Friday, February 08, 2008

Both sides now ...w/update(s)

KSLG's John Matthews interviewed both Larry Glass and the Arkley family spokesperson, Steven Glazer, regarding the AG's decision... (Hank has dubbed it Push comes to Shove)

First, Glass: I've pretty much heard Larry Glass' side before, but there were a few new things.. he sure is mad at the Times Standard, calls them "despicable" - laughs that he got better treatment from the Eureka Reporter, says Heather Muller's coverage was accurate and that he tips his hat to Glenn Franco Simmons, says he went out of his way to give a fair presentation, without spinning it. I actually thought the Times Standard's coverage was fair, the letters and cartoons may be what he is referring to, but, ok.

Says he had stuff leaked to him, which begs the question 'who and when?'

Says he stood up and did what he had to do, It's water under the bridge now.

Larry didn't pull any punches. Everyone who listens to it will take away from it what they want. I'd say one thing, Larry, being a public official isn't the same thing as chatting at the record store, some things oughtta just be kept close to the vest, and calling Arkley names and sneering at the Mayor of Orinda because he also happens to have a job as a PR guy... I don't know, that part is kinda beneath the dignity of your office.

Then, Glazer: I've read the reports, so I had a basic idea of what to expect. Obviously, the Arkley family is gratified to have an end to this. But Glazer didn't pull any punches, either. He talks about Larry acting at the behest of his "handlers" - changing his mind about pressing charges (Which I agree with, after listening to Larry's first interview way back when and watching the subsequent events unfold.) He talks about Larry's anti-Marina Center crusade (which are also well documented) and questions his ability to set aside his bias with regards to the Marina Center Project.

Richard Salzman's anti-Arkley stickers are a big part of the story, as Richard knew they would be. But Salzman's antics actually bolster Glazer's argument that these were politically motivated charges brought by an individual with a long-standing grudge against the Arkley's. That single thing stands out.

One thing I've noticed is the spin on the blogs turning into "Of course the AG wouldn't prosecute a rich man." The absurdity of that, when the AG is a prominent democrat, and this case presented an opportunity to 'get' a major republican donor - it just strikes me funny to see the spin unfold. I do think Jerry Brown's integrity rises above that. And when the evidence wasn't there, he did the right thing.

John Matthews asks them both if Larry and Rob could sit down and have coffee some day. Maybe someday they can. In the spirit of - as Glazer says - of making Eureka the best it can be. Stranger things have come to pass.

Matthews does a good job of giving you both sides. When all is said and done, however, I'm left with - this is another case where we would all be better off if Richard Salzman hadn't injected his particular poison into the process.

Ya want the flip side? Try "heraldo" and Carol and Greg's Place. Eric has a more balanced post.

TS - Glass accused of 'political crusade'
TS editorial - Not a bang, but a whimper 02/10/2008

The TS responds to Glass' charges - Tossing a hand grenade
I was listening to an interview with Eureka City Councilman Larry Glass on KSLG last week regarding the state attorney general's office's decision not to act on Glass' charge that businessman Rob Arkley threatened and shoved him.

In the middle of the interview, Glass launched into a tantrum about media coverage of the incident, saying, “The papers treated it as comic relief. The Times-Standard took great glee in trying to ridicule me by portraying me as a baby who was whining, complaining and crying. They're despicable in their portrayal of this whole thing.”

”The Times-Standard?” asked the interviewer, John Matthews, expressing surprise.

”Rich Somerville in particular,” Glass replied. “Editorial cartoons, editorials and spinning the coverage.” The councilman said it was a “horrible mistake” for Somerville to have been hired as editor of the Times-Standard.

If politicians or other public officials think I'm terrific, I usually wonder what we've been missing. Thus, I take Glass' crack as a compliment, sort of like being on Nixon's “Enemies List.”

But the unsubstantiated characterization of the Times-Standard's coverage of the Arkley-Glass incident -- the equivalent of tossing a hand grenade and running -- is surprising from a person who is described by his friends as straightforward....

Rich Somerville read the rest


  1. J Warren Hockaday2/08/2008 10:12 PM


    I appreciate the balance.

    It was my party and I was there when the deal supposedly came down.

    I genuinely believe that Larry felt threatened and I also believe that Rob was offended by what he saw as a slam on his family.

    More than that I sincerely believe that this is a classical example of a political minefield that was not so successfully traveled. Facts and circumstances notwithstanding.

    It was a non-starter from the beginning. It goes to the culture war that embraces winners and losers only. It diminishes simple misunderstandings and overreactions of which we are all guilty.

    I know both Larry and Rob well and respect them both for my part and for different reasons.

    If they decide to have that cup of coffee....I'll gladly buy.

    And to you John Matthews...thanks for the straight up account. As a society, we need more of that.


  2. Welcome and thanks for the info, JWH.

  3. From this minor incident what was really gained? EPD Detective Hubbard conducted an "exhaustive" investigation according to the police chief. A true waste of police resources and for what?

    All Glass did was grandstand a bit. Trying for his own urban ledgend of being the brave David who faced up to the big bad Golith. Just dirty politics. Glass should be ashamed of making such a big to do about nothing. And yes I think it was nothing, an attack on the Home Depot ? A favor to Ken Miller or the anonymous blogger Hairaldo?

