Enough, enough, I say, to those who are chastizing various local GOP bloggers and GOP blog responders over their inadequacies and mealy mouthedness when it comes to calling out the racists and racism swirling around doomed congressional candidate Tan Nguyen. First, you left fielders criticize Republifucks for going all Three Blind Mice to the racism right in front of them every day forever and ever in these United States. Then, when they join you in piling on Tan, you mock their lack of finesse, ability, experience. Isn't it enough that everyone's on the same page for a change? (Well, everyone but the Mexican haters, of course.) When's the last time in this country that both sides could agree on something? Okay, other than Clay Aiken's obvious gayness.

We must say, however, it is refreshing to hear some on the right telling others on the right that if they are against Tan, they are obviously for incumbent Democrat Loretta Sanchez. Nothing could be farther from the truth—just like you can be against that effin' war in Iraq AND for the troops AND against terrorism.

Check out this little ray of sunshine from Bloomberg (the news service, not the mayor):

Candidates Ignore $1.35 Trillion Minimum Tax `Bomb'
By Ryan J. Donmoyer

Oct. 31 (Bloomberg) -- Congressional candidates this fall are furiously debating Iraq, Medicare and extending tax cuts. Most are staying quiet about an imminent legislative challenge: how to stop a tax increase that will hit more than 20 million households next year, some with incomes as low as $50,000.

The rest is here.

From this morning's USA Today, a report on your tax dollars in action:

The federal government's "no sex without marriage" message isn't just for kids anymore.

Now the government is targeting unmarried adults up to age 29 as part of its abstinence-only programs, which include millions of dollars in federal money that will be available to the states under revised federal grant guidelines for 2007.

The government says the change is a clarification. But critics say it's a clear signal of a more directed policy targeting the sexual behavior of adults.

[…]

For last year's state grants, Congress appropriated $50 million. A similar amount is expected for 2007, but the money has not yet been allocated, according to the Administration for Children and Families.

On the bright side, this means that if you are an 18-29 year old with no prospect of sex on the horizon, you're no longer a loser, you're a model citizen. Well done. Now go hit the (cold) shower.

The good news: Tan Nguyen supporters held a rally at Tan's office yesterday, providing still more ridiculousness to keep our spirits up as we draw closer to the Election Day of Reckoning. Tan supporters are certainly a colorful bunch. Over on the Free Republic website they've posted quite a few pictures, along with the following claims:

• Loretta Sanchez's office provided the faulty translation of the Sergio Ramirez letter


• Loretta's office was notified about the raid on Tan's office, hence the major media presence

Right. Congresswoman Sanchez's office mistranslated a letter to 14,000 Spanish-speaking immigrant voters, illegally telling them it would be illegal for them to vote. Why would she disenfranchise her supporters? Because the inevitable backlash would benefit her? That's about as insane as the idea that Loretta's office would lend Tan a hand, or that there are so few bilingual folk around OC that Tan would need to beg a favor from Loretta.

As for Loretta's office having prior notice: that's true. In fact, most politicians and local media outlets had prior notice to show up, provided by none other than Tan Nguyen. Remember, Tan? You promised us a press conference on the afternoon of Oct. 20 outside your campaign headquarters to explain the letter. So yes, Loretta and the media were warned - by YOU.

None of this is surprising; Tan's an accidental satirist of epic proportions. But what did shock me was the vitriol and bigotry evidenced in the local blogosphere's response to these pictures. Over on OCBlog the commenters referred to Tan's supporters as hookers, Nazis and massage parlor workers. Even the site moderator, Jubal/Matt Cunningham, who likes to take people to task for name-calling, said "Maybe they should re-name it Freek Republic." Wow, we haven't seen this kind of bigotry on OCBlog since they went after Bill (Belal) Dalati.

Even Orange Juice joined in on the racist ranting. OJ's a slightly more bipartisan blog if you bar Art Pedroza's occasional spittle-flecked rantings. On the Juice, Claudio Gallegos lapsed into OCBlogspeak by referring to Tan supporters as "hookers, racists and brainwashed nutcases." Okay, so there was one woman who was dressed a little slutty. I lent a friend a top-hat for a Halloween party that same Saturday night; she may have been similarly party-bound. Hell, either way, more power to her. I wish more girls dressed like that, all the time, every day of the year. Please?

I don't know if people are getting antsy so close to the election and feel like beating up on the most obvious targets in order to feel better about themselves or what, but I suspect that resorting to insults is exactly the sort of behavior that allows us to justify torturing prisoners. After all, they ought to know better than to hate America, right? So who cares if we violate our principles and sink down to what we perceive as their level? It's all a farce.

At the end of the day we should at least pretend to treat our enemies, or those with whose politics we disagree, with respect or at least tolerance. I know that's all that's kept me from going on a blood-soaked rampage during this election cycle. How do you all restrain yourselves?

UPDATE: NOBODY READS THE PAPERS ANYMORE

Just spotted this in the Sunday Register:

Buena Park's the Rev. Wiley Drake showed up to videotape his global prayer-line broadcast, and a club singer in black fishnet stockings repeatedly lip-synced to her recording of the campaign's new country-Western theme song, "Stand by Our Tan."

