Democrats can't even be bothered to update their attack sites on him. Gallegly will win again unless something big changes.

That attack site against Elton Gallegly does not belong to the Democratic Party. Why don't you email the owner of the site and ask them why it's not updated?

Then you still prove my point. Democrats don't have the infrastructure to go after Gallegly. They don't have local office holders running or animated, compelling story lines like an Iraq office Veteran. They don't have a body of research. They don't have mailing lists. They don't even know his finances.

And to top it all off they don't have a single site up about exposing his record.

Maybe they should see if they could elect more city council members first before they run yet another Democratic activist that wants to start at the top.

Local dems don't even get the top 40 reference.

I agree that the Dems don't have their act together for the Congressional race. They're going to have to do a lot better than this if they expect to knock someone with the backing and support of an Elton Gallegly.

Mary Pallant may not be the best choice either (way too liberal). This has been tried before and failed against Gallegly (Anna Perez-Ferguson and Martinez). They need a Dantona-type (more of a centrist) to be successful in this district.

Mongo,

Do you think that people voted against Martinez because of her policies or did she not get their vote because she lacked the resources to get her message out?

With Anita Perez-Ferguson ( Good memory going back to 1990 AND 1992 was it?) there was also the attack that she wasn't really from the district if I remember correctly.

Is there still a chance that Gallegly might retire and not run again?

I assure you that the DCCC (since it is a federal office) looks at Gallegly and the 24th every year. They know full well what his finances are, what his voting record is, and what the make-up of the district looks like. The Reps have a 10% voter registration advantage and there is a 20 year incumbent. It's a tough race, no doubt. Local electeds that have been approached or shown interest over the years have talked to the DCCC and local Democrats. Some candidates do polling and then make their decision as to whether they want to give it a shot. If they do, they run in the Primary. The voters then choose their candidate.

Some candidates see this district as a multi-year project. Their first run is to get experience, name recognition and learn the lay of the land. A second run allows them to capitalize on that experience, and perhaps a better shot at it in 2010, with possible redistricting and an open seat if Gallegly retires. Some run to carry the Democratic banner and hope to inspire dialogue on issues like the war. I tip my hat to anyone who puts themselves on the line and runs for office. It is not easy or for the faint of heart.

Mary Pallant has decided to run, and is doing what any serious candidate would be doing at this stage: she's raising money, lining up endorsements, preparing a campaign and working the press. She is very fierce and dedicated to this race.

I know Jill Martinez said she was running again a few months ago, and Richard Francis was also considering a run. Brett Wagner has dropped out. I think we'll know pretty quickly after the first of the year who is in the race.

Brian, regarding Jill Martinez, I actually think it was a combination of the two factors you mentioned. But, really, the bottom line in this district is the Dems will need to runs someone with an awfully high profile to unseat someone in as solidly as Gallegly. I think even Laura Winchester recognizes this, based on her post.

Laura, as I recall, you denigrated Mike Gibson several times on this blog for a so-called "poor showing" in his run for Ventura City Council, yet you seem to acknowledge here that running for public office is often a "multi-year project" because of the need to build experience and name recognition. I guess your comments only apply to Democrat Party candidates, huh?

Mongo,

Are you from the Republic Party?

No, Brian, it's the "Republican Party" and the "Democrat Party." "Democratic" is an adjective, as in a "democratic" society, but is improperly used when applied to the Party's name. Sorry, if I'm coming off a bit officious here (must be the old English teacher in me).

Mongo, nowhere did I ever see you or Gibson say that his run for city council was part of a grand master plan for higher office. In fact, we heard all about how he was committed to the city and leading it into the future. From the chorus of fake names, we saw a lot of chest pounding and proclamations that he was the great white hope of the VC GOP and would unseat an incumbent in the Ventura City Council race. So, surely, you can understand, if not appreciate, many of the comments made about his 8th place finish. A little humility (u-milll-leee-tayyy) and a committment to redoubling his efforts in the community would have gone a long way towards building his credibility as a future candidate.

However, the only thing we started seeing were posts about what a great candidate he would make for State Senate. Now he's the great white moderate hope of the GOP? If you couldn't see the humor and absurdity in some of those posts, then I can't possibly make you see it now, and I will just bid you bon voyage on your trip to Fantasyland.

But hey, if you can parlay no previous political experience and an 8th place finish in a city council race into a legitimate State Senate bid against Tony Strickland for the GOP nomination, ti saluto. You will have out-Roved Karl Rove.

BTW, if your best response to a purely political jab is to attack a woman with personal childish innuendo, you reveal your weakness on the playing field, and expose your candidate to more negative press. He's already had to apologize to me once for it. But hey, I'm happy to draw fire away from my candidates and Party.

That pain you feel right now in your backside is my elbow in your piriformis muscle. I learned how to do that in massage class. ;-)

Happy New Year, Mongo.

@ Mongo,

Check this link and tell me the name of the party at the top of the page.

http://www.democrats.org/

I don't know why you don't call a party by its recognized, legal, and official name but you are clearly wrong.

