Sunday, September 10, 2006

It's about POWER

Here's Ken Miller, in his own words:

AEB Humboldt
Previous Message All Messages Next Message
Re: No big money in local elections
Ken Miller

Nov 14, 2003 11:57 PST

When we awaken to the potential for determining our destiny, and
start fielding strong candidates aggressively, we can increase voter
participation. The anti-recall campaign IS just such an organizing
opportunity to develop an electoral constituency, a machine, if you
will, to get our perspective into the power structure.


Read more:


  1. Well, he was right. The recall campaign probably galvanized progressive control over local politics, for better or worse. You can thank PL.

  2. You can thank Richard Salzman.
    The threatened Recall would never have gotten off the ground without him. The situation in Iraq was heating up, Elizabeth Smart was in the news, no one cared about a little lawsuit against PL. It wasn't the first and it wouldn't be the last.

    It was how Gallegos' handlers reacted that led to it. And Richard Salzman wanted it. He reasoned that Recalls generally fail, and that, when it was over, Paul would be UNTOUCHABLE. His words.

  3. He was right. But for the recall attempt, Dikeman would probably be DA by now. And Salzman didn't donate hundreds of thousands to the recall effort (initially financed by Arkley, Sr.). The recall talk started immediately following the filing of the suit, and PL's illegal protest around the court building during the hearing in which Gallegos was asking for authority to hire outside counsel - a meeting that had been postponed but put back on calendar at the last minute at the insistance of PL (who had their truckers there en masse).

    No rose, you raise many good points and I commend you for that. But Salzman is right. That recall effort was a blatant attempt to affect impact the criminal justice system, and Dikeman's association with that effort, his denials notwithstanding, are what did him in. That and misrepresenting what the courts had said about his jury discrimination issue.

  4. Well, first of all, Dikeman never had anything to do with the Recall, despite Salzman's propaganda.

    Second, no one will ever know how much Salzman "donated" or had to work with because he did not have an FPPC number and was no subject to any of the campaign reporting that any other candidate or PAC is subject to. You don't know how much money he had, where it came from, how he used it - nothing. For example, Michael Shellenberger claims he was "hired" by Salzman. How much did that cost? Who paid for it, Eric?

    And third, Dikeman never misrepresented the Kesser case, the fact is - four courts had found that Dikeman acted properly - the state trial court found that he acted properly, the state appellate court found he acted properly, the California Supreme Court refused to hear the matter based upon the lower court's ruling, the federal district court found that he acted properly and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that he acted properly.

    No, it appears, another panel of the 9th Circuit has found differently.

    However, to date, only one attorney in the history of Humboldt County has ever had a Wheeler Motion granted against him. Paul Gallegos.

    In People v. Mika Myers, case # CR972919 Judge John Feeney found Paul Gallegos guilty of using peremptory challenges to dismiss prospective jurors based upon their race. After the judge found Gallegos guilty of racial bias in exercising his challenges to jurors, the entire panel was dismissed and the case had to start over from scratch.

  5. Dikeman didn't misrepresent the case, but he did misrepresent the appellate court judge statements to the effect that he had acted properly. The 9th Circuit panel did not find that he acted properly. They simply found other grounds to uphold the conviction. Heather Muller broke the story during the campaign.

    And those 4 courts don't matter now. The 9th Circuit trumps. The guy gets a new trial.

    Dikeman wasn't officially part of the recall, but it was a very well coordinated three pronged attack on Gallegos. You had the woman, can't remember her name right now, playing "bad cop," and then Dikeman taking the high road except in the last debate where he slipped up and said something about the voters having lost confidence in Gallegos. I'm sorry, but I don't believe his decision to enter the race was spontaneous, nor based on Schechtman's entry. In fact, I think they had in mind a recall very early on, maybe even before the PL suit. They came busting out of the gates, very well organized. I've been politically involved all my adult life, and I'd never seen anything like that before, not at the local level. I was involved in the anti-recall campaign and I honestly thought we were going to be steamrolled.

  6. You're sadly mistaken.

  7. Eric's not mistaken he's intentionally misleading. He is Paulie's A#1 spin Doctor.

  8. Eric, you keep saying Dikeman was involved in the recall! Shame on you, you know it isn't the truth.

    You mention Arkley Sr. initially funding the recall ? You didn't mention that Arkley Jr. initially funded Gallegos' 1st campaign! And now you, and like minded persons, are always talking trash about Arkely Jr.

    Eric you won. Gaggegos got re-elected, Dikeman got fired, and you Masters of the Universe can continue to pull your kind of crap to get other regressives elected. You should be happy, quit being such a loser. Live with yourself.

    Today the DA's office, tomorrow the city of Eureka. Keep patting yourselves on the back.

    And Rose keep putting Mr. Kirk, and others, back in line. They can wiggle and squirm but the truth is the truth.


Comments are open, but moderated, for the time-being. Good luck.