An explanation for the so-called "hooker", and an appropriate song, considering the original lyrics:

Eddie Rose writes:

"In California this year, we have--with one notable exception--the WORST slate of candidates, including a man who can't pronounce the name of the state he claims to serve! Were it not for the importance of several ballot propositions, it probably wouldn't make much sense to go to the polls at all--unless you believe that we should simply vote for the LESSER OF EVILS. What an option!
Here are my recommendations:

Prop. 1A: Use existing gas taxes for roads and transportation projects. What a novel idea! That's what gas taxes SHOULD be used for! If "our" elected officials weren't so corrupt and incompetent, we wouldn't even need Prop. 1A. But we do! YES

Prop. 83: Residence restrictions and monitoring of sexual predators; increases penalties for violent and habitual sex offenders and child molesters. YES

Prop. 84: Protects drinking water quality and coastal resources. YES

Prop. 85: Parental notification prior to termination of minor's pregnancy. YES

Prop. 86: Tax on cigarettes to fund hospital emergency services. All we need to know is that Phillip Morris and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco companies have spent over $60 million (!) to date to try and defeat this proposition. The tobacco companies are blatant LIARS. A definite YES

Prop. 87: Tax on oil companies to fund alternative energy research and production. If anyone could be more corrupt and vile than the tobacco companies, it's BIG OIL. Chevron, Exxon/Mobil, and Shell Oil have spent over $60 million (!) to date on their propaganda to con voters into voting against this proposition. Like BIG TOBACCO, BIG OIL LIES. A definite YES

Prop. 88: $50 parcel tax. An end-run around Prop. 13. NO

Prop. 89: Public financing of political campaigns. Time to end political corruption by BOTH major political parties. Just see how much money BIG OIL, BIG TOBACCO, drug companies, the insurance industry, HMOs and powerful labor unions pour into the campaign coffers of unscrupulous politicians who do their bidding. A definite YES

Prop. M: Continuation of half-cent sales tax to fund additional transportation projects in Orange County. Measure M was originally approved by Orange County voters in 1996, but it has FAILED MISERABLY to deliver on some of its promises, such as synchronization of traffic signals and more efficient (i.e. rail) mass transit. Measure M bureaucrats DON'T deserve another chance! NO

Governor: In retrospect, Steve Westly would have been a better choice than Phil Angelides, but at least Angelides knows how to pronounce CALIFORNIA--unlike his Republican opponent--and at least Angelides' daddy wasn't a card-carrying Nazi--unlike Schwarzenegger's daddy--and Schwarzenegger has an IQ only about 5 points higher than the average NFL running back. ANGELIDES

Lt. Governor: McClintock lost whatever credibility he had left when he endorsed the evil empress Pat Bates for Orange County Supervisor. As Insurance Commissioner, John Garamendi refused to accept ANY campaign contributions from the insurance industry. That shows integrity, something lacking in most elected officials today. GARAMENDI

Attorney General: What a choice! Poochigian is almost as ANTI-environment as Congressman "Dumbo" Pombo, if that's possible. And then Governor Jerry Brown appointed the unfit and incompetent Rose Bird to the California Supreme Court. This one's easy. NO RECOMMENDATION

State Treasurer: Bill Lockyer did a good job as Attorney General. LOCKYER

U.S. Senator: Dianne Feinstein has done a good job as our U.S. Senator. She deserves re-election. FEINSTEIN

Orange County Board of Supervisors, 5th District: The primary was reminiscent of the movie "The Good {Eddie Rose}, the Bad {Cassie DeYoung}, and the Ugly (Pat Bates}." Unfortunately, the Bad and the Ugly outspent the Good by about 400 to 1. If the election proved anything at all, it was that there are only about 10,000 INTELLIGENT voters in Orange County's 5th Supervisorial District. Bates shares one trait in common with BIG OIL, BIG TOBACCO, George Bush, and Dick Cheney---they are all PATHOLOGICAL LIARS! And DeYoung wants to con the environmental community into thinking she's an "environmentalist." I cannot, in good conscience, support either of these candidates. Write in me, EDDIE ROSE, for OC Supervisor

PS: If you know anyone who lives in Florida or Washington, please remind them to vote for Bill Nelson or Maria Cantwell, respectively, two GREAT U.S. Senators."

[Eddie Rose, a former Republican Laguna Niguel City Councilman, is famous for his political independence, card-playing skills and opinions. Just ask OJ.]

Next week, the pinche hilarious Borat Sagdiyev graces American screens with his Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan. The Weekly sponsored a screening yesterday at The Block at Orange, and weren't we all surpised when the Virgin Megastore there played a crucial role in the film! Lest we be accused of spoiling films, let's just say it involves Pamela Anderson and a parking lot. Jagshemash!.

Like the unstoppable killer in a horror movie, an unfeeling entity who once menaced OC and was believed to be long gone, is now poised to return. Just in time for Halloween, no less. If nothing else, you have to admire the timing.

A county finance committee voted yesterday to add Merrill Lynch to the list of approved underwriters with which the county may do business. The reason Merrill Lynch hasn't been on the list, despite the fact that it is one of the county's leading brokerage houses, is, of course, because Merrill Lynch played a leading role in driving the county into bankruptcy back in 1994.

The vote was unanimous, and done very quietly, since, perhaps, some members of the public might still be a little cool to a brokerage house whose actions helped land the county $1.6 billion in the hole. But to paraphrase Stalin's famous line about killing: The bankruptcy of one is a tragedy, the bankruptcy of a community of millions is a statistic. The county's actually being doing limited business with Merrill Lynch for the past three years. And seeing how the county's bankruptcy debt is down to a svelte $600 million, it's felt that it's time to let bygones be bygones, and put the outfit that did so much to dig the hole back on the list of the trustworthy with no conditions attached. (Personally, I would have waited until the bankruptcy debt dropped beneath the half-a-billion dollar mark, but maybe I'm overly sensitive.)

So, what guarantee is there that Merrill Lynch will be either more competent or more honest or both this time? According to committee chairman Thomas Hammond (a mortgage banker by day), no one needs to worry because a company like Merrill Lynch is inherently unstable. Hammond explained to the Los Angeles Times that "investment bankers never stay at the same place. They move on after five years." See, instability and the ability of investment bankers to avoid responsibility for the consequences of their actions by moving on before all but the shortest term results are known are the cornerstones of financial reliability.

The final decision is up to the Board of Supervisors, who will take up the matter at its November 14 meeting. Presumably, the board will go along with the committee and welcome Merrill Lynch back into the fold. And then the committee and the board can take the next step in restoring the old status quo: putting psychics back on the list of approved county financial advisors.

