The California GOP Central Committee met this weekend in San Francisco. There was hope that the party would at last abandon its Taliban platform. Alas, the knuckle-draggers prevailed again. Jon Fleischman, the former PR flack for disgraced and resigned O.C. Sheriff Mike Carona, showed up to rail against Mexicans. So the CA GOP will continue to be the anti-Mexican party. The party kept its anti-choice plank as well.
The media had a lot to say about the sinking California Republicans. Here are a few excerpts from the L.A. Times:
And the party has alienated, at least in part, two of the fastest-growing segments of the California electorate: Latinos and independents. Latinos have largely rejected the GOP since divisive rhetoric surrounded Proposition 187, the landmark 1994 voter initiative to cut off services to illegal immigrants. Independents, who now constitute 19.37% of voters, were barred from voting in February’s Republican presidential primary but were welcomed in the Democratic contest.
James Hartman, the former chairman of the Alameda County Republican Party, said those handicaps are the byproduct of an inflexible party leadership, and he doubts the GOP will reverse its fortunes unless that changes.
“It’s being dominated and controlled by a very conservative faction,” said Hartman, a Walnut Creek attorney who joined about a thousand other Republicans attending the convention. “How can you win an election without appealing to the ‘decline-to-state voters’ and when you have only a third of the electorate? Just look at the math.”
At the last state party convention in November, Schwarzenegger said the GOP was “dying at the box office” because it remains too ideologically conservative on issues such as healthcare and global warming — criticism that still burns many party loyalists. Earlier this year, Republican state lawmakers helped torpedo the governor’s $1.49-billion plan for universal healthcare.
“Essentially, there is no relationship between Schwarzenegger and the Republican Party. He’s basically a man without a party,” said Mike Schroeder, a former state GOP chairman from Orange County.
Gee Mikey, wouldn’t you say that your former golden boy Carona is a “man without a party?”
Here are a few excerpts from the Sacramento Bee:
California has elected two Republican governors since supporting Bush in 1988, but both Govs. Pete Wilson and Schwarzenegger supported abortion rights. In contrast, McCain has said during the primary campaign he would like to see Roe v. Wade overturned. He also supported a Supreme Court decision last year that upheld a ban on so-called partial-birth abortions.
The San Francisco Chronicle published a very funny analysis of McCain from the ever-loony Rev. Lou Sheldon:
“John McCain will be a marvelous selection as our nominee,” said the Rev. Lou Sheldon, who heads the Traditional Values Coalition in Anaheim and was a staunch supporter of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. “He is with us on abortion. He is with us on the marriage issue.”
With regard to concerns about McCain’s relationship with lobbyists – the subject of a recent New York Times story – Sheldon was not in the least worried. “The John McCain I know is a man of the highest integrity,” he said.
Integrity? What the heck does Sheldon, a sham minister who takes money from politicians in return for his “support,” know about integrity?
And Bob Mulholland ripped the CA GOP and McCain as only he can:
“California is in play only in Republican press releases,” said Bob Mulholland, campaign adviser to the state Democratic Party. “McCain will be 72 years old in the fall, and he believes women should be prosecuted if they have an abortion.
“That won’t fly in California. … If he puts his toes in California, he will be beat up by the Democrats and the pro-choice community,” not to mention voters outraged by McCain’s support for the Iraq war, he said.
I will let Fleischman get the last word, as it is inadvertently hilarious:
“John McCain still has … to endear himself” to conservative activists, Fleischman said. McCain “has my head, but he has to win my heart.”
Fleischman has a heart? ROFLMAO!
“Jon Fleischman showed up to rail against Mexicans. So the CA GOP will continue to be the anti-Mexican party.”
Did he “rail” against Mexican’s, or did he speak out against illegal immigration?
Big difference don’t ya think?
“anti-choice.”
There you go again, Art, talking in code.
I think what you mean is “anti-abortion.” As in, unborn babies are human beings, and thus have the same human rights as you and me. Is that so hard? You do still think unborn babies are human, don’t you?
And how exactly is that a “Taliban” platform? How do you expect anyone to take your commentary seriously when you toss out, completely unserious rhetorical lawn darts like that?
And Art, you’re characterization of anyone who criticizes illegal immigration as “anti-Mexican is completely and totally dishonest.
