Flashback: WWll Politicians

Since it's obvious that liberals have not ever learned that history repeats itself, here is a clever back-in-time flashback, using today's liberal idiot politicians, but instead of the War on Terrorism, here's how they would handle WWll. I found this on the Hot Air blog:

How about the Tranport-Back-In-Time Card to a war fought successfully in 1944 by Democrats and replace them all (exceptFDR) with 2006 Democrats.

Nancy Pelosi: “We never should have invaded Europe. Don’t you see that by fighting Germany we are only creating more Nazis.”

Wesley Clark: “FDR’s obsession with Hitler and Nazi Germany is a distraction diverting attention from the real enemy—Serbia.”

John Kerry “Those stupid, uneducated bastards (American Soldiers) have no chance against Hitler’s War Machine.”

John Murtha: “Those rapists, murderers and pillagers (American Soldiers) should not be turned loose on the poor, defenseless German population.”

Ted Kennedy: “FDR has failed to produce one scintilla of evidence regarding Germany’s WMD’s. Where are they? Where are they? FDR is a liar and a war criminal.”

Jimmy Carter: “It’s still not too late to admit we made a mistake and surrender before we suffer grievous war casualties.”

Howard Dean: “YEAHHHHHHHHHHARGH.”

But not to worry. Before all this “advice” the ‘NY Times’ has already leaked the D-Day War Plan to German Military Intelligence’ making defeat a foregone conclusion.

Are these the people you really want in charge on Nov 7?

*************

let's come up with a few of our own...

Bill Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman - Eva Braun."

Hillary Clinton: "It takes a party to raise a child."

John Kerry: "I voted for the war before I voted against it."

Al Gore: "I invented the war."

Cynthia McKinney: "President Truman or members of his administration have personally profited from the Normandy Invasion."

John Edwards: "We can't build enough prisons to hold all of the criminals or eventually there will be no black people left because they would either be in jail or dead." (real quote - I could not resist)

add your choice, political anti-war comments (to the comments section)

Fabian's Latest Shakedown Attempt

The Bee's Jim Sanders reported last week, Fabian Núñez has privately asked all 47 California Assembly Democrats to donate about $50,000 apiece to help pass a February initiative that would modify term limits and allow them more time in their current seats. Some lawmakers have greeted this as a shake-down – further undermining Núñez's ability to craft bills, such as a breakthrough on health care reform.

Sanders then followed up with a report that Núñez's wife, Maria Robles, is employed by a group, Californians for Patient Care, that has ties to the hospital industry that is trying to influence health care legislation. A few months ago, the California Hospital Association donated $100,000 to Proposition 93, the measure that will allow Núñez and others extra time in office.

If that weren't sordid enough, the Associated Press reported last week that Núñez shares a luxury penthouse in downtown Los Angeles with a fundraiser, Dan Weitzman, who has collected nearly $600,000 from Núñez's political committees and the state Democratic Party since 2005.

If this trend continues, Núñez will need to hire a crisis manager. We hear one is available in Sacramento for $275 an hour. Some might call that an excessive expenditure, but at least it would be a legitimate use of campaign funds.

A couple of the more relevant comments from readers of The Sacramento Bee wrote:

airfoilmod at 8:45 AM PST Friday, October 19, 2007 wrote:

Beg to differ

Nunez is not an idiot, he thinks we are. He's a slimy, presumptuous gas bag who
thinks he's invulnerable. He also is representative of how criminal enterprise works.
Shakedowns, lies, bribes, coercion, snarky smile, etc. A figurehead of democracy
with terminal disease. NO ON 93. No on legislation to benefit "legislators".

awk1 at 9:19 AM PST Friday, October 19, 2007 wrote:

The Simple Solution?

Vote No on Proposition 93. Nunez and Perata will be gone. At least until they can figure out another way to feed at the public trough. The sad reality is that there are plenty more bottom feeders waiting in line behind Nunez who will act the same way. Not much room for optimism...


**************
Fabian is nothing more than a crook. I am just hoping that his own party turns on him. Its about time the few remaining decent Dems in the party stand up for what they used to stand up for...

Go get 'em boys!

"Lavishgate" - the Fabian Nunez Scandal

There's an expression about crapping in your own nest... Fabian Nunez continues to poop in his nest but now he's got the ire of people who once supported him. I love it when they turn on each other.

The CA Term Limits Defense Fund has been thoroughly following "Lavishgate" up and down the state, from the LA Times, to The Sacramento Bee and The San Jose Mercury News. Here's more on the Nunez scandal:


Nunez's Conflict of Interest

Fabian Nunez is on the payroll of the lobby for California's hospitals. He's paid through his spouse so that the money goes into his personal bank account while he tries to maintain the fiction that his employer doesn't pose a huge conflict of interest. But now the California Nurses Association are calling out our ethically-challenged Speaker on his key role in negotiating an overhaul of California's health care system - an issue that affects every Californian - while profiting personally from one of the biggest interest groups at the center of this policy debate. Fabian's working for the hospital association - and himself - not the people of California.

This is another reason why term limits are so necessary - to prevent the accumulation of power and limit the opportunity for politicians to abuse their offices. Can you imagine how many different ways a Speaker Nunez if he was in office until 2014 would find to line his pockets if Prop. 93 passed?

Nurses group says Núñez has conflict

By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
Published 12:00 am PDT
Wednesday, October 17, 2007

The California Nurses Association demanded Tuesday that Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez abstain from voting on health-care legislation because his wife works for a nonprofit agency bankrolled by the hospital industry.
"Californians can no longer trust that he will represent the public interest and not the financial interest of a large industry that has put his wife on their payroll," Zenei Cortez, spokeswoman for the association and for the National Nurses Organizing Committee, said in a written statement Tuesday.
The Bee reported Tuesday that Núñez's wife, Maria Robles, was hired at a six-figure salary in January to serve as president of Californians for Patient Care, a Sacramento-based nonprofit agency that receives nearly all its funding from the California Hospital Association.
Link to full article

and there's more...

