Monday, May 25, 2009

Switching parties - a meaningless move.

Neely makes the switch: Longtime Republican supervisor now a Democrat What's not in the story? Well, hinted at, maybe. One: Republicans were done with her. And two: This effectively kills off Richard Marks' ability to run against her.

73 comments:

  1. "And two: This effectively kills off Richard Marks' ability to run against her."

    How is that?And what is different now compared to the last race when the party declined to back Richard?Hell,if I was a Neely supporter I would want Richard in the race,seeing that Leonard will pull votes away from Neely,where Richard would more likely pull votes away from Virginia.Richard not running benefits her the most.

    ReplyDelete
  2. And if Virginia Bass were to switch parties too? Would that be a meaningless move? Are the Republicans done with her too?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes, it would be, or should be, a meaningless move. SUPERVISOR is a non-partisan position.

    What was meaningful was signing on with Salzman. What is meaningful is the "getting re-elected is more important than anything else" mentality.

    ReplyDelete
  4. You didn't answer the question. If Virginia Bass were to switch parties, would it be because the Republicans were done with her?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Out manuvered by the Queen of Politics once again.

    You are right, Rose. This effectively kills off any chance of my running. Going to be too costly of a race for this out of work Humboldt County resident. I may have to re-locate for my vocation. Whatever that might be.

    I am sure the HCDCC will be endorsing her and helping in capacities they could not when I ran.

    Jeff has made enemies in the wrong places on the HCDCC and has little chance at an endorsement, even though he is a longer tenured Democrat.

    Humboldt County politics! The saga continues!

    ReplyDelete
  6. "This effectively kills off any chance of my running.".

    Not necessarily, Rich. You could always switch to the Libertarian Party. That would raise some eyebrows.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've said it before, I'll say it again - both the republican and the democrat central committees should serve as a help group, a resource for ANY member of their party who runs. They should not act like a PAC, should not be choosing favorites, should not be any candidate's campaign committee, especially in the primary.

    They should offer advice, assistance, help with mailings, etc.

    Instead, at least locally, the HCDCC has chosen favorites, attacked and denigrated and sabotaged Candidates who were and are Democrats, life-long Democrats.

    It is a vicious, filthy, nasty business, with no redeeming qualities. I have no sympathy whatsoever. Though I like carol Conners personally, and some other members, past and present, of the democratic central committee, I have ZERO respect for the way they have conducted themselves in recent years.

    As to whether the republicans are done with Virginia? No - not to my knowledge. she has done a good job, made considered decisions and shown herself to be a good public servant, what more can you ask? Extreme partisanship? That's for the democratic side of the aisle.

    I'd be surprised and disappointed if she switched.

    But it's her right to choose and all this partisan bullcrap is stupid beyond belief anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Changing political parties is like changing religions.

    Both require faith in one narrow world view.

    ReplyDelete
  9. In a race between Bonnie Neely and Jeff Leonard?

    I'd have absolutely no one to vote for.

    At least Nancy Fleming had a few accomplishments to point to. These others have achieved nothing. Leonard can't even complete a frigging skate park.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Rose says County Supervisor is a nonpartisan position. The local Democrats have been supportive of a Republican for Supervisor. When did the local Republicans ever support a Democrat for Supervisor? So, which local party has demonstrated it can be nonpartisan and which local party is strictly partisan?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Humboldt heretic5/25/2009 7:04 PM

    Neely, a Republican? She, Specter and powell are the reasons for the coining of the term RINO. Nothing has changed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Bonnie's DNA is not RINO,it's VIRUS.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Thats as dumb a question as asking if Miller will continue to shit in the woods.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Quick Rose, start digging up dirt on Judge Sotomayor. I'm sure you can link her to ACORN, Salzman & Paul.

    ReplyDelete
  15. 10:22 - been drinking this morning or what? Salzman and Paul are clearly an item - everyone knows that.

    Acorn is being slammed by its own members for the executive board being corrupt. Everyone knows that too. (which doesn't mean all the volunteers are corrupt - only the greedy scum siphoning money for their own corrupt ends including the 1 million that the brothers on the board embezzled.)

    Don't know about Sotomayer, but if she is a token instead of a scholar I will be both disappointed and disgusted. I want the best no matter what sex, religion or ethnicity.