Not that that will stop you from continuing to do it.
Jon Fleischman has no credibility, so I don’t need to know what he said. The OC bigmouths who fell on their swords for Carona are irrelevant.
I was there at the convention watching Jon Fleischman in action. The man is no friend to Latinos, regardless what party he’s registered with. As the elected Vice-Chair South of the GOP he even failed to make it to the well-attended CA Hispanic Republican Assembly. He represents the largest area of California with the highest percentage of Latino Republican voters, and failed to even address them. The man is egotistically crude and is turning the CA GOP into “The Jon Fleischman Show.”
Poster 5,
You are very right. What a tragedy for the CA GOP. Fleischman is twice married. He worked for years for the most corrupt perverted OC Sheriff ever. So much for family values!
He hates Mexicans. If this is the best the CA GOP can do, this party may have to cease operations in the near future.
Matt/Jubal,
If not for men there would be NO unwanted pregnancies. Women certainly cannot impregnate each other. You want to stop abortions? Then focus on the guys. And stop telling women what to do with their bodies.
BTW, it looks bad for your position when married Reeps that you have endorsed repeatedly, such as Mike Carona, are complete man-whores. They cheat on their wives from day one and you still have the huevos to come here and talk about your “values?” Please. What a bunch of damn hypocrites!
Jubal
Get a clue-your position is meaningless-and the Republican Party (with you and Jon Fleischman involved) is dead-as is Guy Houston’s legislation penalizing Berkeley-You pursue an agenda that only will lead to continued loss after loss after loss-
I am a Servite graduate-well before you-when we were taught to think for ourselves-a Republican and pro-choice in its puriest sense and in complete agreement with Roe v. Wade. And I work in Sacramento so I am in the mix and not like you and Flushman. I recently interacted with several historic former Republican members of the state legislature that have reregistered as DTS and have voted for Barack Obama. Their take on the idiot luns running the party? They want nothing to do with the CRP-the biggest joke-the Caucus position on Prop 93-just lost all legitimate leverage in both houses as many of those districts will turn- BTW have you taken a second on your house to help Nehring and pay back the $3MM loan-oh I forgot the current visa problem #2 that Nehring has with his staff doing work in San Diego-Change is afoot and Nehring will be gone as will the idiot Grover Norquist-Roger Niello is laughing all the way to the bank-Dont forget Jubal-make sure that your check to Nehring is good-the bankruptcy and foreclosure is a done deal-Carona may help you out by donating his prison earnings as will Doolittle and soon to be indicted Pombo-and I forgot Gary “my middle name is emminent domain”-Thinking moderate centrist Republicans are watching and laughing and voting Democratic
I’m no Jon Fleischman sympathizer, but the CA Hispanic Republican Assembly meeting occured during the CRP Proxy meeting, the YRFC meeting, and the CFRW meeting. I, like many others, tried to jump back and forth between all of the meetings, but I missed a lot of substance.
Jon’s leadership role likely required the majority of his presence at the proxy meeting.
And for the record, the CAHRA was the least attended meeting of the four, so the phrasing “well-attended” is questionable, Anon 6:00.
If not for men there would be NO unwanted pregnancies.
Art, do we need to re-fresh you on the birds and the bees? It takes two to tango.
Does an unborn child’s humanity hinge on whether the pregnancy is wanted or unwanted? Planned or unplanned?
I’m not telling any woman what to do with her body. It just happens there is a another body inside a pregnant woman’s body. You may have heard of these things called “sonograms” that enable us to actually see those little humans.
They cheat on their wives from day one and you still have the huevos to come here and talk about your “values?” Please. What a bunch of damn hypocrites!
Again, Art: what exactly does that have to do with the humanity of unborn children? Is just a dash, just a smidgen of logical thinking too much to ask?
I am a Servite graduate-well before you-when we were taught to think for ourselves-a Republican and pro-choice in its puriest sense and in complete agreement with Roe v. Wade.
And thank you for not further embarrassing our alma mater by attaching your identity to that incomprehensible ramble. identifying yourself. Maybe you were taught to think for yourself. When I was there, we learned to actually think, period.
They cheat on their wives from day one…
One more thing, Art — who are “they”?