After you look at that link look at the history of "Democrat party".

How to you really expect people to think you can work on a bipartisan level when you slip attacks into every conversation?

Your choosing a new name to attack a rival party is childish and shows you have no intention of working with that party.

Greetings from Cabo San Lucas!

When the people of this district begin to finally pul the wool from over heir eyes and start voting in their own interest and the interest of the nation instead of a few fat cats and corporate interest then we will see closer elections ad Democratic victories in the county.

As far as the war is concerned, it is as if a giant fairy has sprinkled victory dust in our eyes. We are a long way from victory in Iraq even as the war on terrorism shifts to Pakistan and Afghanistan. Maliki and his corrupt cronies are playing us like fools and will continue to milk resources from us for as long as possible. We need a real political surge to follow up the military one that has brought about this uneasy lull in the violence that plagues Iraq. We cannot simply pretend that we are winning when we still haven't been told the truth about wh we invaded and occupied the country in the first place. When will this country stop believing in liars and deceivers whose only allegiance is to themselves and not the true interests and welfare of its people?

Mongo, it's time to retire the silly moniker. Wait awhile then get back on here and post with your real name. You do understand that I and many others know who you really are, right? Lots of people on this blog use their own names. It lends credibility to your arguments and it shows courage of conviction. I'd have a lot more respect for you if you did that.

Hey, Laura (that's a song isn't it?), you obviously missed my previous point, so I'll slow the words down a little so you can understand it a bit better. You had previously criticized Mike Gibson for only receiving 2,000 votes in his first try at political office and having been a Ventura resident for only 2 years. However, you went on and on to make the point on this thread about how first-timers often write-off a first run at office in order to gain experience and name recognition for a future run (not for a higher office, but for the same office, capiche?). Apparently (and I'm surmising this from your inferences here), this was only in reference to Democrat Party candidates.

So, please help me out here. Did I miss something? I really, truly tried to follow your logic for a while until I realized it was just another partisan attack from a partisan representative from the VCDCC. So, draw your only conclusions folks. Me, I'm done with her. Oh, and while you're at it, Laura, could you move a little lower and to the right - there, you got it!

Marie, as I've stated many times before on this blog, I have no intention of revealing my true identity. That's part of the fun of posting on a blog. It frees you to be more open and candid in your comments. You (and others) choose not to, obviously, and that's your choice and your personal style. Me, I've chosen otherwise. I believe part of the enjoyment of being on a blog is the fun and the freedom it provides. Those are my values and motivations, so leave it alone.

OK, fine, Mongo. Believe it or not, I'm just looking out for YOU. What you do is sort of like dancing naked out in the street with a paper bag over your head. You're not good at hiding your identity but you've made an a-- of yourself in the past.

Granted, you have been better lately.

Obviously Laura and I still have lots of fun posting under our own names. :-)

Mon Fla seems more like a partisan brawler than a leader. I am amazed he wants to represent so many Democrats when he ridicules the name of their party. Maybe he only wants to represent Joe McCarthy Republic Party people.

Mon, having a conversation that you expect to be elevated but slipping in a slur doesn't make sense. It would be like asking someone " What do you want to eat for dinner, stupid" and then being surprised they don't want to go out with you.

Feel free to support candidates again. But know that I might help target any Republic Party candidate you support because I know they must appeal mostly to your partisan instincts and nothing more.

Sorry that my humor may a bit too subtle for mere mortals to appreciate, but, believe me, there has never been any ill intent meant towards anyone. I'm all about having fun. Feel free to join me in this endeavor. I'm sure Brian would have banned me long ago if he felt I was that disruptive of a force on this blog.

However, if Laura W. insists on attacking me and candidates I support, what do you expect me to do, stand there and take it? The New Yorker in me simply won't permit me to do that, sorry. People disagree with me generally because I present an opposing point of view on this blog, which tends to be dominated by liberal "Democrats." I don't mean to sound egotistical, but if it weren't for me, a lot of good debate and discussion would probably not take place here. Everyone would simply be patting themselves on the back and agreeing with each other. How interesting and fun would that be?

Mongo,

I didn't realize you were trying to be funny, I thought you were serious.

I think Mike Gibson did learn about what people want and expect, what civic organizations are the most influential, and how to reach out to people better. I expect he will learn from this and try again.

I think you do add to the discussion on this blog. But the idea that it is dominated by the left is a but funny when Owen Paun writes articles on the front page about John McCain every few days.

There are plenty of conservatives around these parts.

But thanks for writing.

Now a tough question for Laura. Who would you rather represent you in Sacramento: Gibson or Strickland?

And who would you rather Dantona run against if he wins the nomination?

Mongo, I could give you a long list of crummy things that you've written about people (me included) that were not even remotely funny. Let's see... there was the remark about the weight of one of the Ventura candidates, numerous off-color remarks to women, etc.

There are other Republican voices here who I think do a better job in elevating the dialogue. Katie, Owen, and Leslie are Republicans. So is Moondoggie. I actually liked listening to Bubba's opinions before the gopher alerts did him in.

