Author Archives: gdewar

Protest Post Mortem or Why You Can’t Trust All Blogs All The Time

As I said earlier this week, rather than just “blog away” about issues, sometimes I like to actually do something somewhat tangible, so I spent Tuesday with all sorts of snarky signs in front of Gov. Doofinator’s latest special-interest fundraiser.
While I can’t claim credit for the event’s a success or failure based on my presence, it was nice to spend a nice sunny day outdoors, and to see for myself what was really going on.
The news media tends to make these things out as “union” events, but they’re really not – I was rather surprised at the number of Ordinary People who showed up, not for some massive Agenda of the Left, but because they were sick and tired of politicians who lie and take lots of special interest cash, without any benefit to the average citizen.
As rallies go, it was loud, but relatively peaceful. If you look closely at the video footage from KRON you might catch a glimpse of the snarkiest of signs, the one I made for a protest in front of the GAP’s San Francisco headquarters (calling attention to the big donations the company has made to the Governor’s campaigns), that labeled the Governor the “Doofinator.” [Insert rolling eyes here.]
I had a bet wtih one of my firends at the event that my inimitably goofy sign would make all three local network affiliates for the news because it was so dopey, and it did!) You can also see some political commentary from retired political consultant and local philanthropist Clint Reilly commenting on the situation as well at KRON.
Rallies, protest, and direct action these days usually don’t do a lot to swing The Masses to any one side, nor do they tend to convince the people on the inside to change their mind. However, when it comes to Gov. Doofinator they’re more effective than people realize.
That’s because this Governor is not committed to the Republican Party, any basic set of ideals, or other politicans. He is only committed to the idea of being popular. Any time that popularity takes a hit, as it has done recently, and he’ll quickly drop an idea or sell out a friend to restore said popularity.
That’s why, after taking multiple hits on his ill-thought out scheme to take away teh pensions and death benefits for police and firefighters, he abandoned his much ballyhooed reform efforts and gave up, rather than risk having some unhappy fans out there.
So for those well-heeled kids spending their fun money on the Doofinator’s signature gathering machine, all I can say is, you may want to rethink how you spend your money. A new popularity poll can sink that wacky initiative you’re trying to promote.
This is not the first time a little heat has made the Governor abandon a policy proposal – we only have to look back at the Great Puppy and Kitten Revolt of 2004, which always astonished me.
For someone who loves to hurl insults, taunts, and bad jokes, he sure can’t take a little criticism. But I suppose that’s what happens to someone who’s spent a career working on being popular all the time. It gets to you after a while.
There was a lot of coverage of this particular protest/event/whatever in local papers, television, and the wire services. There was also a lot of noise on blogs. I think it’s interesting how some people in the “blogosphere” (God, I hate that word) really get on a high horse about how they’re somehow “better” than the mainstream press in reporting what “really” happens.
Sometimes, it seems like most political bloggers are loudmouths, so full of themselves they don’t let something like the facts get in the way of a good sounding “messaging exercise.” But I digress. (and yes, if I may paraphrase Sideshow Bob, I see the irony of using a blog to decry blogs. So what.)
However, in this case I’d like to point out two blogs that covered Tuesday’s events and compare and contrast them a little. I found both using Google and picked them at random.
The first is a blog written by a guy in Livermore, CA who attended the rally. He’s posted a nicely detailed account of the day’s events, complete with pictures that more or less synced with what I saw and heard while I was there. No sensationalism, true, but a nice, crowd’s-eye view.
Yes, there were a lot of people, yes it had its goofy moments, and no, there was no riot, no Chicago ’68-style head bashing, no calls for La Revolucion issued to the proletariat. It was interesting to see so many people give up Opening Day and some nice weather in San Francisco to show up and talk to the Governor the only way they’re allowed to, and it was amazing to see so many of our first responders out in force.
He also had a link to another site which had a lot of links to coverage as well. Since it’s Friday, and I don’t feel like re-inventing the wheel, just click over there and see what he’s got.
In contrast, Bob Brigham at the Swing State Project posts a very different account, a tale rife with images of brave clashes with The Man and The System, the People igniting La Revolucion, etc.
It all sounds really nice, but unfortunately, the embellishments start to take on a life of their own and don’t sync with what many other people saw, nor with anything I observed. It’s one of those things that super-liberal people who spend all day behind a computer can get excited about – but also at odds with a lot of what really went on, which ends up being a lot more interesting.
I’ve met Bob before and he is a good guy, well intentioned, and all, and I am sure that in all the excitement it was easy to embellish a little while talking to a friend on a cell phone to “report” the events. But as usual, the ideological embellishments, be they from right or left, detract from the facts, which was much more interesting than an attempt to once again Bring Back the Freakin’ 60’s, as some people insist on doing.
Although, in the case of Bob’s blog, I can kind of see what he’s doing – it’s a sort of Hunter S Thompson “reveal the truth in the embellishments” kind of writing, which has its place.
Blogs are fun to write, and occasionally fun to read. At the same time, we need to realize that not all blogs are the stand-alone grassroots efforts they represent themselves to be, nor are they all free of pre-paid opinions, nor do all of them care whether what they write is true or not.
That’s fine – it’s all part of freedom to let everyone have their say – but it’s part of the responsibility of the rest of us to make sure we don’t let ourselves be so insulated from contrary thought we start reading our own personal Pravdas for our respective ideological biases.
PS: I want to take a moment to address a particularly egregious example of lying by a political hack – in this case the total fabrications that spew out of the mouth of the Doofinator’s spokeman, Rob Stutzman.
In several interviews he has repeated the assertion that the only people attending any demonstrations against the governor were “paid” and yet refuses to offer any documentation or proof whatsoever of this charge. It’s a nice way to put a nasty piece of BS out there and let the ideologues on the right have their fun with it, even though it is false.
I took a random sampling of people and most folks were not only unpaid to attend the event – they were giving up their own time and paying their own way to show up, from as far away as Los Angeles County, to tell the Doofinator and his henchmen what they think of his plans. I know I wasn’t paid – I gave up a day of work to help out myself and paid for my own bus fare.
Furthermore, if anyone is “paid” in this initiative scramble, it is the signature gatherers, all hired by professional signature gathering firms, who get a $1-$2 bounty for each signature they gather in front of a grocery store, etc. It’s easy to document this – one only has to look at the financial disclosure reports filed by these commitees to see the names and addresses of professional signature gathering firms employed to get these “grassroots” measures on the ballot.
I am now issuing a formal challenge to Rob Stutzman – prove on paper that the vast majority of protestors at Tuesday’s event were paid, and I’ll buy you a case of Pabst Blue Ribbon and have it delivered to your office. If you can’t do so, then you owe me a case of Schlitz. The distributor in Sacramento carries it – I expect to get my delivery soon. Thanks!

© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

When We Want Your Opinion, We’ll Tell You What To Say OR the GOP Wimp Factor

Isn’t it funny how Republicans talk tough, but when it comes right down to it, they are the biggest wimps and scaredy-cats in politics today?
Here you have a President, for example, who apparently won a national election, and has one-party control over the House and Senate to rubber-stamp anything he wants to do. Yet, apparently, every time he’s had a so-called “town meeting” on Social Security, a lot of time and tax money is spent keeping the crowds 100% friendly to the president.
Got a question or concern about Social Security? Great. Just don’t be expected to ask any questions or make any suggestions to the President’s tax-funded “discussion.”
You’ll be kicked out by a member of The Party, or a member of the internal security forces for that. Yes, we may be promoting democracy in Iraq, but we just can’t have anyone daring question The President or The Party on issues – that would be “messy.”
Either the President is so under-confident about his proposals and so scared of a few little questions that dare challenge his views, he feels the need to put up the walls, or his handlers feel he’s so out of whack they have to “protect” him. I don’t know which one is worse.
Come on, George? One hippie with a question about your plans is enough to bring down the US Government? Please.
Likewise, self-styled “tough guy” (he may not be one but he played on on TV) Governor Doofinator is tooling around the state with the gimmicky rallies, and so called “Kitchen Cabinet” meetings to “listen to the people of Cal-ee-fornia.”
Except, of course, that the people in these “meetings” are hand-picked by local Chambers of Commerce, and are 100% pro-Arnold in their questions. The press is never allowed to talk to the Great Doofinator, and no one with any dissenting views is allowed to ask the Governor questions, and make him defend his proposals without a script.
Funny, I thought Gov. Doofinator said he was going to be a “people’s governor” and listen to us, not special interest cash. Instead, he’s spending most of his time raising millions of dollars from wealth special interests, and won’t talk to anyone that doesn’t already agree with him in advance.
The only way anyone can even try and talk back to the governor is in the form of a street protest. Funny thing, that. We dumped Davis because he was a “coin-op” Governor who didn’t listen to you unless you had a few dollars. Now we have a Governor who won’t listen to you unless you have bundles of cash, and won’t listen to you unless you tell him what he wants to hear, and agree with him 100%. Nice!
Now, unlike some bloggers around town (whose names we’ll not mention) who seem to think that sitting in front of a computer and being rude and snarky to other bloggers somehow accomplishes something, I plan on doing something a little more relevant, and put my
Today, April 5th, a coalition of good folks who don’t like being stepped on anymore by Doofinator’s Special Interest Mob, are going to be holding a rally in downtown San Francisco at the Ritz Carlton this afternoon, starting at 4:30. I’ve decided to lend a hand to the organizers of the event.
It is unfortunate that the Governor feels it’s better to spend more time out of the Capitol, raising money from out-of-state special interests, instead of using his alleged independence to tell the apparatchniks on both parties to stick it and deal directly with everyone, fair and square. Since he has chosen that route, however, others are now responding with something he may understand – a loud, and organized crowd of folks who have this crazy notion that pensions for our cops and firefighters are worth defending.
I will report on the proceedings from my side of the lines later on as time allows. Until then, if you want to talk to your President or Governor, bring your checkbook and be sure to leave any disagreements at the door, or you won’t be let in!
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Stem Cell Con Job or Why Are We Scrambling to Let A Deadbeat In Our Community?

I don’t know what is more irritating to me, as a taxpayer, to observe and make me cringe when it comes to the so-called “Stem Cell Research Initiative” voters, in their inimitable wisdom, passed in 2004 here in California.
Part of it is the actual law itself – but also, the way both the press and so-called “leaders” of local governments have chosen to overlook serious problems with this law.
Instead, they’ve chosen instead to shower an institute funded with $3 billion dollars of credit card spending with yet more “free” (aka “taxpayer funded” goodies). All for a scientific institute that is to be headed up by…a real estate developer with no experience in science, let alone stem cells.
Let’s start by taking a look at the law itself. Now, throughout the campaign, voters heard endless, heart-tugging emotional stories of those afflicted with terrible diseases. The initiative’s backers skillfully manipulated people, who want to do things to help others, to vote for this new law. People against the law were dismissed as ultra-right religious extremists (even though opposition came from people of diverse political views).
Like so many other initiatives, any real examination of the ramifications of the law were never fully examined. Then the thing passed. And suddenly, after the dust settled, we started to see a wave of “mea culpas” from the press like this one in the December San Francisco Chronticle, and another in the Bay Guardian.
Among the little details: the initiative is using borrowed money, $3 billion worth, and part of that has to go to paying of the debt created by the borrowing right away. So first thing we’re seeing these guys spend money on isn’t life-saving research – it’s bond debt. Out of $300 million in borrowed money in the first few years, as much as $200 million could go to…debt service. To paraphrase the Chronicle – this is like using part of a home loan to make the house payments. Now there’s a responsible way to manage money!
If the institute wants to stop spending money on stem cell research, they can. And if they want to spend it on wild parties, they can. And if you want to call your elected officials to bitch and demand a stop to such shenanigans…you can’t. They wrote the law so it’s almost impossible to enforce the same kind of oversight we demand on every other state program.
Best of all, the guy who wrote this thing, with all its faults, and vague promises of how the taxpayers will make their money back, just happens to be the guy in charge of the institute now and responds to queries about how he’ll run things with the words “trust me.”
That inspires a lot of confidence. Especially since he’s the one that wrote so many poison pills in the law that keep anyone from stopping him from using the state credit card any way he wants. No wonder he was the Governor’s choice for the job – we all know how much Gov. Doofinator loves spending on the taxpayer’s credit cards!
Now, I am sure the reporters here are congratulating themselves on a job well done for ‘exposing’ the innards of this law. But I have to wonder -where was all this investigative journalism before the people voted on it and why did so many people including celebrities, politicos, and pundits, sign on to this thing without reading the fine print?
It gives me little satisfaction to say “I told you so!” in this instance – I’d rather people have been a little more responsible, used their votes a bit more wisely, and demanded real answers to some questions before voting.
Now, it’s bad enough that voters passed a law with more loopholes, giveaways, and outright deceit as this one – but it is worse to see what so-called “leaders” of California’s cities are doing now to attract the Big, Taxpayer Funded Headquarters for this thing.
Reading the “bids” taxpayers’ representatives in cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Jose, and elsehwere are simply astonishing. We have a situation where cities, in a desperate bid to get the institute in their home towns are trying to out-do each other with offers of free office rent, free gym memberships, free this, and free whatever. Anything at all to get the $3 billion dollar credit card in their home town.
Now, what’s really pathetic is that once again local elected officials are doing two dumb things local electeds do really well – make “investments” in vague promises, and never tell anyone where the money is coming from to pay for said “investments.”
The first is one we hear a lot. Whenever some large, and usually dumb, idea is presented to the public, elected officials use their favorite word when they want to “invest” in a vague promise with your money. They use the word “encourage.” Whenever you hear this word, you need to get out a guard dog and put it next to your wallet – because it usually means someone wants to take money away from you and piss it away on something really dumb or give it away to someone who already has billions of dollars.
In this case, cities are giving away all kinds of free things, including hundreds of thousands of square feet of real estate, money to pay for fancy offices, and money for things like gym memberships to get the Big Headquarters of the so-called “California Institute for Regenerative Medicine” aka “The $3 Billion Credit Card You Have to Pay For.”
Every single time you read what elected officials have to say when asked why they’re giving away money in a time of budget crisis to this thing, they all say something along the lines of how spending this money is an “investment” that will “encourage” businesses to open up shop near said institute, and thus, trickle down the effect of all that spending into local tax coffers, and of course, “create jobs.” Now, there’s nothing in any of these deals that guarantees any of that. But you never hear that part. No one asks, and no one tells.
If there is one thing I wish I could accomplish in politics, it would be to spend the next ten years on a long rage PR campaign to put a stake in the heart of political “junkie logic” like this in public discourse. Why? Because it is 100%, pure, unadulterated bullshit. Let’s see why.
Now, let’s use our friend “metaphor” to deconstruct the political junkie logic in an easy to understand way, and see why any local elected official that engages in said logic needs to be asked to leave town:
Suppose you were asked to take a good portion of your take home pay and put it in an investment your new friend wants you to make. No one can show you the potential rate of return. In fact, no one can show you that there’s any return at all. Worse, when you ask how the investment will work, you’re attacked as being a coward, a liar, or just plain crazy. “Can’t you see how your ‘investment’ will ‘encourage’ people?” they say?
You keep asking “But if I give you my $40,000 of savings, how will I make the money back?” and your new friend keeps saying that your money won’t directly benefit you back – but it will encourage others to give money to you since you’re such a great person for making this investment, and you want to encourage others to do the same so you get your money back. You have no guarantees, and the person taking your money could disappear tomorrow -and you’d be left with nothing.
Now, if this sounds more like a “con” than a sound investment, you’d be right. If you did something like this, you’d go to jail. If you’re an elected official, you’re praised as someone who “creates opportunity” and is “pro-business.”
Meanwhile the countryside is littered with abandoned office space and industiral plants businesses got at the taxpayers’ expense, all in the name of “investing” in the community and the vague promise of “jobs” in the future. And guess what? Most of those elected officials got promotions from the voters anyway!
In the case of the Stem Cell Mafia Institute, the “winning” city may find itself in for a rude shock should they “win” the right to have this debt-creator in their backyard, paid for by more of their citizens’ money. See, there’s no rule in any of that well-written law that the money has to be spent locally. In fact, they’re mandated to spend money where research is being done now – anywhere. Even out of state.
And no company has put up its stockholders’ dividends or its own profits up and said “Hey, I’ll move to the city where the Institute is!” – because most companies aren’t so stupid as to invest in fairy tales. There’s also no guarantee that in the future the Stem Cell Mafia won’t come back and say “give us more or we’ll leave” after the big investment.
So while we can’t figure out how to pay for a few cops in L.A., we can find money to give away $177 million to a billionaire for speculative development, and we can find millions more to “give” to a taxpayer-financed credit card agency with no real fiscal oversight. We can’t vote ourselves taxes to pay for roads, schools, and whatnot but we can vote to borrow money and entrust it to a guy with no scientific background and let him play with it as he sees fit.
It’s time to end the madness. If there was even a small amount of common sense, civic leaders across California would not be letting themselves be played like this. They’d instead suggest that if the Stem Cell Mafia wants to pitch its circus tent in their neighborhood, they’d have to have written guarantees that they’d employ local people at decent wages.
They’d have to guarantee that the states taxpayers, who are paying for the credit card debt keeping the lights on, would share in the patents and royalties generated by any research. And they certainly wouldn’t’ compete against each other like hookers at a street corner – they’d work together, since all of California voted for the initiative, and all of California should benefit.
I realize what I just said was a fairy tale as well. But hey! A person has to dream, right?
(note: this article was originally published on March 29, 2005. However in the ensuing upgrade from one platform to another, it was lost. It is being republished as current events warrant a trip in the Political Wayback Machine.)

