I am happy to see Dantona has not given up his idea to represent this district. I'm one of those republicans who voted for him. He was the only one who brought up important issues. Voters need to see it's not Democrat or Republican it's someone who can lead, Dantona can lead. I personally think either of the Stricklands are weak candidates who have done little or nothing while in office. I know it's early but I think Dantona has what it takes and I for one would vote for him. Go get em Dantona.

I think a candidate who was very careful to embrace the middle would have an excellent chance provided there was a comprehensive outreach program to educate DTS voters that they should ask for a Republican or Democratic ballot during the primaries.

The candidate would also need to be very congizant of the percentage of absentee voters and be aware that most of the slate mailers in the county are owned by entities in bed with incumbent elected officials - some in the county, some outside the county.

If a candidate made it clear that he or she was interested in working across the aisle and working for the people of the county instead of his or her political party, I think either a Republican or a Democrat could win.

Jim Dantona surpassed everyone's expectation is his run in a predominantly Republican part of the county, despite the ten of thousands that was spent in the last days on Foy's behalf.

Jeff Gorell was positioning himself as a moderate Republican in his run against Audra. Not sure if he still is but he might be an option.

I think Steve Bennett should run if Jim Dantona does not.

I agree with Katie that a candidate who can truly show they will be representing all the people of the senate district can win no matter democrat or republican. As a republican I have seen Tony and Audra Strickland do more to destroy the republican party than help it. I personally hope we see 4 or 5 republicans in the primary, so that Tony will be asked some tough questions and the republicans will have other options than just Tony. As far as Dantona I voted for Judy in the primary but for Dantona in the general. Peter Foy is just a puppet for Strickland and McClintock and I refused to vote for someone who can't think for himself. I think this race is looking much like the supervisors race and might have a similar finish. Dantona ran a strong primary and general and I'm not sure that Tony could survive that. He took a million dollars from casinos and that hurt him in my mind. He says one thing but does another.
I'm tired of just voting for a party I would vote for who I believe and trust will do a good job. It's obvious that Dantona appeals to republicans since he lost by only 800 votes. Tony will have a tough time winning this race in my mind.

Tony Strickland is old news. He won't win because people see how insincere he is. I'd vote for anyone but Strickland. After all didn't he endorse Dantona in the supervisors race and than pull his weak endorsement off to support Foy. I think that only helped Dantona.

ISH to the idea of Ropespierre as the nom de plume for local democrats.

How about James Carville?

Dantona would definitely get my vote over Strickland. Dantona actually gives a damn about the people in this district. Strickland would be in it just for skimming campaign cash and sticking it to the taxpayers.

Even though I am unsure of who I would like to run for Senate, I would love to see a race of any kind between Dantona and Strickland. Dantona knows how to play hardball. It would make opening up the AM paper an entertaining event as well.

I would be interested in Linda Parks running for a higher position, possibly go up against Audra Strickland.

Tony Strickland seems to be losing his punch. He gave the nominating speech but couldn't get Mike Osborn elected as Treasurer of the county chairman's club at the convention in Sacramento.

A full page of people writing under pen names saying they want Dantona to run...

But no real names. I wonder why?

Lets not even dignify this discussion with has been, ineffective political hacks. There are viable candidates in this community and none of their last names start with "S". The dems seem to have the early position unless the R's can find someone not completly insane.

I'd love the way Dantona fights. Can you imagine what he could do with Strickland? Like someone else said, it would make reading the morning paper fun!

Something for the next S19 wanna-be to consider when he/she comes looking for east valley votes....

I bet McClintock, Becerra, and The Stricklands will all get together and make a deal for who will run for what.

Maybe Democrats will get their act together and end the Strickland machine locally. Starting with the VCOE and going towards Conejo schools.

Truth is, the Dems don't need to do much of anything; the GOPers have proven to voters that despite the myth they are NOT fiscally responsible, guardians of ethics & morality, protectors of law & order nor have any of their highly touted pocket book issues done anything but taken from the most and given to the few.

Mr Foy won locally because the VCCRC pulled threw everything they had into squeeking by a Dem in a heavily conservative area. The voters won't be fooled a second time.

WE DON'T NEED TONY OR AUDRA STRICKLAND

Well I don't normally respond in blogs but as someone who was deeply disappoineted in the outcome of the Dantona-Foy race I need to chime in. I was at one point a registered Republican I am a member of the chamber of commerce and of rotary and voted for Ronald Regan who I believe ranks as the greatest president ever. I am however one who changed my party reg to DTS because of Tony Stickland. He and his wife pay each other with campaign money, maybe not illegal but unethical, take a million dollars from casinos and then say they don't want indian gaming. I consider myself a concerned citizen on the enviroment yet Tony Stickland supports off shore oil drilling anywhere on California's coast. I'm sorry but Tony Strickland would be a bad choice for everyone, take it from a lifelong Republican now a Declined to State. I've had it with the hypocritical right wing that preaches one thing then does another. Oh yes Tony in case you're wondering I am an evangelical belonging to Grace Brethern church. I know the election is a good time from now but I just can't support Tony Stickland and had to say my piece.

The Republican race is going to be brutal, allowing any Democrat a much easier chance to get some steam built up going in to the General. You have to consider though, if the County Supervisor's seat was considered difficult for Dantona due to Rep-Dem ratio, the Senate seat is an absolute nightmare. Besides Simi and Moorpark, now you get TO, Santa Clarita and Buellton... Sorry, no Dem could win no matter what kind of fight.

I only hope that we finally get a moderate voice representing us, because no resources are going to come our way with a semi-Dem Governor and Dem legislative body. Who else is in from the Reps? You also have to consider that Elton should be leaving at the same time. Who goes for Senate? Who goes for Congress? Simi Councilman Becerra has to be gunning for one - though the wake-up call he'll get with his background should be interesting. McClintock will probably be in Congress race. Does Audra go Senate, while Tony goes Congress? Could the useless Peter Foy jump in the race thinking he has a place to run from now? That would be hilarious as all those who backed him in his race wouldn't be pressured to back him this time. The other Reps would cut him to shreds, but his ego is big enough to think he might be able to win.

No Dem can win either race, but will be fun to watch the cat fight in the Reps.

Hey,
I just got back from the Republican State Convention and guess what the news on the floor was? Glen "I've done absolutely nothing" Baccera is thinking of running against Tony "Slide the $$ in the back pocket" Strickland in the Republican primary for state senate. It appears republican leadership is quite unhappy with Tony and Audra. In a leadership meeting held during the convention the word was the 19th Senate District is not a safe republican seat anylonger and they fear Tony, Audra or Glen would be weak candidates. Meanwhile flyers were being handed out on the floor and at the hotel promoting Glen for the seat. We need to do better than them. I think most republican observers believe it isn't safe republican anymore. Dantona's name was brought up as someone who could (with leadership help) beat any one of those three. After meeting with leadership I agree SD 19 is not a safe republican seat. We can't afford Tony, Audra or Glen.

What on Earth are you talking about "Tony"?

A background check of Councilman Becerra will show nothing but years of fighting for Simi Valley. Your attempt at whispering that there must be something else is pure slime. I am betting you won't back it up.

