Saturday, September 22, 2007

Behind the scenes


Ask any politician or aspiring politician in this county if they are working with Richard Salzman and they will deny it.

But he continues to work behind the scenes, continuing to stir up trouble and smear his opponents. He got caught sticking his little anti-Arkleyville stickers on parking meters in Eureka, got caught mailing out "Dump Geist" bumper stickers - sneaky attacks and dirty tricks characterize his political dealings.

He is now avowedly anti-Arkley, where once he went begging for money for his candidates.

Is there anyone who believes he is not involved in the Glass/Arkley affair?

His latest listserve emails show where he is working these days:

Under Richard's list he is inviting people to make comments on the Glass/Arkley story in the Times Standard today,

Under the AEB listserve he is supporting Pat Higgins and continuing to beat the drum against Palco.

Larry Glass is citing the boilerplate "privacy disclaimer" as a reason for his not releasing the apology he received from Rob Arkley.

Subscribers to the AEB listserve are also blessed to receive emails from Richard's List, Redwood Progressive, Behind the Redwood Curtain/ourhumboldt.org, For the North Coast/Local Solutions, Local Solutions PAC, Michael Twombly, Friends of Chris Kerrigan, Friends of Paul Gallegos: yet Richard has added his own privacy disclaimer to his listserve. This is Richard Salzman's personal list, intended for fans, friends and supporters only. This communication constitutes an electronic communication within the meaning of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC 2510, and its disclosure is strictly limited to the recipient intended by the sender of this message. Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not an invited subscriber, please contact the sender by return electronic mail and delete all copies of this communication.

50 comments:

  1. Of course R. Trent's fingerprints are all over this mess.

    I doubt if Glass' steadfast supporters even doubt Dick's involvement.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Well Salzman also sent out an e-mail from the same listserve advertizing Stories By The Sea.Is there some controversy over that.
    Why did Arkley send him a privacy disclaimer in the first place,if his sharks were going to go out attacking Larry for not releasing an e-mail?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Because the disclaimer attaches to every e-mail sent from a Security National account.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah, Mark. 7:27 has it. It's automatic. Lots of people have these "signatures" set up - sometimes it is a privacy notice, sometimes a favorite saying, sometimes your address, so you don't have to type it over every time.

    I doubt Rob Arkley expected Glass to keep anything a secret - he has already had his emails to Salzman published in the Times Standard.

    ReplyDelete
  5. how is sending out stickers "sneaky"? just because you didnt approve of it? lol lol lol....fascists crack me up....this salzman guy is looking better to me by the minute.looks like he strikes quite a nerve with all the fake conservatives

    ReplyDelete
  6. heh heh - yeah, sending them in plain brown wrappers, designed to make it LOOK like it was from her conservative opposition, sent only to them...

    Slipped up though - he had his hatchetman on the radio sounding the advance call.

    The effort failed. Amazing what you guys think is ok.

    ReplyDelete
  7. think is ok? what happened? who got stickers, and what did they say? you should be a little more specific when accusing people of wrongdoings

    ReplyDelete
  8. Oh? I thought you didn't recognize this as "wrongdoing," dear.

    ReplyDelete
  9. recognize WHAT as wrongdoings? by the way, you are talking to a person who voted 100% on the conservative platform for the last 2 elections, both nationally and locally........first impressions mean ALOT and the first time i heard of this salzman guy was about letters to the editor. ive never had a reason to like the guy. just tell me what he did!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rose makes stuff up about Richard Salzman all the time, and is just trying to make the current mess look like it belongs to ANYone other than her God Arkley.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 10:11 This is a long and complicated story, and alot of it is detailed in early posts on this blog. The specific incidnet you are asking about is discussed here: Salzman's hatchetman strikes again. You might also want to read Salzman's Plan.

    As for 7:45, looks like the spin has begun.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Seems pretty spin like to me to make a boogyman out of Mr. Salzman and then smear with negativity and snipe at anything he might support without having to even look at the issues. Just makes it all so simple.

    ReplyDelete
  13. On the contrary. It is not simple at all. I have stated before - I liked Richard. I have a certain degree of respect for Richard and I believe he is inherently more honest than his project, Paul Gallegos. I feel sorry for him having to constantly keep covering for Gallegos, who has let him down astronomically.

    But the ends don't justify the means.

    ReplyDelete
  14. the conservatives who got those stickers called Jill to let her know something strange was going on and threw them in the garbage.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Correct. And, if you read "The Web of Lies" and the follow up stories, you will see that Salzman, using one of the aliases, tried recruiting people to run against JIll.

    Why? She wouldn't vote the way he wanted her to. His goal is to get three votes on the Board of Supervisors.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Rose has Richard Salzman pegged right, and has. Her scrutiny of his actions have kept him somewhat in line and low key.