Memo to John Kerry: You Lost. Stop Emailing Me. And Don’t EVER Run Again!

Watching Sen. John Kerry post-election is something that makes feel both anger and pity for the man. Anger, because there’s been constant media reports of how he found new and improved ways to blow the election, but pity, because it is clear that his delusions of grandeur that the Republicans capped on him about during the campaign seem to have some basis in reality, at least now.
It’s also amazing how Kerry’s spin team is trying to take a page out of 1984 and employ an army of Winston Smith wannabes to rewrite history, blasting anyone who dares suggest that their “campaign” wasn’t some genius effort. What? You didn’t realize he was for losing the election before he was against it?
Today, an advisor to Sen. Clinton said just that and for that has been getting all sorts of crap from the Kerry-ites in Washington D.C. and Boston for simply telling the truth – they ran a bad campaign, and took advice from D.C. insiders and Corporate thinkers who give not a whit about anything but lining their own pockets.
This is not the first time Kerry’s spin team has tried to sell a version of events that is entirely at odds with the truth – in this case, the fact that he lost the election, primarily because of his campaign’s constant bumbling, along with his own personal ineptitude.
Watching his top aides try and spin their fumbles is at once enraging, and entertaining. Enraging, because they can’t seem to figure out that they blew it. Entertaining because it’s fun to watch corporate-style mouthpieces come up with new and creative uses of the language to deflect blame and responsibility. Hey! There’s money to be made in 2006 blowing more races!
Even more irritating are the constant emails I still get from Johnny boy begging for money, even though he has millions ready for more campaigns due in large part to the fact his campaign ended the 2004 election with a surplus.
Now, that in and of itself is another indictment of multimillionaire Kerry and his overpaid advisors in and of itself. How he can dare ask Mr. & Mrs. Average American for a penny out of their limited incomes to fund his future foibles is beyond me.
Even more pathetic are the appeals to “protest” Bush policies – which presumably wouldn’t be happening if he had, say, won the election.
Here’s a recent message I got after the Senate voted to allow oil drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge. The subject line was “51, 49, and 260,000. Here is a portion of Kerry’s (overly wordy) email:
Dear Greg,
Yesterday, we saw a relentless Republican attack on one of our most treasured natural wonders sneak through the Senate on a 51 to 49 vote. But, we also saw more than 260,000 Americans act in less than 24 hours to add their names to our Citizens’ Roll Call in favor of protecting the Arctic Refuge.
It was the first time ever that I or anyone else could stand on the Senate floor and announce that, in a day’s time, a quarter of a million Americans had gone online to express their passionate support for a given course of action.
That awesome display of grassroots power rattled our opponents. They even railed against my e-mail message on the Senate floor and entered its text into the Senate record. So, think of it this way. The Republican leaders of the Senate have 51 reasons to celebrate today, but you and I have 260,000 reasons to do the same.

