.
.
.
Vampiric attention-sucker and disgraced once-again attorney Lenore Albert-Sheridan and a visibly unsettled State Democratic Party Chair aspirant Eric Bauman.
So I get a call at about 5:00 from an excited friend who occasionally slums on Liberal OC to ask me if I can POSSIBLY GUESS who has just entered the race for Chair of the California Democratic Party — a timely topic given that leading candidate Eric Bauman is speaking before DPOC (and whoever else shows up) at 6:30 today. (His underdog challenger Kimberly Ellis will speak at the same time before April’s meeting.) I made four or five guesses and not even a hint could help me.
“LENORE ALBERT-SHERIDAN,” I was finally told. “And Dan is trashing you!”
Well, the latter is not news — let me know if he ever lands a blow — but the former made me SLOL. (Snort Loudly Out Loud.) Lenore? The woman who notably cuddles up to Ray Cordova and to Chumley himself at DPOC meetings? That’s a — well, actually, it’s not a surprise, given her advanced level of attention-vampirism.
Here’s part of Chumley’s take on Lenore:
Additionally, she was recommended for a 30-day suspension of her law license by the California State Bar over allegations from a former client. Albert-Sheridan is practicing law and was considering another shot at Allen due to his affection and loyalty to President Trump and rumors Allen might run for Governor as a Republican.
She is also known for filing paperwork with the state party to have DPOC Central Committee member Greg Diamond removed from the Democratic Party due to his long standing support of conservative Republican Anaheim Mayor Tom Tait, for serving as campaign manager to independent Brain Chuchua in AD-68 even though Sean Panhani was the only Democrat in the race, and for blog attacks on elected Democrats in Orange County. We’re told this case is still pending.
Apparently Chumley doesn’t know that she has another case against her pending, which I haven’t written about because it hasn’t been newsworthy. Until now. I also don’t like “piling on” gratuitously — but it no longer is! But you’ll have to wait for that.
I’d love to hear that the case against me is pending because I would relish fighting it — if it’s under the jurisdiction of the current CDP at all. But for the record:
(1) I’ve supported Tom Tait’s positions where they overlap the positions of the “good government” wing of the Democratic Party, which they often do. I argued against endorsing Lorri Galloway’s hapless campaign for Mayor against him because of the danger of it leading to the election of execrable and corrupt bigot Lucille Kring. When I lost that vote — when Galloway, who had claimed to be called by God to run, made various “overpromises” about her viability in the race, I followed DPOC rules and did not endorse Tom.
(2) I did manage Brian Chuchua’s campaign for AD-68 in the primary because — unlike Sean Panahi (the actual spelling) he could have won over either execrable Harry Sidhu or execrable Stephen Choi, largely because he would have had Tait’s enthusiastic support as well as that of any straight-thinking Democrats. (He has quite the GOP in disgust.) Brian would have voted with good-government Democrats between a third and half of the time, by my estimate, and before that last year that was by far the best we could ever have gotten out of AD-68. If Chuchua had become the swing vote in the Assembly, as seemed quite plausible, it would have been great for good government types and for OC in particular. And Panahi entered the race at almost the last moment and had nothing going for him other than a largely Republican platform and a D after his name. Because Panahi took the Democratic votes that could have gone to Independent Chuchua — among whose sins is support for Dr. Jose Moreno during his attendance at Los Amigos — we lost the chance to compete for as much as half a loaf in November.
(3) Blog attacks on elected Democrats. Hey, if the CDP wants to say that people can’t write nasty truths about corrupt elected officials just because they wear the fig leaf of our party affiliation, they can say so out loud. Until then, I’m following the existing rules.
