Brian,

I think the lack of comments under this post speaks volumes. This is a tired topic, and I think as Scott has mentioned, unless this candidate starts speaking about the issues more, and "what happened" less, then all he'll be talking about is "what happened?"

Tim Keaney

Tim,

I am not going to argue with you, but instead ask for your opinion.

What would it take for a Democrat to win this district? The numbers are against them already. If you were to be an adviser to the Democratic Party, would you tell them to let this area go uncontested?

If not, how could they make some of these races interesting and hopeful?

Brian

No race should be uncontested. However, this one has never been close. Since 1996, no democrat has ever received more than 40% of the vote. Further, in that same time, Elton has never received less than 54% of the vote. Most of the time its 60-65% to 35-40%.

So unless a huge number of dems move into the district and a huge number of republicans move out, or the district boundaries are changed (they were in 2000 which only made the 23rd more republican - following Case's 14 point defeat in 2000, the closest on record since 1996), there is not much the party can do.

In general, I would say find a candidate that appeals to the "moderate" republican and independent voter.

But really the easiest thing to do is just move to Ventura or Oxnard (or Santa Barbara if you can afford it).

Alan

I think democrats should pursue more local non-partisan seats. This way, they'd build some local credibility with their respective interest groups before running for assembly or a house seat.

What I notice is a lot of people who run from the democratic side kind of blow-off city races while focusing first on a house of representatives campaign.

All politics is local as Tip O'neil once said.

Scott

I agree with Scott. I think the easiest way to win a congressional seat in a tough district, is to bring the experience, credibility and name recognition that a lower office holder brings.

For example, a democratic mayor who has done a good job, or even a City Council member from a big enough city might get the funding and name recognition. A Linda Parks has the fundraising, name recognition and base to make a challenge.

I think you'd also have to prove the ability to make the seat work - for yourself, as well as your constituents.

Tim Keaney

Tim,

I thought Linda Parks is a Republican.

But your point stands, a good candidate frequently holds a lower office, or has a unique life story. Someone like Paul Hackett, a lawyer who fought as a Marine in Iraq.

But truly, are these lower seats non-partisan, or are they just not labeled on the ballot?

Anyways, I agree the best plan is to build up a party from the ground up.

BUT...why isn't this the plan when Republicans run for high office in California? The last few choices were people like Bill Simon and Arnold, not a legislative leader? Are state Republicans in the same state as East County Democrats?

Brian

You're going to be surprised again Brian, but I agree with you. Simon ran because he thought he had enough money to buy the seat - He's a Jon Corzine kind of guy. Arnold, well Arnold was basically drafted by the anti-Davis crowd and ran, but you can the lack of experience is not helping.

Tim

Here is another press release from the Brett Wagner team...you can sign up at their website to recieve these e-mails directly.

Dear Friends,

Sometimes we read words that seem to jump right
off the page (or in this
case, a computer screen) and straight into our
hearts - inspiring us to
dig a little deeper within ourselves for truth
and understanding.

For me, one of those moments came this morning
when I opened my email
queue and found a very poignant message from that
great American poet Maya
Angelou where she discusses the lessons of
Hurricane Katrina.

Please take a few moments to read Maya Angelou's
thoughts on Katrina and
(although she doesn't put it quite this way) the
"State of Our Union":

"WORDS FROM MAYA ANGELOU ON KATRINA"

I'm not mad at Barbara Bush. Or Fox News' Bill
O'Reilly. Or even at U.S.
Rep. Richard Baker (R-La). Maya Angelou says
that when people show you
who they are, believe them the first time. So,
no, I ain't mad at them.

Not at the former first lady for suggesting that
Hurricane Katrina
evacuees living shoulder to shoulder in the
Houston Astrodome were now
better off than they were living in poverty in
New Orleans.

Not at Fox News' conservative talk-show host, who
maintains that the
lesson poor children should learn from Katrina is
that all they have to do
is educate themselves and work hard and they will
be able to avoid being
left behind on the "metaphorical rooftop."

Not at the Republican from Baton Rouge, who The
Wall Street Journal
reported was overheard telling lobbyists: "We
finally cleaned up public
housing in New Orleans. We couldn't do it, but
God did."

Despite the public comments, the private ones
made in segregated company
(by conservatives and liberals) likely have been
even more crass and
unbelievable.

The hurricane indeed has shed a light. The spin
masters in the Bush
administration have done a glowing job over the
last several years of
pretending that America has achieved a
colorblind, class-blind society.

Look around you, they say. Look at Condi and
Alberto. Colin and Clarence.

