OTT: The Noose of Issues Tightens - McClintock Challenges Brown to take No New Taxes Pledge
Posted by: Aaron Park | 08/25/2008 7:11 PM
Blogger's Notes - Sorry Charlie! WWCBD? Will Pelosi let him take the no new taxes pledge?
McClintock Challenges Brown to Take the No Tax Pledge!
McClintock Says "I Will Not Raise Taxes"
State Senator Tom McClintock's Democratic opponent, Charlie Brown, who has never been involved in state budget negotiations, last week distributed an email demanding passage of the budget now pending in the State Legislature. McClintock delivered a response to Nevada County Republicans in a speech Saturday in Grass Valley.
"Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California . I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period," McClintock said. "And, that is something the people of this district can take to the bank."
While McClintock is a candidate in California 's Fourth Congressional District, he has not stopped fulfilling the duties of his day job. McClintock is one of the 15 Senate Republicans holding the line in the debate over California 's state budget. The current state budget proposal that Charlie Brown demands be passed includes more than $5 billion of new taxes that will boost California 's sales tax to nearly 10 percent. McClintock said the state budget proposal contains the second biggest tax increase in the history of California .
"It will cost an average family some $550 of additional taxes at a time when they're struggling to pay their electricity bill, their gasoline bill and a tax burden that is already one of the highest in the nation," McClintock said. "That shouldn't surprise us. Charlie has already proposed an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies. There's only one problem with that. Oil companies don't pay oil company taxes. We consumers pay oil company taxes as they pass them along to us as higher prices."
McClintock said it comes as no surprise that Charlie Brown refuses to take the "No Tax Pledge" to protect the people of the 4th Congressional District from the massive tax increases that the Pelosi Congress is already preparing to unleash.
McClintock said that the Pelosi and her colleagues have refused to make the Bush tax cuts permanent - and they have refused to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. He said their refusal to do so makes those tax increases automatic.
"That's why the election is so important. That's why the no tax pledge is so important. And that's why Charlie Brown's insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling - and why it's important to understand what it would do to our economy," McClintock said.
The full text of the speech follows:
Nevada County Republican Central Committee Barbecue
Grass Valley, California
August 23, 2008
A funny thing is happening on the way to the Obama coronation. Americans are waking up and asking some basic questions, like:
Does anyone seriously believe our health care is going to be improved by handing it over to the same people who run the DMV and the Post Office?
Does anyone seriously believe that a House leadership that places William Jefferson on the Homeland Security Committee after he was caught with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer has the best interests of our nation at heart?
Does anyone seriously believe that socialism will work any better in America than it did in the Soviet Union ?
Nobody here does - and fewer and fewer people across the country do either as they begin taking a closer look.
And once they began asking those questions, the political tide began turning in our favor. Just since the energy debate began in Washington last month, the Rasmussen poll has tracked a five point shift toward Congressional Republicans. Last week, John McCain pulled even with Obama for the first time in the Gallup poll.
Another thing is happening: Americans are awakening to the fact that the Luddite Left of the Democratic Party has been blocking development of America's vast energy resources and we've had enough.
Last month, my friend Charlie Brown announced that he was marching in lock step with Nancy Pelosi by opposing opening the 97 percent of our offshore and 94 percent of our onshore land that is currently off-limits to American oil production. At a time when our families are struggling to afford a tank of gas, we have more than 800 billion barrels of American oil under American land that is off-limits to American production. That's three time the known petroleum in Saudi Arabia and enough oil to meet American needs for the next century.
But that's just part of the damage they've done to American energy independence. We Californians are already paying the highest electricity rates in the continental United States - and the utilities have just filed for another rate increase.
The cleanest and cheapest possible way to produce electricity is from our dams. Hydroelectricity costs about 1 1/2 cents per kilowatt-hour (compared to 28-cents for solar energy). At 1 ½ cents per kilowatt-hour, your average household electricity bill should come to about $90 - per year.
Meanwhile, water rationing now threatens our region although we have the most abundant water resources in the nation.
And yet, a short distance from here is the site of the Auburn Dam. The footing was carved for that dam more than 30 years ago, but it was suspended because of opposition from people like Charlie Brown.