This complaint was actually, in fact, a revenge attack from the Sukhee Kang partisans like Chumley and Fullerton complainants Molly Muro and Arnel Dino (about whom I still haven’t said boo in these pages.) They’ve remained bottom-hurt after the SD-29 primary race, where I happily — and in that case, perhaps against party rules, if CDP really wants to come after me — gave my strong support to Josh Newman. (Most people of common sense seem to have accepted by now that while Newman beat Ling-Ling Chang, Sukhee would have gotten his clock cleaned in the general, because the sole tactical advantage that led him to move here — his Asian heritage — would have been neutralized by state GOP Chair Jim Brulte’s savvy counterprogramming. But that’s a little subtle for Chumley.)
Chumley finally gets to the meat of the nut here:
Albert-Sheridan’s entry into this race is a wild card — who might [she] siphon votes from most? Bauman, for being in So Cal? Or Ellis, because she’s a she?
It’s not so much a “wild card” in the poker deck as an Uno card, or a Monopoly “Chance” card, or (more to the point) a business card, stuck incongruously into the deck, leading everyone to stare at it blankly (at best) when it is dealt out. But sure, let’s play the “who does it favor?” game!
Probably no one, because she’s probably not going to get more than a couple of votes — and the sweet thing is that the votes are public so we can identify them! (Come on, Ray Cordova, vote for her!) But if she does have an effect, it will hinge on how each delegate answers one question: “Was Eric Bauman truly insane enough to try to lure her into the race to “split the opposition vote with Kimberly Ellis?”
I prefer Ellis to Bauman, because even though Ellis supported Hillary Clinton in the primary — like anyone else who cared about her political career, she presumably figured that she was in for a world of pain if she didn’t — her persona and apparent platform suggest the openness and inclusiveness of Bernie Sanders. Bauman would be a tough and strong chair who would not hesitate to threaten (and follow through with) political consequences for those who oppose him — something that a lot of Orange County Democrats discovered when they supported Betty Yee over Bauman’s old boss John Perez for State Controller. As a Party member, this does not warm my heart.
But on most non-intra-party issues, where he’d be dealing with the outside public, Bauman and I would be on the same sid — and I’m sure that he would ably represent my favored positions, although I might not know about those issues while rotting in the dungeon of some Democratic Party re-education camp in Imperial County. (I jest, I jest.) And my friend, ally, and relative by two marriages Jeff Letourneau is one of Bauman’s biggest supporters and fundraisers statewide — seriously, if you’re going to give money to Bauman, go to Jeff’s party for him and do it there! — and so in my view the State Chair’s race is something about which reasonable people can disagree.
But while Bauman was practically the epitome of a deluded, myopic, out-of-touch, and arm-twisting Hillary supporter in the primary, one thing that I’ll say about him is that he’s not dumb. And even the suspicion that he has lured this crackpot fame-snorter into the limelight for his personal gain would be incredibly dumb — and damaging to his candidacy. So like other people, I’m going to presume that Bauman is not this dumb, and that pushing forward Lenore is indeed such a dumb plot that it could only come from one possible source in the universe — the “establishment” Democrats of Orange County.
The nice thing, from my perspective, is that the suspicion that the dunderheads working alongside Lenore — to defeat Kimberly Ellis because also has lady parts??? — is pretty much inevitable. And that puts Bauman in a really uncomfortable position. He’ll either have to reject this “smoove move” as crass and offensive and stupid and not in his interest — or he’ll have to keep quiet and let people think what they will. And, oh yes, they will. I think that Kimberly Ellis is clinking glasses with her supporters tonight!
The hallmark of this as a DPOC anti-good-government faction production is that it is, at bottom, so incredibly selfish and self-absorbed. It doesn’t help anyone: it just “puts OC on the map” in a way that no rational person would desire. But if your interest in entirely what happens within the county — I suppose it makes a certain amount of sense.
Just kidding. It still makes no sense. But I’m still going to sit back and enjoy it!
I know, huh. I literally laughed out loud when I saw that on the Liberal OC today. Can’t comment there anymore, they’re lucky…
“I won’t come in first, or second either, but I will unite the party…” HUH?
