|
UCSB students Christopher Michaels-Martinez, Veronika Weiss, Katie Cooper,
Cheng-Yuan Hong, George Chen, Weihan Wang. |
If you're wondering, like Rebel Girl, how former Trustee, now Assemblyman, Don Wagner has been voting lately, especially on gun issues, especially on that high profile AB 1014 (signed into law by the Governor) which allows private citizens to ask a court to seize the guns from family members who they believe pose a threat to themselves or the public - a gun violence restraining order - the answer is "nay." Nay, nay, nay , nay.
|
The Nayster during his SOCCCD days |
The bill was drafted in the wake of last year's mass shooting at UCSB in which six people were killed and more than a dozen wounded before the gunman took his own life.
- Don Wagner voted Nay (Concurrence Vote) - AB 1014 - Authorizes Gun Violence Restraining Orders
- Don Wagner voted Nay (Concurrence Vote) - AB 48 - Prohibits Large-Capacity Magazines and Large-Capacity Conversion Kits
- Don Wagner voted Nay (Passage With Amendment) - SB 396 - Limits Firearm Magazine Capacity
- Don Wagner voted Nay (Passage With Amendment) - SB 755 - Expands List of Crimes that Disqualify an Individual from Firearm Ownership
- Done Wagner voted Nay SB 374 - Prohibits Semiautomatic Rifles with Detachable Magazines - Key Vote
For more information on how Don votes on other issues (Does he ever vote Yea? Yes, he does!), visit his page on
Vote Smart. You can also see who endorses him (NRA Political Victory Fund, natch) and how various organizations rate him (0% by the California Labor Federation and the ALF/CIO).
To get to his page, click
here.
18 comments:
Well Roy, et al. How about this seriously corrupt Democrat who lies about everything including his 3 degrees from Cornell U, his law degree from UCLA, and his membership in the CA Bar Assn? This story is about a month old, but not a peep from the blog folks.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/madison-634011-beach-jon.html
Did this guy teach at IVC or Saddelback? Did he work at the district? What's your point? Why is Roy responsible for covering what you want him to cover? I don't get it. If you want to bring attention to this matter and others, you should sustain your own blog for your interests.
Your one-sided blog is constantly pointing out examples of corrupt Republicans, local, state and national, regardless of any connection to our schools. The point is that the Democrats are just as corrupt, even more so. So there ys go...
We tend to cover the activities of Don Wagner because (1) he was on our Board of Trustees for many years (he was first elected in 1998 and left the board only a few years ago), (2) he was a powerful and influential trustee, leaving his mark, (3) he is now a representative for many in the SOCCCD community, (4) he continues (in our opinion) to pursue unsavory tactics and absurd policies.
Pay attention, dude.
You haven't read our blog, have you? Count the number of our posts about Irvine's Larry Agran, the corrupt Democrat.
Idiot.
Agran is a red herring, Roy. We're talking about the ideologies here. This blog is constantly demonizing conservative thought as shameful, corrupt, racist, and morally inverted. No surprise, it is consistant with what academia, the lib press and the white house does.
Wagner is a walking anachronism, an embarrassment to the educated community that he purports to represent.
Environmental concerns? No!
Reproductive rights? Nah!
Reasonable gun purchase legislation? Hell no!
But, he'll slobber over anything that suits the Chamber, and he sure loves a good old fashioned theocracy.
Evidently, you need to take a logic class. Our posts re Agran directly counter 10:25's charge that DtB only criticizes Republicans and conservatives. No, we often attack the Democrat Larry Agran.
Please cite a single instance in which we have "demonized" "conservative thought." We certainly disagree with some policies pursued and tactics employed by some "conservatives"--Wagner, Williams, Fuentes, et al.
As I recall, one man who has given generously to Don and to the organization Don helped guide (Education Alliance of Tustin) is Howard Ahmanson, Jr., who is on record supporting a form of theocracy and who has stated that he would not object to the execution of homosexuals.
There you go again inserting the gay agenda as if it is some legitimate kind of litmus test of personal character. How about also gauging people based on their allergy to peanut butter while you're at it? You people are a bunch of pessimistic, complaintnik termites.
Don't forget, self proclaimed know-it-alls too! LOL
Who says "the gay agenda" in 2014? Your ideas are about to be in the same history books as people who opposed interracial marriage, "miscegenation," and the idea that women's brains weren't capable of understanding politics or economics. Whether you like it or not, "times, they are a'changing". You know that, right, or you'd sign your name to that sort or comment?
And, it is a litmus test of character. If you are homophobic, you're just an asshole.
"Of" comment, before anyone dings me for making a grammatical error.
Hi George! How's your campaign going? Don't you know these are the kind of anonymous posts that can really come back to haunt a guy if he is lucky enough to get any kind of public office?
Don's votes are all consistant with the US Constitution. How is that a bad thing? I think California has much more important items to vote on.
You're absolutely right--there's nothing at all important about the environment, reproductive rights, and theocracy.
Membership in the Flat Earth Society is also "consistant" with the US Constitution. Not everything "consistant" with the US Constitution is a good thing. Obviously.
This is a college blog; think before you write.
So is slavery. Our constitution is so racist!
Post a Comment