"Tom McClintock has become an icon in California for steering a steady course no matter what the political winds. Even those who disagree with him know that they can trust where he stands and can trust that he will stand firm."

That's right. McClintock has a long history of voting "no" on any and all tax increases and new government programs. You can trust him.

Uh, except when it comes to government payments that go into his own personal pocket. More like his own personal moolah bag because $300,000 ain't gonna fit in anyone's pocket. He has no trouble with this government spending program. So no, this CD4 voter who doesn't like Tom McClintock can't trust him to stand firm on his principles, either.

Day Six of the McClintock Per Diem Watch. When will Tom announce that he has stopped taking government handout payments for nothing and when will he pledge to introduce legislation to eliminate this outrageous unnecessary government spending?

Bob

Bob,

I might try a different line of attack, sir. That one didn't stick much in the primary, as far as I recall. I don't think it will be much different in the general.

My understanding is that the money is offered to legislators for having to live near Sacramento in the course of their duties. Is it really so terrible for McClintock to accept it? What's the alternative? That he pay for it all himself and shortchange his family? Then he wouldn't be a family man. Or maybe he should get a jet and fly back and forth between Northern California and Southern California? Then he'd contribute to global warming too much. What if he came from a very rich family and didn't have to accept the money to live near Sacramento? Then he'd be criticized as the scion of a wealthy family who is out of touch with the voters.

Really now Bob, is there any way for McClintock to win here? Probably not, if you just don't like him.

Hector,

Your post indicates you don't have full knowledge of the McClintock Per Diem issue. Let me fill in a few of the blanks.

McClintock doesn't pay anything for a home in Ventura County. His home of record is his mother's home in Thousand Oaks. The only home he owns and pays for is in Elk Grove, fourteen miles from the capitol building. His immediate family lives in Elk Grove. He doesn't even have an apartment in Ventura County. At least John Doolittle, whose family home is in Virginia, has an apartment in Placer County.

So McClintock does not have double living costs. But he is accepting per diem as if he did. This is legal given current California law. And since his "home of record" is not within fifty miles of the capitol this per diem is tax free.

You may argue that Tom is prevented from living at "home" in Ventura County because of his job. Well, millions of people pull up stakes and move because of their job but don't get to collect per diem because of that. On top of the per diem, Tom can and does get remibursed for travel to and from his Senate District from Northern California. He should not be able to have it both ways.

McClintock has accepted well over $306,000 in per diem payments yet he does not and has not maintained two residences which is the primary purpose of the per diem.

I recommend you read this LA Times article from last March. McClintock has not denied anything in this article.

articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/23/local/me-mcclintock23

If you don't like the LA Times try the Ventura County Star:

www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/may/07/mcclintocks-foe-making-residence-an-election/

Also, please note that there has been some movement to address the per diem problem through a ballot initiative:
www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2007/070285.htm
I don't know the current status of this initiative but it was clearly intended to close the "McClintock loophole" long before he announced plans to run for Congress in CD4.

So I ask: Why does a man who wears his fiscal conservative credentials on his sleeve--more than any other legislator in California--continue to accept $170/day per diem payments when the legislature is in session to cover the costs of a home he does not have? Why hasn't he stepped up and introduced legislation like the initiative I linked to above? Such an act could save $4.5 million a year which certainly won't solve the budget crisis but is a considerable chunk of change.

Does this help, Hector? The only excuse for Tom's behavior that any of his apologists have been able to offer is this: "Everybody does it. Stop picking on poor Tom!". Well, everybody else isn't California's Conservative Icon, standard bearer of small government and less taxes. And everybody else doesn't do it. There are some exceptions.

Tom's willingness to accept government per diem payments is one of those things that when you think about it for a few minutes you realize what a serious character issue it is. Did it work when Ose attacked McClintock? No, but then that was the Republican Primary and apparently primary voters were willing to overlook a character flaw given Tom's position on many issues important to conservatives. The situation is not much different from Sarah Palin where social conservatives are willing to overlook her many warts because she is pro life. The general electorate won't be as forgiving.

Day Seven of the McClintock Per Diem Watch. When will Tom stop the hypocrisy and act?

Bob

"Bob" - please start sending out campaign mailers on Per Diem, you need to do it quick, because illegal immigration, taxes, spending, gay marriage, ultra left-wing support, anti-war activism are getting to be too much for brown to answer.

Second - please explain to everyone how you know that the Ventura house costs Tom nothing to maintain. Perhaps I can write a post about the mind reader Charlie's Angel???

Hector

Thank you for opening up a can of worms.

