Wednesday, May 9, 2007

CM PRESS # 134


THE NEW DAILY PILOT, SAME AS THE OLD DAILY PILOT--JUST A LITTLE SHINIER?

In his column in the Daily Pilot today, old/new editor Tony Dodero writes that some readers are taking issue with the Pilot's "new Latino-issues and conservative columnists."

Put the CM PRESS down for taking issue with these two columnists as follows:-

1. THE NEW LATINO-ISSUES COLUMNIST

This new Latino-issues columnist--Alicia Lopez-- is little different than the old Latino-issues columnist the Pilot used to have.

It seems to us that all she's doing is writing a PR spin column that tries to put a happy face on illegal immigration that is destroying our schools, our quality of life and our city and that she's trying to convince readers that illegal aliens are our new best pals. In other words, she's doing the same thing that the bigs at the paper are doing with their frequent tear jerk columns about this or that wonderful Bible reading illegal alien facing deportation.

To justify a racial/ethnic columnist, Dodero gushes that more than 30% of the population of Costa Mesa is Latino and [gosh golly, gee whiz] "That's a large chunk of people who had no voice in our newspaper."

Nonsense.

What about that larger chunk of 70% of the population that isn't Latino? Where's their voice in the Pilot?

As far as we know, the Pilot has never given any racial/ethnic group, except Latinos, a special column written by a member of their racial/ethnic group and written from a racial/ethnic perspective about their specific racial/ethnic issues.

Where, for example, are the White columnists writing specifically about White-issues from a White perspective?

There aren't any in the Pilot.

The White columnists at the Pilot are ethnic eunuchs writing as aracial lumpen "Americans." They don't write as Whites about Whites on specifically White issues. In fact, we bet if you asked most of the aracial White columnists at the Pilot about White issues, they'd give you blank stares and they might say: "White issues? Huh? Whites don't have issues. Why, to think that Whites might have issues sounds racist." Call it low consciousness. Call it societal conditioning.

If Whites don't and can't have issues, then why should any other racial/ethnic group have issues based on their race/ethnicity?


2. THE CONSERVATIVE ISSUES COLUMNIST

First, Jim Righeimer is too new to Costa Mesa to actually have any bonafides to write about improvement (remember that word) in this city, so he writes about so-called conservative issues.

While many Improvers are conservatives or libertarians, they seem to be more motivated, at least locally, in wanting Costa Mesa to be improved and to become more like our coastal neighboring cities, than they are by larger philosophical and theoretical issues.

What's the first thing Righeimer writes about? A friggin' library in Newport Beach.

You may say, well the Pilot covers both Newport and Costa Mesa so it's only right that Righeimer write about both cities. Okay, but Righeimer is on the Costa Mesa no-Planning Commission and one would hope that he would be concerned about Costa Mesa instead of seemingly trying to get name recognition across the border in Newport Beach for his expected run for higher office--that will eventually require the support of Newport money and GOP suits who live there.

Righeimer's first votes as a no-Planning Commissioner in Costa Mesa (Remember that place?) were even against improvement in Costa Mesa!

It should also be remembered that Righeimer has tried for higher office in the past when he didn't live in Costa Mesa. He didn't make it. In fact, he seems to have come up a day late and a dime short in his attempt at elected office.

To some Improvers, Righeimer looks like a political opportunist who moved to Costa Mesa because he saw that the Improvers have been able to elect four people to office in the face of massive liberal status-quo and good ol' boy opposition. Perhaps, goes the thinking, he may be hoping that some of that magic will rub off on him.

It may not be that easy. Many Improvers have been telling the CM PRESS that they don't want our city to become a stepping stone for politicians who don't care about this city and who are using it to move on to higher office. And, they tell us they don't care if these politicians are Republicans, Democrats, Liberals or Conservatives.

They want OUR politicians to fix OUR city. If they do that, then they may get local support for higher office, but if they don't do that, they had better not expect to get annointed just because they say they're conservative or Republican or whatever. The Improvers are looking at actions and aren't often fooled with words.

It appears to some Improvers that Righeimer's game plan may be to use his seat on the no-Planning Commission and his column in the Pilot to run for the Costa Mesa City Council in two years. Then, once on the Council, he may try to get appointed as mayor and use that title as a resume enhancement to run for higher office.

The fact that Righeimer appears to be on the good side of the Daily Pilot and some liberals who have been trying to defeat Improvers should be a clue as to the political nature of what's afoot.

DEEPER BACKGROUND (All the world's a stage)

Righeimer is a Dana Rohrabacher associate and a GOP party regular.

Don't get us wrong. The CM PRESS likes Congressman Rohrabacher and supports most of what he does as our Congressman. However, as a Congressman, he is not totally focused on Costa Mesa. He has bigger fish to fry.

Other associates of Rohrabacher have tried to get elected to the Costa Mesa City Council in the past. They failed. The reason they failed, in our opinion, is because they hadn't been in the grassroot improvement trenches and they didn't connect with the Improvers on a visceral level.

And, in this regard, back when the Improvers calculated that they could help get Chris Steel elected to the City Council--after he had failed without their help in nine previous attempts--the CM PRESS contacted Dana Rohrabacher's office to see if they'd endorse Steel.

We were told that Steel didn't have a chance and therefore they wouldn't endorse him.

No doubt the Rohrabacherites were thus shocked when the Improvers got "unelectable" Steel elected--with more votes than anyone else running that year. Of course, once in office, Steel made many mistakes and the Improvers had to help un-elect him in the next election, but that's a different story.

Nevertheless, Steel was not a mistake by the Improvers. He was the necessary candidate for the Improvers at that time. His election paved the way for Mansoor, Bever and Leece. Without Steel, their elections may not have been possible for many reasons that we don't need to go into here.

This brings us to Righeimer and Mansoor.

Mansoor actually kept the application process for the no-Planning Commission open past the date when it was supposed to be closed. Could that be because Righeimer had failed to get his application in on time? Then, Mansoor made sure that Righeimer would be appointed to the no-Planning Commission instead of a long time Improver.

In our view, this was the second screw-up by Mansoor with this one Commission. Back when Mansoor was first elected, he was the one who put Bruce Garlich back on the Commission, only to see Garlich (as the CM PRESS had predicted) run against Improver supported candidates in the very next election.

So, what's in this for Mansoor? He, like Righeimer, reportedly has his eye on higher political office and both apparently feel that they need the support of the the GOP establishment including Rohrabacher. As a result, they may feel that the local yokels in Costa Mesa can be dismissed.

A LESSON FROM ENGLAND?

Mansoor and Righeimer might learn a thing or two from the elections in England this past week.

One small, ultra-conservative party that had seen some success in prior elections and which had gotten a few of its people elected, lost some of those seats while picking up some others.

In the party's post-mortem of the election, it was learned that their victories were in those areas in England where small bands of grassroots activists did the nitty gritty work in the neighborhoods day in and day out, long before the elections, and where they built support by using small, local newsletters instead of slick nationally generated brochures printed just for the election.

In those areas where they lost seats, there had been less emphasis on the grassroots work and the candidates had "gone Hollywood," as we say on the streets.

Needless to say, the English party bigs are now going back to grassroots organizing.

Is there a lesson for Costa Mesa Improvers in this? You decide.
# # #
Those are our opinions. Thanks for reading them.

 http://frankspeech.com/