Tony,
Hope you're right about a Democrat, and the joke republicans we have. Republican leadership believes the reg has changed so much we need a strong candidate to win that seat. Republicans fear that Democratic Leadership has nowhere else to find a competetive senate race, and put their money in SD 19. I also think the Presidential race will be important in the senate race. Interesting % in the last Presidential race in SD 19, Bush 49% Kerry 47%.

If any flyer exists that was pumping Glen Becerra for state senate send it to me and I will post it.

I will give credit or keep your name out of it. Whatever you want.

Brian Dennert

To Question:

You obviously are privy to the same info the rest of us in Glen's 'hood are. I am sure a "background check" today would turn up nothing, as that has been scrubbed pretty clean.

But you know as well as I, Mr. Becerra's record is anything but clean. Elton obviously wasn't comfortable with it either, because as he was trying his end around democracy, Mr. Becerra wasn't even ready to pounce. Why has Elton abandoned Glen? You think all those skeletons will stay buried in an extremely heated primary. I don't.

It is a real shame that Dantona is not our County Supervisor. He would have represented us fulltime and not been an absentee supervisor the way Foy is. He also would have worked for what the people wanted and not what the extremist VCRCC wants.

Well now I hear Glen Beccera is trying to run against Tony Strickland. Whats next Sandi Webb throws her hate in the ring. Not a bad idea I actually like Sandi and she truly believes in less government. I think a number of republicans will throw their hat in the ring. The latest name is Jeff Gorrell who ran against Audra Strickland. I think we are a long way from election day but it's good for moderate republicans to see so many choices. Not to leave Dantona out he would be a threat to any of the above hell he knocked out a republican incumbent and almost beat a second reublican (Lost by only 800+ Votes)all in one election cycle. I think the Fire has just begun, hang on for the ride.

CAPC (California Association of Political Centrists) will be developing a candidate ranking system this year to be used in many of the upcoming races. A candidate will have to do more than just "announce" they are a centrist to receive a positive ranking. Their history of votes, public service, willingness to put community above personal ambition, ability to reach across the aisle when needed to solve our problems - all will affect candidate ranking. These will be posted and publicized by web site as part of our voter education campaign.

Tony, please no more double-speak. If you are going to level charges against someone, don't tip-toe around the issue. In plain-speak, tell us what specific "skeletons" exist in Glen Becerra's closet???? We really should know...

Tony, you are quite wrong when you make the statement that "no Dem can win either race".

The numbers in SD19 are very competitive. We are going after that seat with everything we've got. Count on it.

Damn the torpedoes.

You are right "Interested" you deserve to know what skeletons are in Mr. Becerra's closet, but Mr. Becerra also has the right to come out with them himself. I guarantee you if Mr. Becerra doesn't come forward with them himself and decides to run - you'll get to know about them.

Laura it will be interesting if the Dems go after the 19th. Heck if it ends being a moderate then it will be welcome. Our District could use the attention and resources that a member of the majority might garner.

Being close to the supervisor race, i know that Mike Osbourn and the republican party only released a SMALL SMALL portion of what Dantona's past really entails. There is too much Republican money and now that the republicans know that Dantona has no ethical line that he wont cross. He stands 0 chance against anyone the Reps decide to put in their.
Dems need a younger passionate leader that speaks from the heart to win in this place. Not an old time Liberal Lobbiest saying whatever it takes to win.
Does anyone have anyother suggestions besides Dantona? Then we can beat the stricklands

It is indeed shocking that Osbourn has so much more dirt against Dantona that wasn't used. It looked to me like even the kitchen sink was thrown at him. Oh, perhaps he rented an adult video or maybe even used profanity. Heavens, thank goodness they didn't use all they had. They won by only 800 votes. Was Osbourn that sure of his polling that he would hold back on a race that was so very close? I don't think so. Dantona would once again make a great candidate who would make the Stricklands shake in their boots.

I think about the only real dirt on Dantona has been generated by a small contingent of unhappy Republicans in the East County - the same ones that keep pushing Elton, Bercerra, etc and try to destroy any new Republican meat that surfaces. Some of these same Republicans hate the Stricklands so it will be real interesting if there is a Strickland/Dantona run-off. Like what would Bob Larkin do if the Lincoln Club had to give substantial money to the Stricklands?

Don't give Osbourn so much credit for anything - he is a puppet. He likes people to think he operates on his own, but he doesn't. Never has and never will.

I don't know John that I would go so far to say that Dantona has 0 chance against any Rep thrown out there. The Stricklands and Becerra have equal if not more baggage than Dantona does - just because you don't know it yet or choose to ignore it, doesn't mean it is not there. It definitely is.

It shouldn't be about that though, as long as you are only referring to the personal stuff. The discussion needs to revolve around the issues of the State. Besides, moving outside the immediate sphere of influence that Mr. Becerra and the Stricklands currently have - it's a toss up (with only Tony Strickland) maybe having some name ID as far at the Santa Barbara areas.

I say BULLSHIT to the idea that Osborn has Xfiles on Dantona. He was on the verge of LOSING that race to Dantona, and in fact LOST it on the ground at the polls. He got lucky with the ultraright absentees. He threw every bit of mud that he and his hired gun, pretty boy Duane, could dream up. And when that wasn't enough, they brought in a semi loaded with kitchen sinks to throw.

Strickland has plenty of name recognition up in Santa Barbara. Unfortunately for him, it's all bad.

John - Dems have no one other than Dantona. Democratic Party is so pathetic in the area you have no reserves. No other electeds in the area and the rest are simply gadflys (like the ones on this blog). Reps have nothing to fear. John don't work on who could win, start with anyone who could even run. Reps have a fully loaded pro team and Dems have one player and a bunch who constantly put their name on the ballot to lose. Good luck.

I just can't get over all the political double-talk in these forums. As someone who participated regularly in the discussions during the 4th District Supervisor campaign I remember all the Dantona faithful declaring that the absentee votes were going to carry Dantona to victory. Many of his supporters said that these voters were the undecided who, after hearing the debate, would overwhelmingly vote for Dantona. When it was learned that a large number of absentee ballots were dropped off at the polls the Dantona supporters claimed that these were more intelligent voters who waited until the end to get all the facts and that they would ultimately support Dantona. It was, supposedly, the early absentee voters that were the loyal right-wing extremists, but the later absentee ballots were from thinking, educated voters.

Yet in the end a solid majority of the absentee ballots fell in favor of Foy. Now all I hear from the Dantona camp is the gripes about all the "ultraright absentees" that tilted to elected toward Foy.

Please at least try and get your stories straight. The propaganda on this site is incredible. Had the Dantona won by even one vote, his supporters would have proclaimed that voters had made an enlightened, informed choice. But because he lost the Dantona supporters have condemned local voters as a bunch of right wing extremists. Give me a break.

Maybe its as simple as this. 4th district voters participated in a democratic process to decide who was the best candidate to represent them. In the end they elected Peter Foy. That is how democracy works folks.

And for those who want to gloat over Foy's slim margin of victory, don't forget that Dantona lost to a newcomer and political unknown. Winning McClintock's senate seat will be a formidable challenge for any democrat, and something far more difficult for a guy like Dantona to pull off. I'm not saying he can't win, but I think his chances were much better in the Supervisor's race.

