« AD71 Watch: Who Has Jim Silva Endorsed? | Main | “…a modest bit of fiscal responsibility…" »

June 28, 2007

Comments

What do you have against Janet

Jubal,

What do you have against Janet. Everyday you post something. DO you live and Dream about what to put on the blog next? Hey guess what I heard she just went to the bathroom. You should put that up.

LOl

Milk Man

Jubal doesn't hate Janet, she just is not giving anyone anything good to write about. The incompetent that is coming out of the 1st District Office is unbelievable.

Jubal or Wiskol cannot write anything good about Janet if:

1. She opened an illegal legal defense fund that violated county law.

2. She refused to disclose who her hidden donors are until the entire blogosphere started a "count up".

3. She would rather appoint someone who is not in her district to an important commission in exchange for political support from the CWLA - this is also in violation of county law.

So there we have it, Janet has been in office for nearly 3 months and she has screwed up on 3 issues.

Art Pedroza

Lechero,

How long was Nehring the CA GOP Chair before he screwed up your party by hiring the felonious Aussie?

Nesta

Art what the heck does Ron Nehring have anything to do with this post? You're really going off the reservation man...

on the inside

there are at least two other supervisors who have appointed people outside their district to various boards and committees,,,why dont you go after them

No Comparison

To play Art's game...
How long did it take Ron Nehring to correct that mistake as soon as it was revealed in the SacBee compared to how it took your above-the-law Supervisor Janet to FINALLY comply with the law regarding disclosure of donors after it was revealed in the Register, the Times, here, there...?

Try 3 days for Ron on a bad judgement call and 53 days for Janet on wilfullly breaking the law!!!

Had Nehring remained defiant - LIKE Janet, then that would make him subject to the same scrunity. But he didn't. Instead, he took responsibility for his actions and put the blame squarely on his shoulders - UNLIKE Janet. Then, he immediately hired a man with a proven track record, Bill Christinsen, to fill the vacant position.

Of course, you most likely disapprove of Christinsen because he's not La Raza and therefore not pro-amnesty, nor homosexual and he supports what you call a "red herring" issue like pro-life values in our schools.

Nehring made a bad judgement call and immediately fixed the problem.

Janet BROKE the law and thumbed her nose at the voters of O.C. for almost two months.

Yeah, Art, I think I see your point - NOT!


Jose

Jubal,
Stop pickin on her. Other Sup did the same thing. Go head and delete my comment.

Art Pedroza

Jose,

And Jubal/Cunningham himself has been forced to admit that what Janet did was not illegal.

Will Jubal/Cunningham never tire of picking on Supervisor Nguyen?

BTW, I understand that Shirley Grindle is going after Trung Nguyen because he has not reported all of the in-kind contributions he has received from his lawyers...

Flowerszzz

Art - you are soo full of it. Campaign reports are not even due until July 31st - how the hell would Shirley G know whether or not he has reported them yet?

You have just been caught in a bold faced lie. How do you live with yourself.

Jubal

And Jubal/Cunningham himself has been forced to admit that what Janet did was not illegal.

And just when did I do that?

I don't understand what the fascination is with whatever Janet does or doesn't do. It looks like there is a hidden agenda here to just continue to ride her.

In the words of Van Tran: "we are all Republicans and we should not be saying bad things about one another, the republicans are getting that reputation for 'eating their own young'" He personally said that to me. So, perhaps everyone should just back off of Janet.

What do you hope to gain? A democrat in that seat at the next election?

Jose

I think Van Tran is full of it when saying "we are all Republicans and we should not be saying bad things about one another, the republicans are getting that reputation for 'eating their own young". He is the one indirectly staged the attach of Janet. If he is truly mean it than he should have stopped his puppet Trung to stop filing complaint after another. I bet my head that Trung also did not list all his cash constribution. Let's be fair Janet is not perfect. Her only mistake is make is not listening to Van Tran or letting her step all over her. I don't like Janet much but I admired her courageous. We need someone who is independence.

Yes, I have come to believe the comments from Van Tran were rather disingenuous since he was referring to another case in point where one of his people was continuing to lash another person in public forums, after his person had used misleading information to win his seat on a local board. When protests were voiced he came out with the "we shouldn't be talking bad about each other we are all Republicans" comments... but then he does not live by this in the case of Trung and Janet.

Art Pedroza

Jubal,

Here is what I asked you a few days ago:

I asked but did not receive an answer: is it legal for Supervisor Nguyen to appoint someone from the 5th District to this commission? Yes or no - simple question.

And here is part of your answer:

Ipso facto, the answer to your question is yes.

Jubal

Art:

1) I thought you were referring the comment by "No comparison" about Janet's concealing donors, not the HBP Commission appointment.

2) My answer was based on what turned out to be mistaken information.

3) I wasn't "forced to admit" anything, because in my initial post I never said Janet had done anything illegal. I made a very simple point that it would wiser for Sup. Nguyen to appoint one of her constituents to the HBP Commission rather than someone from the 5th. A very reasonable point.

4) Since then, it's clear that under the governing ordinance, there must be one commissioner from each district. Since 5th District Sup. Bates has made it clear she will appoint one of her constituents to the commission, that doesn't leave room for Sup. Nguyen to also appoint a 5th District resident. Would it kill Janet to appoint one of her own constituents?

Art Pedrosa

Before Art continues his nonsense, it is important to point out that even if Janet does not rescind her nomination of a 5th District resident, the Board is not obligated to approve that nomination.

These are actually Board appointments, not appointments by individual superivosrs. They are voted upon by the full Board following a nomination by a Supervisor.

Trung56%-Janet 44%

June 29, 2007
Poll results: Janet v. Trung
In political campaigns, there are no unwritten rules. If it's not expressly prohibited, it's fair game. In recognition of that, Total Buzz congratulates Trung Nguyen for winning our poll -- and getting more than twice as many votes here as he got in the actual election. In losing, Janet Nguyen got nearly twice as many votes as she did on Feb. 6.

That February election for supervisor changed the way we think about central county elections. And this poll changes the way we here think about our fledgeling poll, designed strictly for entertainment purposes. We've decided to make it more challenging for a single person to vote hundreds or thousands of times. Stay tuned for Total Buzz Poll 2.0

-- Martin Wisckol

We are flattered that the Nguyens and their backers put so much effort into this.

The results as of 4:45 p..m.:

Trung Nguyen -- 25,696 (56%)
Janet Nguyen -- 19,908 (44%)

The results from the real election?

Trung -- 10,912
Janet -- 10,919
(These are the certified numbers -- a judge later determined that Janet won by just three votes.)

Total ballots cast in the Total Buzz Poll: 45,604
Total ballots counted in the Feb. 6 election: 45,946

I guess Adam Probolsky doesn't have to worry about us moving into his polling turf just yet....

Next up, as soon as we learn how to use this sophisticated new polling tool we're getting: Would you vote for Diane Harkey for Assembly?

-- Martin Wisckol


The comments to this entry are closed.


Categories