This is Mark Bucher's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Mark Bucher's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Mark Bucher
Recent Activity
9:34 - You have not gotten a response because I was out for a few hours. I have already said that if I became convinced that Janet (or any other politician) is corrupt I would not support her.
Toggle Commented Dec 3, 2007 on Schroeder's dishonest denial at OC Blog
6:19 - I have addressed this om ny post to Flowerszzz at 4:51.
Toggle Commented Dec 3, 2007 on Schroeder's dishonest denial at OC Blog
d'Anconia: I addressed the seriousness of her "illegal activity" in my post to Flowerzz. But I will add this - the very fact that you are focusing on it is exactly what Trung, et. al. were trying to accomplish. Keep giving her detractors sound bites that allow them to paint her as a criminal. This is minor stuff. If the FPPC disagrees she'll be charged with a crime. Do you want to wager whether that will happen? I'll give you 10 to 1 odds. Actually, I do not know anyone personally outside of Trung's team that believes this is a big deal. Your specifics are all just a repeat of the "secret illegal account" talking point except getting help from the unions. I would consider her selling out to the unions to be serious. I have seen no indication of that in her votes. There is no contradiction in saying that I am bringing this up on my own and also stating that people are angry about it. I have observed conversations and talked to people who do not like what is going on. None of them asked me to write what I have or had any involvement in it whatsoever. The reason no one is saying anything is that it is being done by prominent Republicans who you generally do not challenge publicly. It is not because they agree, or they would not be angry about it.
Toggle Commented Dec 3, 2007 on Schroeder's dishonest denial at OC Blog
Flowerzzz - I agree she is going to have a tough time keeping the seat. I addressed that in my emails to Schroeder when he accused me of supporting her for political reasons. It would be a poor calculation on my part if that was why I am speaking out on this. Regarding how serious her violations were, we will just have to agree to disagree on the seriousness. The explaination that she believed that it was OK to collect donations for a legal defense fund is believable and why this will most likely resolved with at most a fine. I know alot of people who have made similar "serious" violations. I don't know why my post did not have my name. It says I am signed in. Mark
Toggle Commented Dec 3, 2007 on Schroeder's dishonest denial at OC Blog
Rocket - Sheriff Carona is charged essentially with selling his office for personal gain and has been indicted. Janet's issues are minor campaign reporting mistakes. While not making any statement regarding the truth of the allegations against either of them, they are not at all comparable.
Toggle Commented Dec 2, 2007 on Schroeder's dishonest denial at OC Blog
7:51 - This issue has nothing to do with whether a court eventually may find in favor or against Janet. I do not support the "scorched earth policy" of serial legal action as a way of weakening an incumbent Republican. If Trung is the incumbent (i.e. including if the appeals court puts him there) I would support him and oppose any such attacks aimed at him. Also, I do not take issue with Trung filing the initial election law challenge or the appeal. If I lost by 3 votes I am sure I would have done the same. It is the multiple complaints and the overall plan to attack her over and over with complaints that I oppose.
Toggle Commented Dec 2, 2007 on Schroeder's dishonest denial at OC Blog
But - it is still better than 5 scientists!
The press release actually helps point out the problem: The cost is $1.4 million, with a $243,000 rebate from Edison (which is really just some other rate payer's money, but we'll give it to you), so the cost is about $1.2 million. It pays for itself in 12 years, so the district is saving $100,000 per year. However, the panels have a life of 24 years, so they are going down in value by $50,000 per year, so the district is actually only saving $50,000 per year. That means the district spent $1.4 million dollars of our taxpayer money to save $50,000 per year. If they had just put that money in the bank at 5% interest, they could have made $70,000 per year and we (the taxpayer's) would be $20,000 per year ahead.
"The landfills" will never be full - we will simply have to go further for them, which increases the cost, and eventually it will be more economical to recycle than to throw away. At that point the cost of throwing away might exceed the cost of recycling, which is when companies will be falling all overthemselves to get our recyclables. I remember hearing as a gradeschooler that we were going to run out of space to put our trash. I even did a speech on it - good little student that I was. You're starting to sound like a liberal on this one Adam!
I am not certain we all agree that recycling is a good idea. Recycling is actually a poor use of resources when, as is often the case, it costs more to recycle than the recycled product is worth. That is why the government has to step in and require recycling. If recycling made economic sense, companies would be falling all over themselves for the right to pick up our recyclables, or even paying us for the privilege. The same principle applies to solar - the economics do not make sense yet. That is why the government is subsidizing the installation of solar equipment. And with respect to global warming - it is all a waste of money. Even if the planet is warming, which has not yet been established, the popular belief that man is powerful enough to do something about it is really silly. I do agree that it is probably better to spend money on solar panels than on global warming research, because at least with solar panels you have something other than a report of little to no practical value when you are done!
Debo - I did not say that the DA found Deborah innocent. That could only happen by a jury at a trial. Of course, despite the best efforts of your cabal, there will be no trial because the DA has found that there is "no reliable evidence" that she did anything wrong.
Toggle Commented Jul 30, 2007 on DA clears Deborah Pauley at OC Blog
642 - For most unions, it is not true that you can "opt out" as you claim. You can become an agency fee payer, but then you are thrown out of the union and have no say whatsoever in what goes on in the union, but you still have to pay dues. That is not allowing people to opt out, it is punishing anyone who wants the freedom to think on their own.