Matt/Jubal,
You tell me. How many of the CA GOP “leaders” are divorced? How many have married more than once? How many cheat on their wives? Who knows?
Legislators, both state and federal, are guilty of this sort of conduct, irrespective of their party affiliation. You know that is true. You have been around long enough to know better.
The difference is that the Dems don’t pretend to be holier than thou, whereas the GOP “conservative” knuckle-draggers love to spout verses while they do God knows what behind closed doors. What a bunch of hypocrites!
How many times did you personally endorse Carona? He was your boy – even though the OC Weekly had outed his perverted behavior for years. And you had NO problem backing him. What does that say about you Matt?
Art, I think you have invented a new category that supersedes the grossly oversimplified generalization.
Let’s see. “All” conservative GOP leaders are Bible-verse spouters who secretly carry on infidelities. Is that right? That’s cartoonish reasoning.
The difference is that the Dems don’t pretend to be holier than thou…
You mean, if there are no standards, then it’s easy to live up to them?
Seriously, Art, Democrats have their own brand of holier than thou, Art. YOU have been around long enough to know that.
How many times did you personally endorse Carona?
I voted for Mike in 1998, 2002 and 2006. By spring of 2006, I thought Mike had put his bad decision-making and poor judgment in advisors (Haidl and Jaramillo) behind him. It was not an enthusiastic vote, but I didn’t think Hunt was any kind of alternative and Martin had zero chance of making it into a run-off with Carona. If Mike had been forced into a run-off with Hunt, I believe Hunt might well have won — and for all his flaws, I thought Carona preferable to Hunt.
What does that say about you Matt?
And there, ladies and gentlemen, we have the living, breathing, walking definition of “holier than thou”; Art Pedroza.
Matt/Jubal,
What you have just admitted to is systematically doing what is expedient instead of what is right. That makes you a gutless wonder Matt.
Would you entrust any of the women in your family to Carona’s “Care,” for even five minutes? I wouldn’t. In fact I don’t think you would either. But you handed him the keys to the O.C. Sheriff’s Department every single time he asked for them.
You have to live with that Matt. I don’t.
Don’t even get me started on your other moral failings…such as the Urell Amigos fiasco.
It is easy to go along to get along. You have done that your entire life. I hope you are proud of yourself.
What you have just admitted to is systematically doing what is expedient instead of what is right. That makes you a gutless wonder Matt.
Classic Art Pedroza: substituting insults for arguments, name-calling for thinking.
It wasn’t expediency, Art. You didn’t even use the word correctly. It was making what I felt the best decision was given the choices available to me.
Kind of like you did when you told you readers during the special election that you thought Janet Nguyen was a great candidate when you really thought she was — to quote you — “an empty suit.”
But you handed him the keys to the O.C. Sheriff’s Department every single time he asked for them.
What does that even mean, Art? As I said, I voted for him in 1998, 2002 and 2006. You voted for him, too — just not in 2006.
Don’t even get me started on your other moral failings…such as the Urell Amigos fiasco.
I don’t care if you do or not, Art. Being lectured on moral failings by a compulsive liar and confabulator like you would be amusing.
It is easy to go along to get along.
Obviously, you don’t know me very well.
You have done that your entire life.
I have? And you would know that how, given you have only known me for a few years?
Art, you just can’t help making things up, can you?
Matt/Jubal,
Who is making things up now? I voted for Carona exactly one time. I have been opposed to him ever since.
How you could deem Carona to be better than either Hunt or Martin is beyond me. I will let my readers judge you for that one.
Who is making things up now? I voted for Carona exactly one time.
My mistake. Who did you vote for for Sheriff in 2002?
I have been opposed to him ever since.
Really? You mean, since 1999? That doesn’t jibe with what you posted on OJ in the past.
How you could deem Carona to be better than either Hunt or Martin is beyond me. I will let my readers judge you for that one.
I’ve said it before, but I guess I have to say it again, Art: work on your reading comprehension skills.
I’ll re-state it so that you may understand. If Carona were forced into a run-off, it was going to be with Hunt. Martin wasn’t running a campaign that could put him in a run-off with Carona.
I judged Hunt less qualified to be Sheriff than the incumbent Sheriff, even with Carona’s flaws.
