Friday, April 2, 2010

There's Something About Nadia

The Citizen

In front of a crowd, Nadia Lockyer appears uncomfortable. She shifts. Her eyes dart with some unknown worry. The further she steps to the right of center stage, the more her anxiety seems to subside. That was the observation as she opened her campaign headquarters Thursday night in Hayward. But that's only half of the story.

The well-funded candidate hoping to replace the retiring Gail Steele on the Alameda County Board of Supervisors spares no expense. Boxes of slick black and red lawn signs sit at the front of the rather large A Street office. The real estate is honestly more befitting of a campaign for U.S. Senate than the board of supervisors. The spread laid out for supporters is a typical selection of party platters along local pols gulping down glasses of white wine. Lockyer's campaign has vastly outraised and outspent her three rivals for the seat so much that one of her opponents, Hayward Councilman Kevin Dowling said in jest, she's singlehandedly boosting the local economy by hiring so many high-priced consultants.

Yet, on the surface, there is very little known about Lockyer's opinions on the issues confronting the county. Her website only offers a quick bio, while other candidates in both open races for the board list reviving the local economy with jobs and health care, in addition, to boosting funding for education as part of their vision. Frankly, the political answer is she doesn't have to talk about the issues when she has the Lockyer name, powerful financial and political contacts and a pretty face. Here, though, is the intriguing part of Nadia Lockyer, when the spotlight is not blaring like klieglights in her eyes a different candidate shows up. The dynamic is not if we're looking at an empty pants suit, but possibly a candidate some will wistfully look back and remember the first time Nadia Lockyer ran for office and what she later became.

Lockyer is hard to peg. She has a quite charisma. She's thin yet strong. Has focused, but kind round eyes and flashes a sometimes uncertain toothy half-grin. As opposed to her opponent, former state Sen. Liz Figueroa, who tends to flash a coy smile that make men gush, Lockyer pulls an uncanny ability to connect with women. Standing in the crowded campaign office, it's clear women of every age and color simply adore Lockyer. It's really no different than the generation-busting cadre of female supporters of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, who while shouting encouragement at rally's in Oakland two years ago, were really shouting for the advancement of women in general. Older women view her as their successful younger sister and young women look at her as the person they want to be. Lockyer's female supporters were, for the most part, uninterested in snacking on the policy details, they just wanted to shake her hand, embrace her or, as one person did, merely said goodbye and blew a kiss. The exuberant group at one point had Lockyer holed up in the doorway of a storage area for nearly 30 minutes.

On the whole, Lockyer's nervousness in the spotlight could point to a disenchantment with the standard operating procedures of politics. Her luster shines far less when she is asked to play the role of politician than performing the duties of being a politician. When Bill's "friends" show up the party changes from a hipsters paradise to old dudes breaking out card tables, sipping on Highballs and telling old war stories from their days in Sacramento.

When the former chairman of the California Democratic Party Art Torres stood in front of the throng, he along with Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi sucked the genuine air out of the room. The slicked silver-haired Torres performed a standard cocktail hour schtick replete with references to his once-black pate while explaining why Lockyer was the candidate for the job. The scene bore more in common with the opening remarks at a meeting of the Loyal Order of the Moose than the introduction of a possibly tranformative local politician. Hayashi made note of the dignitaries in attendance and said she was the person who urged the former Assembly Speaker Karen Bass to run along the current Speaker John Perez. Of course, the implication was we should thank her for her personnel decision as if she was the plucky baseball scout in wool overcoat and fedora who discovered a young Willie Mays playing stick ball in rural Alabama. I think Bill found her first.

So, maybe Lockyer doesn't need the name or the backing in the Democratic Party that is attached to her famous surname. It sure doesn't hurt, but once she plays by her own rules, there's no tempering the enthusiasm she generates. She says her campaign is about families. It's for the mom's. As the event wound down, volunteers gathered up the leftovers and straightened up the kids room in the center office. Nadia was gone, but Bill stayed around to help clean up. If that isn't a sign of the times-they-are-a-changin', I don't know what is.

JOIN THE REVOLUTION! www.eastbaycitizen.com


Oh good lord what a joke. She is what number wife of Lockyer? And she thinks she should be a County Supervisor? Give me a break. Bill Lockyer has wracked havoc upon California and now someone whose mind he's help contaminate wants to carry on the tradition? Help US!!!!

The times may be "a-changin'", but Steven still spends paragraphs of this story comparing the smiles of the two female candidates and the adoration Nadia gains from those wimmen, among other patronizing perceptions.

The experience and knowledge Nadia has in Alameda County government and policy, as well as her groundbreaking work as a young Boardmember (see, she's already won elected office) of one of the largest School Districts in the state, is a plate that Steven leaves untouched. But, digging into the "issue" of the speculative effect that the female candidates' smiles have on men....yummy!

Good closing image, though. The Treasurer tidying up....

Mr. Jones, are you speaking for all women? How can a man declare descriptions of women as "patronizing"? Maybe you should let women make that opinion. I'm going to assume you are a caucasian man can you also speak as an expert on the experiences of young African American men too? This story is very kind to Mrs. Lockyer. It makes me want to learn about her. I just wish the story would have tried to find out what she's actually for.

