The Tony Strickland campaign has a new press release out touting their numbers of counter protesters and how much money they raised. It does not mention the few that took away from the many amongst the protesters on each side.
I am not vouching of the numbers of protesters on either side mentioned in the press release. I saw about 50 on each side.
Click on continue reading for the press release.
I know that I have my critics on both sides but is there any other blog that goes out of their way to post almost every event and press release by both sides?
I will continue adding more photos in the coming days but here are a few more.
These photos are from the shots taken by Greg "Flap" Cole, a conservative, center-right
blogger. Thanks. Click here to see more of his work. He comes across as bitter at times in his writing but in person he is much more charming. If you write your own blog feel free to leave comments with links back to your stuff.
This photo is my own. It shows the police questioning a Tony Strickland supporter after an altercation between him and a few Hannah-Beth Jackson supporters. After questioning the police agreed to file a citizen's arrest on him by the Hannah-Beth Jackson supporters but he asked and was told he could do the same as he claimed they roughed him up. When the two groups agreed to not arrest each other the police let everyone go. As they didn't directly witness the confrontation they had little evidence, except forthcoming videos including a video from a Hannah-Beth Jackson that was hard to review without audio and on a camera screen, to go on at the time. I am pretty sure there is more information coming out.
I talked to Louis Pandolfi before the protest and he said he let the police know they were coming but apparently the police on the beat didn't know and were not there until people from both sides called after there was an altercation. Both Strickland and Hannah-Beth Jackson supporters admit something happened but disagree on who did what.
The event helped raise a reported quarter of a million dollars which will go a long way in a campaign that the Strickland campaign has said will cost a total of $10 million dollars when all the expenses are added up from all the different groups.
After all the debate about tobacco money Mitt Romney said it was Tony Strickland that would help limit the influence of special interests. From now on I have a new rule. When a local politician says special interest we should insert the names of the interests.
Anyways, I will post a Hannah-Beth Jackson press releases later.
Thanks for leaving comments. I want to remind everyone that if you see a comment that goes way overboard in nastiness or gets too personal send me an email so I can take it down. On a busy day there can be 50 plus comments and I don't read through them all. I know that many of you don't or can't use your real names because of the type of work that you do. I understand that. But most people give more credit to someone that uses their real name. And all of us give more respect to a reasoned post that is fair to all sides instead of a screed. before you post try to think about if you are just screaming back at someone or trying to persuade them. If you are just yelling back remember that isn't how most arguments are won.
Thanks for reading and posting.
P R E S S R E L E A S E FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Matt Guthrie June 18, 2008 (805) ***-**** STRICKLAND FUNDRAISER FEATURING MITT ROMNEY SURPASSES EXPECTATIONS Strickland Campaign Raises Nearly Quarter Million Dollars (Westlake Village) Last night, featured speaker Mitt Romney addressed a packed room of close to five hundred donors and supporters of Tony Strickland at the State Senate candidate's highly anticipated fundraiser in Westlake Village. The event, which highlighted the importance of the 19th District Senate race, surpassed the original fundraising goal of $200,000 and took in nearly a quarter-million dollars. The sold out event was an overwhelming success for Strickland and continues the trend of strong and growing support for his campaign. With only two days to prepare, the Strickland team was also able to organize a successful pushback to a protest at the event that had been planned for over a week and included between 30-40 people. At 92 supporters strong, the pro-Strickland crowd more than doubled that of the protest demonstration as they lined the streets with American flags and signs showing their support for Tony Strickland and welcoming Governor Romney to California. Strickland's opponent also didn't escape the wrath of supporters as they carried signs slamming her tax and spend positions and exposed the hypocritical nature of contributions received by Hannah-Beth Jackson and the democratic party. Governor Romney's message to California voters was clear. "I believe Tony Strickland can cut back on wasteful spending and can remove the interest of special interests and bring new ideas to Sacramento," Romney said in an interview before the event. Strickland received a standing ovation when speaking about the importance of this particular race and his message about growing the economy while being environmentally responsible played well with the crowd. "You can be pro-economy and pro-environment," Strickland said. " The solution isn't raising taxes, it's to help the economy grow. Raising taxes will only drive people and businesses out of the state. We need to push the green economy so we can get off of foreign oil and reduce gas prices for all Californians". ###
Hey, when I started this blog the categories weren't a feature. Therefore many of the entries over the years aren't put in any place except the archives. You can use google or go month by month. I expect to go back through the old entries by the end of the summer.