All credits to their race. What inequities? What
ghettos? What barrios?
For some time now, the underclass has been kept
off camera, rendered
invisible, its voices muted. But now that the
hurricane has reminded us
that, there are
Americans too impoverished to leave their
community even when a great
storm is hurtling toward them, it's not
surprising that many are shocked
by it.

Including the compassionate conservatives, who,
in scrambling to say
something pithy and nice, are speaking off the
cuff and unwittingly
revealing themselves: "Almost everyone I have
talked to says, 'We're going
to move to Houston,'" the former first lady told
National Public Radio's
"Marketplace." She was referring to the evacuees
in the Astrodome. "What
I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all
want to stay in Texas.
Everyone is so overwhelmed by the hospitality.
And so many of the people
in the arena here, you know, were underprivileged
anyway, so this, this is
working very well for them."

I suppose it takes tragedy to shock us, to reveal
us. Until the E2
nightclub disaster here, many well-meaning
Chicagoans weren't aware that
the city had its share of segregated nightclubs.
In Chicago today, there
are still places where African-Americans (and not
all poor) go so they
don't have to dance around the color line.

I guess I'm not mad about the comments from the
elite or the unknowing.

Wealthy people get to choose whether they want to
understand or deal with
poverty. Many have chosen to and have been
unfailing advocates for the
poor.

What's more disappointing are those who come from
humble beginnings and
who now have the king's ear, but have remained
silent. It's as though
they've been struck with a form of selective
amnesia. They can recall
their humble beginnings during election time or a
confirmation hearing,
but how soon they forget.

They're the ones who should be explaining to the
Bill O'Reillys of the
world that, yes, education is key and hard work a
necessity.

But this also is true: A black or Hispanic PhD
who tries to hail a cab
late at night will probably be profiled just like
any other black person.

Maybe someone could explain to Mrs. Bush that
being huddled in a stadium
not knowing where other family members are and
uncertain about the future
does not translate into an experience that's
"working out well for them."

Maybe someone could explain to the Baton Rouge
congressman why now isn't
the time to be flip about cleaning up public
housing and God should be
left out of this.

No, I'm not mad at members of the elite. They're
merely saying aloud what
they've been thinking. It just shows us that "the
line" and "the spin" can
go only so far before - thank heavens - the spool
eventually runs out.

* * *

Many worship services include words recited by
the minister, followed by a
response from the congregation. Well, here's the
response that Maya's
words inspired in me (besides "AMEN!"):

>From the time we are children, we Americans
learn to recite the Pledge of
Allegiance. It's something that truly belongs to
all of us.

And whenever we Democrats and Progressives gather
together to recite the
Pledge, we often hear a phrase or two where a
couple of voices seem to
drop out (for example, the words "under God").

For me, I'm always proud to recite the whole
Pledge, but if I had my
druthers, I'd probably leave out the three words
"the flag of" - I'd
rather be pledging my allegiance directly to the
United States of America.

But unlike Republicans and Conservatives - who
once launched an
unsuccessful recall campaign against Santa
Barbara County 3rd District
Supervisor Gail Marshall simply because she
refused to bend the rules at a
subcommittee hearing to allow the last minute
reciting of the Pledge (or
at least that was their excuse at the time) - we
Democrats and
Progressives rarely choose to make a "political
issue" out of the Pledge
of Allegiance.

After reading Maya Angelou's words, however, I
think the time might be
ripe for us Democrats and Progressives to begin
"politicizing" the Pledge
in order to remind all of our fellow Americans
that we are indeed "one
nation" "indivisible" "with liberty and justice
for all" - not only for
the rich, but also the poor (and everyone in
between) - not only for the
"haves", but also the "have-nots."

For example:

>Why must we create artificial criteria whereby
we choose which of our
fellow Americans we help, and those who we are
content to leave by the
wayside?

>Why should we help the families of the victims
of 9/11, but not the
families of other victims?

>Why do we help rebuild the homes of people who
were wiped out by Katrina,
but not the people's homes in Appalachia or South
Central L.A. which have
been wiped out by extreme poverty?

>Why must we leave the answers to important
questions like these just
"blowing in the wind" as Bob Dylan once sang.

That's why I support (among other things):

-> Universal Affordable Quality Healthcare for
ALL Americans

-> Fully Funded Public Education for ALL
Americans

-> Developing a Concrete Plan and Timetable to
End Poverty in America ONCE
AND FOR ALL

That's part of what the "American Dream" means to
me. And that's a small
part of what I'm talking about every time I
challenge my fellow Americans
to
"Unleash the dreams that are in your hearts and
unleash the love that's in
your hearts that can make those dreams come true
- it's time to dream
again America, it's time to dream again."

