Tuesday's Daily Roundup by the Capitol Weekly reports on a new poll which shows a closely divided electorate on the question of whether marriage equality should be allowed in California:

There are some other interesting facts in the crosstabs of the poll:

According to the poll, Democrats favor same-sex marriage by 63 percent and 32 percent oppose. Republicans are 70 percent opposed and 24 percent in favor. In the San Francisco Bay Area, those polled are 64 percent in favor and 31 percent opposed. In Los Angeles County, 55 percent favor and 40 percent oppose. Voters aged 18 to 39 favor gay marriage by 55 percent while those 65 or older are 58 percent opposed, according to the poll.

Cross-posted at Swing State Project.

Here is my analysis of the 2008 election in my home state of California. As I mentioned in my 50-state analysis, California was a mixed bag on November 4, 2008. The presidential results were anything but disappointing, while we came up short further down the ballot, from the House races to the state legislature and the 12 ballot measures.

I was amazed as I saw polls leading up to Election Day showing Obama up by more than 20 over McCain, and was astonished at the 61-37 Obama blowout that ended up occurring on Election Night (and the calling of the whole Left Coast for Obama, putting him over 270 electoral votes and making him the winner!). I couldn’t wait to check out the county results and see which ones flipped for Obama and which ones were close.

As the final absentee ballots rolled in, I was able to check out the numbers, and see that Obama way outperformed Kerry, winning by 3 million votes and pumping up his national popular vote numbers very nicely. In fact, Obama outperformed every single Democratic presidential candidate except one, scoring the second-best Democratic presidential performance in California’s history after Franklin Roosevelt in 1936. As you can see, Obama gained 1.5 million votes over Kerry, while McCain, who claimed he could compete in California, lost half a million votes from Bush.

2008: Obama 8,274,473; McCain 5,011,781

2004: Kerry 6,745,485; Bush 5,509,826

Looking through the voting histories of the California counties that went to Obama, I found that Obama broke some longtime Republican streaks in quite a few counties. Obama won a majority of the vote in two counties that last voted Democratic presidentially with more than 50% of the vote in 1976, Merced and Trinity.

Most significant are the six counties that in 2008 voted Democratic presidentially with more than 50% for the first time since 1964: Nevada, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Joaquin, San Luis Obispo, Ventura

And finally, San Diego County, which last voted for a Democratic presidential candidate with a majority of the vote in 1944, also delivered a majority of the vote to Obama!

Obama also came close to winning majorities, instead winning close pluralities, in Butte, Fresno, and Stanislaus Counties. The last Democrat to win a majority in Butte and Fresno was Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and the last Democrat to win a majority in Stanislaus was Jimmy Carter in 1976.

Now I will do a tour of the state, north to south. I will give a bit of an overall summary of California’s counties: Obama improved upon Kerry’s performance in all 58 of them. The amount of improvement varies from region to region, and the numbers are over the flip.

North Coast

Counties = Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Lake, Sonoma

Combined population = 800,932

2004 = Kerry 63%, Bush 34% (D+29)

2008 = Obama 69%, McCain 28% (D+41)

Obama improved considerably over Kerry’s margins in this part of the state, growing Democratic margins in Humboldt, Mendocino, Lake, and Sonoma, while cutting McCain’s margin in Del Norte County to half of Bush’s. These growing Democratic numbers in this formerly swingy region (CA-01 changed parties 4 times in the 1990s alone) suggests this region will continue to trend Democratic for the foreseeable future.

Northern Mountain

Counties = Butte, El Dorado, Lassen, Modoc, Nevada, Placer, Plumas, Shasta, Sierra, Siskiyou, Tehama, Trinity

Combined population = 1,205,952

2004 = Bush 61%, Kerry 38% (R+23)

2008 = McCain 54%, Obama 44% (R+10)

Our next stop is this sprawling, low-density region. I figured McCain would crush Obama in this small town-heavy region, even overperforming Bush’s numbers. When I examined the counties in this region, all of which went for Bush in 2004, I was shocked. Not only did McCain underperform Bush here, he actually got FEWER votes than Bush did. Obama even won 3 counties outright: Butte, Nevada, and Trinity. This region will likely continue to be considerably Republican, but Democrats can become more competitive here if they grow their margins in Butte County (home of UC Chico) and the Tahoe region. Some of this area, most notably Placer, is becoming more like suburban Sacramento and may also continue to trend Democratic. These numbers show that we can win here, and if we can find more Charlie Browns, we might be able to pull off wins in this region, namely Congressional District 4 (which will very likely be open in 2010 when McClintock runs for governor) and Senate District 4 (which will be open in 2010 due to term limits). A couple of Assembly seats here will be open in 2010 as well. Let’s jump-start that 58-county strategy!

