Sep 192012

A few years ago I wrote a post lambasting the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer’s Association for Endorsing Meg Whitman over Steve Poizner.

I caught hell for that post – including having an employee of Jarvis tell me to go to hell in a phone conversation. They hinged their whole decision on Steve Poizner’s support of Prop 39 – the measure that changed the threshold for school bonds to 55%.

They ignored the $300K Whitman gave to the Environmental Defense Fund (think Delta Smelt lawsuit), the over $1million she gave to stop development in Telluride, CO, and a host of other things.

We all know that Whitman got trounced by Jerry Brown as Brown being the deft politician that he is – actually got to the Right of Whitman is his campaign!

I tried to argue that Prop 39 was years ago (2000) and Steve Poizner now is not the same person in 2010.

Didn’t work.

Here we are again – Jarvis dual endorsed Dan Logue and Jim Nielsen. Is it some sort of establishment thing? Is it that Jarvis did not want to cross Dave Gilliard?

I don’t know – but let me point out a few things about Gentleman Jim that the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer’s Association seems to have either ignored or forgotten.

Nielsen voted for the bloated state budget in 2010. So did a lot of other Republicans – but it does not make it right.

2009/2010 Jim Nielsen Voted for AB1422 – increasing “fees” collected to subsidize healthy families Logue Voted No

2009/2010 Jim Nielsen Voted for SB279 – increasing Mello-Roos Taxes – Logue Voted No

OK – so maybe the above bills are really minor and don’t rise to the level of endorsing against an incumbent – something that those of us on the Placer GOP Central Committee have been attacked and assailed for.

Jim Nielsen Voted to Put Prop 14 on the ballot (SB6 – 2009/2010 session) – Dan Logue Voted No. Prop 14 is enabling the Realtors, Charles Munger and the Dentists to attack Fiscal Conservatives in several districts as all three have their reasons for wanting tax-raising Republicans in office. (Granted, Jarvis endorsed on the right side of several of those races)

Jim Nielsen Helped Negotiate the deal that put prop 1A on the ballot – the largest tax increase in state history (Source: Legislative Staff)

Does this count? Does Jim Nielsen’s vote in CRP Platform Committee against the Conservative Party Platform Count? (Voted against Conservative Platform in Drafting Committee but changed in the full Platform Committee)

If these are still not enough to warrant standing up for Dan Logue alone – there is more.

Jim Nielsen voted to give Illegal Aliens Medi-Cal benefits (SB175 in 1987) (This vote removed the citizenship requirement)-

In the late 1980’s Nielsen Voted for AB1202 to help Contra Costa County Circumvent Prop 13! (Here it is – a direct attack on Prop 13)

In 1989, Jim Nielsen Voted for AB1109 to impose the illegal $300 per car smog impact fee! (This was so bad that a court overturned it and California had to pay it back to everyone, including me that got charged it)

(Source on above three: Op-Ed in Paradise post by Jim Ledgerwood)

There is a reason why I have become openly hostile to the Republican establishment – the bunker mentality that has taken over as our numbers continue to shrink statewide and the fact that organizations line of behind the title rather than the principle of the person it what has the California Republican Party doomed.

I was speaking to a campaign operative in a Congressional Campaign who told me that “Aaron, in our area, most of our DTS voters are former Dems… you know in most areas they are former Republicans…”

He was explaining this to me in context of why he candidate who is an extremely liberal Republican should be enthusiastically supported.

I was thinking of that comment in terms of the behavior of the Republican Establishment and their suicide pact in the political bunker. People are registering DTS because the principle has been flushed.

I will probably never get in to the good graces again of the Jarvis folks after this blog, and I don’t care. Charles Munger spent $45k to unseat me from the Placer GOP Central Committee by 20 votes – this is what we are dealing with in the current GOP. Stand up for competent leadership and you get attacked. Take on hypocrites and you get attacked.