Brian, thanks for weighing in on this stuff. Your perspective is always appreciated. Aside from Owen and Bubba K (who has been noticeably absent of late), I don't hear an awful lot of conservative viewpoints.

Regarding your question to Laura, I'm sure she has an answer, but I think it may be an academic question given that Gibson probably won't run if he doesn't have significant support from County Republicans. This isn't likely with Strickland in the race, however.

Again, Marie, I would defer to Brian to make those kinds of judgments, since he's the ultimate arbiter on the blog, not people who simply disagree with my political views. You need to let go of the past a little. Have I made some mistakes and been a bit over the top in the past? Sure I have. I've admitted as much. But, let's move on, shall we?

BTW, I think I do a fine job of elevating the dialogue though, thank you very much. I'm well informed on the issues, relatively non-emotive, express myself quite well, and have a good sense of humor. What more could you ask for?

I just got back from playing a round of golf at Club Campestre in San Jose de Cabo. I didn't mak any eagles out there but I saw an eagle pick up a lizard on the 18th fairway. Pretty cool!

Why is it that so much of this blog is devoted to the politics of the personal and the petty? I am also troubled by the obsession with money and the perception that a campaign war chest trumps a candidates record or his or her ideas and leadership skills. Mary Pallant may not have a million dollars in the bank at the ready to deceive or hurl mud at the oposition but her skills are sharp and her thoughtful and reasoned proposals are worth their weight in gold. She would make an excellent congressional rep in D.C. because she knos how to communicate and bring people together rather than focus on the partisan tripe we have become all to familiar with these days.

Are we really this superficial?

R.J., golfing sounds like a great idea today. Wish I could join you.

To the issue at hand. No one's saying Mary Pallant doesn't have some good ideas or that she's not a credible candidate for Congress. However, the reality is she's looking at the task of unseating a long-term Congressman with longtime support in his district. Like it or not, this will take money and lots of hard work. My hat's off to her for trying, but I don't see it happening this time around. Not in this district.

What you don't have, Mongo, is humility. But I will defer to R.J.'s plea to get off the personal, as I have complained about that myself.

I also agree with him that Mary is an exceptional woman. I've attended her Speaker Series and met her at a NWPC meeting. Jill Martinez also has a lot of guts and integrity. Bless them both.

Hey, Marie, I'd be happy to get off the personal too, if you'd stop with your baiting comments. You and Laura both. I have to retain the right to defend myself, which I've always done and will continue to do.

Aw, Mongo. Guess you've incurred the wrath of both the Wicked Witch of the East and the Wicked Witch of the West.

My New Year's Resolution: Be nice to Mongo or he may drop a house on me.

Happy 2008, buddy!

Marie, I take it you've had your first glass of champagne already. I don't anticipate that I'll be dropping any houses on anyone in 2008, perhaps s few surprise announcements though - one in February for sure.

Hey, BTW, what happened to that Wicked Witch of the East anyway? My temerity must have scared her off again.

Happy 2008 to you too, Marie. I'll try to be nicer too. I know you think I'm a rat sometimes, but I really do try and keep it positive as much as possible.

Well, at least we know Mongo has no self esteem issues. He's so pretty, oh so pretty...video linked in your honor.

Stop looking in the mirror and try to keep up, ok? I already explained to you why everyone was jumping on your 8th place finish in the election, but let me try again. If you hadn't been such a braggert before the election, as a first time candidate, predicting a lbig win, no one would have said a word. And when someone did, you started to spin, saying that they were 2,000 high quality votes; dedicated citizens and charter members of the da Mike G. fan club (we'll try to give you some gangsta cred here). We all support our candidates passionately, but come on, give it a rest! You ran, you lost, you'll live to run again another day if you want. Let it go. There are far worse things in life than losing an election. Have a laugh and a glass of champagne to ring in the New Year.

Brian, the answer to your question is really quite simple - if those were the only two choices, it would make little difference if tweedle dum or tweedle dee got elected. The end result would be that the district would continue to stumble along without any meaningful representation or voice in Sacramento, and without our fair share of state funding, as we have with 8 years of McClintock. We would continue to be that pitious district whose Senator routinely ranks near or dead last on women's issues, health care, education, environment, etc.

As to who I would prefer Dantona to run against in the General - Gibson could be beat without anyone breaking a sweat, but it would be much more sporting and satisfying to take on Strickland.

Right over here Mongo. I've got your little dog too.

Now, let's turn this thread back over to the subject of Mary's candidacy and the 24CD race.

Laura, Mongo,

Please move back to this topic. I will set up topics in the future if you want to taunt each other.

I am looking forward to seeing Mary Pallant's end of the year finances. without knowing what they look like what do you folks think would be a sizable enough figure to show she is serious?

Laura, I find it absolutely hilarious that you used this John Edwards footage to make your point about obsession with looks. Your proud Democrat Party's possible choice for the presidency in 2008! Hilarious!!! Him and Clinton should get together and compare notes about hair styles. BTW, I think you can count on Strickland being the one to take on your man Dantona in the 19th. It should be fun watching the early returns on that race!