McClintock has defined the role of a California legislator differently than most of his peers. He decided he wanted to have all the comforts of “home” way back in 1996. That is 12 years ago. However, he has been a career politician (by anyone’s definition) for 22. Therefore he apparently decided at the beginning that he did not have the clout to pull off such an audacious move with the folks he ostensibly represented way back then.

I do not know if Barney Brantingham was being factious or not back in March. He hints that McClintock did not exactly stand before the voters down there and be totally up front as to his shift in primary domicile.

Speaking of Two-Timing Carpetbagging Politicians
State Senator Tom McClintock Doesn't Live Here Anymore
Friday, March 7, 2008
By Barney Brantingham

Missing McClintock: Well, ha, ha, the joke’s really on us. All this time we thought State Sen. Tom McClintock (R-Thousand Oaks) was living here in the 19th District representing us. But all the time, since 1996, he’s actually been housekeeping up in northern California.

Living there, but voting here. And now that he’s being termed out of the state legislature, McClintock wants to run for the US Congress in a different northern California district—not the one he lives in.
(...)
It comes as a surprise to Santa Barbarans because, although the carpet-bagging issue was raised in Ventura County during one election, it wasn’t aired in Santa Barbara. After all, by one count he’s only visited here about four times. The News-Press loves the guy and if it knew about his sham, it never said a word. We just kept re-electing him, foolishly thinking he was our man in Sacramento. While all the time he was Elk Grove’s man in Sacramento.

“It wasn’t a secret that he really didn’t live in the district,” former Assemblymember Hannah-Beth Jackson of Santa Barbara told the L.A. Times. “He very rarely appeared in the district.”

http://www.independent.com/news/2008/mar/07/two-timing-carpetbagging-politician/

please note that Barney has chronicled for the Santa Barbara area for 48 years. He is bi-partisan in his scorn of nogoodniks.

___________________________________________________________________

The last line, "He very rarely appeared in the district" gets to the crux of my problem with McClintock. It is not the per diem issue per se.

When McClintock moved his family to Elk Grove, he began the process of emotional disengagement from District 19. The ties that bind were severed. The family church was left behind. The schools were left behind. The PTA meetings, the fundraisers for this and that at the schools, the school games and cultural events and all the interactions with folks in the community. The community involvement in other ways; scouts, the YMCA Fitness Center, the Boy's and Girl's Club, and much, much more.

There is this thing I call "walking the plant". Good leaders walk the plant to talk with folks to see how they think things are going. McClintock might have been able to get a whiff from the grass roots that something fishy was going on at Countrywide and IndyMac.

This neighboring guy, Hollingsworth (R-Riverside) apparently "walks the plant" and saw that folks were being swindled out of their properties by unscrupulous folks including realtors. He crafted and pushed through a bill to address that problem specific to Riverside County.
http://cssrc.us/web/36/news.aspx?id=4384

Riverside is/was not alone:

Daniel McMullen, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles area criminal division, announced a multi-agency program to target rampant mortgage fraud called SCAM — for Southern California Mortgage task force. About 40 FBI agents are devoting full-time to the fight against mortgage fraud in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura counties.
http://mortgage.freedomblogging.com/category/crime/

Hollingsworth is in touch with his district. McClintock is disengaged from his district. That is unacceptable...

That is unacceptable...

Aaron,

If you had read McClintock's own statements in the VC Star article then you wouldn't ask me a stupid question like that. See relevant excerpts, below. McClintock says nothing about spending even a dime on his mom's home which is owned by the his parent's trust (a very common arrangement). Given that his parents paid $35,000 for the house in 1965 and with Prop 13 property tax limits just how much do you think the house costs the family today?

Face it, your man is a hypocrite. A $300,000+ hypocrite.

Bob

Quote
During the great gubernatorial recall campaign of 2003, state Sen. Tom McClintock made a statewide name for himself by evoking his nostalgic vision for a return to California's Golden Age. He talked often about the home in Thousand Oaks his parents purchased in 1965.

"On a modest income, they bought a four-bedroom, ranch-style home with a 40-foot swimming pool," McClintock often said during his unsuccessful run for governor. "They bought that home for $35,000."
Unquote

Quote
During the years he has represented Ventura County and lived near Sacramento, he has routinely accepted the $170 per-day payment that legislators receive as compensation for having to maintain two households. Many lawmakers who live in and represent areas near Sacramento accept no per-diem pay.

However, each year McClintock has collected about $30,000 in per-diem pay, topped by $36,012 last year, when the Senate spent an extra month in the Capitol as the result of a budget stalemate. The money is in addition to his $114,000 annual salary as a senator. McClintock's per-diem payments are not subject to income tax.

