Wednesday, November 2, 2011

Here is the Sheriff's email to Mr. Matakas

6/27/11

CC-11-13 is the official complaint number The Sheriff isn't going to investigate but read what he does say.







CC 11-13


Friday, June 24, 2011 9:29 AM










From:




"Adam Christianson"








To:


rmataka@deleted








Message contains attachments




1 File (1129KB)








•CC11-13.pdf
















Good Morning Mr. Mataka,


Attached please find my response to your citizen complaint filed on May 26, 2011.


I mailed you my letter to the address listed on the complaint form but the letter was returned via USPS as undeliverable.


Thank you,


Sheriff Christianson






Adam Christianson, Sheriff-Coroner
Stanislaus County Sheriff's Department
250 E. Hackett Road
Modesto CA 95358
(209) 525-7216


"Doing the wrong thing for what one sincerely believes is the right reason can be most dangerous".

The Sheriff's Threat

6/27/11

Quote



"Doing the wrong thing for what one sincerely believes is the right reason can be most dangerous".

…Sheriff Adam Christianson

Comment


I took the Sheriff's quote to me on his e-mail as a threat! I took it as he was saying that my questioning of Steroid use in the Sheriff's Dept. was wrong, even though I might believe my questioning is right, and that this could be dangerous for me personally or my family…John X Mataka

Muratore's Blue Ribbon Homeless Commission Tainted by Second SCAP Director

By Emerson Drake
6/27/11

At the time of Modesto's Blue Ribbon Commissions (BRC) inception many thought it unusual that Frank Ploof, a resident, of Salida was chosen to take part. Mr. Ploof certainly didn't flaunt his Directorship in SCAP to the public. Yet he used that relationship to parlay his way onto the BRC.

It's common knowledge that Joe Muratore nagged at fellow council members to push his agenda regarding the homeless in Modesto. He used his business partners father, Terry Swelha's comments to the Modesto City Council to push his agenda to ban, not just the homeless, but all members of the general public from the use of McClatchey Park except between the hours of 11:00 AM and 1:00PM.

It certainly brings home the adage, What the do to the least of us they do to all of us, doesn't it.

But why did so many members of the Council go along with this? Easy. We have two council members running for Mayor (Marsh and Hawn) and two more seeking reelection Lopez and Burnside. They didn't want to dirty their own hands by taking part in the starving of the homeless themselves so they managed to appoint some willing dupes.

Dupes that had a vested interested for going along to get along.

This committee has so many people scratching each others backs it looks like one big daisy chain.

Darryl Fair wants a building and a grant next to a public park where he can get paid for providing homeless daycare.

Steve Madison of the BIA wants more concessions for the building industry. Madison so distrusts the council he is running one of his Building Industry Association buddies Bill Zoslocki for mayor just to make sure the BIA gets what it wants in preparation for next building boom(yes they actually look that far ahead.)

Vanessa Czopek from the Stanislaus County Library first pulled the cement tables from around the library portico (there goes that adage again) to provide her Bona fides to Muratore and is now hoping for a law which will ban anyone from using the library for more than two hours. Isn't that what Muratore is wanting for the public park system?

Maybe it's time to pull the plug on the Blue Ribbon Commission so the City Council will have to do their own dirty work.

What they do to the least of us they do to all of us.

Fighting for America's Middle Class

6/25/11

The Attack on America's Middle Class, and the Plan to Fight Back
Netroots Nation 2011, welcome to Minnesota!

This is the state that sent Hubert Humphrey, the middle-class son of a pharmacist, to the U.S. Senate, where he cheerfully waged--and usually won--great battles in the name of the young and the old, the poor and the vulnerable, the oppressed and the disenfranchised.

This is the state where Walter Mondale--who, at the age of 20, had helped to organize Humphrey's first Senate campaign--rose to become the living embodiment of common-sense Midwestern progressive values.

And this is the state where Paul Wellstone, a professor down at Carleton College in Northfield, became my hero--and the hero of a generation of progressives who believed, as he did, that we all do better when we all do better. We all do better when we all have health care. We all do better when we all can get a good education. We all do better when we all can earn a fair wage at a good job. We all do better when we all can find a good home and economic security and justice when we're wronged.

---

Today, 100 years after Hubert Humphrey was born, nearly half a century after Walter Mondale began his legendary career in public service, and two decades after Paul Wellstone won his first race for the Senate, we gather in Minnesota to take stock.

We all believe that we all do better when we all do better. The question is: How are we doing?

And if we're talking about the fate of ordinary families, the answer is clear: We're losing.

