You certainly have to wonder if this blog is shining a light on our county’s political diversity and causing some discomfort among those with more inflexible, long-lasting political views.
Not a day goes by without the hard-right blogs — Juvinall, Steele, Rebane or Pruett — making a snide comment about the commentary, either here or own their own political blogs. It’s endless — and it increases during the political season. The poor fellows can’t help themselves.
The commentators here — from Tom O’Toole Michael Anderson to Steve Frisch — represent a diversity of political views — not just one.
In fact, our county’s political demographics are changing. This blog is just holding up a mirror to the community at large.
We should celebrate our political diversity, not denigrate it.
Much of the friction began when Tom McClintock was elected as our Congressman, spouting hard-line rhetoric like it’s time to get rid of the “left-wing clerk recorder” — a nonpartisan post. McClintock is largely going away with “redistricting,” but the divisiveness continues.
The campaigning against Tom Anderson in the judges’ race and Doug LaMalfa for Congress has been “negative.” For his part, LaMalfa is a staunch conservative. There are “whisper campaigns” about Beason, though he has done a good job.
The Union newspaper’s editor/publisher has exacerbated the friction in the Anderson-Smyrnos race, writing uninformed columns about judicial sentencing under new laws called “public safety realignment.” It means that some criminals can be released from prison without parole, jeopardizing public safety, so a judge has to consider this. Retired Judge Al Dover has called out The Union on its uninformed coverage.
People are going to be watching the results of our local elections closely — the Beason-McGuire and Andersonl-Smyrnos races, in particular — for signs of how the electorate feels about this negative, divisive campaigning.
My hunch: They don’t like it. They’re tired of it. They’re tired of the behind-the-scenes political operatives — the self-appointed tiny-town political puppet masters. They want to get on with their business.
We have a “silent majority” of voters in our community. They are reasonable, hard working and more “middle of the road” than the extreme ones who try to grab the spotlight all the time.
Filed under: Uncategorized
Jeff,
I was at my nephew’s final lacrosse game this weekend in Santa Cruz. As usual the conversations with my brother turned towards politics. He has a degree in political science. My nephew asked me if I saw the documentary “You Betcha”? I hadn’t. We watched it together and what it showed once again that hard core conservatives generally can only win by dividing the people. Palin did this in her run for Mayor. She made Christianity and abortion part of the campaign, which had nothing to do with the role of mayor. What it did do was totally divide the town into us vs. them. Once in office she fired long time people from head positions because they disagreed with her. This is what the whole trooper gate was about.
http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1849399,00.html
I think the diminishing power of so called “conservatives” in our area are sticking with the tried and tested divide and conquer strategy bringing the chance of reasonable dialogue to a minimum on purpose. The reason for this goal is most people would realize we have much more in common than we have in differences. The other thing around our local right blogs is their lack of understanding what are hard-core leftist policies. Communism is hard core leftist policies and I haven’t heard a liberal in my entire lifetime say we need to end ALL private property and leave in the control of the government. That would be a hard-core leftist policy. On the other hand an extreme right wing policy is allowing corporations to regulate themselves and in generally control the society we live in. I hear that coming from the republican’s and extreme right wing in our community all the time. There really isn’t real representation of extreme leftist policies in America today for good reason- extremism doesn’t work. I wish the right side of the isle would realize this and move back away from the edge of pure corporatism towards the middle so we can get our country, state, and local back on track.
Thanks, but Nate Beason and Doug LaMalfa ARE conservatives. We’ve got a bigger problem here — the political extremists who want to be the “tail wagging the dog.” Time to speak out. Tks.
I don’t know Nate Beason real well but have heard that he is a decent reasonable man. Doug La Malfa and myself had a nice disagreement in 2010 at the Nevada County Fair. Our booth was across from the republican booth so I moseyed on over to talk to the man in the big hat. Kim Pruett and I had a good long conversation that year as well. I like Kim P. and think she does a good job one on one with constituents.
