Scott Baugh loses it over LA Times story

Here’s his post from

LA Times Gets It Wrong On OC GOP Endorsements
The Sept. 5 LA Times article on the OC GOP endorsements program has motivated me to officially become a blogger.
Let’s start with the Headline:
GOP Endorsements Carry Price Tag
This headline is not misleading – it’s a lie. No candidate has ever been charged directly or indirectly to receive an endorsement. The sub-headline to the Times story and the lead don’t get much better than the lie in the headline which state:
A new arm of O.C.’s Republican Party charges incumbents $200 if they want a shot at an early nod. Some consider it a shakedown.
For the first time, the county’s GOP is requiring incumbent candidates to join a special party association and pay a $200 membership fee if they want to receive the party’s “early endorsement.”
Wow, if you didn’t know any better, after reading the headline, the sub-headline and the lead, one could conclude that the OC GOP is selling endorsements for $200. What a bargain for the candidates! The problem with the story is that facts left out of the story completely eviscerate the splashy headlines and lead in the story.
First of all, the endorsement of the OC GOP doesn’t have a price — it is reserved for those who support Republican values and help the OCGOP achieve its goals. Thus, no amount of money could buy an endorsement from the OCGOP. Second, the OCGOP has bestowed early endorsements on candidates who did not pay any fees to become a member of the association, a fact conveniently omitted from the story.
Third, and more to the point of the story, the OC GOP charges $200 for a membership in the Local Elected Officials Association (“LEOA”). This membership entitles a local elected official to receive admission to the “400 Club,” which entitles the member to attend anywhere from 12 -20 events per year. The member also receives admission to the VIP Reception at our annual Flag Day celebration, the member can attend a political campaign training seminar, and the member can attend a variety of receptions that the OCGOP hosts throughout the year with Governors, Senators, members of Congress and State Legislators. These benefits were conveniently left out story.
In addition to the forgoing benefits, the LEOA puts on events that are designed exclusively for members of the LEOA. The $200 does not begin to cover the cost incurred by the OC GOP to put all of these events together. Rather, the $200 helps defray a portion of the costs.
We established the LEOA program specifically to help local elected officials get involved in the mission of the OC GOP, which is to elect Republicans. We elect Republicans by registering voters and getting those voters out to the polls on election day with thousands of volunteers. Participation in helping the OC GOP achieve its goals by becoming a member of the LEOA is what entitles a member for consideration of an early endorsement.
In short, an incumbent does not have to be a member of the LEOA to receive an endorsement but you wouldn’t know that from reading the headlines in the Times.


Go to the post yourself and read the comments.

Calling it a lie is a real stretch; the fact is, the County GOP charges a fee to belong to an association in which an early endorsement could be granted and some Republicansfeel this is a shakedown. So rather than address the questionable program, Baugh attacks the messenger. Classic.

  14 comments for “Scott Baugh loses it over LA Times story

  1. September 9, 2006 at 12:12 am

    This seems rather stale. I am no supporter of the OC GOP, but there is a reason they have millions more dollars than us. They actually cultivate donors.

    These people are incumbents and get endorsed almost all the time.

    The OCGOP see their local electeds as a commodity, while we pull endorsements from incumbent Dems because they have the nerve to act big tent and work with Republicans.

    Illegal voter registrations and a failed social/fiscal policy in OC is something worth focusing on.

  2. Richard Simmons
    September 9, 2006 at 1:38 pm

    I heard Mike Lawson hit on Scott Baugh and he said “NO.” Is that why this negative article about him is being written about him?

  3. September 9, 2006 at 2:26 pm

    I didn’t even write this. Read the “written by” that comes before the article.

    And before you start saying that Dan hit on Baugh, I should tell you that Dan has a firm rule of never dating men that have silent letters in their last names.

    Has anyone else noticed that a lot of the ridiculous comments left on this page refer to homosexuality? It looks like you’ve got some issues to work out, my friend.

  4. September 9, 2006 at 2:32 pm

    DevilsNightOut –

    Very decent point. In fact, when I first read the LA Times piece I thought: “The OC GOP is loaded, a measly $200 isn’t helping them win anything.”

    But in truth, the exclusivity of this club denies grassroots candidates that don’t have $$, and don’t have the power of incumbency, to come out to play. It’s the good old boys helping the good old boys.

    With that said, the point that you make about focusing on our own parties problems and spotlighting the murky waters that the OC more worthy of airtime.

    If you’ve got any specific suggestions on post topics, don’t hesitate to send me an email:

  5. September 9, 2006 at 3:16 pm

    He´s an imposer. his real name is Charlie Scotland and he´s an entertainer from Copenhagen.

  6. September 9, 2006 at 5:38 pm

    Geez Mike, my wife of 23 years is a little surprised by that comment 😉
    So are the kids….

  7. September 9, 2006 at 6:01 pm


    Since you’re married my guess is that you have a firm policy of not dating men or women. While it is splitting a hair, Mike was accurate in your statement, in that since you wouldn’t date anyone; a person with a silent letter in their name would definitely off limits. 🙂

  8. September 9, 2006 at 6:02 pm


  9. Anonymous
    September 9, 2006 at 11:29 pm

    There a “Toe Touching Contest” in Westminster tommorrow and I heard Mike Lawson is the favorite. Good luck Mike.

  10. Anonymous
    September 10, 2006 at 12:36 am

    Would this be the same Scott Baugh who was housing a handsome local youth pastor, clad only in a towel, when the DA investigators searched his house one morning to gather evidence for their case against him, Rhonda Carmony (now Mrs. Dana Rohrabacher) and others who recruited Laurie Campbell to run as a Democrat back in 1996?
    Dana and Mike Schroeder worked hard to keep that little detail out of the mainstream press, but why?
    And the same Scott Baugh who has been close pals with accused child molester Jeffrey Nielsen for many years.
    The same Scott Baugh who quickly married when questions were raised about his sexual orientation (following the examples set by Ed Royce and Dana Rohrabacher).
    That Scott Baugh.
    Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
    But I think Mike can do much better than some closet case Republican.

  11. September 10, 2006 at 12:40 am


    You left out the vaguely homo steam-room visits with budding young republican males.

  12. Anonymous
    September 10, 2006 at 1:18 am

    My visits? Your visits?
    I have heard rumors of Fuentes Fridays at the Balboa Bay Club.
    And Pulido at Bally’s in Orange.
    But nothing about Scott.
    Let’s chat about this.

  13. September 10, 2006 at 3:13 pm

    What does “toe-touching” imply? I really don’t get it.

  14. September 11, 2006 at 7:30 am

    Mike — something about “bending over.” Chris, you’re a crack up. And while we’re on the subject of “closeted” Republicans, shouldn’t David Dreier be included?

    All the same, see today’s Total Buzz column in the Register. Marty buys Baugh’s story because there are (count em) two Republicans whodidn’t join the association but got the Republican nod anyway. Both pretty low level offices.

Comments are closed.