Is Disney Now So Blatantly Anti-Latino That It’s ORDERING Brandman to Oppose District 3 in 2016?

By
Greg Diamond
– December 8, 2015Posted in: "The OC", Fresh Juice

.

.

.

Brandman, Mickey Mouse, Dora in Anaheim

Let’s face a basic fact about Anaheim Councilman’s Jordan Brandman’s delaying the ability of Central Anaheim Latinos to vote for self-representation in the City’s new District 3 until 2018:

It doesn’t make sense.

Brandman’s stance doesn’t make sense for him politically.  One of his two starkest fundamental characteristic is his slavering political ambition — the other is that he wants to convert political power into personal wealth — but he is bleeding support of Democrats and some previous Republican supporters over this issue.

[A quick digression: Brandman does still have the support of OC’s Democratic Old Guard — electeds, rich (and selective) donors, their advisors and lackeys.  He may figure that support from them and lots of Republicans may be all that he really needs for the rest of his political career.  He may even have figured out the six political “escape hatch” races he could switch to by the March 11 deadline, once he abandons his doomed Congressional race, which would keeping him from having to move and run for Anaheim City Council.  (What he doesn’t know is that I’ve already figured them out and warned the appropriate people, who are developing effective countermeasures.)]

But it’s not just the politics of his decision that are odd.  It’s that his own justification for it doesn’t make sense!

His big argument, presented first on The Liberal OC and since amplified by the Kleptocrats’ AnaheimBlog (and repeated in full at the link just above) is that he has a personal beef with Dr. Jose Moreno.

He says that he thinks is Moreno os acting as if  he “believes he should be granted a seat on the Anaheim City Council without having to earn community support and work for it.”  (To this, anyone following Anaheim politics would have to say “WHAAAAT”?  If that’s so, let him run and lose!  But, of course, it’s totally wrong — he’s already worked hard for community support!  He WON District 3 in 2014!)

(Note again: it’s not like Brandman’s critics are sneering behind his back that his decision to backstab Anaheim’s Latinos is a completely personal grudge.  He’s saying this about himself!)

Brandman is saying that he is SO PETULANT and SO PETTY and so DEVOTED to his hatred of Dr. Jose Moreno that he will risk the City’s loss in yet another lawsuit just to keep Dr. Moreno off of the Anaheim City Council for another two years — from 2016 until 2018.

This is so bizarre that it’s amazing that Brandman is asserting that it’s true.  Seriously — WHO DOES THAT?

It would have to be someone with an awfully good reason.

* * * * * * * * * * *

The sheer implausibility of Brandman’s explanation — complete with a blithe dismissal of the injustice being done to Latinos here because after all a significant majority of the populations of Districts 4 and 5 are Latino despite the fact that about a third of them can’t vote — starts to give credence to another theory about what’s going on.  This theory is not original to me, but that been discussed in the background since the moment Brandman first opened up his mouth in the November public hearing.  In fact I didn’t believe it could be true until I saw what Brandman did at that public hearing — just a few minutes after I publicly predicted that he’d do the right thing for Anaheim’s Latinos.

That theory is that this decision is not Brandman’s to make.  It may not even be Curt Pringle’s to make.

The theory is that Brandman cast this vote because Disney essentially ordered him to do so.  And the revision is that he’s publicly claiming to be acting out of pure spite to give cover to Disney over this decision.

If he plays along and votes the right way, the reasoning goes, someday Disney will make Brandman very wealthy — rewarding him with riches that are, to the $25,000 he got from Tom Daly for the Wikipedia Report, as Puumba is to Timon (and maybe to Jiminy Cricket.)  This may not be written on paper anywhere or even a formal agreement — but only what Brandman (who after all by now knows where lots of bodies are buried) has every reason to believe to be so.

He believes it enough that he is willing to pretend that this whole fracas is about his being ticked off at Dr. Jose Moreno rather than that Disney wants to ensure that Moreno doesn’t become a leader on the 2017 City Council.

Think of it: the “Tait forces,” for lack of a better term for the bi/multi/non-partisan reform movement in Anaheim, will go into the 2016 elections with a 2-to-1 lead on the City’s Kleptocracy issues — Tait and Vanderbilt versus Murray — with four seats to be filled.