Brian you gotta give me this one. She lobbed me such a softball here.

Mongo,

Please move back to this topic. I will set up topics in the future if you want to taunt each other.

I am looking forward to seeing Mary Pallant's end of the year finances. without knowing what they look like what do you folks think would be a sizable enough figure to show she is serious?

See Mongo, you've got to be able to laugh at yourself. Ask Mitt Romney to pass the hair spray, please.

Don't hate John Edwards because he's beautiful. And brilliant. And compassionate. And shrewd. And the next President of the United States.

I know Mary wouldn't mind me throwing in a plug for Edwards. She and I are both supporting him in the Primary.

Brian, just set up a permanent Cage Match thread, where you can move these nonsensical, off topic posts. Poor Brian, you must grow weary of us sometimes. I've linked a little video for you too.

Oh, I'm laughing, girl, I'm laughing. All the way to the General. Edwards may need a little plug (hair plug, that is) by the time he's ready for the presidency.

Laura, I liked your video of KISS too. Paul Stanley reminded me a little of you after a little prodding by old Mongo.

I am such the political geek i think I might enjoy doing that at a rally.

Happy New Year!!!!

While John Edwards is continually being trivialized about his haircuts he also has a lot to say about money in the political arena. Responding to a question about how Clinton and Obama have raised much more money than his campaign, he reponded:¨¨We´re not gonna have an auction, we´re gonna have an election.¨ The same can be said in the 2008 race for the 24th CD. Who cares if Gallegly has over a $1,000,000 in his war chest. Nobody needs that amount of cash to be competitive in two counties. If Ms. Pallant can raise $40 to $50K through the primary season that would allow her to target and mobilize enough potential supporters to gain momentum going into the General Election. The only reason Gallegly has that kind of cash on hand is to scare off his fellow Republicans from challenging him in the primary.

Doesn´t anyone find it ironic that the candidates with the most money seem to have the least to say?

In all the years I´ve been watching C-SPAN as an ardent viewer I´ve never once seen or heard Elton Gallegly on the floor of Congress or in any committee meeting of any substance. The people of Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties deserve better representation than that from a 22-year incumbent. Mary Pallant would run circles around Gallegly in any debate. anywhere, anytime. Gallegly himself knows what a lightwieght he is in Congress and is accutely aware of his less than formidable skills as a speaker and communicator. That is why he has avoided debating his opponents for the last twenty years and limits his engagements to photo-ops and canned speeches in front of friendly audiences.

It isnt hard to understand why Gallegly has a lot of money - he has done pretty well for his main constituents through the years (big pharma and real estate interests). He is a reliable supporter of the disaster capitalist agenda and votes pro-corporate every chance he gets. He is also a very insincere fundamentalist Christian - I say that because he does not act very Christian in person. I found him to be quite offensive personally with his scowling face and insincere platitudes about caring for people he helped send to war. I mean really - how many millions would Jesus accumulate?

Gallegly's political career is so unremarkable in its' accomplishments as to almost be laughable if it werent so sad. What was his main sponsored legislation last year - something about dog fighting? This is all he cares about? One thing he has cared about considerably is making sure that no one truly understands that the worst nuclear accident outside of Chernobyl took place in our backyard. I mean what would that do Simi's property values after all? We know where he is coming from and the ideology behind him is emotionally pervasive - who doesnt want "free" markets, "blue" skies & children not left behind? Seems like a person has to actually understand what these mean and not just fall for their ubiquitous, pretty-sounding names (get it twenty-five percenters?!!).

As for Mary Pallant's campaign, progressive Dems did quite well in Red districts in 2006. This is not a good sign for Gallegly because his party had a historically higher than 10% edge in voter registrations prior to '06. I have personally witnessed a lot of frustration towards the right-wing locally. Many typical Repub voters have engaged me to discuss issues during voter reg drives. They are confused, upset at their personal complicity in the criminal Bush mafia and want to know what they can do to make things better. Well the first thing I tell them is vote progressive because progressivism is utilitarianism not cronyism and we need to start thinking about community and not just ourselves. Mary is much more progressive than Jill Martinez in the sense that Jill seemed focused on beating Gallegly at his game - that is raising and spending large sums of money. Jill is a great person and I wish her well but Mary has true utilitarian motives and is willing to stand up to the money machine politics that is the problem - not the means.

As for middle-of-the-road candidates in this district, to borrow a saying "the only thing there are yellow stripes and dead (animals)". MOR means doesnt stand for anything in my book. Politics is the art of compromise and I dont think any country, government or policy is served well by negotiating from the middle. I have had enough of fundamentalists' doctrine whether it is religion, economics or social policy. There should be two sides in any debate and not just the haves and have-mores of BushCo and Congress Inc.

Go Mary!!

If I remember correctly Gallegly has been a member during some important hearings. Something in the late 1990's and a judiciary committee thing.

