(As I may have mentioned, I’m going into the hospital for hernia surgery this morning and I don’t know when I’ll be back online. So I’m setting this to be published several hours after I’m supposed to be up and around, even though I expect that I’ll be sleeping steeped in pain medication for much of the day.)
It has recently come to public attention, in a couple of those political blogs that mama told you not to read, that while First Supervisorial District candidate Andrew Do was unanimously endorsed by the OC Republican Party, former State Senator Lou Correa was only “endorsed” by the Democratic Party of Orange County. That is, the vote to endorse him was not unanimous. Several people — we don’t know how many — didn’t vote for his being endorsed, but only one actively voted against it — and that was me.
I think that before I go “under the knife,” as it were, I should offer an explanation.
First, one subtle point: The vote before us was not as to whether Lou Correa should be elected. It was as to whether Lou Correa should receive the official endorsement of the Democratic Party of Orange County for that office. If there were no other reasonable candidate, I would not have shown up that night to vote, but there was — a “Tom Tait” style Republican that we could not endorse, due to party rules, but that we also did not have to ignore. I didn’t see much difference ideologically between Lou Correa and Garden Grove Councilman Chris Phan — both are moderates — except that Phan seemed less extremely devoted to the wrong side of some issues that I found obnoxious. (You can read the interview I did with him to get a better sense of the man.)
In short, Lou Correa was not devoted to supporting issues normally associated with the Democratic Party — and certainly not the progressive wing of it. (Call it “the Liz Warren wing,” if you wish; for me, it will always be named after Paul Wellstone.) Not cooperating with the progressive wing of the party is Correa’s own choice to make. His choice. The question is whether his making the “anti-Left” choice should, or should not, come with a cost.
That cost was not whether he was going to receive the Democratic endorsement; it was as to whether he was going to receive that endorsement unanimously — without one dissenting vote.
Under the circumstances where Correa has routinely engaged in what some of us at Daily Kos generally call “hippie punching,” fixing a shit-eating grin to one’s face and giving Correa completely free pass seemed to be a step too far. It’s one thing to endorse someone; it’s another to act like a terrorized victim pretending to the outside world that there’s nothing wrong. Sometimes, a statement must be made: that statement is not necessarily “I want Correa to lose,” but “we can’t pretend that this is really uncontroversial and perfectly all right.”
So I voted against his endorsement. When there was a motion to pass the endorsement by “acclamation” — essentially, telling the world that this was a unanimous vote — I objected to that as well. (Some people, my sense was that this included the Chair, did not quite get the idea that you can’t have both a split vote and acclamation; I had to explain to the body the concept of what a dissenting vote means more than once.
The process of considering the endorsement was, how shall I say this, a bit rushed. As the only one of the speakers to oppose endorsing Correa out loud, I had been given 60 seconds, total, to make a speech explaining my opposition to nominating him. This was, of course, impossible — I got the boldfaced heading below out and little more.
Here’s what I said: Lou Correa shoudn’t receive the Democratic endorsement for this position because he had:
Bringing longtime independent into the Democratic Party Dr. Marino was a big “get” this year for the DPOC; it came about as a result of the leadership that we had shown in the fight for real district elections in Anaheim — a fight led by party activists like Jeff LeTourneau, Gloria Alvarado, Carina Franck-Pantone, and , if I may say so, myself. As I wrote a long time ago, activating the Latino communities in North, Central, South, and West Anaheim is a major key to promoting both the Democratic Party and its liberal wing throughout the county. And I was very proud that this “man of the people” had become the Democratic party’s endorsed candidate in the Anaheim city council election. Sure, given how hard we had worked to integrate Dr. Moreno and his following into the party, that would be respected, right?
Alas, not so fast. Correa had, I’m told, given Moreno his endorsement — and I was impressed; maybe change really was in the air. (Moreno wouldn’t have the money to get the message out, as Correa surely knew, but it was still a good gesture on Correa’s part. Then he undermined it — one could even say undid it — and more.)
The weekend before the election, the best time to reach Latino voters (who tend to vote in person rather than by mail), a flyer was mailed out out to Democratic voters, who were likely looking for more guidance from local Democratic officials about who to support for city Council. That flyer featured Jordan Brandman flat-out endorsing Moreno’s “Pringle Ring” opponents Gail Eastman and Kris Murray. Correa had some very positive things about their uncompromising pro-police positions in support of the police — a highly charged issue in the Latino communities where people accuse police of shooting young Latino men without justification, with impunity, and (in at least one high-profile case) of planting a gun near the dead youth’s body to justify the use of deadly force.
I realize that we don’t expect Democratic politicians to take positions as radical as many activists about excessive use of force by police — but I sure didn’t expect the exact opposite from Correa — something that flew in the face of what the DPOC (well, at least parts o the DPOC, was trying to do. I don’t know exactly how much this flyer helps the two Republican women and harmed Dr. Moreno — but it clearly went against the intended direction of the Democratic Party and undercut it’s strategy with Latino voters. It was a slap in the face to the Left. It was not, in my opinion, the sort of thing that one wanted to reward uncritically.