Nunez's Second Income - the Scandal Grows

As if we needed further confirmation, is there any doubt why Fabian Nunez is pushing Proposition 93 to cripple term limits and enable the termed-out Speaker to keep his post until 2014?

Nunez hasn't been just caught with his hand in the cookie jar - he's covered in crumbs. "Lavishgate" - as the San Jose Mercury News has dubbed the Nunez scandal - isn't just about the Speaker violating state law by using his campaign account for personal use, international travel, and luxury items (we're sure the clothes and shoes purchased in Sacramento really were for those foreign dignitaries). It's also not just about the Speaker sharing a luxury loft with his fundraising consultant and paying a reduced rent while paying the fundraiser $600,000 from campaign funds.

It is about the Speaker literally cashing in - using his position as the second most powerful politician in California state government to generate money for his personal bank account.

As the Sacramento Bee reports in today's front-page story, the Speaker is clearly using his wife as a conduit for special interests and the politically connected to line his pockets. The bottom line is that she wouldn't be receiving six-figure "consulting" contracts if she wasn't married to Fabian Nunez and her "employers" didn't know the big buckers were actually going into Fabian's checking account. Supposedly Mrs. Nunez's contract with AQMD was $125,000 for arranging "seminars". Where can we get that gig? Oh, that's right, we can't. You have to be married to the Speaker of the Assembly to get that sweetheart contract.

In one newspaper account, the self-proclaimed middle class Speaker admits that he and his wife generate about $300,000 a year. That means his wife's income is at least equal to, and probably larger, than the Speaker. Her "employment" is key to the Speaker living in a $1.25 million dollar house in Sacramento with an annual mortgage and tax bill of almost $100,000. Frankly, that arouses even more suspicion about the true income of the Nunez household because $100,000 is a lot of money to pay even for people who make $300,000 a year.

The California Term Limits Defense Fund again calls on Nunez to immediately release his wife's list of all current clients and copies of her current and previous contracts. We also demand that the Speaker put these questions to rest by releasing his tax returns.

Oh, and Fabian, spare us the classic "how dare you attack my wife" defense. The Speaker's numerous financial and ethical lapses are the fundamental issue here. It is Nunez who made his wife part of this growing scandal by putting her on the payroll of the special interests.

The Sacramento Bee story follows:

Job of Núñez's wife at issue

Link to hospitals with stake in health reform criticized.
By Jim Sanders - Bee Capitol Bureau
Last Updated 12:07 am PDT Tuesday,
October 16, 2007

Shortly after Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez became a point man in the fight to expand health care for the uninsured, his wife accepted a lucrative job with close ties to hospitals that have a massive financial stake in such reform.
Maria Robles was hired as president of the nonprofit Californians for Patient Care in January, one month after Núñez introduced a bill declaring his intent to provide "affordable, quality health care coverage" to all Californians.
State law does not bar Robles from such employment, but it means that much of her salary - which apparently exceeds $100,000 - stems from contributions to the nonprofit agency by a powerful special interest that stands to gain billions if Núñez's health care efforts succeed.
Robles said she has never discussed health care reform with her husband.
"Fabian and I have this agreement," she said. "First of all, we don't see each other very much. When we do, we don't talk business. We just can't. The marriage would never survive."
But Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles, said Robles' job can create the perception that special interests are paying Núñez indirectly.
"It certainly doesn't hurt them to have a financial relationship with his wife, even if she's doing absolutely nothing to influence Núñez," Stern said. "He has to know where the money is coming from."
Californians for Patient Care says its goal is to "preserve and improve a health care system that will be available when you, your family members or your friends and neighbors need it most."
The 3-year-old nonprofit agency does not employ lobbyists and makes no political contributions, records show.
Robles supervises a two-person staff whose primary job is to create a database of health care resources for Californians who lack private insurance. Her role also involves soliciting funds for future years, although she has not yet begun to do so, she said.
State law requires Robles to disclose her employment to the Fair Political Practices Commission, but not until March, more than a year after the latest health care debate began.
Robles declined to provide her salary, but she replaced Kristine Yahn, who received more than $140,000 per year, records show.
Núñez defended the right of his wife, a registered nurse, to accept the job.
"She's been in the (medical field) longer than you and I have been talking about health care," Núñez said. "And she's not been involved in policy in any way, shape or form."
Doug Heller, executive director of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, said bankrolling a job for the wife of a legislative leader can do more for a special interest than a campaign contribution would.
"This is lifestyle protection," he said. "It's a way to provide personal financial benefits to a politician whose votes you depend on."
In announcing Robles' hire, Californians for Patient Care touted both her "political acumen" and her nursing expertise in emergency room care, oncology, pulmonary medicine, research, utilization and case management.
The group is not legally required to report its donors, and Robles declined to do so voluntarily. But by all accounts, the Sacramento nonprofit agency has close ties to the California Hospital Association.
C. Duane Dauner, president of the association, said his group worked with others to create the nonprofit agency in 2004, "because we felt it was important for there to be an organization to speak for patients."
Dauner said he doesn't know precisely what percentage of Californians for Patient Care's funding has come from his group.
"But we've given a substantial amount of it," said Dauner, whose association represents 450 hospitals and health systems.
The California Nurses Association, in a bulletin for members, characterized Californians for Patient Care two years ago as a "hospital industry front group."
"Now, to have (Núñez's) wife in a position to essentially lobby for the hospital industry, we think it's an enormous specter of concern," Executive Director Rose Ann DeMoro said.
Several times this year, Núñez's votes benefited hospitals and hurt patients - including his support for Senate Bill 306, allowing hospitals to extend by seven years a deadline for meeting seismic safety standards, DeMoro said.
Steve Maviglio, Núñez's spokesman, countered that the nurses association was the only organized opposition to SB 306, which received bipartisan support.
Maviglio, in a written statement, said Robles' job has had no impact on Núñez's votes and "it's absurd that the speaker's political enemies are trying to connect those dots."
He noted that in politics, it is not necessarily rare for a legislator's spouse to work in a job involving public issues.
David Townsend, a political consultant for the California Hospital Association, said his firm recommended Robles for the nonprofit post after she worked effectively on last year's tobacco tax initiative. That unsuccessful campaign was spearheaded by the hospital association.
Townsend described Robles - paid nearly $100,000 as a Proposition 86 consultant - as a perfect fit for the nonprofit job.
"She's articulate, hard working, attractive, bilingual and she knows health care inside and out," Townsend said. "She's the whole package."
Dauner said he also recommended Robles for the nonprofit job.
Jane Hirsch, a nursing professor and member of the Californians for Patient Care governing board, applauded Robles' performance.
"In my experience, she's very well qualified and has been very energetic and really done an amazing amount of work," Hirsch said.
Núñez's health care legislation, Assembly Bill 8, was a lightning rod for Capitol debate but ultimately was vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The bill would have placed the onus on employers, not hospitals, to expand health insurance. Maviglio noted, however, that hospital officials have expressed numerous other concerns about the bill.
Schwarzenegger's health care plan, which has not been accepted by lawmakers, calls for the financial pain to be shared by employers, employees, insurers and government. He negotiated an agreement with the hospital association in which the latter would pay 4 percent of its revenue up front, with an expectation that they would be reimbursed with federal funds.
The California Hospital Association is a major contributor to both parties. Months ago, it donated $100,000 to Proposition 93, a term limits measure pushed by Núñez that would allow him to remain in power six extra years.
Robles, besides campaigning to pass Proposition 86, served as a consultant for the South Coast Air Quality Management District. She organized asthma conferences for the group this year and in 2006.
Robles' political ties apparently came in handy: Keynote speaker for the 2006 conference was Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Núñez's close friend. This year's conference featured addresses by Núñez and Schwarzenegger.
Article Link