Well said Bubba.

Tony - We are still waiting for a real response, not some song and dance. If you are going to level accusations at someone you better be specific. So what is in Glen's closet that he should be so afraid of? You brought it up, so please finnish it. Or are you the one who is afraid of getting sued for libel? Seems to me you are just trying to smear someone - no real story, just smear and run tactic. We need the truth, not dirty politics. Come clean!

I know what is in Glen's closet. Do you really want to know? Peter Foy is hiding in there, okay. Glen supported Foy, even though Foy has no business being a County Supervisor, as the guy cannot put two words together and does nothing unless he gets clearance from Osbourn and Strickland, the guy is a hand puppet. Glen must live with the fact he helped elect this bum!

I attended an event for Foy after he beat Mikels. He said to me " Glen Becerra and Paul Miller had endorsed him and, "what's those other peoples names?" I responded Foster and Sojka, his response "oh yeah, right I am sure they will endorse me too"

I was perplexed that someone who was running for County Supervisor and lived in SV did not even know who our City Council Members were.

Even more peculiar was that before he ran, they didn't know him either. I still can't understand how a person that has never been active in his own community becomes their leader.

I guess it all comes down to money and party politics. How sad.

I sure hope voters wake up and do their research of candidates for future elections instaed of having someone pay to do it for them. We know what the consequences will be, the better advertiser, fundraiser and more wealthy person generally wins.

Had Dantona had an extra $100000 and volunteers to walk precencts, for the final push I think he could have won.

These slime tactics are really tiring. I would hope that people in this blog would like to engage in an intelligent debate of the candidates and issues instead of continually relying on innuendo, name calling, or unproven accusations to tear people down. This race hasn't even started yet the political rhetoric is already out of control. How disappointing. It should be no surprise why so many qualified people are reluctant to run for political office.

I believe that had Dantona lightened up a bit on Mikels in the primaries he could have beat Foy. Dantona came on too strong and dirty right out of the gate, that turned many of Mikels supporters against him, they would vote for anyone other than him. There were several mailings he did about Mikels that really turned me off, I began to think geez I wouldn't vote for anyone that was using character assassination of his opponent, why couldn't he focus on his positive atributes and accomplishments.

I always say don't tell me what the other person hasn't done tell me what you HAVE DONE. I am smart enough tolook at the history of an incumbent.

I agree with Dirty Games. In my opinion it all came down to whether voters trusted Dantona versus Foy. There were a lot of people turned off by some of those nasty political flyers, especially during the primary. I heard comments about Dantona's sleazy campaign tactics from many people, and read the same in numerous letters to the editor during the course of the campaign. In such a tight race it may have been the difference. In retrospect I believe that Dantona would have won if he had focused his efforts on a positive message instead of trying to convince us to vote against the other guy.

But I guess all this stuff is moot. Hopefully it is a lesson learned so that next time he runs he can, hopefully, keep the campaign out of the gutter.

I think the real problem is that Dantona had too many angry, extremist liberals like notbubbakidd involved in his campaign, which is why he lost.

Or the other hand the angry extremist Liberal have control of the Senate and the House and in 2008 after the Rebublicans continue to lead us deeper and deeper into a failed Iraq policy and continue to try to cut veterans benifits and continue to deny the existance of global warming and continue to try to destroy social security, the Democrats are going to run the whole f***ing thing and there will be more people belonging to the Whig Party that the sorry a** Republican Party.

Go ahead...go down with the ship, we're better off without you.

Or the other hand the angry extremist Liberal have control of the Senate and the House and in 2008 after the Rebublicans continue to lead us deeper and deeper into a failed Iraq policy and continue to try to cut veterans benifits and continue to deny the existance of global warming and continue to try to destroy social security, the Democrats are going to run the whole f***ing thing and there will be more people belonging to the Whig Party that the sorry a** Republican Party.

Go ahead...go down with the ship, we're better off without you.

I am amazed at Bubba. You still think the Mikels stuff was dirty. Judy Mikels was spending 1/2 her time in Arizona. In fact, somebody e-mailed me a quote from a Arizona newspaper where Judy is quoted as a member of her HOA board. (http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/167022 - last comment of article) Do you think that she just got on the board after she left the County? Probably not. People knew her around there because she was spending a good deal of her time there. Her former chief-of-staff is hired as the special projects manager at Waste Management. To work on what? Waste Management's project with the County. Hmmm, I wonder if he had any special contacts in the County Supervisor's office. This woman was Nixon-esque. If Dantona didn't bring up these issues Judy would have won with more than 50% of the vote. Damned if you do and damned if you don't.

The Dems are advancing in Senate District 19. So Bubba you may want to do the research first. In fact, the race for a Dem is easier than trying to run through the right-wing nightmare known as Simi and Moorpark (difference in Supervisor's seat: Democrats to Republicans is nearly 18% more Rep, Senate is 3-4% more Reps). The Bush catastrophe will serve as boom to moderate candidates like Dantona or any other moderate Dem.

"I like to watch."

So, what ARE the issues of concern to Senate 19? My top three would be Rocketdyne, our East-West traffic corridors and the Sacramento trend towards phony budgets combined with credit card spending...not necessarily in that order. There are plenty of other issues but these are three that should be able to be tackled with will power rather than a lot of money.

PS...and let's NOT forget about the coming increases in tax...er, "FEES", that will be hitting our pocketbooks to pay for the Terminator's proposed redistribution of (middle class) wealth.

I guess Gary misses the days of "honest" budgeting under Gray Davis.

Let's see, McClintock just wrote an op-ed calling Arnold a liar over his proposed budget saying it was not balanced and Arnold was lying and Audra Strickland just wrote an op-ed saying Arnold's health plan sucks because it would hurt the businesses that finance her campaigns, but oh yeah, it's Gray Davis's fault. Get a life BubbaK!

I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy of some of the regulars on this site, like gs and notbubbakidd, who continually whine about Arnold but ignore the fact that it is the democrats that control the state senate and the legislature, and it is a former democratic governor who managed to build up a $36 billion budget deficit. But none of that matters because in the end they ignore the facts and selectively play the blame game.

The truth is that Arnold has played the same games that Gray Davis did while in office. But an honest person would recognize that and at least be fair in placing the blame on both parties and not on any one person or political party. But honesty is something hard to come by these days, especially from some of the regulars on this site.

BK, maybe you can get past the grudge you have against me (presumably a spillover from some run-in you had with my wife and which you've issued veiled threats against twice on this blog) and tell us what issues are of concern to you. Hysteria or not, I've shown my hand, its time for you to stop with the personal jibes and show yours.

I have never issued threats, veiled or otherwise, against your wife or anybody else. Mentioning your wife's occupation cannot in any way be construed by any reasonable person as a threat. The fact that you repeatedly try to fabricate false allegations against me and others demonstrates your complete lack of ethics.

For those on this blog who might be curious how Gary Selvaggio dreamed up his "veiled threat" accusation, here is a brief transcript of how all this got started. You can also click the link below to read the full text of the conversation.

----------------------------------
Gary, I'm really surprised at you. You haven't answered any of my specific questions about Danton's position on public safety. I'm not going to participate in mudslinging against Mikels or Foy. The issue is Jim Dantona and why anybody should vote for him. You've yet to give me a good reason and instead keep trying to change the subject back to Mikels and Foy.