I don't care about Mary's ideas if she has know way to communicate them to the public. So far she hasn't shown a plan to get plenty of local news coverage nor has she shown the ability to raise money for paid campaign speech.

Superficial? Hardly. Don't ask me to raise money, phone bank, or spend serious time until you come up with some sort of plan.

Bottom line, as I've stated before, Mary Pallant will need at least $500K to seriously challenge Elton. He is ready and willing to spend the $1 million, if necessary, to defeat any and all challengers. He doesn't have a serious Republican challenger, so the point that his war chest is being used as a threat against another possible Michael Tenenbaum is ludicrous.

"Gallegly's political career is so unremarkable in its' accomplishments as to almost be laughable if it werent so sad. What was his main sponsored legislation last year - something about dog fighting?" Funny

Gallegly doesn't seem to stand for much other than animal issues and following the republican sentiment, voting nearly 100% with his party. Doesn't he claim "right to life" issues? But then he also votes no on health care for children, sends older teens into a senseless war, which has made the entire world more dangerous, and for which we have to borrow money to fund the war from the Saudis and China- then leave the next generation to pay off the debt. He's just part of the Bush clan.

Dear Monica,

Elton's role in the judiciary hearings regarding the impeachment of Bill Clinton was akin to a potted plant perched on a window sill. He was even passed over for chairmanship of said committee in 1995 because his own party recognized his obvious shortcomings. As far as Mr. Clinton is concerned, potted plants should not be calling the kettle black. Oh, that's right, it's OK to lie about your infidelity as long as you don't do it under oath.

Mongo don't be ridiculous.

You don't need half-a-million dollars to win a seat in Congress, you need votes.

How could Mary not be appealing to thousands of people, no, voters who now realize that invading Iraq was a mistake from the start. Make no mistake, Mary Pallant would not have put us into this war, and let's stop calling this a war because the real war ended with "Mission Accomplished" and the occupation of Iraq began. Mary is the only candidate that will work to repair that mistake and not find excuses for keeping the troops in Iraq as an occupation force in hostile territory for an idefinite time period. That's just insane. Make no mistake, we are not the Iraqis' friend except as expressed in the Arab proverb that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend"

All this coupled with a hemorrhaging economy, how could you say any Republican district was a safe one?

The people deserve a clear choice and they will get one with a Pallant-Gallegly match-up.

We could look to some of the mistakes of the past, but we need a clear break from the past. Martinez' message was and is muddled. It is the tendency of too many Democrats in the past to muddle their message. Mary is consistent and principled in her approach to governing and the governed.

R.J., of course, the other key point about Mary Pallant is she is far too liberal for this district. Why do you think Elton continues to get elected time after time, despite serious Democrat Party challenges? This is essentially a conservative district. Lots of retired military, older Americans (who vote consistently), and a strong voting bloc in East County (favoring Republican candidates).

The only way a Dem (particularly one as liberal as Pallant) could win is if Gallegly decided to hang 'em up and a new, lesser known Republican were to run. This would take the $500K because it would then become more of a money race for higher name recognition. Ain't gonna happen in 2008, bub. Elton's in!

Just what makes that little old ant
Think hell move that rubber tree plant
Anyone knows an ant, cant
Move a rubber tree plant

But hes got high hopes, hes got high hopes
Hes got high apple pie, in the sky hopes

So any time your gettin low
stead of lettin go
Just remember that ant
Oops there goes another rubber tree plant!!

At this time in the political season hope always runs eternal. Perhaps you're right Mongo. The reality is that inertia wins again. The safe districts our cowardly politicians carve out for themselves will consistently thwart any real elections for now. The conventional wisdom is that establishing name recognition can make for a real race when Gallegly finally relents the throne in 2010? Perhaps I do indeed run away to fight again some other day.

But we're gonna put the fear of God in you in 2008.

It is so easy to sit back and say that no one can beat Elton because of East County especially when you arent paying attention to anything besides old history. Sometimes the right thing is not the easy thing and arguing here that Elton is in (no matter what) serves zero purpose. Nobody besides Elton and his cronies really cares about arguing that he is a shoe-in. Get over it - we dont care if he is a shoe-in. We are still gonna FIGHT 4 RIGHT and Elton is wrong. Pointing out what in your mind is merely obvious wont deter us in the least.

So now that we can move on to what needs to be corrected in CD24, clearly Elton has had a lot of years to do something for this district and he has managed to avoid any progress the whole time. He is just another vote for a losing cause now. If Simi wants to waste their representation for 2 more years on a do-nothing has-been like Elton Gallegly then they will undoubtedly get what they deserve: more waste (Waste Mgmt), more fraud, more cancer from Rocketdyne, and basically a lotta notta otherwise.

Mary is the answer where Elton is the problem. Stop pretending like there is any other alternative to this equation regardless of your ideology. When it comes to local politics, which this race most definitely is, liberal doesnt mean anything. Hell, I would bet Mongo couldnt define liberal objectively w/o looking in Websters. The people of this district deserve to have their interests served equally. What has Elton actually done for you, Mongo?!! Fess up. Cause we'd all like to know....

