.
Wednesday night, after partially prevailing in Cynthia Ward’s ballot designation lawsuit against him, corporatist Anaheim Council candidate and Sudden Mexican Steven Albert “Chavez” Lodge showed up asking for the OC GOP’s endorsement and was immediately met by hostile questioning by true conservatives Allan Bartlett, Tim Whitacre and Lucille Kring. And he answered them with the cavalier disregard for the truth that he had honed over thirty years of covering his ass on the Santa Ana Police force.
Chavez-Lodge and Brandman, colorized and flipped horizontally because we’re getting tired of this silly picture.
One of three rich moments was when he tried to disown his toxic running mate, Democrat Jordan Brandman. I mean, who wouldn’t? But when he claimed he’s not associated with Jordan, and has never been to any events with him, his credibility just sort of abruptly flatlined. Most have, and now more will, see the picture to the right, reportedly taken at an event in Kris Murray’s back yard. And thanks to SaveAnaheim.com we now have another pic of the two amigos, at a SOAR fundraiser / Angels game / barbecue last year (below.) You always need photographic evidence with these cops and ex-cops who are used to everyone just taking their word! And then, with perfect timing, the following day’s Anaheim Bulletin featured a full-back-page Brandman-Lodge ad. D’OH!
Chavez-Lodge continued to amaze the sworn-off-union-dough OC GOP with his tall tales when he claimed he’s never accepted any contributions from the hated unions. Well, we have proof that he’s already taken money from PAC’s associated with police/sheriff unions. And that is just the beginning – with his endorsements from fire and police unions from Santa Ana and Anaheim, it’s GUARANTEED he’ll be getting tens of thousands of these union shekels in the final months of the campaign when it really counts.
Amigos at the SOAR baseball game / barbecue, before the cock crowed three times.
Then I love this one: He was caught donating thousands to hated, feared, liberal Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez. He didn’t lie about this but neither did he volunteer the information; instead he made a ridiculous excuse: In order to be in construction one HAS to pay tribute to Loretta. (And he regrets it, and apologizes.) Right, big tough enforcer Loretta will see your business DESTROYED if you don’t pay her protection money! Also, Steve demonstrates here how comfortable and accepting he is of “pay to play” – so if he does get into office don’t be surprised when HE operates that way.
But, what can these Republicans expect, from the cop who lied in court about the jaywalker he beat in 1990, claiming falsely that the poor guy resisted arrest and that he never hit him with his baton, despite the jaywalker’s ruptured disc and head wound requiring eight stitches. Who knows how many times this cop got away with lying? It has obviously become a habit with him. Is anyone on the OC GOP Central Committee still considering endorsing him? Are any Anaheimers still considering voting for him?
*
Now some unutterable shill who’s allowed to write under the pseudonym “OC Insider” at the OC Politics Blog has produced a piece clucking over supposed instances of “chutzpah” that night, supposedly finding Tim Whitacre hypocritical for pointing out Chavez-Lodge’s union-cash lies, when Whitacre’s work for the noble “Take Back Anaheim / Let the People Vote” cause was mostly funded by the OCEA before they ditched that issue. Big fucking deal. Tim is not running for office. Tim is not asking for the OC GOP’s endorsement. Tim is not lying to the OC GOP about taking union money. Tim is not taking money from unions to run for office and be later beholden to them. Tim accepted money from those who were willing to pay, to work on a cause that he believed in and still does. On top of, I’m not even sure that Tim ever signed on to Scott Baugh’s retarded anti-union jihad in the first place.
But these supposed conservatives shilling for Steve Chavez-Lodge have got me thinking: Is lying a conservative value? Is abusing your authority as a cop a conservative value?
Of course those aren’t serious questions. But I think this is a good time, a defining moment, for conservatives and Republicans to ask themselves this:
Who are the real conservatives in (and operating in) Anaheim – and by extension, the rest of the County and elsewhere?