As a school teacher I can only hope that your wife sets a better example than you. I'm really disappointed.

Posted by: Bubba at May 12, 2006 11:03 AM
----------------------------------
Speaking of myself & my family, Bubba. Because I dont know who you are your post of 10:55, earlier today now takes on a different possibility. You werent making some veiled threat against my family, were you?

Posted by: gs at May 12, 2006 01:12 PM
----------------------------------
On the issue of "veiled threats", I never threatened anybody and it certainly was not my intention to imply anything of the kind. If you took it that way then I apologize since it was not my intention.

Posted by: Bubba at May 12, 2006 02:27 PM
----------------------------------

Gary has repeatedly twisted this conversation to accuse me of making a "veiled threat" against his wife, simply because I mentioned her occupation. When he first brought this up as an issue I responded in just over an hour to clarify that my comment was not intended to be a threat and I apologized if he had interpreted it that way.

The real issue here is that Gary will sink to any level to fabricate allegations against others. That has been demonstrated repeatedly by the false accusations he has leveled against Judy Mikels, Peter Foy, and even the members of Cornerstone Church.

Those are the facts. Read it for yourself.

Hey BK, how about your post that suggested that if I and my wife continued to support Dantona, it would cause problems for us? Mentioning my wife's occupation AND such a comment in the same post can easily be taken as a threat. And you didn't so much apologize for that comment as much as told me I was nuts to consider it a possible threat.

Besides, what accusations do you still consider false?

Bubba - you do amuse me. Ocassionally you come up with valid points, but then you ruin it by not seeing your double standard. You are repulsed by this negative campaigning, but only when its against the candidate you are supporting or you aren't using the negative comment to support your point.

You call anybody who debates an issue with you, a mud slinger, when they are bringing up valid points/facts. You seem to ignore points of facts when they impede your argument.

I think you have made valid arguments before, but you have a tough time staying on point. Gary never said anything about Gray having a good budget. He simply said Arnold didn't - so why argue with Gray's budget? That has nothing to do with the argument, nor does party. Again Gary made no reference to Dems or Reps, yet you immediately change the tone and the line of the argument. Then you criticize others for mud slinging or not staying on topic. You would be better served to argue with facts, consistent line of arguing and practice what you preach.

Gary, please provide detailed quotes and a link to show where I suggested that you and your wife's support for Dantona "would cause problems" for you. Since you like to throw around accusations I'd like you to back it up with some facts. It should be pretty easy to do if it is the truth.

Gary also states in his last post, "And you didn't so much apologize for that comment as much as told me I was nuts to consider it a possible threat".

But just look at my response:
On the issue of "veiled threats", I never threatened anybody and it certainly was not my intention to imply anything of the kind. If you took it that way then I apologize since it was not my intention.
Posted by: Bubba at May 12, 2006 02:27 PM

No apology? Once again Gary plays fast and loose with the facts and has trouble being truthful.

I'll say it again. I never made any kind of threats, veiled or otherwise, against anyone. I challenge Gary to provide the quotes and link backing up his accusations.

Gary also wanted stated, "Besides, what accusations do you still consider false?"

There are so many to chose from, but I'll give one example. During the Dantona/Foy campaign Gary Selvaggio made a blanket accusation against members of Cornerstone Church. He accused some church leaders of being "despicable liars" and alleged that congregation members were being pressured by some church leaders to vote for Peter Foy in exchange for his Foy's support for a new church on Tierra Rejada. He accused church members of practicing "extremist" politics and using using "faith as a tool to achieve the political agenda of a few hypocrites". Unlike Gary, I'm willing to provide direct quotes to back this up:

-------------------------------------
Despicable liars! I've just heard from a member of CornerStone Church that the congrgation is being told to vote for Peter Foy because Jim Dantona is opposed to them building a new church on Tierra Rejada. She says they've been told time and time again, not from the pulpit but from lay leaders within the congregation, that only Foy will approve their plans and that Dantona is against new church building.

This is the sort of extremist politics you get when you vote for a member of the CNP. Its despicable and its morally wrong to use Faith as a tool to achieve the political agenda of a few hypocrites. If anyone knows members of the CornerStone Church, please set them straight and let them know who their REAL enemy is.

Posted by: gs at November 2, 2006 07:24 AM
-------------------------------------
1) The despicable liars are the ones spreading these rumors at the Church. I don't even believe Mr Foy is doing it but those who are are playing extremist politics with that Church.

2) The rumors are NOT being spread by Pastor Chan, they are being spread by certain members.

Posted by: gs at November 2, 2006 08:50 AM
-------------------------------------

Those were reckless, false allegations. Gary Selvaggio never provided any information to back up these charges, and the reason is because they are lies. Furthermore, Gary Selvaggio has no business lecturing others about aplogies since he has never once apologies for defaming a highly respected local church and its membership.

You can read the entire exchange by clicking on the link below.

I'm really confused now. I thought it was Calvary Church in Westlake or TO that was so involved with Foy's run for office - I think they were the ones who also sponsored the School District(s) forum during church hours. Clarification anyone?

And Grace Bretheran in Simi Valley. I know many parishoners/parents of students there that were talking about the Pro-Foy stuff that was circulating there.

Listen, it was one of his main constituencies and they worked voted in gigantic numbers for him. It is the Rove strategy of getting them to vote from the pulpit. Not complaining about it, but that's just how it is. You want to go up against the religious right, know that they are going to use that to their advantage. The middle has to find their outlet to use to their advantage - part of politics, if the middle wants to survive.

Tony, what a perfect lead-in for a plug for our organization (CAPC)which is geared for the broad middle represented by the best of both parties. We don't advocate the creation of a third party, but the reclaiming of the existing parties. Those that want more information can e-mail me directly at dteague1@adelphia.net.

I forgot about Grace Brethren - that church was also involved. I hope all the churches enjoy their tax exemption status while it lasts! I suspect there will be a crackdown pretty soon because parishioners don't like it.

Calvary Church had candidates come to introduce themselves during a church service, they did not endorse.

Cornerstone Church in SV did not endorse any candidate. Whenever you have a body of people that meet on a regular basis you will have sharing of opinions and beliefs it is in our nature to network. I have numerous friends that attend Cornerstone and Grace Bretheren, several helped my campaign, I recall that the people I knew were pretty split regardless of religious affiliation

Let's face it when we support someone or something and are passionate about it we will share that information with our network.

I have always encouraged people to go straight to the source to clear up understandings.

I don't think that churches and politics should mix. I'm opposed to churches using the pulpit to push political issues or candidates. At the same time, any accusations against an individual or organization should be substantiated with facts to back it up. If the charges against Cornerstone were in any way true I would be the first to take it up with Pastor Chan directly. But I believe that the allegations made against Cornerstone are completely unfounded with no evidence to back it up. Perhaps that is how some church organizations operate, but in my experience the leadership of Cornerstone Church has never engaged in that type of political activity.

If individual church members discuss their politics in the parking lot that is their own business. But specifically accusing church leaders of a particular church of being hypocrites, liars, and extremists with a political agenda is a pretty serious charge.