The Auburn Dam would generate 800 megawatts of the cleanest and cheapest electricity on the planet - enough for nearly a million families. And it would conserve 2.3 million acre feet of water - enough for more than two million families. And all this at a time when we can't guarantee enough electricity to keep your air conditioner running or enough water to keep your lawn green.
And yet Charlie Brown has vowed to block the development of this vital local resource that promises both cheap electricity and abundant water for the people of this region.
Ronald Reagan was right: Government is not the solution to these problems - government has been the cause of these problems.
And this week Charlie Brown sent out an e-mail to supporters demanding that I vote for the state budget. Ladies and gentlemen, that state budget contains the second biggest tax increase in the history of California . It will cost an average family some $550 of additional taxes at a time when they're struggling to pay their electricity bill, their gasoline bill and a tax burden that is already one of the highest in the nation.
That shouldn't surprise us. Charlie has already proposed an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies. There's only one problem with that. Oil companies don't pay oil company taxes. WE CONSUMERS pay oil company taxes as they pass them along to us as higher prices.
An $18 billion tax increase at the federal level is nearly $200 of additional taxes an average family will pay at the pump.
So it should also come as no surprise that Charlie refuses to take the "No Tax Pledge" to protect the people of the 4th Congressional District from the massive tax increases that the Pelosi Congress is already preparing to unleash.
They have refused to make the Bush tax cuts permanent - and they have refused to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. And it is important to understand that their refusal to do so makes those tax increases automatic. If they just sit there and do nothing those tax increases will take effect. They are already set in motion.
That's why the election is so important. That's why the no tax pledge is so important. And that's why Charlie Brown's insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling - and why it's important to understand what it would do to our economy.
The current state budget proposal that he demands be passed includes more than $5 billion of new taxes that will boost California 's sales tax to nearly 10 percent.
The last time we did this was in 1991, when Pete Wilson increased the California sales tax to almost 9 percent.
The first thing that happened is that retail sales in California fell faster in the next quarter than they had fallen in the previous thirty years. Remember that 2/3 of economic growth depends on consumer spending - and a sales tax strikes at the heart of our economy.
And that's exactly the next thing that happened. The tax increases of 1991 sent California into an economic nose-dive. The new taxes produced only a fraction of the new revenue that had been promised, and then produced two consecutive years of billion-dollar-a-year declines in state revenues as our economy imploded.
And that was at a time when the rest of the country was heading into an economic boom - imagine the damage that will be done to our economy at a time when the nation's economy is faltering and our own unemployment rate is running frighteningly ahead of the national unemployment rate!
At least people can escape bad energy and tax policy in Sacramento by moving out of California . Where can we go to escape bad energy and tax policy in Washington D.C. ?
So here is my response to Charlie Brown: Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California. I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period. And that is something the people of this district can take to the bank.
A year ago, Sam Aanestad and I and several other Senate Republicans warned that the state budget was dangerously out of balance and that we were running out of time to fix it. We offered billions of dollars of spending reductions that would have prevented this fiscal meltdown. Where was Charlie Brown then? I know where his fellow Democrats were: they were crisscrossing the state assuring everyone that the budget was not only balanced but included the biggest budget reserve in the state's history!
Here's the good news: Americans are paying attention and they understand what's at stake. And I'm not just talking about Republicans. Our voter ID calls in this Congressional race now indicate that we're bringing in one in five Democrats who reject the Pelosi-Brown obstructionism on energy and who don't share their exuberance for higher taxes.
I am confident that this district is now poised to send a clear and powerful message to Nancy Pelosi and her minions just 73 days from now: We want our country back. We want our Constitution back. We want our freedom back. We want our energy independence back. We have had it with your high taxes, your bloated bureaucracies, your empty promises and your endless obstruction of every attempt by American enterprise to restore American abundance and prosperity.
Ladies and gentlemen, what has happened to our country has happened on our generation's watch, and it is our generation's responsibility - and our generation's destiny -- to set things right.
And when history looks back upon this period, I believe it will record that just when it looked like our American rights might be consumed by the bureaucratic state, this generation of Americans rose to the defense of our liberties and when we were done, we had produced a new era of American freedom, prosperity and energy independence and abundance for generations to come.
