This is a composite photo-illustration. This pose did not actually happen — that we know of. We HOPE that this did not happen, anyway. It is sort of plausible, though.
The absence of Latinos in the City’s Charter Review Committee is surprising, as we have been eloquently complaining about our exclusion from adequate representation. Not even our good Mayor appointed one of us. The composition of this committee, all whites, has reopened discussion on race and on the CVRA (California Voting Rights Act); a recent discussion is taking place in the Voice of OC.
My take on this is that I am a “gavacho”- (white-) looking Latino who would not vote for a Latino “just because.” I did not vote for Steve Chavez Lodge — and I would not vote for him in any kind of electoral system. As a bloc, Latinos in Anaheim are under-represented. Our voting registration and votes do not reflect our population size; who knows when this situation will change. In the meantime, the current at-large election system perpetuates the under-representation and disenfranchisement. Its proposed replacement by an at-large districts system, the Santa Ana system, will maintain this pattern.
The appointment of the controversial former Mayor Curt Pringle, currently a lobbyist, to this Charter Review Committee is also surprising. He is perceived as the force orchestrating the crucial decisions taken by the city council: the reluctance to create district councils to enhance our democracy; the opposition to a Civilian Police Review Board; the firing of the City Attorney and the resignation of the previous City Manager; the subsidies to developers; the appointments of anti-immigrants advocates in the election committee and now in the charter review committee.
I did not know about Pringle’s influence until I got involved in the last council election. I knew that he had been Mayor twice, that he was involved in the placing of security guards at some Santa Ana polling places when he run for state office, and that years later he was supporting the opening of a Mexican superstore in Anaheim which had been denied a liquor license. He has been demonized by his critics, called by some as the “whitest man alive”, and it has been that his “ghost” presides in the council chamber.
Who is this man vilified by many? Wikipedia provides a summary of his background:
Pringle, a Republican, a onetime Speaker of the California State Assembly, former Mayor of Anaheim, California and former Chairman of the California High Speed Rail Authority, today runs his own public relations and government affairs firm, Curt Pringle & Associates… As a young man, Pringle ran, unsuccessfully, three times for a seat on the Garden Grove City Council. In 1986, while working for his parents’ drapery business, Pringle ran unopposed for the Orange County Republican Central Committee, which is the controlling organ of the county Republican Party. In 1988, the Republican nominee for Pringle’s Assembly district, freshman incumbent Assemblyman Dick Longshore, died the day after the June primary election, and under California law the central committee members were charged with selecting a replacement. They chose Pringle.
Pringle took office as a state assemblyman in December 1988 at the age of 29. In 1990, he was defeated for re-election by Democrat Tom Umberg, but after legislative district lines were drawn between Pringle and Umberg’s houses following the 1990 census, Pringle ran again for the Assembly in 1992 and won. Pringle worked his way up the Republican hierarchy, and in 1996, after a protracted power struggle between Republicans and former Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, he was elected Speaker of the Assembly. According to Brown, Pringle was the last Speaker to wield broad power in that office, since rule changes immediately after Pringle’s tenure transferred much of the Speaker’s authority to committee chairmen. Pringle, for example, issued committee assignments to both parties’ members, controlled State Assembly funds, and had broad administrative authority
…
In 2002, Pringle re-entered electoral politics with his campaign for Mayor of Anaheim, California, the tenth-most populous city in the state…During his tenure as mayor, Pringle and the Anaheim City Council over which he presided enacted a number of reforms that The Orange County Register depicted as “freedom-friendly.” According to the Los Angeles Times, “Pringle has built such a strong reputation for his aggressive pro-business approach to governance (creative tax waivers, sweeping zone changes, market incentives to redevelop run-down parts of the city) that other local officials have coined a verb for his philosophy: ‘to Pringle-ize.’
This summary indicates that Pringle rose to power by cunningly navigating the political institutions, accumulated political and economic wealth using the authority vested on his offices, either as Assembly Speaker or City Mayor. A career as an elected politician prepared him well to establish his consulting business. These are the main reasons for Pringle’s success.
