This morning I thought I would take a few minutes to share some of my thoughts about goings-on in San Diego County. It’s a crazy time in the county just to the south of my own…
Congressional District 50 – a.k.a. "Oatmeal vs. Acid"
What do you do when the Republican candidate in the special election doesn’t excite conservative 
voters? The only issue on which he seems to be campaigning where he is in line with conservative voters is on the immigration issue, where he has been paid to be hardcore as he has represented (as a federal lobbyist) a hard-line immigration reform group. Bilbray moved into the district. He was tapped by D.C. power-brokers. He defeated a horribly split field of conservative candidates to eek out a plurality, most likely with the help of non-Republican voters. On many issues that I care about, he is only marginally better than the liberal Democrat Francine Busby. And so I read in ‘insider briefings’ that Bilbray is neck-and-neck or a little behind in the special election to replace Duke Cunningham in this solidly Republican seat, and I don’t wonder. In this particular year, with no high-profile GOP primary contests on the ballot and conservative opinion of the President and Congress at historic lows — what is going to motivate GOP voters to turn out on election day? I’ve been in e-mail contact with a lot of folks in the 50th District who backed Bill Morrow, Howard Kaloogian, Eric Roach…and Brian Bilbray is running out of time to convince these people to go and vote for him. They are turned off by his candidacy. Perhaps Bilbray’s biggest challenge is that five of these conservative voters have said that they see this as a chance to send a message to Republicans in Washington, D.C., that a record of massive spending increases should not be ratified with their support of ‘their’ candidate. Add to all of this the fact that conservative businessman Bill Hauf is running a spirited challenge to Bilbray from the right on the regular primary ballot that is on the same ballot as the special election. Hauf is running a strong contrast-campaign, pointing out how liberal Bilbray is on many issues (his latest mail piece is attached below). Hauf’s two biggest challenges — first of all is that he has made a personal pledge NOT to campaign against Bilbray on ‘character issues’ — and the second is that a Hauf victory depends on turning out some very chafed and demoralized conservative voters. Ironically, if Hauf can turn them out, he may save Bilbray and national Republicans from having a lot of egg on their faces. Francine Busy, who recently had a fundraiser held for her by her choice for House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, is God awful. But the spending increases in Washington, D.C., since 1995 make the contrast campaign much harder for Bilbray.
Assembly District 77 – Joel Anderson deserves your vote!
There is a spirited primary taking place to see who will fill the shoes of Republican Jay LaSuer in 
this overwhelmingly Republican district in East San Diego County. Fortunately for conservatives, there is a strong candidate that should be nominated by GOP voters next week — Joel Anderson. I have known Joel for over fifteen years, since our days of involvement with Young Americans for Freedom while in school. Joel is a rock-solid conservative who would be a great legislator in Sacramento. Not only would he be a good vote in the Assembly Republican Caucus, but he would bring some much-needed backbone and conscience to a Republican Caucus who couldn’t hold together to stop a horrific Housing Bond (read: borrow from my children to buy someone else a house). Joel is someone with whom I have battled together in the trenches for so long that I can assure FR readers in this district that he is a solid conservative. Here is a link to Joel’s website.
**There is more – click the link**
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Much needed backbone? Come on Jon! Anderson worked in 2004 for Phil Thalheimer, a man that supports gay civil unions, liberalization of marijuana laws and the distribution of needles to drug addicts. Now, Anderson is taking big bucks from the Indian Gaming industry in his campaign contributions. What part of this is the conscience or backbone that you are referring to?
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Really? Joel’s company worked professionally (mail house) for the only Republican in the race, the one that supported keeping the Mt. Soledad cross, against the only Democrat in the race, the one that voted to remove it.
I guess if you’d rather have Busby in Congress than Bilbray, maybe you’ll never get that sort of thing.
I’ve discussed with Joel his company’s work for Phil Thalheimer. He can’t speak to everything Phil supports because they have not discussed every issue. But I can say, Joel (and I for thay matter) totally agree with Phil on the Mt. Soledad Cross, Jessica’s Law, and most fiscal issues. Phil not only volunteered his time but he spent his own money to qualify the initiative & defend the Mt. Soledad Cross. Phil is
also the Regional Co-Chair, Jessica’s Law and Chair of Southern Californians for Jessica’s Law. He has been one of the driving forces behind the initiative.
Obviously, Joel Anderson doesn’t support the gay agenda. Anyone that knows his track record knows that. However, Joel did work with Thalheimer on the Cross, Jessica’s Law, and fiscal issues, believing Phil to be the better choice than his opponent Scott Peters for the city council seat.
Joel just told me, “Anytime someone agrees with me on an issue, I will work with them on that issue. We don’t have to work on every issue together because I am not limited to working solely with my clone. California is facing serious issues and I plan to work with anyone who agrees with me on an issue.”
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
I can speak to the gaming half of Mr. Gold’s comments re: Joel. I am, of course, now a proud Las Vegan. You can’t live here and not feel the presence and weight of Big Gaming on the political and economic life of the region. The fact is that legalized gaming – whether it be the Las Vegas-based conglomerates, the Indian casinos, or joint ventures thereof, like Harrah’s Rincon – is here to stay. There’s no putting that genie back into the bottle. At least the Indian tribes donating to Joel’s campaign continue to spend millions of dollars giving back to San Diego’s local communities. Would you rather reduce the local presence of gaming and make the choice easier for SoCal residents to take their gaming dollars out here to Vegas? Much as I respect them, the Vegas-based gaming companies aren’t going to give back to your communities – you’re not their home constituency. If you’re against tribal gaming, you’re (wittingly or otherwise) strengthening the hands of the Vegas-based gaming conglomerates.
