Fire Protection and FEMA Response are Inadequate
Posted Jul 04, 2008 8:44am
by Robert Cruickshank, Courage Campaign
Comments (0)
Write Comment
Write your comment in the form below. Be sure to 'Preview' your comment to make sure that it will appear as you want it to.
You Are Replying To This Comment:
You Are Commenting On This Post:
Confrontation at the Resolutions Committee Meeting
|
|
Things took a pretty nasty turn, unfortunately.
I entered the California Democratic Party Resolutions Committee meeting room with Eden James, Courage Campaign's Managing Director, bearing our sign and easel. We found a free space at the front of the room and set up the sign.
Almost immediately, Resolutions Chair John Hanna approached us, demanding that we remove the sign. Eden politely asked if there "was a rule" against signs in the meeting rooms. Hanna replied "yes."
Kathy Bowler, CDP Executive Director, then calmly approached me, stating that the sign should be removed because the room was getting full and she had staff she needed to get into the room.
John then grabbed ahold of one side of the sign, attempting to remove it from Eden's hands. Eden, maintaining his hold on to the other side, repeated the question to John about whether a rule existed against signs inside the meeting room. John said "yes"again and Eden asked to see the rule, saying that if there was an actual rule against signs inside the room -- he would respect it.
Increasingly angry, John threatened to call security. Eden, surprised, calmly responded that John "should go ahead if that's what you want to do."
Suddenly, Hanna then shoved his side of the sign and Eden at the same time, forcibly pushing Eden backwards. Eden held on. John shoved again, then pushed Eden's shoulder back with the palm of his hand.
Stunned, Eden let go of the sign as John ripped it from his hands and threw it to the floor. An unknown person then picked up the sign and sprinted it out of the room, taking it to the staff room (according to Kathy Bowler).
More below.
This is the Last thing that we wanted to happen. And Eden is one of the most peaceful, non-aggressive people that I have ever met. It was shocking to see his calm, determined words met by violence.
The goal of bringing the sign into the room was to provide a visual representation of the large number of people, clubs and groups supporting the resolution to censure the Senator.
Our purpose in continuing to discuss moving the sign was to get a clear reason and clarification of the rules surrounding bringing in signs. If a rule was presented against posting signs, we would have respected it without question. And indeed, we would have entertained a discussion about its removal due to space issues.
We are shocked and shaken by this turn of events and so are many others. It is extremely disappointing that something as simple as trying to bring a sign into a room (that lists organizations supporting a resolution) can escalate into physical violence.
Eden and I want to commend Kathy Bowler for her professionalism throughout this incident. John Hanna's conduct, on the other hand is shocking, upsetting, and completely inappropriate.
This resolution should be addressed on its merits. No matter what side you are on, this discussion does not deserve to be marred by physical violence.
I entered the California Democratic Party Resolutions Committee meeting room with Eden James, Courage Campaign's Managing Director, bearing our sign and easel. We found a free space at the front of the room and set up the sign.
Almost immediately, Resolutions Chair John Hanna approached us, demanding that we remove the sign. Eden politely asked if there "was a rule" against signs in the meeting rooms. Hanna replied "yes."
Kathy Bowler, CDP Executive Director, then calmly approached me, stating that the sign should be removed because the room was getting full and she had staff she needed to get into the room.
John then grabbed ahold of one side of the sign, attempting to remove it from Eden's hands. Eden, maintaining his hold on to the other side, repeated the question to John about whether a rule existed against signs inside the meeting room. John said "yes"again and Eden asked to see the rule, saying that if there was an actual rule against signs inside the room -- he would respect it.
Increasingly angry, John threatened to call security. Eden, surprised, calmly responded that John "should go ahead if that's what you want to do."
Suddenly, Hanna then shoved his side of the sign and Eden at the same time, forcibly pushing Eden backwards. Eden held on. John shoved again, then pushed Eden's shoulder back with the palm of his hand.
Stunned, Eden let go of the sign as John ripped it from his hands and threw it to the floor. An unknown person then picked up the sign and sprinted it out of the room, taking it to the staff room (according to Kathy Bowler).
More below.
This is the Last thing that we wanted to happen. And Eden is one of the most peaceful, non-aggressive people that I have ever met. It was shocking to see his calm, determined words met by violence. The goal of bringing the sign into the room was to provide a visual representation of the large number of people, clubs and groups supporting the resolution to censure the Senator.
