by U.S. troops. All the other candidates said that America must finish the job it started in the region.

“Our conduct in Iraq is sadly lacking,” McClintock said, referring to the shortage of resources to back U.S. troops."

ENDQUOTE

And, in all honesty, at these candidate forums, I like to ask "Be honest, raise your hand if you'd like the war to be over" and nearly everyone in the room raises their hand, we're nearing consensus on this issue. Terbolizard is more opposed to the Iraq conflict than Charlie Brown.

Ted:

Regarding, "I like to ask "Be honest, raise your hand if you'd like the war to be over" and nearly everyone in the room raises their hand, we're nearing consensus on this issue."

WHO CARES?

Seriously, raising hands and forums and public opinion polls are a lousy way to conduct a war or public policy.

In January 1945, if you had asked the same question, most people would raise their hands. Everyone in the abstract wants "the war to be over."

It is the terms on which the war ends that matter.

Ron Paul and Barbara Lee are easily at the top of a very short list of Congressmen who actually have a bit of integrity, I admire both of them for having the courage to cast the lone dissenting 'NO' votes in Congress, something both are well known for. These two have guts; they are not spineless grunts following orders.

Jeff, since you're taking the war apologist position, are you in favor of a fifty year Iraq occupation, as we have in Korea? Who surrenders in Iraq, Maliki? Conducting foreign policy against the overwhelming will of the people is very, very dangerous, best of luck to you... your courage is at least very admirable, I like someone with guts.

I would rather be right and unpopular. I would also take issue with you calling me a war apologist...I have not apologized and have nothing to apologize for! :-)

Jeff, massive respect to you for your adhering to your principles, we agree on that issue. I've never supported the official Iraq foreign policy put in place by any of the past Presidential administrations and won't back down. I suspect you have been equally consistent in your opposing position.

Mark & Bob:

I am glad to hear the Charlie will be endorsing Senator McCain in the fall!

This will make him tougher to beat, but it is better for the country!

John

Jeff,

I agree with you that military experience is useful but not required for a member of congress during wartime. I have heard Brown speak on the war but I have never heard him say that military experience is a must. I think the reporter who wrote the article added some embellishment...the passages you objected to are not direct quotes, and are not entirely consistent with his views. I think Brown will tell you in an instant that it gives him a leg up on the subject of the war over either McClintock or Ose, though. And that would be hard to debate.

That said the number of representatives and senators with military experience is small and getting smaller. I think that is an issue when defense is not only vital (national security) but also incredibly expensive.

My point was that Brown does not want to quit and come home defeated and to that you can agree, I hope. What he is proposing is that the U.S. look at different policies to somehow make lemonade from this lemon. I don't think he thinks he has all the right answers but I am sure he thinks that the right questions are not getting asked about Iraq right now and that that is a serious problem.

Though McCain has military experience he has said some really dumb things about the war like getting Shiites and Sunnis mixed up and singing a little ditty about bombing Iran. He hasn't got any new ideas about how to deal with Iraq and God knows we need some. I can easily see him micromanging the war effort like Lyndon Johnson. And though I myself am eligible to be a member of AARP I think John McCain is just too old for the job. I don't think you will see Charlie endorsing McCain, either.

I don't believe for an instant that Obama is going to pull the troops out quickly. I think he will ask some of those questions that need to be asked, form a coherent policy and then lead in the best interests of the country.

Bob

Bob,

Just giving you fair warning: IF you and Charlie endorse Obama in November you are going to have a very tough time selling Charlie as anything other than the anti-war candidate, unless of course Obama plans to change most of his views after the primary, which has been known to happen with some Democrats.

John

John, of course Obama's views will "evolve" as the process moves from the primaries to the general election. McCain is already tacking away from Bush by declaring his belief that humans contribute to global warming and declaring that he will not let eight long years slip by without action.

With 62% of registered voters across the country saying that the next president should end the war I'm not sure why you think it's a bad thing to be in that camp. That said I think Brown has been and will continue to be more conservative on this question than Obama.

Bob,

I would say that shifting or "evolving" views are one thing, but Obama would have to CHANGE his stated views about the war to be anything other than quit and come home as quickly as we can.

My advice to Charlie is to endorse McCain early, it might be the only hope that he has in this district!

John

PS: Just a few weeks ago this blog was saying conservatives did not support McCain for many reasons, including his support for the global warming myth... Talk about CHANGE!