The American middle class is in trouble. Median family income is down. Jobs are scarce. Opportunities people thought they'd earned through hard work are disappearing before theireyes. Working families are falling further and further behind.

And that means it's hard for progressives not to feel like we're losing, too. Our movement is about putting the concerns of those working Americans at the forefront of our national agenda.

Now, you can argue that Democrats in Congress should be doing more to win legislative battles--although, as someone who is in the room every day, I can tell you that I don't doubt for a second my colleagues' commitment to moving our country in the right direction.

And you can argue that the Democratic Party should be using different tactics to win elections.

But the fact remains: We as a progressive movement are losing the argument. On issue after issue, we're playing defense.

We're ready to fight for cap-and-trade. But instead, we're forced into an argument about whether global warming even exists.

We're ready tofight for the Employee Free Choice Act. But instead, we're forced into an argument about whether workers should have any rights at all. As proud as we all are of the fight our movement has shown in Wisconsin and around the country in the face of Republican efforts to end collective bargaining, we know that these aren't the conversations we should be having in the year 2011.

And instead of having a debate about what the government should be doing to help the struggling middle class, we're having a debate about what parts of the social safety net we should sacrifice in order to preserve and extend giveaways to the wealthiest few, and to well-connected corporations.

---

We can urge Democrats in Congress to stand stronger when Republicans hold our government hostage. We can urge each other to work harder to win elections. And you won't hear any disagreement from me on either count.

But if we're going to win these fights, we have to start by reclaiming the upper hand in the argument over what our country should be about. And I want to suggest that conservatives might just have given us the playbook.

For decades, their argument against progressive policies hasn't just been about the substance of our ideas, but about the scope of our vision. They call us radicals. They say we want to do too much, too fast. They accuse us of wanting to remake the fundamental fabric of American society, as if we were proposing to rip a few dozen stars off the flag.

They understand that Americans don't like radical change. We love our country, and are rightly proud of its traditions. We revere our past.

And it's easy to offer people a return to the "good ol' days"--when the economy was growing, everyone was optimistic, and we went to bed at night secure in the knowledge that our kids would have better opportunities than we had.

What conservatives miss when they talk about those "good ol' days," of course, is that they were good for a reason.

---

Some of you might have heard me talk about my childhood here in Minnesota. My dad never graduated high school. He was a printing salesman. We lived in a two-bedroom, one-bath house in St. Louis Park, Minnesota. We weren't rich--but we felt secure.

I felt like the luckiest kid in the world. And I was. I was growing up middle-class in a time when growing up middle-class in America meant there would be jobs for my parents, good schools for me to prepare myself for a career, and, if I worked hard and played by the rules, a chance for me to do anything I wanted. Including being a comedy writer and then a Senator. In that order.

Between 1947 and 1977, we experienced three decades of incredible growth--growth that flowed to the middle class.

And as we grew, we grew together. Everyone benefited. Income for the top fifth of Americans grew by 99 percent, and the income of those in the bottom fifth rose by 116 percent. I know that's hard to believe. The wages of the bottom fifth grew more than the wages of the top fifth. Really. That happened.

Meanwhile, the middle class could afford to buy more, so there was more demand--and that meant there were more jobs.

And with the tax dollars that came from all this growth, the government built 40,000 miles of straight freeways that greatly reduced the cost of transporting goods, invested in education that prepared kids for the workforce and innovations that created entire new industries, and strengthened the social safety net so that everyone could aspire to the middle class.

Oh. And we sent a man to the moon. Actually, a number of them.

---

Which brings me to my wife, Franni. When she was seventeen months old, her dad--a decorated veteran of World War II--died in a car accident, leaving my future mother-in-law widowed at age 29 with five kids.

That family made it because of Social Security survivor benefits.

Every single one of the four girls in Franni's family went to college, thanks to Pell Grants and other scholarships. My brother-in-law, Neil, went into the Coast Guard, where he became an electrical engineer.

My mother-in-law got herself a $300 GI loan to fix her roof, and used the money instead to go to the University of Maine. She became a grade school teacher and taught poor kids, and so her loans were forgiven.

She and all five of those kids became productive members of society. They pulled themselves up by their bootstraps--but first, they had to have the boots. And the government gave Franni's family the boots.

---

These are stories about security and opportunity. These are stories about the American dream. These are stories about the country we are so proud to call our own, the one we all want to protect and preserve.

But they are also stories about a progressive America, one in which the government adopts the principle that we all do better when we all do better.

It was our vision that government should provide economic security for the middle class and provide the boots for people looking to pull themselves up into it.