Pringle’s empire building did not necessarily require the cooperation of Latino community leaders, as has been argued by the OC Weekly‘s editor, Gustavo Arellano. The Gigante controversy helped him; it got my attention even though I was not following the city politics so closely. I did not think badly of Nativo Lopez and Mr. Amin David, who as community leaders had to navigate the political waters to achieve some results. The ACLU lawsuit shows that it did not much matter what reasonable steps they tried to take; the political power in the city was not going to address the fundamental problems.
Disenfranchisement or “victimization”, which Gustavo questions in his latest Weekly criticism of Dr. Moreno, permeates many aspects of our life, including Gustavo’s. He wrote in his “Anaheim’s Tragic Kingdom” piece:
I try to not write about Anaheim politics, mostly because I have kith and kin who work for the city, and I want to shield them from any retribution caused by my rants, but mostly because—for once—the anger that accumulated over the years about what’s going on rendered me silent.
The argument of the Weekly, that “vendidos” (sold-out) Latinos helped Pringle to create his empire and ruin Anaheim, is not a serious one. It does not explain the fundamental reasons that Pringle rose to power.
Many people consider Pringle’s business unethical: he takes advantage of public funds to finance highly questionable projects while profiting from fees as a consultant. One of the earlier such projects was high-speed rail. According to the LA Times:
Two prominent California High-Speed Rail Authority leaders who are already under scrutiny for holding potentially “incompatible” public offices have received tens of thousands of dollars in consulting fees from firms with financial interests in the $43-billion project…” Rail board chairman and Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle has been an advisor to a major construction supplier. Fellow board member Richard Katz also works as a consultant and for several years has advised Walt Disney Co., a major backer of the project
Pringle’s business relationship with the Disney Company and his influence on the city’s council members, the latter of which culminated in the approval of the $158 city subsidy to one of his clients, have been documented in several places, including this article from Orange Juice Blog. That influence cuts across party lines.
At one of the council candidates’ forums I had a brief conversation about Pringle with then-DPOC-endorsed candidate and now-City Council member Jordan Brandman. I told him my observations and reservations. His reply was: “Pringle is a good guy.” His appointment to the city Charter Review Committee by Brandman completes the circle of their mutual dependence. Pringle, through Brandman and Ms. Kris Murray, continues to exert his influence in the council. Brandman has become what many had already predicted, a puppet of Pringle. His record clearly indicates that he pays lip service to the promises he made to support change; he has consistently voted to maintain the status benefiting businesses and issues associated with Pringle & Associates. The steamrolling approach used by the majority of the council, isolating the Mayor, has divided the city even more.
Pringle is a major player in our city politics. The question is how much longer his negative influence will continue to prevail. It took years for him to build his network, and to establish policies that made Anaheim a heaven for business opportunities for some, at the expenses of the city as a whole. The two Anaheims — the very affluent one mostly in the hills, and the other Anaheim composed mostly working class Latino communities in the flatlands — are to a large extent a result of these policies.
Hopefully it will not take years to democratize our politics, to stop career politicians and businesses from ripping off government resources. Orange County, and Anaheim, have significantly changed since the days when Pringle was associated with posting security guards at polling stations. Demographic changes place the Latino population in the unique role of playing a pivotal role in improving Anaheim politics. It is estimated that 53% of the city is Latino. We can, and we should, bring about change to create jobs with a living wage, to fix the neglected neighborhoods, to address the roots causes of crime and gangs, to change the APD’s insensitive culture towards our community, and to establish a trusting relationship.
Electoral and grassroots organizing are the methods that usually bring about change. Both the Republican and Democratic parties contain people aware of the need to change the politics of our city. Let’s hope that their county’s central committees take action on this direction. At election time, voters’ registration campaigns and a coalition for change needs to take place, supporting the adequate candidates. We cannot afford to dilute our votes on unknown candidates with Latino-sounding names, nor can we split the votes among well-meaning but non-electable ones. The district level electoral system should produce candidates who better knows the specific needs of the communities. Until then, as the civil rights movement proved, politicians change their positions when communities organize themselves and advocate for change.