In many respects, McClintock is unique among lawmakers in that after four campaigns for statewide office, he has developed a constituency that encompasses all of California. At this year's state Republican Party convention, activists who were urging McClintock to seek the Northern California congressional seat carried placards calling him "California's Congressman."

McClintock's standard response to the residency issue is that voters "care more about where a candidate stands than where he lives."
Unquote

hmmm... worked so well for Ose, didn't it?

Brown has a worse problem - he is a liberal Democrat who can't finish a sentence or speak without a script.

You have a tall order with your candidate!

And... what an all-star team Brown has assembled!

I see, Aaron.

With your shoulders pinned to the mat and the count at two you yell at the referee "Look, there's a distraction!" while pointing off into the distance. You then pull out a rusty shiv and knife your opponent.

Can't argue with the logic, can you? Can't face the facts, can you?

Day Seven of the McClintock Per Diem Watch continues...

Ladies and Gentlemen

McClintock who lived in Elk Grove at the time showed the crass politician that he is and was with this:

Seven years ago this week, Republicans in the California Senate were poring over the maps of proposed new Senate districts that had been unveiled a few days earlier and saw something they didn't like.

By mutual agreement between the parties, the new districts were supposed to protect the partisan status quo for the coming decade. But something about the new 19th Senate District that included most of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties raised a red flag.

It wasn't red enough.

It had been the task of Senate Republican leader Jim Brulte to protect all his incumbents, including Sen. Tom McClintock of Thousand Oaks, but some feared the proposed 19th District fell short of that goal.

"Republicans were not satisfied," said GOP strategist Tony Quinn. "McClintock went to Brulte and said, They're not really taking care of me.'"

Brulte disputes that version of the story, saying he remembers only the final version of the map. But the bottom line is that sometime between the first public release of the maps on Aug. 30, 2001, and their final adoption on Sept. 10, 2001, the mapmakers took out their pens and redrew the district.

Out from the 19th District went the heavily Democratic small towns of Santa Paula and Fillmore in Ventura County. In went a solidly Republican sliver of Los Angeles County.

Mission accomplished. With a revised district that had a stronger GOP advantage in registered voters, McClintock coasted to victory in 2004 without serious Democratic opposition.

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/aug/30/senate-race-19th-district-parties-almost-evenly/

Yes, it's all about Tom then and now. He cry-babies to Big Jimbo to take care of him.

And now he waited for his "long-time confidant", John Stoos to front run his chances in CA-04 by having a poll taken by Stoos to make sure he had a massive base to tap into.

And now that he has won the primary, he shifts to running against Nancy Pelosi and San Francisco which are still at last reckoning nowhere around north of Sacramento.

Is this one courageous, principled politician or what?

Ahhh, the Per Diem issue again, and again, and again... I'd like to have you know Bob, the Per Diem is offered to EVERY member of the Legislature. Tom is not special in this regard. In all of his 22 years serving in the State Legislature Tom has never been charged with taking any money he wasn't entitled to.

Here's the point. Members of the Leg. are given a salary, health care, and where it applies a Per Diem. This applies across the board, not just to Tom.

I thought you might want to take a look at Sen. Pro Tem. Don Perata's Per Diem. To date he has collected $577,000 in Per Diem funds. Wow! That's quite a chunk of change. Care to comment Bob? Lee? Below are some of his spending habbits and so-forth. Maybe you guys should quit whinning about Tom taking care of his elderly mother after her husband died, if you two had any heart at all.

Here you go:

Perata has spent at least $119,517 on restaurants and paid for at least 62 meals with bills that exceeded $500.
Perata stays at some of the state's most expensive and luxurious hotels - including the Lodge at Pebble Beach, the Four Seasons, the Ritz Carlton, the Beverly Hilton and the Biltmore - for an expenditure of at least $68,503. Strangely, Perata has spent $7,883 on what the paper calls "posh lodging near his homes" in both the Bay Area and Sacramento.
Perata paid for a $50,000 charter flight with Komar Aviation of Santa Ana. Perata does not specify where he went, but other published reports reveal that Komar typically charged $10,626 to fly eight people from LA to Aspen so Perata's expenditures are extraordinary.
Perata has charged $30,048 in Target purchases to his personal campaign accounts.
Perata has no campaign offices but has spent $6,574 at two Oakland art galleries for "office" expenses. He's spent $11,773 at Office Depot in Oakland, $1,826 in "office supplies" from Montclair Village Wines.
Perata has spent a total of $6,814 at Montclair Village Wines and given varying descriptions of the justification for the purchases and he's spent $11,738 on total alcohol purchases.
Perata has spent $14,747 at Macy's, Bullock's and Nordstrom. He spent $6,669 at Abigail women's apparel on Piedmont Avenue in Oakland in 2002 alone.
The paper reports "Perata also spends campaign funds on basic household items such as groceries and coffee." His favorite stores for such supplies are two close to his house - spending $5,007 for groceries from Village Market and $6,600 for items from Terrace Coffee. Perata has also spent $1,163 at a local Home Depot.