San Francisco Bay Area

Counties = Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano

Combined population = 6,791,908

2004 = Kerry 69%, Bush 29% (D+40)

2008 = Obama 74%, McCain 24% (D+50)

A very blue region in a very blue state just keeps on getting bluer with each election. Republicans will be extremely lucky if they can get even a third of the vote here again! In addition to overwhelming Democratic numbers, every single Congressional, State Senate, and State Assembly district is in Democratic hands, almost parallel to the shutout Republicans suffered on the House level in New England. Only if the Republicans return to being the party of Earl Warren and Hiram Johnson will they have a prayer of winning here again. The funny thing is that this region used to be a very Republican region in a very Republican state back in the early 20th century, and San Mateo County was the origin of powerful Republican governor Hiram Johnson and the Progressive movement in California, which Republicans of that time embraced. The region shifted strongly to the Democrats in the 1950s, with 1956 being the last time San Francisco and Alameda Counties voted Republican presidentially, and has not looked back since.

Sacramento Valley

Counties = Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Sutter, Yolo, Yuba

Combined population = 2,606,646

2004 = Bush 51%, Kerry 48% (R+3)

2008 = Obama 56%, McCain 42% (D+14)

This is a swing area, with Democratic strongholds in the city of Sacramento and Yolo County, home of UC Davis, and Republican strongholds in the Sacramento suburbs (though their majorities here are getting smaller and smaller by the year), and Amador, Calaveras, Colusa, Glenn, Sutter, and Yuba Counties. San Joaquin County, the second-biggest county in the region, has been a Republican-leaning county in recent history until the influx of people from the Bay Area and the overall Democratic trend of suburbs near the Bay Area, culminating in a double-digit win for Obama in the county and the region. This region is also trending Democratic on the congressional and state legislature level, giving victories to Democratic Congressman Jerry McNerney, and Democratic Assemblywomen Alyson Huber and Joan Buchanan.

Eastern Mountain/Yosemite

Counties = Alpine, Inyo, Mariposa, Mono, Tuolumne

Combined population = 108,338

2004 = Bush 58%, Kerry 40% (R+18)

2008 = McCain 53%, Obama 44% (R+9)

Like the northern mountain region, McCain got fewer votes here than Bush did and Democrats saw a modest improvement from 2004 here. The 2 Democratic counties, Alpine and Mono, used to be two of the strongest Republican counties, even voting for Bush in 2000, but an influx of young people from the San Francisco area to work on the ski resorts shifted these counties to Kerry and even more for Obama. If we can get a similar trend in the other counties, then this region too may become Democratic before long.

Central Coast

Counties = Monterey, San Benito, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Ventura

Combined population = 2,275,917

2004 = Kerry 54%, Bush 45% (D+9)

2008 = Obama 60%, McCain 37% (D+23)

This region was normally divided in half, with the northern half of the region (Monterey, San Benito, Santa Cruz) leaning strongly Democratic and the southern half (San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura) leaning Republican aside from the Democratic stronghold of Santa Barbara. Now that barrier has been shattered, with all 6 counties (yes, including San Luis Obispo!) going for Obama. This provides us with great opportunities to expand our majority in the upcoming State Assembly elections in 2010 and the State Senate elections in 2012. You will also notice that this region is generally the bellwether region for determining how California will go in statewide/presidential elections. Not surprisingly, the bellwether county of San Benito is also in this region.