Let’s heal our city by stepping forward to this challenge. Let’s stop the Curt Pringle & Associates approach of dividing a city for the enrichment of a few.
In the words of Dr King:
Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy.
Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice.
Now is the time to open the doors of opportunity to all of God’s children. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood.
“We didn’t take him on,” said Latino activist Art Montez, who also sits on an Anaheim school board. “Pringle’s young enough, and he saw what happened with the poll guards. He knew not to take the HMS Republican back into those stormy waters again. He’s young enough to repair his career.”
http://articles.latimes.com/2002/nov/07/local/me-pringle7
And repair his political career he did! There wasn’t a fight in 2006 either as is evidenced and argued elsewhere. But I guess people can willfully…just forget everything they know!
They cooperated with someone on a given issue. Cooperating or not cooperating with someone is always a gamble. In the 1978 Gubernatorial election, many of us wanted to be sure that we kept Chief Ed Davis of LA from winning the Republican nomination. I registered Republican — my first vote as an adult — specifically to vote against him. I had to vote for someone else, of course, in order to vote against Davis. I chose to vote for the person considered the relative moderate of the group — a guy from San Diego named Pete Wilson. (He didn’t win.) Oops.
Pete Wilson wasn’t yet the awful Sen. Pete Wilson, let alone the awful Gov. Pete Wilson of Prop 187 or the awful anti-immigration crusader since then — but he eventually became just that. Looking back, I wish that I’d voted for the eventual Republican nominee, Evelle Younger, to whom Davis finished second. But I didn’t, and couldn’t know at the time that Wilson would become what he did. You can only judge people by what they knew or should have known — and even then only so far as their actual responsibility carries.
Right now, I — and you, and Gustavo — are cooperating on many political issues with Tom Tait, who had not had a progressive record until this term. If Tait becomes a Pringle-like figure sometime in the future, would you judge us as culpable for what we do now? Not if you have a lick of sense.
If you’re going to be a political reporter, Gabriel, you had better learn that politics makes for strange coalition partners and unintended boosts where one might later regret it. Not understanding that will make you look like a fool rather than a journalist.
I’m not “cooperating” with Tom Tait. I’m a reporting on him. When he gets surrounded and attacked unfairly, I call it. When he casts lousy votes (on the creation of the Enterprise Zone & curbing yard sales) I call it. I was not a fan of his “regulatory relief” task force nor do I particularly care for his stance on public unions.
As for you, it’s entirely predictable for you to make excuses. The ACLU plaintiffs aren’t even doing that, though. They engage in rank historical revisionism instead. It’s not all water under the bridge. The public stances behind Chief John Welter by Amin David and Jose Moreno well after the summer’s upheaval (documented, of course) are quite apart from that of many Latinos, particularly in the barrios, that they are self-appointed to lead.
Good day now.
The Weekly, which appears to control your programming at the moment, has been editorially supporting (not just reporting on) the positions of Tom Tait on the main conflicts of the day in Anaheim. Do you really need me to compile evidence from its pages? The four things that you mention at the end of your first paragraph haven’t been among them. Use your employer’s site as a reference.
It’s entirely predictable that you, as Gustavo’s new lapdog (while still pretending to independence and radicalism), would respond as you did (1) You dismiss the subject of my comment with a vague phrase (“rank historical revisionism”) — easy to write, not easy to interpret, but easy to rebut if you ever clarified what you mean — and then change the subject to whether David and Moreno were satisfying a public taste to “damn them all” last summer at a time when political finesse was pretty damn important. (Even Duane was showing some.)
Did things go better or worse last summer and thereafter because of whatever stance they took supporting Welter — or, more properly, aspects of what he was doing — in an attempt to get him to move in a more position direction? I don’t know, but I’d be interested in hearing from them and thinking it through without claiming the benefits of hindsight. You, on the other hand, seem entirely uninterested in their reasoning or their success — that they just “did not do what hoi polloi demanded!” is enough for you in this instance. Is that your standard for judging actions, now, GSR? You’re going to end up in a trash pile with Pat Buchanan, if so.
