Kranz’s endorsement of Ose doesn’t make sense
Supervisor Bruce Kranz endorsed Doug Ose because he said Ose is good for Placer County’s District 5. District 5 runs from North Auburn to Lake Tahoe. To completely understand what Doug Ose has done to District 5, let’s introduce the National Endowment for the Arts. The NEA (read taxpayers) funds “art†that cannot find funding elsewhere. The infamous “art†displays the NEA funded with our tax dollars included the crucifix in a jar of urine and other things. Left of center Republican Doug Ose voted at three times against minuscule cuts to the NEA— HR 2466, July 14, 1999, Roll Call Vote 287; in 2000 with HR 45, Roll Call Vote 282; in 2001 with HR 2217, Roll Call Vote 184. How this relates to District 5 is found with HR 5093, July 17, 2002, Roll Call Vote 314. Tom Tancredo’s amendment would have transferred $50 million from the NEA to the U.S. Forest Service, and Ose voted against this. Much of District 5 is U.S. National Forest including the Tahoe Basin. The U.S. Forest Service manages the forest to prevent wildfires. (unless Clinton-appointed judges prevent them from clearing brush). So for Doug Ose the NEA (read Placer taxpayer funded) foul art displays are more important than forest (and fire) management in the Tahoe Basin. Bruce Kranz is a fine supervisor — but his support of Ose does not fit that paradigm. Aaron F. Park Roseville
|
Change Location:
|
Ah yes, another bashing of Ose by Aaron Park and his hate monger friends. I wonder if he ever thinks why people are sick and tired of dirty, candidate assination politics? Too bad Kranz has to associate himself with the Placer Co Rep Party and their hate speech.
Park's post raises a good question about Reagan's 11th commandment "Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican".
I think Reagan was right, but I wish I had clarification on how to deal with RINOs who put an R on their registration, but vote L every chance they get.
Kranz is a good conservative who actually is pretty environmentally sensible and reasonably conservative fiscally. Take his Middle-Fork proposal to constrain the revenue from the middle-fork project (>$10M/year) into water/power projects rather than buying more buildings.
On the other hand, Kranz support of Ose, call for a big Supervisor pay raise, and failure to reign in spending during the housing boom has been less than stellar.
I would still recommend him, but he really needs to rethink his Ose endorsement. Maybe events will overtake this letter in the next few days??? Lets see!