I know the clip is sideways. There is an error between youtube and kodak that will be fixed in future clips.

I will gladly post clips from other candidates in the future if they are interested.

If Jim doesn't snap into it this summer will be a wasted time for the campaign. This isn't about Dantona, it is much larger than him.

Brian, your portrayal of Dantona on the mat will prove prophetic. Election over-Foy wins.

I am missing your metaphor. What mat? For the record I plan to have more candidates have clips posted in coming months.

I want to say thank you to the people for walking my block and giving me more information about the campaign. I am sorry I didn't catch your names.

Now that Judy Mikels is retiring to the desert The Knolls is no longer an issue in the campaign. The Knolls people won't be walking anymore for Dantona. They got what they wanted, now they will go back to the hills.

It is hard to imagine Dantona will find anyone as worked up against Peter Foy. I think Dantona was hurt by Mikels not making the run off. He should of gone easier on her!

Mikels wasn't the issue. Mikels' belief that zoning restrictions were bad for developers was the issue. What does Foy have to say about zoning and land use restrictions? What we think we know about Foy comes from some anxious (or shrill) voters that appear to read anything they want into the few nebulous talking points that the extreme right's scripted for his campaign: Protect Ventura County (from invasion by LA County?), Immigration (is he for or against it?) and Community Values (scary, cause his notion of community values is probably a lot different than mine and yours).

Foy might be an unknown, but Mikels was a known quality. People don't know if they like or dislike Foy because he is unknown. They knew they didn't like Mikels ideas.

Therefore the energy that The Knolls and surronding communities brought to the Jim Dantona campaign will not be as forceful. Without such an energetic backing Jim Dantona better have a back up plan because the Knolls will be quiet until the next outsider pokes that box of hornets.

Like GS, I would like Foy to explain his position on a number of issues. But the reality is that he is the frontrunner and should easily win this election so long as he can avoid controversy. And given the way that politics works, his chances for getting elected improve by keeping his mouth shut, which is what he will do. My guess is that he will be vague on most issues and will then crush Dantona in November. In the end the voters will get what they wanted, which is somebody other than Judy Mikels. Whether that person is actually better or worse is really irrelevant at this point.

Bubba Kidd, if Foy avoids discussing any issues in detail or beyond lip service will you still vote for him?

Does anyone know if the new Supervisor will have to swear an oath to protect the Constitution (I really don't know and neither does anyone else I've asked)? If they do, I know for certain that Jim Dantona can swear on that oath with 100% conviction. Can Foy do the same? Will his association with the CNP and its anti-Constitution members, like the Reconstructionists (they feel the Constitutions an abhorrance and must be replaced with Old Testament laws), prevent him from swearing to uphold the Constitution, or cause him to violate that oath. So far, Foy's not talking about his involvement (or not) in the CNP so we can only guess about what kind of elected official we'll be voting for in November: a capable county administrator or an ultra extremist with anti-American views. Foy needs to speak up about this issue because it's more important than any other out there. None of us want to see Ventura County become the nest that spawns another Kansas-like takeover by the ultra-right wingers.

You've got to be kidding about Dantona protecting the Constitution. He was David Roberti's right hand guy. For those of you who don't remember, Roberti was the original California gun grabber. He didn't just ignore the Constitution, he trampled it and Dantona helped.

I firmly believe in ALL of the Constitution, including the 2nd Ammendment. I don't just pick through it to see which ones are convenient, and I give my support to candidates accordingly.

In case you didnt know, its not Roberti running for office but, since you feel that association is grounds for disqualification, then some of the other members of the CNP are/were Tom Delay, Jack Abramoff, Cheney, Robertson, Falwell, Bob Jones and their ilk, as well as a bunch that believe that gays should be exterminated, that women adulterers should face the death penalty, that your daughter should be killed for seeking an abortion, that the USA is an affront to God and should be replaced with a theocracy, and a host of other strange ideas that make Roberti's support to keep assault weapons off the streets seem like a rebuke from Miss Manners. Do you actually prefer someone that associates with THAT sort of crowd?