    You sound like a Paul apologist 10:22, aren't you getting tired of his stupidity? Aren't you ready for a change for the better?

    ReplyDelete
  16. What about all of those gays that are being allowed to stay married? What an outrage!!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Stick it 10:49 - go hate blog on Heraldo you ignorant putz.

    ReplyDelete
  18. More power to 'em. Looks like the Court split the baby.

    ReplyDelete
  19. What about Judge Sotomayor Rose?

    ReplyDelete
  20. What about sticking it and going over to Hateful Heraldo 11:35?

    You have no takers here.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Inquiring minds want to know there 12:20...

    ReplyDelete
  22. Pretty tough to have an opinion when you haven't heard much, 12:23. Why don't we wait and see what comes out. Looks like a smart lady, and a nice one at that.

    Her ethnicity and her sex shouldn't have any bearing on whether or not she is confirmed. Excellence and a true understanding of the law and the judiciary's role should be the deciding factors.

    It;s also starting to look like she should have run for Senate, where policy actually is made. If she truly doesn't understand the judiciary's role, if she really is an activist judge, then she should not be confirmed in my opinion, if you want the Constitution and the balance of power to have any meaning going forward.

    No danger of her being Palin-ized.

    There, ya happy?

    Let's just wait and see what comes out - maybe she'll turn out to be someone we can all agree on. I doubt it given Obama's record, but ya never know.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Why is Neely switching parties? Could it be a seat in the Woolley-Berg-Chesbro musical chairs ? Is she batter up? Running for Wiggins' seat?

    ReplyDelete
  24. What's your take on the State Supreme Court ruling today? I believe that they upheld the will of the voters, but expect another ballot measure soon which will have a different outcome.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I know you're just dying to know my opinion, 1:21, I'm not sure why - your Prop. 8 is just not one that particularly interests me one way or the other. I can see both sides, and both sides feel passionately. I grew up in the time where we derided marriage as nothing more than a piece of paper, and alternative choices, so I don't see the sudden vociferous focus on it as making any sense. Living together and lifelong commitment doesn't require a piece of paper.

    If I have any opinion of it at all it is that I wonder why you who are so violently and adamantly supposedly in favor of gay rights are absolutely mute, um, on the leader of Iran's statement that there are no gays in his Country.

    Same as I wonder why those who profess to care about women's rights are absolutely mum on the plight of women under Sharia law, why there's never a peep or a protest about women being beheaded, teenage girls the victims of "honor killings" - why aren't you rioting in the streets over real injustice in this world?

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think Neely is a Borg. Should fit in well with the state democrat machine.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Neely, a Republican? She, Specter and powell are the reasons for the coining of the term RINO. Nothing has changed.And you wonder why you're becoming a marginal fringe party?

    ReplyDelete
  28. Same as I wonder why those who profess to care about women's rights are absolutely mum on the plight of women under Sharia law, why there's never a peep or a protest about women being beheaded, teenage girls the victims of "honor killings" - why aren't you rioting in the streets over real injustice in this world?Give it a rest already. Feminist groups were trying to make people aware of the abuses of the Taliban long before most conservatives had even heard of the Taliban and hating the Taliban became fashionable.

    ReplyDelete
  29. yep. I used to get the emails about the plight of the women - send this to everyone you know... blah blah blah.

    Then, when the war came and something WAS actually being done, nothing. So the question is, when you sent those emails, what did you think was going to happen if someone listened? Did you think that they would issue some lawyerly statement? Or did you realize there would be guns involved, and killing? That asking nicely wasn't going to help.

    Maybe if it had been a Democratic President the women's rights groups would have stepped up to the plate instead of bashing and denigrating the effort.

    But their treatment of Palin tells me otherwise.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Rose, I think it's called the Democratic Central Committee, unless you think you are a Republic.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Humboldt Heretic5/27/2009 6:44 AM

    Eric,
    FYI: Humboldt Heretic is NOT a repub.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Hey Rose, who do think will win the 4th District Supervisor seat? Do you think anyone will run against Jill? Prediction?