I will not support Mary Pallant until she has raised at least a quarter million dollars. It is a sad fact but she hasn't proven able to communicate with voters for free in the past and has no plan that I know of to do so in the future.

Why should I make a single call, put up a sign, etc. until I know she has a plan to win?

Nobody is going to win this seat for $25,000. And I don't appreciate being lied to that the party will show up with a million bucks but I should put down hundreds of dollars Now.

It isn't fair or right but it is a plain fact you need moeny to communicate ideas.

For R. J. Lebeck:
Today I got a response from Medvid:
"We don't find any occurrence of him (Gallegly)taking the floor in our dataset.
He does not show up that much, here are his appearances on the
Congressional Chronicle site:
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77530&pid=6712 "

Just how long has he been a representative? "Doesn't show up that much" Scary.

But he did have a moment that will go down in history for us- here is a transcript of it:

AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAQ RESOLUTION OF 2002

>
Permanent Link

Text From the Congressional Record

Gallegly, Elton [R-CA]
Debate: H.J.RES.114
Begin 2002-10-09 13:18:28
End 13:23:29
Length 00:05:01

Mr. GALLEGLY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support today of H.J. Res. 114. I want to commend the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hastert) and House leadership for working in a bipartisan manner with the White House to develop what I believe is a very strong, but balanced, resolution.

Last week by a strong vote the Committee on International Relations passed this resolution. As part of its responsibility to carry out its role in helping shape United States foreign policy toward Iraq, our chairman, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), and our ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. Lantos), deserve a great deal of credit for their efforts in guiding this effort through the committee process.

September 11 has tragically taught us the price of not acting when faced with a clear and present danger, and there should be no doubt today we face a clear and present danger in the form of weapons of mass destruction in the possession of Saddam Hussein. We know after the 1991 liberation of Kuwait, Iraq unequivocally agreed to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and agreed to allow international weapons inspectors to ensure that be accomplished.

But as we all know, Iraq has willfully and in direct violation of its own agreement and those of the United Nations Security Council thwarted over and over again the efforts of the inspectors to find and destroy those weapons. This can only mean one thing, Mr. Speaker. Saddam intends to hold on to these weapons and use them at the appropriate time and in the manner he deems necessary.

As early as 1998, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan in a letter to the Security Council stated, ``No one can doubt or dispute that Iraq's refusal to honor its commitments under Security Council resolutions regarding its weapons of mass destruction constituted a threat.''

These words remain even more true today in light of the scourge of global terrorism. Today the threat to the national security of the United States and to international peace and security continues to grow. It is especially serious because we know that Saddam Hussein supports terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda and could very well be working with these agents at this very moment providing them with the expertise to use chemical and biological weapons against the United States and others.

In 1991 in the aftermath of the Iraq invasion of Kuwait, I led a group of our colleagues in the House in introducing a resolution authorizing then-President Bush the use of all necessary means to force Iraq from Kuwait. There were dissenters who felt we should not go to war, but in the end there is no question we were proven right. In 1998 I strongly supported the House resolution which declared Iraq to be in breach of its international obligations, and we urged the President to take appropriate
actions to bring Iraq into compliance.

However, at that time significant penalties for noncompliance were not invoked, and so here we are again today, confronting the same issue without an inch of change in Saddam's attitude or actions.

Today we are faced with the same proposition and very similar arguments on both sides; but with the passage of this resolution, we will again provide the President the authority he may need to take the appropriate actions necessary to protect the national security of this great Nation.

Mr. Speaker, this time around we must have an absolute commitment to not allow Saddam Hussein to have chemical or biological weapons anymore. But the enforcement of Security Council resolutions this time must include significant penalty for noncompliance which are immediate and automatic. The resolution we are debating today is forceful in that it again gives the President the authority to use whatever means, including force, to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction. But this resolution
is balanced in that it encourages the President to pursue diplomatic avenues to achieve international support of enforcing U.N. mandates and provide for an important role in the Congress.

I believe the gravity of this issue mandates that we act now to give the President the tools he should have to deal with this significant threat. The potential terror of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of a madman to the world must be addressed, and it must be addressed decisively and now.

Mr. Speaker, I urge the support of this resolution.

I'll also post this on my blog for easier reading. I guess everyone gets to have that famous moment.......

For accomplishing little in a long history of holding the position, this sure was quite a moment to open his mouth. Just another Bush instrument. We sure do need a change, an independent thinker should get some good support this year.

OK, Brian L, go ahead and waste your time and money on "Pallant the Rant." She doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell against a well-funded, well-liked, well-established Republican incumbent in a majority Republican district. The sooner you realize this and get over your naivete, the better off you'll be.

What has Elton done for me, exactly? Not that much really, except represent my values, beliefs, and philosophies in Congress for the past 21 years. That's about it.

Come on Mongo, even my neo-con sister thinks Gallegly is a big do nothing. Politically, the GOP doesn't even let him sit at the big kids table. Let's not confuse his ability to fly below the radar at home and rubber stamp everything the GOP says he should in Washington, with real ability to legislate, lead or inspire.