...and the smear job against Foy begins. I guess I'm not surprised given how Dantona supporters resorted to smearing Mikels instead of debating the issues.

In response to "Question for Bubba", I have not given much thought to who I will vote for in November. But I will say that smear tactics and negative campaigning are a real turnoff and is what has kept me from taking Jim Dantona very seriously as a candidate. I would love to have Peter Foy answer questions, but he probably won't need to since Dantona and his supporters are doing such a good job turning off everyone that Foy will win by default. So to that end it is very disappointing that Foy will win by simply saying nothing. But on the same note, I have a problem casting a vote for Dantona since the whole negative campaigning strategy of his is very insulting to me. Maybe I will vote for none of the above.

Naturally I will now be accused by some of being a Foy supporter, just as I was earlier accused of being a Mikels covert operative. But I've said from the beginning that smear tactics and negative campaigning will not win this election. This whole CNP nonsense and the insinuation that Foy is associated with so-called right-wing extremists will not resonate with anyone other than the die-hard Dantona zealots. The reality is that the negative campaigning against Mikels did the trick and drove her from office, but at the same time it left a negative impression among voters about Jim Dantona, and voters then cast their votes for Foy because they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Mikels or Dantona. So unleashing another smear campaign will only solidify the already negative impression of Dantona held by 2/3 of 4th district voters.

Since EVERY possibly negative item ANYONE brings up about your candidate is part of a smear campaign, then so be it. In any case, if your candidate IS a plant by the CNP and/or its ultra-right wingers the voters should know about it and we should let THEM make the decision. Same goes for Dantona, if HE's a Maoist masquerading as a moderate Democrat. Maybe a town hall meeting to ask Foy and Dantona their views could put these issues to rest? Anyone know how to get such an event started??

So Gary, why do you refer to Foy as my candidate? I have never spoken in favor of Foy, just like I never spoke in favor of Mikels. Ever since I started posting on this blog the only thing I have commented on regarding this campaign has been my disgust for negative campaigning. If you have confidence in your candidate and he has confidence in himself then perhaps he can try to convince voters why they should vote FOR him instead of AGAINST the other guy. All this smear tactic stuff will not work in this election. But go right ahead, just don't complain later that I didn't warn you.

Dear "got to be kidding,"

Dantona visited my home and I asked him specifically about the 2nd Amendment. He assured me that as a gun owner himself, he supported the 2nd Amendment. I was also pleased to see his bumper sticker posted at Greta's Guns. I hope that puts your mind at ease as it did mine.

The truth was Dantona was very open about many issues we discussed. Mr. Foy is a complete mystery. I spoke with Jim - I liked him - and I liked his campaign. In fact, many of my neighbors who met him had a very positive impression. Bubba, to make the statement that "2/3 of the 4th district voters have a negative impression of Dantona" could apply to any of the candidates by your logic.

I don't think you are a Mikels or Foy supporter - simply a Dantona hater. You have either never met him, or you were on the wrong side of a political issue with him and lost. Dantona plays to win. I like that about him and will support him again.

Thanks for that post, TTT! I wish more people that have met and spoken with Jim would speak up about his proposals for the Community, his eagerness to find out what WE want and his passionate devotion to serving the People without any political agenda. Its become too easy for stealth candidates to step in and say they're for "protecting" the County and then tossing out pre-scripted sound bites like pellets at a fish pond. Jim's the ONLY candidate that offered substantial suggestions.

I have met Jim Dantona and I have spoken with him. He seemed very personable, but his answers to many of my questions were a bit vague. Both candidates left in this race are relying on pre-scripted soundbytes and neither is being very specific in their position on many important issues. But I also have read Dantona's numerous offensive campaign mailers during the primary and was really turned off by them, as were many voters that I've spoken with. I've said from the beginning that Dantona would be better served by running a positive campaign and staying away from the smear tactics, but some people around here don't want to hear that.

