Van Tran launches campaign against Rep. Loretta Sanchez

The Orange County Register ^ | May 6, 2009 | Martin Wisckol

[Clintonfatigued]

Setting the stage for what is expected to be one of the nation’s hottest Congressional races of 2010, Assemblyman Van Tran announced today that he will challenge seven-term Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez.

Tran had been recruited heavily by Washington GOP leaders, who consider central Orange County’s 47th Congressional District one of their best chances for gaining a seat next year.

“Both sides will be pouring resources into this,” Tran said in anticipation of a heavily funded drive.

Democrats have a 12.4 percentage point advantage in the central county district and Sanchez is popular there, winning by 44 percentage points in 2008, 25 percentage points in 2006, and 21 percentage points in 2004. And Barack Obama carried the district last year, but Arnold Schwarzenegger won there in 2006 and George W. Bush won there in 2004.

Sanchez indicated she was ready to take on Tran.

[Clintonfatigued]

Santa Ana, CA, will be Ground Zero of the 2010 House elections.

[skeeter]

Loretta Sanchez soon to change her name to Loretta Nguyen.

[americanophile]

LOL. Nguyen-Sanchez.

[fieldmarshaldj]

"Sanchez indicated she was ready to take on Tran."

No kidding. Loretta "Dirty" Sanchez enjoys taking on lots of men.

[Ikemeister]

wasn’t Sanchez the one who stole the election from B-52 Bob Dornan?

[icwhatudo]

Yep, close election stolen by illegals voting.

[taillightchaser]

Yes she was. And she also signed up lots of illegal mexicans to vote for her. With Klintoons help I might add.
Of course with Acorn on the job now she won’t have to worry about getting re-elected.

[Churchillspirit]

Considering the number of Vietnamese in Garden Grove Van Tran should have a good chance.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Those weren’t illegals. Those were White liberal rodents voting under the names of Hispanics. Yup, nothing to see here, just move along.

[ExTexasRedhead]

GOP must stop the voter fraud and that is going on. As for Sanchez, I’m sure there’s enough on her for the GOP to go door to door to show the voters of her district what she is and what she did.

[Clintonfatigued]

“wasn’t Sanchez the one who stole the election from B-52 Bob Dornan?”

Yes, she’s is, among other things.

[MilspecRob]

I think that was “B-1 Bob”

[festusbanjo]

OK, I’ll be the first to say it. DIRTY SANCHEZ.

[calcowgirl]

Let’s hope he doesn’t get thrown under the bus like Tan Nguyen.

[getarope]

It was “B-1 Bob” Dornan who had the election stolen. Newt Gingrich, in one of his rare idiotic moments, offered no support for Dornan.

[martinidon]

Yep, I lived in OC when this happened. I also think she changed her last name to get the Hispanic vote; i think it was her maiden name. She is one big POS

[martinidon]

yea, but Dornan didn't do himself any favors. His campaign was a mess and he and his family gave the liberal media a lot crazy sound bites..... I do not think he took Sanchez seriously and that is the way he campaigned.

[Mojave]

Yep, close election stolen by illegals voting.

And her husband was caught stealing Dornan's campaign signs.

[backhoe]

She's a fine specimen...

HOPE AND CHANGE: Lawmaker Defends Imprisoning Hostile Bloggers.Lawmaker Defends Imprisoning Hostile Bloggers

• By David Kravets
• May 7, 2009 |
• 7:53 pm |
• Categories: Censorship, Politics

Rep. Linda Sanchez responded Wednesday to Threat Level’s tirade against her proposed legislation outlawing hostile electronic speech. Her answer: “Congress has no interest in censoring.”

Sanchez, with the introduction of the Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act, clearly has a great interest in censoring.

Still, the Democrat from Los Angeles makes several valid points that cyberbullying has lasting consequences on our nation’s youth. The 13-year-old Meier’s suicide is clearly a tragedy. But how she characterizes the measure is simply untrue.

“Put simply, this legislation would be used as a tool for a judge and jury to determine whether there is significant evidence to prove that a person ‘cyberbullied’ another,” she wrote in the Huffington Post. “That is: did they have the required intent, did they use electronic means of communication, and was the communication severe, hostile, and repeated? So — bloggers, e-mailers, texters, spiteful exes and those who have blogged against this bill have no fear — your words are still protected under the same American values.”

But that’s not what the proposal says. It goes way beyond youth cyberbullying. As we said the other day, the measure seemingly outlaws logging onto the internet.

But don’t take our word for it. Here’s what H.R. 1966 says:

This measure and Sanchez’s... defense of it are so emotionally distressing to us that, if adopted, perhaps Sanchez should be the first to be prosecuted under the statute.