It was our vision that America should be in the business of making things, and that we should invest in innovation and infrastructure so that we could have an economy where there's enough for everyone.

It was our vision that American workers should earn enough to buy what they produced.

It was our vision that everyone should have basic rights at work, no matter how powerful their employer, and that the law should be a place where anyone could turn for justice.

And although that vision has always remained a work in progress, Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale and Paul Wellstone and generations of progressives made this country what we dreamed it could be for millions and millions of families.

And while our vision was broad, the policies we fought for--from the social safety net to workers' rights to investment in our manufacturing sector--were grounded in values that began as "progressive," but have become simply American.

---

And having built that America we're all so proud of, it's now up to us to save it.

Progressives, in a way, are the new conservatives. We want to conserve what we fought to build. And the right-wingers who call themselves conservatives are the ones who want radical change in the way our government works, and the way our country works.

Newt Gingrich went on "Meet the Press" last month and said that the Ryan plan that would end Medicare was "right-wing social engineering," that it was "too big a jump." He has spent the month since apologizing--but for once in his life, Newt was right.

Actually, that's not fair. He was calling for electronic medical records years before the rest of the country got on board with the idea. So he was right the one other time. Gotta give a guy credit.

But ending Medicare, like privatizing Social Security, is astonishingly radical.

Part of the middle class promise is that, after a lifetime of hard work, you'll be able to retire and enjoy the fruits of that labor. Medicare was established to secure that promise. There was no private insurance market for people over 65 back in 1964. And if Republicans destroy Medicare, there won't be one now. The average Social Security benefit is $15,000. The average out of pocket health care cost for seniors under the Ryan plan would be over $12,000.

So if Republicans eliminate Medicare, America will become a country in which you can never retire--and once you physically can no longer work, you are desperately poor until you die. That is a radical change to our society.

The Republican agenda is a radical vision in which Medicaid is slashed to the bone--in which we start to balance the budget on the backs of, literally, our most vulnerablecitizens. Say you have a parent who suffers from dementia and lives in a nursing home. If Republicans pass these Medicaid cuts, you'd better be ready to take that parent in. That is a radical change to our society.

The Republican vision is one in which we cut billions from job training and education and infrastructure--the things that enable ordinary Americans to find good jobs, enable businesses to find the customers and trained workers they need to grow, and enable middle class families to build real economic security. All these cuts, just to fund more tax cuts for people who are richer than any people have ever been in the history of the world.

It's a vision in which workers have no protections from their employers, ordinary Americans have no access to the courts when they're wronged, and big corporations control everything from our media to the Internet to our democracy.

After decades of fighting against any interpretation of the Constitution that secured basic rights for all Americans, conservatives have somehow found in that text special First Amendment rights for oil companies.

The growing gap between rich and poor, the failure of our generation to leave our kids the America we inherited from our parents, and the inability of our political system to respond to these crises--for today's Republican Party, these are features, not bugs.

The right wants America to be a nation of social Darwinism in which the powerful are protected by the government, and the rest of us are on our own.

To achieve it, they'll say things they know aren't true, disown ideas they used to support, contradict themselves on everything from how the legislative process shouldoperate to how weather works. They'll let the government shut down, let us default on our debts, bring our country to its knees to fulfill their ideological fervor.

---

So how do we stop them? Well, I haven't been in politics my whole life. But I think we always win when we work together and stand on our values. Medicare, and Medicaid, and investment in infrastructure, and public education, and workers' rights, and civil rights, and equal rights under the law--these aren't just good progressive ideas, they're examples of traditional American values.

And when Republicans talk about destroying these things, they're talking about turning their backs on the America we've built. They're talking about ripping apart the fabric of our society. They're talking about a transformation of our country--about undermining our tradition so radically, they might as well be tearing stars off the flag.

And we should say so.

Here in the home of Humphrey and Mondale and Wellstone, I urge you all to stand up for the America our movement helped to build. Stand up for the principle that we should grow together instead of growing apart. Stand up for the principle that we all do better when we all do better.

Be proud to stand for Medicare and Medicaid. Be proud to stand with workers. Be proud to stand for a government that invests in America, a legal system that respects the rights of all individuals, and the progressive values we've fought so hard to defend. Be proud of who we are and what we've built.

We have a tough fight ahead. But it's one we have to win. It's not just the Democratic Party that's depending on us. It's the American middle class. And it's the American tradition, one that we helped to create--and one that we must now protect.