McClintock Challenges Brown to Take the No Tax Pledge!
McClintock Says "I Will Not Raise Taxes"
State Senator Tom McClintock's Democratic opponent, Charlie Brown, who has never been involved in state budget negotiations, last week distributed an email demanding passage of the budget now pending in the State Legislature. McClintock delivered a response to Nevada County Republicans in a speech Saturday in Grass Valley.
"Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California . I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period," McClintock said. "And, that is something the people of this district can take to the bank."
While McClintock is a candidate in California 's Fourth Congressional District, he has not stopped fulfilling the duties of his day job. McClintock is one of the 15 Senate Republicans holding the line in the debate over California 's state budget. The current state budget proposal that Charlie Brown demands be passed includes more than $5 billion of new taxes that will boost California 's sales tax to nearly 10 percent. McClintock said the state budget proposal contains the second biggest tax increase in the history of California .
"It will cost an average family some $550 of additional taxes at a time when they're struggling to pay their electricity bill, their gasoline bill and a tax burden that is already one of the highest in the nation," McClintock said. "That shouldn't surprise us. Charlie has already proposed an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies. There's only one problem with that. Oil companies don't pay oil company taxes. We consumers pay oil company taxes as they pass them along to us as higher prices."
McClintock said it comes as no surprise that Charlie Brown refuses to take the "No Tax Pledge" to protect the people of the 4th Congressional District from the massive tax increases that the Pelosi Congress is already preparing to unleash.
McClintock said that the Pelosi and her colleagues have refused to make the Bush tax cuts permanent - and they have refused to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. He said their refusal to do so makes those tax increases automatic.
"That's why the election is so important. That's why the no tax pledge is so important. And that's why Charlie Brown's insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling - and why it's important to understand what it would do to our economy," McClintock said.
The full text of the speech follows:
Nevada County Republican Central Committee Barbecue
Grass Valley, California
August 23, 2008
A funny thing is happening on the way to the Obama coronation. Americans are waking up and asking some basic questions, like:
Does anyone seriously believe our health care is going to be improved by handing it over to the same people who run the DMV and the Post Office?
Does anyone seriously believe that a House leadership that places William Jefferson on the Homeland Security Committee after he was caught with $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer has the best interests of our nation at heart?
Does anyone seriously believe that socialism will work any better in America than it did in the Soviet Union ?
Nobody here does - and fewer and fewer people across the country do either as they begin taking a closer look.
And once they began asking those questions, the political tide began turning in our favor. Just since the energy debate began in Washington last month, the Rasmussen poll has tracked a five point shift toward Congressional Republicans. Last week, John McCain pulled even with Obama for the first time in the Gallup poll.
Another thing is happening: Americans are awakening to the fact that the Luddite Left of the Democratic Party has been blocking development of America's vast energy resources and we've had enough.
Last month, my friend Charlie Brown announced that he was marching in lock step with Nancy Pelosi by opposing opening the 97 percent of our offshore and 94 percent of our onshore land that is currently off-limits to American oil production. At a time when our families are struggling to afford a tank of gas, we have more than 800 billion barrels of American oil under American land that is off-limits to American production. That's three time the known petroleum in Saudi Arabia and enough oil to meet American needs for the next century.
But that's just part of the damage they've done to American energy independence. We Californians are already paying the highest electricity rates in the continental United States - and the utilities have just filed for another rate increase.
The cleanest and cheapest possible way to produce electricity is from our dams. Hydroelectricity costs about 1 1/2 cents per kilowatt-hour (compared to 28-cents for solar energy). At 1 ½ cents per kilowatt-hour, your average household electricity bill should come to about $90 - per year.
Meanwhile, water rationing now threatens our region although we have the most abundant water resources in the nation.
And yet, a short distance from here is the site of the Auburn Dam. The footing was carved for that dam more than 30 years ago, but it was suspended because of opposition from people like Charlie Brown.
The Auburn Dam would generate 800 megawatts of the cleanest and cheapest electricity on the planet - enough for nearly a million families. And it would conserve 2.3 million acre feet of water - enough for more than two million families. And all this at a time when we can't guarantee enough electricity to keep your air conditioner running or enough water to keep your lawn green.
