“A movie director told me, ‘You can be the next Cantinflas,’ ” he said, referring to Mario Moreno, a revered Mexican comic actor who died in 1993. “I just said ‘No, no, you’re missing the point. This is satire. Outrageousness mixed in with jarring truth.’ ”
Cantiflas was like Charlie Chaplin, actors who often portrayed the downtrodden in a humorous way. The quote above is from an interview that Gustavo gave to the NY Times in 2007. This interview sheds interesting lights on Gustavo’s personality that many times have driven us crazy. His talent at portraying the life of mostly Mexican immigrants and their assimilation to this country, highlighting the reactions and contradictions of our society, has been recognized at a national level.
Gustavo is so chingon that he is the mero mero editor of a newspaper, the Weekly, in a predominantly but fast fading hardcore Republican county. On top of that, he was born and raised in Mickey Mouse’s city. He makes us, la raza de Anaheim, very proud of him as he is a role model for our youngsters. He is the whole enchilada from one of our taquerias, but sometimes he tastes like a Taco Bell burrito.
It took until this month of July for Gustavo to clarify his position on the major contemporary civil rights issue in our city, which until then had made him yawn. I was lucky to find the statement of a professor in Chicana/o studies confirming from his perspective that the at large system clearly violates the voting rights of Latinos. I posted an excerpt of Dr Guerra’s hoping that our friends at the Weekly would read it, and get the message that supporting districts elections is the right thing to do.
I felt vindicated when Gustavo did come around, as I always felt that his heart is in the right place — although his support is kind of lukewarm because of …Los Amigos! Damn it! I agree with Gustavo that certain type of Latinos will be supported by one group or another, and we may end up with Solorios, Pulidos, Lou Correas or Murrays’s chosen types like Chavez Lodge… Disney/Pringle and its operatives may still control the council. On the optimistic side, we may end up with people genuinely representing the interests and needs of the community. At least the playing field could be a little more even.
I do blame Los Amigos for pissing off Gustavo, not so much because of the Gigante and Pringle fiasco, but because of this:
“I don’t see the humor in the way he describes our culture,” said Amin David (in the 2007 NYT article), president of Los Amigos of Orange County, a civil rights group. “He’s feeding the prurient interest of people who are against Mexicans.”
I finally found the real reasons of Gustavo’s grudge against Los Amigos! Old Amin David did not understand the generational gap, and what came across as a lack of respect was just another way of looking at the Latino experience. That was the wrong thing to say to Gustavo, a nerdy guy, who often acts like a prima donna, by definition a temperamental talented person unwilling to work as a part of a team, unless he/she is in charge or recognized as the star.
Since then, we have been under a curse, any Latino who dares to match or exceed Gustavo’s achievements and is associated with Los Amigos, is a candidate for the “scariest person of the year’” — and to become an untrustworthy political figure. This happened to the current president of Los Amigos, Dr Moreno, who is blamed for trying to keep Gustavo for participating in an event at his Chapman Alma Mater, plus proposing to honor the retiring Chief of Police, and now his alleged involvement in the controversial transferring of a popular school administrator.
We are cursed, messed up. We eat each other up and stay divided.
This would be funny, but it isn’t. The most meaningful challenge to the power held by the “whitest man alive” and his associates is the Voting Rights lawsuit, filed by Los Amigos. This group has for years been advocating for changes on behalf of our community, and correctly or incorrectly made political alliances with the relevant players. In the meantime, others like me and Gustavo were silent.
I am an amateur blogger, so I don’t matter — but Gustavo does. Although he states that he has” fought Pringle and his minions longer and harder than anyone else,” he would not for a while write about Anaheim:
“I try to not write about Anaheim politics… — the anger that accumulated over the years about what’s going on rendered me silent.”
This desire to protect relatives and friends is understandable. What is not acceptable is to condemn the people who were doing something to change the system and hold a grudge against them forever, even if the grudge is legitimate.
We don’t have to like every person or groups, but on certain issues there is a common ground. To question whether Latinos have been victimized or not as a minority group, as Gustavo did in one of his recent tirades against Dr Moreno, goes beyond of the personal animosity between them and makes a mockery of the disenfranchisement of our community.
To claim “fighting Pringle longer and harder” but you were silent for a significant amount of time, or to “truly caring about minority representation” but then questioning whether Latinos have been victimized or not, is Cantinflas at his worst. One of the Cantinflas trademark ability was his communication skills to confuse others and get away from embarrassing, contradictory situations or not say anything coherent at all.