These people are pure slime. It's good to know just how slimy they are, and to what extent they will go to keep their fraudulent lifestyles.

You can take the thug out of the union, but you can't take the union out of the thug... my Nunez mantra.

Fun With Fabian

It's a beautiful thing when an arrogant, horses' ass like Fabian Nunez gets caught with his pants down - or in this case, with his hand around a very expensive Bordeaux - in France.

Several actual reporters have latched onto Nunez's monetary philandering, and are having a verbal field day with his antics.

Steve Weigand wrote a humorous little article showcasing Fabian's middle-class habits:

"So, here are some reasons we shouldn't be too hard on Núñez:
1. He's not rich enough to afford that kind of lifestyle on his own.
True, he makes $130,062 a year as speaker, or a bit more than twice the median income of a three-person California family. Plus, he does get another $30,000 or so in tax-free income for having to live in Sacramento while representing a district in L.A.
And there is that state-provided car, with a sergeant-at-arms to drive him the block-and-a-half from the Capitol to the Esquire Grill.
And his wife, a nurse and consultant, did report making more than $100,000 last year for her work on a statewide proposition.
And they do own a $1.25 million home in a nice part of Sacramento.
To which I say, "So what?" The guy has young children, and he is probably putting away a good chunk of change for their college educations, which will come around when he's no longer speaker.
Unless there's something in the fine print of the term-limits initiative we don't know about.
2. It's not like he's taking the money from special interests that stand to benefit from his support on legislation they are pushing. Oh, wait.
3. He might need the $5.3 million in his campaign war chest, just in case the term-limits initiative passes and he runs again next year and actually has an opponent this time, which he didn't last time.
4. When he's off in France or Argentina or Spain or Italy sucking down $400 bottles of wine or noshing on hummingbird tongues, he's not in Sacramento."
read the rest of the article.

George Skelton of the Los Angeles Times wrote this: "After my deadline -- after I'd written this column -- Nuñez called to explain. He "became a hit around the world" after his global warming bill passed last year, the speaker said, and received many foreign invitations. "The dollar is pretty darn weak in Europe these days" and that runs up expenses, he added. He also buys lots of gifts for dignitaries, staffers and other legislators.Nuñez defended paying for all this with political money rather than tax dollars. "My conscience wouldn't allow me to do that, so I use my campaign funds. That's between me and the people who contribute."

Go here For the article

And finally, from the Political Vanguard Blog, by Tom Del Beccaro:

PV's Top 10 Fabian Nunez expense explanations

10. I DID fly to France to buy wine. But it was California wine, I swear!

9. $9000 for a hotel in Barcelona? I knew those money changers were ripping me off!

8. You mean to tell that the middle class doesn't eat caviar?

7. $400 for a John Edwards hair cut? Looks pretty good right about now, doesn't it?

6. Come on . . . I really can't use those $699 stamps to mail campaign literature?

5. $5,149 for a meeting in a cave? At least it was cheaper than the hotel.

4. Yeah I flew to Europe and shopped. But those Vuittons were totally knock offs.

3. Trip to Sweden: to study universal preschool. Trip to Spain: to see high speed rail. Trip to Colosseum: to study throwing Christians to the lions.

2. Hsu defense fund, Perata defense fund, Jerry brown defense fund, Sandy Berger defense fund, William Jefferson defense fund........

1. $13,000 in Flower purchases: I felt bad for Antonio's girls, so I gave each a flower.

(read his whole article here)

This is just too much fun!

As I said in another post, you can take the thug out of the Union, but you can't take the Union out of the thug.

Fabian Runs From Reporters

Fabian can run, but the little weasel cannot hide. After speaking to a Latino group, he refuses to answer questions about his extravagant travel, shopping sprees and lavish meals at five-star restaurants.

You can take the thug out of the Union, but you can't take the Union out of the thug. Fabian Nunez is a liar, a cheater, a user, a phony, a social and economic climber, and all on the backs of his own people.