Great post, Ben. After a civilized dialogue with T. Juvinall, when the symbol of the former Soviet Union’s flag appearead next to a post on the supposed liberal/progressive/socialist/communist opponents of the right wing ideologues, I delivered my short diatribe on how they wouldn’t know the difference between a Marxist and a right wing deviationist. Thay really are ignorant of in depth knowledge of communist policy and practice and the vast differences from socialism fragments of socialism existing in today’s world, including programs in the U.S. benefitting the tea people.
As I posted long ago, the far left, such as the SDS, is no long a relevant factor in today’s politics, so out of necessity, the right has moved the bar, trying to make reasonable positions seem extreme. And again I’ll repeat the fruitlessness of debating with thse people; they’ll never respond to honest questions, only ignore them and counter with shopworn dogmatic talking points. In Rebanes case, he mimics Rumsfelds pomposity, uses charts instead of knowledge based experience and believes all problems will be solved, it seems, if we become a nation of individuals educated in near isolation, predominately in the areas of numerology w/o any humanology.
Ed,
The more I read George Rebane’s blog the more I understand he doesn’t know what he is talking about. His resume is great. His writing has the appearance of being academic but falls short when fact checked or sourced. Todd and the rest have very limited ability to understand macro policy. So you are correct in your opinion that it is a waste of time but it can be entertaining some times.
Thanks Ben, I have always enjoyed talking with you as well, we can disagree with one another’s views but in a civil manner and can learn something from everyone we meet and talk to. I don’t always agree with the Republican Party on issues, in fact I am more of an independant than most of my friends who are in the GOP, I try to see all sides of the issues and I agree with you on the fact that we need to get money out of politics, it is ruining and has ruined our system. Some of the people I know in the GOP only care if someone has an “R” behind their name and care nothing about the person’s ethics, experience or record, that is sad. As far as our local politics, I actualy agree with Jeff Pelline, our County is politicly purple, but I don’t like labeling people so I am of the opinion that people are just people, and some are more passionate than others about their views, I don’t think that is extreme. Ed, as far as George Rebane is concerned, he is a good friend of mine and I have found him to be extremely generous in this community,he is thoughtful , reasonable and intelligent. I don’t always agree with Pelline’s views but I enjoy reading his blog and I don’t think it is a waste of my time.
Hi Kim, I will not take issue with your characterization of Mr. Rebane’s thoughtfulness and intelligence, as loyalty to one’s friends is a quality I value very highly. I read a number of commentators, but seldom his pieces, although I happened to notice a recent one on teaching. His belief on the remedy for the educational system seemed to be based on all teachers being numerate, in other words, as it came across, engineers, math, etc., types, That cure, IMO, exhibited no experience based knowledge of the problems of the educational system. I don’t believe a mathemtical formula exisits to determine how best to educate a diverse student classroom.
And you will notice, my waste of time comment came before discussion of GR. As a life long history and political junkie–from a conservative Republican family–specializing in Soviet History and also spending time there in 1972–I feel that I’m intimately aware of the driving force of the so-called right wing and have spent hours debating/arguing with adherents who have absolutely no background or insight in this area, except that they don’t want to pay any taxes, want a big Army but so many refuse to serve, pursue the dollar and upon making lots of money, declare themselves experts on everything with their opinons equal to those who have studied complex social and historical lessons all their lives. And some become so ideological fixated and stubborn, they’ll never respond with a reasoned answer to a legitimate questioning of their stance, answering only with switching the subject to another attack. This is what I meant by its a waste of time. And it doesn’t mean just with bloggers; I’ve become estranged from close friends, even one for whom I was in Nam with and I was best man for his wedding. I know he hasn’t a book in his house and never expressed a political thought since I first met him in 1964, but now he’s an expert, flying CEO’s in corporate jets. And the list goes on.