Well, if you read the post’s title to the end…
Can one think of anything as selfish and ridiculous as running for one of the most significant positions of a major political party, in a major state, while have the cloud over her head that Lenore Albert-Sheridan does?
Albert is of course entitled to any benefits of the doubt, or presumptions of non-culpability until such is proven. But usually when the State Bar sets out to prove something, it does, is my understanding. Some of the charges are serious…failing to cooperate with an investigation into misappropriating a check for $8,000…failing to pay judicial sanctions for pursuing meritless claims…taking a $20,000 retainer for a patent infringement case then failing to do the work or associate an actual patent attorney to do the work. We’re not talking just discovery fines and a missed court appearance or two.
People who have already attained such positions typically resign them under such circumstances. But noooooo, not Albert-Sheridan. She’ll drag the whole party down, in her quest to advertise her progressive bona fides, so that someone might give her a job where she doesn’t use a law license.
If she were successful, would she put the party in a good light…probably not. She would generate a lot of negative press. Drive some people from the party, to third parties and republicans. It would call into question the whole party.
Is this the witch you say is the Irvine trolls only friend in the Democratic Party ?
You misquote me there. But this is who you’re thinking of.
Yeah, he does have a dismal little roster of adherents.
Some highly placed, in the petit scheme of things.
Yeah, you know what? Name names or I’m calling bullshit. The same goes to Milo The Irvine Troll because I keep getting reports that hes quoting my comments. I don’t )wont) go that fat, white, piece of trash’s blog because he is beneath me or I would be able to verify that. So I have to take H’s word for it. so it goes to you Greg, and Milo The Irvine Troll (You know I’m talking about you, you piece of trash). I know no one cares about blogs or what is said here especially from that fat fuck. Name names of who supports and cohorts with this trash or take back your assertion that he has allies and or friends in the DPOC. Fair weather or other wise. Same challenge to you Trash.
For one, people who don’t like the progressives Greg and Jeff, because they make them uncomfortable and call them on shit, have a slight appreciation of Dan, and alliance with him, because he attacks them nonstop. Doesn’t mean they really like Dan though. I have Democrat acquaintances who hang out with him a little but they tell me “Just between you and me he really IS an asshole.”
Are you still out of the country?
Wow — Chumley left FIVE comments in response to this post! (That doesn’t count the one by his alter ego, “OC DEM,” the guy whose avatar symbol there is a slightly modified and decorated swastika. Which Chumley might now change. Because anyone who has a reason to be attentive to swastikas would see the resemblance right away.)
Only one of those comments warrants an immediate response — (although to be honest it is just for “making fun of” purposes:)
For those of you who aren’t processing this oddness quickly:
Chumley does not know the difference between Birkenstock (and similar type) sandals and “flip-flops”!
(The latter are also known as “thongs” — not the underwear kind, Chum — or, for his use in one of his “impress the Spaniards” posts, “chancletas”).
Also, Chumley thinks that New York footwear fashion rules apply in Southern California, and that one should wait to wear them until the end of March, “when things thaw out.”
(Honestly, I DID wait until things thawed out this year!)
Look, I grew up in Huntington Beach, not in some woebegone burgh in upstate New York. We would wear sandals (or even flip flops, if we can’t afford anything else) any time of year that we wanted to … because that’s a prerogative of living in Southern California!
(I do keep the nails on the big toe of each foot on the long side. If some day I have to defend myself by kicking some drunken hulking shambling gelatinous snow-creature in the face, I want to make sure that the resulting scar goes all the way down to the skull.)
P.S. “peak at”! Posted with comments attacking me for typos! BWAAAHAHAHA!
There are typos, and then there is just illiteracy. I don’t think the poor fellow did well in school, and doesn’t have much natural intuition or analytical skill to make up for that either.