Click on the YouTube link to see Speaker Nunez's ridiculous refusal to answer questions from the press.

And here's the link from abc7.com for his bogus campaign fund expenditures:
http://cal-access.sos.ca.gov/PDFGen/pdfgen.prg?filingid=1238362&amendid=1

More on Slimy Little Fabian

More from the California Term Limits Defense Fund press releases:

Nuñez middle class? Boy, that's rich

by Steve Lopez
October 7, 2007

If he crashes and burns in politics, California Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez could have a great future as a travel agent.

As my colleague Nancy Vogel laid out in a jaw-dropping exposé Friday, L.A.'s man of the people has not missed a trick while traveling extensively and luxuriously about the world, throwing campaign funds around like confetti.

Italy. France. Spain.

Our very own rascal in paradise has been there, and he's tasted the world's finest offerings.A $1,795 meal in Paris. An $8,745 hotel bill in Barcelona. A $5,149 meeting at a Bordeaux wine shop."There's not too big a difference," Nuñez told Vogel, "between how I live and how most middle-class people live."Hands down, it's the quote of the year.

I'm not sure what middle-class people Nuñez is talking about, but I'm worried that he's spending entirely too much time with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Could the speaker be talking about Brentwood's middle-class?

We're talking lifestyles of the rich and famous here, not Applebee's and Ramada. Nuñez may even be trying to compete with Schwarzenegger, who's been using an obscure nonprofit group to finance lavish overseas travel involving private jets and exclusive hotels, as detailed recently by my colleague Paul Pringle.

And there's one more thing these two high rollers have in common:They're both bending rules of ethics, if not snapping them in half.

Schwarzenegger's little nonprofit is well-fed with donations from people who don't have to disclose their identity. So not only is it unclear who's paying for the governor's travels, but the tax write-off for donors, and the use of a charitable organization to fund luxury travel, are arguably a corruption of the tax code.

In the case of Nuñez, it's legal to use campaign funds for travel, but only if it's related to the business of government and politics.I suppose it's possible that a Bordeaux wine shop hosted a symposium on California infrastructure bonds, but when I called Nuñez's office for more information I got a stock answer from a spokeswoman:"The expenditures were properly disclosed and described as required by law."

It's the democracy we've all been waiting for in Sacramento. Gulfstreams, Louis Vuitton office supplies and nose-thumbing responses to inquiring constituents.

Given Nuñez's refusal to explain the specific purpose of his travels, Carmen Balber of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights is biting her nails, hoping Nuñez wasn't sampling fine wine with players who have pumped $5.3 million into the "Friends of Fabian Nuñez" campaign kitty."The first question that comes to mind is whether the health insurance industry was sponsoring the speaker's lavish trips, as he's now debating the future of the health market in California," Balber said.

She notes that Nuñez's travel fund has received $136,000 from health insurers and their lobbyists. And Nuñez is working with Schwarzenegger ($719,000 and counting from health insurers and their lobbies) on a health insurance reform bill that would require every Californian to buy coverage, but wouldn't require insurers to cap the cost.

Certainly the insurers would love to raise a fine bottle of red to the passage of such a bill, and Nuñez has been known to pop the cork on crushed grapes that run as high as $224 a bottle.

But do we really want Nuñez managing billions of our tax dollars if this is his idea of money management? Easy come, easy go, I suppose, when you've got campaign funds to burn, on top of $170-a-day in spending money along with a six-figure salary.

I checked one five-week stretch of Nuñez's expenses in 2006 and found that he'd dined at the likes of the Water Grill ($602.29), Pacific Dining Car ($1,003.37), and Asia de Cuba ($538.10), and, in Sacramento, Biba restaurant ($1,026.58).

Along with several other meal/meetings in that five-week stretch, his dining tab came to $7,764.94.

Can someone please give him directions to a Pizza Hut?

As you might have imagined, the news of Nuñez's champagne tastes had some donors feeling duped."We would much prefer that he be educating himself about what's the best healthcare system in the world rather than the best wine or the best shoes or any number of expenditures," said Donna Gerber, director of government relations for the California Nurses Assn., which donated $4,000 to Friends of Fabian.

Barry Broad, who represents the Teamsters ($15,900 in donations to Nuñez) and other labor groups, says it's hard to ask members to keep digging into their pockets for campaign donations when the working stiffs open their paper and see that Nuñez is frolicking around the world like he's playing with Monopoly money. It's the kind of story that "further undermines the public's view of the political process," Broad said.

But "I don't know how much lower it could go."Not much, especially when the records reveal that Nuñez rang up unspecified office expenses at Nordstrom for $476.28.

A set of wine glasses, perhaps?As for the office expenses from Louis Vuitton, they ran $787.50 on one occasion and $1,775.36 on another, which is a lot of staples.

Based on a call to Louis Vuitton and a search of the website, I'm wondering if Nuñez bought the $650 Taiga binder as a travel calendar and, to enter his next dreamy destination, the Cargo pen with alligator skin, Rhodium finish and an 18-carat gold nib for $1,620.

If the speaker reveals nothing else, can he at least fill the rest of the middle class in on what a gold nib is?
steve.lopez@latimes.com

******************************
looks like Fabian may have finally been caught crapping in his own nest. The work of the people is is such a dirty job... perfect for Fabian. He's such a slime.

SF's Folsom Street Fair Controversy

Warning: The following post contains some sexually explicit material. Do not continue or click on any of the links without knowing this.

**************

Michalle Malkin's undercover reprter "Zombie," covered the Folsom Street Fair in San Francisco on september 30, 2007, took photos of the fair which included openly homosexual sex that took place right in the streets, alleyways, doorways, in vendor "booths" and displayed on stage. the mostly gay male event, participants walked around mostly naked and in S & M attire.