3) Betrayed Dave Jones / Prop 46
(I’ve written about this before, but it’s been a while.) Proposition 46, which would have given the Insurance Commissioner the ability to block unjustified increases in the costs of health insurance premiums, should not have even had to come to the ballots. The current (and newly reelected Insurance Commissioner, Dave Jones, had sent the bill to the legislature more than once when he was a member — during the Schwarzenegger Administration and then again during the Brown Administration. When Arnold was the Governor, Correa supported the bill — and easy vote given that Arnold was sure to veto it. When Jerry Brown was elected governor, and was considered likely to sign such a bill, Correa — who has received substantial funding from medical insurers, doctors, and hospitals — switched to opposition to the bill. (This was in the form of an abstention, but those of him and several similarly situated colleagues were enough to kill it.) Typifying the stereotype that many have of democratic officeholders, he had wanted to take a safe progressive only so long as it would not irritate his donors by turning into an actual progressive policy. That makes it really hard to get people activated. And this was a critical bill — people die for lack of decent medical coverage.
4) Belittled and helped to scuttle statewide single-payer — with an extraordinary explanation
When a bill for statewide single-payer health insurance came to the legislature and early 2013 — a relatively popular democratic position in California both for its simplicity and its likely cost savings — Correa was among those who led the charge against it. He said that the high cost of medical care was not a priority in his district – despite the large number of uninsured there. This is the sort of thing that both the smarter (“your party’s no better than mine”) Republicans and the raucous Lefts like to site to show that Democrats ain’t worth crap. Again — did we want to endorse the author of such a statement unanimously, or was there room — even demand — for a symbolic protest?
5) Major support for private prisons
To me, Correa’s uncritical support for police — “my police force, right or wrong!” — is troubling, but is not all that unusual. I think that voters in poorer communities may not like it, but they understand it. What they don’t understand is why Correa has been a strong supporter of the prison guards lobby — especially when it comes to support for private prisons, which need a constant influx of new inmates to maintain their profitability, whether or not it actually makes logical sense to send them to prison — not to mention whether it makes fiscal sense. I understand why the Building Trades what to build things regardless of whether the public really needs it; I tend to disagree with them in most such cases — largely because I think that there are other untried options, but I do get the logic of it. That sort of philosophy becomes far more heinous when we’re not just talking about building a train station or expanding a convention center, but literally taking people away from their families and putting them in children even if that is not the best policy alternative for reducing crime just because it creates more jobs for more prison guards. That is simply morally wrong. The excuse for many of the DPOC members voting on the endorsement is that they probably had no idea that this sort of thing goes one — but while that is an excuse, it is also a lousy excuse if you wand to see people do their due diligence as party members.
6) Alienating Latinos and Sympathetic Liberals
Voters are not vending machines; a party can’t expect to stick 75 cents for a mailer into their house and expect a vote to come out. For a significant size of the electorate — particularly those to whom other people come for advice and who actually do activate others enough to vote rather than slack off — the sorts of positions you see above really do matter. Correa has been an elected leader in Latino areas of the County for a long time — and those areas have lousy turnout. If it were Joe Dunn, Julio Perez, Dr. Moreno, and some similar others in power, it stands to reason that we might already have the higher Latino voter participation that has been predicted for the future. Lou Correa is Latino, but is he bringing out Latinos? It will be interesting to compare how Correa and Phan (who has a lot of Latino allies in Garden Grove) perform in Latino districts. If in Latino districts a Vietnamese Republican who seems likely to listen to the community can outpoll a Latino Democrat who, ahem, perhaps doesn’t, then the folly of blindly following Correa without making ideological demands on him will be fully apparent. As a Democrat, even one who likes Phan personally, it just kills me that the person who figures out how to unlock the Latino vote may be a Republican. That would be a level of failure almost beyond imagining.
7) “Stabbing Labor in the Front”
Former Orange County Labor Federation head Tefere Gebre used to have a hilarious line contrasting Lou Correa favorable to another local politician who he considered a double-dealer and double-crosser. I’m going to clean it up a bit and tell it this way: This other politician would regularly speak nice to Labor’s face and then stab Labor in the back, while Lou was good enough to tell Labor exactly what he thought and “stab labor in the front.” I can see the merit and well as the humor in that argument, but let’s keep something in mind: wouldn’t it be better to have a candidate who would not stab Labor at all? This doesn’t mean always agreeing with Labor; it means agreeing with Labor on “existential issues,” working to enforce workplace safety and wage laws, and looking kindly on Labor’s reasonable proposals. (They’re not all reasonable. They’re not supposed to be. If they were, then Labor would get kicked around just like an attorney whose initial demand is only exactly the amount that he or she thinks they are able to get. It’s not a problem to let one’s reach exceed one’s grasp; it’ a problem when that becomes more than a negotiating tactic.) If you look at Chris Phan’s description of what he’d do regarding Labor, it seems pretty reasonable — and, frankly, by being reasonable seems more likely to lead to useful consensus on the Board that someone who sells himself as an “agent of Labor” (even though he really isn’t.)
