Rumor has it that the Ventura County Board of Education is trying to figure out how to get by with appointing Audra Strickland to the County Superintendent of Schools position vacated by Chuck Weiss.

This would give Audra job security for next year, a big pay raise and all their fundraising can be left for Tony's run for Senate.

With the economy (especially for locals) in the dumper and the war now being seen for what it is (lie heaped upon lie), it should not require a Zen master to beat Elton after decades of his incompetence. It only needs a decent candidate with the ability and will to communicate the message and have voters get out and vote, but not for Elton.

Is Elton returning money these days if he thinks it might be embarrassing to take it? Was Mr. Mazilo's money suddenly tainted because of possible scandal associated with his industry? Will Elton be turning back money from leaders in industries that are similarly tainted? How about oil money tainted by speculation? Money from military contractors from an industry tainted by cost overruns and incompetence? Money from industries that might be tainted by a reputation of employing undocumented immigrants - like agriculture, hospitality, construction and manufacturing, etc.? In the name of such high minded ethics, he might find that he has no real money with which to run a campaign.

Hey! That could be interesting as it would put him on an equal footing with his opponent.

As far as Mr. Foy not running again, it should not be a surprise if he chose not to run again. There are more than a few on the inside that believed his election was really about the new county Republican leadership removing Judy Mikels - and other such "RINOs" - from office. In that regard, mission accomplished!

Rumors,

I thought the VCOE hired a firm to find applicants. I don't see them appointing someone with very little education experience. The position is elected but it requires the ability to run a system with so many laws and regulations involved that I would expect a retired principal or district official.

If she resigned to take the position wouldn't it require a special election for her seat?

What are the rules in regards to a special election?

Captain,

Funny, in your whole rant about Gallegly returning money from a tainted donor, you never suggested that Hannah-Beth Jackson return any of the tobacco money she got siphoned to her campaign from Ron Calderon. I guess it should come as no surprise.

Hey Flamo,

First, I thought this blog item was about news on Mr. G and his most recent and never ending the efforts to keep the local congressional seat. (In case you have forgotten, HBJ is not running for that seat.)

Second, I was asking questions to see if I could follow the logic which somehow implied impropriety in taking money from one special interest that is on the public hot seat, but not others. Apparently, since you have no answers, you would rather change the subject.

So I guess that Dodd as head of the Senate Banking Committee getting a sweetheart deal from Countrywide doesn't bother you?

Doesn't bother who?

Hey Brian,
Your link to Gallegly's refund isn't there (it goes to Marta's early filing). But here's the link to his lobbyist fundraising:
http://www.maplight.org/map/us/legislator/253

And here's the link to his TOP contributers:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00007231

And here's where he's SPENDING his money:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/expend.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00007231
CHECK THIS OUT. A cool $41,834 to JANICE GALLEGLY in 23 separate disbursements!!! Wanna ask what that one's about??? By the way, why don't YOU call Elton and ask him about the Countrywide refund? Aren't you a journalist?

And would anyone really like to see what Elton's done for you lately?
Elton Gallegly Voting Record, otherwise known as WHY GALLEGLY MUST GO!!!

Oil and Energy

Voted NO on tax incentives for renewable energy. (Feb 2008)
Voted NO on investing in homegrown biofuel. (Aug 2007)
Voted NO on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)
Voted NO on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
Voted NO on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
Voted YES on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004)
Voted YES on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003)
Voted NO on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
Voted NO on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
Voted YES on starting implementation of Kyoto Protocol. (Jun 2000)
Rated 0% by the CAF, indicating opposition to energy independence. (Dec 2006)
On Iraq War:

Voted NO on redeploying US troops out of Iraq starting in 90 days. (May 2007)
Voted YES on declaring Iraq part of War on Terror with no exit date. (Jun 2006)
Voted YES on approving removal of Saddam & valiant service of US troops. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on authorizing military force in Iraq. (Oct 2002)

On Environment:

Voted NO on increasing AMTRAK funding by adding $214M to $900M. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on barring website promoting Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump. (May 2006)
Voted YES on deauthorizing "critical habitat" for endangered species. (Sep 2005)
Voted YES on speeding up approval of forest thinning projects. (Nov 2003)
Rated 10% by the LCV, indicating anti-environment votes. (Dec 2003)