Sigh. The LA Times reports today that the Los Angeled Police Department officer who paid for the now-infamous letter to Spanish-speaking immigrants in Orange County is none other than Mark Nguyen. Mark is said to have paid $4,000 for the letter's dissemination under a fake name, and he lives with the officially unnamed Tan Nguyen staffer who allegedly sent out the letter without Tan's knowledge. Mark is also Tan's close friend from back in 1992 when they met as fellow Bruins at UCLA.

Tan Nguyen and Mark Nguyen are not related. Nguyen is one of if not the most common Vietnamese surnames. Just check out Theo Douglas's great article this week on sculptor Tuan Nguyen. When you hear Nguyen, think Johnson. Think Smith. Think Doe. Tan and Mark Nguyen, John and Ken Doe.

I can't wait to see what kind of mix-ups and confusions occur now that we've got two Nguyens in the story, especially considering how confusing it's been so far. Example: The news swept 'round Ireland days ago that Nguyen was Schwarzenegger's opponent (why else would the governor get involved in a congressional election?), though they've finally corrected themselves. In THIS STORY, the headline originally read, "Schwarzenegger urges opponent to step down", and it can still be found in that format on Google News. According to Jill O'Sullivan at the Irish Examiner, "our US news supplier mixed up some facts." And then half the news outlets in the country ran with it until it was corrected half a day later.

Whether you're eager to bring justice to OC, or you've just always wanted to indict a ham sandwich, there's good news: Orange County Superior Court is accepting applications for the 2007-08 grand jury. If you are 18 or older, have been a resident of the county for at least one year, posses "ordinary intelligence" and a decent command of English, and more or less meet these other criteria, you qualify. (There will be a background check, so don't bother trying to fake "ordinary intelligence".)

The grand jury, of course, does make decisions on criminal indictments (both ham sandwich and non-ham sandwich-related), but most of its time is spent on civil investigations.

The civil, or "watchdog" responsibilities of the grand jury include the examination of all aspects of county government, including special districts, to ensure the county is being governed honestly and efficiently and county monies are being handled appropriately. The grand jury is mandated by law to inquire into the conditions and management of public jails.

Investigations may be conducted on public agencies, the administration and affairs of any city within the county, or to examine books and records of redevelopment agencies. It is also appropriate for any private citizen, county official or county employee to present a written complaint to a grand jury for investigation.

During its term, the grand jury may select the government affairs which it wishes to investigate. These investigations are conducted by Grand Jury committees in cooperation with the departments and agencies of the county. Committees may ask for support and advice from Superior Court, District Attorney's office, County Counsel or outside consultants.

In addition to a sense of having done their civic duty, grand jurors receive free parking and "$50.00 per day not to exceed $250.00 per week" (plus mileage to and from meetings). So, if you are of ordinary intelligence, etc., and interested in making the wheels of justice in OC turn, you can watch a recruitment video here and find an application here. Applications can also be obtained by calling (714) 834-6747.

Sergio Ramirez is a double major in environmental studies and political science at Long Beach State. In March, Ramirez and a friend attended a meeting of the California Coalition for Immigration Reform for one of their classes. The two signed in, talked to some folks and took some pamplets back to their professor. They were the only Latinos.

Last week, that Long Beach State professor called Ramirez and asked if he was the Sergio who signed the infamous Tan Nguyen "immigrants can't vote" letter that used fake CCIR letterhead. He wasn't, but Ramirez can't help but to think that the people behind the letter stole/borrowed his name from the CCIR sign-in sheet he signed this March.

"I don't know how many Sergio Ramirezes there are in Orange County, but I don't think it's a coincidence that I went to that meeting and then my name shows up on a letter with CCIR letterhead," Ramirez says. "I really do think that's what happened. When [my professor] called me, she sent me the letter. I was shocked. It makes sense that Nguyen's people would grab my name from a CCIR list of people who signed in to their meeting. They probably picked up the most Latino name and used it. Maybe it's a far-fetched idea, but it's just too crazy a coincidence for it not to be true."

Ramirez's professor, Leah Fraser, confirmed that he did attend a March CCIR meeting for a class project and brought her pamphlets as proof. Ramirez also faxed the Weekly the agenda for CCIR's March meeting.

CCIR chair Barbara Coe has repeatedly denied her group's involvement with the Nguyen letter, but there's a definite connection between the two besides the faked letterhead. Last December, Nguyen was a featured speaker at a CCIR meeting. A press release for the meeting gushed that Nguyen, "believes in America as a 'nation of law', has made a commitment to uphold and defend our Constitutional rights and freedoms, has courageously publicly praised the Minuteman Project and publicly opposed any illegal alien 'guest-worker' program or amnesty." And now the possible Ramirez connection.

And what does Sergio Ramirez think of the Sergio Ramirez-authored letter? "It's ridiculous, it's not good," he says. "It's scaring people. It's nuts."

Today we spoke with Cassie DeYoung, candidate for Orange County Supervisor. She has an uphill battle against Pat Bates, a former Assemblywoman and cog in the Republican Party machine. Bates has the support of Congressmen Ken Calvert and Gary Miller, the OC GOP, the Transportation Corridor Agencies, Assemblywoman Mimi Walters and pretty much everyone else who makes me nauseous. DeYoung on the other hand has earned her party's enmity for courting Democrats and detailing certain aspects of the lock-step party politics against which she is campaigning. Her most notable disadvantages stem from her opposition to Calvert and Miller's beloved tunnel, and also her more recent assertions that the 241 (Foothill-South) toll road extension is a pathetic excuse for traffic relief, one which will in fact make traffic worse.
Who would have thought?

Tell me about the 241

Well, a recent OCTA study [the South Orange County Major Investment Study] shows that traffic in Orange County will increase by one thousand percent on the streets and roads, and over two hundred percent on the I-5 South—with the fully completed 241 extension, given the alignment they came up with. There would be virtually no traffic on the 241.

The real issue is that the I-5 needs to be improved, first and foremost. The 241 was billed to everyone and represented to everyone as a traffic relief measure for the I-5 , based on OCTA recommendations. This study shows that it won't do anything to relieve congestion. And that's very very troubling.