Being the editor of the Weekly is a position of influence. If its editor were a white guy, I would have been crying foul for the excessive negative portrayal of Latinos as criminals, and for the sexist depiction of women. Gustavo knows what he is doing, it is not all his call after all, as he must be following the parent’s company business model. A critique of the Weekly no longer being an alternative paper was already done by UCI professor Jon Wiener in 2007. Some of this critique is still valid.
Gustavo’s advocacy — within the limits of journalism, which is by nature expected to be objective — is appreciated. The question is what to think when that advocacy is confusing, manipulative, and does not help to change what is wrong.
At the end, Gustavo’s status of celebrity based on his talent to portray the life and experiences of immigrants falls short of making profound contributions to change the life of this population as a whole. The pro-democracy movement in Anaheim is entering a crucial stage, and the support of everybody is needed. I hope that Gustavo gets engaged in this movement. As the chant in the meetings of the organizations supporting the lawsuit: It is time Anaheim! ¡Si se puede!
What about the babosos blogueros? Local blogs would never pretend that they are going to replace professional media, like the Weekly or Voice of OC. As long as the operators of the blogs are transparent on what they represent, they are a democratic tool in the sense that allows anybody with access to the Internet, to express our opinions.
If you do not like a particular one, say so and move on; do not keep saying “I will not dignify or add to the traffic to this shitty blog” — and then keep coming right back. The editors/operators of the blogs should be responsible and sensitive when covering issues impacting our immediate community. Otherwise they are indeed going to come across as babosos.
*One thing that is rather disturbing about our dear friend Arellano is his appearance on Rick Rieff…So Cal Connected. You have to be sold out to Chapman to get on that
show. Rick is totally not the right deal for a good law abiding illegal immigrant who cares about the environment. Even for a legal immigrant that cares about Mexicans!
Actually, Ron and Anna, Ol’ Rick had me on before, during, and after Chapman banned me from campus. And I ain’t an immigrant…
I am too afraid to comment.
This screams for a cartoon of a naked skinny little Gustavo, complete with receding hairline and cheesy hipster glasses, pecking(!) away at his typewriter!
Nah — you’d have to be pretty low to do that sort of thing to someone!
Sorry, but no one does a caricature of me better than Lalo Alcaraz—but the Bloviator sure as hell can try. After all, he has no life…
Just heard from Lalo today. What a guy…
“Has no life” is such a weird insult — especially from someone whom I’ve never met and most of whose knowledge of me seems completely made up. But if that’s your best shot, Gustavo, I understand why you’d have to take it.
Ricardo: If you’re going to find critiques of the Weekly than still stand, better investigate them. While Jon did have problems with us in 2007, we’ve long made up, and he’s had me and other Weeklings on his KPFK show many times.
I have no idea why you’d cite Amin’s 2007 quote as the reason I have a problem with Los Amigos. I’ve written it before—from the moment they slandered Duane Roberts’ good name for daring to expose Don Garcia as a carpetbagger, I have not trusted him or Los Amigos. Does that mean they’re evil? No. But they’re hardly the altruistic saints they portray themselves to be.
And while I’m for district elections, they’re not going to solve the problems that currently afflict Anaheim as long as they become the playthings of the Republicans and Democrats, which is definitely going to happen. I’m definitely lukewarm to the ACLU lawsuit because it’s based on distorted history that Los Amigos and others on this blog actively engage in—and I will not play ball with such pendejos.
I’m glad that Gustavo hasn’t denied my assertions about him holding grudges — because the conflict over Garcia is over a decade old.
Roberts and Los Amigos had both been supporters of Garcia’s campaign before Roberts shifted his position. I’m not sure what Amin David would have said that “slandered Duane Roberts’ [sic] good name” as opposed to insulting him and his priorities. (I tend to doubt, from personal experience, that Gustavo has much of an idea of what “slander” entails.) But I can tell you this: if this is really what has driven Gustavo towards contempt for Los Amigos and Moreno, he’s a hypocrite.
Why? Mimi Walters in 2012.