San Joaquin Valley

Counties = Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Merced, Stanislaus, Tulare

Combined population = 3,270,343

2004 = Bush 62%, Kerry 37% (R+25)

2008 = McCain 52%, Obama 46% (R+6)

Here is another Republican stronghold, though unlike the mountain regions, this one is more populous, with population centers in Fresno and Bakersfield. Every county here was Republican in 2004, and then Obama punched holes in the Republican firewall, winning Merced and Stanislaus Counties, as well as the big prize of Fresno County. We still have work to do here on the state level though, since we lost the 30th Assembly district last year. Though maybe with that Yacht Dog Nicole Parra gone and the Democratic trend here, we may have a chance to regain that district in 2010.

Southland

Counties = Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego

Combined population = 20,951,621

2004 = Kerry 52%, Bush 46% (D+5)

2008 = Obama 59%, McCain 38% (D+21)

And finally, our tour ends in the Southland, the most populous region in the state, which alone holds more than half of the state’s population in a mere 6 counties and is home to the state’s 2 largest cities, L.A. and San Diego, and the state’s 3 most populous counties (L.A., Orange, and San Diego). As recently as 2004, L.A. and Imperial Counties were the only Democratic counties in the region. Obama changed that, blowing even more holes in Republican strongholds, turning 3 more counties blue with majorities in Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego, and falling just two points short in Orange County, nearly staging a complete sweep in this former Republican stronghold. That spells trouble for certain Republican Congressmen/women, as well as State Senators and Assemblymembers, some of which are term-limited in 2010 and/or scored weak wins in 2008. Probably the most exciting part of California to watch in the 2010 elections will be right here in the Southland. My hometown of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bernardino County went for Obama. I can only hope it and many more cities in the region continue to trend to the good guys! If the Democrats have a lockhold on the population centers in Northern and Southern California, then there will be ZERO chance of Republicans winning this big prize again!

Whew! Now that I’ve finished the marathon tour of my big, beautiful home state, I can give the region-by-region breakdown of Democratic improvements from 2004 to 2008, ranked from the smallest shift to the largest shift. Here they are:

Eastern Mountain/Yosemite: 9%

San Francisco Bay Area: 10%

North Coast: 12%

Northern Mountain: 13%

Central Coast: 14%

Southland: 16%

Sacramento Valley: 17%

San Joaquin Valley: 19%

Every region shifted considerably more Democratic, though the biggest shifts occurred in the regions that up through 2004 were swing or Republican-leaning areas. These are the areas we need to target heavily to make the biggest gains.

With some legislative seats open in 2010 due to term limits, we can take some of them and further inflate our Democratic majority in this state. If the California Democratic Party, with the new fresh faces of Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento) and Assembly Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles) actually invests in the legislative races, we can make major gains and have no more disappointments that we had in 2008’s U.S. House and legislative races, where Democrats, especially in swing districts in Southern California, underperformed Obama. Also, with enough investment, we will hopefully also have no more disappointments in the ballot measures such as Prop H8. And a suggestion I have for reforming our dysfunctional ballot measure system is to not have any repeat ballot measures such as Prop 73 (2005)/85 (2006)/4 (2008) and also require a supermajority (say 60%) on passing some measures. And of course we need major reforms in the legislative system, such as doing away with the ridiculous 2/3 rule for taxes and budgets.

Nota Bene: This is an open letter to Charlie Brown, Democratic candidate for CA-04’s open seat. I have notified the Brown campaign of this diary by email. It is also crossposted at Daily Kos.

***

Dear Charlie,

I supported you in your race against John Doolittle back in 2006. This year I would like to support you again in your open seat race against Tom McClintock. While I would never under any circumstances vote for Tom McClintock, as things stand right now I cannot in good conscience vote for you. I do not currently intend to cast a vote in the CA-04 House race.

Almost one year ago I decided to write to you because I wanted assurance from you on a matter that became very important to me after the 2006 elections. After a few brief formalities, I wrote the following:

Subject: A Constitutional Question

To: The Charlie Brown Campaign

Date: 10/1/07

… I have come to realize that my support depends entirely upon your answer to the following question:

Is the Congressional power of impeachment an oversight and investigative right which the House may exercise or not exercise at will, or is it an oversight and investigative duty which the House is obliged to fulfill for the sake of the Constitutional system itself?

I trust you can intuit the subtext of this inquiry.