And you're going to bring up Tom's Per Diem? Ose tried and failed, so will you guys.

Last time I looked Perata is not running in CA-04. He is a good example of a crass politician too. Argumentation has descended to "McClintock looks good in comparison to Perata."

Well, you win that argument. Now do a victory lap.

That is a political winner to be sure...

Lee, the point is either it's wrong or it isn't to take the Per Diem. Just because Tom says he is the conservative in california doesn't mean he isn't entitled to his paycheck, healthcare or Per Diem. If I openly go and tout myself as a thief, does that all of the sudden make it ok for me to steal? If something's ok then it's ok, if it's not ok then it's not. make up your mind, and hold everyone to the same standard please.

Your point doesn't stick, and let's move away from this issue.

Lee, you are nothing more than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapors!

Tom McClintock got an invite to this:

August 21, 2008

Today, from 6:30 to 8 p.m. at the Ventura County Office of Education in Camarillo (5100 Adolfo Road, Salon A), the Prison Hospital Action Committee is hosting a panel discussion with local resident experts, political officials and candidates about the prison hospital proposed to be built near Camarillo. The public is invited.

The panel will discuss the project's damaging impact on the community in various ways. Then, elected officials (and those running for office) will be invited to join the discussion and talk about actions they've taken, or propose to take, to help the community stop the proposed facility from being built.

Invited resident expert speakers include Ventura County Sheriff Bob Brooks; Camarillo City Manager Jerry Bankston; Jerry Arcuri, vice president of the Hospital Association of Southern California; Bob Majorino, broker/owner of Prudential California Realty throughout Ventura County; Handel Evans, president emeritus of California State University, Channel Islands.

Invited political panel members include Sen. Dianne Feinstein — a representative from her office will attend; Rep. Elton Gallegly; Assemblywoman Audra Strickland of the 37th Assembly District; Ferial Masry, Democratic candidate for the 37th Assembly District; state Sen. Tom McClintock of the 19th District; Hannah-Beth Jackson, Democratic candidate for the 19th state Senate District; Supervisor Kathy Long.

I don't think McClintock bothered with this one. He doesn't have any kind of investment in this matter. He has not lived in that area for 12 years. His family doesn't live there. He does not have a church family there...

What is past is prologue...Shakespeare

Bob, Bob, Bob...

When I left in June YOU were the one that often brought this list back to a real discussion of the issues and now you have become "johnny-one-note" on an issue that Mr. Ose spent almost $5 million trying to get traction on. He failed because it is a non-issue!

So, let's try and get back to some issues: Charlie does NOT think that Americans can rise to the occasion and drill enough oil over the next few years to end our foreign dependence. In fact, Charlie does not want ANY new drilling.

At the same time, he believes that Americans CAN develop a whole new way of doing things with energy over the next ten years so we don't need oil.

Am I the only one that see the difficulty in trying to hold these two positions at the same time?

John

Well, a point that my Republican friends understand is this.

Snackies and adult beverages before dinner at our home two evenings ago. Five people. The fairly hard oore (R) is the target.

Me: Did you realize that Tom McClintock can not vote for himself?

Hard Core: That's not right. This is a democracy. ( yes, he was a Navy pilot who flew Corsairs off flattops at night time over Korea)

Me: Yes this is a democracy, HC, but he doesn't live here, he is registered to vote in Ventura County.

HC: That doesn't make any difference where he lives, he is running for Governor.

Me: No , HC, he is running for Congressman here in this district.

HC: (stricken look on his face)Oh! #%@$!, well Brown is going to get my vote then!

Another vote for Brown (up to about 6 or so using the "McClintock can't vote for himself"...which anyone can can see the absurdity of.

Mr John Stoos

You have made a timely visit. You have been gone for the better part of 3 months now.

There is a question as to exactly what your relationship is with Tom McClintock...

Tight association vs. Loose Association

Aaron Park uses “loose associations” in his assigned role to do the Atwater-Rovian character assassinations against those not favored by the PCRA.