Mr. Vieira, the last three sentences of your comment capture much of my view of this story. One does want to learn more about Nadia's qualifications as a result. There's plenty to learn.

However, Steven considers the smiles of the two female candidates and speculates how their appearances might affect their chances with male and female voters. It is noticeable that Steven does not draw in comparisons of the smiles of the two men running in this race, and how their appearances might affect public perceptions. Perhaps that's the world we swim in, but it's healthy to point out that this is, in fact, patronizing.

To the idea that women are the only ones qualified to state an opinion that certain views sound patronizing- that seems off. Drawing in the metaphor you use here, I'm certain that a white person is qualified to state that yelling a racial epithet at an African-American of any sex is a racist act. While the offense in this story is much, much less, it is still noticeable to me that the story holds the women candidates in this race to a different judgement than the men.

The story is joke. When someone reads it all they want to learn is what does this chick look like? Obviously her opinions and views are so nonexistent and shallow that they're not even worth covering in the article. Let's see her in some stilletto heals.

Nadia was so groundbreaking on the Santa Ana School Board that she lost her first re-election in 2002!

Doesnt ANYONE want to know how this young woman landed in a marriage with such a powerful California politicians? Don't you WONDER how she gets the support she gets? It's as if it's just ok, because, well, she's a Democrat and surronded by good Democrats. We know little about her other then she didn't do much on a school board in Orange County (didn't win re-election), she's a "county manager" or whatever you want to call it and she's married to Bill Lockyer (was the marriage even consummated?). If, IF she didn't have the last name Lockyer, Doug Jones and every other bandwagon follower would support Liz...(I know this because I went back in time.)

Bottom line is, the shoes of Gail Steele are big ones to fill. Gail has pride, courage and is all around good people. Filling those shoes needs to be done by someone who has been around a while, not someone who sat on a school board (I'd look into what she accomplished there) in Orange County (two difference worlds, two different jobs) and wound up marrying a powerful politician. If this were a movie script, Hollywood would buy it.

before I can vote for Nadia Lockyer, I need her to convince me (just as Doug Jones ones said)...I need her to respond to my 6 emails (just as Doug Jones once said)...WE ALL need (wait, where does Doug Jones lives)...to know who Nadia Lockyer is...the other candidates are not mystery's. I need to know what shes done in the past is going to set her course for the future on the BOS.

Nicholas (Yes, I'm back) Terry
Alameda County Consumer Affairs Commission (appointed by Gail Steele)

There's something about how we campaign in America. The Democratic Party activists tend to be too old to really engage their members,especially door to door. They also have ex-communicated them from any meaningful Internet discussions, though the price is right. It all comes down to figuring out what short line or two will persuade the voter into giving up their vote. Money money everywhere but not a drop for organizing people after the election for say saving San Leandro Hospital or a foreclosure campaign. The poverty of power.
All the candidates are good people but the candidate centered system is corrupt.


Doug Jones wants to read about Kevin Dowling's smile? I don't. The author wonders whether Nadia Lockyer is an "empty pants suits." Read between the lines! She is!

Trying to break this down by gender is bullshit. Love your balls Doug and remember men and women are different and that's a good thing, not something to be ashamed. Why don't you ever support a male candidate? Stop listening to Hall & Oates you manhater.

Anonymous...you just welcomed Mr. Jones into your world...and he'll use the same big words he always uses...drink a red bull; it's going to be a bumpy ride!

I hate being on agreement with Tavares, but I don't think that the issue of "looks" and "last names" is irrelevant to this campaign. The fact is that attractive people often get more attention and more votes - from the Junior High Homecoming Dance to the presidential election. Nadia Lockyer is a beautiful woman (though she photographs horribly) and I'm sure that she will get some votes for that reason alone. But I doubt that her support among women is as much related to her looks as to her personality. I met her once at Zocalo years ago (she was hanging out in the children's area with her kid) and she is really and genuinely "nice". She comes across as an intelligent, sincere person, who is really not different from you and I. I doubt that's an act.

But I am concerned about her lack of political experience, and most importantly, the fact that she is pretty much running solely on Lockyer's name and money. That might have been a plus at some point, once upon a time I thought of Lockyer as a good liberal whose views matched with mine. But then he turned and decided to support Schwarzenegger, even after he knew about the allegations of sexual harassment/assault against him. No, Lockyer's sliminess shouldn't be a point against Nadia, but his name (which she chooses to use) and his money shouldn't be a point on her favor either.

It comes down to the fact that this woman is an "empty skirt". The District had that knucklehead Gail Steele there for way too long and all she did was moan, groan, cry and collect a check. We need someone who will bring businesses back to Alameda County, not running them out.

Wow, if you knew Nadia you would see a bright
capable exiting young leader that this district needs more than ever! In her job
everyday she makes contact with different
departments in Alameda county, and knows what
going on better than the other candidates.
Nadia by far is what this area needs.Not more
of the same, we need someone with the heart drive and backbone Nadia has. I will vote
for her on June 8th and will urge every one
who can to please do the same.