    The "Web of Lies" incident says it all.... dishonest !

    ReplyDelete
  17. It's just harder to detect him now as everyone tries to cover it up. But people stumble across his clandestine meetings, and, when seen, those meeting with him scurry off.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Rose,

    I guess I'm confused about your position here-

    Are you believing the theory that Larry is lying about the whole thing? Or are you just critical about how Larry is handling himself?

    What is your stance?

    ReplyDelete
  19. I guess I would say I am critical of how he is handling himself. Or rather, I am critical of how he "evolved" to his current position.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Do you think he should have not ran for council given his work with GREG? I think all of this was common knowledge when he was elected.

    What would you do if you were him?

    ReplyDelete
  21. rose,
    thank you for answering my question regarding salzman and the issue about mailing the stickers. i ahve to say though, politics is a dirty business, you are going to have to deal with that fact if you want a clear perspective on things. people "spinning" things will never go away. "spinning" used to be called "debating".........from a outsiders perspective, it seems like you approach the political process like its a team sport. therefore, everything that doesnt sound right to you is "spin"....remember, this is coming from a person who has never voted for the democratic party........we need to look at issues individually instead of jumping to take sides. normally i would be on your side of things, but in the arkley/glass case, i am amazed that "conservatives" would abandon democracy so fast to serve bully..........sorry,just trying to tell you how its coming across to everyday working joe american, rose...

    ReplyDelete
  22. Back from the weekend - and what a weekend it was.

    Gee - I smell Sterling Nichols and Salzman throughout some of these posts.

    ReplyDelete
  23. No Rosie my girl...I know!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Both Salzman and Glass really are dumber than dirt. 18 USC 2510 et seq ONLY PROVIDES FOR DISCLOSURE OF INTERCEPTED INFORMATION. IF IT IS SENT TO YOU OR DISCLOSED TO YOU BY THE RECIPIENT THAN THERE IS NOTHING IN THAT ACT THAT PRECLUDES DISCLOSRE.

    What morons.

    ReplyDelete
  25. yes!! we want to see an apology......an apology is an admission of guilt.....please, larry, just show it

    ReplyDelete
  26. update on the glass/arkley poll:

    50 people beleive LARRY GLASS
    6 "people" beleive rob snarkley

    ReplyDelete
  27. All of which is on Greg and Carols blog who nobody reads except for the same 10 people who posted 50 times. Wow, like I am really impressed with that poll!

    For what its worth...I think Glass is a whiner and is not credible. No comment on Arkley because I have never met the man.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 4:57
    if no one reads it, how did you know where the poll appeared? i never mentioned the site in my post.....

    ReplyDelete
  29. "All of which is on Greg and Carols blog who nobody reads except for the same 10 people who posted 50 times. Wow, like I am really impressed with that poll!"


    1. 57 people have voted so far

    2. only one vote is accepted for each IP address

    3. 51 people believe LARRY GLASS

    4. 6 "people" believe rob snarkley

    since rob turned this into a public opinion battle, who do you think is winning?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Apparently Kevin reads it - and his comments are worth the visit - he starts with an excellent point, which is why isn't "I wasn't there and I don't know" one of the questions... well, it's because of Bush and Cheney don't ya know?

    ReplyDelete
  31. i voted for bush, i dont approve of arkley's actions. evidently, you do....

    ReplyDelete
  32. Rose,do you normally send out apologies to people for things that you never did?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Good. Then you will condemn, Paul Gallegos and Tim Stoen for attempting to intimidate an elected judge.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Mark - if I felt I had hurt someone's feelings, or been unfair to them, then YES - I would, and I have.

    You have, too. remember?

    ReplyDelete
  35. A person might say "I'm sorry I came on too strong." "I'm sorry I got upset." "I'm sorry for my behavior." "I'm sorry for what I said." Any of those things... it's human, Mark. What has happened to people's humanity here?

    People get mad at each other all the time. David Elsebush and Tad say much worse things to the Board of Supervisors every Tuesday.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Hi Rose. Thanks for lumping David Elsebusch in with Tad. That gave me a good laugh!

    On the other hand, I don't think either of them have ever threatened to 'destroy' any of the Supes. And even if they had, neither of them has the power to deliver on that threat the way that Akley does.

    Look, I don't condone the "No Arkleyville" stickers, nor do I particularly care if Arkley pushed Larry, but I think that threatening an elected official with retaliation if they don't vote a certain way is poisonous to democracy. Can you really condone such actions coming from someone who has demonstrated their willingness to deliver on such a threat?

    ReplyDelete
  37. No. I do not condone it. Nor was I there. So I do not know exactly what happened. But my read on the situation is that it has been blown way out of proportion by those seeking to gain political advantage.

    Arkley may have promised to destroy Salzman, but he certainly hasn't done so - and believe me, I was looking for signs.