Back to Jarvis –

If all the above they could ignore – the next action by Jim Nielsen, they can’t:

Jim Nielsen Supported SCA 2 in 1990 that was a direct attempt to abolish Prop 13 (Source: Jim Ledgerwood Editorial in Paradise Post)

Whoops. Now there’s one up on Steve Poizner, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Meg Whitman.

What was the mission of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayer’s Association again?

Apr 192012

In politics, self-righteous pompous arrogance has consequences – as does hypocrisy.

There is a story that involves me that pops up occasionally about when I was thrown off of the Red County Blog for being paid to blog for Steve Poizner. The part that is seldom-told is that Red County was told by me about my relationship with Poizner’s campaign and two that 4 days before I was expelled, they had taken the first $20,000 of what ended up being $110,000 from Meg Whitman’s Governor Campaign. (They claim for advertising – I’d love to get 1/10th of that from a campaign – any takers?)

I also remind people that it was Meg Whitman that attempted to hire me – I got the gig with Poizner because I refused to betray him without warning him. He decided to match the offer I had from Whitman – before I was thrown under the bus because of the negative press.

Now the issue is causing the FPPC to attempt to regulate blogging. The obvious issue is that violates the first amendment and the second is that the regulation is unenforceable.

I was called by a Sacramento Bee reporter relating to a newly proposed regulation requiring public disclosure by bloggers if they are being paid by campaigns.

I am Les Baugh’s general consultant – he is not paying me to blog. So, would I have to disclose that?

As an example, what would happen if Steve Frank called me up and asked me to do some more independent contracting on behalf of some of his clients? No campaign is paying me – do I have to disclose? What do I have to disclose?

What if I wrote a blog lighting up a candidate who is a nimrod, then the opponent called me and bought an ad on the blog? What about my ads that I put up that aren’t paid for? What about my right to kick the crap out of candidates I disdain? People could get really really confused and I could be turned in to a criminal by the FPPC for exercising my right to free speech.

The intent of this regulation is bad enough – but this would not be an issue had it not been for Chip Hanlon of Red County and his self-righteous hypocrisy.

Jon Fleischman gets paid by campaigns and he rarely, if ever discloses it. (Sources tell me) He gets paid frequently by Dave Gilliard (or Gilliard’s interests). The irony is that Mr. Gilliard may well have been behind the call from the Bee to my cell phone today as Mr. Gilliard has a proven affinity for floating stories to local media outlets. Gilliard’s nexus would be that several of his clients are frequent victims of this blog.

Almost every “major” blogger I know gets paid one way or another. Here is a story that the Bee reporter I spoke with wrote. (A portion of this came in to people’s email boxes as a Capitol Alert this evening)

I love the quotes that the reporter gave me in the story:

“A lot of people out there that pilloried me and talked about what I dirtbag I was, they’ve all been on the take for years,” Park said.

Park said he opposes “government telling anybody to do anything, but if these idiots would start being ethical about what they’re doing there would be no reason for government to be stepping in with more regulations.”
So, there you have it folks. The hypocritical ranting of a man (Chip Hanlon) who is now in serious legal trouble with the SEC for fraud and selling securities with an expired license has caused the FPPC to attempt to extend the heavy had of government in to blogging.
Sometimes a failure to have personal ethics does indeed hurt others – in ways you never intended when you think you are serving yourself.

Let the recriminations begin – New Website BLASTS Team Whitman

 Chip Hanlon, Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner  Comments Off on Let the recriminations begin – New Website BLASTS Team Whitman
Nov 062010

There is a liberal Republican that a lot of Whitman’s donors were positioning to run for Chairman of the California Republican Party… former Assemblymember Guy Houston.

How much you wanna bet – he gets cold feet?

There is a new website called

It TORCHES Meg Whitman and her team.

I have to derive some pleasure from this site after all the hell I have caught for the Red County episode… but Meg Whitman’s flunkie Chip Hanlon is the biggest political loser in the California Blogosphere because he sold out to the worst campaign in history.