This humble blog offered story after story after story after story after story discussing Walters’s sham residence in Irvine during the six weeks before the 2012 election. Garcia at least had an argument that he had a place to live in Anaheim, he had lived there, and planned to return there — pretty much what you need for a domicile. And, of course, his case stopped at the DA’s office, where so many righteous causes go to die. Walters, however, had rented an empty apartment in what she wanted to be her new district, never lived there, lied about she and her family having left their Laguna Niguel mansion for a small Irvine apartment. Her opponent, Steve Young, filed a big old well-researched lawsuit in Sacramento, which went to a hearing, which stated that it was left to the State Senate itself to judge her qualifications — which, a bit scandalously, they just waved at and grunted. This was a deception that on its face looks as bad or worse as the accusation made by Roberts against Garcia — and the Weekly’s coverage of it, in a much more significant and high-profile race than an Anaheim School Board?
Nothing. From what I can tell from searching their website using queries such as “Mimi 2012” and “Mimi Irvine,” not a peep — about a story that was being covered statewide. (And Steve Young put a lot more into his investigation than Roberts did into his — although Roberts did an admirable job given his resources.)
Slamming someone (and participating in attempts to slur him) because he’s not a purely “altruistic saint” is the mark of a political coward. Gustavo would not hold himself, or anyone else whom he actually likes, up to such a standard. Politics is impure; in one’s associations and one’s endorsements, if nothing else, one will end up on the side of some “lesser evils.” If one truly think that purity is all that matters, as someone as quixotic as Duane does, then it can still be admirable. But Gustavo lies down with dogs all of the time — starting with his employer. Claiming a moral purity that prevents him from associating with anyone less pure is just a way of evading responsibility for anything that is tried and doesn’t turn out to be an unalloyed good.
Damn right, district elections won’t be a cure-all — but they’ll be better. Politics is about better. Disdaining serious reform because it can’t be proven to be better enough is stupid and cowardly — unless you don’t actually give a damn in the first place. So maybe that is Gustavo’s most effective defense for his squatting on the sidelines while people like Moreno do the real work.
As usual, the Bloviator just bloviates while making no points and further embarrassing himself with his bloviating. You want to talk about grudges? Go ask Los Amigos about Duane. Coverage of Mimi? You ain’t looking hard enough. Becoming an apologist for carpetbaggers? BRAVO. Excusing—again—the cutting deals with devils like Pringle? HA! Keep trying to twist the past, Bloviator, but you weren’t around—Duane and I were. You and Jose keep trying to paint Richard Chavez as somehow being aligned with corporate interests when he was elected—those of us who know the truth will continue to laugh our asses off, and laugh even harder at your bloviating out of the shit pits that you dig for yourself.
As usual, Gustavo hopes that calling names and making unsupported assertions will prove to readers that he’s right.
Yeah, you’ve covered Mimi. You didn’t covered her residency issues that cropped up in Sept. 2012 — when the coverage mattered. If carpetbagging was such a huge issue for you, you would have been all over the story.
Deals are cut with political opponents all of the time when interests coincide. You really don’t know this?
Los Amigos supported Chavez, according to your quotes, in 2002. That may mean as little as that he was the best available candidate at the time (and in getting the “first” of any group elected some allowances may be made for policy differences.) If it later turned out that when in office he was too aligned to the business interests, then it’s fine to say so. What may have been obvious in 2006 may not have been obvious in 2002.
That much insulting, especially when I’m rebutting you point for point, is usually the sign of a weak argument. Or, in your case, seven of them.
Greg Diamond wrote:
> Roberts and Los Amigos had both been supporters of Garcia’s
> campaign before Roberts shifted his position. I’m not sure what
> Amin David would have said that “slandered Duane Roberts’ [sic]
> good name” as opposed to insulting him and his priorities.
> (I tend to doubt, from personal experience, that Gustavo has much
> of an idea of what “slander” entails.)
Greg, I’m not going to sit here and waste my time trying to school you about everything that happened over a decade ago, but prominent members of Los Amigos of Orange County did try to wage a dirty smear campaign against me for filing a criminal complaint against Dr. Don Garcia with the Orange County District Attorney’s Office. I have evidence to back this.
One person who tried to do that was the wife of a person who was then-Amin David’s right hand man back then. She was quoted in the media as saying I was “stalking” Dr. Garcia’s children, even suggesting I was “child murderer.” I thought about filing a slander lawsuit, but didn’t bother primarily because the whole thing backfired and destroyed her credibility.