Meanwhile Foy's mailers were simply bizarre since they bring up things like illegal immigration, which is not something that seems very relevant to this campaign. So my distaste for Dantona's tactics is not an endorsement for Foy. I'd just like to see someone step up and run an intelligent campaign, and so far both candidates have been big disappointments.

Meanwhile, Gary continues to shower praise on anyone who even remotely agrees with him rather than engage in a substantive discussion of the real issues. Sorry Gary, but that's the truth.

I doubt very much you've met with him cause he's never been vague when asked about issues. Either that or you've never asked him about any issues.

That's typical of you Gary. You don't want to hear the truth so you just dismiss it outright. I have met with Jim Dantona and have spoken with him personally more than once. Whether you choose to believe it or not doesn't change the truth. I've said repeatedly that my biggest problem with him is the negative campaigning, something that is well established. Personally he seems like a nice guy, but he still talks like a politician.

You should also note that I have been just as, if not more critical of guys like Peter Foy. I find it remarkable that people around here continue to accuse me of being a Foy supporter when I have yet to say anything flattering about him. But that just goes to show that some people don't want to hear the truth. I was falsely accused by you and others of being a Mikels covert operative. I am now being falsely accused of being a Foy supporter. And now you are falsely accusing me of lying about having met Jim Dantona. I guess given your track record your response is not surprising. Relying on diversion and false accusations seems to be the M.O. for many Dantona supporters around here, and that's really too bad because I think it is a disservice to their candidate.

Calm down. Never said you lied. Only said I doubted you met him AND/OR asked him any questions about issues. If you DID ask him, maybe you can illuminate us as to what was asked and what his answers were.

Also...if you DIDNT vote for Dantona in June and you DIDNT vote for Mikels in June (as you already told us that you were not one of here supporters) then you either voted for Foy and that makes you a Foy supporter (and there's nothing wrong with that as long as we all know what it is that Foy supports). So which is it?

Ha Ha... OK Gary, I'm calm now. If you must know, for the primary I voted for Elmer Fudd (as a write-in).

Bubba,
You've got Dantona all wrong. I met him in a supermarket and he spent more than 20 minutes with me regarding important issues. He is supported by Greta's Guns so I'm sorry but your wrong on that issue. Plus you shouldn't judge Dantona by anyone but Dantona. I have known Foy for over 10 years we go to the same church, but he is a man of extremes. He has much he should be honest with the voters about, but I don't think he will. I voted for Judy in the Primary and I'm a Republican but Dantona has a better record of community service and I will be voting for him in November. Bubba your much to critical regarding Dantona he's a good person who really cares about people. He is the right man for the job. Give it some serious thought.

Fair enough. I'll try to keep an open mind and seriously consider both candidates. I'm hoping that the runoff is a clean campaign that sticks to the issues instead of either candidate resorting to mud-slinging. Maybe that is too much to hope for, but we shall see.

ICIT: Can you give us one example of his
" extreme" ideas? I'd hate for him to get a bad reputation just because he favored oatmeal cookies at the last bake sale.

Peter Foy is a mainstream American Conservative in the lines of Ronald Reagan. Anyone that says otherwise works for Dantona.

Reagan would NEVER have subscribed to some of the beliefs at the CNP, including the notion that the Constitution's an annoyance that needs to be gotten rid of or that guys like Abramoff and Delay should be leading the Nation, and he would have said so publicly.

I have another video of Jim coming soon.

Again I don't want to simply bash Foy but since I was asked about his extremism, let me simply say he is no Ron Reagan Republican. I am a Reagan Republican I would compare Foy to a Alan Keyes Republican whom he supported for President. The reason I know that is that I was invited and attended at Foy's home a fundraiser for Alan Keyes. I did it because I wanted to give Mr. Keyes the benefit of the doubt, but he is the farthest right Republican I have ever listen to and I have heard many speak at Republican Conventions etc. Foy is a copy cat of Keyes and that scares me not only politically but in terms of who could have the power. As I said I voted for Judy Mikels, but I can't vote for Foy. He is wrong on most issues. He like Keyes refuses to compromise. The Republicans should have chosen a better candidate. He is truly hiding behind a fake image. Watch as the campaign unfolds. He has probably been told not to say a word, but that's not like him. Besides I want the issues discussed we have a right to know.