Thanks for reading!
Dude, you totally Rick-Rolled me. DAMN YOU!!!!!!!!
In all seriousness, though: the coverage in this blog was, to me, much more interesting than the coverage in the Star (Sorry, Star, no offense!)
It's obvious that you try to be fair, while at the same time not passing on spin. And for the most part, your commenters have added to the coverage. I've been skipping over the bickering.
So, hey: good job!
Just please don't Rick-Roll me again.
nice job
R,C, Beckom,
Is that your book you and I linked to? Have we met? How long have you been reading my blog?
Hey, if the two sides do this again try not to bring flags with spears on the end. Another suggestion try to coordinate the time a little better. Seems the two sides didn't make an appointment to meet at the same time. That makes it harder for the media to cover. Be considerate!
Yep, I got rick rolled by Brian.
On another note, I think the sidewalk protester hotheads need to give it a rest. I'm not inclined to believe partisans on either side without first seeing hard evidence. All the hearsay being posted on this blog by the local partisan activists is not persuasive in the least. If someone has an actual video of what happened then post it, otherwise learn to stay on your side of the sidewalk next time.
I would also add that the actions of a handful of hotheads is not a reflection on either candidate, just a reflection on the immaturity of certain individuals.
I'd also like to know why the liberals who critisize Tony Strickland for taking tobacco money don't complain when members of their own party do the same? HBJ indirectly taking tobacco money that is laundered through the democratic party is pretty hypocritical. She needs to hold herself and her own party to the same standard she is demanding of TS and, therefore, should demand that her party and other democrats immeditately return any tobacco money they have received. Otherwise she has no credibility on this issue since the money she receives from her own party is tainted. I'm not buying this argument that there is a difference between direct and indirect contributions. And if HBJ is so concerned about special interest money then why doesn't she also take a stand against other democrats who take contributions from indian gaming casinos and public employee unions?
So pardon me if I'm not buying the propaganda. Maybe HBJ should focus on the issues and convince us why we should vote for her instead of against the other guy. The only people getting worked into a hysteria over this tobacco issue are partisans who are already voting for HBJ anyway.
Bubba Kidd,
Welcome back. I think most candidates would appreciate it if you have some tips on how to raise millions of dollars for a state senate race without special interest money.
Do you think all special interests are just as dangerous to the public interest? Do you see a difference between them?
It isn't the money as much as it is the voting records.
I don't like any kind of special interest money since it corrupts our process. Unfortunately the only way to raise serious money to run a credible campaign is to solicit from various special interest groups, which includes public employee unions, gun lobbyists, tobacco companies, Indian gaming casinos, oil companies, trial lawyers, etc. Unfortunately, private citizens don't send in enough money to fund large-scale campaigns, and taking money from special interests, while sometimes ethically questionable, is perfectly legal.
Strickland is taking money from tobacco companies, which is a legal business that has a legal right to contribute to political campaigns. They also have a vested interest in laws that regulate or tax tobacco use, so they have clear motives for supporting candidates who support their positions. Tobacco companies have been successful in lobbying against laws that restrict tobacco use, tax their products, or otherwise harm their business.
By the same token, Jackson takes money from public employee unions, which also have a legal right to contribute to political campaigns. Like tobacco companies, they also have a vested interest in laws that can benefit or harm their members. They also have a clear motive in supporting candidates who support their positions. Public employee unions have been very successful in lobbying for laws that have enhanced pay and benefits for their members, expanded the number of union jobs, and maintained job security and strict work rules.
Admittedly, tobacco is a dangerous product that is directly and indirectly responsible for millions of deaths and other health related problems, as well as a huge cost to our health care system.