He wrote this:

Every year in San Francisco there's a free outdoor "fetish" event called the Folsom Street Fair at which hundreds of thousands of mostly gay men stroll around the city streets in leather or rubber fetish outfits. This year, a major controversy surrounding the fair was ignited by its official poster, which was a parody of the Da Vinci's The Last Supper featuring sex toys and fetish gear, instead of the standard biblical scene. Christian groups and some conservatives found the poster offensive. The controversy then spread when critics discovered that Miller Beer, a mainstream corporation, was the fair's main sponsor. Conservative groups began to call for a boycott of Miller products if the beverage company did not withdraw its sponsorship. The fracas expanded when images of young children attending the 2005 Folsom Street Fair -- illustrations for an online magazine article -- began circulating in the blogosphere. The controversy first started in Catholic publications, but Michelle Malkin had the most extensive coverage of it, including updates about the photos of the children at the fair and the calls for a boycott. KTVU News had an excellent video report about the dispute surrounding the fair (video may take a while to load on some browsers).

As the controversy grew, some Christian leaders described the Folsom Street Fair as an "open-air gay orgy." Wait a minute: is that really true? I thought the argument was about the appropriateness of the poster, not a condemnation of the entire event itself.

I am not going to link to his entire report or the photos. The depravity is horrendous. For a city that wants to silence Michael Savage for his "hate speech," City officials need to clean their own streets first.

Fabian Nunez AGAIN Demonstrates his Crooked Ways

Fabian Nunez again demonstrates his crooked ways, and he has help from the equally corrupt
"Godfather" Don Perata.

(reprinted from a Press Release from California Term Limits defense Fund)

LA Times: Nunez Travels The
World Like a High-Roller

The L.A. Times reveals today that Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez has spent tens of thousands on lavish foreign travel and personal luxury items out of his campaign funds. He's spent over $47,000 alone on plane travel to exotic locations. What's more, Nunez has failed to provide details or a legitimate legislative purpose to these trips as state law requires. This brings to mind the report by the East Bay Express newspaper on Senate President Don Perata's expenditures of over $1 million out of his campaign funds for travel, gifts, expensive meals, personal items, alcohol and even groceries. It's no wonder these two politicians are trying to trick the voters into weakening term limits by pushing Prop. 93. They are living the life of the "Rich and Famous" at the expense of the taxpayer and Sacramento special interests. These are the best jobs that political hacks Perata and Nunez will ever hold and they don't want to let them go.

From the Los Angeles Times:

Nuñez travels the world like a high-roller

The leader of the Assembly spends tens of thousands of dollars in campaign funds but refuses to provide details on his trips. He says the trips are 'not only justified but necessary.'

By Nancy Vogel
Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
October 5, 2007

SACRAMENTO -- As leader of the California Assembly, Speaker Fabian Nuñez has traveled the world in luxury, paying with campaign funds for visits to some of the finest hotels and restaurants and for purchases at high-end retailers such as Louis Vuitton in Paris.

It is not clear how these activities have related to legislative business, as state law requires, because the Los Angeles Democrat refuses to provide details on tens of thousands of dollars in such expenditures.

The spending, listed in mandatory filings with the state, includes $47,412 on United, Lufthansa and Air France airlines this year; $8,745 at the exclusive Hotel Arts in Barcelona, Spain; $5,149 for a "meeting" at Cave L'Avant Garde, a wine seller in the Bordeaux region of France; a total of $2,562 for two "office expenses" at Vuitton, two years apart; and $1,795 for a "meeting" at Le Grand Colbert, a venerable Parisian restaurant.

Nuñez also spent $2,934 at Colosseum Travel in Rome, and paid $505 to the European airline Spanair.Other expenses are closer to home: a $1,715 meeting at Asia de Cuba restaurant in West Hollywood; a $317 purchase at upscale Pavilion Salon Shoes in Sacramento; a $2,428 meeting at 58 Degrees and Holding, a Sacramento wine bar and bistro; and $800 spent at Dollar Rent a Car in Kihei, Hawaii.

Asked in an interview about his foreign travel in general, Nuñez said: "For me, it's a question of: Is my perspective on issues broad enough? Do I have enough context when I make decisions? This is a big state to run. You've got to know what you're doing.

"These trips," he said, "at least the ones I've taken -- I feel very confident and comfortable that they're not only justified but necessary for the decisions I need to make on a daily basis.

"Given a list of 99 entries culled from his campaign finance filings, however, Nuñez's staff refused to show how the expenditures were related to California government or politics.

Spokeswoman Beth Willon would say only that the expenditures were "properly disclosed and described as required by law."

California law requires all campaign fund expenditures to be at least "reasonably" related to a political, legislative or governmental purpose. Expenditures that confer a substantial personal benefit must be "directly" related to such purposes.

Some of Nuñez's travel in his more than three years as speaker has involved studying high-speed rail and preschool programs in France, studying renewable energy in Germany and Denmark, and visiting South America with other lawmakers and lobbyists to study global warming solutions.

Some activity, however, including the 2006 Barcelona visit and a $3,199 stay at Hotel Parco in Rome this year, does not appear tied to any policy-related trips announced by Nuñez's office.

In the interview, Nuñez said he wouldn't need to use his $5.3-million "Friends of Fabian Nuñez" campaign account to offset travel costs if he were independently wealthy. The speaker's job pays $130,062 a year plus a tax-free $170 for expenses each day the Assembly is in session.

"There's not too big a difference," he said, "between how I live and how most middle-class people live."Politicians are required to periodically disclose to the secretary of state's office contributions to and expenditures from their campaign accounts. Expenses are reported under 27 categories, such as "campaign consultants," "fundraising events" and "candidate travel, lodging and meals.

" The reporting forms also allow entries to be described in greater detail.

Doug Heller of the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica called on Nuñez to explain his spending."How much political, legislative and governmental work does Fabian Nuñez have to do in Barcelona?" Heller said. "If they're legitimate [expenditures], you've got to explain it."

A popular politician from a heavily Democratic district, Nuñez ran unopposed in his last election but, as speaker, is responsible for helping fund and manage other Democratic Assembly campaigns.