Hmm…so it I am to understand this correctly, we’re supposed to celebrate because a bill he and others didn’t want to pass got approved by the Senate, but 260,000 people signed an online petition that had literally no effect on the outcome did so. Talk about spin!
I’m going to use Junkie John’s logic in my world, one without bazilionaire friends, ski chalets in Idaho, and spending millions on on other loser millionares.
I’ll go call up the phone company and tell them that I was this close to paying my bill this month, but I am choosing not to.
I will reassure them by telling the phone company that I had a petition of my friends and family, who would like to call me up on the phone, asking me to pay my bill so I could take their calls, but darn it! We just couldn’t make it this month. But it was still a victory for the phone company because an unprecedented number of people kicked me in the butt to pay my bill on time.
See how the media junkie logic of today’s spinmeisters doesn’t cut it in the world you and I have to live in? See also just how irritating it is to receive this crap from St. John the Loser over and over again. At least retired Gen. Wes Clark’s site and emails aren’t nearly as annoying.
IT’s time to kill the spin and speculation about Sen. John “I Blew It” Kerry’s plans for 2008, or any other year. It’s time to stop the madness. Despite the spin, despite the BS, despite all the denial, and despite all the blogging, he lost the election. It was not all the fault of some vast conspiracy – it was not merely a failure of a few mishandled tactics.
John Kerry lost the election because he never should have been the nominee in the first place. He was momentarily boosted at a time when his campaign was dead broke by a collusion of insider interests and the bungling of other candidates, untested by a real campaign in years.
St. Johnny and his people never realized that the crowds and money and volunteers weren’t there because of St. John the Windbag – they were there despite his presence. No amount of talking, spinning, and blogging by desperate, cynical D.C. insiders is going to change that fact.
Stop the Madness. Just Say “No John Kerry” in 2008.
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Schadelmann.com All Star Guide to the Los Angeles Elections!

Every year I get calls from friends and relatives at election time, asking me to help them make sense of the choices they have at election time. Even after a campaign as high-profile as the last one in 2004, people still find it difficult to discern just which candidate is best for them.
When you’re dealing with as underwhelming a campaign as we’ve had for the last couple of months for the leader of America’s 2nd largest city, well you get more calls. Hence, my guide to the elections this Tuesday.
I have been purposely ducking writing about the election much this past week, partially due to real-life concerns, but partially because, well, it’s all been a bit underwhelming in this rush since January to talk about Big Issues.
People keep asking me who I am voting for, and to be honest I really don’t know – or if I’m even going to vote at all.
There’s been too many disappointments in this race to date, and it makes it hard for me to cast a vote for someone just because they are “not” someone else. Here’s what is keeping me from voting right now. Read it and if you agree or disagree, drop me a line or post a comment…
When I look at the candidacies of the two incumbent City Councilmembers who are running, Bernie Parks, and Antonio Villaraigosa, I see two people who could not be further apart in terms of viability. However, they also both share a dirty secret.
Bernie Parks’ one-man grudge match against Mayor Hahn has about as much chance of winning as one of the fringe candidates at this point. Antonio Villaraigosa’s campaign is definitely in the top 2 and is guaranteed a runoff, but there’s been something underwhelming about his run this time vs. 2001.
I hate to join that chorus, but I’ve been waiting to see the “magic” his staff has been touting to me for a year now, and there is no magic. A competent campaign and a solidly run operation, yes, but the much-promised “epiphany” of The Great Antonio hasn’t happened yet. Well, at least he gets Democrats to vote for him – maybe that’s magic.
But my main problem with the incumbent councilmembers are two unanimous votes that tend to exemplify what’s wrong with City Hall.
One was a vote to give $177,000,000 to billionaire developer Philip Anschutz (the world’s 62nd richest person) to build a hotel near the Convention Center. The other was the unanimous vote to codify the really dumb and expensive idea to muck up the Venice Boardwalk.
The first is another example of how we talk about a sushi-bite issue, like “cops” but don’t talk about anything else. Then when another “issue” comes up we talk about that. No one makes the connection. We somehow can’t come up with the money to pay for the police without more taxes. We agonize and freak out about the “tax vs. no tax” debate.
And yet, the city finds money to give to the 62nd richest man in America for a speculative development that frankly, he oughta bear the burden of himself. It’s hard to see why he needs a government handout when we can’t pay for police. The city won’t make any profit off their money – they just give it away, and don’t even get the benefit of investing $177,000,000 the way a private investor would.
It begs the question: could the City Council have found a way to say, cut, $10 million off of billionaire Anschutz’s government cheese to pay for more cops? Or, if the city is going to go into the hotel business, why not buy $177,000,000 of the proposed development as an investor, and take the alleged profits this genius is going to create, and pay for more cops that way?
The Boardwalk situation here in Venice is an example of why it never pays to talk to City Hall when your Councilmember has come up with a really dumb idea. You can go to the hearing, bring 1000 of your best friends and talk until you are blue in the face.
None of the councilmembers could care. They vote for each others’ projects to ensure, well, that everyone votes for each others projects. Meanwhile, all that noise you hear about open government is just noise.
It was truly sad to see all these assorted Venetians get all worked up about this issue, and try and “lobby” the council during the public comment period. It was a nice effort, but also doomed from the start, because, frankly, most of the councilmembers could give a hoot about what a bunch of hippies that can’t vote for them think.
I realize these are two little issues out of many accomplishments both have on their resumes. Guess what? They’re my issues and they are what’s keeping me from voting for either one right now.
If the grumpy white people in the Valley can get mad about “those people” in the schools, I can be perturbed at wasteful spending and unresponsive goverment. Tha is keeping me from committing to vote for Villaraigosa (Parks was never a serious candidate in my mind) just yet.
Likewise, when I look at the candidacies of three former or current Sacramento legislators, Bob Hertzberg, Richard Alarcon, and (again) Antonio Villaraigosa, a similar situation comes to mind – the incredibly stupid Energy Deregulation bill that was put together at the behest of the private utilities, and screwed California over pretty good.
In the case of Hertzberg and Villaraigosa, both were serving in the Legislature when this turd of a bill was passed with a unanimous vote. Since the mayhem that ensued, enriching Enron and power speculators at the expense of most citizens, I’ve yet to hear one legislator from that vote admit it was stupid idea and apologize, for making an honest mistake.
While the Mayor’s attack ads may not be entirely accurate, implying that Ken Lay was pulling the strings with Bob and Tony, it is accurate to point out that yes, they did support this idea, and yes, California got screwed over to the tune of billions of dollars, by wealthy special interests. Can’t we have anyone take responsibility anymore for their actions?
Which leads me to a particular disappointment with Bob Hertzberg. While he seems like a nice guy and was kind enough to call me up after I wrote an early column talking about his candidacy, we’re now in the final days of the campaign and I can’t really tell what he’s going to do if he gets elected. But more troubling is his constant evasion on his current roster of law clients, many of whom have business before state and local boards, and the seeming intentional vagueness of his proposal to “break up LAUSD.”
I am not naive enough to think a former elected official wouldn’t use their contacts and knowledge to make money once they leave the legislature. But when I read stories like the one that I read in the LA Times, detailing Hertzberg’s flip-flop on why he can’t tell us who pays his bills, I start to get disappointed. For someone who has taken shot after shot at the incumbent’s ethics record, this rings rather hollow.
Even more troubling is his work on behalf of a chain of auto-repair shops sued for fraud. After reading how he used his status on Gov. Doofinator’s “transition team” to try and stop an investigation into the chain’s fraudulent practices, and the Doofinator’s removal of a regulator not favorable to Hertzberg’s client, I really was astonished. It did explain a little bit more of that hugging session the two had in Santa Monica to discuss “the plan” to break up LAUSD (the one we can’t read on paper because it doesn’t exist yet). Put it all together, and it leaves me really disappointed, since I wanted to like the guy (even if his campaign web guys stole my slogan idea).
If he’d just been up front at the beginning as to who pays his bills and let us decide early on what he’s about, instead of playing the Sacramento politico “dodge and weave” rhetoric, I’d have an entirely different opinion of the situation. For me, being up front is way better than concealing until the end.
Sen. Alarcon has talked a good game throughout this race , and in the debates he’s often been one of the best speakers on issues I care about. That said, he hasn’t been able to get much traction for someone who’s been in politics as long as he has. Plus, while he has a nice laundry list of ideas and reforms, there’s nothing particularly new for any of them, and there’s no indication that much would be different, aside from some tweaks to the way city contracts are awarded.
Finally, we have Our Mayor. I’ve said a lot in the past about what I think of the Mayor’s performance, it’s no surprise that I have a hard time pulling a voting lever for this guy. I had hoped that somehow the embattled mayor would seize the movement and say “f–k it” and charge forth with some sort of revitalized campaign, knowing he was in trouble and try something daring.
Yes, I know, I know, wishful thinking. But he’d have been in no worse shape than he is in now, which at this point may mean not making the runoff. The whole situation more or less sums up what the problem has been all along – a person who has neglected to seize the moment from Day One on any major issues, with the results plain as day. Yes, hiring Chief Bratton has been great (beats the heck out of that other guy who was Chief that he tossed out) but you can’ only run on that and Dad’s name for so long.
So at this point I don’t know who to vote for, or whether I should bother to vote at all. Thanks to the continuing follies of the LA County Elections people, I never got my permanent absentee ballot – they claim I’m not registered as one even though  I have registered as one twice – so I’ll head to the polls. That is, unless there’s something good on TV.
But wait! There is a reason to go vote! That’s only if you live in Council District 11, which encompasses all of the West LA communities. A very spirited battle has been waged by three candidates. Of them all I am supporting Bill Rosendahl.
There have been many cheap shots taken at this guy by certain other candidates in this race who will remain nameless, which to me typify what is  wrong with politics these days. More to the point – when I asked all the candidates for their opinions on a hot-button issue in Venice regarding the Boardwalk’s new rules, Bill responded right away, and didn’t duck the issue.
His opponents have yet to return a single email or call of mine with responses to a few simple questions, including one on the Boardwalk issue. Plus, Bill’s not afraid to say what’s on his mind, even if it is not popular. At a Democratic Party debate watch at the Santa Monica Headquarters, Bill was asked to speak about how he felt John Kerry did in the debate, and while he was supporting Kerry, he said that in his opinion he didn’t feel Kerry had done as well as he should have.
That’s a gutsy move when you’re in a room of potential supporters and hard core Dems, to say what you think, and let the chips fall where they may. It beats the bureaucrat mentality some would bring to this job, and it beats business as usual. So if nothing else, I’ll head on over to the rec room and cast my ballot for Bill. My vote for mayor is still up for grabs – candidates, feel free to drop me a line and convince me of their strengths.
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Memo to Bernie Parks: You’re Four Years Too Late