If you like Nadia so much, why can you only praise her anonymously? :-)

What does it matter if I put my name. It does
not change the facts. She far outshines the
rest of the candidates. We do not get this
caliber of candidate hardly ever. And besides
it got your attention with anonyomus, didn't

You seem to confuse "facts" with "opinions". A "fact" is something that can be objectively proven. An "opinion" is your own take on something. The fact that you are anonymous in your opinion does get my attention - but not in a good way.

"She far outshines the rest of the candidates. We do not get this caliber of candidate hardly ever."

How authentic is that caliber though? She's a politician, they are all suppose to outshine the other, at least us. Her lack of responding to my 6 emails and once voice mail really doesn't sit well with me; too busy? The folks that I know who have met her, who are open to any candidate, think shes putting on a show. Who she is today, may not be who she is after election day.

For such a small area of campaigning, I've only seen her supporters come to my door. Thats a major turn off there; not to say anyone else has knocked on my door.

Right wing radio have made a political industry out of the hypothetical. I see its also thriving in the East Bay. Is the employment issue, housing, the environment, crime, incarceration or education on the radar?

I'm sure that was directed at me, Craig...sorry, but I don't listen to talk radio...makes my eyes bleed, so I stick with 103.7 The Band...nice try though.

Interesting the double standards in the East Bay. Although, I am making a point in wanting to know who this woman is...it will help people better understand how she REALLY thinks (or who thinks for her).

But, most of us should probably just let them do their job... after all, they are smarter then us (sarcasm).

Yes, there are important issues at hand...so, what have the candidates down about it? They are all elected or former elected officials or executives with the county...theyve had time to do good (and bad).

Wasn't directed at you Nicholas.She seems bright and committed and progressive. With a weak party system no elected official is really accountable. We handed in a couple hundred hand written letters to Keith Carson of the Board of Supervisors regarding San Leandro Hospital . George Mc Govern on KQED last year said , send him 25 hand written letters as a U.S.Senator and he would give the issue a serious look. Carson left the room when San Leandro people began to plead their case, adding insult to injury.That could only happen in a weak party system.


Keith Carson is a moron. But then so is Gail Steele. Get off that San Leandro Hospital kick. It's an issue that's spinning wheels in the mud. Back to Lockyer, there's nothing here other than another left-wing, mean hack wanting a cushy job with a big fat paycheck and perks.

A bold anonymous statement from deep in the blogs closet.

Good points, Craig. Thanks for clearing up that it wasn't directed at me.

Perhaps the issue isn't just the candidates, but the entire Board of Supervisors.

As for Lockyer...she's playing good old fashion politics. She's the Democratic Sarah Palin...playing to the female, mom vote...she's a mom after all, first and foremost. The idea of having a play room at her campaign headquarters is so cheesy; if a Republican did that it would be the same thing.

She's probably a bright woman, hell, she went to law school. I just don't think she has what it takes to sit on a board of supervisors; unless Uncle Art and Big Daddy Bill are going to tell her what to say. Or Mary; Mary is a powerful scout!

Oh Mary...Steven, please write something new about her...there's plenty of material ;)

Character assassinations denigrate democracy. Right wing radio spend a great deal of time ridiculing liberals. Progressives feel conservative are weak on the issues so they aim below the belt. Conservative leaders are the CEO's of corporate America and have betrayed Americans on every issue, from shipping jobs to China to tax breaks for the rich , to financial Ponzi schemes that have destroyed home equity and the economy and cost millions of families hundreds of thousands of dollars, including millions of conservative families. Say it ain't so but your leaders have betrayed you , time and time again.


What denigrates democracy is the fascist tendencies of Democrat politicians. Tax breaks for the rich??? Boy, that's an original thought. And just where do you think the tax breaks go? Oh back into the private sector economy, not into the government where it's lost and never returned. Home equity was lost by liberals and financial ponzi schemes were conjured up by liberals. Get the government out of the way and let AMERICAN'S do what Americans do best; take care of themselves and improve their livelihood.

If Nadia wants to play up to the female voters in Alameda County she better start looking old, ragged and matronly like all the other sows that run for office because the women around here are very jealous of any woman who shows pride in her appearance, and she better not be showing too much leg or cleavage otherwise she'll be eaten up alive.

Well the Bush tax breaks didn't lead to a better economy. The financial meltdown was almost as bad as the Great Depression and since the job recovery is not coming from manufacturing because our conservative CEO's have cut and ran to China to produce their products. Your conservative heroes have "made in China" on their products. Sucking up to Communist officials isn't a crime , but you're a hypocrite if you slander leftist here and suck up to them in China.Sort of like the Chicken hawks in the Iraq War who when younger strongly supported the war in Vietnam but said "hell no I won't go."


How can anyone be taken seriously when you post your name as Anonymous?

Oh, and not all female voters are old, ragged and matronly...some are attractive Republicans.

The tax cuts didn't lead to a better economy????? Let's see; under 5% unemployment as compared to 10% for Obama. But I guess since France had 10% unemployment we should all be glad. The economic meltdown was caused by LIBERAL hero's; Warren Buffett and George Soros. You know that scumbag who breaks currencies. You know that dirtbag who wants to legalize pot.