Aaron Park uses a close cousin to “loose associations”, “loose analogies” to justify his use of this:

“Brown’s crowd has sought to tar and feather the CRA – using the behavior of some of its’ members to project onto McClintock. Since the ACLU fights against Megan’s Law, Jessica’s Law and defends pedophiles in court – an ACLU membership just does not look good at all.”

Let’s look at what a TIGHT ASSOCIATION looks like:

John Stoos circa Jan. 2004 advertised himself thus:

“John E. Stoos is a political consultant living in Sacramento California with his wife Linda. They have six children and soon thirteen grandchildren. John is the former host of the radio talk show, Dialog, and serves as Chief Consultant for Senator Tom McClintock…”
http://politicalvanguard.com/index.php?id=stoos

Let’s look at that for a moment. Stoos claims he was “Chief”, not “a” consultant. This job title seems to be a transition from being McClintock’s
in-house Chief Political Analyst paid 93K+ and concurrently being McClintock’s campaign manager before being outed as a prolific contributor to the Chalcedon Foundation founded by Christian Reconstructionist, R H Rushdooney.

But in politics, 4 years ago is ancient history, unless one is a right wing smear artist. Then it is an hour ago. So we find that 3 years ago, Stoos wielded this title, Chief Consultant in this article dated August 2005.

"We don't put any limits there," said John Stoos, chief consultant to McClintock. "Theoretically, if a city wanted to buy a hotel and run a hotel, it could. We would think that's bad policy and would oppose it."
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0BYL/is_8_20/ai_n25114933

But again, that is 3 years ago. Again ancient history in politics.

February 15, 2008:

“a lot of people, joking around, say that he [McClintock] could win a `primary for any Republican office anywhere in the Golden State.
Well, if we needed some proof that this very well may be the case, you need look no further than a survey, released today, that shows Tom McClintock RUNNING AWAY with the GOP nomination for Congress in the 4th District, where incumbent John Doolittle is retiring. The survey, commissioned by Ted Costa and long-time McClintock confidant John Stoos over at Constitutional Advocates, and conducted by the very reputable Moore Information public opinion research firm, shows some pretty powerful numbers for the termed-out State Senator.”

So you as of mid-February of this year were identified as an advance man for a possible (probable) run for JTD's open seat.
Your were described as a "long-time confidant"

Then in sometime in April-May, you were the one who broke the news at Red County of Val Smith's polling commissioned by the McClintock team.

All said, this is fairly evident current involement with McClintock and/or John Feliz

What say you?

From the mast head of "Rush" as you called him:

History has never been dominated by majorities,
But Only by Dedicated Minorities
Who Stand Unconditionally by Their Faith

http://www.chalcedon.edu/

News reports in the 2003 Stoos tempest quoted Feliz as knowing of your "theology"...for "years". However in the same breath he disclaimed that he passed that information on to McClintock.

Would you agree that many, many very savvy persons of the California political scene had a hard time swallowing that?

Now back to the per diem issue:

Here is the statement of ETHICS for the California Legislator

Ethical Standards

Provisions of the California Constitution, the Political Reform Act, and other sections of the Government Code regulate the official conduct of Members of the Legislature and legislative staff. Among other things, Members and staff are subject to limits on gifts from lobbyists and others, a ban on speaking fees, rules governing conflicts of interest, and the requirement of disclosure of their financial interests. Further, the law provides that legislative resources may be used only for legislative purposes, not for personal or campaign purposes. To insure awareness of these provisions, Members of the Legislature, most legislative staff, and registered lobbyists must attend an ethics orientation course once in every two-year session. Each house of the Legislature has an ethics committee, responsible for training, advice, and investigation of complaints.

Let's extract this:

"Further, the law provides that legislative resources may be used only for legislative purposes, not for personal or campaign purposes."

It seems to me to say that per diem within these ethical standards means...to help facilitate "legislative purposes" regarding one's constituents in one's home district. McClintock used per diem to support himself and his family to live, not in his district, but in someone else's district. The per diem in effect enabled him to not be as in touch with things going on in his district as he was during the first 10 years he was in the Legislature

For me, who has a very rigid moral and ethical code, if something is "borderline", I err on the side of a conservative rather than a liberal interpretation of the matter. I have many friends and family who can testify to that assertion...

and the standard, "everybody else does it" is way beyond what I can personally live with when it comes to moral and ethical issues...

Lee,

Thanks for this last post. You captured why I think the per diem issue is seminal in a nutshell. It's simply not ethical. It doesn't matter what the other guys do. They aren't running for office in CD4 and they aren't billing themselves as "California's Conservative Icon", standardbearer of low taxes and limited government. And, with over $300K involved, it's not just unethical it's not trivial, either.