I would love to hear from anyone who would like
to share what the
"American Dream" means to you. And I would love
to share those thoughts
in a future entry of "Candidate's Diary" - until
then. . .

Yours truly,
Brett Wagner

CANDIDATE'S DIARY 2005, ENTRY #6:
"Trading Thoughts with Maya Angelou"

"Together we can build the America of our Dreams
-- But only together!"

Oh yeah, I forgot about this...

Scott

Brian:

I liked the link on Mary Pallant because it gave me a window into the local democratic party. Here is why she is running...

"Mary Pallant
by Mary Pallant
I am running in the 24th Congressional District because it is time for a change. We all need to invest in turning Congress blue. Then together we can take our country back"

Here is Mr. Wagner's message from his website...

"Brett's Vision

Brett Wagner shares more than our concerns about the issues at hand and the state of our nation. He shares our values of family and community. Wagner believes that America's best days are still ahead of us and that working together we can build the America of our Dreams-for all Americans.

To achieve this we must begin in our our neighborhood, the 24th Congressional District. Because its time for a change in 2006."

Can you decipher for me what they would accomplish if elected to Congress from these campaign messages? I can't. Platitudes are part of campaigning, but I think a stronger, consistent, and more precise message would communicate much more effectively to voters.

I'm not trying to be harsh, but if you want to serve me in one of the greatest institutions ever created in the history of the world, you better have more than just feel good language that stands for everything and nothing...

I'm not an expert on this, more just making an observation. To me, campaigning is a competition of ideas and competing candidate stories. Don't you think that candidates should take us seriously enough to give us real campaign messages about what they stand for?

Scott

One more thing...

If local Democrats want to be succesful, they ought to get message help from Arleigh Kidd or Tim Keaney.

I think both have proven they know how to campaign.

Scott

Scott,

Thanks for your kind comments. I agree with you that we need more than "it's time for a change" because the next logical question from a reader would be "because...?"

Also - I didn't realize Maya Angelou had announced for this seat - I am excited about her candidacy.

Tim

How about...

" America can do better "

And let the voters fill in the blanks

Katrina, Iraq, Rove, Libby, Arnold, Delay,gas prices, the debt, Frist, special elections, border control...

Brian,

I agree completely - Wouldn't it have been nice for one of these proposed leaders to have said such a thing, except us bloggers?

Tim

Tim,

I took the line from Harry Reid.

I personally think "America can do better" is really weak. Considering where the bar has been set by this administration, "doing better" sounds to me like more of the same Beltway back-and-forth, with perhaps a little more competence.

The line needs to be drawn much deeper in the sand. The Republicans don't have an albatross - they have a whole flock of them.

I'll suggest "Honesty, Integrity and Responsibility" as a possible theme that draws a distinction between the parties. Because clearly, the party in power is exhibiting none of these traits.

This is my first time participating in a blog like this but some of my activist Democrat friends in Ventura County told me I should take a look at it. When I did, I was amazed at some of the insight written there. Whoever Tim Keaney and Scott Blough are, they seem to really have a good grasp on political things. I was also amazed at some of the really defamatory and information that one of the Congressional candidates, Bret Wagner, is putting out on here.

After reading all of the messages poseted on here, I think Tim was exactly right that
"the lack of comments under this post speaks volumes. This is a tired topic, and I think as Scott has mentioned, unless this candidate starts speaking about the issues more, and "what happened" less, then all he'll be talking about is "what happened?"

From what I have seen and read, Bret seems to be the only one trying to keep his allegations of being "attacked" and "beaten up" in Santa Barbara a couple of months ago out there in the press. I've read several of the newspaper stories since the whole issue first came up, along with some of the emails he sends out to the people that still keep saying he was attacked in a gaybashing incident.

What is very interesting to me are the emails that he does not post on blogs or aparently send to the press. It really seems that he is trying to use being gay for his own political purpose. To me, if that is what he is doing, that is an insult to the rest of the respected gays and lesbians in this area who already think Bret is a buffoon and is far outside of the mainstream LGBT community.

One of my more progressive activist friends sent me a copy of an email Bret sent out to some people back on August 29 that tells a whole different story about that incident. This email was informally circulated in the gay and lesbian community as well, which is laughing at him. I think the air needs to be cleared on this once and for all. It seems to show what a prevaricator Bret really is about all of this this. Here it is for everyone to read. Draw your own conculsions like I did.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"I think I'm mostly O.K. now, but as you know, I did suffer a very bad blow to the head and a rather nasty concussion the Friday before last."

"Since I had no memory of how I was struck, I initially thought that someone must have assaulted me in the parking lot of the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner. for days, I had no memory of what had happened."