He received a total of $1.9 million in 2005 and 2006 from unions, corporations and others with a perennial stake in legislative business. They include $17,300 from AT&T and Verizon, phone companies that pushed Nuñez legislation allowing them to compete against cable television companies, and $2,500 from a group of pharmaceutical companies affected by a Nuñez bill to create a prescription drug discount program.The State Building and Construction Trades Council of California donated $5,000 in February 2006, one day before a bill it sponsored was introduced in the Assembly.

The state Democratic Party, which unlike officeholders can raise unlimited sums, transferred $4 million to Nuñez's campaign account last November.

Nuñez occasionally looks beyond his campaign account to pay for travel. In 2006, he reported accepting $12,500 in airfare, meals and lodging from the tax-exempt California Foundation on the Environment and Economy, whose donors include utilities and oil companies with business before the Legislature.The group helped pay for Nuñez and his wife, a nurse and consultant, to travel in Brazil, Argentina and Chile, where they and other lawmakers, lobbyists and the governor's chief of staff studied technologies to reduce global warming.

Similarly, the tax-exempt William C. Velasquez Institute, a policy think tank focused on Latino issues, paid $6,169 toward Nuñez's 2005 trip to France and Sweden to study universal preschool. The institute also helped finance Nuñez's trip to France in April to study high-speed rail, according to institute President Antonio Gonzalez.Nuñez, a former union organizer, travels and dines much more comfortably with campaign funds than he could on the taxpayers' dime.

The state limits employees to $6 for breakfast, $10 for lunch and $18 for dinner when they are traveling on business in California. Hotel reimbursement ranges from $84 to $140 per night plus tax, depending upon location.

Luxurious living is incompatible with Nuñez's image as a champion of working people, Heller said: "Here's a guy who gives a lot of lip service to speaking for the little guy, but he's living like a Goliath."

And "when his campaigns are funding it, you have to wonder: Who does he owe for this lifestyle?" Heller said. "That's the problem."

The campaign filings of Nuñez's legislative counterpart, Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), show no overseas travel over the last three years and few "meetings" costing more than a few hundred dollars.

Much of the spending from the "Taxpayers for Perata" fund are described as gifts for colleagues or constituents, including a $490 "gift for staff member" at the Claremont Resort and Spa in Berkeley.

Perata also reports spending $3,249 at an Apple store for "holiday gifts for colleagues," $799 at Montclair Village Wine shop for an office "election party" and $2,665 for a staff party at À Côté Restaurant in Oakland.

For decades in California, lawmakers were permitted to use campaign funds for personal benefit, said Robert Stern, president of the nonprofit Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles and former general counsel for the Fair Political Practices Commission.

They could, for example, buy a car with political donations and pocket any remaining contributions when they left office. The Legislature, under pressure from the Fair Political Practices Commission, passed laws in 1982 barring those practices and further restricting the use of campaign funds, Stern said.

The commission is responsible for enforcing those laws and is assisted by the Franchise Tax Board, which audits 30 randomly chosen lawmakers every two years. Nuñez is among those being audited this year, and a report is due by February.

The commission has taken action against fewer than a dozen politicians for misuse of campaign funds. Among them is Charles Calderon, a Montebello Democrat who served in the Assembly in the 1980s, the Senate in the 1990s and is now in his second Assembly stint.Calderon has been fined by the Fair Political Practices Commission a total of $33,000 for numerous violations, including using campaign funds to pay for a Lake Tahoe family vacation, limousine rental, clothes for his wife, modeling photos, a costumed entertainer and a tennis outfit.

***************

Shouldn't Californians be outraged? Nunez and Perata are two of the most corrupt politicians in this state, and rubbing taxpaying, legal residents' faces in it.

But you can't accuse them of living beyond their means... they have an open checkbook - YOURS! Pigs. Calling them Corrupt Politicians is becoming a joke. But the joke's on us.

Don Perata and Fabian Nunez are trying to trick the voters into gutting term limits so they can remain in power. Both Perata and Nunez are termed out next year. The Legislature’s Bosses are pushing an initiative that claims to strengthen term limits when it actually dramatically weakens them and would let Perata remain as Senate President until 2012 and Nunez as Assembly Speaker until 2014 – the end of the next Governor’s term in office.

read this http://capoliticalnews.com/s/spip.php?article298 for the real scoop on their term limits extention. Fight it.

Why Let The Truth Get in The Way?

"Phony Soldiers" or "Phony Americans?"

Speaking of liars, let's be clear on who is doing the lying.

While Congress persons are up in arms over Rush Limbaugh calling one soldier a "phony soldier," and how the Left is using “phony soldiers” to attack the war effort, Rush called out soldiers who had claimed to have been in Iraq participating in war crimes when they had not in fact set foot in the country.

Human Events writer Erick Erickson wrote "Democrats in Congress ran to the floors of the House and Senate to denounce Rush and offer resolutions of condemnation. Hillary Clinton saw no irony in her failure to denounce Rush while she defended MoveOn.org’s attack against Petraeus. Richest of all, however, was Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) denouncing Rush from the floor of the Senate and accusing Rush of being under the influence of narcotics. Harkin, of course, saw his hopes for the Presidency sink in 1992, when it was revealed he had lied about his own war record." Yes, Tom Harkin who has the unmitigated gall to call anyone else names, is one of the biggest liars in politics. He lied about his own war record.

Here is his fabricated war story from the WSJ opinion Journal: "In 1979, Mr. Harkin, then a congressman, participated in a round-table discussion arranged by the Congressional Vietnam Veterans' Caucus. 'I spent five years as a Navy pilot, starting in November of 1962,' Mr. Harkin said at that meeting, in words that were later quoted in a book, Changing of the Guard, by Washington Post political writer David Broder. 'One year was in Vietnam. I was flying F-4s and F-8s on combat air patrols and photo-reconnaissance support missions. I did no bombing.'

