Comments on: If you aren’t “Cruisin’ into the New Year,” I would encourage you to let Congresswoman Sanchez and others know!

By: DfD

DfD — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:02:51 +0000

Webmaster,

If you’re referring to job losses and foreclosures of latinos to include Illegal Aliens, nobody feels one bit sorry for them. If your only referring to American citizens, then I feel sympathy. However, it’s clever how you guys are sneaky, not seperating the two. Illegal Aliens have absolutely no right to be here and should be deported, and their jobs that were taken from Americans and given to them, should be restored to the Americans at a decent wage.

By: Red Baron

Red Baron — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:42:43 +0000

Jammer, I actually have several advanced degrees. What does that have to do with anything? Adultery is still a crime under Article 134 of the UCMJ. Obviously, you are ignorant of the code. If you served, thank you. I never based my criticism on the card, and the card is not Yolanda’s main point either. I don’t care about the card. It is her CRIMES that bother me. You said it all–”I don’t care.” OK, fine. We got it–you don’t care. So, why you are bothering us with your misinformed opinions?

By: jammer

jammer — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:12:41 +0000

Red, your response makes my point. You are drawing alot of infrences from a silly card. First, I read very well. You have to to get through graduate school. Second, I was a member of the US Army and served 3 years in the Viet Nam era. Adultery is no longer considered a crime under the military codes of justice. They would lose half the military if it was. It’s not my role to tell Jacks kids anything, it’s up to Jack. I don’t care. Thirdly, I don’t particularly like Loretta nor her politics. I never said I did. Where did you read that? What I have consistently said is it’s a silly card. Why is it worth getting all worked up about? I would bet that at this moment there are a number of Members of Congress adulterying and worse. What are you going to do to stop it? Is it going to get you worked up as this silly card? No vale la pena…, Get it?

By: Michaelr

Michaelr — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:07:12 +0000

And I sympathize with you Red Baron, because those personal issues of LOretta reveal the extremely low content of her character, which I have been able to personally observe on numerous occasions. But my issue with her is mainly about public theft, which so many people, especially in her Congressional district seem to be ignorant about. These Christmas cards LOretta sends out to everyone in Southern California cost $130K. That is what she expensed for last years Christmas cards. So I imagine this year’s cards cost a little bit more. Her supporters and staff claim these cards are financed by campaign funds, which they rationalize and paint as her personal funds. Who sends money to LOretta? OpenSecrets.org reveals the list is mostly single donors and local unions, since LOretta is extremely ineffective in getting legislation past committee, large lobbying entities, PACs, Corporate American, and multinational corporations don’t fiscally support her. So all those middle class people and unions are giving money to this individual, who spends over $130K a year sending out Christmas cards, amongst other spending irregularities listed on OpenSecrets.org, not common to other Congressional representatives, including her sister Linda Sanchez. We have yet to find an Congressional Representative who expenses their Xmas cards to this extreme fiscal amount. Based on this alone, LOretta’s balance sheets probably will reveal fiscal behavior that amounts to more public theft.

By: Red Baron

Red Baron — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:07:41 +0000

Jammer, I guess you don’t read very well. I explained that Loretta’s adultery with Jack violates the law. It is not a merely private offense against a family. It was a crime under the military code and has done serious damage to her credibility as a member of the Armed Services committee. She often boasts (see her book, for example) that she is the senior woman on Armed Services and a champion for military spouses and families. That has become a joke in the Pentagon. She destroyed a military family when it suited her selfish needs. In other words, her adultery has had very public consequences. It also quite clearly violates House Ethics rules to lead a soldier into criminal conduct during official travel. You, obviously, have never served, so you don’t get it. This isn’t a “private” issue. Tell your nonsense about “uncontrolled magic” to Jack”s kids. Tell them to relax. Tell the generals to stop laughing at her behind her back. It is an outrageous embarrassment to the Congress that one of its members deliberately abused her office to satisfy her sex needs. She is a terrible example to our young people. I guess you just refuse to admit that because she you like her politics. A majority of her constituents voted for her not knowing about her offenses, because the Register and other worthless media refuse to report on her misconduct. Finally, just because a majority votes for her, doen’t mean we can’t dissent and tell the truth about her. I agree with Michaelr, but I am highlighting a different aspect of her derelictions.

By: jammer

jammer — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:35:01 +0000

Loretta has been charged with stealing?

By: Michaelr

Michaelr — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 18:13:46 +0000

I don’t care about affairs. And don’t lump me in with the Red Baron, her pain is very personal regarding LOretta. However, I am livid about theft…especially public theft.

By: jammer

jammer — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:37:16 +0000

Red and Michaelr, Relax guys. If she is your representative you have a reason to be pissed. If not, then its her constituents who apparently are not. Her “affair” is none of my business. Why is it yours? I grew up in a home where we were taught to be polite and asking someone about an affair is impolite if it doesn’t concern me. I was also taught that whom we fell in love with was uncontrolled magic. I would give her the benefit of the doubt and leave it at she and Jack fell in love. You guys see it as lust. Oh well. Que lastima que no tienen mas mejor que hacer. Ya basta esto, no vale la pena.

By: Red Baron

Red Baron — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:43:57 +0000

It’s not about the card (which makes no mention of Christmas, by the way) or the trees she killed to make it. Dr Y says right up front why Loretta has to go: “Her continued missteps, misbehavior, shenanigans and ineffectiveness as our congressional representative warrants it.” You, Anna, can’t see the forest for the trees.

By: Anna

Anna — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 02:18:00 +0000

Re: “Her appeal to our Senators is a good and lawful tactic.”

Over a Christmas card? I’m sorry if you can’t see how NUTS this is.