Are the real conservatives Mayor Tom Tait, Cynthia Ward*, Tim Whitacre, and Brian Chuchua, who – despite their occasional and/or partial alliances with Labor guys like John Leos and progressives like Lorri Galloway:
- oppose corporate welfare such as this year’s TOT giveaway of $152 million, and believe that since this was a tax imposed by the people, exceptions to that tax of that size should have to be approved by a vote of the people;
- oppose wasting good taxpayer money on law firms in a fruitless losing fight against the ACLU‘s districting lawsuit;
- constantly fight for government transparency, typified in Leos’ model ordinance; and
- fight AGAINST excessive labor giveaways like last June’s contract with Anaheim’s general employees union that promised, among other things, no layoffs, no outsourcing of city services, an end to furloughs and lump sum payouts totaling $2,200 to every employee who had previously taken furlough days.
Or are the real conservatives the Pringle-centered group of corporatists who get defended and apologized for on the OC Political Blog – councilmembers Kris Murray, Gail Eastman and Harry Sidhu and Council hopefuls Jordan Brandman and Steve Albert “Chavez” Lodge, who:
- believe in doling out hundreds of millions of corporate welfare to their campaign contributors with no strings attached;
- give lip service to the beauty of district elections while voting to waste millions of Anaheim taxpayer dollars fruitlessly fighting it, just to stay in power a little longer;
- fight tooth and nail AGAINST transparency, dubbing themselves “masters of the universe” whose secret dealings the public doesn’t need to know about; and
- APPROVE obscene, unaffordable labor contracts like last June’s contract with Anaheim’s general employees union that promised, among other things, no layoffs, no outsourcing of city services, an end to furloughs and lump sum payouts totaling $2,200 to every employee who had previously taken furlough days… all as part of secret political deals with the OCEA, with the goal of perpetuating their own power?
Shit. Now that I put it like that (knowing and accepting the risk that in some dumb minds my own dirty liberalism rubs off and soils the conservatives I support) the question answers itself.
* Before the prickly Cynthia gets on and gripes about my broad-brush picture, I’ll grant that she has no “alliances” with Lorri Galloway or any labor people, but they do all agree on several important things.
We agree that you are cute as a button Vern.
Now that we have that out of the way, frankly the best thing to happen to Jordan is to distance himself as completely as possible from Steven Albert Chavez Lodge. The Chamber did him no favors running that ad yesterday, sucking up the back cover of the Anaheim Bulletin with their mugs posed side by side as a slate. If I were Jordan (which would greatly dissapoint Richard) I would be begging everyone who had endorsed both to please, please, please not run us a s a slate. Steven Albert Chavez Lodge’s mud is going to get all over Mr. Brandman, and I realize some of y’all rejoice at that, but if Lodge wants to hide his obvious friendship and co-candidacy of his secret pal, it is to Jordan’s advantage.
Well, I would encourage Jordan to never be seen WITHOUT Steve … but then, I want Jordan to lose as well.
Good write up Vern. There is no way in hell the OC GOP should endorse this guy.
Allan, are you going to call out Tim Whitacre for taking more than $60,000 from his client, the OCEA, to advance their political agenda in Anaheim?
Or will you give him a pass?
Ballan, that’s pretty retarded. I’ll let Allan know you put this comment up, he doesn’t look at OJ threads every day like I do. But I imagine he’ll bring up a few things, which I already did in my story above, such as:
1. Did I miss something? Is Tim asking for the OCGOP endorsement?
2. Did I miss something? Is Tim running for office?
3. Did I miss something? Did Tim lie to the OCGOP about getting money from unions?
4. Did I miss something? Did Tim take union money to help him run for office and then be beholden to the unions?
And also, “advance OCEA’s political agenda?” Allowing the public to vote on large hotel subsidies is the agenda of lots of people – including Mayor Tait, and many other conservatives including Tim himself. The OCEA’s agenda? They ditched “Let the People Vote” as soon as it was convenient.