Another troubling thing is the non-compete clause with the 241 extension. If you improve the I-5 after the 241 is completed, taxpayers would have to pay the TCA for their loss of revenue.

The TCA says the I-5 improvements, or any regional transportation plan aspects, will not affect the non-compete clause, but it's my understanding that the only improvement to the I-5 they're talking about is the addition of a single HOV lane.

That's exactly right. And that's not the improvement that we need. We need major improvements. Why not have them give it up today? Have them say, "Okay, there is no more non-compete clause." We don't want to have to pay twice for the improvements to the I-5 freeway, especially when it shows that there will be no traffic on the 241 extension.

What does "no traffic" mean exactly? No congestion?

No congestion. In fact the graphics show the I-5 Freeway as red - that's Level F: severely congested conditions. The study shows the 241 as actually grey; absolutely uncongested.

I know two local congressmen, Ken Calvert and Gary Miller, have been real workhorses in terms of getting earmarks for the 241.

I don't know if they have; they've been real workhorses in terms of getting earmarks for the Riverside to Orange County tunnel. They got $15 Million for the tunnel; I don't know if they got any earmarks for the 241 extension.

They did. TCA likes to say that not a dime of taxpayer money has gone to the toll road. But in the SAFETEA-LU bill, Ken Calvert got an $8 Million earmark for the 241 with the help of Gary Miller. When I spoke to Miller about it he said he had definitely sought out that money, that $8 Million, and wished it had been $10 Million as the money was for environmental studies. I noticed that Miller and Calvert are not only supporting your opponent but attacking you.

Yeah, they're writing nasty letters because I came out against the tunnel. That's their pet project. The cost of the tunnel is six to eight Billion dollars. The impact to south Orange County would truly be devastating. It would dump 120,000 cars on our streets and roads where the tunnel ends. When you look at the traffic from Riverside to Orange County, the vast majority is headed from Riverside to North Orange County, then up to Los Angeles. The tunnel, however, diverts the traffic to South Orange County. The problem is, what happens when the traffic dumps out at the tunnel's end? It then has to proceed north, so a bottleneck in essence is created at the 405 and I-5 where that traffic would ultimately end out. As those commuters continue on their journey, we really have the potential to create two new El Toro Y situations.

I asked OCTA what improvements would be there for the South Orange County freeways, particularly the I-5 and 405 freeways, to handle this traffic? They said, "Well, there are none." The plan is not only exorbitant in terms of the cost, and they may tell you it will be privately funded, but not one private entity has stepped up to fund this tunnel. The only money so far has been federal taxpayer and local taxpayer money. Calvert and Miller got $15 Million for the tunnel, and OCTA and Riverside transportation agencies had to put in $3 Million to get the $15 Million. So now we're at $18 Million taxpayer dollars.

Sure they're both mad at me; they're representing their constituency and their constituency is basically Riverside. I'm representing our constituency is South Orange County and our traffic is bad enough. We can't have them dumping traffic in here.

They like Pat [Bates] because Pat supports the tunnel.

They're not the only ones. The OC GOP also seems to like Pat.

Again that came from the two congressmen; they are behind Pat and are not supporting me because of my position on the tunnel. So because I staked out a position for our residents in South Orange County, I took a hit for that.

Is that what's responsible for the OC GOP's endorsement of Bates over you, despite their rules about not endorsing candidates in non-partisan races?

You know, the OC GOP was based on representatives from the state assembly. Each congressman has a representative too. My friends came up to me and said, "We can't help you because we have directions from the state legislators to support Pat." They're all part of the same system. It just shows that it's an old-boy system and very, very difficult for somebody new to come in. I've been loyal to the party for all these years, but once you're part of that system, that state assembly system, they all stick together.

Some of them have the opinion that you're being somewhat less than loyal in your attacks on the party this election cycle.

I have never attacked the party. I have laid out exactly what Congressman Calvert has done with this tunnel and Congressman Miller and that's the extent of it. It's a non-partisan race, but they took umbrage that I would go speak to Democrats. I go and speak to all different organizations and the speech is almost always the same. I talk about transportation and the need for transportation funding, and I talk about the terrible, terrible waste of funding on a tunnel that would create havoc on our streets and roads.

The point is, we should be getting transportation improvements that help us, not hurt us.

I often point out that it's the pet project of two Riverside congressmen.

Any comment on Miller and Calvert being named to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress list?

I think that speaks for itself.

Somehow it's fitting that the only good news to come out of Iraq recently is the fake news. The New York Times reports on a satirical news show that debuted on the Iraqi sattelite station Al Sharqiya at the beginning of Ramadan. This being Iraq, the show's title is somewhat darker than "The Daily Show"-- it's called "Hurry Up, He's Dead".

Nearly every night here for the past month, Iraqis weary of the tumult around them have been turning on the television to watch a wacky-looking man with a giant Afro wig and star-shaped glasses deliver the grim news of the day.

In a recent episode, the host, Saad Khalifa, reported that Iraq's Ministry of Water and Sewage had decided to change its name to simply the Ministry of Sewage — because it had given up on the water part.

In another episode, he jubilantly declared that "Rums bin Feld" had announced American troops were leaving the country on 1/1, in other words, on Jan. 1. His face crumpled when he realized he had made a mistake. The troops were not actually departing on any specific date, he clarified, but instead leaving one by one. At that rate, it would take more than 600 years for them to be gone.

The newscast is a parody, of course, that fires barbs at everyone from the American military to the Iraqi government, an Iraqi version of "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart." Even the militias wreaking havoc on Iraq are lampooned.

[. . .]

The newscast opens with an explanation of the show's underlying premise: it is the year 2017 and the main character, Saaed, is the last Iraqi alive. He is lying face down on a beach with a red suitcase next to him. When he comes to, he is quickly encircled by beautiful women.

Cut to a scene of Saaed clad in a black T-shirt imprinted with "2PAC," showboating in front of a white stretch Humvee limousine with dancers cavorting all around.