    And don't tell me the "Web of Lies" meets that criteeria, Salzman did that to himself, and I think that even that he would have gotten away with had he not lied when questioned. It's also unrelated to Rob Arkley. (Unless you're one of the grand conspiracy of newspaper editors believers).

    Like Nixon and Clinton, it is the lying that gets them in trouble.

    ReplyDelete
  38. does anyone here think that it is possbile for rose to make a post that doesnt mention either gallegos or salzman.....talk about obsessive compulsive....

    ReplyDelete
  39. Uh. Do you understand the purpose of this blog? It isn't a recipe exchange.

    And when you bring up the threat to destroy, that is always followed by the "just look at Richard Salzman" as if any of his troubles are related to Rob Arkley.

    Well scratch that, he is having more trouble raising money these days, but again, that is of his own doing.

    But - if Paul resigns, this blog will disappear.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Rose said,"But my read on the situation is that it has been blown way out of proportion by those seeking to gain political advantage."

    Like you said you weren't there,you don't know if anything is being blown out of proportion.Maybe you are correct,maybe my evaluation is off.But why should Larry release it? Or maybe a 3rd party should.Rose,would you not think that Larry may be being advised by his attorney to not release an e-mail because it may being used as evidence?

    ReplyDelete
  41. 7:15 here. 7:58 wasn't me.

    Salzman's e-mail thing was his clearly his own actions, but the Eureka Reporter showed uncharacteristic zeal in pursuing it the way they did. Can you think of any other issue over which the ER has initiated a police investigation? I can't. Seems kind of selective, no?

    Still, though, the issue is not whether Arkely succeeded in 'destroying' Salzman, but simply that he has the capability to deliver on such a threat. A threat from him must be taken more seriously than from an average shmoe.

    And, besides, it is patently against the law no matter who makes the threat. You do support the law, right Rose?

    ReplyDelete
  42. No, Mark, but I do know others in similar situations who have handled it with grace and composure, and not gone whining to the media.

    As to the apology, any attorney could tell him that, as the INTENDED recipient he is under no constraints as to how he distributes it the message sent to him. I cannot imagine any expectation of privacy in this circus.

    It's interesting though, that those seeking the high road crying about an elected official have nothing to say about the threatening of elected judges by Gallegos and Stoen.

    They also have no issue with an elected official persecuting a private citizen, which, it could be argued, is what happened with Glass and the anti-Arkley memorabilia.

    My opinion? Rob Arkley should have apologized - and it appears from the news reports that he did. Larry could have adhered to his initial statement that he would file an incident report and let it go - that at least made some sense.

    What happened after that? After that, the machine went into motion.

    Now, there is a question as to heraldo's identity and his possible affiliation with Glass. Again, if that is the case, you have an elected official participating in the harrassment of a private citizen.

    This can only be cleared up by heraldo coming forward.

    ReplyDelete
  43. My comment above was not addressed to you 10:10.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Ok, 10:10 - Does he have the capability of delivering on the threat? In theory yes. In practice, no. That's what we have seen.

    But again - with Salzman and crew, they are their own worst enemies. Gallegos is the gift that keeps on giving, the full employment act for Salzman, just to try to cover up for him is a full time job. Which forces Richard to do things that get him in trouble. His loss of reputation is directly related to Gallegos and Stoen's incompetence and agenda. He has been a willing footsoldier, and they do not care what happens to him.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Don't trust anything Rose says. Rose is a complete idiot. Rose is so stupid she actually thinks Anon.R.Mous is NOT Nick Bravo. Some investigative skills there, Rose! Everyone knows Anon.R.Mous is Nick Bravo. And everyone, except Rose, knows Rob Arkley is a liar.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Been up all night, Jake?

    Don't forget to say Arkley tells all the eidtors of all the papers what to do, and then link it to Bush and Cheney - you left that part out.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yeah, whatever you think about Larry Glass, there is no excuse for what Arkley did or has done to other candidates. Rose is a right-winger who obviously has no concern for our Constitution or democratic republic. Rose wants her right-wing good'ol racist boys to rule by any means necessary, even if it means stealing elections. Bush/Cheney in 2008! Who needs a transfer of power, when we all know the Democratic candidate will win.

    ReplyDelete
  48. It's a pity there is no cure for the apparent brain damage brought on by Al Gore's losing his presidential bid. Maybe Gore ought to start a new research foundation, and raise money to search for a cure.

    What are the symptoms of the disease? Foaming at the mouth rants, inability to move on and obsession with words like neocon and Republican. Ya gotta love it. Is that stuff you're on going to wear off sometime today? Jake?

    ReplyDelete
  49. I'll agree with you on one point, though, Jake, it is a shame that Arkley ever gave Gallegos campaign money.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.