Additionally, Dr. Garcia, while under investigation by the District Attorney, tried to make the same case against me at Los Amigos meetings, with David’s blessing. Dr. Garcia later filed a bogus criminal complaint against me with the Newport Beach Police Department saying I was “stalking” his family at his Corona Del Mar residence. The police report is in my files.
I was interviewed by a Newport Beach Police detective regarding this matter (who I freely spoke to without the benefit of a lawyer being present). It was an interesting discussion because I also talked about other possible corrupt activities by three other Democratic Party politicians linked to Dr. Garcia. The case was closed rather quickly.
If anyone has a grudge, it should be me. The ironic thing is I don’t feel angry about what happened. I’m glad I went through this “trial by fire” because it toughened me up. I do admit, however, that I will not talk with David for any reason whatsoever. If he is at a social function, I will completely ignore him. I just pretend he doesn’t exist.
Now you may think I have a grudge against Dr. Jose Moreno, but I don’t. All of what I described occurred before Moreno’s time. Does that mean I’m not cautious of him? No. He has faults. But I deal with him in diplomatic manner. For your information, I spoke briefly with him last week at a meeting I attended in downtown Anaheim.
To be quite frank with you, I personally did not want to resurrect this old story about me, David, and Los Amigos of Orange County partly because I have much bigger fish to fry. And you wouldn’t like it at all if I started posting some of the files I have on this and related matters since it would expose the unethical and dirty dealings of the local Democratic Party.
“To be quite frank with you, I personally did not want to resurrect this old story about me, David, and Los Amigos of Orange County partly because I have much bigger fish to fry.”
Take that up with Gustavo, Duane. He acts like the 90’s happened yesterday.
Vern Nelson wrote:
> Take that up with Gustavo, Duane. He acts like the 90′s
> happened yesterday.
Greg Diamond is making a big issue of it.
I forget that you just walked in.
” it would expose the unethical and dirty dealings of the local Democratic Party.”
So WHY should those get a ‘pass’? I thought everybody here is all about better Government, or did I just find the ‘sucker’ (ME) at the card table?
Yeah, let it all out, Duane. This is the time and place.
Duane apparently can’t imagine someone in the Democratic Party hierarchy actually not wanting this party to engage in “unethical and dirty dealings.” I’ve loudly criticized Tom Daly’s hiring and then giving a sweetheart consulting contract to Jordan Brandman, for one example, so I don’t see why he would find it surprising. However, Duane’s version of what is unethical may differ from mine; I consider, for example, splitting the vote to hand over a seat that would otherwise go to a decent Democrat to a corrupt Republican — thereby hurting the interests of the people I purport to want to help — to be unethical.
My bet is that, if I had all of the facts, I’d agree with you that you weren’t “stalking” his family, but “stalking” is a nebulous term. I’d need to know more about why they said that about you.
I don’t know if Gustavo really “holds a grudge” about what happened to you in 2002 or so — or whether he’s grasping at straws.
We all have faults, you and me and GSR and Vern and Gustavo included. But we should also all be willing and able to take cogent criticism.
Post your files as you please, Duane. I’m part of the reform faction of the local Democratic Party. I hope that most of the political actors in the party (with the exception of some who are obvious lost causes) have done nothing seriously wrong — but if they have, then that just strengthens my case for internal reform.
I will note, though, that what you consider “unethical and dirty dealings” from the standpoint of one who intentionally stands outside of the two-party system — and suffers the consequence of an inability to elect people or influence policy from the inside — may strike even a party insurgent like me as merely “unappetizing.” Electoral politics, far more than issue politics, often means making uneasy and transient alliances in order to get things done. Only someone childish, uninterested in outcomes, and very interested in being able to squawk and howl about how bad everyone is — I speak here not of you, but of your friend Gustavo — would consider such temporarily alliances a basis to damn someone permanently. Then again, I suspect that he’s perfectly fine with progressives not actually making it into office; gives him more to write about. That’s why he mouthed support for your own campaign but did not do anything of note to try to elect you.
The German Green Party (the most electorally successful in the world, I believe) has a term: “beautiful losers.” One can afford to be a beautiful loser if one doesn’t actually care that much about changing government for the better on behalf of those one purports to serve.
I don’t get the big push for district voting – Anaheim is only 28% non-Hispanic white. When it comes to a voting block, minorities should kick-ass on whitey.
If you’d have read my series on the Demographer’s Report rather than complaining that it was too much work (or whatever your excuse was at the time), you’d understand why 72% of the total population doesn’t do the trick.