The show's raucous theme song, which has become a popular cellphone ring tone here and is sung by children in schoolyards, laments that it would be better to be a lowly cat on the street than an Iraqi: "No one asks the cat where you are from, which party you're from, whether you are an Arab, a Kurd, a Sunni or a Shiite."

He sings on, "I am the last Iraqi alive, but I still do not own a house," a reference to the country's acute housing shortage.

The twenty minute show was originally intended to have a limited run during Ramadan, but has proved so popular that Al Sharqiya is considering giving turning it into a weekly program. There are problems, of course. Al Sharqiya already has an uneasy relationship with the Iraqi government. As the Times notes, it "has at times run afoul of the government for its regular news coverage". Whether the government will be more open when it comes to satirical news, remains to be seen.

There are some topics that have been deemed too controversial to air. An episode that Mr. Sudani wrote ridiculing the Saddam Hussein trial was dropped because producers were afraid it would anger loyalists of the old regime and the current government.

Hopefully, the show will survive. A willingness to embrace satire would be one sign of progress amid the gruesome chaos. And given the show's focus-- "the gallows humor with which many Iraqis now view their lives — still lacking basic services and plagued by unrelenting violence more than three years after the American-led invasion"-- it's unlikely to run out of material anytime soon.

(via This Modern World)

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher had his ass handed to him yesterday in not one but two debates with opponent Jim Brandt. At least, I think he did. It's kinda hard to find out. Why is that?

It's because the only mention of Rohrabacher in the past day's press is as Tan Nguyen's former opponent. Damn it. I told you Tan was nothing but a dangerous distraction. Oh well; you Nguyen some, you lose some.

It doesn't matter what Brandt wins, whether it's arguments, debates, or friggin' triathlons--his race isn't getting any publicity. All my searches turned up was R. Scott Moxley's coverage of a Brandt-Rohrabacher-Lash debate from two years ago. I had to check the comments section of Liberal OC's post announcing the Brandt-Rohrabacher debates to find anything. Luckily opendna, also a DailyKOS diarist, posted two links to coverage at LongBeachPolitics.org.

Apparently the first debate (at CSU-Long Beach) was poorly planned. I'm told that Student Union Building Rm. 224 filled up almost immediately, and a good portion of those inside were not students but campaign volunteers. It's said Brandt did very well, so well that Rohrabacher's people called and changed the format for the day's 2nd debate at Golden West College.
Brandt entered the second debate to a hero's welcome and shouts of "Semper fi!" from the many Marines present. They discussed 5 major topics

1. Education: Rohrabacher claimed education is a local issue, not a state or government problem. He also pointed out that we shouldn't pay to educate those in this state illegally, nor should we offer student visas to Chinese students, as China is a "potential enemy country". Brandt suggested we need to educate kids to become scientists, especially scientists who focus on developing alternative energy sources. He also said we should scrap No Child Left Behind as it focuses on specific test results rather than actual education.


2. Immigration: Rohrabacher thinks there are 20 million "illegal immigrants" in the country - fully 5 million more than even Pat Buchanan is willing to guesstimate. He thinks "we should not provide social security" to these folks. Do we? No. Brandt cited 12-13 million "workers", all of whom need background checks. He sees the problem as a "business issue", pointing out all the Baby Boomers soon to grow out of the job market.


3. Healthcare: Rohrabacher blamed healthcare troubles on (surprise!) immigrants who "eat up" health care dollars. He also cited frivolous litigation and big government. But don't worry, he's working with his friends in Big Government to solve the problem. Brandt meanwhile spoke of the universal healthcare in countries like Canada and Britain, sharply contrasting that with some Californian families that are one accident away from financial insolvency. His solution? A single-payer universal healthcare system (for catastrophic injuries only).


4. Terrorism/Security: Rohrabacher toed the Republican party line. He supported the Iraq War, fighting them over there, we can't cut and run or they'll follow us home. He also failed to correct a questioner who suggested that the Port of Long Beach annual security funding rose from $250 Million in 2001 to $1.6 Billion in 2005. It fell to Brandt to point out that the $1.6 Billion figure was for ALL ports. Not only that, but nowadays Long Beach only gets $24 Million a year - HALF of what it got in 2001. His recommendation - fully finance first-responders, the Coast Guard, and inspections.


5. Iraq: Rohrabacher actually admitted that Iraq "might not have been the right decision at the time," but if we withdraw now we might embolden our enemies. Natch. He weighed moderate Muslims, who would never trust us if we left now, with radical Islamists, who hate us, our way of life, and apple pie (even the Dutch variety these days). Brandt said we've had terror since the beginning of time - the Taliban tain't nothin' new. However, Bush failed to stamp them out by cutting and running from Afghanistan, diverting our strength to Iraq and allowing the Taliban to regroup. He suggests we redeploy as soon as is safe, sending some troops to Kuwait and others to buff up our Afghani presence.

After the second debate, Brandt met with members of the audience for a "Meet & Greet" as advertised. Rohrabacher, however, left through a side door, just like he did in 2004. One topic that is hotly debated is whether attendees chanted "Where's Dana?" or whether it was "Dana Cut and Run!"

Our favorite Demopublican (or, conversely, Republocrat) had a chance to endear himself to a national audience this morning on The Radio Factor, home of loofa-loving Bill O'Reilly. KABC-AM 790 morning guy Doug McIntyre filled in and was ready to give Nguyen an on-air hummer. Then Nguyen actually spoke.

Nguyen began by correcting McIntyre about his Vietnamese surname's proper pronounciation--"win" as opposed to "Nu-win," which ticked McIntyre off. Nguyen then went to claim recent polls show him beating 47th Congressional District incumbent Loretta Sanchez, polls that the boyos at OC Blog dismissed in a post I can't find (help, Jubal!). "I don't care about that," McIntyre told Nguyen. McIntyre then asked Nguyen if he was behind the infamous "immigrants can't vote" letter, to which Tan replied with his stock statement that he neither "authorized" nor "approved" the letter. McIntyre asked the same question again, to which Nguyen said no one connected to his campaign was behind the letter--this despite Nguyen admitting earlier that his office was behind the letter and him holding a press conference defending the letter.