On Immigration:

Voted YES on building a fence along the Mexican border. (Sep 2006)
Voted YES on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment. (May 2004)
Voted YES on extending Immigrant Residency rules. (May 2001)
Voted NO on more immigrant visas for skilled workers. (Sep 1998)

On Labor:

Voted NO on restricting employer interference in union organizing. (Mar 2007)
Voted NO on increasing minimum wage to $7.25. (Jan 2007)
Voted YES on end offshore tax havens and promote small business. (Oct 2004)
Voted YES on $167B over 10 years for farm price supports. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on zero-funding OSHA's Ergonomics Rules instead of $4.5B. (Mar 2001)
Rated 7% by the AFL-CIO, indicating an anti-union voting record. (Dec 2003

On The Internet:

Voted NO on establishing "network neutrality" (non-tiered Internet). (Jun 2006)

TAKEN FROM http://www.jorgensenforcongress.com/
###

Does it trouble anyone else that Gallegly's issue page doesn't talk about Iraq?

I find it really odd.

I think "Voter" was referring to Captain Renhault, who would prefer to argue about who holds which office than acknowledge the hypocrisy of his comments.

It seems that when it's a Republican benefiting from corrupt practices that elected official should be subject to severe condemnation. However, if it happens to be a Democrat (like Jackson or Dodd), they are beyond reproach.

It's not a matter of changing the subject, but, rather, keeping the playing field level.

I guess the double standard continues with the venerable Captain though.

I know you don't like politics but I haven't heard you cal Hannah-Beth Jackson corrupt before. You have some evidence of her breaking the law for personal gain or was it just hyperbole speaking?

Try to be as powerful, but accurate, as you can with your words.

Add HR 6251 to Gallegly's ongoing efforts to keep fuel prices high.

The House bill would require oil companies to actually USE their federal oil leases or lose them on 68 million acres of federal land. Companies that are simply sitting on these leases, waiting for prices to climb higher and higher would have to give them back, so they can be leased to more productive companies. Gallegly says NO! That's OUR oil and Gallegly thinks BigOil has the right to hoard the OUR oil so that THEIR profits can continue to climb, at OUR expense.

http://politicalwatchcentralcoast.org/

I'm gonna toss out an opinion:

Unfortunately, Gallegly's simply a guaranteed NeoCon/BigOil vote and can't understand the bigger picture.

The NeoCon goal isn't to control oil but to control the virtual oil faucet that determines who pays what price for energy. The ability to do so is an economic tool stronger than any military might we can project around the world.

Controlling Caspian Basin energy, via control of the petroleum & gas pipelines through Afghanistan is one way to accomplish this goal. Another is to control the flow of oil from Iraq, a nation that has provided about 6% of the market's daily petroleum needs.

Another way to achieve that goal is to shut down 5% to 10% of the market's global suppliers while increasing supplies from domestic and friendly sources. This offset would also place a virtual facet in the hands of BigOil & the NeoCons. Shutting off Iraq's oil was always a big pre-invasion issue yet NeoCon planners deliberately made no plans to protect 12% of the world's proven reserves when they did invade. So now we have a shortfall of 6% of daily petroleum needs, causing panic in the marketplace and frustration amongst voters.

The NeoCon answer is to increase domestic production, regardless of the real costs, and to kiss the arses of "friendly" regimes around the globe...like Nigeria, Myanmar, Columbia (ready to pounce on Venezuela's oil), Indonesia (already pounced on New Guinea's oil, etc. Shutting down the oil trades of "non-friendly" regimes makes the job of controlling the faucet that much easier.

Panic & Frustration are the key. A closed market, where some nations are allowed to trade their oil while others are not, is the NeoCon's best friend. Remove those factors and the NeoCon plan falls apart. Remove our troops from oil hotspots and allow all oil nations to compete and you'll lower the price of oil.

GS,

I'll give you one thing, you know how to toss out an opinion. Usually, an opinion has some facts associated with it, in order to lend some validity to it. Yours is sorely lacking facts and more about spouting from the hip.

It sounds like an enormous conspiracy theory where these no-name, evil, "NeoCons" run around trying to interfere with and control the world oil market by foisting their devious, nonsensical schemes on the unsuspecting public. Please...