Our purpose in continuing to discuss moving the sign was to get a clear reason and clarification of the rules surrounding bringing in signs. If a rule was presented against posting signs, we would have respected it without question. And indeed, we would have entertained a discussion about its removal due to space issues.
We are shocked and shaken by this turn of events and so are many others. It is extremely disappointing that something as simple as trying to bring a sign into a room (that lists organizations supporting a resolution) can escalate into physical violence.
Eden and I want to commend Kathy Bowler for her professionalism throughout this incident. John Hanna's conduct, on the other hand is shocking, upsetting, and completely inappropriate.
This resolution should be addressed on its merits. No matter what side you are on, this discussion does not deserve to be marred by physical violence.
This Resolution followed the failed effort of Levine to pass AB #1634 with this MANDATE, dubbed "Healthy Pets," and which would have made them veritably extinct. Levine withdrew his effort in July with the volume of public outrage and organized opposition, and with a revival now underway statewide, he appeared personally to oppose this opposition to his efforts which had been placed by the committee on the consent calendar.
This effort is being revived statewide joined by a new "coalition" apparently of PUBLIC EMPLOYEE UNIONS [job slots for animal control dysfunctional and incompetent statewide] and PETA that poses as a champion of "animal rights," allegedly in association with those considered terrorists groups ...
To its credit, The City Council of Huntington Beach has moved to withdraw their proposed MANDATE of the same nature due to overwhelming opposition and introduction of scientific veterinary data as to the gravity of these major surgeries, complications, risks of potential adverse health impacts and deaths varying with breed, gender, age, weight, cumulatively indicatinng an inherent right and responsibility of pet owners and veterinarians to make such determinations.
Slots for "Canvassers" alone at $70K each were to be added to go "door to door" in HB for virility checks. Pending however is a proposal to ENACT a fee to "opt out." Prominent proponents of this proposed MANDATE in HB were those identifying themselves as "rescue" people who argued that MANDATED SPAY/NEUTER of family pets that are licensed, provided veterinary care and even that insurance coverage, pampered and secured by responsible owners would resolve issues of "strays."
60% of American families have pets; 64% of those surveyed by an MSNBC poll opposed AB #1634; 64% of dwelling units in HB averaging $1 Million are owner occupied; pet supplies are a $43 Billion industry.
ORANGE COUNTY ANIMAL CONTROL OVERALL HAS A "KILL" RATIO OF 58% [mostly cats!] and those statistics employed were not applicable to HB; one (1) HB dog was euthanized due to "space," others due to behavioral or health issues. Upon inquiry of OCAC as to qualifications of "RESCUERS" to whom they released pets as those who testified in SUPPORT of MANDATED S/N in HB as to their "tired hearts" and "empty wallets," none! A 501c3 certificate of a non-profit organization suffices for release of family pets after legal requirements for hold over business days, four (4)for those without a license [lost, removed?], seven (7) for those with a license. And owners searching for pets? A business license suffices for ownership and kennel operations. The CA Veterinary Assoc does not regularly inspect those veterinary facilities nor does it release findings. [Yo! Levine!]
A diligent HB resident found that only 14.9% of licensed dogs in that city are intact and those surcharges on those licenses [$90 for males] represent 30% of revenues to OCAC which contracts with the city. Ca ching! HB is the third largest city in Orange County and pays the highest fees to OCAC; go figure!
Fines for having an unaltered animal(s) were to start at $150, compound at $50/mo, and max at $500. Such MANDATES are known to reduce licensing and in turn vaccinations, and these procedures would also REDUCE LICENSING REVENUES. No mention has been made of failure to enforce existing regulations as to "strays."
Levine is termed out; his prior efforts to outlaw light bulbs went down to defeat. One wonders at his avowed concerns for cost of animal services as a legitimate return on licensing fees that go into the General Fund compared to the more egregious issue as the $48 Billion shortfall statewide in funding of benefits for PUBLIC EMPLOYEES and Millions in liability for conduct of PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, as opposed to say, the public welfare, health and safety?
These are all issues that should be addressed by representatives of our diverse Democratic constituencies. Issues brought before the Resolutions Committee are that representation.