    I bet Glass got quite a kick (rush) from seeing his name in the paper so much? Does this remind you of anyone else?

    Did I mention the waste of the time and resources of the AG's office.

  4. Now that the AG has determined that the evidence is insufficient to support charges being filed, it would appear that Mr. Gallegos should prosecute Mr. Glass for filing a false police report. That is, if he is true to the principles which led him to file the Palco suit. I am sure that Dr. Miller would agree that to allow Mr. Glass to escape without consequences would set a dangerous precedent - that anyone could say anything to the police with impunity! A right to lie!

  5. Well, after listening to Larry, it's obvious that he is still very angry about what happened that night. He stated that it's old news, but it sure sounds like it still bothers him. And I think it shows poor judgement to call Arkley "Bullyinare" and also criticize Mr. Glazier's abilities as a PR spokesman.

    I wonder who is the "Prominent City Council person" was that Larry spoke of? My bet it that it was Connie Miller, who lost to Chris Kerrigan a few years back. She is very close with the Arkleys, and probably would be willing to stick up for them without being asked to do so. I could actually really see her defending the Arkley's without any remorse for Larry.

    What bother me about the Glasier interview is that he was all over the map with accusations of Larry without much more evidence than the fact that stickers were handed out at Larry's business, and that he participated in GREG. Seems like every point me made centered on this personal vendetta against Arkley. Never did he really talk about what actually happened that night- Does that mean that there is something to hide?

    Sure looks that way, especially if you need to hire a PR guy to make the argument.

  6. nice try pbj

    some very good points Red!

  7. I just commented over on "heraldo"s that "he" and I and Carol and Greg, and Eric and CPR have ALL as bloggers taken worse hits than what allegedly happened that night. Big deal. Would it affect Larry's vote? I doubt it. If anything it would make him more determined.

    It is disingenuous to pretend that Larry wasn't intensely involved in the Anti-Marina Center smear campaign that was waged - or that it was intensely personal because one of the anchors being proposed was a Best Buy. "Crusade" is a word that, of late has all kinds of PC police tags attached to it, what word would you prefer? Campaign?

    The two people who had something to lose if Marina Center went in was Larry Glass and Pierson.

    It's unfair to smear all the people who were at that event that night, and allege them to be liars.

    Glazer may be a real PR person, but it isn't like Glass doesn't have his own "PR guys" - it's just a new breed, Salzman printing up his little Anti-Arkley stickers and running around town in the dark of night sticking them on parking meter, so that Larry could claim a "grass roots" wave of support is just one form of the guerilla PR tactics. "heraldo" may well be another. It's a new-age ballgame, and it isn't a game with alot of niceties.

    I'd be mad if I was Arkley. Sometime sit makes me mad and I am not even Arkley.

  8. "ALL as bloggers taken worse hits than what allegedly happened that night. Big deal."

    Really Rose? You really believe this is a proper comparison? Someone commenting on your blog site vs. someone threatening a council member? Please explain yourself-

    Unless you believe that there were ZERO threats made, and it was all just a bunch of tough talk, then your argument makes no sense.

    Shame on you for defending your typical political crowd just because you feel it's your obligation.

  9. My obligation? Pssshhh. You guys are funny. My opinion has nothing to do with obligation. Larry would have been better off to have laughed it off. Filing his report so it was on the record was understandable - coming back a few days later and turning it into a federal case is laughable.

    You really think this is a BIGGGGG deal. It's ludicrous.

    I'll tell you what is a big deal - Plea bargaining child abusers and prosecuting Sean Marsh.

    Filing politically motivated cases and using the DA's Office to further someone like Ken Miller's political objectives. I don't hear 'you' (the collective 'you') saying anything about that, do I?

  10. If the table was flipped, and one of your allies was in Larry's position, you would have the opposite opinion on the matter, no doubt.

    It's just as much about politics to you as it is to Miller, Salzman, etc. You feel the need to be the counter to the Heraldo blog crew.

    So sad.

  11. The sad thing, really is that I WAS the only one to speak out. Had that not been the case, this blog would not exist.

    That situation is changing. More and more are coming to see and understand the truth, even if all that means is that they understand that there is another side.

    My job is almost done.

  12. Unfortunately for you Rose,despite me liking you personally,other comments which make it to this blog may inevitably help Paul because of their demeanor and tendency to lump everything and everyone together(you are getting better at that),and it may actually invigorate your opposition by assuring of what one is up against.

  13. I guess that's what Schwartz's piece was supposed to do, mresquan, reinvent the boy to try to hide all this stuff - plagiarism, and all the rest.

    You oughtta have higher standrds than that.

    It really is ok to say not all "progressives" are alike, not lump them all together., weed out the bad ones, you'd have a stronger position too. IF you could admit that Paul is a screw up.

    And that trying to buy the DA's Office is bad.

  14. tom mcmurry not connie miller was the former cc witness

  15. I like J's comments. I believe he sincerely would try and bridge a divide for the betterment of the community. We need more of that in this divisive time. Go J.W. Hockaday.


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