8) He Won’t Stick Around in Office
Phan argues in his OJB interview that Correa won’t stick around in office when a new office — like, oh, say, Congress or Attorney General — opens up. (After all, Lou did it before in 2006.) This bothers me less than it does Phan; it’s pretty much an occupation hazard of voting. Yes, Phan says that he’d stay put, but if Correa won’t make the same commitment — or if he will, but won’t really mean it — well, such things happen.
It does affect whether he warrants an endorsement, though. The main reason that so many in DC are willing to endorse Correa uncritically is that it ends the humiliation that Democrats have felt since Tom Umberg lost the race to Janet Nguyen and another Nguyen in early 2007. Now there would be a Democrat on the Board of Supervisors again!!! — for all that one vote from a non-Chair matters. But if he’s likely to move on, then that advantage will be short-lived.
With respect — and I do very much respect many of the people who chose to vote to endorse Correa — I don’t think that it’s right to be motivated to support Correa to prove that we aren’t screwing up. If what we’re doing in the Latino areas of the county does stink, then air freshener only hides the problem. We need to work with people like Moreno, like Perez, like Alvarado — like Eric Altman, who led the “Yes on L and M” campaigns to a stunning (in the case of L) victory in Anaheim — to figure out how we can be different in a way that activates the Latino community, that gives us a stake in what we’re doing. We were, I believe, well on the way to doing so before DPOC Chair Henry Vandermier fired LeTourneau as head of the DPOC’s Resolutions Committee — more activist than the rest of the party put together in 2013 — and replaced him with the connected, cautious, and conservative on non-Labor issues Ray Cordova, under whom the committee has stalled.
If we are doing a lousy job in these communities — and in 2014, I think, we have been, especially given the weaker-than-should-have-been support for Dr. Moreno outside DPOC’s own meetings (which sadly is too large a portion of what many DPOC members perceive of their organization — we should not be papering it over. If we do, we will keep on not doing better in our Latino communities.
9) Should Correa Become Loretta’s “Heir Apparent” if she does run for U.S. Senate?
This last reason, following from the previous one, is truly “realpolitik” — and I fear that it is the fundamental reason that ranks have closed so decisively behind Lou Correa — especially among the “Business Democrat” portion of the party. Monday’s vote was, in part, the first indication of who we might see as the successor to Loretta Sanchez if she moves on, for example by running for the U.S. Senate seat that Barbara Boxer now seems likely to abandon.
Loretta Sanchez’s seat is the “big prize” on which many people have set their eyes in the medium to long term — or, sometimes it seems, in the short term as well. Loretta gave everyone something to think about when she said over the weekend that she would certainly consider running for Boxer’s seat if she retired. (Good politics on Loretta’s part. Keep her name out there and head someone like Anthony Villaraigosa off at the pass.)
The “Business Democrat” faction of the party — which, let’s get something straight, I do like much more than the Business Republican sector of that party, although the Reform Republican faction also has much to recommend it — would love to see someone like Correa, or Jose Solorio, or Miguel Pulido, or Tom Daly, or Jordan Brandman — take over Loretta seat. I have had my differences with Loretta, but by and large I respect her very much. The shots at her smarts seem like juvenile sexism; her weakness is more that she tends to shoot from the hip, but that is also part of her charm (to which I realize that my Republican friends are immune.) Any of those names would be a substantial step down.
The sorts of names I’d like to see would be a Julio Perez, Jose Moreno, Joe Dunn — but Dunn is unlikely to run and the others (thanks in part to being hamstrung by the dominant faction in our party) haven’t been able to get the elected job experience they’d need to make such a leap — and they would also probably be more vulnerable ideologically in CA-46. In between these groups are several others — Sharon Quirk-Silva, Bao Nguyen (in a few years), and some others — who can show both the moderation and the resume that it would take to win, especially if the Latino areas in the district can be better activated.
This, I’m afraid, is that the battle whose first shot was fired on Monday night is really about in the long term. My sense is that the Business Democratic wing of the DPOC is so far ahead of most of its Left wing that it’s like they’re not even playing in the same league. In my 60 seconds, I got to this point near the end, in what seemed like maybe three seconds — and there’s a slight chance that that simply was not enough time to make the point clearly enough. But here’s how I see it: if Correa becomes Supervisor, he becomes the overriding and maybe even preemptive favorite, at least among Democrats, to succeed Loretta. That gives me pause — and I think that it should have given more other reformers within the party more pause than it did Monday night.
The guiding principle in “issue activist” politics is that you don’t necessarily need to get the best possible person out of each district; but you want to get the best person that you can get. (Hence my support for Quirk-Silva, whom I like personally but with whom I have some huge and persistent policy differences — because she’s smart, she’s usually open to reason, and in many races that likely makes her “the best that we can get.”) Lou Correa is not “the best that we can get” out of CA-46; except for his presumed vote for a Democratic Speaker of the House, I really do wonder whether he’d be any better than the perhaps slightly more conservative but far more open-minded Chris Phan.