It would be understandable if you really were ignorant about how politics (including community organizing and advocacy politics) works, but you aren’t. You’re just cynically playing to your imagined audience, as if a community leader who doesn’t satisfy the strongest (even if justified) thirst for revenge in the community obviously isn’t doing his job.
(Who appointed you, by the way, if not yourself?)
So, let’s get back to the point above. Gustavo has a crackpot theory — and you are perspicacious enough to KNOW that it is a crackpot theory, though I’m sure you’re too discreet to tell him so — that the temporary alliance made at the time of the Gigante liquor license application was enough to cause all of the problems with Pringle since then.
Gustavo grabbed onto this issue when he first got to the Weekly and has trotted out countless times (though actually, they could be counted … hmmm …) whenever he wants to slam people related to Los Amigos — largely to justify his often reactionary libertarian viewpoints and partly to puff himself up as a man of the people. (Need I recount for you those viewpoints of this man whom you now defend like a ninja? I doubt it.)
David, Moreno, Tait, me — and you (as in your better days you’d admit) — are involved in politics. Politics is not always pristine and often involves alliances and compromises. Attacking people well after the fact because one alliance or compromise didn’t end up working out well is weak and poor reporting — it’s easy, when one has the benefit of hindsight. (It’s the journalistic equivalent of Dick Cheney being able to shoot partridges that have been planted nearby him and for all I know probably drugged or weighted down so they can’t flee.)
Your problem, personally, is that you’re smart enough to know this. Gustavo, at some point, will suspect that deep down you don’t buy his bullshit. Have an exit plan ready for that day, because that’s unforgivable.
P.S. to Gustavo: don’t even bother, you git.
Much of your response doesn’t warrant mention. But here’s a few passages to which I’ll respond:
* If it was a “temporary alliance” why was there quoted statements largely supportive of the fact that Pringle was going to run largely unopposed for Mayor in 2006?
* “(Who appointed you, by the way, if not yourself?)”
Never said I was a leader.
* “Satisfying a public taste to “damn them all” last summer.”
Actually the documentation I would point to would be from April of this year. But anyway, Chief Welter was an appropriate target of criticism during the summer. He was the head of the APD, blamed ‘outside agitators’ for July 24 and defended his police for their actions. Hardly “damn them all.” But if that’s someone Moreno had wanted the ACSD and board to honor upon retirement months later, well, that’s on him.
These are pretty clear and concise. Bloviate all you want. Knock yourself out.
“Just Forget Everything You Know About Him: ‘Pringle is a Good Guy’!” — Ironically, the title of this post would have been applicable to the Los Amigos line in 2002 and 2006!
I understand your not being up to the task. On to the parts you thought you could handle:
(1) Do you think that “temporary” means fleeting? A temporary alliance can last; moreover, a tactical decision not to try to unseat someone (even without an “alliance”) can be lasting. However, I was referring specifically to the Gigante liquor license controversy.
(2) Leadership is as leadership does. But hey, if you say that you are not and have never been a leader, some things do make more sense.
(3) You didn’t point to that documentation, so I have no way of knowing that. If it’s from just this past April, Moreno’s response makes even more sense. I’ve been pissed off at Welter from last summer, but I can easily imagine that he may have done good things as well, and (more easily) that he may have been preferable to any available alternative. But I don’t know about Moreno’s thinking on this. Hey, you’re a journalist — have you asked him?
Do you see a difference between (1) deciding not to oppose someone whom you probably won’t beat anyway, especially when working with him tactically on a given issue, and (2) appointing him to become de facto leader of the City’s Charter Review Committee? Well, that’s not really the question; of course you’ll see the difference. I suppose my question should be: will you own up to seeing it?
The Bloviator will do anything to try and make people forgot that his beloved Great Brown Hopes helped Pringle get the power that has reduced my city to rubble. You weren’t around during Gigante, Bloviator, nor was Moreno. I, on the other hand, was. You can try and pass yourself off as a savvy realpolitik genius, but your understanding of Anaheim politics—and OC politics, in general—is as based in reality as your chances of winning a political race.
“Nor was Moreno.”