A couple days later I received the following response from your campaign manager, Todd Stenhouse.

Subject: RE: A Constitutional Question

To: Me

Date: 10/3/07

Thank you for your question. Charlie asked me to respond to you directly on his behalf.

Charlie views the issue of impeachment as part of Congress’ oversight power – which includes everything from the power of the purse, to investigation, to censure, and on up the chain. That said, just like a district attorney may choose not to bring charges, so the House might choose not to bring impeachment charges.

As a number of investigations continue, the decision to actually vote on impeachment is a decision each member of the House must make – carefully considering the costs and benefits of such a decision – not just on the business of government, but the nation and world community as a whole.

For the past 6 years, we saw Congress essentially abdicate its responsibility to provide meaningful oversight over the Executive Branch – or to deliver the results the people need on so many issues – healthcare, global warming, education, and a horribly mismanaged foreign policy to name a few. The nation spoke loudly last November. Regardless of who the next President is, Charlie Brown will never forget who he works for, or what his responsibilities are as a member of Congress operating within the system of checks and balances.

Just over a year from the next election, Charlie’s focus is on bridging the growing divisions in our country, solving the problems we face, and the vital cause of electing new leadership to our Congress and White House in 2008. Only then, we believe, can we bring the sad era of corruption, incompetence, and scandal ridden partisan politics as usual to a close.

I hope this answers your question, and I hope we can count on your support in the months ahead

Thank you again for your inquiry.

To this I replied:

Subject: RE: A Constitutional Question

To: Todd Stenhouse, Charlie Brown’s Campaign Manager

Date: 10/10/07

Thank you for your reply. At the end of your email you said “I hope this answers your question, and I hope we can count on your support in the months ahead.” Unfortunately, no, you did not answer my question to my satisfaction. But I have not given up on you yet.

You wrote that “Charlie views the issue of impeachment as part of Congress’ oversight power—which includes everything from the power of the purse, to investigation, to censure, and on up the chain. That said, just like a district attorney may choose not to bring charges, so the House might choose not to bring impeachment charges.” Even if I put it in the best possible light, your answer is, in the end, a mere truism. Bringing impeachment charges implies the event of an actual vote of the full House on those charges. In such a vote the House does not have to vote (choose) to bring charges as they could vote against bringing charges.

The choice (the right) of a district attorney to bring charges or not is predicated upon there already having been an investigation into whether or not there are grounds to bring charges. The investigation is obligatory. While district attorneys often only review evidence and evaluate investigations conducted by law enforcement, in the House investigation, evaluation of evidence and the bringing of charges are combined in one body. The House functions to that extent less like a district attorney and more like a grand jury. While it is true that the House may ultimately vote not to bring charges, the question is really whether the House can choose not to investigate grounds for impeachment. That is why I did not ask merely about bringing charges, but about the investigation that necessarily precedes any decision over charges.

When I wrote initially I deliberately asked about the rights and duties of the office and chamber. I did this to spare you from having to answer the historical and specific version of my question. But perhaps I should ask it.

I agree with you that in the last 6 years we have seen “Congress essentially abdicate its responsibility to provide meaningful oversight over the Executive Branch.” For 5 years after 9/11 the Republicans proved themselves quite unwilling to provide such oversight. What I find reprehensible, however, is that in the one year since the Democrats took control of Congress they too have proven themselves unwilling to provide meaningful executive oversight. The reason for this delinquency is quite simple: Nancy Pelosi took impeachment off the table. Because of her decision Congress has left Bush’s claims of executive power entirely unchallenged and intact.

If Charlie is elected to Congress he will take an oath neither to me nor to you, nor to any party or any person. The oath will say nothing of “healthcare, global warming, education” or of our “horribly mismanaged foreign policy.” The oath will be to the Constitution itself – that would ultimately be “who he works for.” The oath would require him to affirm to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” and it would require him to pledge his “true faith and allegiance to the same.” For a Congressman, when it comes to defending and supporting the Constitution there is no consideration of “the costs and benefits of such a decision.” He is duty bound in that regard.