"Finally, one of my friends and supporters suggested that I look into hypnosis as a possible avenue to recapture my memory, and recommended a friend who is a hypnotist who might be able to help."

"Long story short, I was able to recapture the memory of cutting between cars in the parking lot and being hit in the head by a rear-view mirror of a very large vehicle door, most likely a truck or an SUV, that someone opened at the worst possible moment. No idea, though, who it was or if they knew what they had done."

"I had quite a cut on my forehead, but thanks to the miracles of modern science and plastic surgery, my scar is very small."

"And thanks, of course, to God for always looking after me – not always an easy task."

"Best regards,
Brett"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why doesn't Bret publish these kinds of emails? It's obvious, isn't it? He's telling two totally different stories about that incident.

Several days ago, he also sent out two more emails to his list and to the Ventura County democratic central committee. In one of those he urged the committee to pass a rule at their meeting last Tuesday night that would prohibit any member of the committee to speak out publicly to criticize any candidate or another democrat without permission of the whole committee. In the other, he recommended that the committee's new webmaster (she is also a central committee member) be fired because she had been in the group that had questioned his background. Several members who were there Tuesday said that the central committee totally ignored Bret and his suggestions. Bravo for them.

I personally think that such actions would have been a violation of free speech. Should someone who prevaricates and who does not believe in free speech be elected to Congress?

Freya

Freya,

Thank you for reading my blog. I didn't see the toher e-mails. Can you post them here so we can all read them?

Thanks,

Brian

Well, I guess Freya isn't reading anymore. If anyone either has the e-mails she is talking about, or knows what she is talking about, please post it.

Brian

Looks like Brett is still talking about investigating while Ms. Pallant is talking about issues. What a contrast!!!

Scott

We should have an investigation about into Mary's thoughts re: the investigative process around investigations. We need to investigate why she doesn't feel investigations are worth...investigating. Now THAT is an issue worh investigating!

Brian,

The press is reporting anywhere from 6-60 congress members are under investigation, but by whom, and for what would be anyone's guess.

Of course, this is the same national press that completely blew off Joe Lieberman's evaluation of the Iraq war progress. Have you read it? I can send it to you, and you should post it verbatim.

Tim

Brian:

I'm so sorry I could not get these other emails to you before now that Bret sent out to all kinds of people. I know you asked for them over a week ago. They are attached below.

I'm not really involved in any of this controversy, but I just don't understand where he is coming from. Weren't the officials he's trying to silence elected to their positions? It would seem to me that they have a right to speak out on such issues any way they want to.

Some of my gay and lesbian friends also tell me that he has tried to start a local group for gay and lesbian Democrats but it is not going very well because no one in our community wants to be involved with him.

Freya

*********************************

>>
>>Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:45:43 -0800 (PST)
>>Subject: Laura Winchester's appointment as webmaster
>>From: "BRETT WAGNER (for CONGRESS)"
>>To: Shillbrant@aol.com, bobcdp10@rain.org
>>Cc: michael@brettwagner2006.com
>>User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5
>>X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1181/Mon Nov 21 03:10:32 2005 on
>>mpdglobal.net
>>X-Virus-Status: Clean
>>
>>
>>Madam Chair, VCDCC Members, Regional Directors:
>>
>>I would like to submit a formal protest regarding the recent decision by
>>the VCDCC to appoint Laura Winchester as the central committee's official
>>webmaster (VCDCC Chair's announcement enclosed below).
>>
>>As everyone should know, Ms. Winchester, a recent appointee to the VCDCC,
>>is one of the local Democratic party officials who violated their oaths of
>>office by calling a press conference on Oct. 5 which - according to local
>>attorney and VCDCC member Joe O'Neill - was called clearly for the purpose
>>of personal defamation against me, Brett Wagner. It bears noting that Ms.
>>Winchester made very specific comments in the media that she was acting in
>>her official capacity as a party official.
>>
>>And as everyone should know, the actions of Ms. Winchester and the other
>>Democratic Party officials who called that press conference are now under
>>investigation by the California Democratic Party, an investigation which
>>is being led by Regional Director Bob Manley.
>>
>>The decision to appoint Ms. Winchester to be the committee's webmaster
>>bears a striking and regrettable similarity to actions taken by the George
>>W. Bush White House to reward members of the administration following
>>questionable activities which many Americans, and especially millions of
>>Democrats, believe should have instead been punished or reprimanded.
>>
>>Considering that the actions of our local Democratic party officials who
>>called and participated in the Oct. 5 press conference have been compared
>>by many local Democrats to the modus operandi of Karl Rove, it is
>>especially regrettable that the VCDCC has chosen to reward one of these
>>local Democratic officials much like Mr. Rove has chosen to reward White
>>House officials under similar circumstances.
>>
>>Therefore, I hereby request that the appointment of Ms. Winchester to be
>>the VCDCC webmaster be immediately rescinded, and that our committee begin
>>the search for a new (less controversial) webmaster.
>>
>>Finally, as everyone knows, this series of still unfolding events has
>>become a national media story that will likely continue until the
>>investigation ends and justice is achieved (or, in a worst case scenario,
>>justice is not achieved). Decisions such as the one that resulted in Ms.
>>Winchester's appointment could possibly become part of that national media
>>story, and could foster the impression that the VCDCC supports the actions
>>taken in the committee's name by members such as Ms. Winchester. That
>>would, of course, be very unfortunate on many different levels.
>>
>>The time has come, in my humble opinion, for the committee to condemn the
>>actions taken in its name. Otherwise, that opportunity will be lost and
>>the impression will be fostered in the minds of many local Democrats that
>>their local party is irresponsible, if not worse.
>>
>>Very Respectfully,
>>Brett Wagner
>>24th C.D. Ex Officio