Nguyen then insinuated Loretta was behind the letter, adding that "someone" was "fueling the hysteria." An exasperated McIntyre tried keeping Tan on the subject, but he wouldn't answer questions. And then Tan trotted out another stock phrase, but quickly tempered it with a caveat (I'm paraphrasing here 'cause I took notes while driving 90 on the 5 South toward San Juan Capistrano toward next week's entry of This Hole-in-the-Wall-Life):

"I'm going to tell it like it is, but my hands are tied.

McIntyre quickly ended the interview. When he returned, McIntyre told a national audience he "wasn't happy" with Nguyen's answers--this from a man who thought Nguyen did nothing wrong.

Summary: Tan Nguyen either lied to McIntyre or he's a moron. My vote: both.

Many of you, including KFI-AM 640's garrulous JohnKen and idiot John Ziegler (we'll never forgive Ziegler for his unceremonious swipe at us Coast to Coast listeneners) keep insisting Tan "Hate The Republicans, Love their Candidacy" Nguyen had a legitimate reason to send out his infamous letter to Latino voters because everyone knows 47th Congressional District incumbent Loretta Sanchez stole the 1996 election from Bob Dornan with the help of illegals.

Conduct your Google searches better, pendejos. Find the Weekly's 10-year anniversary issue. Read the first blurb, where we recount how Moxley laid that myth to rest quickly. Then find all the articles Moxley did on the matter. Thank you.

Listening to L.A.'s favorite boors and heard that Tan Nguyen will appear this Wednesday--maybe an in-studio appearance. As a preview of what may come, JohnKen spelled out Nguyen's last name to their listeners. JohnKen also praised my earlier post examining La Opinión's translation games, then went on to blast the "activist" who offered his Spanish translation services to Nguyen at yesterday's press conference
. Um, pendejos: That was me.

Tan Nguyen is an unfortunate, foolish, racist man who did and continues to do unfortunate, foolish, racist things. But who cares? Don't get me wrong, the issue deserves coverage, especially from OC's homegrown authority on all things Mexican. But Tan is drawing all eyes to him - journalists and bloggers, Republicans and Democracts, conservatives and liberals. And, of course, foaming-at-the-mouth racists.

Seriously. Tan was never going to beat Loretta Sanchez. I suppose rallying the troops against him could really galvanize the left, but I'd like to think there are more interesting races to watch.

So what's with the obsession over Tan? Simple: he's a distraction - nothing but a top quality, Gustav-Anders-grade red herring whose idiocy distracts us from other races threatening Republican incumbents in this sinkhole of conservativism they call Orange County. Here's a sample platter:

Dana Rohrabacher (R) vs. Jim Brandt (D): Dana, we hardly know ye. We think you're Congressional material, despite your Taliban-friendly behavior and your globetrotting at the expense of special interests (with wifey in tow, who also happens to be your well-paid campaign manager - and isn't paying your wife like indirectly paying yourself?). Lucky for us Esquire magazine thinks differently. Here's their endorsement of Brandt from the Esquire Endorses America feature:

For kicking back and having a beer, going surfing, or maybe doing the swing shift for the Minutemen down on the border, Rohrabacher's your man. Otherwise, we are sad to say the act has worn thin.

John Campbell (R) vs. Steve Young (D): Young also picked up the Esquire endorsement. Why? Because of Campbell's blind loyalty to the White House, even now. Last year, during the special election that vaulted him into Congress, he said, "Of the leading candidates, I'm probably with the president on more issues than anyone else." Campbell puts the "ick" in lickspittle. Not only that, but he was helped into his Congressional chair by the Club for Growth, a PAC financed by Howard Rich. Rich is the primary financial backer behind Proposition 90, the Taxpayer Trap. Last year his Club for Growth injected Campbell's campaign with $120,000, and this year Campbell endorsed Prop 90 - an initiative that could cost the state billions. Tit for tat?

Ken Calvert (R) vs. Louis Vandenberg (D): Not only did Calvert get caught with a junkie whore's head in his lap, then lie to the police about it; not only was he named to the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's 20 Most Corrupt Members of Congress list in September; not only is he in hot water both for shady land deals as well as garnering earmarks for campaign donors; but he's still at it.
Earlier this year Calvert and his business partner Woodrow Harpole bought land in Jurupa, CA. The Jurupa Community Services District sold it to them without offering it to other state agencies first, which would be a sweet deal if it wasn't against state law. Think no-bid contract. Instead of the planned little-league field, Calvert the Canny plans to build a mini-storage business. No doubt he needs a place to stash his growing list of dirty secrets.

If you haven't registered to vote in the November 7 general elections, the deadline is 8 p.m. TONIGHT at the Registrar of Voters headquarters:

1300 South Grand Avenue, Building C, Santa Ana--close to the 5 and 55 freeways.

More information can be found at the Registrar's brand new website, www.ocvote.com

Come on: It's a painless process that takes about 45 seconds.

Or you can sit on your ass and continue to let corrupt, special interests control government unchecked...

Our favorite xenophobic Vietnamese hasn't yet renounced his Republican candidacy for the 47th Congressional District, even though GOP chair Scott Baugh has demanded his resignation and Nguyen blasted Baugh at yesterday's press conference. Yesterday, Nguyen also passed out his latest mailer to the press corps. It urges voters to "Choose the person not the party" and tells 'em "Finally, we don't have to end up voting for the 'lesser of two evils.' Here is the mailer (one page in the original but in two separate images here so you don't have to crane your neck). Click on thumbnails, por favor!:

I agree with you, Tan: the Republicans and Dems are full of it. So when are you going to renounce your Republican Party nomination?

For more Tan Nguyen posts, read our Tan Nguyen archives

Today is the last day to register if you want to vote in the November 7 election. Answers to any questions you might have can be found at the Secretary of State's website, or by calling one of his office's toll-free helplines.