Thank you,

By Senator Al Franken

To watch the speech go to http://blog.voiceofmodesto.com/content/fighting-americas-middle-class

To Keep and Bear Arms

6/23/11

The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution says “A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

This seems pretty straight forward to me, and I think most people would agree. So why do so many Americans have this fear that there are forces out there that are trying to take their guns away?

My opinion is that it is a scare tactic that is used by some to maintain a base of voters that will always fall in line and vote for the person that is supposed to be protecting our right to keep and bear arms.

The trouble with that thinking is I have never heard of an amendment to change the 2nd amendment. I have never heard one politician make a statement regarding the confiscation of arms from Americans. I have heard some say they would like to see it harder to buy guns and that we should regulate those sales to responsible people and that these people should have some training in the proper use and handling of firearms prior to the purchase of that firearm.

There are also those that do not believe the average person should be able to go out and buy a fully automatic weapon. And there are those that believe that there is certain types of Ammo that ordinary people should not have access to, such as those “Cop Killer” bullets and extended clips.

I really don’t see a whole lot wrong with those regulations. And I see no need for students to be allowed to carry a gun to school.

Right now in this country we have over 200 Million guns (legal) that we know of in the hands of the public.

Knowing this fact please explain to me how you think these guns could be confiscated. Please tell me with some kind of reason how our government could possibly do such and amazing thing as this. Do you really believe that can be done?

And please tell me the name of any politician that has advocated this, because I don’t know who that person is.

So is our 2nd Amendment Rights in jeopardy? I don’t think so and I don’t think that any rational person, when they think about it would believe that they are either.

Charlie Lockett

City Council Says Human Cock Fights are OK for City Parks But the Homeless Must GO

By Emerson Drake
6/26/11

City Hall can certainly move fast when they want to. If a business wants to hold a special event in a hurry they have pay Chris Ricci's committee through the nose(read financial inducement) to obtain a permit if things weren't arranged at least on month prior.

But to stage a series of mixed martial arts Cage fights in a public park all you have to do is call Parks and Neighborhoods at 1:30 Friday afternoon, pay a few bucks and voila like magic you can stage your human cock fights that night.

Council Joe Muratore and his syncophants on the Blue Ribbon Homeless Commission are not only trying to starve the legitimate homeless out of Modesto through attempting to regulate acts of Christian Charity ( feeding the homeless) but are also pushing forward the idea that anyone including home owning taxpaying citizens should only be allowed so many hours to enjoy the very public parks their taxes pay for. Papers please, let me see your papers.

The question seems to be not of the use of the parks system, but can friends of the Muratore/Ridenour make a buck from spectacles being staged there.

In other words if Muratore, Wright and Madison could figure a way to make a buck selling tickets to watch the homeless, all would be well.

Maybe if good old boy Councilman Joe Muratore could sell homeless cage fights....

Are Modesto City Council Races Nonpartisan? Not According to Republicans

By Emerson Drake
6/20/11

Modesto has bragged for years about its council races being nonpartisan but it wasn't true then and it isn't true now. Most recently the Republican party and Jim DeMartini have chosen to endorse Todd Aaronson for the District Three Modesto City Council seat. That of course is their right.

In many cases the Republican party actively seeks out members to run, like they did with Dave Geer, unlike the Democrats who still believe in non partisanship and never actively seek or promote candidates for local office in Modesto.

Unfortunately developers, real estate magnets, builders, those with personal agendas (Muratore's War on the less fortunate) have enjoyed the fruits of their manipulations, while the rest of the citizens of Modesto have been sent to the back of the bus and been taken along for a ride to nowhere.

The aforementioned people have bled city coffers dry (remember village I) while lining their pockets with taxpayer money. They continue to manipulate the rules to this very day. Remember the $480,000.00 they gave to an out of town developer (Florsheim Homes) and permission to forgo the need for middle class housing, that's right not homes for the less fortunate but middle class houses) in their high end development.

We aren't taking sides in the District Three race but feel the need to point out to everyone exactly what is going on. You already are aware the local print media endorses one poor decision maker after another.

In this we remind you that the local print media has endorsed every single Director on the MID Board. Our rates are skyrocketing through the roof from mismanagement and all you see in print are excuses.

Many people have pulled papers for public office by the actual submission of papers doesn't start until next month. There is still time to find a candidate you believe has the same beliefs as you and support them. It doesn't have to be one of the already declared candidates.

Don't let the deep pockets of a few make decisions for you. Developer Stephen Endsley believes he bought something when he gave Mayoral candidate Brad Hawn a $14,000.00 contribution for his race.

Don't let people like this buy your vote like he's buying Brad Hawn's.

Every vote counts so make sure you're registered and make sure to vote.