Its not "bashing" nor is it "negative campaigning" to discuss a candidate's political beliefs or to insist that a candidate explain his/her political ideology as an election nears.

Last time I checked over 50 people watched Dantona's video. If you want videos of your candidate posted, please e-mail me.

We want more Dantona talking. I want to know how he is any different then Peter Foy. All their ads make them seem the same.

How about hearing BOTH Foy and Dantona talking? Ask them both to appear at a town hall gathering and tell us why they're different. So far Dantona's been willing to talk about the issues in public; Foy either hasn't or he's not yet prepared to do so. If Foy intends to be prepared to do so then he won't shy away from a public discussion of his views...will he?

I agree with Gary. I'd like to see both of them speak on the issues, or better yet at least have a debate that includes questions from the audience. But politics being what it is Foy has very little reason to risk his frontrunner status by opening himself up like that. Not that I support that type of strategy, but it makes for smart politics. As I've said before, Foy should win easily so long as he keeps his mouth shut and simply recites vague soundbite responses, and my bet is that he will play his hand that way. That leaves Dantona in a tough position, and he will likely have to resort to negative campaigning in order to try and tear down Foy's support, much like he did to knock Judy Mikels out of the race. But in this instance I don't think it will work since voters in this district are already turned off by that nasty primary.

In any case, I am not endorsing any particular candidate or expressing support for evasive or negative campaigning. I'm simply predicting how this will play out. I feel pretty confident that I am right, but we shall see. To be honest, I hope I'm wrong about both candidates. But if it turns out the way I think it will I'll be voting for none of the above in November.

Refusing to discuss the issues may be "smart politics" in some circles but it's allowed a hypocritical extremist faction to hijack Conservative America and put a wide range of Neo politicians into office around the country...to this Nation's harm. Perhaps we should be a bit more skeptical of "smart" politicians.

"Silence is golden when you can't think of a good answer." - Mohammad Ali

Foy hasn't said anything, but that certainly isn't cause to accuse him of being part of a "hypocritical extremist faction" that will cause this nation "harm". That is exactly the type of smear tactic campaigning that I've been complaining about. These were the same tactics used by Dantona supporters against Mikels and we're already seeing a glimpse of that here against Foy. Again, I stand my predictions of a organized negative smear campaign by Dantona and his supporters, and Gary is only too kind to provide the proof to support that argument.

Now where did I say Foy was part of the HEF? I was referring to a trend towards stealth candidacy that's been harmful to the Conservative movement in particular and American politics in general. Andvoters are becoming more and more resigned to it as busines-as-usual (you seem to be a classic case in point) and that's not good. It's allowed the CNP and others of their ilk to hijack the GOP. Whether or not Foy is a bonafide member of the HEF or the CNP (or any other group) isn't my point, though by waging a stealth candidacy he perpetuates this damaging trend.

Bubba Kidd, My problem is that Foy wants to run a stealth campaign and might have some extemist beliefs. How can I be assured he does not if calling him on running a stealth campaign is negative? Do you promise not to vote for him if he runs a stealth campaign? You can define what stealth means if you accept.

Do not be too hard on him:

It may be that as disappointed as you are in with his silence, you might really be disappointed once he begins to speak. Please let his handlers continue to put that moment off. You may thank them for that later.

To "Not a Foy Fan", I don't think we are in disagreement. If Foy decides to run a stealth campaign (which I think he will) then I will not vote for him. At the same time, if Dantona decides to runa smear campaign (which I think he will) I will not vote for him either. Instead I'll vote for Wile E. Coyote as a write-in. It is up to either candidate to prove me wrong and win my vote. But they have to give me a reason to vote for them, not just reasons to vote against the other guy.

To Garibaldi, you are probably right as well. Sometimes hearing what somebody really has to say only ends in disappointment. Kind of like asking a really pretty girl out on a date only to be let down when she finally opens her mouth and begins to talk.