Obama has gas; blames Bush.

CitiBank is in the hot seat and NO one cares to look into the 1996 lawsuit against them, TRIED by then citizen Obama?

This is the world we live in.

You mean Barack Hussein Obama actually did something in 1996????? Wow that's news.

I take that back, in 1994:

Case Name
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011
State/Territory Illinois
Case Summary
Plaintiffs filed their class action lawsuit on July 6, 1994, alleging that Citibank had engaged in redlining practices in the Chicago metropolitan area in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. 1691; the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601-3619; the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 42 U.S.C. 1981, 1982. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant-bank rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, actual damages, and punitive damages.
U.S. District Court Judge Ruben Castillo certified the Plaintiffs’ suit as a class action on June 30, 1995. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1995). Also on June 30, Judge Castillo granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel discovery of a sample of Defendant-bank’s loan application files. Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 162 F.R.D. 338 (N.D. Ill. 1995).
The parties voluntarily dismissed the case on May 12, 1998, pursuant to a settlement agreement.
Plaintiff’s Lawyers Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Clayton, Fay (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Love, Sara Norris (Virginia)
Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois)
FH-IL-0011-7500 | FH-IL-0011-7501 | FH-IL-0011-9000
Wickert, John Henry (Illinois)

Bubble economy? Bush's five percent unemployment with a booming housing sector led by loan fraud and a military invasion fraud, to prime the pump as well. Is that what you mean?House of cards scam.
Red lining leads to wonderful things, is that it? Is urban blight real or is that mirage you see in most urban inner cities, the boarded up small retailers a result of red lining or maybe it's the failed welfare state.They closed up their business and went on welfare , right? But the retailers were white people , so we don't associate them with red lining or the failed welfare state, RIGHT.The devils in the details.

The devil is as plain as the nose on it's face. Redlining? This cited case sounds like another shake-down operation by "community organizers" or trouble makers. Create false illusions of "racist" lending, file a suit, then agree to settle out of court because it would be cheaper than if the defendant fought it out in court. More nonsense.

Loan Fraud??? You bet there was loan fraud, by the borrowers and realtors.

Urban blight is caused by the people who live within the areas of the blight. The citizens and the local governing body. East 14th St./Mission Blvd is a slum because the cities of Oakland, San Leandro and Hayward refuse to allow businesses to freely expand. The citizens don't take pride in themselves nor their environment and for that matter then people they elect, thus urban blight becomes the norm.

You apparently don't take pride in yourself by remaining an anonymous comment.Sub prime loans are fraud. Banks refused to make loans to cities and states unless they passed legislation permitting sub primes. Most blight happens through slum lords who don't take care of their property and small businesses that go under and board up their building. Go down e 14TH Street and look at the homes off the main street . Most are kept up unless owned by an Free Enterprise eagle flying land lord. Conservative ideology is blight.

There are slum lords, no doubt about that, but it's excessive taxation and regulation on the City's part that causes blight, thereby the only cockroaches that enter the place are slum lords. Get the Cities of Oakland, San Leandro and Hayward to make it easier and less costly to start a business or improve a parcel of land and economic development will multiply. Get rid of the Board of Zoning Adjustments and Planning Commission. Two idiotic boards made up of political stooges with no idea how anything works unless it's a government bureaucrat saying; "increase my pension".

And look at the greasy unkept politicians elected to the Hayward and San Leandro City Councils and School Boards. They can't even take care of their own appearance, how can anyone expect to take pride in their community.

You're dreaming . Blight is caused by "creative destruction" in the market place where the big retailer puts the small guy out of business and where he ends up boarding up his storefront. That's what the mainstream economists liberal and conservative call it. They end up crapping on the community in the process when they board up their storefront. The other blight comes from slum lords in a political system that is so corrupt
that both parties organize money and not people,especially tenants. Most business start ups fail because of economic concentration.


"Creative destruction"????? Big retailers have been around for over a century. That's just another liberal excuse to go after the biggest on the block. The ones crapping on their community are the very people that live there. Businesses fail because of "economic concetration" what the hell is that???? bahhahahahhaah circular illogic at it's worst. There is no guarantee that any new business will succeed or fail, it takes, talent, location, luck and perserveance for any business to succeed. That's just life and no government intervention is going to help it, but government intervention can surely destroy a business.

Yet. No one wants to question the law suits forcing banks to loan money to those not good for it. Those who lived beyond their means are to blame and those that support them get no blame.

That's the liberal mantra; blame inanimate objects not people.

This "forcing banks to loan money" argument is nonsensical and false. Lawsuits seeking to prevent financial redlining of poorer communities is a whole different animal from the massive deregulation of financial institutions which created the current crisis.

I'm not feeling too badly for Citibank. They SETTLED a single case in 1998 covering the Chicago metropolitan area, continued to make massive profits for nearly a decade, and this caused the financial meltdown? What larger facts allow people to claim something so absurd?

If there were provably false claims of "racist" lending, Citibank would hire Grade A1 attorneys to destroy those false claims. It's silly to think otherwise; Citibank has deeper resources than nearly any opponent they would encounter.