At the same time, public employee unions have often contributed toward inefficient and ineffective government bureaucracies through arcane work rules, made it almost impossible to terminate incompetent workers, caused huge increases over time in the cost of government, contributed to massive unfunded pension and health care liabilities, and has threatened the fiscal solvency of many communities (the bankruptcy of the City of Vallejo being a good example), as well as the State of California itself.
So, to say that one type of special interest is bad but another is OK is simply dishonest. And for HBJ to attack TS for taking direct contributions from tobacco companies, while she takes indirect contributions from tobacco companies and direct contributions from public employee unions is, shall we say, more than a little hypocritical.
The corruption is systemic and, unfortunately, to wage a serious political campaign you have to play ball. So I am not going to come down hard on any candidate who follows the rules. Neither candidate is doing anything illegal in raising money for their campaigns, and that is the bottom line. It is ridiculous to come down on TS for taking tobacco money while giving a free pass to HBJ when she takes public employee union money. As far as I'm concerned both are ethically questionable, yet perfectly legal.
Well said, Bubba. I've been saying the exact same thing for weeks now and have been beaten over the head with a sledge hammer by Marie (and other anonymous bloggers) for having the balls to call a spade a spade.
Hannah-Beth has zero credibility on the issue of campaign donations, not just on the tobacco issue (which she's already been called on the carpet for - and rightly so), but also on the issue of special interest money in general, whether it's indian gaming, public employee unions, trial lawyers, or whoever. These groups all have paid lobbyists and huge campaign finance budgets and their not afraid to give money to those they feel can serve their interests once elected.
Welcome to the real world.
Both of them need large amounts of money to stay competitive. That much is agreed upon by almost all.
Both of them also take money from groups trying to influence elections and buy access to our elected officials.
Both of them it could be argued take money from tobacco companies if you count indirect contributions.
But both of them do not solicit those contributions.
Both of them do not take the same levels of money from the same special interests. If tobacco gives 90% of their money to a party am I really going to be equally mad at the other party?
I don't see people arguing that Hannah-Beth Jackson doesn't take money from unions. That is pretty clear. But the voting public sees a major difference between unions for teachers, firefighters, and police officers different then tobacco money.
All of that doesn't really get to the point though. The point is Tony Strickland takes large sums of tobacco money and then votes the way they want him to vote.
I have a question for Mongo about indian gaming money. Does it matter if the casinos clearly favor a candidate over the other?
This could all be cleared up if Tony Strickland announced where he agrees and disagrees with tobacco companies.
Hey "Bungalow" Bill, isn't it? Beatles song, right?
Anyway, I've said it before, and I'll say it again, and I've even said to some of Tony's key supporters and staffers. He should give it back. He doesn't need it and it's not worth the agony. I don't know if anyone is listening to me, but I still think that would be the best decision for him at this point.
As for Hannah-Beth and the unions. It's not just teachers, firefighters & police officers, although, yes, they definitely have strong & active unions. But, it's also a whole host of local, state & federal bureaucrats who also belong to such unions as SEIU (one of the most powerful in the State, by the way).
Most observers see the teachers' union and the prisoner guards' union as the strongest in the state as far as organized labor goes.
The other strong interest is casino money from either race tracks, card clubs, out of state casino interests, or tribal gaming.
Mongo, maybe it is odd but I agree with you that the money isn't need it and it isn't worth giving the Democrats an issue that most of the public is against. The other night Tony Strickland raised $250,000 from the Mitt Romney event. That was a stunning success by all indicators I have seen. That doesn't give an issue to local Democrats. If the campaign is primarily about taxes then Tony Strickland has the advantage. If it is about campaign finance then Hannah-Beth Jackson has the advantage.
By the way, what was on the menu?
As far as popularity of interest groups I cannot think of many other groups that are pushing for a legal product or on behalf of a legal group that has lower support.
It isn't about smokers but it is about tobacco lobby money.
Oil companies make a legal product that benefits all of us but I don't think in the current political climate it would be a wise choice to take a dime from them.
I know in a tough race it would be tempting but it wouldn't be worth it.