I haven’t read this piece yet, been busy, but you’re right, Moreno was not around during this horrifying Gigante incident that was so traumatic to you. So why do you keep trying to link him to it?
Realpolitick me this: you’ve been doing the dirty work of Pringle’s crowd – Kris Murray etc. – whether you intend to or not.
You’re right that my understanding of Anaheim politics may be deficient, Gustavo, because most of it comes from reading your own reporting in the Weekly. You got a bug up your ass about their liquor license. (Having watched you for a while I will bet that it was likely due to some personal relationship of yours, maybe a smaller store that would be harmed, maybe someone insulted you. If your real concern is what you stated in the articles, I’d have expected you to act differently. I’d give specifics, but you’d consider that bloviation.) They agreed with Pringle on this issue and so held their fire at him in some cases, hoping to engage him constructively. That’s what civil leaders, as opposed to people beating the drums of scandal and outrage to get page views and ad dollars, sometimes do. It turned out that he would go in a worse direction (and travel further) than they would reasonably have expected. (Part of the problem? Maybe you! You, after all, despite your position as a Latino leader in OC, chose not to write about Anaheim for years to protect your family and friends. Want me to find your quote?)
As for the unsupported insults in the last sentence — ironic given your rag’s description of me as the worse State Senate candidate in state history, or was it just in 2012, just before I got 45% of the vote in a heavily Republican district — for God’s sake, you can be funnier and wittier than that, can’t you? (Or are you outsourcing your column writing these days?) It doesn’t take genius to analyze OC Politics; the time I spent in Indiana and Arkansas, for example, are very good preparation. But from your perspective, maybe basic competence in political analysis looks like genius, just like to someone from an isolated tribe a transistor radio can look like magic.
Says the guy who was taking Lucille Kring’s personal calls during the last election…Real good realpolitik there.
Touche. A little bit. But still can we all figure out how to move forward now and turn things around?
If you’re talking about Vern: as I recall, he was trying to get her on record as supporting districts. Those were good calls to take. And despite her betrayal, having her on record like that may still do some good.
That you judge things only by their results, rather than what the odds of success were prospectively, puts you on a par with eight-year-olds. But keep on being brilliant, Señor San Echón.
Kring has been, is and always will be a ‘say to play’ politician. Her xenophobia was most recently on display by the defiant selection of Amanda Edinger to the charter review commission, but her past makes that not surprising at all. I didn’t believe that someone with Know Nothing politics would truly be in favor of Latino political enfranchisement in Anaheim.
She also has a past voting record in favor of sizable subsidies for developers. It didn’t come to me as a surprise that she voted for GardenWalk 2.0 this year.
So no, my assessment of Kring wasn’t based on after the fact results, but the odds of success given her prior history!
Bloviate on, Bloviator!
And who in the field did you support in the Anaheim election, San Echón?
Vern supported Kring in hopes of edging out Brandman. You supported who, Duane? How’d that work out? And after all the hard work that the Weekly did promoting his candidacy — you did do that, didn’t you? Whoops!
He got more votes per dollar spent than John Leos.
Yes, “votes per dollar spent” is surely a very important measure. It’s why I’m currently in the State Senate.
dude, that sounds like a little factoid that’s probably true.
unless you correspondingly subtract the hundreds of thousands spent to defeat John.
It’s also like saying “the tallest building in Topeka.”
I had the same reaction of being surprised of his transformation. As an outsider, I thought that it was a positive development. Did it help his political career? Of course it did. I doubt though that one single event repaired his political career. Did he take those leaders for a ride? Of course he did. He deceived them.
What transformation? There never was a transformation.
Some people were fooled that he had changed. Just like you and Gustavo and the El Centro activists were fooled that Ceci Iglesias was really pro-immigrant and progressive despite evidence she voted in 3 consecutive GOP primaries and pictures on her Congressional Campaign website with Ed Royce and Dana Rohrbacher. You pendejos can get off your high horse now.
Hey, let me know where and when I was ‘fooled’ by Ceci Iglesias! Any Salvadoran who loves Ronald Reagan is immediately suspect.
Have fun proving otherwise anonymous pendejo!