English: 1-800-345-VOTE
Spanish: 1-800-232-VOTA
Chinese: 1-800-339-2857
Vietnamese: 1-800-339-8163
Japanese: 1-800-339-2865
Tagalog: 1-800-339-2957
Korean: 1-866-575-1558

Or, I suppose, you could try calling Tan Nguyen for advice about getting registered... but I suspect he's kind of preoccupied at the moment.

Rebel Girl over at the always awesome Dissent the Blog weighs in on OC's Keyser Soze, the man who signed the infamous Tan Nguyen "immigrants can't vote" letter. Turns out it might be a Sandinista!

Full Tan Nguyen coverage:

Why is La Opinion Changing the Tan Nguyen Letter?

Tan Nguyen: The New Bob Dornan!

Tan Nguyen's Only Friends…

We Defend Barbara Coe--Again!

We Defend Barbara Coe!

The Infamous Tan Nguyen "immigrants can't vote" letter

La Opinión is the dean of America's Spanish-language dailies, dating back to the 1930s. Its owners, the Lozano family, are tireless advocates of Latinos, and the paper's Pilar Marrero is one of Southern California's best political reporters, damn the language.

But their coverage of the Tan Nguyen scandal (read previous Blotter posts below) is inconsistent when considering the infamous letter's most infamous passage--that illegal immigrants and resident aliens can't vote. The Spanish-language letter states, "Se le avisa que si su residencia en este país es ilegal o si es emigrado, votar en una eleción federal es un delito que podrá resultar en encarcelamientó, y sí sera deportado por votar sin tener derecho a ello ("You are advised that if your residence in this country is illegal or you are a non-citizen immigrant, voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time, and you will be deported for voting without having a right to do so.")

However, in this article, Opinión writer Araceli Martínez Ortega writes that the Nguyen letter says, "Estás advertido que si tu residencia en este país es ilegal o eres un inmigrante, votar en una elección federal es un crimen que puede dar como resultado la cárcel." And in this second story, Martínez Ortega says the letter (sent to 14,000 Latinos in the 46th Congressional District) reads, "Te advertimos que si tu residencia en este país es ilegal o si eres un inmigrante, votar en una elección federal es un crimen que puede resultar en cárcel." This article, however, has it right.

We're not going to translate the Martínez Ortega's two versions (mix-and-match with the original Spanish above!), 'cause it essentially translates word-for-word, sentiment for sentiment. Except for one word--inmigrante. Means immigrant, of course. But the original said emigrado.

So why the change? As reported earlier, emigrado refers to immigrants who are legal but not citizens; inmigrante refers to immigrants without distinction to legal status. The original letter tells readers non-citizens can't vote; La Opinión's version spins it so that readers think even former immigrants who are now citizens can't vote.

You can excuse the English-language press for mistranslation--we're just a bunch of gabachos y pochos, after all. But why would La Opinión change the content of Nguyen's letter. Honest mistake (twice)--or deliberate misdirection?

P.S. to Adam Probolsky: Cut the "Tan was a Dem" shit out. Readers: Probolsky said that in the first Opinión article. And same goes to the rest of the Republicans who are saying this (that's you, Chuck Devore). Ustedes weren't saying that before Nguyen turned stupid.

UPDATE: Today's Opinión article on Nguyen has yet another offering of the letter, this one now stating, "un residente con la tarjeta verde (green card) (a resident with a green card). But the letter said no such thing. Implied? Sure. But why not just print what the original letter said, not implied? Or is the nation's most prestigious Spanish-language paper in need of a Real Academia Español dictionary?

Much more tomorrow on today's nutty press conference held by Tan Nguyen, the man who proclaimed this afternoon he would defeat Loretta Sanchez and blasted the Republican leadership for abandoning him (Tan Nguyen is the new Bob Dornan--we said it first until someone proves otherwise!). Nguyen and a campaign spokesperson claimed their infamous letter to Latinos in the 47th District warning that illegals and immigrants can't vote was wrongly interpreted--the Mexican Spanish word the world took for "immigrant" in the line, emigrado, actually refers to an immigrant who hasn't become a citizen but is in the country legally. We originally dismissed the semantics as laughable, but a call to mami y papi proved Nguyen right--but even then, the debate between my parents was loooong. Point is: Mexican Spanish is full of it.

However, we noticed something strange in the English translation of the letter that Nguyen distributed to an impatient press corp (more tomorrow) and insisted was the correct version that should've been translated into Spanish. A line in the Nguyen camp's translation states, "Private anti-immigration organizations may also bring a law suit to have access to this new computer system."

Problem is, there is nothing even close to that in the original Spanish letter. The sentence in question that corresponds to the above translation states, "Organizaciones en contra de la emigración podrán pedir información de este nuevo sistema computarizado." The literal, mami-approved translation of this is "Organizations against immigration will be able to ask for information from this new computer system." (The computer system in question, according to the letter, will verify all new voters in the upcoming election). Nothing about lawyers, nothing about "private," nothing about "access." Nguyen said a "respected" Spanish translator did the work for him. Awright, Nguyen folks: care to comment? (Probably not: neither Nguyen or his camp took many questions about much at the conference--more on that tomorrow).

More coverage at OC Blog, The Liberal OC, Orange Juice, and Andrew's Wild and Wonderful Blog.

From Bill Allison's blog, Under the Influence, over at the Sunlight Foundation:

DEAR FRIEND:
We want to transfer out of Washington ($207,000.000.00 USD) Two hundred seven million United States Dollars) earmarked from a Government Account in Washington D.C. I am looking for reliable and honest person who will be capable and fit to provide either an existing bank account or to set up a new Bank a/c immediately to receive this earmark, even an empty a/c for a new company with no federal contracting experience can serve, as long as you will remain honest to me till the end for this important business, trusting in you and believing in God that you will never let me down either now or in future.

I am Mr. Edwin Worsh, the accountability auditor of the Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham special projects budget. During the course of our auditing I discovered a floating fund of earmarked money designated for a company that I had been unable to locate. After going through some old files in the records I discovered that the owner of the company died without a [heir] hence the money has been floating and if I do not remit this money out urgently it will be forfeited for nothing back to taxpayers--an unacceptable outcome.