"Remember that the character of a man can often be measured by the company he keeps. You may not realize who I am, but I know you and your family. Think carefully about what you are doing."
Posted by: Bubba at May 12, 2006 10:55 AM

"I?m telling you that this smear campaign is a real turnoff. Listen to me before its too late, otherwise its at your own peril.
Posted by: Bubba at May 10, 2006 06:19 PM"

Threats? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe they were just the ramblings of a bitter person who's somehow developed a grudge against my family.

As for Cornerstone Church: I stand by my post. Some members of the Church DID spread lies about Dantona preventing them from building. As I stated, neither Foy nor Pastor Chan had anything to do with these lies. That same day I called Pastor Chan and on his message service I apologized for any problem those lies may have caused and to reassure him that I did not believe the Church itself was involved in those lies.

So, BK, give us another false accusation, since they're so many.

I don't know if you realize it Bubba Kidd but mentioning someone's wife in a conversation that isn't referring to them AND mentioning their occupation comes off as a cheap shot. I don't know if it is a cheap threat, but it isn't classy.

Keep it classy Simi Valley.

Impartial Observer is right. I should not have brought Gary's wife into the conversation, and it was unfair for me to do so. At the time I made it clear to him that I did not mean it as a threat, implied or otherwise, and I immediately apologized if he had taken it that way. I'll go further and apologize for even bringing her up at all. It was unfair and wrong, and I shouldn't have done it.

I will say that these repeated accusation that I'm making threats are a complete stretch of the imagination. In that context I was wrong to bring Gary's wife into the conversation. Still, no honest person could possibly believe that I was making threats, and I resent the continual insinuation by Gary I have been making threats against his wife and family. That is simply false.

Regarding Cornerstone Church, I believe that Gary owes the leadership of that church a huge apology. Unless he is willing to substantiate his accusations he should retract them. What he did was reckless and cruel. I noticed that he has revised his statement by now saying that "some members" of the church spread lies. That conflicts with his original allegations that it was church leaders who were liars, hypocrites, and using the pulpit to advance an extremist agenda.

I think Gary needs to come clean on this and his refusal to retract his statements is troubling, to say the least.

I think Bubba Kidd has gone out of his way to admit he was wrong.

There are two parts to the Cornerstone conversation as I see it. Tell me if I am wrong.

Some people were allegedly spreading rumors that one candidate, Peter Foy, would support construction of a church in a previously undeveloped area whereas the other candidate, Jim Dantona, was against building in that area. If you replace Cornerstone with local Boy Scouts the story has about the same weight. Any group could oppose or support a candidate based off of their beliefs about zoning alone.

Next to that was the idea that some members or rather leaders helped to spread that idea. I don't see what is wrong with that if one candidate supported that type of zoning. Maybe they were wrong but people had the right to be wrong. I take it that Gary thought that conservatives were pushing other conservatives based off of wrong information on zoning. Does it really seem like an evangelical church member would abandon the former treasurer of the Californian Christian Coalition only to come back over zoning? That seems hard to believe.

Nobody has said that it was ever done from the pulpit. With the many thousands of people that go through Cornerstone I don't think they should be offended. I would imagine they would be proud to be called a conservative church with a conservative Christian world view. I bet the average Cornerstone member voted for Peter Foy proudly and I don't see any scandal in that.

Maybe I missed something but how would this make the members hypocrites?

I would also imagine many types of political side conversations are held in a church that has thousands of members. Just like Americans of all types discuss important elections.

Casual conversations or debate amongst citizens wherever that may be should be encouraged. Not enough voters are well informed on the issues. This is not about being hypocritical. It's about money. Churches enjoy a huge financial benefit for not being involved in government (including organized political campaigns) and they run the risk of losing that benefit if they choose to participate in politics.

What use is religion if it doesn't touch upon reality? Why should religous leaders not be allowed to speak about politics? Does this only apply to Republicans? What about when Democrats speak at churches, why are they never denounced?

If true, speaking about the prospects for church expansion would be a very reasonable issue to discuss. Though I would be uncomfortable with churches explicitly endorsing candidates, I certainly think that religion should not be divorced from politics. Are believers supposed to leave their faith at the coatcheck? For believers the church's position on war and poverty, just to name two examples, would be extremely important. After all, the role of religion is to offer guidance in our lives, and as the Feminists taught us, "The personal is political."

Owen:

You just said why are should religious leaders not be allowed to speak about politics, then say your uncomfortable with churches explicitly endorsing candidates.

Care to explain this contradiction?

It was never an issue of political discussion within the church nor among its congregation. There is nothing wrong with that and the church members have every right to base their votes on matters that affect them. including the expansion of their church. Instead, the issue had to do with a small number of members spreading falsehoods in an attempt to sway opinions to support their own agenda. There was never any question of the Church or its pastor being involved.

If there is going to be a church discussion, what purpose would it serve to be led by lies?

There is a huge difference between churches talking about specific policies and saying that the membership should vote for a particular candidate. In large part because there is no way to predict what a person is going to do once in office.

GS: Obviously, if people are lying, then that's unacceptable. Moreover, I am completely unfamiliar with the facts in this particular matter, this being the first time that I've heard anything about it.

Owen: In short, my wife and I were contacted by a member of the church, very upset that she and others had been told by influential lay members of that congregation that if elected one candidate would not allow the church to expand but that if the other candidate were elected the expansion was assured. We've known this woman for many years and have no reason to believe she wasn't telling the truth.

I posted her concerns and described the trading of such falsehoods as despicable lies and, in that same post, assured readers that no church officials were involved in that lie. One of our fellow readers has cheaply attempted to "grab the dialogue" by insisting that I insulted the Church, its Pastor and (presumably, because she doesn't quite believe in its members' right to discuss politics and thus takes it as a dire insult to have someone mention that they do) the entire congregation.

First I think Gary needs to explain what specific "lies" were being told to his friend. If some church members honestly believed that one candidate would be more supportive of development of a site than the other candidate that does not make them "despicable liars" and "hypocrites" as Gary has depicted it.

Second, Gary keeps changing his story. Now he says that no church leaders were involved in spreading these "lies". But in prior posts he clearly referred to church leaders being involved in spreading lies, practicing "extremist politics", and "using faith as a tool to achieve a political agenda for a few hypocrites". He says he stands by his original accusation but at the same time he has clearly begun to substitute the word "members" for "leaders" in his more recent posts. If he stands by his original accusations as he claims, then he is still calling church leaders liars, hypocrites, and political extremists.

Finally, if members of a church discuss politics that is their own business. But Gary accused Cornerstone Church of something more sinister, which is an involvement by church leadership (or certain "influential" church members depending on the version of the story he is telling) in knowingly and deliberately spreading falsehoods to its membership.

So I'd like to know from Gary what specific "lies" were told. I'd like to know how he can stand by his original accusation against church leaders. And I'd like to know what specific statements were made by these individuals that makes Gary feel justified in accusing them of being liars, hypocrites, and political extremists.

Gary also requested to anyone that knows a member of Cornerstone Church to "set them straight and let them know who their REAL enemy is." So Gary, who is the "REAL" enemy?