That clearly is not an accurate picture of his Navy service. . . . Mr. Harkin's Navy record shows his only decoration is the National Defense Service Medal, awarded to everyone on active service during those years. He did not receive either the Vietnam Service medal or the Vietnam Campaign medal, the decorations given to everyone who served in the Southeast Asia theater."
It turned out Mr. Harkin had not seen combat and was stationed in Japan.

Harkin on the Senate floor:
Well, I don’t know. Maybe he was just high on his drugs again. I don’t know whether he was or not. If so, he ought to let us know. But that shouldn’t be an excuse. Read the above insert for the real Harkin story.

The Radio Equalizer wrote this: "Somehow, a group called VoteVets.org not only cooked up an anti- Limbaugh hit piece at lightning speed, it had no trouble coughing up $60,000 for the occasion. Get the feeling the left had been planning this attack for some time?Get a load of the lefties on the board of VoteVets.org. Partisanship, anyone?"

Some of these same politicians have been fast and loose with the truth. They claim Rush is calling America's soldiers "phony," when in fact he called one lying guy, a phony. Jesse MacBeth claimed publicly to have seen military men committing horrors in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq, when in fact he never made it out of boot camp, and served time in a military prison. Who is a liar?

Ann Coulter wrote a great piece, reminding us who is telling the lies.

Speaking of liars, remember John Kerry's big lie? "He claimed to be a valiant, Purple Heart-deserving Vietnam veteran, who spent Christmas 1968 in Cambodia -- until he ran for president and more than 280 Swift Boat Veterans called him a liar. We've been waiting more than 20 months for Kerry to make good on his "Meet the Press" pledge to sign form 180, which would allow the military to release his records."

And then there's "Al Gore endlessly bragged to the media about his service in Vietnam. "I took my turn regularly on the perimeter in these little firebases out in the boonies. Something would move, we'd fire first and ask questions later," he told Vanity Fair. And then we found out Gore had a personal bodyguard in Vietnam, the most dangerous weapon he carried was a typewriter, and he left after three months. Although to his credit, Gore did not put in for a Purple Heart for the carpal tunnel syndrome he got from all that typing." Good one Ann....

"Then there was Bill Burkett, who gave CBS the phony National Guard documents; Scott Thomas Beauchamp, The New Republic's fantasist anti-war "Baghdad Diarist"; and Max Cleland, whose injuries were repeatedly and falsely described as a result of enemy fire."

Read the rest of Ann's article here "Pretend to be all you can be"

(Human Events) Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), who herself suffered an attempted political assassination by MSNBC and MoveOn.org last week, also raced to blog at RedState. She wrote, “This is the second time in as many weeks that the MoveOn.org crowd has attacked conservatives without checking their facts. There is a saying in the mainstream, drive-by media: "Why let the truth get in the way of a good story?"

I thought the Democratic party was supposed to be the "voice of the people", "champion of free speech," and "tolerant of all points of view?"

What kind of an argument is totally based on lies? One Human Events reader summed it up: "Phony Americans. Those who claim to be Americans and stand for the rights of the little people but are really anti-patriots and communists in kind. These 'phony Americans' have taken over the Democratic party and you know who they are."

Introduction To The Fairness Doctrine

Welcome to Communist Congress... Where Harry Reid and Tom Harkin, accomplished liars, believe that the ends always justify the means. In other words, they do whatever they need to, say whatever they wish, tell whatever lies they can come up with to accomplish their very shady goals.

Congress is trying to silence conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh because they disagree with him. He is a threat to libs. And they have repeatedly lied to try to get him fired from Clear Channel Communications. They and 39 other Dems signed a letter to Clear Channel claiming that Rush called all of America's soldiers, "Phony Soldiers." Not true. He called one guy, A Phony Soldier. Why? This fellow, Jesse MacBeth is a liar about his military service. He is not decorated; he is a military criminal, tossed out of the Army for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim and his Army discharge record as well. Yes, MacBeth was in the Army -- for 44 days. He washed out of boot camp. He is not an Army Ranger. He is not a corporal. He never won the Purple Heart. He was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen horrors in Afghanistan or Iraq.

And Rush talked about this guy on his show.

Instead of shunning a loser like Jesse MacBeth, the liberal left called Rush names, put Rush on trial and lied about what he said - about one guy, and not all soldiers.

And these are your elected representatives.

A similar witch hunt is taking place in San Francisco. World Net Daily reports The San Francisco Board of Supervisors today condemned nationally syndicated radio talk-show host Michael Savage, whose program originates in city by the bay, for "hate speech."

Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval is trying to get Michael Savage fired for "hate speech." Sandoval claims that because Savage rails against illegal aliens that he is attempting to vilify Latino-Americans" and it "will not be tolerated." How's that for a violation of Savages First Amendment rights.

"We are saying first that we are recognizing this speech is hateful and we are condemning it. Don't fool yourselves. This kind of speech just incites behavior that is nothing short of hysteria. It's the kind of hysterical behavior we saw in Nazi Germany 60 years ago," Sandoval said.

That is plain and simple slander. Fortunately, David Horowitz agrees and has offered to file suit on behalf of Savage against Supervisor Sandoval.

"You have a strong federal civil rights action that you can file against Supervisor Sandoval and the city of San Francisco," he advised. "You have a constitutional right to state your political opinions and no city official has the right to lie about what you said or to call for a mob to come to your door to threaten you and to try to have you fired."

Horowitz said the Civil Rights Act of 1871, designed to tame the terror of the Ku Klux Klan, can be used as the basis for a federal civil rights action against the official and the city.

"You are protected by this civil rights act because you are the victim of the same type of mob terror that (the) Klan used to inflict," wrote Horowitz. "This terror is being organized against you simply because people do not like what you say. Translated into legal language, you are being attacked by a type of terrorist because you have exercised your First Amendment rights."
Horowitz wrote: "The Klansman in your case is wearing a suit and not a white robe. He is doing his dirty work under the hood of his elected position instead of under the coward's hood of the Klan."