Board of Zoning Adjustments and Planning Commissions have nothing at all to do with pensions. Good God, the b.s. is freely slung about in this comments thread.

Redlining is a load of crap. If the ecnomonic postives aren't in an area, that's not redlining. Just another made up term by the cry baby lobby who don't produce anything.

Banks and business have better uses for their money than to spend years in court fighting frivolous lawsuits brought by agitators. In addition the courtroom is not the only avenue that businesses have to deal with, there's the other thing that trouble maker "community" thugs use; busloads of screaming morons staging sit-ins in corporate headquarters, making noise, disrupting business and stinking the place up with their low intelligence and body odors.

Where is this fantasy universe you create where "agitators" are able to keep frivolous lawsuits alive for years against institutions whose financial resources dwarf those of the "agitators"?

In the real world you and I live in, large businesses often take great pleasure in taking people who have been harmed by their practices and tying them up in years of litigation. Lawsuits which could be won often fail only because the plaintiff does not have the money to sustain years in court. Skilled attorneys working on behalf of megawealthy clients get frivolous lawsuits tossed out of court.

Anonymous, it is noticeable that your rhetoric is full of angry, dismissive slurs. Why do you wish to avoid discussing these issues on their merits?

Bush's tax cuts didn't lead to a better, more
sustainable economy.

In February of 2009, a few days after Obama was sworn in, the unemployment rate was in freefall at 8.4%. That number was growing at a half percent a month, which is ridiculously bad. A few months after the stimulus passed it peaked at 10.1% and has lowered to 9.7%. This is also a lagging indicator which always takes time to recover after things like the recent crash. There has been a huge improvement under Obama, unless you think it was better when that number was rising a half percent a month.

We were also losing 700,000+ jobs per month when Obama took office and that number was also getting worse and worse each month. The monthly job losses were reduced after the stimulus was passed, and it has improved every month since. We are now gaining jobs again.

The stock markets lost a large amount of their value under Bush. The Dow Jones average was 10,578 when he came in and 8,279 when he left. Under Obama it's recovered to 11,000. How could history be kind to Bush there?

In addition, the median income for middle-class Americans stagnated during the Bush years; only the incomes of the wealthy rocketed up. One of the reasons for the depth of the current crisis is that the average person was barely getting by even before the failures of our private sector. Few had savings to fall back on when jobs were lost or pay and benefits were reduced.

A healthy capitalist system works only when a wide swath of citizens have disposable income; sustained policy implementation of "trickle-down economics" has never been shown to work. The persistence of Republicans in wishing to move policies which have been revealed as failures is frustrating and radical; it requires an "up is down" view of the world.

Unregulated capitalism is as inappropriate to a sustainable American economy and society as unfettered communism. Our citizens want a balance, and need a balance, between these two poles.

More left wing silliness perpetrated by those who wish to destroy the American Way of Life. Your points sound right out of the Soviet playbook of the 50's. Repeating Krushchev in the Kitchen Debate may work for the ignorant and the over educated who only spend days locked up in acadmenia comning up with useless theories.

The Leftists Agitators whole playbook is to tie up the Legal Departments of coroporations with made up claims in the hopes of getting an out of court settlement. Just like the fools who demand that businesses go through their records of 200 years and determine if any of them "profited" off of slavery. Then these crooked bastards demand a settlement. These are the same fools that brought busloads of big mouths to the homes of businessmen and protested on their streets. Don't try to paint these low-lifes as victims.

Obama's economy will never see any improvment of unemployment below 10% because that street thug thinks it's good for the USA. "Oh Europe has a 10% unemployment, it's not fair we should have 5%" The same redistribution crap bellowed by the leftists fools. The meltdown in October was just part of any ecnomic cycle. The best thing the government could have done was nothing. The Stimulus put forth by Obama was and is a joke. Unemployment hasn't gotten better and it won't because The Stimulus was nothing but a make work project of paving roads. Similar to that money pit known as the Bay Bridge. Billions wasted.

Another leftists lie is that "trickle-down" doesn't work. The economic policy put in place by Ronald Reagan brought in the largest expansion of the American economy ever. The USA had 20 years of misery under Roosevelt and years between 1971 until 1983 was 12 years of rampant inflation and misery brought upon by Lyndon Johnson and GOP liberals Nixon and Ford. It reached it's apex under the incompetent Jimmy Carter who only made the matters worse with his child-like mentality. Only Obama has a more stunted view of the world than Carter.

No disposable income???? Of course when a person is racking up the credit card bills. People have no sense of quality and value. But they do have a keen sense of entitlement that everything should be given to them. Another liberal talking point; "entitlments, free loading, and slothfulness".

My comment just got censored and it was very good.