It wouldn’t be a race for Mayor in Los Angeles without someone playing the race card to their advantage, and it seems Councilmember Bernie Parks has finally decided to do so. Right on, Bernie! Stick it to the man!
Lagging in the polls with a campaign organization that’s more quaint than effective, he decided to lambaste a Hahn advertisement from 2001 as “racist” at a recent forum, and came to the defense of fellow candidate, Councilmember Antonio Villaraigosa.
For those of you who have safely put out of your minds Campaign 2001, the ad criticized then Assemblyman Antonio Villaraigosa for sending letters out on behalf of a convicted drug dealer, asking for a pardon for the son of a politically connected local donor. Then-Speaker Bob Hertzberg also sent letter on behalf of said convict.
There’s no doubt that if you start talking about someone’s past actions, and that person’s not a white male, and you start making connections between them, drug dealers, and the like, it’s hard not to sound “racist.” But in this case, while I felt the imagery used was rather shocking, and probably not be what I would have chosen to do, I don’t know that it’s necessarily “racist.” To me it’d be racist if the charges were false, at the very least.
After all, then-Assemblyman Villaraigosa did write letters to the Clinton White House on behalf of Carlos Vignali. That’s not a made up charge – it is true. Just like the fact that then-Assemblyman Bob Hertzberg, and a host of other politicians did the same exact thing. (They, however have escaped ads with crack pipes in subsequent campaigns).
Heck, even Cardinal Roger Mahony and Sheriff Lee Baca sent letters in support of the pardon too.
Now, whether that’s relevant or not in a campaign for Mayor is for people to decide. There are probably a number of Angelenos who wouldn’t like the idea of a candidate, of any race, writing letters to President Clinton asking for a pardon of a convicted coke dealer. And there are probably just as many who could have decided to vote for or against Villaraigosa in 2001 for any one of a number of reasons too or could care less.
It’s easy to dismiss this as demagoguery – but then again, perhaps if the Villaraigosa campaign had responded differently to this situation four years ago, we’d be having a referendum on Mayor Villaraigsoa right now, instead of Mayor Hahn. Such is the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, four years after the fact.
In all fairness, it is very easy for outsiders, such as myself, to say that today, in 2005, but there may have been a perfectly logical reason for the way the 2001 campaign effort responded that made sense. Just because it didn’t work in that particular case is no indictment of the competence or integrity of Villaraigosa’s aides. Sometimes even the best plan, and the best message are derailed by things you can’t control.
Parks’ belated outrage demonstrates as much about his lagging standards, as it does for Mayor Hahn. When this controversy erupted in 2001, then Chief Parks was strangely silent on the issue. I searched desperately to find any instance where Chief Parks spoke out against this “racist” ad campaign.
I couldn’t find any.
I also couldn’t find any instances where Police Chief Parks spoke out in favor of asking for pardons for convicted drug dealers, or at least dismissed the idea as “no big deal” as he does here:
“The issue that a person writes a letter of recommendation, we do it all the time (emphasis added)  Parks said. “It is not even an issue that’s worthy of consideration in a campaign in my judgment.”
So it wasn’t an appeal for a pardon, just a “letter of recommendation” as if the guy was applying for an internship with his local Congressman? Hmm. I wonder if this is how Parks felt about the issue in 2001, or if this is a recent evolution of his views on the issue. And what does he mean by “we do it all the time”? Makes me a bit curious, to say the least!
Hearing Bernie Parks’ “outrage” today rings a little hollow. However, I began to realize why he was so quiet on this situation four years ago. Bernie Parks wanted to keep his job. Bernie Parks thought Hahn was going to win. Candidate Villaraigosa had criticized Parks’ performance as Chief during the 2001 campaign. Add it all up and you see why Parks was not about to raise any hackles about Jim Hahn’s 2001 campaign ads, regardless of how “racist” they were or were not.
For all of his thundering denunciations in 2005 of a Hahn campaign ad, at the moment in 2001, when he could have done something about this and made a difference as to who would win the election, Parks was silent.
That to me is as much of an indictment of his conduct four years ago on this “issue” as it is for Mayor Hahn.
PS: Salon.com had a piece about the campaign four years ago that reminds us of some of the dynamics of the 2001 campaign. What a difference four years makes.
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Random Weekend Thoughts on “Messaging” and Alternative Views on Redistricting

