NorCo Council member Seth Vaughn is one of four GOP Council members seeking re-election.He should be shown the door Last year, he missed the crucial budget hearing at which Council members propose their own amendments. It's arguably the only time of the year that Council can flex its muscle. His response when confronted? "Who cares? So what? I'll be re-elected anyway." His remark was made in the presence of two witnesses. Vaughn thinks you're pretty dumb, and demonstrated that recently by signing Executive John Brown's nomination petition twice, and within three days of each other.
He signed one petition on February 15 and then three days later, signed another. Now I could see someone forgetting and signing a petition twice. But within three days? That seems unlikely.
(Blogger's Note: I am declining to post these signature pages out of respect for other Brown supporters and even Vaughn. I am uncomfortable posting exact addresses and signatures on the Internet.)
Today's one-liner: "The shortest way to the distinguishing excellence of any writer is through his hostile critics." Richard LeGallienne
Local Government TV
▼
Thursday, March 09, 2017
14 comments:
You own views are appreciated, especially if they differ from mine. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks at my discretion. Comments that play into the tribalism that has consumed this nation will be declined. So will comments alleging voter fraud unless backed up by concrete evidence. If you attack someone personally, I expect you to identify yourself. I will delete criticisms of my comment policy, vulgarities, cut-and-paste jobs from other sources and any suggestion of violence towards anyone. I will also delete sweeping generalizations about mainstream parties or ideologies, i.e. identity politics. My decisions on these matters are made on a case by case basis, and may be affected by my mood that day, my access to the blog at the time the comment was made or other information that isn’t readily apparent.
Mr. Brown needs the signatures
ReplyDeleteAre the petitions published anywhere? How can the public review the petition.
ReplyDeleteIs signing the petition an affirmation of public support for a candidate or isn't it.
Nobody signs things like John Hancock anymore.
What a dunce. Fits right in with the Clown administration.
ReplyDelete1:07, I would oppose publishing these signature pages online for two reasons. First, it would have a chilling impact on people who are asked to sign. Second, A person who signs must provide a signature and street address. That is an invitation to identity theft. A person who wants to see a petition can go to the elections office and look at it and make a copy. He can also publish it. There is no law banning this practice. But I won't.
ReplyDeleteAgree, in todays era of lazy internet trolls publishing these online would definitely have a chilling effect on petition signing. People are already nervous when asked to sign and put down their personal information. If someone is so determined to make a big deal about people signing petitions then pick up your ass and go to the office. It is sad that regular citizens who are willing to sign a petition could become fodder for political extremists who want to further damage out electoral process.
ReplyDeleteSigning a petition isn't an affirmation of continued support, IMHO. I have signed petitions simply to give somebody a chance to run for office that I think I may support, or to put somebody on the ballot against a person I want to see removed. Others may file that I like better and I might not have signed their petition.
ReplyDelete3:56 pm
ReplyDelete"If someone is so determined to make a big deal about people signing petitions then pick up your ass and go to the office."
Lets hope it's "big deal" enough for someone to make sure the names are real and living in those districts.
You don't have to be an internet troll to want legitimacy and oversight.
No one would argue here on this blog, that your published name gives more legitimacy to the ideas expressed here than if you post anonymously. If that is true on this blog, it should also be true on a petition of such consequence.
I respect the reasons and concerns that informed Bernie's decision not to post it on his blog
"I respect the reasons and concerns that informed Bernie's decision not to post it on his blog"
ReplyDeleteThen what the Hell are you bitching about?
3 questions is what passes as "bitching" these days, that definitely has a chilling effect on curiosity.
ReplyDeleteWhat "3" questions? Are you for real, an alt-right fanatic or just a troll?
ReplyDeleteShows you how intelligent Vaughn is. His arrogance has no boundaries!
ReplyDeleteMaybe he's schizophrenic, and both manifestations forgot to talk to each other.
ReplyDeleteThis is a big deal. I'm sure you heard of voter fraud, well same goes for nominating petitions. If you knowingly and willfully sign your name for one candidate more than one time you are committing fraud. Names are usually stricken from a petition when challenged, however a Judge can strike the entire petition and has done so in some cases. Check it out Bernie. He committed an election violation and can be charged.
ReplyDeleteA judge will not strike an entire petition based on evidence that Vaughn signed twice. He would only strike the second signature. Believe me, I went through this. The argument, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, is quite logical but is not the law. I tried.
ReplyDelete