And yet Charlie Brown has vowed to block the development of this vital local resource that promises both cheap electricity and abundant water for the people of this region.
Ronald Reagan was right: Government is not the solution to these problems - government has been the cause of these problems.
And this week Charlie Brown sent out an e-mail to supporters demanding that I vote for the state budget. Ladies and gentlemen, that state budget contains the second biggest tax increase in the history of California . It will cost an average family some $550 of additional taxes at a time when they're struggling to pay their electricity bill, their gasoline bill and a tax burden that is already one of the highest in the nation.
That shouldn't surprise us. Charlie has already proposed an $18 billion tax increase on oil companies. There's only one problem with that. Oil companies don't pay oil company taxes. WE CONSUMERS pay oil company taxes as they pass them along to us as higher prices.
An $18 billion tax increase at the federal level is nearly $200 of additional taxes an average family will pay at the pump.
So it should also come as no surprise that Charlie refuses to take the "No Tax Pledge" to protect the people of the 4th Congressional District from the massive tax increases that the Pelosi Congress is already preparing to unleash.
They have refused to make the Bush tax cuts permanent - and they have refused to repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax. And it is important to understand that their refusal to do so makes those tax increases automatic. If they just sit there and do nothing those tax increases will take effect. They are already set in motion.
That's why the election is so important. That's why the no tax pledge is so important. And that's why Charlie Brown's insistence on passing a budget with the second biggest tax increase in the history of California is so appalling - and why it's important to understand what it would do to our economy.
The current state budget proposal that he demands be passed includes more than $5 billion of new taxes that will boost California 's sales tax to nearly 10 percent.
The last time we did this was in 1991, when Pete Wilson increased the California sales tax to almost 9 percent.
The first thing that happened is that retail sales in California fell faster in the next quarter than they had fallen in the previous thirty years. Remember that 2/3 of economic growth depends on consumer spending - and a sales tax strikes at the heart of our economy.
And that's exactly the next thing that happened. The tax increases of 1991 sent California into an economic nose-dive. The new taxes produced only a fraction of the new revenue that had been promised, and then produced two consecutive years of billion-dollar-a-year declines in state revenues as our economy imploded.
And that was at a time when the rest of the country was heading into an economic boom - imagine the damage that will be done to our economy at a time when the nation's economy is faltering and our own unemployment rate is running frighteningly ahead of the national unemployment rate!
At least people can escape bad energy and tax policy in Sacramento by moving out of California . Where can we go to escape bad energy and tax policy in Washington D.C. ?
So here is my response to Charlie Brown: Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California. I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period. And that is something the people of this district can take to the bank.
A year ago, Sam Aanestad and I and several other Senate Republicans warned that the state budget was dangerously out of balance and that we were running out of time to fix it. We offered billions of dollars of spending reductions that would have prevented this fiscal meltdown. Where was Charlie Brown then? I know where his fellow Democrats were: they were crisscrossing the state assuring everyone that the budget was not only balanced but included the biggest budget reserve in the state's history!
Here's the good news: Americans are paying attention and they understand what's at stake. And I'm not just talking about Republicans. Our voter ID calls in this Congressional race now indicate that we're bringing in one in five Democrats who reject the Pelosi-Brown obstructionism on energy and who don't share their exuberance for higher taxes.
I am confident that this district is now poised to send a clear and powerful message to Nancy Pelosi and her minions just 73 days from now: We want our country back. We want our Constitution back. We want our freedom back. We want our energy independence back. We have had it with your high taxes, your bloated bureaucracies, your empty promises and your endless obstruction of every attempt by American enterprise to restore American abundance and prosperity.
Ladies and gentlemen, what has happened to our country has happened on our generation's watch, and it is our generation's responsibility - and our generation's destiny -- to set things right.
And when history looks back upon this period, I believe it will record that just when it looked like our American rights might be consumed by the bureaucratic state, this generation of Americans rose to the defense of our liberties and when we were done, we had produced a new era of American freedom, prosperity and energy independence and abundance for generations to come.
CATEGORY:
4th Congressional District Race, FEATURE
Women's right to vote didn't exist until they fought for it. Blacks rights for equality didn't happen until...