I await you next non sequitur
Matt/Jubal,
Not at all. I turned on Carona after he was elected because he endorsed Nativo Lopez for the Santa Ana School Board.
I don’t recall who ran against him the second time around. But I know I did not vote for Carona. If he was not opposed most likely I just did not cast a vote for Sheriff.
I raised a huge stink about the Nativo endorsement. An editorial I wrote about it was published in the Register. I was told by insiders that his department’s phones rang off the hook with angry callers in the wake of the Nativo endorsement.
Art, you just stated that “I voted for Carona exactly one time.” and you have had the nerve to rip anybody who has endorsed him in the past.
Hypocrite!!!
Cunningham-again your posting leaves much to be desired. A starting point is lucidity of your thought process. When I attended Servite, a key element of our education was the importance of independent thought and thinking and the danger of group alliance and thought. Independence of thought, by definition, is the beauty of thinking. Given your writing style and poor grammer, I would have thought that you would have been a Mater Dei graduate. Reluctantly, we have to acknowledge you as a graduate because mommy and daddy paid your way. We dont have to accept you.
I am sure that you took biology there. Obviously you failed but more likely you spent more time with Urell and that blinded common sense from your lexicon. It must frustrate you to no end that the concept of choice and the correlative Goldwaterism that government has no place in a persons private decisions go hand in hand. The fact that your tired and dated effort to impose your moral standards on the rest of California society is consistently repudiated by a majority of Californians of all political stripes, except for the neoKlanspeople like yourself (yes I am that same person that you booted off your blog site last year and stated that you should go home and find solace in wearing your klan robes and hat), must drive NeoKLAN “thinkers” like you and Flushmann nuts. Thank God we Californians, as a society, have the strength to repudiate your tired thinking. It must drive you nuts to admit that Ronald Reagan signed California’s landmark legislation, despite his later statements, and that moderate Republicans who are successful in statewide elections, as Pete Wilson, are successful because they repudiate such thinking as you espouse. Thank God for moderate thinking Republicans as opposed to dogmatic Republicans as yourself. Legislative efforts around the country to change societal thinking about abortion and choice undertaken by neoconservative advocates such as yourself and Flushmann have failed in a miserably consistent manner.
Any effort to change California law regarding abortion and choice results in abject failure and will continue to produce such a result. As George Deukmajian said this weekend, it just wasnt an important issue.
BTW-you didnt indicate whether you would be writing your check to avert to coming bankruptcy of the CRP. In fact, you didnt address any of those issues. I would characterize that as avoidance of the most obvious-something I would expect from Carlos Bustamante, a Mater Dei graduate, but then people like the two of you have common thoughts and moral standards and ethical challenges-what is wonderful about your thinking is its abject transparency and the ability of thinking Californians to reject it outright.
Dont forget to write your bailout check to Nehring. If he is gone, Im sure that Arnold will be happy to endorse it as we take back the California Republican Party.
Reluctantly, we have to acknowledge you as a graduate because mommy and daddy paid your way. We dont have to accept you.
What do you mean “We,” kemosabe? I don’t know who you are, let alone if you’re even a Servite grad, as you claim.
As for the rest of your semi-literate diatribe, it’s just not worth wasting my time with someone who’s idea of serious discussion is calling conservatives “neoKlanspeople.” You’d likely be more comfortable at DailyKos if that’s your point of view.
So perhaps it’s best you continue to use your oxymoronic pseudonym to avoid further embarrassing Servite, which has a reputation to uphold, after all.
Matthew Cunningham
Servite, Class of 1982
Poster 21,
Not at all. When Carona first ran he was presented as an honest, God-fearing conservative. We had no reason to believe otherwise.
We now know that his image was a facade. I was amongst the first GOP activists in this county to start opposing him. For that I ought to get some kind of credit…
Lou’s son Steve, claims he is an attorney but the CA Bar has no Steve Sheldon listed as being able to practice law in California. Is this another scam by the Sheldons?
Anonymous 4:00, Stephen R. Sheldon was admitted to the bar in February 1998 and went inactive on January 25, 2008. Do you have specific documentation of his practicing law in the past 31 days? If not, there are no other blemishes on his bar record.