I'd like to add that all I'm asking is that Gary retract his allegations against Cornerstone Church. It is possible that his friend had a political conversation with certain members of the church who may have tried to persuade her to vote for a particular political candidate. But I believe that Gary's accusations, labelling prominent and influential members of the church as being liars, hypocrites and political extremists, was more than a little over the top.

It may be something as simple as Gary just getting caught up in the emotion of the campaign and saying something that was an embellishment of the facts. Things like that happen. But the campaign is over, and to stubbornly stand by those types of false and inflammatory statements only damages your credibility.

As a member of Cornerstone Church I found your statements offensive and I believe that most, if not all, of what you claimed was untrue. I don't think that requesting a simple retraction is asking for too much.

Maybe Owen should tune into the world we live in aka W. world.

The only church busted for political talk that I remember is a liberal church!

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6100888

Somehow the entire Christian Coalition is fine but one little anti-bush church gets audited.

Bush is the new Nixon.

Anyone notice the PR offensive the last couple of days on how safe Simi Valley is?

This past year, I posted somewhere on this blog about the impacts of big box growth on increasing police response times.

The article states emergency times are at 4.4 minutes. The goal is an average of 4 minutes. In 2000, Simi's response was 3.4 minutes to emergency calls.

If this trend continues, we'll be close to 5 minute emergency response times by 2010.

Lastly, the police department released some figures stating property crime is down while violent crime in Simi Valley is up. I'm interested to see where the FBI safest city list puts Simi...

What you left out was that the same article stated that Simi Valley had expanded its police force from 45 to 53 officers in just the past three years. The city has also upgraded equipment for its officers, including the addition of a new call center.

Your argument doesn't hold water because it assumes a zero sum game where big box retailers generate additional crime but don't contribute any offsetting value to the city. What you are conveniently ignoring is all the additional sales tax revenues that provide additional revenue to city, allowing them to expand the police force and fund a wide variety of additional programs. It is no coincidence that the city was suddenly able to afford new equipment and add eight full-time officers right after the Simi mall was completed.

Couldn't you also make the argument that the mall increases crime, violent or otherwise? As the increase in people from other regions now flow in to the City and do not share in the care for the community as its residents do. Furthermore, the City had not realized the tax gain to implement these new officers, it simply took general fund monies and added police. So let's not credit the mall with successes it is not due. Though the mall seems to be a success, so far.

Though to your point Bubba, I do agree that new development commercial/residential is important for a successful city. For if a City is not growing, its dying. Maintaining an even balance between growth and resources to limit crime and other strains on service will be difficult since we do not live in a vacuum and Los Angeles is on our Eastern border. Crime and growth pressures will surely become increasingly important and a Council led by Miller and Becerra is not necessarily in our best interest.

Bubba--

You can't say my argument doesn't hold water and then fail to even address the facts of my argument at all. You may be able to pull that kind of slide of hand BS with Dantona's groupies, but this is a different matter.

Fact-- in 2000, emergency times were 3.4 minutes, now according to the article they are 4.4 minutes.

That's a full minute higher than in 2000.

That's great they have more officers.

That's great they have more equipment.

But again, you didn't address the performance question at all in your argument and instead just made a groundless opinion to say my argument didn't hold water.

Are you saying 4.4 minutes is acceptable, when it was 3.4 minutes before?

During an emergency what can happen in 1 minute?

"Bubba"

The mall came in Oct. 2005. You said officers have been added for three years, then you said they were able to add 8 officers right after the mall came in.

Why should we trust your argument when you can't even complete a post without contradicting yourself?

Bam Bam--

I think that's a cheap shot on Bubba. We all understood what he was getting at. I don't think he meant it to be contradictory the way your are casting it...

"Samson"

I think if someone can't even get their facts straight in a post, we have no business taking them seriously.

The article says 8 officers were added in 3 years and Bubba wants to make it seem like as soon as the mall opened the city was able to add 8 officers. That is factually inaccurate.

Bam Bam--

All your doing is taking people's words on this blog to create contradictions to make the person look bad. That's just a little John Stewart magic where they take a politician and piece their arguments together to make them look like fools.

While I see that Bubba said three years, then said right after the mall opened comment, I don't think it's relevant to the main points we are writing about.

"Samson"

I think Bubba's contradiction means everything. Bubba's attributing growth in a police force to the production of sales tax revenue from the mall, when in fact the article said over a 3 year period.

Bubba's giving too much credit to the mall to fit his own conclusion rather than gathering facts to conclude a position. There is a huge difference.

His inaccuracy is like people who cherry-pick the news to fit their own pre-conceived ideological positions.

Gathering facts to fit your own pre-conceived conclusions is the essence of an ideologue. To me, his inaccuracy matters.

Bam Bam--

The focus should be on response times. The major change to our community in the last 10 years has been growth. Now we have to deal with the bad parts of growth such as increased response times for emergencies.

I'm not going to play these word-smithing games where people try to twist what I said. Any fair person knows the point I was trying to make, so I won't waste my breath debating Bam Bam.

In answer to Samson, any increase in response time is unacceptable. But there can be many reasons why response time numbers can vary. I haven't seen any information that leads me to the conclusion that the increased response time can be directly attributed to the creation of the new mall. It may be one factor, but there could be many others as well. Perhaps there is a relationship, but I have seen no data to back it up. But on the whole the response time in the city is still very good. Is there room for improvement? Of course. And just because we have seen an increase in response time does not necessarily mean it is a trend that will continue.

The same goes for crime figures. Year-to-year we see crime statistics that fluctuate. But Simi still remains a relatively safe city. Some years the crime numbers go up and some years they go down. My point is that when crime goes up in the city one year doesn't mean we should interpret it as a long-term trend.

Bubba--

At least we can agree that Bam Bam is taking writer's words to claim a contradiction where it was not intended. Just to clarify, I never singled out the mall, nor claim a direct cause between crime and the mall.

My opinion is there is a direct correlation between big box growth in communities and declines in services. I have read this in many places and if I come off a little over-vigilant about it, so be it.

A lot of promises have been made on how big box growth will help our community and I intend to point out trends I see. Service Matters.

To my knowledge there is no study of Simi Valley that says what I'm saying, but absence of evidence is not proof of a contrary view. There are studies of other communities and I'll put them here that show the impacts of the the type of growth we are seeing here and the impact on the community.

The problem I see is a lethargic reaction. Well, crime is up this year, it'll be down the next or up, who cares. I don't agree at all, we need to be 100% vigilant in getting to scenes quickly and stamping it out fast.

I believe that our city takes crime very seriously and is always looking to make improvements in trying to keep our community safe. I'm not trying to say that we have become lethargic with regard to crime, in fact I believe it is quite the opposite. But statistics are, well, statistics. It all depends on what you are measuring and how you are measuring it. The important thing is to look for long-term trends and get a sense of the overall picture without making too much out of statistical variations.

Regarding the big box argument you are making, I'd love to see some information on that if it is available. Actually we may not be that far apart on our views of big box retailers. However, the way taxes are divided up in this state creates a perverse incentive for local communities to rely on increasing sales tax revenues. What we really need to address is how money is distributed in the state between local governments and the state government. Unfortunately there is a lot of money at stake and very litte incentive for those that control the money to give it up.

"Bubba"

You won't waste your breath debating your contradiction because your wrong. Why don't you take responsibility for your mistatements like you lecture everyone else to do on this blog?