I say eliminate all taxes! Stop taxing! Stop the government altogether! Anarchy for everyone and for FREE!
How stupid. Never say never. Read my lips: Sometimes you have to raise taxes. Even Ronald Reagan understood that. Stupid, mindless pledges like this impede progress on closing the budget stalemate because they are simply not realistic.
There is nothing new here. McClintock has been like this for decades. If there is a budget surplus, cut taxes. If there is a budget shortfall, cut taxes. Never a word about the impact of the cuts he proposes to make to balance the budget. He is completely divorced from reality.
This is pure nonsense. Step up to the budget issue and find a solution. It will involve a mix of hard spending cuts and hard revenue increase measures. Stop prosletyizing. Stop pandering for votes. Roll up your sleeves and get to work, dammit!
Bob might be right. Sometimes you have to raise taxes when the California legislature is dominated by Democrats, as it has been for as long as I've been alive, who love to blow money on ever-growing bureaucracies and guilt-relieving entitlement programs. Sometimes an unnecessary growth in spending just isn't enough. Sometimes an unnecessary growth in taxes is needed too!
I think we've stumbled upon a winning campaign message.
Hector,
Can you tell us what college you attend, what your major is and whether you are a graduate or an undergraduate student?
Alos, please recall that except for the Davis period Republicans have pretty much owned the governor's mansion for decades. Seems like your storyline has a problem. There's been a veto pen available. And a lot of spending (in the form of bonds) has been built in through propositions, not legislation. Your argument is a little too pat.
Thanks,
Bob
Hector
It seems that you have made a distinct shift from your initial presentation of yourself. You have shifted more towards predictable partisanship. That then follows the classic partisan troll profile.
Anon with minimal background info
Initially presenting as wanting to contribute in an even handed, willing to listen to the other side.
Then regressing to following the talking points of the troll's candidate pretty much down the line.
It is not that I want to shout or crowd you out. Far from that because years ago and now my 27 year old Staff Sergeant son( doing intense training as I write to be deployed to Ali al Salen AB in Kuwait) have/are served this country so that you can be a troll in anonymous hiding. That is protection of your first amendment rights.
It is that you have nothing to say to me. And that is my right to associate with anyone or not of my choosing.
That is the way the cookie crumbles, "Hector"
Yours in Duty, Honor, Country
Lee Reed (there is a real Lee Reed and Mr. Park knows that)
Whatever the case may be, Charlie has this hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.
So Bob and Mr. Reed, we return to the obsession with my background, and little attention to the issues I bring up. I find this all very odd. Is this not a forum for a political discussion relating to Placer County? Is it a club with membership limited to political insiders who have been featured on A&E's Biography or they are just too "anon" to participate? So be it.
I am an undergraduate history major who goes to UC Davis. I take an increasingly serious interest in politics as I grow older. I find that one's voice is easily drowned out in national politics, and city council elections and such are not important enough. So the race for the 4th CD, which, may I remind you, is where my parents now live, has national importance and yet individual informed citizens can make more of a difference than with, say, writing about John McCain or Barack Obama. This is why I participate here like I do, and have learned as much as I have.
I don't take talking points from some overlord. I read what McClintock and Brown have to say. If McClintock or Mr. Park makes a good point, then I am apt to repeat it, looking for an answer. If in repeating it I am repeating a talking point, then that is not because I am blindly partisan. It is because I think it is a good point. Note that I have not leapt to defend everything McClintock or some supporter of his says. I defend what I actually believe, contrary to what some cynics in this forum might say.
Would you like me to describe my parents' place in Newcastle? It is beautiful. It has a windy dirty road to reach it, with big windows and a small pond. A handful of sheep wander around and occasionally give birth. I am very lucky to have such a home in my family, though my parents worked (and work) very hard for it. I would offer more of a bio, as is so often demanded to be heard around here, except that I am less than a third your age Mr. Reed. That probably means less than a third your bio.
If you wish to avoid associating with me because I have not given out my date of birth and social security number, that is your choice, as you so astutely point out. But that does not mean that your conscience should rest easy that I have nothing worth hearing.