Nancy Pelosi has forgotten and betrayed her oath of office. Her decision to take impeachment off the table has led to a dereliction of Congress’s Constitutional duty. Had a full investigation been allowed then it may very well have led inexorably to a vote on impeachment. But Pelosi had already said that impeachment was off the table. Consequently, no investigations could truly proceed and no oversight could truly take place. I consider her decision to take impeachment off the table every bit as dangerous to this country as George Bush’s extensions of executive power.

Indeed, Pelosi’s decision was arguably even more dangerous. The Constitution anticipates overextensions of executive power and provides impeachment as its specific remedy. Unlike “the power of the purse” and “censure,” impeachment speaks directly to the Constitutional question and has the express effect of defining and clarifying executive power. The Constitution, however, does not anticipate that Congress will render itself impotent by disavowing this remedial power because such a disavowal would grant the president de facto immunity from effective oversight and undermine the integrity of our system of checks and balances. That is, however, precisely what Pelosi has done.

So I can ask my question again in a different way: Does Charlie believe Nancy Pelosi had the right to “take impeachment off the table”?

If Charlie honestly believes that Pelosi had that right, then I, as a matter of conscience, will have to take my support for him off the table. More than that, however, if Charlie honestly believes Pelosi had that right then, should he be elected, he should not be able to take his oath of office in good conscience.

Now that I have told you where I stand on these matters, I hope you can tell me in specific terms where Charlie stands.

For several weeks I waited in vain for a response. Finally, I sent Todd Stenhouse another email:

Subject: RE: A Constitutional Question

To: Todd Stenhouse, Charlie Brown’s Campaign Manager

Date: 10/29/07

Todd,

Should I consider your lack of response to my reply an indication that you do not believe you can give me the assurance I require in order to pledge my support to Charlie Brown?

Unfortunately, that email went without reply as well.

Over the winter I decided to post the entire email exchange on Daily Kos. I hoped placing this discussion in a public forum would bring a response, and even if it didn’t I wanted to raise these points publicly because I believe all voters should demand that anyone who is running for Congress answer these questions and answer them rightly.

But between the holidays, the primaries, the summer, and the conventions the timing never seemed right. I have, however, run out of time. Circumstances now dictate that I cast my ballot on Monday, October 6, the first day of early voting here in California.

On all these matters I feel as strongly now as I did a year ago. With this open letter I am giving you one last chance to assure me that you are a man of integrity who will uphold the oath of the office for which you are running.

And so I ask my questions once again.

1. Is the Congressional power of impeachment an oversight and investigative right which the House may exercise or not exercise at will, or is it an oversight and investigative duty which the House is obliged to fulfill for the sake of the Constitutional system itself?

2. Do you believe Nancy Pelosi had the right to “take impeachment off the table”?

These questions ask the same thing in two different ways. You do not have to answer both of them, but if you want my vote you will have to give the right answer to one of them. If I do not receive a reply, or if I receive a reply with the wrong answer, then my vote will remain off the table.

Sincerely,

CA04 Voter

Dr. Bill Durston (a Combat Vietnam Veteran and Emergency Room Doctor) is the Progressive Democratic candidate for the California 3rd Congressional District.

Dr. Bill Durston is running as the Democratic candidate for House of Representatives in California’s 3rd Congressional District to give voters a choice for change.

Bill is running against an incumbent career politician who is in virtual lock-step with the Bush Administration. Dr. Bill Durston stands in marked contrast as a challenger with combat-tested courage (PDF File), unquestionable integrity, proven leadership, and a vision for a better future.

Bill Durston has just released a two-part campaign ads as part of valiant effort to help us achieve the goals of electing MORE and BETTER Democrats. I urge you to please SUPPORT BILL DURSTON FOR CONGRESS.

Below is the official communication from the Durston for Congress Campaign. Please HELP BY CONTRIBUTING TO OUR EFFORTS to unseat one of the worst Bush-enablers in Congress.

Two Durston for Congress television ads are currently running on cable and network TV stations that broadcast in the 3rd Congressional District. The first ad, “Leadership, Courage, and Commitment,” shows some of the many ways in which Dr. Bill Durston exemplifies these qualities. The second ad, “Business as Usual,” stars Dan Lungren himself and demonstrates his lack of ethics and arrogance as he defends taking handouts from special interests.