We are finally getting rid of a guy who couldn't say no to campaign donors who needed political favors. I know, I know, Doolittle has not been indicted or convicted of corruption. But he obviously is guilty of severe ethical transgressions with respect to conflicts of interest.

So we don't need "a new boss, same as the old boss". We need someone with a moral compass who won't say one thing and do another.

THAT's why I am going to play this song over and over. Ose failed to make the case. As with Palin conservatives have been willing to turn a blind eye to ethical transgressions by McClintock. I'm going to do my best to make sure this issue doesn't get swept under a carpet.

Bob

Oh, and Davido...

Perata is dead wrong, too. Happy now?

And since John hasn't been around he probably forgot that Ose received 39% of the Republican Primary vote. McClintock only got 56%. Not enough to win the general election unless a lot of those Ose voters decide to support him. Maybe per diem was a big issue for a lot of those folks...maybe enough to send Tom into retirement...FINALLY.

Bob

Lee,

An interesting set of posts... You really are stuck on the per diem issue, which is fine with us since, like I said, Mr. Ose tried and failed on that one!

On your first response you spent a whole lot of electrons to say what Aaron and I have said all along: I served for ten years as a consultant to Senator McClintock, I worked with Ted Costa on the independent expenditure project to survey the 4th CD and I have no official role in the McClintock campaign. John Feliz and I have shared campaign war stories since we worked together to take our Tom Hayden's boys on the Chico City Council back in 1984.

I have not been keeping track of all the posts for the past few weeks, but I suspect that you owe Mr. Parks several apologies for accusing him of distorting the facts that you yourself have now outlined in detail.

And finally, IF you insist on focusing on residency and per diem, then the answer is simply what Senator McClintock keeps saying: People care more about where a politician stands than where they live!

For example, did you explain to your friend on the porch that Tom wants to drill for our domestic oil and Charlie does not? How about amnesty for illegals? How about taking a "no tax pledge?" Did you tell him that Tom supports Prop 8 while Charlie is against it?

IF you did cover all these issues and they are still voting for Charlie then we know it is one of your liberal friends and there are not enough of them in this district to give Charlie a victory on election day.

John

Bob,

If Tom only got 56% of the Republican vote that is a BIG problem: That means that Mr. Ose would have to send out a massive mailing with a BIG picture of himself telling all those voters that he endorses and support Tom McClintock...

Oh wait, that has already been done. That John Feliz is REALLY good!

John

PS: Just curious: What "ethical problems" does Mrs. Palin have that conservatives are overlooking?

Bob - would you like to talk about ethical transgressions by Palin?

Inquiring minds want to know - since 3 hours after her nomination, you had your DNC talking points ready to go.

I can't wait for your response.

Aaron and John,

I know you are both pumped by the Palin speech. She did a good job with the Teleprompter and the speech written by the campaign speechwriters. The network I was watching (CBS) even let us read along with her for a few words.

But she didn't tell us that she was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it (but kept the money anyway). And she completely overlooked Troopergate (the ethical transgression I was referring to) in her speech. And her involvement in Ted Stevens' 527.

I don't have a problem with a pregnant daughter but I think it's a sign that she and her husband haven't been spending enough time with their kids. I was dismayed to learn that she returned to work three days after giving birth to her youngest (this was about the time Bristol got pregnant, too). Couldn't she have given it a week or two?

I was mad when I learned that she was against spending money for a place for teenage moms to go if they had nowhere else to go. My wife worked with pregnant teens and teens with babies for five years. Palin's position on this simply seems cruel.

And I won't get into a debate about her position on rape, incest and abortion.

So bask in the glow and the poll bump, buckos. But give it a couple of weeks. That's when the bump will be gone and reality will set in again.

Bob

John

You say you have been totally out of the loop with respect to the goings on here at Red County?

Really?????

Well you got up the speed real quick somehow as to exchanges between your good friend Aaron Park and myself. Yes, I am a Hoosier Hick, but I didn't fall off a turnip waggon.

And, you haven't lost your McClintock Team touch in trying to peddle those stale talking points about oil drilling and what not.

Never met a lying distortion about Charlie Brown you didn't like, even though it is 180 degrees from where Charlie stands.

Re the oil drilling issue, Charlie is willing to drill anywhere, even on the WH rose garden. Whoops, I don't think he would much care for drilling in Arlington National Cemetery or at the
Viet Nam War Memorial, that is sacred ground for him (and me too, glad you took care of Hayden's Boys)

Lee,

Charlie has a very interesting position on oil drilling: He supports drilling anywhere where the oil is NOT.