The Federalist Papers, essays written in support of the Constitution that are recognized as great political commentaries, were anonymously written under the pen name "Publius." Are they any less valid because Alexander Hamilton didn't sign his name every time his essay appeared in a newspaper?
As far as the lecture on whether or not I am open minded, Mr. Reed, I do not appreciate it. You strike me as the type who so unceasingly dwells on his "open mindedness" as part of his political identity that he is no longer open minded. It gives you the obstinate confidence to move forward shutting out most or all of the information that is presented to you. After all, why actually consider what Mr. Park is posting? You are so open minded and objective, and he is not. You are simply... a superior being.
If partisanship is really such a cancer as you claim, then why do you play these games with Mr. Park? The tone between you two is very much a "gotcha" attitude, with hostility and a deep-seated eagerness to win the fight, rather than to find what is the best thing to do for our people and our country.
This leads me to suspect, Mr. Reed, that you don't have much of a problem with partisanship at all. If that is so, then perhaps we really should sit down and have that conversation about "predictable partisanship" which you haughtily claim is so beneath you. I am happy to have it.
Lastly, my tone was not much different between my first comment and my last before your arrogant response. But my tone is indeed different now. Three times you called me a troll when not only have I never called you a name, I call you by your last name, because you have not given me permission to call you by your first.
Politics is filthy. I don't know why I bother.
Hector
Well put, Hector. Yeah, these two act as though they are very understanding of both sides, wanting to promote some dialogue, but they're not. They're burnt out, left wing fascists who just want to see this country keep sliding down the wrong course as they sit around playing bridge and sipping espresso at the country clubs (Lee).
The thing is, McClintock is offering solutions here that do not require raising taxes. Period. Yes, they're are times when taxes must be raised and Tom is well aware of that. But this is not one of those times, and the reason why is because California has gotten so accustomed to spending tax dollars on useless, wasteful programs. I'd get specfic, but I think we all can think of many. One example that comes to mind is the Governor's special election (A REPUBLICAN BOB AND LEE, LOOKIE THERE). He wasted so many tax dollars on that and it all went up in smoke (even though I believe he had the right ideas). We need to start making better decisions when it comes to allocating tax dollars, and this is something Tom McClintock has been doing well for over two decades.
B&L, instead of trashing Tom for all he hasn't done, why don't you say a little something about the good things Charlie Brown has done to help out on energy, the budget, the 4th CD, anything. I don't want to hear about his so-so military background, and "oh, he's such a good man" stuff. I want to hear about ANYTHING legitimate this guy has done with his no-experience, unwillingness to be bipartisan (because after all, it is patriotism before partisanship) in not asking Pelosi to come back to session, and his unwillingness to get tough on taxes by not signing the pledge. If you're honest, you'll have nothing to say except let's take a gamble on a man with no experience who can only repeat what your lib hero Nancy Pelosi has to say. Let's elect a liberal democrat to serve a heavily conservative district. It's a-- backwards, so unless you have something of any substance to say, I suggest you pipe down until you do!
Hector,
Thank you for that.
Can you take a point where you and Mr. McClintock don't agree and explain why you feel that way? You see, I feel (as Lee does) that you have said you are fair and balanced and yet every time you have taken a position it has been against Brown and for McClintock even though a reasonable person (who doesn't buy into every one of Aaron's dirty conspiracy theories) would consider Brown a moderate. Forgive me if that causes me to question your intentions here but I'm not seeing your more recent posts align to what you said when you joined the forum.
Bob
Who am I?
I'm in my 50s. Raised by parents who lived hand-to-mouth in the Great Depression, both of whom were WWII and Korean War Navy veterans. Many relatives served in the military including most aunts and uncles, many cousins and both grandfathers. Married, three children. Wife works with disadvantaged kids. Retired U.S. Navy Reserve Commander. Gulf War vet. Qualified submarine officer and later, CO of a mobile coastal defense unit. Decorated over and over again for exemplary service.
Undergraduate degree completed while enlisted in the Navy through the University of the State of New York. MBA from the University of Washington. Manager at a Fortune 25 company for over a decade. Scout leader, youth sports coach. Very involved with my kids.