Conservative CEO'S sold America down the river. They exported their manufacturing to China, taking a short hold over in Mexico. Chevron led the way . sending representatives around the country teaching companies how to suck up to the Chinese government. They offered 37 tips on how to get into China, during the Cold War mind you. Now we have the China Price for manufacturing which means you need to compete against U.S.companies that manufacture there. That is why we may not solve our unemployment problem for years, if ever. The U.S.Corporate developed China Price, lots of luck American workers and families.
Conservatives also spit on Americans during Vietnam. You've heard the story about anti-war activists spitting on vets, it was made up, bs. The truth is that cargo containers were perfected during the Vietnam war , bringing over bombs for the villages we were bombing to liberate them to death. With empty containers they needed something to fill them up with on the way back and figured Asian imports would help out blue collar American workers.
We also went through a de-industrialization during the 70's when conservatives were developing their ideology . We lost 32 to 39 million jobs mostly in manufacturing, much of it through disinvestment and outsourcing to poorer countries. Also mergers and acquisitions ,where bright conservatives boasted of destroying companies by making them into 'cash cows, conservative economists loved it." Part of the strategy also involved the war on drugs and minorities where the prison population swelled from 300,000 to over 2 million in less than two decades. Many people busted for weed, incarceration for intoxication a strict double standard where if you were black you were busted , if you were white you were all right . Eighty percent of drug offenders were users not dealers, a tough on tax payer strategy . We're number one in the world in jails. something like 5.4 times the rate per capita as our European buddies, tough on tax payers tough on minorities for the dangerous offense of intoxication.
Taking us down that bankrupt path to war , in a hurry to invade Iraqi where there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction found but a million citizens killed and an estimated long term tax bill of $3 trillion when all is said and done. And higher prices at the pump , which no one seemed to predict before the invasion. Conservative media mogul Rudolph Murdoch predicted oil prices would drop to twenty cents a gallon. And all those sub prime loans where bankers the true conservatives looked the other way when people scrapping by were placed in loans that would double after a year or two. Or those anti science climate change doubters who just happen to be funded by Big Oil. We are on a ride driven by the conservative ideology , our job prospects are bleak we've been living on bubbles since de industrialization, stocks then the Dot com con then the sum prime housing and derivative crime. Conservative war on America. Wages haven't gone up since the 80's. Instead of union cards people have credit cards. A conservative oligarchy with a base that's a little sadistic and racist and angry as hell when they get drunk and hate a lot of people who ain't like them.

Mr. Jones continues to know more about anything then anyone, kudos to him. He hardly addresses points made and instead, gives a one liner then turns the discussion around. It's almost worthless to even continue engaging him.

Mr. Jones, on April 5 I asked if you even lived in Nadia Lockyers district. Care to put me in my place?

PS. George W. Bush is not President.

PSS. When George W. Bush was President, William Jefferson Clinton was not President...and so on.

Show some class and stop blaming someone else. SOME Presidents have been able to do that.

I live in Alameda County's District 3.

It is unneccesary to address "points" which are slurs or cannot be substantiated by facts. Policy implementations need to be judged on their realities, successes and failures. No-fact statements that a movement's supporters are fools, bastards, big mouths, crybabies, low-lives, etc. are not points worthy of debate. Being in the arena is good; drawing people into the mud pit is not.

What were the real economic policies put into place by Ronald Reagan, and what were their results? Here are some facts:

- With increases in Social Security and Medicare taxes, and an expansion of the Alternative Minimum Tax into lower incomes, middle-class tax levels were increased in six of the eight Reagan budgets.

- The national debt was tripled during the Reagan years to nearly $3 trillion. Major factors in Reagan's debt spending were massive slashes of income tax rates for the very wealthiest (from 70% to 28%), and total government spending increases of over 11% during these years. These changes were not paid for under Reagan, resulting by far the largest increase in gross debt relative to Gross Domestic Product of any post-World War II President.

In comparison, during Clinton's eight years government spending increases were held to slightly over 6%, and the national debt was meaningfully reduced in Clinton's last budget.

- According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment during the Reagan years peaked at 9.7% in 1982, the second year of his Presidency; the average unemployment rate was 7.5% during his terms.

Clinton once again compares favorably; the highest unemployment rate in Clinton's 8 years was his first, 1992, at 7.5%; the lowest was his last year, 2000, at 4.0%. The unemployment rate went down every single year of Clinton's Presidency.

This evidence shows that the hallowed "Reagan Principles" of low taxes and smaller government are more fabrication than fact, and that trickle down economics do not work as well as other, more equitable policies.

Ok, so we know that Doug Jones CAN NOT vote for Nadia Lockyer, however, he will forever endorse her on anything. Good to know your opinion on someone you can't elect; lucky for you two women are running for Lai-Bitker's seat.

Any idiot, other than the leftists on this page knows that fact that revenues to the Federal Government increased because of the Reagan Ecnomonic policies and that it was the liberal Congress, headed by that old drunk Tip O'Neil who increased spending. Give those leftists points a rest, no one believes such garbage.

Interest rates were over 20% under Jimmy Carter and unemployment over 12% both were slashed under Reagan. bhahahahahahhaah Liberals continue to repeat the same lies over and over. No wonder they welcome mundane, illegals who are gullible and don't understand English.

Some how that 20% interest rate will be anyone but a Democrats fault. "Oooh that President Washington, he messed it all up for its!"

Listening to Dems, Liberals or Progressives talk economics (especially those who use talking points) is like watching a dog chase his tail. Or an ass-hat trying to sound smart. It's cute.