"Samson"

You have no proof of what your saying is true, just raising a stink over a recent news article. You are also cherry-picking facts to support your angst at big box retailers.

I think there are a litany of articles on the impacts of big box stores rather than focusing on developing a strong local business structure. There is an article on this link that evaluates WalMart's impact on police costs.

I don't really want to get into a bash walmart thing, but wanted to point our some studies to take a look at.

I would like to see an evaluation done on how many calls are coming from residents, multi-family dwellings, small businesses, and Big Box stores...

Like I said, we've added a minute onto emergency response times since 2000. I pay the same taxes I did in 2000, probably more. Why do our residents deserve a slower time?

Bubba--

One more thought I'd like you to review for yourself.

In 2000, the city was either the safest or one of the safest large city in America.

We had a population according to the census of 111,351 and 40 police officers.

111,351/40= 1 police officer for every 2,784 residents.

According to the City's website, we have a population size of 122,485 and 53 officers

122,485/53 = 1 police officer for 2,311 residents.

We have more coverage per resident than we did when we were the safest city in America, yet our emergency response time has slowed to 4.4 minutes from 3.4 minutes in 2000.

How does that make sense? How can we have less to cover ie more boots on the ground per resident, yet have a slower response time?

Has anyone looked at how many comments have been posted regarding Jim Dantona running for State Senate. 93 as I write mine. If you look at Elton's or Becerra's blog you'll see it's quite a bit less. Dantona after losing by only 800+ votes is more of the Talk of the Town than the elected officials. Most comments in this blog are very favorable to Dantona, that says something about him. He is well liked by those of us who care about our city and county and know how much he has personally given to make this a better world. As a Republican I admire Dantona for his no nonsense way of campaigning. He has earned our respect and deserves our vote for State Senate.

That is a very interesting bit of information. I agree, it is troubling that we have improved the ratio of citizens to officers over the past seven years, yet our response time has actually dropped. It is hard to say why that is happening. Of course, just because you add new officers doesn't mean that they are actually assigned to patrol. It could be that we are adding staff into administrative positions and not putting cops on the street. I'm not saying that is necessarily the case, but a better comparison might be looking at the number of patrol officers that are available to respond to calls. Given that we have a new call center I would think that the additional investment in technology should have actually improved response time.

I know a few local police officers. Next time I have a conversation with one I'll ask their opinion on this.

I did check out your link. I'm a little wary of some of the information since it seems to be one of those bash Walmart sites. I'd prefer a source that is a little more objective.

We need Jim Dantona in an elected office here locally. Dantona would have won if he had not been out spent with big questionable bucks from the VCRCC.

Some of you guys just like to sit around and gripe about all the entrenched incumbents. The last election proves that change can happen if enough people are motivated. If Dantona is your guy why don't you have him challenge for a seat on the City Council, or maybe School Board? Stop whining about the VCRCC and rally behind your candidate. Just use your imagination and go for it. Otherwise you're just pissing in the wind and nothing more.

So Bubbak is saying the VCRCC does not have to play by the rules? Funny how guys like him only cry when someone else breaks the rules they don't like.

Put your money where your mouth is and ask Jim Dantona to run for City Council. Or find another candidate of your choosing. Otherwise you guys are nothing more than a bunch of whiners who sit around dreaming up conspiracy theories to excuse away your lack of ability to effect change. Just do it. I double-dare you.

Why would Dantona run for City Council?

There was going to be a competitor against Mr. Becerra and Ms. Foster last election, but all of sudden Keith Mashburn ends up not filing his paperwork for Council. Mysteriously the Mayor's planning commissioner steps down, Keith Mashburn is appointed in his place.

Was a deal made to run next time so that Mr. Mashburn didn't knock out the Mayor's appointee - Foster or better yet Becerra? Instead run against Barbra and Sojka to knock one of them off?

"I like to watch."

That's good advice Bubba. Let's get behind Dantona for Senate. I mean, why would we have Dantona run for City Council when we can send him to Sacramento, and take down a snot nosed little CENSORED FOR GOOD TASTE BY WEBMASTER like Tony Strickland while he's at it?

That's the spirit. Seriously, you should go for it. But I also think that someone should challenge the City Council incumbents. No sense in complaining unless somebody steps forward as an alternative. I'm all for voter choice.

Bubba,

How can you have voter choice when, not only at the City Council level but at all levels, when deals are made to subvert the process? Mashburn is going to run , Mashburn is not going to run. Larry Fried, and many others apply for Council opening, Michelle Foster is appointed on 4-0 vote. Nothing against Michelle, but nobody voted for any of the other candidates? Michelle who has never been on any City boards, Michelle who is simply a business owner and in the Rotary, got all 4 votes? Larry Fried, Becerra's appointment to the Planning Commission, didn't even get Becerra's vote? Definitely a deal.

Gallegly's last minute "I'm not running" to clear the field for Congress, , Gallegly re-elected and trying to figure out how to do it again next time.

The voter will rarely have choice, if they get a choice, only a choice approved by the networks. Sad but true.

It is true that Michelle Foster was appointed to the Council. However she ran for re-election unopposed. If people in this community are unhappy with her appointment they should find someone to run against her. Nobody has a right to complain about her appointment after her position on the Council has been affirmed through an uncontested election. We have a democratic process, but if people choose not to participate they get what they get.

The real issue here is not that the process is being subverted. The issue is that people are not participating in the process.

BubbaK lives in a far right wing fantasy world. He would be the first one slinging mud at anyone who challenged the power structure in Simi who had not been blessed by the VCRCC! The City Council in Simi always appoints because they do not want to take their chances in a general election. Once they appoint, that person has access to thousands of dollars from developers for their campaign, challengers get zilch!

All I've done is try to encourage people to get involved in the process. If you want change that is how it happens. But there are those that would prefer to sit around and make excuses, dreaming up ridiculous conspiracy theories and leveling personal attacks against others. That is your choice, but it still won't accomplish anything. In the end it just makes you irrelevant.

Bubba,

Michelle ran unopposed because the Mayor took care of the competition. I was looking forward to helping Mr. Mashburn in his Council race (even though I don't think he's the best option), when I found out after the deadline that he did not file his paperwork.

He then gets appointed by the Mayor to the Planning Commission, doesn't look suspicious Bubba?

Should there have been more willing to run? Yes, but there were many reason to be intimidated to not run. First, you have to raise $50,000 to make a real run. Most of that money will be funneled to Becerra and Foster (by the Mayor). Second, if you are a male taking on Becerra, Foster and Mashburn, that would be 3 males against 1 female, Foster locks up one spot in that scenario. Who gets the last spot? Mashburn by pulling papers first put himself in the driver's seat. In the end Mashburn bails out and is rewarded with a position to run from next time out. Subverted process. Agree? Disagree? That is reality.

As much as i normally disagree with BK...she's absolutely right. If you don't like the council makeup, then get out and help others get elected. If you feel there's reason for a recall, get out and help get signatures. If you don't like what the council's up to, get out and attend the council meetings. Write letters. Make phone calls. Get organized and knock on doors. Donate a few bucks to alternative camdidates. If you have so much dirt on the council members, use it to make sure they become un-electable.