Registered Republican from 1980 through June 2004. Fiscally a moderate conservative. Believe government (including education) needs to be held accountable for performance and needs to be as efficient as possible. Socially more of a libertarian in terms of personal liberties and a liberal when it comes to safety nets and health care. Strong advocate of a strong military.
Have traveled widely around the world. Asia, Europe, the Americas. Believe America needs to play a leadership role in the world but that we need to do it through moral authority not military might.
That's a bit about me. I work for no campaign. I post here because I am passionate about making this country better and I see Tom McClintock as a big step backward (and John Doolittle as a complete loss). I think Brown is the better man for this job for many, many reasons. I will not engage in mud slinging. My posts are intended to be completely factual--they are as well-researched as I can make them. I will point out what I believe are legitimate problems with McClintock like the hypocrisy of his accepting government checks while leading the conservative charge for smaller government in California, his votes on veterans issues and the people who have influenced his harsh immigration policy.
Hector
I am glad that you have come forward with more information about yourself. What you call "arrogant" I call common sense. What person in their right mind would want to try to dialogue with someone about whom one does not have a scrap of verifiable personal information. To me that would be a sucker play.
I am a sucker for persons who are into history. More about that later. Meanwhile, are you here for the long haul or are you just whiling your time away until school starts back up? When I was in school, I was totally immersed in my studies. I had little time for diversions...
Lee
"Sorry, Charlie, I will not raise taxes. I will not raise taxes in California . I will not raise taxes in Washington D.C. I will not raise taxes, period," McClintock said. "And, that is something the people of this district can take to the bank."
Those are very simple declarations. No polysyllables. Easy to understand.
And yet there is much that hides behind those words. The middle class in the Sacramento area has really taken it on the chin of late. Taxes come in stealth sorts of ways. Tax cuts come in stealth sorts of ways.
Last week, some very close friends of ours called. They live just a few blocks away in Sun City Roseville as my wife and I do. My wife took the call. My wife's counterpart told her she just received a letter from Placer County telling her that their property taxes had been reduced by $1000. Good news, right?
But she was very, very distressed that this reduction in their property tax bill was based on a reduction of $100,000 of the assessed value of their home.
They had bought this house at the top of the market, ie. before the residential housing bubble burst.
Oh well, they have $1000 more to put in their pocket, but their mortgage payments have not been reduced accordingly. so technically they are upside down. No problem as long as they can keep up the mortgage payments. But it is deflating to the psyche where the favorite topic of dinner party conversation in Sun City was how easy money was made in the house they bought.
Come to think of it, I never hear that kind of talk any more...
No tax raising, you betcha...
Cheap Shot Reed - No Mention of the politically correct loans Democrats were pushing lenders to make. Remember chuckie schumer's connection to the failure of IndyMac Bank?
The reason why real estate got so inflated in Placer? Almost out of water and usable land due to eco mitigations, set asides and no water storage.
Mr. Cheap Shot - put down your dog whistle and go get that denial from the Brown campaign. I can't wait to give you a copy of my DD214. Remember, it is my DD214, not that of the campaign and it would be a felony for it to be handed over without my consent. (unlike charlie's DD214, which he had on his website for quite a while making it public domain)
Thank you for your own bio, Bob. It is a pleasant read.
McClintock and I don't agree on everything, certainly. But we do agree on the big issues, and the ones that have been emphasized on here recently.
I don't know for sure, but McClintock might be a little more libertarian than me with the Patriot Act. But I understand his distrust of government and I respect him for his views. For me the jury's still out on the Auburn Dam. I think he's right from the points he's made in a recent speech I found online, but I haven't read much into that debate.
Obviously there is disagreement on here, but I've come to respect Tom McClintock deeply. He is one of a few very politicians in this country I'd be willing to call a statesman. Do with that what you will.
In some ways Charlie Brown seems pretty moderate. In others, he doesn't seem as moderate. A good example is his evident refusal to comment on the Sac Bee piece. A moderate man would not have been at that gathering with the soldier hanged in effigy, and could answer quickly and move on. A radical man would have been there and would be silent. Thus my asking the question earlier. Brown's energy plan, for another example, sounds moderate on the surface, but I think the end result would be pretty close to that of the House leadership (as Mr. Park has pointed out).
I don't hate Charlie Brown. But as I've learned more I do think he is a poor match for the 4th CD compared to McClintock.