One of the primary reasons oil prices are so high and the market is in such disarray is that it is controlled by foreign producers who have every incentive to drive prices up by limiting production and making decisions as a group (OPEC) in order to limit world-wide competition and price reductions.

But, your answer is to remove our troops and, magically, OPEC will be incentivized to reduce the price per barrel. I gotta get some of what your smokin', brother.

Unfortunately, your opinion is based on an untruth. OPEC has nothing to do with high petroleum prices. Nada. In fact, OPEC has, several times during the past year, attempted to raise their output in an effort to lower prices...to no effect.

The oil market is being manipulated by out-of-control (I prefer to think of them as attack dogs let loose) speculators and seemingly insane White House energy policies. The devalued dollar adds considerably to the per barrel cost.

What are speculators doing that is wrong? Guessing that oil prices will continue to be high? Seems like an obvious and smart move.

What am I missing?

GS,

Thanks for reading and leaving comments. I appreciate it.

Elton takes credit for what the "task forces" do. How do we even know he shows up to the meetings?

I will vote for Elton when he scares off oil executives instead of immigrants. I see Republicans using public office to protect themselves more than the public. If it was truly their intent to protect us they would talk about the issues with us. Elton doesn't. They don't.

Any candidate running against Elton needs to take a close look at the Simi Valley precinct that isn't a Republican stronghold. Then concentrate on young voters in Thousand Oaks and Westlake Village..(you would be surprised what's considered young).. From there I would march North through relatively safe territories of Moorpark and Santa Paula. Then I would flank westwardly towards Oxnard and Ventura these are all target rich areas. The important thing is getting people to vote. How bad do the Nations problems have to get before it's important enough to do something?

Nothing wrong with commodity speculation but there is something wrong when traditional regulatory mechanisms, meant to prevent unreasonable price spikes and drops, are abandoned in the name of America's "New" energy policy.

I'm glad to see the Democrats have a plan. Nobody has hit on a brilliant campaign strategy for the 24th Congressional District. March west to Oxnard as a target rich area. Oxnard or bust. Oxnard is the key to winning this district.

Too bad Oxnard isn't actually in the 24th.

Nobody, you would make a fine addition to the staff of Marta "I ain't got no gas money to get to Simi" Jorgenson.

The Republicans give us that simpleton Gallegly. The Democrats don't even know where the district is.

If you want people to get excited about this race you're going to have to do better than that. Otherwise this race is just one more reason to stay home on election day.

Stay home in a presidential election because the congressional ballot isn't competitive? I know you are kidding but if you really care get involved early, not a few months before voting, in the 2010 primaries.

Better yet get involved locally to build up the democratic party this cycle. Party mechanisms pay off sometimes immediately and sometimes down the line too.

The headline at the top of this blog item made me wonder and smile: exactly what is the adjective "useless" modifying?

I'm not kidding. What exactly are the choices for someone who lives in Moorpark?

Tony Strickland or Hannabeth Jackson?
Audra Strickland or Ferial Masery?
Elton Gallegly or Marta Jorgenson?
John McCain or Barack Obama?

There's not one person listed that I voted for in the primary or in Feb. I voted for judge and on the initiatives in the last election. Nothing else. They're all perfect examples of why I'm now an Independant. I can't be the only one here who feels this way.

I think Glen Becerra, a Simi Valley Councilman, looks poised to run for Gallegly's seat in 2010 with Gallegly's endorsement.

Stacy,

You think he will get Rep. Gallegly's endorsement? Why would you support him and not Peter Foy, Audra Strickland, or Cameron Smyth?

Where does Glen Becerra stand on the issues congress deals with as opposed to what a city council deals with?

Where does he stand on the war in Iraq, a constitutional ban on same sex marriage, the estate tax, global warming and the many other issues we face as a nation?

Both of the Strickland's and Gallegly are totally useless morons! How did we get stuck with such complete garbage and corruption? All they do is lie and play golf with local insurance execs. Gallegly has been doing absolutely nothing for nearly 30 years now! Sad!

I think Google has got to be clear about how Google+ fits in with all its other product offerings when/if it does start to support non-human entites. The webpage you've laid out (incredibly awesome) is quite much like Google Places within its Maps product. I am sure this is the internal dilemma Google has as to how Google+ will roll this out for businesses and how this will merge with Places.