***********************************************************************************

Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 10:36:50 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Double Standards Need To Be Addressed
From: "BRETT WAGNER (for CONGRESS)"
To: Shillbrant@aol.com, bobcdp10@rain.org
Cc: michael@brettwagner2006.com
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1181/Mon Nov 21 03:10:32 2005 on mpdglobal.net
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-MailSift-Delivered-To: lmiller@vcnet.com
X-MailSift: GOOD 0.000

Madam Chair, Members of the VCDCC, Regional Directors:

By now, we should all be familiar with the scurrilous Oct. 5 press
conference called by several members of the VCDCC, as well as the Chair
AD37 and members of that committee, and the harm it has done to our local
party. We should also all be aware of the ongoing investigation by the
California Democratic Party into this and related matters.

What continues to astound me is that (to the best of my knowledge) the
VCDCC is yet to take action to help ensure that nothing like this ever
happens again.

I strongly recommend that at tomorrow night's VCDCC meeting we discuss
passing a resolution similar or stronger than the one adopted at the
SBCDCC following similar, but much less serious, actions taken by members
of that committee.

Furthermore, I am extremely disappointed that - to the best of my
knowledge - our Regional Director Bob Handy has not proposed that the
VCDCC adopt a resolution similar or stronger to the one he spearheaded at
the SBCDCC, and sought to enforce just a couple of months ago after a
member of that committee made comments in the press regarding a local
Democratic official, comments which pale in comparison to those unfounded
and scurrilous accusations made against me and my nonprofit organization
last month.

I am enclosing below the message sent by Mr. Weed, a member of the SBCDCC,
to that committee's list serve referencing that resolution.

I am also enclosing below the message sent by Mr. Handy to the SBCDCC list
serve in September recommending that a member of that committee consider
resigning following those comments against a local Democratic official
(which I characterize above as paling in comparison to those made against
me). Also enclosed is the newspaper article in question.

For reference purposes, I have attached the SBCDCC minutes which include
the text of the resolution adopted by that committee to deal with problems
such as these.

I continue to hope that the VCDCC and its chair, as well as our Regional
Director, will faithfully fulfill the duties of our various offices and
take speedy action regarding this matter, and to address the obvious need
to codify the high behavioral expectations which accompany the party
offices we all now hold.

Should the actions which I am recommending have already been taken without
my knowledge, please accept my humble gratitude and - at your earliest
convenience - please inform me of the nature of those actions.

Very respectfully,
Brett Wagner
24th C.D. Ex Officio

******************************************************

SBCDCC MINUTES August 7th, 2003

Date: Thursday, August 27th, 2003, 7:00PM - 9:00PM (Approximately)

Location: Federico's Restaurant, Buellton, CA

Attendees: Quorum was attained.

Absent: Excused absences read by the Secretary

I. Call To Order
II. Special Reports (Information)
a. Chair Report
b. Treasurer's Report
c. Region X Report
d. Club Reports (all present)
III. Special Motion (Action)
a. Russ Weed Read out the following motion:
i. Members of the SBCDCC executive board/committee will refrain from stating personal agendas in the name of the SBCDCC in communications outside the committee that are not approved by the executive board and or the committee
b. Motion was passed with a minority of dissenting votes

IV. Adjournment - (Action)
************************************************************************

Hey y'all,

If the local Democratic Party was copying Karl Rove as often as recently described, wouldn't the party be winning more often?

Just a thought.

But I guess recent events have been tough on Karl Rove.

Brian