Producing and running television ads such as these takes a lot of money, but it’s an effective way of informing large numbers of voters about some of the striking contrasts between the challenger, Dr. Bill Durston, and the incumbent career politician, Dan Lungren. Click on the links above to view the ads, and then make as generous a contribution as you can afford to keep these ads running and to produce others. (We’ve got plenty more material where these ads came from.) Also forward this email and the ads to anyone on your personal contact list who might not already be a Durston for Congress supporter.

Talking to voters person to person is another effective way of informing them that they have a better choice than Dan Lungren for their U.S. Congressman. We hope to exceed the tremendous grassroots field work we did last weekend with even more precinct walking and phone banking this weekend. Click on the Upcoming Events and Action Alert tabs on the right, send Durston for Congress Field Director, Bill Lackemacher, an email, give him a call at 916-812-1794, or drop by the Fair Oaks Office at 4146 Sunrise Boulevard in Fair Oaks to find out what you can do to help elect Dr. Bill Durston to Congress and send Dan Lungren packing on a permanent vacation.

Disclosure:I am an Internet Outreach Coordinator for the Durston for Congress Campaign.

Sacramento, California – September 11, 2008 – Grammy Award winning native American flutist, Mary Youngblood, will be performing  and Dr. Bill Durston will be speaking at a special Durston for Congress gathering on Thursday, September 11, from 7-9 PM at the home of Bill and Nancy Myers, 10300 Sheldon Road, in Elk Grove.

Media representatives and all members of the public who are concerned about the “war on terror” are invited. Refreshments will be served. The event will be held outdoors, so bring a folding chair or blanket to sit on. Call Bill or Nancy Myers at 916-689-6943 to RSVP.

Dr. Bill Durston is the Democratic candidate for Congress in California’s 3rd Congressional District. Dr. Durston is a decorated Marine Vietnam combat veteran and an emergency physician.  For more information about the Durston for Congress campaign, call 916-622-VOTE (8683) or go to the Durston for Congress website.

Dr. Bill Durston’s complete Special Comment on today’s sobering anniversary is below the fold:

September 11, 2008, marks the seventh anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Dr. Durston states:

It is appropriate that we should pause today to mourn the deaths of the almost 3,000 victims of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and to honor those who lost their own lives trying to save them. At the same time, we must reflect on the opportunity we had on September 12, 2001, when virtually the entire world was in sympathy with our country, to say to the rest of the world, ‘We will seek security, we will seek justice, but the vicious cycle of violence must end here.’ Unfortunately, though, our leaders chose to continue that cycle of violence, and today we must also mourn the deaths of over 4,000 U.S. service men and women as well as the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.

At the same time that we mourn the tragedy of September 11, 2001, and its aftermath, let us seek to regain the opportunity of September 12, 2001, to work constructively and within the rule of  law with the rest of the world toward ending terrorism and its root causes.

Disclosure: I am the Internet Outreach Coordinator for the Durston for Congress Campaign – www.durstonforcongress.org

Because they say Charity begins at home and all politics are local, I have volunteered to serve as the Internet Outreach Co-ordinator for California 3rd Congressional District’s Democratic Candidate – Dr. Bill Durston – for the rest of this electoral cycle.

Here’s Bill Durston’s Progressive Positions on various issues.

Dan Lungren – hard to tell apart from Dooltittle – is the Republican incumbent we are trying to replace – with your help.

If you live in this district and have a FaceBook Profile (if you don’t, consider creating one), please add BILL DURSTON to your “Friends” list.

Are you on Myspace? Bill Durston is there, too, and would appreciate your joining us there.

I am very reluctant to impose upon your generosity here (knowing how much you have all individually done to date), but I would like to request that you PLEASE help by making a DONATION (however little) NOW. TODAY. To the Durston for Congress Campaign. I will consider this a VERY PERSONAL favor, and I will be very grateful for the generosity and support.

If you don’t live in the district but would still like to support us in whatever capacity, we welcome all the assistance you can offer.

Equally important (or even more so, given our various commitments), if you are scheduling or participating in any outreach/GOTV/Voter Registration/etc events anywhere in the CA-03 area, please PROMOTE BILL DURSTON in (and invite the Campaign to) ALL your events.