Reagan signed every one of his eight budgets which increased Federal spending by over 11% and tripled the national debt. None of these budgets passed with a veto override.

Unemployment during the Carter Presidency's four years were 7.1, 6.1, 5.8 and 7.1%. No Carter year had as high an unemployment rate as the average unemployment rate of 7.5% during Reagan's eight years.

These issues should be discussed without making up wild lies which are easily discovered.

I'm not sure I get the big concentration on interest rates. The Federal Reserve has lowered the rate to near zero for a lengthy period of time now, but few of us other than the rich would say our current economy is made healthy by these microscopic rates.

The Fed, not the President, controls the Reserve's interest rates. At the beginning of Carter's Presidency, the Fed's rate was 4.7%; it did rise to nearly 19% at the end of his term. The rate bounced between 15 and 19% well into Reagan's first term, and did not exit double-digits until 19 months into Reagan's first term; it went back up over 10% for six months in the middle of 1984. Obama has now been in office for 15 months.

The Fed has never implemented an interest rate which reached 7% since the end of 1990. It is obvious that the Fed has used a different policy in regards to the interest rate in recent years, as the rate range has stayed small whether economic conditions during these 20 years were good or bad. In fact, the rates both before and after the Carter and Reagan Presidencies were similarly low; the 1978-1984 era was the aberration.

bahahahahahahahha 7.1% unemployment under Carter???? Please, just because this blog is centered in Alameda County, Ground Zero for ethnics who overexaggerate everything, I repeat, please don't insult us. If it were 7.1% Carter wouldn't have been tossed out. So why are you making up lies about Carter?

I haven't seen anyone here on this board defend low interest rates here. These low rates are weakening the dollar. If anything, we need to take steps to strengthen the dollar.

Weakening the dollar is exactly what will help exports and create jobs. Our anti-American U.S.corporations with production in China will fight tooth and nail to prevent us from increasing exports and jobs and a weaker dollar.Weak dollars now are good.
Carter was whacked with high inflation starting with the so called Energy crisis, created according to some highly respected energy economists by OPEC working with Big Oil to cut production and knock the small independent companies out of the market. We also were going through de industrialization , we lost 32 to 38 million jobs many were in manufacturing.Disinvestment creating a rust belt and economic wasteland in the Northeast and Midwest. The theory was we would base our economy on finance which eventually created a series of economic bubbles but not apparently a sustainable model.

I love that they are going to resume budget talks AFTER the November elections. As if that will fool voters. What a bunch of ass-hats!

A weak dollar will create jobs? What opium den is that out of???? A worthless dollar is just that; worthless. Obviously you know nothing about history. "oh just print more money and things will be better"???? Infantile mentality. Carter was hit with inflation because of the weak dollar mentality. Again, a worthless dollar is just that; worthless.

In Carter's presidency the dollar
the dollar was too strong in relationship to the Japanese yen, which was great for Japanese exports."Like the pounding rain of a typhoon"is how they envisioned their exports. A weak currency, according to conventional wisdom means your products become more attractive for other countries to purchase. The big problem is dealing with the Chinese currency which is seriously undervalued in relationship to the dollar. They ain't budging because a stronger Chinese currency means less exports and more unemployment. The opium den of China is a good place to start a discussion about the dollar but we can only pray for something to happen.


And where the hell has a weak yen lead Japan??? Almost zero percent interest rates in Japan and they're economy is stagnant. But, then if someone thinks that just printing more money is the solution we might as well just talk to the wall.

The yen is very strong now, in Carters day it was weak. That's when they were the manufacturing envy of the world.They were selling us cars and electronics, we were selling them lumber and rice.


bahahahahahahah What hat do you pick these things out of? A Bugs Bunny Cartoon?

In 1973 the ratio was 301 yen to a dollar, at the end of the Cater years it was closer to 200 . The Reagan administration pushed it down even more to under 200. It is now under 90 yen per dollar.The information is on the Internet.


UH, that means that the yen is now weaker than the dollar, but that hasn't helped their economy. bahahhahahahahahahhaaha Case Closed. bahahahahahaha

That makes the yen strong being pegged at 90 to a dollar. Strong currency means it buys less in other countries, in the exchange rate. Weak when it was at 200 or 300 yen to a dollar means its less expensive to buy Japanese products. And the Chinese currency is the same thing. When the Remninbi is kept low (or weak) it's great for Chinese exports but not good for U.S. exports or jobs. Support American interest once in a while, conservative leaders betray America , Tea Baggers shouldn't.


Again with the "Tea Bagger". Someone's head is where it shouldn't be.

Tea Party is that nicer? Don't you compare Obama to the right wing mad man Hitler? Don't your own members call themselves tea baggers? The Boston Tea Party was about taxation without representation.Don't you have the right to vote? Tea Party members are for the most part WORMs, White Old Rich Males , in the top 5 percent income bracket.The type of people you would hate to work for. For a while I was hoping they were like the Boston Tea Party people dressed as American Indians .Hoping you're not right wingers but pretending to be conservatives, like the Indians at the Tea Party. We can only pray!


We compare Obama to the Left Wing Mad Hitler, because he is just like Hitler; National Socialism, National Healthcare, National Police Force. So far none of the Tea Party Participants have engaged in public acts of sexual deviancy.

