Citizens begin revolt against Racketeer Sizemore and Lying Scumbag Trickey
Carla Axtman
The graceful statue of lady Justice holds forth her scales to weigh the evidence, blindfolded as to be without prejudice to those before her.
Fortunately, there isn't a clothespin on her nose, so she can smell the bullshit eminating from the likes of Bill Sizemore and Tim Trickey when they enter the courtroom in the coming weeks at the hand of citizens who believe their signatures were forged on to petitions the two were circulating:
The complaint filed this week by the watchdog group Our Oregon alleges that at least four signatures, including that of Ellen Clay of Keizer, were forged on initiative petitions for the current election cycle."It kind of looks like my signature, but it was probably traced," Clay said in an interview. "I think my signature was simply copied over from another sheet."
Clay said she signed some petitions proffered by the circulator, but not an initiative sponsored by Bill Sizemore to link teacher pay and seniority rights to classroom performance. She said her family has several teachers, with whom the initiative (and Sizemore himself) are not popular.
"The circulator asked me about that one and I clearly remember saying no," Clay said.
Rightwingers have often flocked to the defense of Sizemore--claiming that progressives simply wish to tamp down Sizemore's wildly popular ideas in the name of our socialist-communist-fascist-regime .The irony of Sizemore/Trickey's alleged forgery being needed to even get enough signatures to qualify deliberately seems to escape their calculus.
Not to mention that if I had a regime, I'd sure as hell be driving a better car than my 2002 Honda.
So today while I search in vain for the laces on my hammer and sickle jackboots, those defenders of Bill and Tim will most certainly rain down--raging against the machine that is the poor individual whose name was likely illegally affixed to a signature sheet.
In the name of Justice--could we please toss these two into the ash heap of politics, once and for all?
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
Jul 27, '08
I know how to put a stop to this: require all signatures on initiative petitions to be notarized. If you want to circulate a petition, each gatherer must be accompanied by a notary public who will verify that each signature is truly that of the person signing the petition and that that person is eligible to sign the petition.
This will also prevent the need for these signatures to be verified the SOS’s office; all they’d need to do is count the signatures.
Everyone will be happy then, right?
Jul 27, '08
Better yet...just vote NO on EVERYTHING.
Jul 27, '08
Sizemore has long outlived what ever marginal good he provided as a check and balance in our society. Now, today he is an unpleasant reminder of the peopl'es initiative system run amock. He is merely re-circulating old, antiquated ideas that have been turned back before - at least once and many times twice.
As long as he remains the initiative process is forever tainted.
4:03 p.m.
Jul 27, '08
As I've noted before, the Oregon initiative process enables mob rule and undermines our (constitutionally mandated) republican form of government.
I'll grant that there are occasions when the RFG fails (envision Oregon's dysfunctional tax system)and an initiative might be appropriate. But I will not grant that it can be invoked as lightly as it is currently.
I like the notary requirement but the more practically achievable approach is to get our Democratic legislators to: 1. Require a greater percentage of the prior general election voters to sign an initiative petition; and 2. Enlarge the state Supreme Court's jurisdiction to allow it to determine constitutionality of an initiative before it can be certified to the ballot.
Jul 27, '08
I find it humorous just how desperate these reichwingers have become. Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, butt-boy.
6:10 p.m.
Jul 27, '08
People will probably get tired of me pointing these things out eventually, but I have to.
Don't do the crime, if you can't do the time, butt-boy.
What purpose does using that name as an insult serve? What is being inferred here, and why?
It isn't neccessary.
Jul 27, '08
Has Bill Sizemore personally commented very much, here on blueoregon? I think about a year ago...he offered a couple comments on a thread having to do with religion or gay marriage. It came out in his comment that he's apparently quite a religious guy. Always interesting to have some perspective.
10:47 p.m.
Jul 27, '08
Has anyone ever asked the SoS what they did with the names that Trickey (and I believe Sizemore over the years) have turned in as suspected forgers?
Let me help. Nothing.
Just because one of the folks on the street "might" have done so this time does not mean that it was a part of the Sizemore/Trickey game plan. Quite the contrary actually as they have been turning people in over the years themselves when they catch something out of the ordinary.
But you will never hear the left or the media talk about THAT aspect.
Now as to the impact on these measures... If those questionable names did not fall into the statistical sample it makes no difference. You know the "letter of the law" thing.
11:37 p.m.
Jul 27, '08
Actually, I think the solution is quite simple. If an initiative is being sponsored or circulated by any person or organization that has previously been found to use a single forged or false signature, then the following additional rules would apply:
The petitioners and circulating companies would each be required to post a $100,000 bond.
Each signature collector would be required to post a $5000 bond.
For each signature found to be forged or false, they'd pay a $100 penalty.
Jul 28, '08
Isn't the idea of the initiative petiion to get enough real signatures to allow an election? Of course it is.
That's really what the left doesn't like.
All of this piling on of excessive disqulaifications, punishments and requirements over the exceptions where some, a few, bad signatures show up is demonstrative of their dislike of initiatives, period.
The SoS has already created ways to toss far more signatures than than is ever found to be bad styaying well ahead of any percieved, or contrived, master forgery plan. But that's not good enough because he hasn't found a way to prevent the public votes the legitimate initiatives facilitate.
Doesn't that just piss you all off?
Of course it does. And in your tantrum your imaginations run wild with these new ides.
Why don't you all just cut to the chase and your "good people" to run out an initiative petition of your own that abolished the initiative system.
And stop pulling our chain.
Jul 28, '08
Lets get some perspective here:
Where did the "assisted" sucicide law come from?
Where did medical marijuana come from?
Where did women's right to vote in Oregon come from?
Where did the ban on urban renewal come from? Which body put it up for a vote, resulting in its re-instatment and the almost $75 million per year in revenue lost to the city and county?
Thanks JK
Jul 28, '08
Jeff is right, mostly. Just because a tool is being misused by felons and frauds does not mean the tool is bad.
There was certainly a big problem with looney, right-wing ballot measures for a while. But now, with as confused, angry, and radical as the right has become in Oregon, I don't think there's much danger of them putting together two cohoerent sentences, let alone a ballot measure that people will vote for.
The initiative system has a purpose. And I'd expect small "d" democrats to see it's power-to-the-people, grass-roots value.
6:58 p.m.
Jul 28, '08
Maybe, Bert, if us small 'd' democrats could organize our way out of a paper bag. Oh well.
Aug 5, '08
Sizemore may be fairly described using many unpleasant words, but I do not for one second believe he encourages or even tolerates forgery. I never saw any indication of that. It's one of those things that happens in the business - and I would bet if anyone took as serious a look at petitions from the left, they would find forgeries there, as well.
I, too, am sick of the incessant reruns of initiatives that have already been rejected. But I absolutely oppose furthing clamping down on the process. That only serves to ensure that ONLY people like Sizemore, with access to deep pockets, can put measures on the ballot.
<h2>If you want to be mad at someone here, be mad at people like Loren Parks and Dick Wendt who keep giving these guys money. Be mad at the State and Federal governments for not criminally prosecuting Sizemore (and his pal, Grover Norquist) for money laundering and tax fraud. Be mad at the press who were too lazy or underfunded or maybe politically biased to accurately cover what was going on. Be mad at the willfully blind idealogues who will always ignore the evidence and believe Sizemore was set up and did nothing wrong. And be mad at Sizemore's enemies who have engaged hyperbole and exaggeration and personal attacks on him, thereby discrediting themselves when they actually had a legitimate case.</h2>