    Funny thing happening my way, before Bonnie switched parties I had e-mails and phone calls concerning my running. Since monday's TS, silence. So your #2 observation is right on.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I think those who toss out phrases about 'the good old boy network' and use that outdated meme as cover are themselves a virulent and toxic, much dirtier and much more dangerous version of that club. They have become what they professed to hate, and then some. And the day is coming when they will be shown for what they are.

    And, yes, they go by nice-sounding names professing to care about health and the environement, more cover, nothing about them is what they pretend to be on the surface.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Rose, the emails may have stopped because there was no longer a government to apply international pressure. They called for sending letters to consulates, but they probably don't have an address for the insurgency.

    However, they continue to write about the attacks on girls' schools, the renewed imposition of Burkas, etc. Visit their websites.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Rose, these days the 'good ol boy' network ARE the democrat centcom machine and their apparatchiks like Loco Solutions, DUHC and the decaying carcass of the local labor councils.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You are right on the mark 4:47,however why are they creeping into every nook and cranny? Because they keep the beer and pot and rock-n-roll front and center. Always throw a party then add the political theater. Bonnie's turned into quite the party girl.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Not to change the subject, but hasn't it been about 5 years since Tim Stoen left your fine county saying that, "Five years from now, people will say they were glad Tim Stoen was here"... or something like that? Was he right? I'm wondering just how omniscient Mendocino County's bad penny is.

    ReplyDelete
  38. The only thing I am glad about concerning Stoen is that he is gone. What a lying, self-serving cheat he is. Talk about bilking the system, he has been on different counties' dole for way too long.

    I feel for Mendocino, but am glad that Humboldt is rid of him. Wish he would have taken Gags with him though as our county has suffered loads over the last 6 years with his incompetence and his corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  39. It's interesting that his name resurfaces - because I have been contacted by some people who say they are having trouble with him.

    Waiting on some details.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Now Rose if you do not like the bylaws of the HCDCC that state that not only can the HCDCC endorse candidates and it is their duty to endorsed one democrat over another, then you can change your party registration, joined the HCDCC and attempt to change the bylaws. We have been over this many times on the blogs. I am no longer the secretary (Richard is the secretary now) and am not a member of the HCDCC anymore.

    I like you, too!

    xo

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  41. Nope. You couldn't pay me enough to get me to join the Democratic party, especially after watching them tank the greatest nation and state on earth.

    I'd consider Libertarian if they got their heads on straight about national defense, because my own beliefs are generally more in line with theirs. But that's a discussion for another day.

    Nope - it is up to the Democrats to fix what is wrong with their own operations. And the fact that it is in the by-laws doesn't justify the vicious attacks perpetrated by members of the HCDCC on lifelong Democrats who have chosen to run for office.

    People who run for office put themselves out there, they have the guts and the courage to run, and they deserve certain respect. Criticism, yes, it is part of the gauntlet that has to be run, that forges the steel spines they need once they serve - but they should not have to suffer the poisonous arrows of a committee that is supposed to exist in order to ASSIST party members who run.

    Period.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Carol: where is it in your bylaws that state that it is their duty to endorse one democrat over another?

    ReplyDelete
  43. here is the link from the HCDCC homepage to bylaws

    http://www.cadem.org/atf/cf/%7Bbf9d7366-e5a7-41c3-8e3f-e06fb835fcce%7D/BYLAWS2008-11.PDF

    Carole what you said is simply not there.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Here, fixed your link to make it clickable:
    http://www.cadem.org/atf/cf/%7Bbf9d7366-e5a7-41c3-8e3f-e06fb835fcce%7D/BYLAWS2008-11.PDF

    (< a href="whatever.com/your url">link words< /a > ) without the spaces between the < > and a, / and a

    ReplyDelete
  45. 1.2 Purposes: The purposes of This Committee are:

    (a) To encourage and promote public interest and participation in political activity;

    (b) To use all means to assure public understanding of the principles and issues involved in national, state, and local elections;

    (c) To support actively Democratic candidates for elective office; and

    (d) To urge citizens to register and vote Democratic.