It’s hard to keep track of all the ways in which you’re wrong. But I think YOU should be asked, why are you so in the tank for Steve Chavez Lodge? Is it not a problem for you that he’s running for office using lots of union money – in contravention of your boss Baugh’s decrees? Is it not a problem for you that he’s given so much money to Loretta Sanchez? Is it not a problem that he’s lied about all that right to you guys’ faces? Or his abusive history as a cop?
And of course, why is it that – in stark contrast to me, Tim, Allan and Cynthia, you are too embarrassed to use your real name, here or at the other blogs, when you do your shilling for Curt Pringle and his puppets?
So many questions. So many pearls I throw before swine.
Vern,
It’s funny you only demand to know the identities of anon commenters who disagree with you or are critical of your political objects d’amour.
So what if Whitacre isn’t running for office (only if you don’t count running and being elected to the OC GOP Central Committee)? Since when has Bartlett limited his righteous judgment to candidates?
Whitacre is one of those self-appointed inquisitors of ideological purity during the OC GOP endorsement process. Since Bartlett is always quick to judge others for being insufficiently conservative or Republican or whatever he thinks they are insufficient at, it’s fair to ask his opinion of Whitacre taking more than $60,000 from the OCEA?
If Bartlett ignores it or soft soaps it, it shows he’s the hypocritical blowhard many already think he is, giving Whitacre a pass for something he would blast others for.
And it desn’t matter if Take Back Anaheim was on the agenda of others. OCEA funded it because it advanced their agenda in Anaheim (which is to increase the union’s influence in city government and grab more tax revenue for members). Whitacre wasn’t working for Tom Tait, he was working for the OCEA, which paid him a lot of money to advance that agenda, which he did, Those are undeniable facts that your obfuscation and misdirection can’t obscure.
Finally, I didn’t say anything about Steve Lodge. I linked a blog post I saw about Whitacre working for OCEA.
see below
MARCO………
Scutaro!
GO GIANTS!
Ballan: Thanks for your thoughtful response, although reading it carefully, I think all my points still stand. I’m glad that you are not sticking up for Chavez-Lodge, and are only motivated by busting Allan’s & Tim’s chops.
Please note that nobody is “demanding your identity,” which I could probably figure out if I really cared. I was only pointing out that, on this issue, one side – the side I’m on – is represented by proud macho blowhards who love to put our own name to things – whereas your side is represented solely by secretive people who feel the need to post anonymously. I just think that’s interesting, and maybe says something about the subject at hand.
There’s a few interesting issues going on. One is how Scott Baugh’s “Manifesto,” depriving OCGOP candidates of any union money, has tied your party up in knots. This was the lawyer/lobbyist’s sledgehammer attempt to co-opt the energy and fire of the Tea Party, although intelligent Tea Partiers seem to find it ridiculous (though I’ll let them speak for themselves.)
But if there’s a reason for it, it’s so that a Republican candidate won’t enter office beholden to unions, as Chavez-Lodge would be if he won. A councilman Chavez Lodge would be owned by both corporations and police unions – hell of a GOP candidate. While it seems to me your great concern over non-policy-maker Tim Whitacre openly accepting money from a union for a cause he believes in, is not in the same ball park, and is manufactured.
And then, I’m trying to figure out your explanation of how “Let the People Vote” is or was in OCEA’s interest. Your explanation is it would “increase the union’s influence in city government and grab more tax revenue for members.” I say, huh? How? Maybe the difficulty of explaining the OCEA’s interest in this helps explain why their support was paper-thin and quickly vanished.
Which bring up another good question – I also cannot explain how “Let the People Vote” was in OCEA’s interest, it just seemed nice for them to be doing something to help democracy, I never really questioned why. Maybe ALL ALONG it was only a bargaining chip for them. It really worked. Maybe the rest of us who really believed in it were just used. Too bad their support didn’t last a little longer, we’d have this worthy measure on the ballot this November.