DPOC Leaders, from the Party Chair on down, love to talk the “progressive” game and go out of the way to attend progressive meetings and events — which softens the blow for some, I suppose — but then they generally end up with “but gee, shucks, we can’t alienate our donors” that (rightly or not) puts an end to most ideological arguments. We progressive reformers need to be stronger, more demanding, and less obsequious.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
One last point: I’m not supposed to talk smack about Lou Correa now that he’s endorsed — actually, I may be able to do so as an ex officio member, but I really don’t trust the current party leadership to fairly interpret and enforce the rules — but given that no one else in the room but me opposed him I have to presume that what I say above is not talking smack. Apparently, this is the track record that got him endorsed by the Democratic Party with only one — my — dissenting vote; it stands to reason that all of the above must be good, and that by recounting it again here I am in fact offering him support. Right?
Some very good people in the Democratic Party voted to endorse Lou Correa on Monday night, as well as some for whom I’ve lost more respect this year than I’d have thought possible a year ago. (I still haven’t written much about that, and still don’t know whether I will.) But the principle at hand was not whether Correa — for all of the things he’s done that gall me and many others — would be endorsed; it was whether he would be endorsed without one dissenting vote.
I care very much about my local party; I’ve put a lot of time into supporting it. And what it needed Monday night, in my opinion — to be able to face itself in the mirror in the years to come, without feeling like my faction was just a bunch of dupes placed on a hamster wheel to run ourselves to fatigue without ever getting anywhere — was at least that one dissenting vote. People will need to remember, in the years to come, that Lou Correa’s record of turning his back on Democratic solidarity really did cost him something — a small thing, to be sure, but something.
Like Dick Cheney said about his support for torture — the polar opposite of the principled stand I’m trying to take and explain here — I would do it all over again. Whatever the personal price to me may be, it’s one that I have to be willing to pay, because in the long term one dissenting vote can be that important.
I read Pedroza’s piece on this, by the way — and it was Pedroza at his Pedrozanest. Wrong on important facts, over simplified, but “Mostly Harmless.”
I have not read Chumley’s piece, which I understand makes me, rather than Correa, its main focus, which I suppose attests to how deeply I have gotten under the “PR professional’s” skin. (He’s probably too dense to see how this sort of stunt hurts him, but I don’t need to be the one to set him straight.) I’m in enough pain as it is right now without doing so — both laughing and raging could wreck my sutures — so I’m not heading out there and don’t suggest that others do either. However, if someone really wants to port some of it over to get my reactions here, when I am next on the Intertubes I will see what I can do.
Since I can’t add any comments on Correa, I’ll just say, Best Wishes for a speedy recovery!
*Mega Dittos for the Gregman! Make sure you deal with any infections …immediately! Can’t be too careful anymore!
Here’s the problem as I see it: Lou is the ONLY viable non-conservative-Republican. He and Andrew Do are sucking up all the institutional support. The rest of the candidates will probably be relegated to spoiler roles.
I understand why so many local prog’s dislike Lou Correa (in some cases, quite strongly). He’s against single-payer health care. He isn’t the best on matters of workers’ rights and economic justice. It seemingly took forever to school him on LGBTQ civil rights, and he may still not be 100% there. In a sense, he’s OC’s own Dianne Feinstein.
But who else is there? Chris Phan? In what’s likely to be a low turnout special election, can a candidate with no institutional support really get anywhere close to the finish line? And why should Democrats just roll over for someone who may be moderate, but will ultimately feel some sort of pressure to toe the Republican Party line?
Perhaps Lou didn’t deserve unanimous DPOC support, but I don’t begrudge DPOC going all in for the one Dem who can break Republicans’ unanimous control over county government. Still, I do think this should make DPOC “leaders” realize they need to focus more on activating their Central County base and strengthening the local bench here. It would be nice to hear about “the party’s future” without hearing speculation of “the usual suspects” running for higher office.
Add to Correa’s faults a drug warrior stance on medical marijuana, any marijuana, and any drugs… and a fealty to the police/prison state. He’s one of our worst. I don’t know how many of those issues will come into play as a Supe. Chris also makes the good point that this would be a temporary convenient thing for Lou, as he goes for other offices when they pop up.
I’m not saying much, because I imagine Lou is a heavy favorite to win and I’ll probably try to work with him. But I’ll go on the record here that I think higher of Chris Phan.
Silver linings: Chris’ll still be on the Garden Grove City Council to help Bao clean things up; and Lou should be best positioned to bring back some of this donor county’s money from Sacramento.
Yet Phan wants to leave GG City Council to become County Supervisor? And didn’t Paul Lucas point out Phan is just as anti-marijuana as Lou?
I think it’s well established now that Lou is not really progressive. So who are the alternatives? Some NPP dude who once worked for Joe Dunn, some Republican dude who may vote a little to the left of Janet Nguyen, some really crazy person, and Janet Nguyen’s hand-picked successor?