The site is pretty caustic – the following is an excerpt which is like the “Mission Statement” of the website:

In every major political campaign, there are 3 main groups of leadership and activity. The leadership team which is made up of political consultants and senior staffer types who are supposed to be the best in their particular field and get paid a ton of money to do a good job. There are the politicians who whore out their principles and lie to the people for the sake of their own career advancement. And lastly the most amusing group, the liars theives and whores that make up the hanger-on types and nobodies trying to make a name for themselves, and assorted dickwads that have brought shame on themselves or the campaign by virtue of being the giant dickwads that they are.

All I can say is that I am glad I supported Steve Poizner.

Is the End Here for Steve Poizner?

 Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner  Comments Off on Is the End Here for Steve Poizner?
May 272010

That’s right. I am asking the question.

I am a Steve Poizner loyalist – I am voting for Steve Poizner, I have worked side by side with Steve Poizner. I have been pillaried by people paid by Meg Whitman and others with self-righteous personal agendas because of what I did on Steve Poizner’s behalf.

I make no apology for supporting Steve Poizner – look at the bumper sticker on the Mustang and the ad in the top Left corner of this blog.

So I don’t ask this question lightly.

Fact – the three polls I referenced earlier when I asked if Chuck DeVore should suspend all have Poizner down 22-35 points.

Fact – there are a ton of absentee ballots out there still. Many people have theories as to why, I will say that $100 million spent is the reason. People are confused.

Fact – Meg Whitman has led throughout the campaign, she has committed the resources necessary to win. (excessively so, but she has)

Fact – Poizner is a Moderate, Whitman is a Moderate. Naratelli and Ken Miller keep inching up in each successive poll. In this environment people don’t like Liberals that much – but Whitman’s message about Steve Poizner appears to have taken hold.

I have serious reservations about Meg Whitman. I have been outspoken in my criticism of her – for 17 months.

However, I am going to apply the same rule I am asking of the DeVore people to myself as it relates to Meg Whitman.

As a long-time Republican volunteer I have seen a number of campaigns – I am writing as one man. I am done attacking Meg Whitman – I see her as the  favorite to win and any further action only helps Jerry Brown.

Unlike DeVore – Poizner still has a chance to win, but honestly, it is faded.

I posted about DeVore first – knowing that I was going to write this post.

So I ask the question – Should Steve Poizner stand and salute? Or, should he fight to the death even though a 20-point loss looks likely?

Top 10 Reasons Why Meg Whitman Lost Her Lead

 California Governor's Race, Meg Whitman, Steve Poizner  Comments Off on Top 10 Reasons Why Meg Whitman Lost Her Lead
May 132010

I can’t help myself. Seeing the polling data and the reactions to it tells me it is real. Steve Poizner has overcome $100million dollars.

I started asking myself – self? My did Whitman’s Campaign fall apart?

10. Whitman gave $300,000 to the Environmental Defense Fund – the Group that sued to turn the water off to the Southern Central Valley in Favor of the Delta Smelt.

9. Whitman supports Taxpayer-Funded Abortion and attacked Steve Poizner for being Pro-Choice. (see also Hypocricy)

8. Whitman opposes across-the-board-tax-cuts. This puts her in the category of Thomas the Tax Engine (Tom Campbell).

7. Whitman thinks California’s Gun-Control Laws are OK.

6. Whitman waffled on the AB-32 suspension initiative (does #10 have anything to do with that?)

5. Whitman took 5 different positions on Prop 8. (She originally supported Prop 8 then tried to clarify it)

4. Whitman is tied to Goldman Sachs – like a noose.

3. Whitman really didn’t have all that money?

2. Whitman bought the Red County Blog. (Couldn’t help myself) See the payments of $20K and $15Kx3 to

1. Meg Whitman is a huge fan of Van Jones.

Steve Poizner only need two things – The California Republican Assembly Endorsement and the Endorsement of Tom McClintock.