Well, it looks like barring some strange alignment of the planets. Dr. Howard Dean will take over as chair of the Democratic National Committee. The highest profile camapign for a job most people have no idea even exists, much less know what it does, has ended.
It should make for an interesting time – now that the talking’s done, it’s time to start doing something. Fast. Laundry lists of promises are fine, but it’s action that wins elections.
There’s lots of talk about “messaging.” A lot of talk. During the race for DNC chair, I think I lost count of how many times I heard “messaging.” Personally I hate it when nouns are verbified like this, butchering the language. Remember when the Boomers started calling it “parenting”? Does this mean by using the word one negates the meaning itself> Oh, I digress.
Much chatter was started when Washington Monthly posted a copy of the Labour Party’s new platform, which fits neatly on a nice little card you can see here:



It’s a point well taken, and hey – printing up about a zillion of these things would be easy and be a money maker for sure.  But aside from all of the chatter and noise about The Best Strategy To Win, and endless patter about “messaging,” one wonders if perhaps all the discussions and arguments and blogging, and meeting is missing a bigger point.
That is, part of the problem Democratic political fortunes face is the fact that, as a party that’s been out of power for a good long time now (ten years out of Congress, even longer in the judiciary), “messaging” problems pale in comparison to “governing” problems. And “power” problems.
We are facing the formation of a one-party state in this country, with the full force of the three branches of government to support and develop that one party. Clever phrases turned at a debate, or neat looking mailers, are only a part of the problem. The bigger one is the fact that as changes in the budget process move on, Democratic elected officials simply aren’t involved at the centers of power in Washington.
Too many aging politicians who still get re-elected due to “name i.d.” and their little piece of the money flowing around still act and react as if they are in charge of something. They’re not.
Because they don’t realize it, they react with horror at the idea of a Dr. Howard Dean, or a Gen. Wesley Clark, because it’s someone that they don’t “own” a piece of, and scares them. Never mind the fact that they haven’t been able to return to power, elite consultants and insider politicians and all.
When Republicans were out of power in Congress, they realized it, and acted as such until they were. Precious few of our elected leaders seem to realize this reality. Sen. Barbara Boxer is one who does. She realizes the only way she’s going to try and stop some of the insanity is to do what folks like Newt Gingrich and his allies did for years – toss political dynamite into the mix, and damn the torpedoes full speed ahead.
Anyway, something for the Doc and the New Kids On the Block (Committee?) to think about.
PS: Unlike some blogs around town, who can’t stand to have any dissenting views on their site, I’m posting a link to consider another side to the issue of gerrymandering and redistricting. As I’ve said before, many times these districts are drawn to benefit a particular single individual already in office, regardless of party, and that tends to dampen enthusiasm, or interest in the election.
We will see something on the ballot, maybe several “somethings” by the time the army of signature gatherers get through with us. Recently the San Francisco Chronicle posted an op-ed piece on the issue that brought up something I’d not really considered before – that in some cases, trying to draw a district as a “swing district” may be physically impossible, given the way population and demographics have changed in the past twenty years.
Thus, a proposal that tries to legislate political outcomes is almost worse than what we have now. As we’ve seen before, when The People Who Know Best are running things, usually they’re paid for by a large donation from corporate coffers. Caveat Emptor, gang.

© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Making Virtue Out of Failure or How Not to Spend $15 million

You have to give it to Sen. John Kerry. After hiring a team of bumblers that found a way to lose an election where they had as much of a chance of winning as not, they follow up the resounding failure of Campaign 2004 with the news that after all was said and done, Kerry’s campaign still had around $15 million in the bank.
Now, far be it from me to beat a dead horse (rhetorically speaking) nor to join the sore winner crowd in charge these days, but when I get an email in my mailbox from Sen. Kerry proudly announcing he’s donating a million bucks to the DNC and spins it as somehow doing a favor for incoming DNC Chair Howard Dean (although he still can’t call him by name!), well, I find myself trying to decide if I want to vomit, or scream.
Well, maybe not scream. But vomiting sounds good. Purge that nasty feeling I’m getting in my stomach right about now.
If there is one thing I can’t stand, it’s when politicians manufacture virtue out of necessity. Kerry has been doing this a lot since it was discovered he had ended the campaign with a surplus of $15 million. Wow! What a smart guy! He’s got money! And now he’s sharing!
When you consider how close the election was in states he lost, or when you consider that we had not one thin dime for GOTV in California for Democrats (killing things like the cops measure in LA and the affordable housing measure in SF that lost by 1%), you begin to realize that having this kind of cash sitting around the day after election day is not a good idea. Campaigns aren’t in the business of stashing away cash – they’re in the “business” of communicating a message to elect someone to office.
Even more irritating is the fact that Kerry has given a cool $1 million to the DNC. He’s given money to other assorted party committees. But he saved the biggest chunks for himself: $4 million to a re-election campaign, and the balance which they claim they’re still using to “pay bills”  (maybe that’s how Bob Shrum cold afford that Tuscan holiday?) – and use some of it to seed a run for President in 2008.
Yes, you heard that right. They’re already floating trial balloons about another run. Isn’t that just what we need? Yeah, a sure fire success. Maybe he can be for losing the election before he was against it. (Sorry, but that one was too easy.)
Now you start to see why Sen. Kerry’s $1 million donation doesn’t count for much in terms of virtuous political conduct. It is a nice thing, yes, to give $1 million to the DNC. So is giving $1 million to Habitat for Humanity.
But when you put it on the spreadsheet and start adding up where the rest of the money’s going – not to mention the fact that if had been spent properly in 2004, we might have a different President in 2005, well then, Sen. Kerry’s “dramatic step” starts to make you feel more “sick and tired” than “warm and fuzzy” about Sen. Kerry’s pious virtue.
I for one am not fooled by it, and I sure wish they’d stop sending me email telling me the latest protest email I can fire off to my Senator. Tell me instead, Sen. Kerry why you had all the money, all the consultants, and all the Washington Establishment, and yet still lost. And tell me how you’re going to repair the permanent damage you’ve done to our party in the process.
Now that would be a truly virtuous thing to do. Brave even. Don’t count in it happening anytime soon. Why can’t we get Jon Stewart to run for President? At least he can talk.
PS: Just in case you were wondering how far a million dollars goes towards grass roots efforts at the state level, $1,000,000 divided by 50 = $20,000 per state if they dole it out as such.
A nice start. But only a start. Regular people are going to have to take matters in their own hands. Sen. Kerry and his Elite Consultants have to spend most of that $15 million on themselves first.

© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

Polls Indicate It’s Time To Change…Election Day in Los Angeles?

Last week the Los Angeles Times published a well publicized poll on the Mayoral race, just a few weeks from Election Day in March.
There wasn’t a lot to be surprised by, aside form the fact that Mayor Hahn’s approval ratings are lower than I’d expected. Mack Reed at did a nice short analysis of the numbers which is worth reading.
But the other story that came to mind for me was that the poll says, without actually saying it, that it’s time to consider moving Los Angeles municipal elections to coincide with the normal June Primary/November Election cycle most other elections abide by.
It may not seem obvious at first, but consider that in the poll, former Assembly Speaker Bob Hertzberg seems to be suffering from a lack of familiarity with voters. Now that’s not to say that they haven’t been trying – Bob’s been in the race for some time now, and he’s made a tremendous effort reaching voters since mid July.
Unfortunately, despite the spin from the campaign, he’s up against the fact that most people don’t know who he is, aside from his former constituents.
For all the hoo-hah about his website, most voters haven’t been looking for it, and the online ad campaigns done so early in the race were nice, but did more to reach the “blogosphere” and insiders than it did voters (Which is fine, but still, it’s only part of the game).
That’s why most of his time has been forced into raising money for TV ads, which started early, and will have to hit voters at the end of this month, along with all the other TV ads the other candidates can purchase in one of America’s most expensive media markets. (Even if you have 2.4 million dollars like Mayor Hahn, you still can’t do a saturation buy in L.A.)
So what? So, the fact is that Hertzberg’s situation is one that comes up not because he’s unpopular, necessarily, but because he’s not well-known to everyone in every corner of the city the way the Mayor, or 2001 candidate Antonio Villaraigosa, is, and he’s got a time/money crunch that makes his job that much harder.
He’s also not unique in the situation either – State Senator Richard Alarcon has even worse numbers, and is known by less people (and he’s less likely to raise the money needed to pay for a big TV buy than Hertzberg is). Bernie Parks is known by lots of people, and, well, maybe that’s why he is where he is.
Now, I’m not suggesting we need to change the election schedule to accommodate ex-legislators and their political ambitions. Far from it. Instead, I’d suggest that it’s time to have local elections match up with regular state elections, not just to save money, but also to have the election conducted when people are more likely to be paying attention.
This is an important election, and yet most people barely get a chance to hear much before they’re asked to fill in the oval for some guy running for mayor.
Whenever you hear someone say we need a “short election cycle” or that “elections take too long” as the patter of some “reform” effort, what they’re really saying is “don’t have elections that last too long so we can protect the people already there.”
I’d argue that in this case, we could go from a hyper-abbreviated cycle that serves no one well, to a normal cycle that would allow more time for everyone to make his or her case to the votes, and boost participation.
Certainly it would be nice to see incumbents sweat it out in a traditional campaign cycle, and allow for some real investigative reporting to develop on each of the candidates. Perhaps we’d even see some more coverage of competitive council races, such as the one being waged in the 11th Council District out here on the Westside.
Other cities have made changes to their local elections to increase interest, with various results. San Francisco, upon adopting district elections for their Board of Supervisors, moved their local elections to coincide with even-year elections in the fall, when more people are likely to vote.
That wasn’t popular with some special interests in town, nor was it necessarily popular with politicians, but it did have the effect of increasing interest in local elections.
Such a change may be difficult in L.A. But if we can think about big issues, like how to make LA a great city to live in, certainly we can also think about technocratic issues, like making election time relevant to Joe and Jane Average Voter.
© 2003-2006 Greg Dewar | All Rights Reserved | Originally Published at www.schadelmann.com

On the Road to Resurgence or Ruin? – the DNC Meeting in Sacramento!