It would not surprise me to see the reformers lose all four races, given the amount of money Disney will be prepared to put into them.  Nor would it surprise me to see the reformers win all four seats, with some smart and disciplined political management.  But the thing to keep in mind is this: reformers only need to win TWO of the FOUR open seats to ascend to a governing majority for the first time since … I’m not sure anyone even knows how long.  (The 1800s?)

It is certainly possible for the Kleptocrats, who seem united behind betrayed-but-forgiving former City Councilwoman Gail Eastman, to beat Dr. Moreno in District 3 in 2016.  Expect a lot of Latinos to run against him — some out of ambition, some out of personal dislike, and others out of prodding or patronage by Disney.  But Dr. Moreno has already been in the forefront of this campaign for Latino rights — and if, as expected, some other Republicans also run against Eastman, one has to suspect that District 3 is reformers’ best chance for a pickup.

Then reformers would only need to win one of the three other Council races — and I’m informed that there will likely be strong candidates in at least two of them.  But there’s no question that reformers would have a tougher time if the 2016 menu has Districts 1, 2, 4, and 5 on it rather than 1, 3, 4, and 5.

Disney is apparently afraid of that majority.  Maybe it’s due to its future plans being thwarted.  Or maybe it’s due to its history with Anaheim’s City government being investigated by a future Council.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Disney, though, is in a real bind.  If the only way to retain its decisive control of the City Council is to keep District 3 out of the 2016 election, then Disney would be objectively on the side of undercutting long-delayed Latino self-determination in Anaheim.  Yes, this would stem from self-interest rather than bigotry.  (That’s nothing unusual; discrimination often stems from self-interest rather than bigotry.)  Legally that doesn’t matter.

And in terms of publicity, THAT WOULD BE VERY BAD FOR DISNEY’S BUSINESS.

Under such circumstances, it would be much better for Disney to wear Mickey’s white gloves during this debate, so as not to leave fingerprints on the backstabbing — by a Democrat, yet! — of Anaheim’s Latinos.

If the public came to associate Disney with such a decision — and how could they not? — its reputation would suffer.  So it would be much better for Disney if the decision were merely attributable to a feud between two local politicians.

So I’m going to give Disney some free advice: PUT ON A SHOW TONIGHT!

Have Carrie Nocella appear at the Council meeting and beg, with her voice cracking — and with her carefully avoiding eye contact with her best friend and European vacation partner Kris Murray — for Brandman to vote to include District 3 in the 2016 election roster.  (Bring some onions, Carrie; make yourself cry!)  And then Brandman can coldly refuse to comply.  We’ve seen this move of his before: nose in the air, crisply intoning something like “I’m sorry — but my mind … is made up!”

I don’t think that it would actually save Disney’s reputation — but they have to try something!  It’s that — or … let him switch his vote!

Come on, Disney — if you’re going to backstab Anaheim’s Latinos, at least give them a good show!  IT’S WHAT YOU KNOW HOW TO DO BEST!

(And if you really don’t want to be on the hook for this one, and Brandman stubbornly won’t go along , then just order Murray or Kring to change their votes instead.  You’re influential; you have a lot of possible ways to dig yourself out of this hole!)

About Greg Diamond

Somewhat verbose attorney, semi-disabled and semi-retired, residing in northwest Brea. Occasionally ran for office against jerks who otherwise would have gonr unopposed. Got 45% of the vote against Bob Huff for State Senate in 2012; Josh Newman then won the seat in 2016. In 2014 became the first attorney to challenge OCDA Tony Rackauckas since 2002; Todd Spitzer then won that seat in 2018. Every time he's run against some rotten incumbent, the *next* person to challenge them wins! He's OK with that. Corrupt party hacks hate him. He's OK with that too. He does advise some local campaigns informally and (so far) without compensation. (If that last bit changes, he will declare the interest.) His daughter is a professional campaign treasurer. He doesn't usually know whom she and her firm represent. Whether they do so never influences his endorsements or coverage. (He does have his own strong opinions.) But when he does check campaign finance forms, he is often happily surprised to learn that good candidates he respects often DO hire her firm. (Maybe bad ones are scared off by his relationship with her, but they needn't be.)