Bob keeps talking the way of 60's liberals when he insists that we could not possibly have a trillion barrels of oil on American soil and shores... Just do a Google search and see that this estimate is probably conservative.

What Bob and folks like Charlie are doing is like saying I am running a little short on food because I am only looking at what is in my pantry and not what is available if I make a trip to the grocery store!

John

Bob,

I can understand why you don't want to debate the finer points of the abortion issue: You just had to watch a precious child on national TV while all of your liberal friends, including Governor Palin's doctors, think his life should have been snuffed out before he ever saw the light of day!

How would you counsel a 44 year old busy career woman who was carrying a downs syndrome baby?

John

John,

I'm against abortion except when the mother's life is in danger or in cases of rape or incest. But we differ on the solution for the vast majority of unwanted pregnancies that don't involve those conditions.

I don't believe you can solve the problem by outlawing abortion. That didn't work before Roe versus Wade and it won't work today. It hasn't worked for drugs or even something as mundane as speeding. The solution needs to address the root causes. That's why it is completely moronic to only push abstinence-only sex education. Abstinence will hopefully be a choice of a growing number of young people but it can't be the only way to address unwanted pregnancies.

See, we agree there is a problem and just differ on the solution. I am happy for Sarah Palin, her family and her son Trig. My wife now works with disabled kids after five years working with teen mothers so I have some experience in the matter if only the conversations we have at home in the evening. She has told me some wonderful stories about her kids and I have had a chance to meet some of them in person and learn a little about them first hand.

You jump to a conclusion that because I don't think Palin was a good pick I must be for abortion as the solution to unwanted prgnancy and I must be a far-left liberal. I wonder what it's like to live in such a black and white world?

Bob

Naw

Bob, John Stoos does not jump to rediculous conclusions. He is a very, very bright guy. He works for McClintock who is a very, very bright guy and McClintock would not have a not very bright guy as his former in-house Chief Political Analyst. Or more recently, front running his chances up here in CA-04. Or allowing John Stoos to pass it around that he is McClintock's "long-time confidant."

John Stoos is the master of the "loose association" school of political smearing. He is the master of "loose analogies". That has been his stock in trade.

The essential purpose here for John Stoos to do that is to try to put him on offense and you (and whoever) on defense. He did so to speak by having you search around. And even through the last paragraph of your comment, you were still somewhat on defense.

You betcha, John Stoos knows what he is doing.

Look at this: "Charlie has a very interesting position on oil drilling: He supports drilling anywhere where the oil is NOT."

What a gamester. He tells a flat out lie in hopes I will scramble around to knock it down.

It is rather primitive rhetorical manipulation. I rather doubt that he uses this in his relationships with his loved ones. This is only reserved for those he considered "enemies"

Bob,

I only address you as a far-left liberal when you support the likes of Obama and Charlie!

To the point in case: Obama thinks that Palin's daughter is being punished by having a baby. McCain rightly sees the baby as a blessing even though it was born in sin: God loves to work such stories of redemption just as he did with the sin of King David which led to Bathsheba being in the genealogy of Christ Himself.

I have often said that I think you and I have much in common and I know it does not make you comfortable to have to defend many of the positions these candidates are taking: Why not just come over and join the freedom coalition? The water is fine!

John

Lee,

You will find out that I really don't play games: It was your boy Charlie who told the crowd down in Beverly Hills that we DO NOT need to drill as part of the solution. NOW I am giving him the benefit of the doubt by assuming he does not want to stop the drilling already underway, but he does not want to drill for new oil.

What else can his words mean? So you don't have to run around and search for that quote, just ask Charlie if he support ANY new drilling that is not in places that already been authorized.

John

John,

You say: "Obama thinks that Palin's daughter is being punished by having a baby"

Prove it. That is a categorically false statement. And your willingness to spread--let's call it what it is--lies like that are one of many reasons why I would have nothing to do with you.

While we are on the subject of misinformation, John, post a reference that supports this statement:

"It was your boy Charlie who told the crowd down in Beverly Hills that we DO NOT need to drill as part of the solution"

Prove it. Show us you are not, in fact, a bald-faced liar, the kind of person anathema to real Christians or even people who simply hold the principle that honesty = integrity and integrity is all a man has.

Is winning this election worth throwing away whatever principles you have left, John?

Bob

Boy Bob, sorry to ruin your morning coffee by quoting some of your friends!

Here is the Obama quote given earlier this year at an event in Pennsylvania:

"“Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old,” he said. “I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby."

And the quote from Mr. Brown at his fund raising event where he was accusing the Republicans of having no energy plan, "other than drill for more oil which isn't a solution."