Give me the short of it – in 300 words or less. If you can’t do that you will not be able to convince anyone else either.
Many are minors or non-citizens (mostly green-card or visa holders) who nonetheless get representation where they reside (per the Supreme Court.) They aren’t yet a majority of voters.
Anaheim’s Latinos are disproportionately not eligible voters. Many are under 18, many are permanent residents or visa holders. The Supreme Court says that as residents they still get political representation. They’re not yet a voting majority.
And many reside in Anaheim illegally. The Supreme Court did not say that non-citizens get to vote – they are counted in the census, that’s about it.
Everyone agrees that they don’t get to vote. But — does the census have any role in drawing political district lines?
Before Mayor Bloomberg disbanded it (the school board) in the early part of this century, New Yorkers were allowed to vote for school board in New York City.
Efforts to broaden this have fallen flat, but, I have LONG advocated this in my city, Santa Ana. By allowing non-citizens to have a voice in therir childrens education we could keep people like Roman Reyna and Rob Richardson, childless politicans from affecting policy germaine to children. I will give Noji a break because she has a PHd in education. I might too consider giving Moreno a pass if he is childless and on the school board if he were to have “pedigree”.
Non-citizens while voteless, don’t have to be voiceless, on this I agree with Diamond. I am frightened however to the degree to which these uneducated, disenfranchised voters are manipulated.
*Arelano…..amazing how popular you are! Hey, we bought both of your books BEFORE you were somebody. Would love to have you autograph them sometime.
Probably will be able to trade them for a Mickey Mantle team jersey….
Anyway…what did mom say….as long as they are talking about you…..it can’t be all bad! Just don’t go on Rick Rieff’s program….he is so paid off. But then guess people do have to do something for a living.
Gustavo: I believe that Jon Wiener still stands on his analysis that the Weekly is no longer an alternative paper. He has invited OC Weeklies to his radio programs, because you and your staff have written good descriptive articles.
One of the features of an alternative paper is to have a political project, or support one, that challenges the dominance of the politically and economically powerful elites. The excerpt below is how a former LA Weekly writer describes the change:
“The city’s biggest problem was the erosion of the middle class and the creation of a huge class of full-time workers who were still poor,” he told me. “That’s why we covered unions and plant closings and Justice for Janitors and the Living Wage campaign. The affluent West Side needed to know what LA had become–and how it could be fixed.” Now that focus is gone. In its place the Weekly features gotcha-style hit pieces targeting the city’s elite, left and right, without any larger perspective on the possible futures of LA. ”
Read more: End of an Era at the LA Weekly | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/end-era-la-weekly#ixzz2ZStkDg86
The second excerpt below is from a local blogger, who you may consider less or as bad as Greg Diamond or worst, on their criticism of the Weekly, to illustrate my point about being good on describing, but not on creating the change being described.
Jon invited you on: Orange County Republicans: the doomsday scenario. The white-hot heart of the GOP outside the South is Orange County, California; and yet it was in Orange County that Republicans lost the key state assembly seat that gave Democrats a supermajority in Sacramento. GUSTAVO ARELLANO will explain — he’s editor-in-chief of the OC Weekly, where Scott Moxley’s cover story on the GOP appears this week.
This is the second excerpt:
“But let’s be honest, Gustavo rarely has a positive thing to say about anyone in politics and the Weekly has become the only alt-weekly in the nation where the only thing liberal about it is the ads and Dan Savage’s column (pointing out the demise of the OC GOP or the idiotic ramblings of Dana Rohrabacher is simply stating the obvious).”
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2013/01/03/a-candidates-profile-henry-vandermeir-for-dpoc-chair/
I apologize I don’t have the time to participate in the conversation in a more timely manner. I will address your other comments about Los Amigos later. Buenas noches.
Greg Diamond – “Anaheim’s Latinos are disproportionately not eligible voters. Many are under 18, many are permanent residents or visa holders. The Supreme Court says that as residents they still get political representation. They’re not yet a voting majority.”
skallywag aka creepyasscracker – “And many reside in Anaheim illegally. The Supreme Court did not say that non-citizens get to vote – they are counted in the census, that’s about it.”
Greg Diamond – “Everyone agrees that they don’t get to vote. But — does the census have any role in drawing political district lines?”
