Press "Enter" to skip to content

The Facebook Lobbying of Jose Solorio

Hat tip to Heather Pritchard over at The OC Progressive for writing about this first, but the story has taken on new life with intense lobbying of state representative Jose Solorio.  And its happening on Facebook. 

Jose writes:

Jose Solorio

is reviewing budget that a Republican Gov., 2 Republican leaders & 2 Democrat leaders proposed: $15 billion in cuts, $14 billion in taxes, $11 billion in loans.


Adam Probolsky chimes in with:
Adam D. Probolsky wrote at 12:25am: Jose, its just plain bad for working families. Sales tax, gas tax, double vehicle license fees.

Now mind you, Republican policies have never paid off for working families or the middle class.  Ever.  Working families want great schools, tuition assistance, healthcare, job creation.  And the only answer Republicans have is tax cuts.

I like what Michael Fox wrote on Jose’s Wall.

Michael David Fox wrote at 3:06pm February 16:
The issue isn’t simply tax increases, as the Republicans claim, it’s the kind of tax increases.

Because the Republicans have sworn an oath to Prop 13 and are unwilling to consider anything but the most regressive tax increases (sales tax, gas tax), no sensible tax increases are possible.

It is because of the Republicans that California has some of the highest sales, gas, and income taxes in the nation.

Again, repeat after me: The REPUBLICAN budget crisis, the REPUBLICAN budget crisis…

Here’s what I wrote on Jose’s Facebook page: Please ask Chuck DeVore to justify the nearly $400 million its going to cost us to stop all those public works projects and then start them up again. Hell, ask any Republican if that’s a smart use of tax dollars. Keep fighting the good fight Jose.

Jon Fleischman writes (with his profile pic in his sherriff’s uniform):

Jon Fleischman wrote at 10:28pm:
Here’s hoping that my friend Jose will reject this deal with all of these regressive taxes that disproportionately impact his blue collar constituents.

“My friend?”  Yeah, I’m hoping “my friend” Chuck DeVore will vote for the budget deal, but I’m not holding my breath. What Jon fails to mention are all those tax breaks that big corporations will get as part of this budget deal.  And Jon fails to mention that the state is going to shell out nearly $400 million to stop work on multiple public works projects and start them up again. 

Jose doesn’t need friends like these.


  1. Adrian Adrian February 17, 2009

    Jon is joses friend?

  2. Dan Chmielewski Dan Chmielewski Post author | February 17, 2009

    Yup and he can be your friend too.

    BTW Adrian, your comments related to censorship onthis site, lovingly cross posted to OJ, do in fact violate our TOS and I join Chris’s opinion that they have no home here.

    You can call it censorship; I call it you being a jerk.

  3. adrian adrian February 17, 2009

    you need to go back and delete the TOS offending posts and articles Chris Prevatt made on Lucas last year, and then issue retractions and apologies. Thats the ony way you can salvage your credibility.

    • Dan Chmielewski Dan Chmielewski Post author | February 17, 2009

      Adrian — stick it. And who died and made you judge and jury of my credibility? Tell me Adrian; did you cut a check for Paul last election cycle? I did. Yet I don’t recall seeing your name on any fundraising list.

      Honestly, why don’t you go over to OJ and ask them to remove all the nasty stuff they wrote about Paul? See what Art says about that.

  4. Paul Paul February 17, 2009

    Adrian walked precincts with me every weekend. he did write a check but i declined it becaus he has 3 kids and a mortgage and I know he would feel the pinch from a donation.

    Art is Art. I would have expected Art to be in janets corner at that time. One would not expect a Democratic leaning blog editor to come to the aid of a Rep who was atking lumps.

    • Chris Prevatt Chris Prevatt February 17, 2009

      Paul and Adrian,

      The topic of this post is the lobbying of Jose Solorio on Facebook. Try to stick to the topics at hand if you want your comments posted in the future. Most people have no difficulty doing so.

  5. Paul Paul February 17, 2009

    All due respect Chris, dan opened that door.

    • Chris Prevatt Chris Prevatt February 17, 2009

      The door is now closed. We give an inch, you take a mile. Move on please.

  6. Dan Chmielewski Dan Chmielewski Post author | February 18, 2009

    Paul —
    Since you’re refusing money from contributors you don’t have to worry about getting another check from me for your next run for office. Since you keep asking the same question over and over and keep getting the same answer again and again, perhaps you’re not cut out to be an elected official.

    Adrian —
    Comments about Paul were germaine to the post at hand, therefore, acceptable under our terms of service. Paul did himself no favors.

    We have only blocked two IP addresses here ever. So unless your Stanley Fiala or Sarah Michelle Spinosa in diguise, your address was never blocked. Perhaps you made technical errors when posted and your comment didn’t show up. That happens from time to time.

    Comments to the “Moderated Comments” post were closed at my request because I didn’t feel like answering Paul’s third round of asking the same question.

    Chris is a liberal; you want free speech? Fine, you’re a moron. We admit mistakes all the time. One of them is engaging folks like you in any sort of reasonable discussion.

    While I like Phil Becerra a lot, he has no more influence over this blog than you or Paul do. He does not influecne Chris’ thought process.

    I like Paul. I really do. Burt if he’s “the best Democrat” then we’re in a lot of trouble as a party.

    If Chris resigns, I take over this blog. Be careful what you ask for.

  7. Bill Spaulding Bill Spaulding February 18, 2009

    These comments about censorship are just plain silly. Tell me, those of you who complain – I have questions. Have you written letters to the editor of the Register or some other publication? Do they all (or even any of them) get printed? When they are printed, are they always printed completely unedited? When your letters don’t get printed, do you scream censorship? When they are edited and printed, do you scream at that, too?

    Frankly, I fail to see the difference. Neither we at The Liberal OC or those at the Register are required to publish comments or letters. I’m aware of no law that mandates it. Both the Register, by way of example, and this blog are private enterprises. As such, those who run it are permitted – no, entitled – to do as they wish, within the limits of the law and their self-determined guidelines.

    What I do see is relentless, gratuitous ad hominum attacks on people who are not running for office and who speak only for themselves. Somebody needs to get a life.

    Oh, and before anyone goes off on a tear about freedom of the press, remember this: freedom of the press belongs to the one who owns the presses, or in our case, the bits and bytes.

Comments are closed.