Readers should realize, as you probably do, that this isn’t Tim Whitacre living high on the hog on 60 grand from OCEA. That was money for him to run a campaign, and went mostly to paid signature gatherers, office space, etc. But I’m sure you know that.
It appears like Matt Cunningham is trolling around again.
That’s what I was thinking, not 100% sure but a good guess.
That boy’s on the wrong side of EVERYTHING.
You’d like to think that. It’s your excuse for ducking the issue.
Hypocrisy, thy name is partisan politics.
So when GOP establishment wonks take taxpayer money to do “consulting”, whether it be the First 5 nebulous “help the children” effort, or PB taking hundreds of millions for high speed rail, it is just a paycheck, it doesn’t mean anything.
But Tim Whitacre takes a privately funded paycheck for a professional contract (doing work in his field) with measurable results, to promote a non-partisan effort to prevent tax dollars from being diverted from the general fund to special interests, and he is furthering the agenda of the evil unions?
In this case, the evil unions, protecting the money-pot that covers their salaries, is on the same page with residents and businesses that want to ensure that there is money to pay for the services that those public employees provide. While the Chamber and its minions tout the advantages of Bill O’Connell creating jobs (low-income, low-to-no-benefit careers that taxpayers will eventually underwrite with subsidized housing, groceries, school lunches, etc) none of that will pay the librarians, parks workers, street repair and graffiti removal crews that citizens have consistently told City Hall are the priority to us.
The Take Back Anaheim/Let the People Vote Initiative was a mechanism for correcting a disparity in what Anaheim’s rank and file people have been asking of City Hall, and what civic leaders continue to shove down our throats.
Tim Whitaker did his job, and collected a paycheck for it, but that is not why the entrenched politicos are going after him. They are furious with him for having the audacity to stand up to the special interest industry currently running Anaheim City Hall. How DARE he oppose their chosen pork projects?
I say, you go Tim!
If you get the chance you do it again, and next time you open it to fundraising (I know, that was Lorri’s goof) but next time you let Anaheim write some checks. This is not an OCEA thing, this is an Anaheim thing that happens to align with OCEA’s interests. Nobody sold out, least of all Mr. Whitaker.
So to whoever is making noise, quit fussing over how Mr. Whitaker earns his living, and go take a look at the business plans for those hotels that taxpayers are underwriting. Or better yet, take a look at how much O’Connell’s lobbyist got for shoving through a giveaway of future revenues on a deal that appears so upside down that even with that subsidy the developer still has not produced proof of a secured loan.
Private paycheck? You’re joking. OCEA is siphon that sucks up tax dollars via its members. Whitacre can do what he wants. But if he is going to go to work for the public employee unions to work on their projects, then he should get off his high horse.
t’s harde to mss that you only want to talk about what you want to talk about, and anyone who raises a contrary point is dismissed for not talking about what you want to talk about.
http://thinkforyourselfoc.com/?p=73
Recap of the GOP meeting, with notes showing how full of it a certain candidate is.
Cynthia’s new blog! We’ll be featuring it in a story in the morning, along with Jason’s and Geoff Willis’ blogs…
Hey, someone started a new blog! Cool!
UPDATE: At last night’s meeting of the full Central Committee, Chavez withdrew his name – good call, spared himself a lot of humiliation – and the second Anaheim endorsement went to the worthy Brian Chuchuca (joining already-endorsed Lucille Kring.)
At the same meeting, for the Fullerton Council race, Ackermanite RINO Jennifer Fitzgerald (curiously named after GHW Bush’s secret lover in China) was rejected
in favor of conservative Bushala-ite Barry Levinson. It looks like the winds of change are hitting Baugh’s Old Party.Correction – misunderstood Whitacre I guess. They decided not to endorse either Barry or Jennifer in Fullerton, to prevent “party disunity.” (Hat-tip OC policial)