You know what Vern? I’m going to keep up this dialogue with the Chumster here — because I’ve been assured by powerful local Democrats that nobody cares what goes on in the blogs, so I am going to enjoy the bracing splash of freedom tonic that that provides.
First, do you think my comment has been misunderstood? I wrote above about preparing for kick-boxing self-defense against “some drunken hulking shambling gelatinous snow-creature” — frankly, given my lack of a high kick, I’d imagined that said creature would have already toppled to the ground for easy access, which surely does happen — and Chumley seems to jump to the conclusion that I’m talking about him!
Is that a fair interpretation on his part? I mean, he’s not actually gelatinous, regardless of any outward appearances. (Right? Or is he actually gelatinous, in which event I can see why he took offense?) Beyond that, he seems fixated on my feet, which — surprisingly employing the Huntington Beach slang of our youth that I’d have thought was beyond him — he considered “gnarly.” From another source I might take it as a compliment, but I’m a bit skeeved out at the prospect of being fetishized.
Also, as a fellow HB-er: when I tell you that some New Yorker in Gawker went off on people wearing “flip flops” (Chumley still does not seem to know the difference between them and sandals) in snowy and cold weather — and then throws in a comment about how the demand to eschew them “also applies to places with temperate climates like L.A. (It’s not that warm there in February),” do you give a shit what such ignorant Arctic-headed goons think? I don’t — and I lived there! It can get cold in Israel and Palestine as well, but sandals were apparently good enough for my distant relative Jesus the Nazarene. Why does Chumley hate Jesus’s footwear? (By the way: the stylized swastika icon for OCDEM’s account is still up — and still, given the screen name, intended to “represent the party!” Egads! I had to remind myself that nothing that happens on blogs really matters.)
Finally, Vern: you’ve seen me in court more than once. Chumley seems to think that I don’t own a good pair of shoes. Did I accidentally wear sandals to court? I like those shoes. (Like my suits, are fairly expensive, so I figured that he’d appreciate that.) But I don’t think that, in less formal settings, people must hide the “nakedness” (scandalous nakedness?) of their feet. (To be fair, Chumley’s latest suggests that he thinks that feet only become unpresentable with age. And thus it strikes me that I’ve never seen his feet: leading me to wonder: could the root of his problem is that his look like hagfish and a sandal — let alone, god forbid, a flip-flop — would make them look like something stevedores would refuse to unload?)
See what happens when fist-headed sirenians warm up to Lenore and start lekking all over the place? This can only get worse before it gets funnier.
So many pearls lobbed in the direction of an unworthy swine. Oh well, good thing nothing that happens here matters.
I suppose that it would be a waste of time if I weren’t enjoying it.
You’re missing one big piece of information, which I may cover tomorrow.
(I don’t think that I need to explains AGAIN why Chuchua could have won Democratic support if he were the only non-Republican in the race, right? And with the GOP split in Irvine and Tait’s support in Anaheim Hills, he’d likely have done well in November. But some Democrats are all about losing.)
STOP THIS!
Ignore the guy. Stop baiting him, letting him bait you and devolving the situation.
Somebody needs to be the adult in the room and explain to all you kids, that this childishness is hurting the party and whatever common goals you might share.
We need a leader to sit you down and whip you into shape. As for Mr. Lucas, nice language. You sound like a garbage man.
I have by and large followed that advice. (I’m baited there a lot more often than I reply.) But something has happened that has changed my view. Like Vern, you’ll just have to wait until I have time to write the story.
you keep alluding to facts you have and things you will write in the future, but you never seem to do so. Why not?
Because I work for a living, have had a lot of family events and other domestic responsibilities recently, and I haven’t gotten around to it.
If you’re really in a hurry, ask Lenore for them. She’s got them; she’s been served with them!
Plus he made me a great photoshop of Shawn Nelson on the Road to Damascus last night, and now I have to come up with a story good enough for its illustration.
No, no — Vern baked the cake for that photoshop by giving me the photos. I merely iced it.