If you need confirmation that this is an accurate quote, just ask Charlie if he said it! It might be good for you to give him a heads up anyway so he can prepare his defense because it was recorded and won't sit well with the voters of the 4th CD.

Now both Senator Obama and Charlie may try to explain away these quotes BUT that is very different than your accusing me of bearing false witness.

John

The full quote (and an excerpt from an ABC News piece):

Quote
"Look, I got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old ... I am going to teach them first about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby. I don't want them punished with an STD at age 16, so it doesn't make sense to not give them information."

Obama and his running mate, Sen. Joe Biden, are in favor of comprehensive sexual education that includes information on abstinence and birth control, while McCain and Palin favor abstinence programs, rather than explicit sexual education.
Unquote

Obama's statement was from a Marchrally, before Bristol Palin became pregnant. So there is no possible way Obama was referring to Sarah Palin's daughter when he said what he said. I admire your ability to twist the truth, though. But what you wrote? It's still a lie.

Now you may think that young girls in high school or younger ought to have sex and have babies, John. That's your prerogative. All Obama was saying is that his daughters--and mine, too, by the way--are going to get full information about how to avoid getting pregnant until they are grown and ready for it.

My wife worked for five years with teen mothers who chose to bring their kids into this world rather than have an abortion. I am sure you know that having a baby as a teenager is incredibly difficult for most young women, especially those not blessed with a supportive family with enough resources to help them out along the way. Is that journey punishing? You bet it is. Is it rewarding and joyful, too? Sure. But had these girls learned more about avoiding pregnancy in the first place (or been strong enough to put their learning into practice) they could have avoided the punishment and still reaped the joy a little later in life.

On the drilling quote it looks like you lied there, too. Your response to my challenge was a different statement altogether from your first and you still didn't cite a source. Do you believe drilling is the solution to energy independence, John? If so you aren't even consistent with your own party nominees for president and vice president.

Sorry to ruin your early afternoon nap. You'd do a better job on your posts if you weren't half asleep.

Bob

Bob

There you go again, as Ronald Reagan was wont to say..

You fall into the manipulative rhetoric designed to make you play defense.

John says, "Obama thinks that Palin's daughter is being punished by having a baby"

John knows exactly what he is doing. It is not very difficult to see through if one is familiar with looking at communication gambits and then being able to meta-communicate about the communication.

Again, trust me, John know exactly what he is doing.

Lee,

You say these words as if Obama does not believe a baby to be punishment. His words are fairly clear.

What is Charlie’s REAL position on Abortion- I have read his website which while cleverly crafted by his campaign team leads me to believe he fully supports Abortion on Demand including partial Birth Abortion. Can you, or the Brown Team, clarify?

Bob & Lee,

Sorry I missed these posts during my naps.

I don't know how you can say that Bob's post is "defense" when he accuses me of lying twice and putting up sleepy posts!

We can debate whether sex outside of marriage is a good idea, but we should stick to the issues that are front and center in this campaign.

My source on the Charlie quote that you insist I am lying about IS Charlie: Have you asked him if he said what I quoted? If you have not, shame on you for accusing me of lying!

John

PS: Bob, since you like to play these games, tomorrow [or later today] will be Day 3 of Charlie not answering the six simply questions!

Day 10 of the McClintock Per Diem Watch.

When will Tom stop accepting government welfare payments and when will he propose legislation to remove a loophole that he personally profits from which costs California taxpayers approximately $4.8 million per year?

When will California's Conservative Icon act?

Bob,

Don't forget to keep things in perspective. As I pointed out in some posts in the primary: The ENTIRE legislative pay package for Senator McClintock [everything, not just the per diem] has cost the average family of four in California about a quarter for his service over the past ten years. [not 25 cents per year, but a quarter for the entire ten years!]

As part of that service Tom led the fight to reduce the car tax by two-thirds: This one act alone, saves that same family of four a little over $600 PER YEAR! That savings came last year, comes this year and will come next year. Not a bad deal for a quarter!

I think if you were honest with those average families, they might think that Senator McClintock deserves a BIG raise rather than asking him to give up part of his employment package.

John

Voters can, of course, look at this another way.

McClintock's actions on the car tax saved his own family about $600 per year. But his lack of action on the per diem issue has put about $37,000 of unnecessary government payments per year tax free into his pocket.

I think if you were honest about these numbers people might think that senator McClintock deserves to be fired.

Bob

Bob,

When they look at those bills from the DMV and think about whether they could afford to pay TRIPLE what is listed, I think they will come down more on the "raise" side.

Of course this will never be discussed in this campaign because Charlie cannot afford to touch it.

John