Lou may be far from perfect, but he’s the only realistic pick for the progressive coalition. What the progressive coalition and the party should do going forward is organize, organize, ORGANIZE (!!!) to build lasting infrastructure, a durable winning coalition, and a deeper bench of local leaders so the party will no longer have to rely on the likes of Lou Correa and Jose Solorio being the official standard bearers for everything.
Phan doesn’t have either major party endorsement, but he has been walking precincts in the area for the past six months — which as you know is the most effective way to reach voters. And the vote from Garden Grove will likely be huge. So while I don’t know that I’d call him the favorite, I also don’t know that I’d count him out — especially if Chuyen takes more votes from Do than from him.
But aren’t there 3 Garden Grove based candidates? Do (who now lives in Westminster, but was previously on the GG Council), Phan, & Nguyen will all be splitting votes there. They’ll also be splitting Vietnamese-American votes. And Phan, Do, & Lupe Moreno will be splitting Republican votes.
While I imagine Santa Ana turnout will be quite low, there will be votes there to earn. Who’s trying to earn them? And who will ultimately be in the best position to serve all the communities in Supe District 1?
Lou has never been my favorite elected, and he probably never will be so long as he bends over backwards to please the Lucy Dunn types who like to show off their slate of “pro-business Democrats” just so they can claim they’re “bipartisan”. Yet with that being said, he’s grudgingly earned my respect over the years for actually accomplishing some good deeds for OC. And unlike many OC politicians who like to claim “fiefdoms” over certain communities, he has made some efforts to build bridges.
Nguyen is in Westminster. He has no ballot statement and I think that it’s questionable as to whether he is running a serious campaign. Moreno also doesn’t have a ballot statement and will probably attract only Minutemen types and low-information Latino voters and others who like the idea of voting for a Latino (or, in this crowd, for a woman at all.)
Phan has been campaigning heavily in Santa Ana, on a retail level.
There are aspects to Correa that I do find admirable. I don’t think that he’d be a disaster on the Board — surely better than Do or Moreno — or, if seems likely if Loretta moves on, in Congress. He’s just way worse than we should be better to do — and we need to remind ourselves of that.
If Phan weren’t in the race I simply would have stayed and home Monday and planned to go to bed early on Jan. 27 and drunk before looking at the election returns on Jan. 28. And while I’m not in a position to endorse Phan — although I’m in exactly as much of a position to do so as my former fellow ex officiao DPOC Committee Member Correa was to promote Eastman and Murray against Moreno in Anaheim — my main concern here is to promote a situation where electeds cannot simply spit on positions and ideals of the Democratic Party without consequences.
I think that that actually makes us a stronger party in the public’s eyes. And I also think that, sadly, many of those running our county party care much less about our principles than about the whims of our electeds — and that is one reason that we get taken less seriously by the public than we could be. We do very well by socially liberal Irvine and Newport Beach — with whose positions on such issues I almost always agree — but we give little more than lip service to broader traditional Democratic positions except for being in a similar “loyal to you even when you’re not loyal to us or our constituencies” arrangement with some of the unions.)
Really? OC Political lists Chuyen Van Nguyen’s residence as Garden Grove. And regardless, it looks to me like he, Phan, and Do will be fighting over the same pool of voters. I guess we’ll have to see if Phan can cut into Lou’s base (and why they should vote for him over an actual, albeit far-from-progressive, Democrat).
I know exactly where you’re coming from re the $$$$$ many OC Dems always chase after. They claim to serve the multicultural and working class base in Central & North County, yet they’re all too often paying lip service while doing the bidding of their moneyed South County patrons who care more about certain issues than others.
Of course, there are many good South County progressives. I’m NOT talking about them. I think you know who I’m referring to.
Lou Correa almost certainly won’t be a disaster on the Board of Supes. Rather, I think he’s in a unique position to build bridges and get s–t done in a way some random bomb thrower can’t. Hell, even Bernie Sanders knows when and how to cut deals to advance good policy.
I’m also not a fan of Lou running for CA-46. But so long as Loretta puts this theoretical Senate campaign in the same place where she’s taken her past theoretical statewide campaigns, I don’t think it’s all that real of a threat. As long as Loretta can hang on for at least a couple more cycles, we’ll probably see a truly worthy successor run.
I am finding it extremely difficult to forgive Lou for endorsing Gail Eastman and Kris Murray. I cannot support a man that would betray our city so. It’s time to find a new candidate. Someone that cares about more than who he can “stab in the front”. He has made his ethics clear. I am unwilling to change mine.
I am DTS, not D, but thank you for saying what I was thinking!
Lou pissed everyone off when he ran foe the State Senate after everyone bust their assses getting him in the 1st district BOS seat. Do you really think they will tolerate him doing it again to go to the US Senate?
Loretta would try to go to the US Senate. Lou would tey to go to the US House of Reps.