Loretta apologists in the house!
Gabriel, the LAT link that you provided illustrates what most people would consider a transformation:
“The Republican, who 14 years ago was dogged by controversy when the local GOP stationed guards at polling places in Latino neighborhoods to block suspected illegal immigrants from voting, stood shoulder to shoulder with Latino activists who once scorned him. Together, they advocated on behalf of Mexico-based Gigante, a supermarket trying to open in Anaheim amid resistance from city planners”
Ricardo: Anyone who actually believed Pringle ever “reformed” wasn’t had; they willfully ignored the truth, or are the most-naive pendejos imaginable. How chilling that those same pendejos now claim to represent the will of Anaheim…
Gustavo
Based on the LAT link posted above by Gabriel, I could see your point:
“Residents elected Pringle as their mayor — along with two Latino council members — ushering in what many say is a new beginning for a city that is now nearly 50% Latino.
Though Latinos did not turn out in droves to support Pringle, neither did they rally against him. An analysis of turnout in precincts dominated by Latino voters showed that no mayoral candidate emerged as the top choice.
“We have a renaissance here,” said Amin David, president of Los Amigos of Orange County, a Latino-rights group. “Curt Pringle did a masterful thing in the Gigante situation. It brought us into an arena that we never thought we’d be in together.”
Pringle cleverly neutralized or minimized the Latino opposition to him. Would he have lost the election otherwise?
Let’s assume that he would have lost, and that the Latino leaders willfully or naively are responsible for Pringle becoming Mayor. I have a great respect for Mr David but for the sake of the argument, let’s agree he is one of the responsible. Leaving aside all the moral judgments and personalities, including those of us who remained silent for whatever reasons, Los Amigos’ lawsuit is a valid one.
This is where I miss your point. Are you in favor or against the council district elections? Don’t we have disenfranchised communities? What is your vision of how to transform the politics and power in our city?
In rereading your story, you’ve also missed a crucial point: what the Los Amigos crowd did was resurrect Pringle’s political career. Again: none of you pendejos where around then, but his career was toast around Gigante. All Nativo, et al. had to do back then was bring up the poll guard scandal, the same poll guard scandal they love to bring up today, and Pringle probably wouldn’t have won against Kring, who had a better Anaheim presence then than he. But we know the rest of the story.
As for the Bloviator’s allegation of me going against Gigante for personal reasons: laughable. Ask your new bud Cynthia why she was against Gigante then. Unlike the Bloviator, we aren’t hacks for any politician—we only go with the truth.
Finally, Vern: it’s important to link Moreno to Gigante, because it’s his political mentors who fashioned that alliance with hell. Has Moreno ever condemned that? Nope. While you’re at it, ask him to tell you how he flat-out lied to Gabriel about how Los Amigos and him laughably tried to get me banned from giving a speech at Chapman!
I am taking your signature term “pendejo” in a friendly way. I hope that we will not end up calling each other “cabrones”. If that happens, ni modo. I still think that Pringle’s empire building did not necessarily require the cooperation of Latino community leaders. I was around, believe it or not. I remember meeting you when you were a young man at Chapman, at an open house for new students. My stepson decided to enroll, as there were Latinos like you studying there. I knew about Nativo as I volunteered for a while at the Hermandad Mexicana’s newspaper. I followed the Gigante developments through the media. I was not involved in anything at that time. I do not know what you were doing, but this is history. It is important to know and learn about history, but today’s challenges are more urgent.
I think you are a very talented person, and I say this sincerely, without being patronizing. You are a role model for many young Latinos. Having said that, I have a hard time understanding what it seems to me your pendejadas like being stuck with the Gigante, or with Dr Moreno. Whether he tried to get you banned or not at Chapman, OK you already punished him by making him the scariest person of the year in your paper, but it is silly to keep harping on it, and worst, questioning whether Latinos have been victimized or not just because Dr Moreno is one of the ACLU plaintiffs!