Toggle Commented Jan 29, 2007 on What is the Veritas Public Policy Center? at OC Blog
ElroyEl - You ask if we would run an ad praising them if they are running the trust fund well. The message of our ad was not that they are running the fund well or poorly. The point is they will not open the books to let us know either way.
Toggle Commented Jan 29, 2007 on What is the Veritas Public Policy Center? at OC Blog
Union Thug - It is possible the fund has been well managed, which is exactly what a full audit will allow us all to determine. Well managed or not, the money in the trust fund could never be used by the county for any purpose. This money is held in trust for the benefit of the deputy sheriffs.
Toggle Commented Jan 29, 2007 on What is the Veritas Public Policy Center? at OC Blog
Blade Runner - Veritas is not funded by people who want to take away the first amendment rights of unions, but I would venture to guess that most of the donors have an issue with union bosses who use their members' money on political causes without getting permission. Also, Veritas, unlike the union, is not receiving taxpayer funds.
Toggle Commented Jan 29, 2007 on What is the Veritas Public Policy Center? at OC Blog
I understand your need to resort to name calling rather than civil dialogue. That is often what people do when the facts are not on their side. You are correct that Supervisor Norby brought this up two years ago, and we still have not received a full audit of the funds. You argue that a CPA has a submitted an audit, which, if true, would make this issue moot. The truth is that a full audit has not been done, and the review done by the CPA does not allow anyone to determine how the money in the fund is being spent. You claim that the fund is being well run. If that is true, there is no reason NOT to open the books. No one is suggesting that the supervisors are going to operate the fund. They just feel it is proper for trust fund monies to be handled like, well, trust fund monies. The truth is that $10 million dollars in a trust fund that spends $20 million per year might actually be woefully under-funded depending upon the terms of the insurance plan. You end your post by claiming I am trying to get free media, but one paragraph earlier suggest that now I have to "crawl out from under [my] rock." Which is it - was I trying to get attention, or trying to hide under a rock?
Toggle Commented Jan 29, 2007 on What is the Veritas Public Policy Center? at OC Blog
Need for leadership: I have to disagree with you that electing principled Republican local elected officials in Orange County is not going to change anything in the state. The local elected officials of today will become our Assemblyman, Senators, and other state office holders tomorrow.
Hey Adam - the "No special interests in politics" line is just not getting any traction. I suspect you cannot see it because you are routinely paid to advocate for particular causes or candidates. You do it well. In fact, you are one of the best, and there is nothing wrong with what you do. But, it is impossible to be objective when you are being paid, and everyone instinctively knows that. Take a poll - ask if a person should be able to rule on an endorsement if they stand to benefit financial one way or the other by the outcome. What do you think the result would be on that question? Time to get a different speaking point on this issue.
Toggle Commented Oct 6, 2006 on Interesting Insight from Nancy Padberg at OC Blog
Art, Those arguements are just red herrings to try and make this look like something other than what it was - a pet project of some politically connected folks at taxpayer expense. (Sorry Jo Ellen - I just can't reconcile your position on this one with the conservative views I know you hold.) Adam is correct - it's now time for the KOCE Foundation to support their cause through volunatry donations rather than forcing the taxpayers to subsidize it.
Tip to reporters talking to Rudat - Ask her if she has ever been fined and required to take an ethics training class for violating the Realtors code of ethics. If she says no, call me - I have a great story for you.
Toggle Commented Sep 30, 2006 on Carol Rudat Unplugged at OC Blog
Interesting question. To answer it I would have to know what you think Mr. Rocco is saying that could be construed to be an unfair labor practice. However, any attempt at a prior restraint on his ability to speak freely would be problematic. He has the right to speak as an elected official, but what he says is just his opinion, and not that of the district. You could always recall him. It would not be the first time there in Orange. Mark P.S. The Education Alliance does not "run" candidates. We support candidates who believe our education system would be improved by having a greater emphasis on strong academics, the right of parents to control the education of their children, and local control of our schools.
Toggle Commented Sep 26, 2006 on Crimes and Censorship in OUSD? at OC Blog
If I had used you as a source, I would have given you credit. I learned about this through an email from an insider who played a major role in bringing the scandal to light. Maybe you received the same email.
Toggle Commented Sep 26, 2006 on Crimes and Censorship in OUSD? at OC Blog
Art, I am sure Jordan is a great guy, but that is not really the point. Are you suggesting that if Carlos Bustamante believes the Democrats he is supporting are great then it is O.K.? By the way, provide the specific Democrat candidates that Carlos is endorsing. The 2008 endorsements will be here before you know it. Maddox is not an officeholder or candiate so I would not include him in this list. However, if he does run, support for Democrats will certainly come up.
Toggle Commented Sep 21, 2006 on Pick A Side... at OC Blog
Seneca, your concern about "blind-loyalty" is misplaced. No one is being criticized for not supporting a Republican. In fact, the OC Republican Party withheld endorsements from 40 Republicans. Withholding support is not the same as supporting the other side.
Toggle Commented Sep 21, 2006 on Pick A Side... at OC Blog