Nope – no official role – the census only counts people – crooked politicians gerrymander the districts.
First, you’re wrong about the role of the Census. It results are what allows us to determine how many people live where so that we can equalize the size of the districts. That’s why we have rediistricting in years right after the Census is published.
Second, in California, in state legislative races, we have a citizen’s commission draw the lines rather than gerrymandering.
You cited the census as if it had some official direct role in drawing district boundaries – it does not.
Most states do not have citizen’s commissions do the gerrymandering – and this recent state commission did as fine a job of gerrymandering as any crooked politicians could do.
I may sound dumb but who is this guy you speak of & why is he famous? Where did you get all these things you say & quote? I need to be educated I guess. …..
He’s the “Go-to Latino” for Anglo reporters far and wide. They’re comfortable with his incessant self-promotion and self-serving libertarianism.
If you mean Cantinflas, he was a famous Mexican comic actor (and more.)
@ Mr. Greg Diamon,
As i follow your great commentaries, views, and points, i am a bit puzzled and i find myself to ask you, what do you mean by Self-Serving Libertarianism? I must say I am intrigued with your postings but would you please elaborate a bit more on the latter?
I call him a “libertarian” because his political philosophy is libertarianism.
This has been expressed repeatedly and in various ways, including, I am informed, a choice to cast his protest vote in the 2012 Presidential Election for the libertarian candidate for the Libertarian Party ticket of former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson and OC’s Judge James Gray rather than for the Justice Party ticket of Former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson and acclaimed Californian Latino author Luis Rodriguez (who is running for Governor as a Green Party candidate against, among others, Judge Gray.)
I call him “self-serving” not only due to the inordinate amount of time this thin-skinned insult comic puts into nursing his own personal grudges, but because as the “Go-to Latino” for Anglo media interested in a take on Latino politics, Arellano will generally turn the conversation into a promotion for his rag, his books, his appearances, or more broadly his “piss on both sides” persona rather than taking the risk of addressing the issues as a thoughtful analyst rather than a comic gadfly. I can’t figure out who else he might be serving except himself, the people who pay him, and the libertarians. It sure isn’t Latinos generally (comparatively few of whom are libertarian.)
He has his good points, too — he’s funny and he does skewer racism, especially when it happened a long time ago — but what comes through most clearly (and what I think is in some ways appealing to established news outlets) — is that he is sure to be inoffensive to people with power because he is so clearly on the make. He’s also a good choice if you want a Latino who will take libertarian positions slamming Latino civil rights leaders whose focus on securing courtoom victories, supporting economic restructuring and fairness, and serving the needs of the least empowered makes him yawn.
(Note to Gustavo: hadn’t planned on writing about you today either — but someone asked.)
@Mr. Diamond,
thank your for you clear illustration! I really like this “broadly his “piss on both sides” persona rather than taking the risk of addressing the issues as a thoughtful analyst rather than a comic gadfly”…
Gustavo is famous due to his newspaper column called ¡Ask a Mexican! “The column now appears in 37 newspapers across the country and has a weekly circulation of over 2 million.[3] Arellano has won numerous awards for the column, including the 2006 and 2008 Best Non-Political Column in a large-circulation weekly from the Association of Alternative Newsweeklies, the 2007 Presidents Award from the Los Angeles Press Club and an Impacto Award from the National Hispanic Media Coalition, and a 2008 Latino Spirit award from the California Latino Legislative Caucus.” (Wikipedia)
He is a journalist and a writer, not an actor. His references to Cantinflas appeared here :http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/24/fashion/24mexican.
The quotes regarding his views on Anaheim are from several articles in the OC Weekly. After the riots he wrote the Anaheim’s Tragic Kingdom, stating that “the anger that accumulated over the years about what’s going on rendered me silent.” An article about the current situation is “Hearing Today Over Lawsuit Asking for Anaheim District Elections-YAWN ”
The quote about former Mayor and powerful lobbyist Pringle appeared in a conversation in another thread of this blog: “We at the Weekly have fought Pringle and his minions longer and harder than anyone else, and we’ll continue to do so. I support district elections, but they’re being done solely to support a certain type of Latino—those blessed by Los Amigos, et al. That is disingenuous, and I will not stand by that. These are the same people who told us to vote for John Leos for chrissakes.
… the best advocacy I can do is through journalism, and that is what I’ll continue to do, as I’ve always have.”
VR YOLO….