*Politics does not occur in a vacuum or by use of a note in a bottle thrown overboard at your last cocktail party on Newport Bay. Lou has done yeoman work on a variety of issues. He lets no grass under his feet and if you take the time to chat with him……is logical, cogent and approachable. He may not do everything that you want done, but he considers it strongly. A recepective elected that listens is just about the most attractive concept we can think of. Remember the great Joe Dunn? Another gentleman with an idea. All in all, Lou will serve the County of Orange with distinction and if he plays his cards right….will find further office waiting when he is ready.
Thanks for a great symbolic vote. While there may be a role for the Feinsteins of the world I can assure you it is not what they do to the party. The feeling of working tirelessly for a candidate only to have him betray the most important examples of your idealism time after time is horrible. I beg all campaign volunteers to ask yourselves if you are really in line philosophically with Lou why not work for the republican party? You might be able to get a job out of that.
Lou or Andrew….who cares, my friends and i win either way
and where can i send a donation to the greg diamond memorial fund
“The shots at her smarts seem like juvenile sexism…”
Her “smarts?” That’s hilarious. Gretzky was smarter than she is.
“I missed my award!”
So that’s why she’s beaten back every Republican attempt to defeat her since 1998? Bitter much?
Actually, I find Loretta very entertaining – from the screechy voice making inane statements to her trashy holiday cards in which she pretends to be some sort of model (make up by….hair by…). No I am not bitter about having an idiot represent me in Congress they are all pretty much comical – one way or another.
What’s no so entertaining is her marriage to a defense contractor lobbyist and living in Palos Verdes while representing us. But hey! Why not! It’s Washington.
It is not necessarily that no cogent attack from the right could be mounted against Loretta, David, but you’re just not doing it. As usual, you’re very entertaining with your ad hominem barbs, but really — anyone seeing her interviewed on national security policy issues should have no doubts about her intelligence, and what you find screechy and trashy I find to be someone working within the constraints that women sometime have to use (or at least profit from using) to make connections with males.
Yes, she struts her stuff — as successful women in politics often do. But successful men often get away with it, and so what she does is a blow for equality. Who do you want to talk about in that context, Paul Ryan or Scott Brown?
The one time I can remember when Loretta made me lose my nut was when, at the last minute when even Dennis Kucinich had been dragged on board to vote for Obamacare, she piped in from Florida with a threat to cast a possibly deciding vote against it in the House. (She later claimed that she was doing so from the left, but I think that she had just taken her eye off the ball.) I wrote some very uncomplimentary things about her at that moment — but she fixed her position quickly.
In the meantime, I’ve seen her at rallies hugging a person with AIDS before it was politically safe and I’ve seen her play a decisive role — by virtue of her logistical support — in helping OCVMP put together the movement needed to push through the Great Park Veterans Cemetery. And, now joined by Al Lowenthal, she’s been the “go-to” person in the County when average people have needed help.
So, as usual, I admire your wit, but they’re just snarky opinions and they’re not all that well-founded. You totally dominate me in succinctness, though — but snark and snottiness is always easier to dash off than is the reasoned analysis that you can generate at your best.
Oh, yeah. She did that… But then again, so were other Dems. Most likely, it was due to certain items Loretta and other House Dems wanted included in ACA. Perhaps it was also due to political positioning. But in the end, she did the right thing, voted for ACA, and is now serving her constituents by helping them attain the health insurance coverage they need.
One of my favorite Loretta stories comes from 2007. A whole lot of OC Dems were under pressure from Building Trades to green-light the 241 Extension, aka the Toll Road to Trestles. Arnold even removed anti-241 voices from the Coastal Commission, and certain Dems were cheering this on because “JOBS!!!”
At one point, it was looking like a real possibility and developers were licking their chops over their future prospects. But then, Loretta teamed up with Susan Davis (D-San Diego) to propose an amendment to the annual defense authorization bill to stop the Toll Road to Trestles. Under immense pressure to do otherwise, she did the right thing and threw down big time to protect one of SoCal’s last patches of undeveloped coastline.
I’ll forever be grateful to Loretta for saving Trestles from the “grab & build at whatever cost” crew.
“Who do you want to talk about in that context, Paul Ryan or Scott Brown?”
An even better example would be Illinois Congressman, Aaron Schock.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Aaron+Schock&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=5r2VVNGOMJOzoQSem4GIBA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAg&biw=1273&bih=1046
Okay she hugged somebody with AIDS once; everybody who was anybody got on board the Let’s Play the Vet Cemetery Game. So what?
While I obviously haven’t heard all the things she has squawked, what I have heard is quite appalling – in an unintentionally funny way. I have to admit there is a sort of embarrassing fascination watching her perform, especially in her teenage Lolita mode. But eventually that wears thin.
I said Gretzky was smarter than she is. Not quite right. She demonstrates a rather shrewd low cunning that helps a politician get and stay elected, but which is a far cry from intelligence or good governance. And that, alas, is a distinction lost on most political animals.
Thanks, anon 10:21. I was thinking the same thing. I’m glad I didn’t have to be the one googling “Aaron Schock Shirtless”. And I think I’ll let someone else do the honor of googling “Scott Brown Shirtless”.