Mr. Reed, you and I evidently disagree on what is common sense. I think I've provided more than enough for what most people are comfortable giving online, and to strangers nonetheless. My belief is that you dialogue with someone for good conversation and intelligent debate, and background is helpful but far from necessary. In this regard, I think you a little odd. But that is your choice.
In response to your question as to how long I will be here, I guess that depends on how interesting or important it seems to be. I hadn't thought that far ahead.
As an aside, I have no idea who Tommy J is, but I find his comments highly amusing.
Regards to all involved,
Hector
Hector
You say, "My belief is that you dialogue with someone for good conversation and intelligent debate, and background is helpful but far from necessary. In this regard, I think you a little odd. But that is your choice."
I am different and that is by choice. I am much, much older than you. For me, life is short and every day is very precious.
I am very interested in people. My life's work was to try to facilitate the mending of the soul and psyche. I was a psychotherapist. How people come to feel the way they do about their human condition was paramount. How they came to their world view was paramount. To know simply what they thought,valued, believed was like a song with words but no music.
That is what I believe...
Hector,
You said:
" A good example is his evident refusal to comment on the Sac Bee piece. A moderate man would not have been at that gathering with the soldier hanged in effigy, and could answer quickly and move on. A radical man would have been there and would be silent."
That's one view.
Another view is that any acknowldgment of slimy attacks like this draws attention to them no matter what the target says. So the target of these attacks is damaged coming and going as I posted elsewhere here. That's why these attacks are so slimy. Kerry was damned if he do and damned if he don't in 2004.
If I asked Tom McClintock, "Yes or no. Have you stopped beating your wife?" do you think he would grace me with a response? In essence this is the same thing.
I have said that Pearcy is an unreliable source because by his own admission he had a significant bone to pick with Brown. He knew his statements would hurt Brown. Pearcy is the type of person who doesn't care about that--he has been willing to pretty much say or do anything for his cause. This man is the only source for this information including the Sac Bee piece. The information is almost two years old and nothing else has been added to the record. No one else who may have been at Pearcy's house has come forward to bear witness. There are no photos. And any logical person who knows Brown's military service history and values, understands the military's regulations against wearing the uniform to political events (whether active duty or retired), or has met him and his wife and active-duty son and learned how committed they are to our military, would find--as I do--that the whole thing is ridiculous on the surface.
No, it's a "gotcha". Some anti-war activist lawyer said something on a blog and when cornered by a reporter (after a link to the blog was posted on the Doolittle campaign website) stuck by his story. Conservatives--who normally would have nothing to do with Pearcy in a million years--are still falling all over themselves to publicize his statements. That's watcha got. Any thinking candidate would not grace this story with a single word. The continued emphasis on this by right-wing bloggers is for one purpose only: By repeating something often enough people will believe it.
You seem to be an intelligent guy, Hector. I'm sure you can understand why Brown would ignore this. But if you keep beating this drum that's a sure sign you are the partisan you say you are not.
Finally, this year I believe these attacks will backfire. The Kerry swift boating is well known and people will pay more attention to the claims and the source. And if they don't find them credible (like this one) it will help the target because people will empathize.
Bob
Hector,
Do you support Tom on immigration? Based on information he submitted and was published in the Auburn Journal before the primary, immigration is Tom's number one issue. He basically wants to force all illegal aliens to leave the country. This may sound good to some people but any thinking person would understand it is completely impractical and extremely inhumane. Further, it would damage the economy. There are better solutions but McClintock is on the extreme edge on immigration.
Have you looked up Chris Simcox and Jim Gilchrist yet? Let me help:
Simcox - read just one of the transcripts you can find here: splcenter.org/news/item.jsp?sid=27. This is the kind of guy who personally endorses Tom McClintock because they each hold very similar views on immigration.
Gilchrist - articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/11/local/me-gilchrist11 His suits attempting to fight his getting tossed out of the Minutemen for fraud have since been thrown out. Gilchrist is another guy who endorsed Tom in person.
Yuch. These are the people you want your Congressman to hang around with? These are the people he seeks out for endorsements? His policies--which are bad enough--are secondary to the questions about his judgment.
Bob