Hitler murdered millions, to compare Obama to him means you can make up shit and say whatever you want. Why not say he's from Mars? Why not say he murdered millions of conservative hard working Americans who just wanted to be good parents.While they were coming out of church. Why not make shit up and say he invented the F.B.I and is listening in on everyone's phone conversations. As conservatives you can say anything because in conservative politics anything works. National socialism whatever. Something like 100 million died in World War II because of Hitler and Obama's like Hitler.


100 Million? Are also counting all those that Stalin and Hirohito slaughtered? Hirohito's Japan invaded China before Hitler even came to power. Talk about making "profanity" up. And Obama is compared to Hitler because we don't want this great nation turned into another National Socialist pigsty like Hitler did to Germany. Obama wants a "civilian security force" For what? So his crack head followers and be the 21st Century Brownshirts? Obama is a dangerous thug.

Nadia Lockyer was given her job as Executive Director of the Alameda County Family Justice Center through the manipulations of the now-Distrct Attorney, Nancy O'Malley. The actions taken by O'Malley were probably illegal, violating the Federal Grantee rules that ACFJC is supposed to follow, and the state laws forbidding the Attorney General, which Bill Lockyer was at the time, from using his influence to help his family financially. I have explained some of it on www.indymedia.com but email me for more information, boatbrain@aol.com

Steve White

Steve White at boatbrain@aol.com do not mistake this guy for some crusader for justice.

Steve is a felon, by my guess a dangerous felon who cares as little for justice as he understands about fairness.

This guy stalked judge miller for decade or more? according to him , supposedly took her underwear and personal effects after she was dead. The underwear was turned in but who knows if thats what really happened.

He addmitted in open court to molesting his own 7? yr old sister.

I could go on and on, but suffice it say, whatever this woman is or is not, this guys only motivation is hate for the DA office becuase when he did crimnal acts. he was treated like a criminal. BOO HOO

he may have some jealousy as he has never had any job any esteem , accomplished little to nothing in life while these people actually made something of themselves.

I know its sad pitifull even, but no sympathy is warranted to a person with no moral compass and so much hate for everything, in my estimation.

Bill Lockyer is closeted homosexual and Nadia Lockyer is a cocaine addict.

They need to get their personal lives together before they inflict any more damage on the public.

By MW:

The previous post asserts that Nadia Lockyer is a cocaine addict. While she is almost certainly both a meth addict and an alcoholic, however as to whether she is also addicted to one or more additional other drugs, and such as for instance cocaine, I have no idea.

However based simply on her alcoholism and also addiction to at least one other drug, I think all us residents of Alameda County should chip in and rent a truck to move her and her belongings to San Francisco, since with her resume and background she would be absolutely perfect for that insane asylum.

For instance that word class demagogue, phony, and charlatan Jim Jones, and later of Jonestown fame, was a big hero to most SF politicians, and especially to Willie Brown and SF mayor George Moscone, while he was residing in the Bay area. And Willie Brown and Moscone even arranged testimonial dinners for Jim Jones, and at which they praised him to the skies and reassured the general public that Jones was an extremely wonderful, honest, and trustworthy person.

In fact based on the "standards" of SF, Nadia Lockyer would fit in perfectly on the SF Board of Supervisors, and perhaps could eventually even be elected DA or mayor.

Or if she decided she wanted to be a lawyer in private practice in SF, anytime she needed additional money to buy drugs, she could just use that old standby crooked lawyers use to rip off clients and former clients by going to a judge and declaring that there are "oral understandings" superseding the written contract, and therefore supposedly the client or former client owes her additional money. (As long as she provided the judge with a percentage of the additional money she ripped off from the client, a lot of judges, and virtually all SF judges, would pretend to believe her lies, garbage, and nonsense that there are "oral understandings" superseding the written contract.)

In fact, the crooked lawyers and corrupt judges who play that game are basically engaging in counterfeiting and inventing money out of thin air. And it's much safer for them than if they used a printing press in their own basement to print money, since the Secret Service does not go after and imprison crooked lawyers and corrupt judges who play that game of using phony and fraudulent declarations that insist "oral understandings" existed so as to basically invent money.

In fact as an example of the "standards" of SF and SF's legal profession, one of the crooked SF lawyers who played that game of using "oral understandings" so as to further rip off clients is now not merely a SF lawyer but also serves as a special master for SF Superior Court. (A special master is a lawyer who has supposedly proven to be even far more "honest" and "trustworthy" than the typical lawyer, and who therefore assists judges in performing certain special functions that require a person of the very highest honesty, ethics, and trustworthiness.)

I have to reply to this one. I do wish the Lockyers well, but we "hardly ever" get a candidate like this? Because of the meth, the porno, or the (formerly) good looks?

This is Steve White writing. I only wish to point out here, I do not think this post was made by anyone in the Alameda County power structure trying to discredit me, I believe it was a mentally ill family member who is obsessed with hatred because of delusional beliefs, for example that I killed a local judge who was proven to have died of natural causes. There is no truth to any of the rest of it either.

Post a Comment