    1.3 Duties: As the official and duly elected representative of the Democratic Party of Humboldt County, California, This Committee shall have the following duties:

    (a) This Committee shall have charge of Democratic Party campaigns under the general direction of the California Democratic Party (E.C. §7240);

    (b) This Committee shall have exclusive authority to charter Democratic clubs organized or operating within Humboldt County, California;

    (c) This Committee shall have the authority to make or withhold endorsements in partisan and non-partisan elections, to adopt a platform, and to take positions on ballot measures to the full extent allowed under the Constitutions of the United States and the State of California, under the rules of the California Democratic Party, and these bylaws;

    (d) This Committee shall perform such other duties and services for the Democratic Party as are for the party’s benefit (E.C. §7242).

    ReplyDelete
  46. 6.4 Endorsements: To the extent consistent with law, This Committee may endorse candidates or take positions on ballot propositions subject to the following conditions:

    (a) Endorsements as between two or more eligible persons or positions shall be made only following notice to representatives of all eligible sides and all Members in the manner prescribed by Section 3.6(c);

    (b) No endorsement shall be made except upon the affirmative vote of two- thirds of the members present and voting; and

    (c) This Committee shall not endorse or in any way support any candidate who is not a Democrat. (CDP By-laws; Article VIII)

    ReplyDelete
  47. Article VIII. Term, Amendment, Construction and Waiver

    8.1 Term of This Committee: The regular term of This Committee shall be for two years, commencing as soon as members are sworn-in at a meeting called for that purpose on or within one month after the date on which results are certified for the June primary election in even-numbered years, and continuing until the members of a successor committee are sworn-in two years hence. The bylaws and policies adopted during the given term of This Committee shall remain in effect in succeeding terms unless amended or repealed in accordance with these bylaws or superseded by a controlling provision of law or the bylaws of the California Democratic Party.

    8.2 Amendment: These bylaws may be amended only by affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members present and voting, provided that the proposed amendment is submitted in writing and otherwise in accordance with the provisions of Sections 6.2 and 6.3 above respecting the presentation of special resolutions and amendments thereto.

    8.3 Construction: These bylaws are adopted expressly subject to the Constitutions and laws of the United States of America and the State and California and the Bylaws of the California Democratic Party. No provision of these Bylaws in derogation of any of the foregoing laws or Bylaws, except insofar as the laws themselves are unconstitutional, shall be of any force or effect. An act by This Committee in derogation of its lawful powers shall be a complete nullity as if such action had never been proposed nor occurred. If any of the provisions of these Bylaws is for any reason determined to be illegal or unconstitutional, such determination shall not affect the legality or validity of any other provision of these Bylaws except to the extent that any other provision relies on the provision determined to be illegal or unconstitutional.

    8.4 Waiver of Notice and Objections: Notwithstanding any other provision of these bylaws, no action or failure to act by This Committee shall be deemed invalid on the grounds of insufficient notice unless the member objecting to such action or failure to act does so at the first opportunity available to that member and in any event no more than thirty (30) days after the action or failure to act to which objection is made. Subject to the same time limits for raising such objection, no action or failure to act shall be deemed invalid on the grounds that one or more persons voting with the prevailing position were ineligible to vote, unless it is shown that the person or persons whose votes are challenged are presumptively ineligible rather than merely subject to removal under Section 2.11 and that the number of votes thus challenged was sufficient to change the outcome of This Committee’s vote.

    Certificate of Adoption

    I certify that the foregoing bylaws were adopted by vote of the members of This Committee at its regular meeting on January 14, 2009

    Dated: February 4, 2009

    /s/ Carol Conners
    Secretary of This Committee

    These bylaws amend, restate and supersede the bylaws of This Committee adopted on August 15, 2000, which in turn amended, restated, and superseded the bylaws of This Committee adopted on December 1, 1977 as amended in 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981. 1982, 1992, 2000, 2006, and 2007.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Rose, I beleive you are still disgruntled because the HCDCC endorsed District Attorney Paul Gallegos over his opponent Worth Dikeman. That is the root of your political "beef" with me. I still have the minutes for that meeting (I was the substitute secretary and copies of the minutes are available at the HQ in a notebook with all the meeting minutes) where there was a parade of local attorneys supporting Worth, many stating that the committee shouldn't endorse one democrat over another democrat.