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
So, Barry, what you are saying is that we can maybe keep the cross and get gay civil unions via Thalheimer’s support of the issue in exchange. A True conservative cannot work for someone like Thalheimer no matter how many “new found” interests he has in issues like the cross. By the way, where was Thalheimer the fifteen previous years in the battle to save the Mt. Soledad Cross, prior to it becoming a recent campaign issue? If Joel did not know that Thalheimer has a man who has had a sex change working as an executive in his flight school, or that Thalheimer was going to march in the gay pride parade, than what does that say about Joel’s ability to inspect and investigate issues and people important to conservatives. No true conservative is going to side with or receive financing from gambling interests. True conservative slawarts stand firm on convictions, not on some fluid pragmatism, much like, say a recently convicted “Duke”.
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
How is the sexual orientation of one of Phil Thalheimer’s employees relevant to anything that happens in the political world? I hope you’re not suggesting that he violate the anti-discrimination laws on the books in your fair state.
Joel Anderson has done more for the conservative cause – given thousands of hours of his professional and volunteer time, and probably hundreds of thousands of dollars of cash and resources – than most of the rest of us ever will. He’s certainly given more than a Debbie-come-lately whose sole claim to fame is a bizarre quasi-nepotistic connection to one of the least-distinguished, most ineffective legislators San Diego County has ever sent to Sacramento.
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Ah, now you are going to deflect off of Joel’s poor decisionmaking on Thalheimer to the defense of a transsexual working in Thalheimer’s company. Now that is about as liberal a perspective as you could have hoped to have presented. You have simply supported my entire argument. Debbie has nothing to do with Joel’s support for and involvement with Thalheimer. Thalheimer’s current association with the cross is a politically motivated stunt, not from any conservative or religious conviction. If we are going to promote conservative values and candidates than we have to live them, not just play house with them come election time. And as to your question about Thalheimer’s employees and relevance to the political world. What a ridiculous statment. Of course your choices of who your employees are is relevant to your political decisions. Just ask Abramoff, Cunningham, and the big union bosses.
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Somewhere in here there’s the question of “when did you stop beating your wife.”
Paul, I didn’t bring up the transsexual employee as somehow being relevant to Joel’s decision making re: Thalheimer; YOU did. I’m not defending the individual; I’m a) questioning the relevance, which IMHO is zero, and b) asking whether you think Thalheimer should violate relevant state and local anti-discrimination laws regarding sexual orientation. I hope you’re not a California employer, because if you are, those kinds of statements may come back to haunt you – and you live in a most litigious state. If you employ people in California, I strongly advise you to govern yourself carefully in this area.
I have been (and will hopefully soon again be) in a position to hire employees in a business. I’ve never asked a prospective employee about his/her political or sexual orientation, and I never plan to. I don’t necessarily hire people who beliefs or lifestyle I agree with; I hire only those individuals who can help generate maximum profit for my business. Any other criterion is not only actionably discriminatory, but so asinine for a business owner as to warrant no further discussion.
The rest of your latest posting is so incoherent that it’s impossible to respond to. Except, of course, for your comparison to convicted felons. It’s also too ridiculous (and disgusting) to merit a response.
If those are your best arguments against Joel (and I notice you have no positive ones for Beyer; I guess it’s impossible to praise a nonexistent record of conservative activism or achievement) … well, you’re not doing your favorite candidate any favors – in the absence of real substance, histrionics are a poor (and obviously desperate) substitute.
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Im not going to comment on the relative merit of the candidates since I have a horse in the race, but…
John you sound alot like that raving, foam in the corner of his mouth, “man-about-town” James Hartline (sure James… you won the cross fight… sure you did… and you and your followers just packed the central committee to show who was boss… yeah and you have a list of ‘christians’ who’ll do just anything for you, like 5,000 daily readers…. sure… now just calm down and play with your clay and glass beads).
These kinds of arguements are the signs of a feeble mind. Or worse, the signs of an extremist out of touch with reality. “His grandma got a shop vac from a gay guy so he must be gay”.
Next thing you’ll be claiming you and Hartline invented the question-mark, right? (grrr do I owe you money for using that?, twice)
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
PS – by “John” I clearly mean “Paul”… come on… throw me a bone… its 6 days from the damn election.
May 31st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Duane, you need to share the joke with the rest of the room. Who’s John? It’s been a few years for me, so I’m sure there’s a whole new crop of nutcases out there.
June 1st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Geez, after Duane and Tony, I don’t feel the need to respond to John….er, Paul, except to note the following:
-If the unnamed legislator is ineffective, then Steve Baldwin was as well.
-Joel Anderson is a conservative.
-Debbie Beyer is a conservative.
Election day will tell whether the one with the weaker campaign will have assisted in keeping the other from becoming a member of the Assembly. Yes, Chris Larkin, it will be over in June, not November.
June 1st, 2006 at 12:00 am
Barry,
Exception noted. I understand the challenges of having to serve in a perpetual, shrunken minority. However, you’ll remember that even in that minority, Steve was able to kill AB101 – a bill that the majority embraced and should’ve passed easily – through creativity and sheer force of his prodigious will. He was able to affect legislation, even in the minority. Granted, Steve was exceptional, but he proves what is possible. It’s also possible to work with majority members on what is mutually acceptable and possible (although I’m sure the opportunities for that are rarer and rarer in the Communist-controlled Legislature.) I’ll close by adding that your loyalty to the “unnamed member” deserves great admiration. I wish I could say that I believe he’s worthy of it.