We can agree that realistically this is a difficult district for a competitive race, but let's not pretend the incumbent is still in there for any reason but by the grace of luck and gerrymandering.

Really Mongo - who is being naive? Did I say Mary would win or did I say Mary SHOULD win? Which argument am I making here? Perhaps the subtlety is too much for you in the black-n-white world of money politics. You admit EG hasnt done much for you except represent your values, beliefs and philosophies. Which values exactly would that be given his obvious absence of service? Which beliefs are you talking about? Lack of forced canine violence? Do I even need to ask about his philosophy? That is a pretty big word for someone like EG.

Here is what I see and hear from the nay-sayers about Mary...she has no money and no plan to get any therefore I wont help her with money or suggestions on how to get any. EG is rich and therefore pre-ordained by God to remain in his seat because most people in east valley are too mind-numblingly busy surviving their day-to-day issues to pay attention to the fact that when a Republican like EG says he doesnt believe in an effective government, he is actually promising to be ineffective (as a favor to YOU).

Congratulations Mongo - you win. With a big "L" on your forehead.

Wow, Brian L. (for Loser?), no wonder your candidates don't do very well, with that amount of negativity floating around the Democrat Party. You and Laura should get together for lunch, so you can fight with each other over who will pay the bill.

Nah, I like Brian, we wouldn't fight. He's smart, dedicated and articulate. I think he changed his party affiliation to become a Democrat within the past year or two (sorry if I've got the wrong Brian). Hey, maybe we should run Brian for something.

Mongo, is it all kumbaya and girl scout cookies over at Rep HQ?

Someone's stale m'Lord, Kumbaya.

Someone's twisted m'Lord, Kumbaya.

Someone's brain-dead m'lord, Kumbaya.

O Lord Kumbaya.

I think Mary Pallant would make a great congresswoman. I think she is a very brave and smart lady. She would represent all the people, not like Elton and his friends.

Most people seem to accept the fact that Gallegly lied about his illness two years ago when he withdrew from the race and then pretended to be all better the next week for political expediency.

Doesn't that bother anyone? Don't you think voters should demand to know the real reason he pulled out of the race in '06 - and then lied to the public?

Dear Gallegly Lied, yes, it bothers me tremendously that Gallegly lied and it cost him and/or his annoited heir my vote.

Laura, no it's not all kumbaya and Girl Scout cookies at the Rep HQ. We actually debate issues, disagree with each other, and come to consensus on things. There are no Kool-Aid vats over in T.O., as far as I know.

But, look at you, Laura. You guys over at Dem HQ just love to slurp that Kool-Aid down and die together under the Jim Dantona banner. Am I right, or am I wrong? You know I'm right, don't you? We'll all being singing "Halleluiah" in T.O., rather than "Kumbaya", after the General election, my friend.

Getting back to the Gallegly campaign, exactly why did Elton decide not to run? Was it due to legal issues? The medical issue was totally fraudulent.

I don't like Mary Pallant either because of her strident anti-war stance. It's a complex issue.

Maybe a nice moderate Republican would do? Elton should clear out and leave a clean playing board.

Why is it strident to be against the Iraq War and to have been against it from from the start?

If Bush came to Congress tomorrow to request the authority to go to war with Iran, who would you rather have in Congress? Pallant or Gallegly?

If a moderate Republican had enough courage to stand up to the President and refused to be a part of the folly like Mary Pallant would then I would welcome that day as well. It isn't that complicated.

Mary Pallant would work to correct the first mistake rather than create new excuses for continuing the occupation or compounding the blunder. We cannot indefinitely occupy Iraq.

Unless you are one of the newer group of companies that has made its' fortune from the disaster capitalism industry created by Shrub's privatization of the American military, the only way you can possibly be pro-Iraq occupation is by ignorantly avoiding reaching ANY understanding of the reality of the situation in Iraq and the Middle East.

If for instance you believe the soft platitudes of fighting for freedom and security or even for democracy then all I can say is you need to get some different sources of news preferably ones that dont originate their funding from the shareholders of the war profiteers themselves - generally anything with a TV camera in the Green Zone.

Perhaps if we had more people with a strident anti-war stance, 911 might have been avoided altogether. The resentment of years of profit-taking and gun-running in the Middle East and propping up of unpopular governments was what led to two of America's symbols of disaster capitalist/military doctrine to be attacked.

Only the scared and foolish buy into the 'war on terror' (unless you are profiting from it monetarily of course). War on terror is such a stupid concept when any reason is applied to it. Bush explains it as they hate us for our freedoms. Huh?? Wouldnt that make it a 'war on jealousy'? Make up yer frickin' minds.

For Mongo afraid to use his real Name-O,

"Wow, Brian L. (for Loser?), no wonder your candidates don't do very well, with that amount of negativity floating around the Democrat Party. You and Laura should get together for lunch, so you can fight with each other over who will pay the bill."

Very original with the "L" there - is that some "I know you are but what am I" schoolyard retort thing?