    In the case of supervisor Neely, there were democrats that supported her, but the committee didn't endorse anyone. From my perspective, I did not know about Richard's decison to run until the day he showed-up seeking the endorsement. Bonnie had already garnered support with Dems for Neely.

    Neely was a democrat prior to intitally running for Supervisor, then became a republican.

    And to answer a question that you asked of me long ago before we met each other, no, I did not attend the republican meeting at OH's when Paul and Worth spoke to your party.

    The democratic party did not create the fiscal mess we are in - it was the republican party's mottos of "starving the beast", deregualtion, privatization, offshoring corporations, and the obscene cronysiam. Now it is the democratic parties job to clean up the abyssmal mess.

    ReplyDelete
  49. "Nope. You couldn't pay me enough to get me to join the Democratic party, especially after watching them tank the greatest nation and state on earth."


    Don't you love your new GOP leaders Rose?

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/05/29/MNGF17SNET.DTL&tsp=1

    ReplyDelete
  50. Disgruntled is a funny word, Carol. Disgusted would be more appropriate. And there's WAY more to it than the HDCC's nasty and unforgivable treatment of Worth Dikeman.

    I have no beef with you, regardless.

    I assume that you were, and most likely still are, unaware of the shenanigans being pulled by some others on the committee at that time.

    Obscene cronyism? Yeah, that about describes what I saw happen. LOL

    ReplyDelete
  51. Typos: cronyism and party's job

    I got involved with the party in 2004 right after the November election because I beleived that the election was stolen (again) and Bush and Cheney were just so bad. Immediatley I was wrapped up in local politics, which was really a drag. Maybe it is like this everywhere. My experience with local politics is that it is often mean-spirited and vicious. It is where your friends "stab you in the chest". It is where a local attorney approached me and Greg at a Fortuna coffee shop and said, "What are you liberals doing in Fortuna?"

    One former co-worker said to me back in 1982 when I was a LVN at RMH, "Carol, be careful what you say in H.C., because everyone is related to everyone."

    Good advice: it just took me a while to see what he meant.

    I have had threats, insults, lies, and insinuation thrown at me and my loved-ones. I know who I am. I will just continue to don my teflon suit when I go out in public and try to keep a sense of humor.

    ReplyDelete
  52. BTW, there also was a parade of supporters for Paul at the same meeting where he received over 2/3 of the vote for his endorsement.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Dikeman ran a horrible campaign. Paul didn't necessarily win the position- Dikeman clearly lost it.

    ReplyDelete
  54. I think that one reason that the majority of dems would not get behind Worth is that at the same time,the 9th district slammed Dikeman(rightfully) for his racist view of why those Native American potential jurors couldn't understand our laws.People who didn't support Paul were still appalled by Worth's actions,and possibly drew them away from supporting him.
    I wasn't going to vote on the DA race at the onset of the campaign,but in the end I couldn't get over the political stunt pulled by Dikeman during the recall,where he came out saying that he did not support it,but then once he saw that he could use it to his own advantage,he jumped on the bandwagon.There were a few other reasons why I opted to vote for Paul in the end,which I don't have time to get into now.
    Paul Hagen is a much,much better
    opponent for Paul.I guess we will see if Paul intends on running again.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Worth Dikeman is a big boy. I asked him what drugs he prosecuted people for and he named every single drug, EXCEPT marijuana.

    And yes, I was not aware of everything behind the scenes. That is why I am done with local politics, except offering my opinion. Party politics are rank in probably all politcal parties. Not much fun; I don't know why they call it "parties".

    ReplyDelete
  56. Carol: I still don't see how those bylaws of your say it is your duty to endorse one democrat over another.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Yes it does. Read:

    1.3 DUTIES: As the official and duly elected representative of the Democratic Party of Humboldt County, California, This Committee shall have the following duties:

    (a) This Committee shall have charge of Democratic Party campaigns under the general direction of the California Democratic Party (E.C. §7240);

    (b) This Committee shall have exclusive authority to charter Democratic clubs organized or operating within Humboldt County, California;

    (c) This Committee shall have the authority to make or withhold endorsements in partisan and non-partisan elections, to adopt a platform, and to take positions on ballot measures to the full extent allowed under the Constitutions of the United States and the State of California, under the rules of the California Democratic Party, and these bylaws;

    (d) This Committee shall perform such other duties and services for the Democratic Party as are for the party’s benefit (E.C. §7242).

