Where’s the Party ?

I need your help. It’s a simple question. You remember Bell, California, the city where many leading officials were making salaries in the high six figures and subsequently found to be using city funds for personal loans. It has pretty much been reported everywhere.

Here is the question:
To which political party do the officials belong ?

It’s an open book test. Here are several posts to aid you:

New York Times
Huffington Post
Wikipedia
Bloomberg
LA Times
CNN
Chicago Sun Times
MSNBC

Comments

  1. Isn’t the liberal media just wonderful. All eight yahoos are Democrats, but you’d never know it!

  2. Dan (not Vegas Dan) says:

    I haven’t read all of the articles you link to, but I think it’s safe to assume that none of them mention political affiliation. And although my search wasn’t very comprehensive, I couldn’t find any mention of political affiliation at FOX either. What are we to make of that?

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/4345989/this-is-theft

    http://www.foxnews.com/search-results/search?q=Bell+City+Corruption

  3. Randy in Richmond says:

    Dan
    What I make of it is that internet Fox fell down on it’s job. I do know that on it’s cable network Fox has reported their party affiliation.

    But the main point is that if they were Republicans, most all of the MSM would report that fact. It’s not an omission, it’s an agenda.

  4. Dan (not Vegas Dan) says:
  5. Well, if they say so at newsbusters.com it must be true. I’ll bet those sleazy liberal journalists at the LA Times modified the sample ballot to show no party affiliation.

    Case closed.

    http://bellcityclerk.org/voting/pdf/election-200903ballot.pdf

  6. oh comon … they are neither .. they are CRIMINALS!!!!

    This woe is me about MSM and liberal media… oh comon you guys.

    (and I’m republican before you assault me)

  7. Randy in Richmond says:

    Gee, my simple question has still not been answered. The fact that the positions they held are nonpartisan means nothing. My question is to what party do the officials belong ? Until that is answered the case is not closed. Nonpartisan has the same significance as partly pregnant.

  8. BrkfldDad answered your simple question, twice.

    See comments 1 and 5.

  9. Randy in Richmond says:

    I’m kinda like the creationist looking for the missing link here. Associates, registered voter records, statewide elected official’s given party, endorsements and other thick smoke indicate they are Democrats–but there’s no fire as far as I can see. Newsbusters says they are Democratic and gives as proof the Orange County Register’s editorial page which says they are Democratic but offers no proof that I can find. Can somebody supply me that missing link that explicitely delineates their party ? Just saying it doesn’t make it so.

  10. Randy, not sure if this the OpEd you are referring to http://www.ocregister.com/articles/bell-259387-city-party.html but that’s as close to a confirmation as I can find too. Heck, just look at the numbers. If Republicans had a 100% turnout in an election in Bell (not stateds aside), the Democrats would only need a 13% turnout to win an election.

    If it quacks like a duck…

  11. Randy in Richmond says:

    BrkfldDad
    Yes, that’s the editorial. It states they are Democrats but I do not see any verification or proof. I agree with you that most everything points to them being Democrats but I cannot find, at least on the net, something to verify that fact. There’s absolutely no or little evidence to suggest they are Republican. And as I said before the nonpartisan designation means nothing. I would suspect a reporter in California could easily determine their party affiliation, if so motivated. My point, as it has always been, is that for the MSM that motivation mostly does not exist–they too know how the duck story ends.

    And let me clarify an earlier statement I made. When Fox reported on it’s network they were Democrats, they quoted the Orange County Register’s editorial. I don’t feel like Fox did it’s homework either.

  12. What part of “non-partisan” is so difficult to understand? It’s bad enough that people demand to oust anyone who’s not 100% Dem or Rep (when they’re against them.) Now you want to investigate the secret thoughts of people in non-partisan positions.

  13. Randy in Richmond says:

    John
    It’s impossible to be non-partisan. I understand that quite well. Where in this post is anyone trying to oust anyone ? And aren’t all thoughts secret ?

    If your second sentence were true John McCain would have received a small percentage of the votes he did get.

  14. We get it Randy.

    In order to protect the Democratic Party image, the agenda-driven MSM is conspiring to keep quiet regarding party affiliation. And Fox’s excuse? The dog ate their homework.

  15. Randy in Richmond says:

    There’s nothing to get. Since you can’t or won’t answer my question I must assume you do not have the answer. But you have worked conspiracy, partisanship, and the dreaded Fox News into the fray. Surely Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney must have planned this at an underground location known only to Glenn Beck.

  16. You’re right, I don’t have the answer to the question: “To which political party do the officials belong ?”

    Judging by your comment @ 9:15 am, either do you: “I agree with you that most everything points to them being Democrats but I cannot find, at least on the net, something to verify that fact. “