Jeff Pelline's Sierra Foothills Report

George Rebane is listed as a “community leader” by incoming assessor Sue Horne. (He gave her money in her campaign for the “nonpartisan” seat). The publisher of The Union also hand selected him as a monthly columnist. George also provides a radio commentary for KNCO. The county Republican Party and Tea Party link to his blog.

George likes to tout his Ph.D. and wisdom. But you ought to read George’s blog to get a load of what he’s really about:

“Gentleman, your blogs are all no doubt bigger,” he wrote in a comment this weekend. “This has been a grateful surprise since I write on topics and ideas that are understood by only a very small population, and are of interest to one even smaller. On this I have no desire to get into a dick measuring exercise with anyone.”

That’s quite a choice of words for a so-called academic. George was reacting to a web traffic challenge that began with a post by his blogging pal Russ Steele, as I reported previously.

“Gosh Steve (Frisch), you are right, we are only averaging about 675 page views per day, that is probably a lot less than some of the local liberal/middle of the road blogs,” Russ wrote sarcastically.

I merely responded that the traffic on my blog was double that of Russ, and suggested that Rebane and Barry Pruett’s figures were even less than Russ. I suspect that’s a fact too.

I also had pointed out that commentators such as George are held to ethical standards of disclosure (including his own myriad political donations). I cited the New York Times ethic policy. It’s a fact.

And how did they respond? With the “d” word. It gets repeated throughout George’s blog.

Russ begun moderating his blog this weekend, meaning he is now previewing the comments before they are posted.

The “potty mouth” talk on Russ’ blog is also outlandish.

Many of the objectionable comments come from people who share George and Russ’ political views and comment regularly, including ones with anonymous names like “papertiger.” Russ also has chastised Todd Juvinall for his comments.

In short, the supposedly intellectual right-wing blogs in our county (whose authors are touted by The Union, county Republican Party and Tea Party) have turned into the Jerry Springer show.

My observation: Some of the people who represent the right in our community are coming unglued. It’s time for their compadres to rein them in.

BTW, we don’t use the “d” word here; just thoughtful, signed commentary. Thanks for that.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 22 Comments »

A lawsuit filed in New York threatens to hold the Internet’s more unpleasant characters to account, according to an article in the UK Observer.

“In the free for all that has so far marked internet-based publishing, there seems to be no recourse for those targeted by the so-called ‘trolls.’ Certainly not of the sort they would have if such comments were published in hard copy on the letters pages of old media newspapers and magazines, where the threat of libel has kept up standards. But, perhaps, no longer,” the article reads.

Carla Franklin, a former model and graduate of Columbia Business School, last week filed a lawsuit over anonymous comments that allegedly called her a “whore” on Google’s YouTube website.

She is seeking a court order to force Google to identify the person behind the insult.

“Franklin is also riding a growing wave against anonymity online,” according to the article. “Several American news websites, including the Buffalo News newspaper, have recently forced commenters to use their real names when posting their opinions on stories.”

Filed under: Uncategorized | 8 Comments »

I’ve written previously about comparing our congressional district to what was once the state’s bastion of conservatism, Orange County. The background is here and here.

“A revitalized and militant Right—fueled by a politics of antistatism, virulent anticommunism, and strict normative conservatism—burst onto the scene nationally in the early 1960s, and nowhere more forcefully than Orange County. At living room bridge clubs, at backyard barbecues, and at kitchen coffee klatches, the middle-class men and women of Orange County ‘awakened’ to what they perceived as the threats of communism and liberalism …” writes Tom Schaller on “FiveThirtyEight,” politics done right.

Times have changed.

“Today Placer County is more emblematic—or symptomatic, to be precise—of the state of American conservatism than Orange County,” Schaller writes. “The county is a major beneficiary of white flight caused by the arrival in California of Hispanic and Asian immigrants, and the in-migration of white Americans from other parts of the country. . . . Placer County has become a magnet for exurban growth and development.”

Schaller points to arch-conservative Congressman Tom McClintock as the “most fitting testament to this reality.” McClintock is a “carpetbagger” who moved north to run for the seat, because “there was no district left for a state senator of his ideological bent to run,” Schaller concludes. Our state Assemblyman is very conservative Dan Logue.

Our county also is home to Mark Mecker, co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots.

Now there’s an effort to stitch together local hard-right voices (including some outright “wingnut” views) — George Rebane, Russ Steele, Barry Pruett, Todd Juvinall, CABPRO and the Tea Party — to provide political spin. Some people accuse The Union of being the “Tea Party Gazette” because of its sympathy to the cause.

Some of the commentary is nasty and “in your face” personal attacks, rather than fact-based — harkening back to NH2020. It comes even though most of us, including our family, are in the middle. Our county is more “purple” than “red,” with changing demographics.

But like Schaller, I and many others have pointed out that our congressional district is too small and remote to bring about the kind of “conservative revolution” Orange County did a half century ago. “A rural outpost, Placer is a place to escape from, not push back against, the political changes occurring America,” he writes.

This weekend, the hard-right in our state, led by people in our Congressional district, faced a test: getting the California Republican Party to go along with a controversial resolution in support of Arizona’s anti-illegal immigration law. It drew complaints from delegates who say Meg Whitman’s campaign is too “middle of the road.”

The California Republican Assembly, many of whom supported Whitman rival Steve Poizner in the primary, have accused the Whitman campaign of softening her stances on key issues and working behind the scenes to kill the resolution, as the Sacramento Bee reported. McClintock also endorsed Poizner.

As it turned out, a Republican Party committee blocked debate on the resolution. Supporters could still push for a floor vote during the Sunday general session but would need two-thirds approval for adoption.

The calmer heads were coming from Orange County while the hotter ones were coming from Placer.

“The bottom line is: do we want Jerry Brown for governor?” said Pat Shuff, a delegate from Orange County who agreed with the resolution’s aim but saw the bigger picture. “Bashing (Whitman) at this time is really not going to help the cause.”

“I’m sorry that I’m not going to follow blindly,” shot back Karen England, a Roseville delegate who sits on the board of the National Federation of Republican Assemblies. She declined to say whether she would vote for Whitman in November.

The California Republican Party did agree to support Prop. 23, however, though Whitman has not. Polls show that a majority of “decline to state” voters — a key voting block — oppose the measure.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 16 Comments »