No one's gonna go up against a council member if the voters aren't interested in the race. It's simple as that.

Just because there is not oppossing candidates doesn't mean the councils approval ratings are at 100%.

Really, with lower response times, over crowded schools, higher violent crime, at least two gang shootings in the streets, all being ignored so that the hot dog vendor can be destroyed as public enemy number one you think the people are happy?

The council voted against free speech when they said only the well to do, connected to the property owning class, will have a chance at an election.

Bubba, I don't own big lots of land. Neither do my friends for the most part. But the council does. It gives them an advantage that is hard to overcome.

If Andrew Jackson were alive today he would challenge the entire council to a duel.

I'm not saying it will be easy to win a seat on the Council. I'm not even saying that it is a level playing field. But it wasn't that long ago that the same things were said about Judy Mikels and her seat on the Board of Supervisors. Yes, it is an uphill battle, but you'll never know if you can win if you never try. I hear a lot of complaints on this blog about our City Council. You guys can either continue to complain or actually go out and do something about it. Even a losing bid can shake things up by educating voters and brining important issues to the forefront. Debating the issues is a healthy part of democracy, but something that can never happen in a one-person political race.

As far as Mashburn is concerned, if he was willing to trade for a seat on the planning commission that is his business. I don't know if that is true or not. Still, there has to be more than one person in this town who is qualified to run for office. You can't pin all your hopes on one guy and then give up when he bails out.

BubbaK does not know what he is talking about as usual. All he knows how to do is defend those who are already in power because he is a typical right wing lemming.

I know Jim Dantona or his staff reads this and other blogs.

I just wanted to say thanks for fighting for Democratic values when others are afraid of getting beat up and getting their hair mussed.

We appreciate you.

City Council would be a big waste of time for Dantona's skills and contacts. This guy is perfect for Sacramento. Our District and City will be a far better place with Dantona in Sacramento working for us.

What about Dantona Jr. for either?

I am a 30 year lifelong Republican who voted for Jim Dantona because he was the only candidate to talk about the real issues. All Bubba does is bad mouth Dantona, but at least Dantona had the B____S to run for office and take all the hard punches of lies that you and your friends dished out. Bubba you've got a BIG MOUTH but you still hide behind a fake name. Why not have the B____S
to put your real name in as Dantona did and debate him on a level playing field. I beleive you are a scared little person who couldn't stand up to Dantona. Dantona lost a race that Republicans out numbered Democrats by 17 or 18% and lost by only 895 votes. What does that tell you. Dantona is liked by many Republicans for all his hard work for our community, what about you. So come out from hinding stop your name calling of Dantona and debate him head on you coward. Put your work for the community next to his and finally debate him head on.

Dantona is badly needed in our area. We need someone who will stand up for the little guy! In Simi we have a City Council that only answers to those with the bucks and they crush the spirit of the common person. We need JIM!

Not true NOt BubbaKidd..I answer to any and all who ask, bucks or no bucks....

And yes, Dantona is badly needed in our area. But that really scares some people.

Our committee has already met. All true Republicans will follow are orders without question. When we say right wing you will ask how far. We will support anyone if they have the scarlet R next to their name. But if they run for a nonpartisan dog catcher seat we will equate them with Al Queda and accuse them of raising dog taxes.

Forward march.

"Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'."

-- Bob Dylan

I ran into an friend this week who told me that Dantona is going to run for Senate. I googled his name and found this blog. Is it really true? I hope so. It's about time the Dems ran a take no prisoners candidate in this race. It will be a great day for the district when the Strickland legacy of mediocrity comes to an end, probably with a big whimper instead of a bang. Dantona can kick some azz.

This campaign would be at least a million dollars for any Democrat.

When Republicans nominate Strickland after Becerra forgoes the campaign it will be a perfect chance for Democrats.

We all know Becerra won't run. He despises campaigns as shown by his efforts to thwart campaigns in Simi Valley.

Besides there might be a rogue hot dog vendor in Simi Valley to track down. It takes effort to go from chasing down hot dog vendors to balancing the state budget.

I find it amazing how angry some people get that I don't post with my real name. But given how much they love to slander people and make personal attacks around here I don't have any interest in sharing personal information on this blog. I also find it interesting that those that angrily demand to know my real name also post using fake names. Pretty hypocritical I think.

I'm also amused that asking people to stop complaining and get involved in the process get such an angry response. It just goes to show that some people around here are only good for spewing hatred and anger and nothing more, too cowardly to come out of the shadows and expose their real beliefs.

Come, come now Bubba. Why is it when you post with a nom de plume, you're only protecting yourself from the unsavory elements that might frequent a Star blog, and seek to gleen personal information to slander your good name, but...

When another might be doing the same, they're hypocritical cowards hiding in the shadows and refusing to expose themselves for the pinko, communist, America hating, terrorist loving, tutu wearing, Big Mac consuming, Democrat loving, tree hugging ultra-liberal that they are?

Some of us are good at spewing and exposing ourselves. Oh no, wait, that would be Britney Spears. Nevah-mind...

Laura: Don't ever change!

Hi Gary. Speaking about spewing hatred, I'm still waiting for you to retract the lies you told about the leadership of Cornerstone Church. It is interesting that your liberal friends have no problem when you fabricate allegations agasint a local religious organization and refuse to back it up with any facts, but when I suggest that they stop making personal attacks against the City Council and simply get involved in the political process I get accused of being "a right-wing lemming". You and your friends are a real piece of work.

Don't wait too long, BK. I stand by what I said and after learning you're a member of Cornerstone, perhaps you'll help us with the facts and give us your name so I can ask those other members that came forward whether YOU are one of the liars. You see, me thinks the lady doth protesteth too much and I suspect YOU are one of those that were spreading the lies.

As for apologies, maybe you should ask a bit for yourself for bringing the Pastor and other church officials into all this, since it was clear from my first post that neither were involved. In your selfish attempt to grab the dialogue YOU decided to smear their good characters by implying they WERE accused of being involved. But that's now between you and them. Good luck with working it out.

That's another lie Gary. On November 2, 2006 you accused church leaders of being "despicable liars", you called them "hypocrites" and accused them of practicing "extremist politics" and using "faith as a tool to achieve the political agenda of a few hypocrites". You specifically stated that these lies came "from lay leaders within the congregation". These are not my words, they are yours.

It was you who brought church leaders into this, not me. It was you who made false allegations and then refused to back it up with any facts. If you have any spine at all you would be willing to provide the details that I asked for backing up your allegations. But you can't because they are not true, and yet you keep spinning more lies to try and cover your earlier lies. And when cornered you show your true colors by attacking in all directions to try and weasel your way out. But it is your own words that convict you Gary Selvaggio.

BK you're starting to whine like a little girl.
What's the matter, did GS pull your pigtails? Maybe that means he really likes you.

Sticks and Stones.

http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/vcs/dennert/archives/2006/04/simi_valley_day.html

Funny even after all these years.

Bubba Kidd is a real work of art. Gary calls a spade a spade and Bubba cries. Bubba calls Dantona every dirty name in the book and Bubba hides. Bubba is just a short generation from the white hoods and long robes burning crosses in the darkness. Fortunately, the Bubbas of the community are few and growing weaker.