Dont mistake me for some starry-eyed party hack ideologue like you. I despise the two-party apparatus. The Dem candidates arent MY candidates. I support the ones I believe in but only after they show me something. Your boy EG doesnt have to show you anything for you to stick your nose so far up his arse that your mouth looks like his navel.

Stop projecting your lack of will and forethought upon others and go read some history books. Do your homework on something besides horse race politics - that would serve your party and ultimately your country much better than just being some sycophantic, kajillionaire wannabe.

Did you say your prayers against gay, married, abortionist terrorists today? I understand that particular type of hobgoblin has a real affinity for hanging out in right-wing closets...

Sorry, Brian L. Instead of "Loser", I should have said "Liver Lips". Would that have touched your seemingly impenetrable funny bone, my friend? That's the trouble with you Dems, no sense of humor, whatsoever.

Oh, but wait. I forgot your sophistication in the field of politics is so far advanced, I must have an unmitigable amount gall to actually poke fun at it. Politics, more than anything else, contains an enormous amount of irony and hyperbole, dude. Get over it and laugh a little at yourself. You'll live longer, trust me.

If we want to laugh we can look at Republican Elton Gallegly's record in Congress.

Mongo,
I have several short-comings as a person that I recognize and endeavor to improve upon (ask my wife!!) and the ability to laugh at politics is not one of them. Ad hominem attacks you seem to initiate with relish because (I am just guessing here) they are the only fertile part of your imagination when it comes to responding to the actual short-comings of your chosen ideology.

I would not claim to be sophisticated politically but I would claim to be well-read and researched. I dont buy the Dem party line any more than I buy the Republican propaganda. Frankly, it doesnt take a genius to see that the right-wing machine would like us all to believe we live in upside-down world where gray is blue and war is security and greed is an advantage for all.

It is clear that you are willing to utilize the convenient 'us vs. them' simplicity perpetuated by the two-party system to make your argument that Dems are humorless, godless people even when it is likely that somewhere in your own family tree a Dem exists that is neither.

I have yet to see you respond in any reasoned fashion to the ample weaknesses that have been pointed out here regarding your chosen ideology and candidates. Your responses have fallen into two categories which are really just an extension of each other: blame the messenger and its not our fault.

This particular blog is about Mary P's resolutions to become a representative in CD24. You say she is "way too liberal" without bothering to explain what that means in the ample time and space you have been given here.

You also claim to be well-informed on the issues and non-emotive. I would say you are neither based on your very own writings. You havent talked about a single issue except the horse race. When I called you out on what EG has done for you, you came back with a decidedly lame and extremely general response: nothing really except he represents your values, beliefs and philosophies in Congress...

This is your view of the political equation but you are well-informed? It sounds like you want a Sunday-school teacher instead of a legislator. Congressional representatives write laws and check the power of the executive. That is their job. EG has done neither and you seem content with the results. And I am trying to point out to you that our country has many serious issues to deal with and almost all of them are so far beyond the comprehension of the person currently representing the district - and all you can say is the equivalent of "but the girls just want to have fun" and "I am a material girl" (you have invoked the Madonna doctrine!)

Really - I dont know why you are even walking off the porch in this discussion. You got some 'splaining to do if you want me to lay off your platitudes.

Well reasoned and articulate response Brian L. Just remember you are probably arguing with the current chairperson of the Ventura Republican Central Committee. Impressive, isn't it?

Brian L,, trust me you are NOT arguing with the current VCRCC chairperson, although he'd probably like to be. Mongo likes to play the game of "poke the Democrat with the stick and watch it squeal." Just don't take him too seriously and you'll be fine.

I love hearing your thoughts, Brian. Keep posting.

Thanks for the support, Marie & Bothered.

I realize he's just poking his stick as you adequately put it. I have plenty of experience on national blogs with this type of guy and I just like exercising my chops on them.

I only take the Big Dogs seriously and Mongo cant claim that until he talks seriously about why his ideology works. Tough job given the state of national and world affairs. Blaming Clinton gets only so far and then you have to blame Carter I guess.

Marie - What makes you think that Mr. Flamo isn't Mike Osborn? Do you know who it is or is this a guess?

Take your best shot at guessing who I am, since it seems to be an obsession on this blog. Nobody has come close yet and I mean "nobody" in the general sense, rather than "nobody" the blogger.

One hint though - I'm not Mike Osborn!

I will just let him have his privacy. If I ever run into him again, I may confront him just for fun. We've been at the same events many times.

Marie, are you saying we hang with the same crowd, or something? Maybe you're right, but I'm sitting here scratching my head.

Not really, Mongo. If I explained myself better here, I would be saying too much. Enjoy your privacy. I won't give you up.

Assuming you know who I am, thanks Marie.

Let's play Scrabble:

ektai guetae

IUIKKCN

ikem brosno

I think "nobody" got it right (Mongo = Katie Teague). Yeah!!! We finally figured it out. Good job, nobody!

We better stop before iranB nenertD sees us being fof optic.