Horowitz wrote: "This Sandoval fellow accused you of using 'defamatory language ... against immigrants.' Of course, this statement by Sandoval is slander. I have listened to your show. You are very complimentary of immigrants. In fact, you frequently mention that your parents were immigrants. The slander by Sandoval arises because he claims that your opposition to illegal entry into this country is somehow a stand against Hispanics. That is like saying that every Border Patrol agent and every Congress person is anti-immigrant because they don't condone illegal border crossing."

"I will back you, Michael, and file this lawsuit if you wish," concluded Horowitz.

This is one lawsuit I'd like to see filed.

The fringe-left will stop at nothing to forward their communist agenda. They already trample on the civil rights of Americans who dare to disagree with them, and now they want talk show hosts fired and silenced.

I am hoping that Rush and Michael Savage put up a damn good fight. I know that their listeners will.

Sheila Kuehl Rides Again

read the outrageous piece of proposed legislation below. Lesbian activist Sheila Kuehl rides again...
**************

(California Resource Institute) School locker rooms will soon become a dangerous place for students if Governor Schwarzenegger fails to veto SB 777.

This outrageous piece of legislation by Senator Sheila Kuehl will turn schools into a laboratory for sexual experimentation and complex gender confusion.

Under the guise of promoting school safety, SB 777 would ban any teaching or activities in schools that "promote a discriminatory bias" against homosexuals, transgenders, bisexuals, and those with gender issues. (Remember, California law states that your gender is not how you were born, but how you perceive yourself. If a man perceives himself as a woman, then in the eyes of the state, he is legally a woman.) This vague language is open to all sorts of extreme interpretations. Does it promote a discriminatory bias to only show heterosexual couples in textbooks? Or must curriculum show all types of sexual variations in order to be non-discriminatory? Does it promote a discriminatory bias to only mention "mom and dad" or "mother and father" instead of "mom and mom"?

According to the language of the bill: "No teacher shall give instruction nor shall a school district sponsor any activity that promotes a discriminatory bias because of" gender, sexual orientation (actual or perceived). This means that any teaching regarding traditional families would be discriminatory. Any activities such as having a prom king and queen or gender-specific bathrooms would also be considered discriminatory.

To understand the full ramifications of this radical legislation, one needs only look at Los Angeles Unified School District's policy concerning transgender and "gender nonconforming" students. In this policy, teachers are instructed to keep a student's transgender status private, including from the student's parents. Teachers are told to consult the student first, before talking with parents, "to determine an appropriate way to reference the student's gender identity." This is shocking considering parents expect schools and teachers to be an ally-not an enemy. Instead, groups such as the California Teachers Association and the Parent Teachers Association have actually endorsed SB 777 and its subversive plans.

The most alarming part of the LAUSD policy is that it instructs schools to provide access to restroom and locker room facilities that "corresponds to the gender identity that the student consistently asserts at school." If a male student "consistently asserts" himself as a female at school, he will be granted access to female restrooms and locker rooms.

This is a serious danger for the safety of young female students. As teachers and school officials grow accustomed to seeing boys entering female-only areas, they will be less likely to intervene for fear of offending a transgender student. Those with evil intentions will then gain access to innocent girls in otherwise safe environments. If SB 777 becomes law, it would "promote a discriminatory bias" against transgender students to not allow a male who perceives himself as a female into the girls' locker room. This bill's vague, misleading language literally throws open locker room doors to sexually confused teenagers.

SB 777 will implement statewide the shocking policies LAUSD already enforces. And if this legislation becomes law, the Superintendent of Public Instruction will soon be sending out a model policy, instructing schools to comply with these absurd policies. How many lawsuits will be brought against the school districts that choose to protect their students from such ridiculous policies? Tax payer dollars will be drained in the fight against the extremist agendas imposed by out-of-touch lawmakers.

Last session the governor vetoed a similar bill, SB 1437, also by Senator Kuehl. In his veto message the governor stated that "this bill attempts to offer vague protection when current law already provides clear protection against discrimination in our schools based on sexual orientation." SB 777 is just another offering of the same radical agenda already vetoed by the governor. But with Governor Schwarzenegger's constant shifting on policy issues, we have no assurance that he will continue to protect our children.

And without a veto of SB 777, boys won't need an excuse to get into the girls' locker room-it will be a state-sanctioned school policy.

Read LAUSD Policies

****************

Parents send kids to school to become educated - and not in sex ed.

Sheila Kuehl , preaching her usual "tolerance," has no tolerance for any one's opinions but her own. Anyone who disagrees with with her, she calls racist or sexist or homophobic or some other denigration.

Liberal intolerance, of course, goes way beyond mere disagreement and name-calling. They want to criminalize the beliefs and actions of those with whom they disagree.

Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez has made the Liberal Dems position bluntly clear: "Our purpose is to outlaw traditional perspectives on marriage and family in the state school system." He and fellow Democrats have the Orwellian nerve to call their legislative fascism "tolerance education." Liberal "tolerance" is forcing people at the point of a gun to believe and act as liberals demand. You don't get more fascist than that. (Dr. Jack Wheeler)

Sheila Kuehl does not care that the vast majority of school-aged kids are not homosexual, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or gender confused. She has a dangerous agenda and will stop at nothing until every school-aged child knows, "tolerates," and is forced to co-mingle with this small percentage of the population.

Gee, do you think she was an outcast growing up? Do you think she has a chip on her shoulder the size of the Grand Canyon?

The wonderful individuals I know, who just happen to be homosexual, make no demands for special treatment or recognition. They don't want to be known only for being homosexual - they, like all healthy people, want to receive recognition for who they are, what they do, and how they contribute to society. They want to be recognized for being quality people.

Sheila Kuehl is a sick individual, who needs lots of couch time with a really good therapist. It's obvious she does not have kids.