That ACA thing – I remember it well. She was, at the last minute, trying to get a robust public option included in Obamacare, something that should really be there to help bring down costs. Her claiming to oppose the bill “from the left” was accurate – if by left we mean favoring a public option or even better single-payer (although I wish more conservatives and Republicans would start seeing the value of letting the government/public do what it does in most civilized countries and prevent big corporations from robbing and killing us… but then I guess right and left might stop meaning anything.)
So yeah, she DID criticize Obamacare sincerely from the “left” and made a last-minute ALMOST-NO vote on it. The proof that she did NOT have her eyes “off the ball” was a fine piece she and Jane Harman (Jane Harman!!) wrote in the Register a little earlier called, I think, “Blue Dogs for a Public Option. Lemme see if I can find it… ah here, I guess it was printed many places: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-jane-harman/why-were-breaking-with-th_b_318743.html
Many of us public option-pushers believed that a public option would be a step to, eventually, single-payer … in fact that was what Anthony Wiener said, and just the fact that Wiener said that was enough to turn the horrible DINO Joe Lieberman against the public option. Since we’re speaking of Lou and Jose, Lou always opposed our California single-payer bill… whereas Jose SAID he was for it, and DID vote for it a couple times when Arnold (who obviously woulda vetoed it) was governor, and then voted against it when we had a Dem governor. Maybe that’s an illustration of Tefere’s “Jose will stab us in the back, Lou in the front” observation.
Speaking of trying to get the public option into Obamacare, remember this:
Also around that time, having noticed that most of her votes on IMPORTANT things were progressive, I asked her HOW it is she comes off as a Blue Dog … and she winked and confided in me, “Don’t tell anybody, but I’m in the Blue Dogs as a spy for Nancy Pelosi!” Oh whoops now I guess I told people. But that was a long time ago…
If she had fought the fight that Kucinich and others were fighting at the time that they were fighting it, I’d have had nothing but respect for her adding her name to their number. She might have contributed to a win, if she had done so. But she spoke up belatedly, only after defeat in the battle had been defeated. By that point, it had become clear that the bill that was eventually adopted was the best we were going to get — and, as the capitulation by Kucinich demonstrated, it was time to close ranks. (It was only later that Loretta — at least nominally a Blue Dog, after all — did clarify that her opposition was from the Left.)
If you want to change a policy you get on board the train while it is still traveling, not after the journey is over. That’s why I say, charitably, that she must have taken her eye off of the ball — because the cynical and self-serving alternative is worse.
Corruptea is a big-machine Dem. He will win and seat his enormous bulk squarely in the middle of the road, blocking all progress. Thanks for standing up to the noise machine, Diamond, you really are a voice of reason and hope.
My fellow “person of bulk” Correa could be Bernie Freaking Sanders on the Board of Supes — and as one vote there would still be no “progress.” I don’t think that he’ll actually make things worse than we’ve had with Janet or that we would have with Do, because that would be hard to do! The question is whether someone who can credibly be a voice for stewardship and reform — and at least the chance of thoughtful moderation on some issues like private prisons, police misconduct, and cannabis reform where Lou profits politically from running a jihad against progressive positions — could help moderate some Board policies.
*Urizen- yeah, no doubt Lou will hold back the Board of Supervisors from allowing wood chips. senior pampers and diapers from being burned in OC Park fire rings……
Hernia? Hope they replaced your brain with some common sense. Most Dems in the county hate you. You have no influence
I find your lack of faith in the Force disturbing.
No, seriously — you don’t seem like someone whose opinion I’d care about even if I knew who you were. And if I really “had no influence” you wouldn’t bother to hide your identity.
“Influence” doesn’t only come from hardball tactics, cheating, threats, and catering to the infinitesimal proportion of proportion of OC Democrats who serve on the Central Committee or show up for public indoctrination at the Council of Clubs. It also comes from ideas, ideals, and the guts to express them despite attacks from cowardly and craven keyboard warriors like you.
Thanks for writing and have a nice day.
Since you read Pedroza, you can read me. LOL
Garbage at best!
Ouch. Hernia surgery. Rest up and get well Greg. Happy holidays.
I hope you don’t by my phony bullshit caring act. I am a self centered prick.
Anyways, after you heal maybe you can join me and my pal Matt for an Old Fashioned and we can give you tips on how to really be a successful blogger.
Gotta run, Larry’s waiting for his latte, Jordan’s tutu needs to be picked up from the cleaners and Lorrie is demanding more mattresses. Busy Sunday for me, plus I have to write another $5 check to the Irvine schools foundation.
Tutu? What does ballet have to do with Anaheim politics? Once again, you confound me.
You’ve never seen the picture of Jordan in his tutu Mr. Zenger? Where have you been?
I was so embarrassed. The other day when I dropped by Jordan’s place he refused to come out of the closet. I guess he was looking for his tutu and I didn’t have the heart to tell him it wasn’t in there and that I had forgot to pick it up at the cleaners.