    ReplyDelete
  58. Well, Rose, this has been fun, but it is late Friday morning and it is my Domestic Goddess Day and that means I am going to clean house! It was fun seeing you and Allison at Costco last month. Those were beautiful flower pots you found!

    xo,

    Carol

    ReplyDelete
  59. Hek, I read 13c and it DOES NOT SAY YOU HAVE THE DUTY TO ENDORESE ONE DEMOCRAT OVER THE OTHER. Of course you have the ability to do that but not the duty to do so. This is quite different than a description of official duties.

    ReplyDelete
  60. The Garden Tour is back on this year, Carol, hope to bump into you again.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Rose, did you work on Dikeman's campaign?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Of course.

    Do you have a candidate willing to run against Gallegos? Willing to take the heat, the smears, the attacks? Like the murderers parents sitting on the courthouse steps smearing your name? And the reporters eating it up because it is exciting? Think you can raise the $300 grand need to run against Gallegos?

    His raison d'être is long gone, tossed out by every court that had to hear it.

    Pot's about to be legalized, you don't need him anymore.

    But he needs the big paycheck and the full bennies, so you can bet he'll be running.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Do you feel at all responsible for the outcome of the last D.A. race given your involvement?

    ReplyDelete
  64. This blog is my answer to that question.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Got it, thanks Rose!

    ReplyDelete
  66. The answer is we didn't do enough. Not to inform the media, or to get out the vote.

    Paul was successfully portrayed as the anti-Palco gladiator, the just-give-the-little-boy-a-chance candidate, so all of his failings were forgiven.

    The lost victim-witness grant, the people who lost their jobs there and the decline in services - which, even though he was put on notice DURING the campaign, he never once, to this day, took steps to remedy.

    The precipitous decline in Child Abuse prosecutions, despite taking grant money for just that, something for which he puts the County at great risk - still not addressed, despite his current high-profile and apparently eminently winnable case with Belant (why do you think he is taking that one personally?)

    The absolute lack of support and trust of the law enforcement community would finish him off anywhere but here.

    The absolute respect and trust the law enforcement community had for Worth Dikeman was an anathema to enough Humboldt County voters to make that race un-winnable once the Cheri Moore case broke.

    It's often said that Dikeman ran a negative campaign. Yet he did not hit Paul very hard at all.

    And it is said that Paul ran a positive campaign, yet the opposite is true. Lies piled upon lies, deceit and deception are hallmarks of his campaign from his using Lisa LaDeroute to using the murderer's parents on the courthouse steps to the dishonest letter from Rackauckas regarding CAST, he never had to get his hands dirty.

    Fact is - you get the government you vote for. Humboldt County may be stuck with Gallegos for the next 20 years.

    There isn't much point left, is there?

    ReplyDelete
  67. On a scale of 1-10, how responsible did you feel after the election?

    ReplyDelete
  68. Your point 7:24?

    I believe the responsibility in that election lies with the public and the candidates.

    So, the question is back to you - Did you work on Gallegos' campaign? Why? Given that he has done more to ruin the progressive liberal programs in this county than anyone else has? Are you proud of that? On a scale from 1-10 how responsible do you feel now that there is no domestic violence program, no sexual assault program and child abuse program only in name? Don't you feel responsible for supporting someone who believes that a 200K Hummer and his own assault team is more important that the safety of kids and women in our community?

    I have been in law enforcement fro 20 years and I look forward to your response.

    ReplyDelete
  69. No, not at all. I don't even live in the area. I grew up there, read the blogs to keep in touch and for the pure entertainment value, and find yours interesting, obviously. I didn't know you worked on his campaign till you said so- Given that, and your commitment to this blog, it would appear that you feel very guilty of the outcome. Just wanted to know more behind your motive. Thanks in advance for your response.

    ReplyDelete
  70. If you mean that, go back to the beginning. You'll see the unusual circumstances that put me in a position to know what Salzman and Co were up to - and why it matters that the beholden candidate they got elected used his office to help them achieve their goals.

    That is wrong.

    That is why this blog exists, pure and simple.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are open. Play nice.