Let there be no confusion, my new undertaking will NOT interfere with my passionate support and advocacy for our Presidential Candidate – Barack Obama. It will not dissipate my energy and enthusiasm to see us elect our candidate of Hope and Change, and, NO, it will not stop me from filling your inboxes with my occasional SPAM.

On the contrary, I believe that my closer relationship with the Durston for Congress Campaign will enable me to better contribute to the larger cause of not only electing Barack Obama as President, but also electing a MORE AND BETTER Democratic majority to help him actualize his stated goals, once elected. CA-03 is a “lean-Republican” district gerrymandered for Republican candidates, but that has not dissuaded our immensely-qualified, Vietnam Combat Veteran, Emergency Room Physician and Local Resident Dr. Bill Durston from stepping up the plate and answering the call to help us take back our Democracy from the vagabonds who have been despoiling it for the past eight years.

Dr. Durston has put himself forward to champion a cause on our behalf, and I feel that we have a responsibility to rally round him and help him overcome the seemingly insurmountable odds of defeating one of the worst Bush-enablers in Congress today. After all, overcoming insurmountable odds is what we are known for. With your able assistance and support, and your warm welcome of Dr. Durston into the “Yes, We Can” tent, I am very sure that we can collectively achieve the “impossible”.

Please join me in this quest.

Can’t DONATE money? No problem – we need other things as equally valuable as cash – PLEASE VOLUNTEER HERE

Let’s welcome Dr. Durston into our fold, and let’s adopt a BETTER Democrat to send to Congress.

The 33rd District has a chance to elect a great new leader in the State Senate this year. With the problems that face our district and state, new common-sense leadership is desperately needed. Gary Prithchard is an educator, and a respected member of the community. He offers a new vision, and will fight to represent the 33rd district and insure that our voices will be heard.  

Gary has an impressive resume to point to:

I’m a 37 year old California native who was born in the Central Valley town of Bakersfield and raised near the southern entrance of Yosemite National Park.

I now live in Aliso Viejo with Heather my supportive spouse of 10 years and Charlotte our exuberant five year old daughter..

I am a dedicated educator in the public school system. I completed college in Southern California where I attended Chapman University, the Claremont Graduate School, UCLA, and UCI. I hold a Ph.D. in the Social Sciences and am a tenured professor in the Fine Arts and Communication Division of Cerritos College where I have taught since 1999. In the summer, I am also a lecturer at UCI.

http://garypritchard08.com/?pa…

Gary would fight for Fiscal Responsibility, and for Transparency and Responsibility in our Government:

Transparency and responsibility are the first priorities. Every resident should have access to how their taxes are spent in the State of California. It should also be easy to understand and to know who exactly was responsible for parts of the budget and who put forth earmark spending. Fiscal responsibility is imperative at all times, the good and the bad. Why doesn’t the State currently have a surplus from when our economy was booming? Important revenues were cut and spending was expanded without any regard for unforeseen future economic circumstances. Would the average household not prepare for hard times by saving when times are good? Should we not expect the same common sense approach in our Government by demanding our legislature treat our money like theirs?

http://garypritchard08.com/?pa…

Gary has compiled an impressive list of endorsments in this race:

State

The California Democratic Party

California State Treasurer

California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO

Orange County

Anaheim Democratic Club

Democratic Party of Orange County

Democracy for America, Orange County

North Orange County Democratic Club

Progressive Women in North Orange County

Debra Carrillo, Deputy DA and Candidate for OC Superior Court Judge

Debbie Cook, Mayor of Huntington Beach

Sharon Quirk, Mayor of Fullerton

Pamela Keller, Fullerton City Councilwoman

John Hanna, RSCCD Trustee

Michael Matsuda, NOCCD Trustee

Unions

California School Employees Union, Chapter 161

Cerritos College Faculty Federation – AFT Local 6215

International Brotherhood of Teamsters, California

Orange County Employees Association

United Auto Works, Region Five

We need a State Senator like Gary who will fight for balanced solutions to our difficult problems instead of brushing them off or getting them trapped in legislative gridlock.

Please support Gary, and a better future for California’s 33rd District here:

http://www.actblue.com/entity/…