I got your contact address from my secretary who does not know the need for it. I am revealing this to you with the believe that you will never let me down in this business, you are the first and might be the only person that I am contacting for this business, so please reply urgently so that I will inform you the next step to take. The amount involved is (USD 207M) Two hundred and seven million United States Dollars, which I only want to transfer to a safe private account, but as I work in Congress I don't know any trustworthy people, and I am only contacting you because this money can not be approved to a local person here in Washington.

At the conclusion of this business, you will be given 15% of the total amount, 40% will be for me, while 45% will be for expenses both parties might have incurred during the process of transferring--mostly campaign contributions, payments to lobbyists and greens fees at St. Andrews.

Hope to hear from you soonest.

Yours Sincerely,
Mr. Edwin Worsh

N.B. I need your phone and fax numbers for easy communications as the case may be.

With apologies to any real Edwin Worsh.

...Yep: the anti-immigrant crowd. At today's raid/media circus at Republican congressional candidate/alleged anti-Latino letter sender Tan Nguyen's office, a contingent of fogies from the California Coalition for Immigration Reform--apparently forgiving Nguyen for faking their letterhead and sending a letter off to 14,000 voters--told anyone who would listen that Nguyen was right: immigrants shouldn't vote. Now another organization, the U.S. Immigration Reform PAC, has issued this statement. In part:

The Washington, D.C.- based U.S. Immigration Reform Political Action Committee (USIRP) reiterated its endorsement for congressional candidate Tan D. Nguyen and said it sees "nothing wrong" with a bulk-mail flier his campaign sent to the foreign-born in Orange County, Calif., warning that illegal immigrants cannot vote.

USIRP Communications Director Phil Kent said, "What is wrong with sending a message that immigrants here illegally cannot vote in elections? A campaign or individual has every right to disseminate that opinion under the First Amendment -- especially when you consider this is the No. 1 suspect district in the country because state and federal probes revealed over 1,000 illegal aliens voted in the 1996 November's congressional election."

Hey, pendejos: Nguyen's letter also said no immigrants can vote, which is a lie. It was also sent to Latino voters, which qualifies as voter intimidation, which qualifies as breaking federal law. For an organization devoted to combating lawbreakers, it's strange for you folks to support one, no?

Told you it wasn't the CCIR who sent out the letter telling Latinos immigrants can't vote. Turns out the California Attorney General's office fingered Tan Nguyen, who seemed like the ideal Republican congressional candidate--minority, immigrant-hating, and carpet-bagging. Jail time is rumored for the man, who was running against Loretta Sanchez but is now being urged by GOP head Scott Baugh to step down.

But we digress. 'Member how an alphabet soup of Latino organizations wrote a letter to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez demanding that he investigate the California Coalition for Immigration Reform as the letter's author? This despite the fact that, while the infamous letter bore a fake CCIR letterhead, it was obviously a fraud? The groups will protest that their suspicion of CCIR was legitimate because Barbara Coe's minions have a previous history of yammering about illegals, but that's the same logic the federal government uses when pulling Muslim aunties aside at the airport. So how 'bout it, Raza crowd? Are you going to apologize to Ms. Coe? Or at least pick up her legal bill as suggested by the OC Blog boyos? (sorry, boyos: you'll always be OC Blog to us, just like the Angels will forever be Anaheim, not Los Angeles)

And lest readers think I've gone Glenn Spencer all of a sudden with my defense of Coe, hear my skewering of Coe & Co. on this past Wednesday's edition of Patt the Hat Morrison's show on KPCC-FM 89.3. Best part: when Babs and I reminisced about her last SanTana appearance!

San Diego has no business in San Diego County. At least, that's what their City Council seems to think.

In our Best "Best of OC" Issue yet, Dave Wielenga eloquently described one of the major problems with the Save Trestles campaign: apathy. Surfers and the surf industry pay lip service to their beloved "Yosemite of Surfing," but at the end of the day they're more interested in hitting the beach than working to change public policy. It's no wonder that policy-makers have a tendency to marginalize the beach bums. For a perfect example, look at San Diego.

On September 26 the San Diego City Council voted 4-3 against a resolution to oppose the Foothill-South (241) toll road extension. The proposed road would bisect the inland portion of San Onofre State Beach, the coastal border between San Diego and Orange counties. The state park, one of the most visited in California, lies entirely within San Diego County.

The resolution the Council shot down was put forth by Councilwoman Donna Frye, who once ran a surf shop with surfing-legend hubbie Skip Frye. It concerned Trestles, which road opponents argue is at risk. Engineering studies acknowledge the toll road will affect sediment flow in the San Mateo Creek—in other words, it'll mess with the sand that feeds the sandbars that maintain Trestle's world-class surf break. Road supporters argue that the effects will be insignificant, and that the sandbars don't really need the sand anyway.

The four councilmen who opposed the resolution are Jim Madaffer, Kevin Faulconer, Tony Young and Ben Hueso.

Faulconer's opposition to opposing the toll roads is unsurprising; before becoming a San Diego City Councilman he worked as a Vice President for Porter-Novelli. This is the same PR firm that the Transportation Corridors Agencies—builders of the toll roads—hired in August (to the tune of $125,000) to try and convince the state that paving a state park is the best idea since the Iraq War. In 2001 Steve Danon ran against Frye in the City Council's district 6 race and lost. His next position? Faulconer's old job as Vice-President of Porter-Novelli's San Diego office.

Meanwhile, back in the present: to explain his vote, Councilman Hueso went so far as to express his "concern about trying to police the rest of the state." Interesting—because much of the rest of the state is willing to get involved in what is clearly a statewide issue (like building roads through state parks) focusing on a statewide resource (like Trestles).

CITIES THAT HAVE PASSED ANTI-241 LEGISLATION:

Los Angeles, San Francisco (city and county), Oceanside, Del Mar, Aliso Viejo, Laguna Beach, Imperial Beach, Santa Monica, Santa Cruz (city and county), Malibu and Berkeley