This Saturday, the Democratic National Committee held a conference for the Western States in Sacramento, California. Normally, such meetings are a dull, quiet affair, attended by a small number of people who are actual members of the DNC, and perhaps a few others.
This was not one of those types of meetings.
The day was sure to be one full of something (action not necessarily being one of them) due to the fact that the California Democratic Council, the historic alliance of local Democratic Clubs across California founded by the late Sen. Alan Cranston, held a breakfast event in the morning, in the same hotel the DNC was holding its afternoon session.
The highlight of this morning was, of course, a speech by the the Rev. Al Sharpton. Now, I know that Rev. Sharpton is considered by some to be a “bad guy,” or at the very least, someone who oughta be shown the door, not the stage.
I disagree. While I know of many arguments as to why Rev. Sharpton may not be the best Party spokesman, the fact remains that when it comes to putting into basic, easy to understand terms, why the Democratic Party, in its ideal form, can be a good thing, Rev. Sharpton knows how to say what needs to be said in ways a stumbling doofus like John Kerry could only dream of. (Sorry, Kerry fans, but the Centrist Corporate Senator from Eliteville can’t give a speech. Deal.)
Think about it this way: the Other Side has their Non Stop Quote Machines who can be loud an shrill and get the word out. Why can’t we have a guy who can say what needs to be said, in a way Most Americans can understand too? Every time I see this guy talk, he says what needs to be said in less words than it takes John Kerry to say what his f****ing position is on whether he needs to have coffee in the morning. (Again, deal with it, Kerry true believers. Jon Stewart can call BS on this guy so well. But hey! He wasn’t Howard Dean, right? Yeah. Whatever.)
Jolly Buddah at MyDD.com did a great job transcribing the speech, and I want to give him a link for his efforts. I spoke with Rev. Sharpton after the speech and said to him straight up  that after his famous “Condi is my color but Barbara Boxer is my kind” line, I wanted to get out my lighter and say “Right on, brother!” He smiled and shook my hand.
What a nice guy. I swear, if this guy ever moved to Los Angeles and ran for Mayor, given the enthusiasm he gets from so many people here, he might just be the guy to blow the dwarves and Hahn out of the water and be an elected official some day.
Ok, maybe not. But I digress.
It also turns out that a candidate for Brooklyn District Attorney I’ve been helping, state Senator John Sampson, has been a Sharpton endorsee for many years, and is now running a cutting-edge campaign for DA based on reforming the laws and criminal justice to put more bad guys in prison, and avoid putting people in jail who don’t belong. Right on!
There was no question that the “rock star” of the day was Gov. Howard Dean, former Presidential candidate and party activist. When he came in to a pre-DNC meeting rally with the CDC and other folks, he was swarmed with admirers.
Interestingly enough, Lt. Governor Cruz Bustamante, whose failed bid for Governor in the recall campaign in 2003 made him the butt of many jokes on Saturday Night Live by comedian Horatio Sanz, tried to ride the “Dean Wave” when he arrived in the ballroom with the Governor, only to get booed once he was announced he was there.
He soon left for greener pastures, wherever Dem cratic LG’s with a primary challenge from popular Democratic State Senators go. No one cared.
Dean, and to a lesser extent, former Congressman Tim Roemer seem to be running for DNC chair with an emphasis on themselves as an agent of change. Now, in Dean’s case I don’t know that is 100% the case, but clearly, in former Rep. Tim Roemer’s case, he’s more about talking about himself, and his personal knowldege, semi-good looks, and himself, more than he is about the party. It would not surprise me if that if Mr. Roemer got the DNC chair’s job, we’d see this clown running for office in his home state of Indiana soon enough.
By the way, every time this anti-abortion, pro-Bush “Democrat” talked, there was that hissing and booing that usually accompanies enemies of the Party Faithful. Despite looks that come out of Central Casting, and a LOT of talk about himself, it wasn’t enough to sway most folks.
Simon Rosenberg (who consistently seemed to receive the second loudest applause throughout the day) and Donnie Fowler however, seemed to be more about letting elected officials take the lead on policy, and on issues, and instead spend their time as DNC chair helping local, state and national parties and grassroots organizations get things done to win actual elections.
From my perspective, as someone who has been working in political campaigns for over ten years, Simon and Donnie are people I like best. I like Dean too, and from what it looks like so far, the college of cardinals might just elect him, and I like the ‘tude that Dean himself can exude. But at the same time,  given how the media like to tar this guy as some sort of wild-eyed Communist provocateur, despite his record, it’s hard to know if he can overcome that, and get the party up and running again.
As for the other candidates, while I am sure they are well meaning, they have about as much of a chance of winning as say, a hippie in Dallas, winning a seat on the city council.
Now, here’s one of those situations where my role as an active political consultant and that of informative blogger collide. While I do not mean to harsh on anyone for the sake of hashing on them, there was one comment by one certain candidate that pissed me off, simply because of the pure hypocrisy of it.
That would be former Congressman Martin Frost, who lost his seat in Congress due in large part to the mid-term gerrymandering of Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas. That said, it was very insulting of ex-Congressman Frost when he decried the “consultant culture” of Washington, D.C. in his remarks.
For those of you who don’t work in politics day-to-day, here’s a primer on the sheer amount of bullshit that “political parties” ram down the throats of hapless campaigns and candidates for office.
For the love of God, bear with Schadelmann.com as we explain the tortured logic of this sad state of affairs, and why, despite being seemingly irrelevant, actually affects you, the voter, in the end.
You see, once upon a time, the wise, and kind Rep. Frost was the head of a group called the the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. He headed this committee, based in good ol’ Washington D.C. In other words, the center of all that is wise and good in America. Their job was to get the Democratic candidates elected to Congress in 1996 and 1998, to regain the “majority.”
Yeah, that’s my reaction too. Great job, guys!
Anyway, Mr. Frost’s little Mafia used to play a cute little game with aspiring politicos running for Congress. They’d play the game of “hire our hit men or be denied protection money in the future.”
Confused? Ok, let me spell it out a different way.
Candidate Shmoe wants to run for Congress as a Democrat. Candidate Shm e hires Local Non-DC Political Consultant Schadelmann, because, well Consultant Schadelmann has spent some time West of the Potomac (and in fact is from the West Coast!). Then, when Candidate Shmoe talks to the Party Big Wigs (i.e. Rep. Frost), he hears the following:
“Well if you don’t hire Consultant Jerkface from Washington D.C., and fire Consultant Schadelmann from your little campaign,  the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee won’t pay for your campaign in the future. Figure it out.”
Now, here’s the rub: The threat is an empty threat made by party hacks in DC who know full well that if Candidate Shmoe actually shows some promise, he or she will get the support they need, since it would mean moving the Democrats from back of the short-bus to front of the line. In the end, who gets the poor candidate over the finish line is irrelevant. If enough of these clowns win, the leadership would go from “Ranking Minority Member” (AKA Loser) to “Chair of the Committee” (AKA “NOT a loser!”)
Does Candidate Shmoe know that? No. Instead, they get scared. They see some guy like Martin Frost, with his big office, and his smart, slick boys in charge, and they capitulate. They let go the people who know what the hell they’re doing. They buckle under, and hire the twits the DCCC tells them to hire and the cycle of of inbred political thought continues.
The point of this fable? To point out what a fucking hypocrite a guy like fucking Martin Frost is to decry “Washington, D.C. political consultants” when he in fact was one of the people screwing over anyone west of the Potomac River in favor of his homeboys in D.C.
So, while I very much liked the people backing Frost, who were among the kindest, and most hospitable people I’ve met in politics, and were genuinue kind to me as a person, I have to say when I hear him say this, my first reaction was to stand up, give a one-finger salute to Mr. Frost, and tell the guy off.
Now, political decorum suggested otherwise, but there were way too many people who said “right on” when I suggested said course of action. I still kept quiet, preferring the cozy rant on a somewhat-read blog.
So it kinda sucks. The Texas people were so cool too. But their candidate was a two-faced guy on this issue. One that just happens to affect my bottom line.
Ok, end of rant….
Donnie Fowler, to his credit, didn’t’ engage in such bogus “consultant bashing,” instead recognizing the very “aristocracy” of consultants that makes it hard for younger people, with good ideas, to get work and make a difference in the long run. Which is why, in the end, it’s hard for me to say who I like.
I like Simon Rosenberg because it was clear in the way he runs his own campaign, he “gets it” when it comes to how campaigns work. I like Donnie Fowler, because he also has a “mechanics sense of campaigns,” lives in San Francisco, and attracts a great bunch of folks on his side (and believe me, that says a lot about someone). I like Gov. Dean because he can give a great speech, and I don’t doubt his commitment to folks outside of D.C., since it was those D.C. folks who did their best to stick it to him (like they have the Party).
So what is my verdict? If you’re a Democrat who cares, learn more and support one of the three I’ve mentioned here, and make your choice accordingly. If you’re a Republican Party Operative, piss off, and go trash the country over some more with deficits, lies, and BS.
If you’re a normal human being who just wants this country to be by, of and for the people and not some freaking corporation, then pay attention and get involved. No matter what happens, you’ll be better off for it.
The country can’t afford a one-party state. Just ask the Soviet Union!
UPDATE: Read coverage in the LA Times of the proceedings. The Associated Press has coverage as well. Adriel Hampton of the San Francisco Examiner has some interesting thoughts at his blog as well. Chris Nolan posts an article at PersonalDemocracy.com and at her own site as well.
You have to give Frost’s people credit – he got his anti-consultant quote in there in almost every report of the meeting. regardless of his background. Too bad that no one in the mainstream media (with the exception of the Times) questioned his assertion But perhaps that’s what “blogs” are for?
UPDATE 2:: You can watch the video of the meeting at the California Democratic Party Website and see the proceedings for yourself.
UPDATE 3: And now we see where the Great Martin has landed hanging out with the hippies and leftists at FOX News.
It’s just as well. The DC insider wrecking crew is being shown the door anyway – let’s just hope they don’t get ass prints on the door as it hits them on the way out.