So I wonder what would happen if someone anonomously accused Julio Perez of being a closeted Gay Man?
Wait, that’s exactly what happened and Greg Diamond threated to sue Pedroza, trackdown the accuser and “MAKE HIM PAY”.
Only erasing the past, not opiates can change that.
Oh, look — it seems that carpetblogger’s back.
But he’s wrong — there is an amount of opiates preventing me from changing that. Maybe I’ll get to it tomorrow.
Huh? Please clarify. I have no idea what you are talking about. I know this is Nutcracker Suite time ballet-wise, but still I remain confused.
Not sure who is accusing anyone of being a closeted gay man here other than you.
Jordan hangs his tutu in the closet. Where do you hang yours?
Great. Now I’ve started hallucinating. Thanks, whoever you are.
You thought you were hallucinating when you saw my “Happy Holidays” wishes to you?
If you were a world class journalist like me you would have checked the IP address to confirm whether it was actually from me.
I just did that the other day when I saw a comment from Larry Agran on my blog. I called Larry and verified it was from him, and it was. Ain’t that keen? After I verified it was him he told me to run to Starbucks and get him a latte.
“Destiny guides our fortunes more favorably than we could have expected. Look there, Sancho Panza, my friend, and see those thirty or so wild giants, with whom I intend to do battle and kill each and all of them, so with their stolen booty we can begin to enrich ourselves. This is nobel, righteous warfare, for it is wonderfully useful to God to have such an evil race wiped from the face of the earth.”
“What giants?” Asked Sancho Panza.
“The ones you can see over there,” answered his master, “with the huge arms, some of which are very nearly two leagues long.”
“Now look, your grace,” said Sancho, “what you see over there aren’t giants, but windmills, and what seems to be arms are just their sails, that go around in the wind and turn the millstone.”
“Obviously,” replied Don Quijote, “you don’t know much about adventures.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
Great passage, but are you calling Greg’s casting of a lone dissenting vote in the endorsement of such a compromised character a Quixotic tilting at windmills?
Are you saying there’s not a shitload of great points in the above bill of particulars against Lou?
The only thing worse than a unanimous Democratic endorsement of Lou (would have been) was the unanimous Republican endorsement of Janet puppet Do. Where were all the Zenger/Bartlett/Tait Republicans? Doesn’t Phan have a following there at all?
The endorsement by the OCGOP is an insider thing. I am not nor ever will be on the Central Committee which is quite a rogue’s gallery.
Now I realize that this may just be the opiates talking, Mr. Gericault — but are you calling me a windmill?
windbag Diamond
You tell him Skally! You always have something intelligent to add to the debate.
Sometimes I just post shit….it struck me as something I felt like I wanted to share. Read into it what you will, take from it that which strikes a chord in you.
Are you the the Dreamer, the wind mills, the giants, or the one who knows nothing about adventure?
I just realized a big thing that was left out here – Lou’s endorsement (along with two other prominent DINO’s, Tom Daly and Frank Barbaro) of our DA Tony Rackauckas. I realize Greg couldn’t mention that since it would have seemed self-interested, as it was Greg running against T-Rack. But this should have been a deal breaker for a lot more DPOC members than just Greg.
Democrats (if not all Americans) should be on the side of JUSTICE, by which I mean:
JUSTICE for the misdeeds of the powerful; and
Reasonable, FAIR justice for the smaller misdeeds of the powerless.
EXACTLY the opposite of what Rackauckas has done for two decades.
I realize that people may not believe this, but as I was making up my list of reasons Lou shouldn’t be able to run as an endorsed Democrat – or, beyond that, a unanimously endorsed Democrat – his having supported Rackauckas never even entered my mind. It was fine for him to support the incumbent DA because he agrees with him.
My campaign for DA was essentially a small gift to all those in Orange County who wanted to vote against him. People, in other words, like me. I found voting against him to be very satisfying. Lou, like many other Democrats who are automatically and without internal conflict always on the side of the police, would not feel that way. So I don’t resent his not having unwrapped that present. It wasn’t meant for him.
Based on your closeup picture, GOLEM, I have just noticed that you have disproportionally low forehead which my account for your low IQ.
Probably the genetic based on an incest and inbreeding.
As a special holiday gift to Stanislaw, OJB is allowing two of the many comments by “From the Exile” that usually go to the spam folder to see the light of day — which may explain to readers why comments by “From the Exile” usually go to the spam folder. Happy holidays to our local museum-quality Nazi relic and to our many readers who are better than that!
It didn’t take me long to figure out who that was. Once upon a time, he pretty much dominated the comments section here. Please don’t ever let that happen again.
Besides, I thought Fiala was part of Pedroza’s severance package.
Sometimes I think it is worthwhile to remind people who and what we are dealing with there.
So tell me you coward Jew, what would happen to my 1st amendment rights (which are unalienable) if you would be elected as OCDA?…. same as demonstrated here?
Because you can’t answer, that is why you never be elected to any OC office – GOLEM!