Rather than acting like a “prima donna”, use your talents and contacts to advance the concerns and needs of our community. Take your excellent book series at the Fullerton Library to a higher level. Organize a campaign of celebrities, writers, artists, musicians to make it more known and condemn the pillage of our city by Pringle & his associates, to demand a change in the APD insensitive culture against our gente, to start a massive voter registration campaign to get rid of the Jordans, Krings, Murrays, Eastmans, to bring good people to the council. Finish this campaign in the emblematic People’s park with a concierto de mariachis, salsa, cumbia., rancheras, reggae, hip hops ; musicians, painters, poets from all the walks of life, especially from our barrios and neighborhoods.
You can call me a pendejo, and a cabron. I do not like it, but I can take it.
How long before the vigilant “democrats” turn their back on the principles and “OUT” Jordan Brandman.
When they do, it could verywell provide a lashback (as opposed to “backlash”) and propel him further.
Keep eating your own.
I don’t comment on Jordan’s sexuality. (I have no independent confirmation from anyone that he even has any.) My first fight when I came onto this blog was with Art Pedroza for gay-baiting Jordan. Jordan has a good record, from what I’ve seen, on GLBT issues; I applaud him for that. Would he have a good record if it were 15 years ago? Well, there’s part of the problem.
I could give a shit if he likes dogs.
But, I get the suggestion. I don’t know how long, but, I’d bet that rage against this guy will build up to the point where he is personally attacked, including his sexuality (OK, the apron picture doesn’t help).
I think the point is that OC Democrats who supported this guy are disappointed with his apparent “about face”.
I would suggest that there were warnings, and even flat out accusations that Jordan Brandman was little more than a Pringle plant, an unqualified shill, and I think something like “A FLAT OUT FRAUD”. I’d have to look. But, I know his defenders were wide and bright. Which makes me question politically expedient motives by some.
As for his record, I can NOT imagine what kind of meaningful record one can build up while serving on the Anaheim Beautiful & Kiwanis Club of Greater Anaheim!
*I am sure I am going regret posting this, but I am bored at the orthopedists………
I have said it a thousand times.
These “progressive Dems” on the city council boards will sell the farm and the barn and the whole plantation out from under the people as long as they can easily participate in the brainwashing of the public that Gay Rights and Gun Control and “immigration reform” are what should define them. They don’t half to cultivate their own unique positions on immigration reform or any wedge issue, all they half to do is take their socially conscious marching orders from the DNC. and the liberal corporate media outlets. Distractions, especially at the municipal level.
Brandman and any potential Latino Candidates are likely to have the same platform. Only those that fall out of political party favor stand a chance of standing for something unique and truly independent and or progressive.
Anyone stupid enough to be involved in poll guard harassment of minorities around the turn of the 21th century should have been permanently disqualified in the mind of any reasonable voter. Why? Because there are too many other decent people. Why spend the effort hoping a person with such poor judgement reforms?
I’m all for redemption and second chances … but in that specific instance a person like this needs to redeem himself via another profession.
To any community “leader” in the Garden Grove / Anaheim area who speaks in terms of honoring these police Chiefs or Sheriffs: you have absolutely no idea what’s going on behind your backs. Your good intentions are causing more damage by adding a veneer of respectability to people who deserve none.
But … this doesn’t happen. The “many other decent people” don’t raise funds and run for office. So sometimes one is left with a choice where someone with a sordid past may actually be the best available option. Let’s bear in mind that we live in a county where a man who did pretty much the same thing as Pringle, William Rehnquist, became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States and stayed as such both before and after “around the turn of the 21st century.
Your final paragraph is too cryptic.
An American politician who engages in racial discrimination is equivalent to a doctor who molests a patient or a cop who causes deliberate harm while hiding behind his badge. Reform yourself if you can but not while practicing your current profession. The mistake is serious enough to exclude the “lesser of two evils consideration” in my opinion.
I have a tendency to embrace the impossible and make it possible. Ask the entirety of Orange County law enforcement. As community leaders, you should “make it happen”. Make a viable candidate happen.
“Make a viable candidate happen”? Fund our campaign apparatus and we will. Right now, money is the main hitch.
(Making that comment is almost like setting out a political maturity test. I hope that you pass.)