Kim,
At this moment in time money in politics is the issue. Anything else is a symptom of it. Disagreeing and debating is part of coming up with the best solutions for the most people. Nobody and I mean nobody comes up with a completely original idea. It takes all kinds ideas to shape and form the best solutions. This is why the special interest money controlling our political parties is so destructive. The interests of the people are increasingly obstructions to the bottom line of those who own our government through the leaderships of the republican and democratic parties. This is not what the founders envisioned when they created our grand republic.
Based on comments I have read in here and at other sites, I will say Kim Pruett has the chops to debate in a reasonable and respectful manner as do most of the posters in Jeff’s blog. If only the men from the above mentioned blogs would take notice of her style there could be a meaningful dialogue.
This is the point about Rebane that comes up again and again. From his blog today: “They are of the ‘Me Generation’, and the great part of them will land in the job market without marketable skills, and dumber than the proverbial 2×4 with a face painted on it.”
This from a guy who can’t get it straight that the Mercatus Center is at George Mason University. Who’s really “dumber than the proverbial 2×4″ to use his own words?
Just got home from picking up meds only wanting to hit the rack, but first had to check email. Jeff, you are all too correct. And now Mrs. Pruett I’ll gladly include George in those not worth wasting my time listening to. Okinawa was bigger than D-Day, but the battle wasfought over about a three month period, and be assured, plenty of people kept tabs on the Pacific theater. 12,000 American KIA; 37,000 WIA; 107,000 to 275,000 Japanese troops and civilian KIA. Perhaps my father was involved in rounding up the Germans near Liederberg, as he fought through Italy, and landed in southern France, fighting on into Germany.
The silly people he condems in Europe for economic policy include Nobel Laurette, Paul Krugman, who has been saying for ever that austerity won’t work: and it hasn’t. Nor has Voodoo Economics worked, supply side, trickle down double talk. His analysis is total simplistic and dogmatic adehesion to the far right ideologues. He offers no evidence. He does not feel that outsourcing and competition from Asia are worthy of inclusion in the discussion.
True, some dumbing down in education has occured, but teachers aren’t alchemists and GR’s solutions and analysis leads me to believe he should stick with writing engineering equations and speak of what he knows, for his column today is pure tripe.
I am a life long Dem and a Union member. The Family Court Reformers of Nevada County is a .org that could not be described as right wing. I know for a fact that its members are overwhelmingly progressives. The hard working people at .orgs who take care of domestic violence victims could hardly be called right wingers. I know many people who voted for Obama who are disgusted by what has been allowed to continue in the N.C. courts. The local family law bar tried to tell Judge Dover when he was Presiding Judge what was going on and the late Jan Harlley was retaliated against and had to step down as the head of the family law bar because court staff refused to talk to her. So no, Judge Dover is not well respected on both sides. A copy of the letter of issues given to Dover was recently given to the Reformers. It matched item for item the list of issues Emily Gallup blew the whistle on years later and was fired for. The practice of sneaking a waiver to 216 rights in with madatory forms in violation of state rules led to denial of due process and civil rights violations for years and years. This is all well documented in the public record. Judge Anderson has had years to be part of the solution yet sat by and allowed thigs to go on business as usual. In the State Autidors report on Sac. County Superior Courts they found the practice of paying minors counsels without having parents involved in the review of billing details led to significant improper overpayments. The parents are the only ones who know if a phone call or meeting really happened said the State Auditors. That was 2 years ago. So why as Presiding Judge does Tom Anderson still refuse to follow guiadance from the State Auditors on this issue? His policy of the Presiding Judge (him) suposedly auditing these bills is a conflict of interest. Does anyone really think he is going to say court staff lied in their billings? Judge Anderson chose to not be part of the solution. That is why crime victims, and their family and friends of all parties, victim advocates as well as feminists are flocking to George Smyrnos for Superior Court Judge. Am the only one who see’s the irony of all the criminal defense bar supporting Tom Anderson? It kind of makes our point does it not?
Ellen,
This reads like just so much like inside baseball. If the Nevada County court system is really as dysfunctional as you suggest, can you honestly pin all of this on Judge Anderson?
And will a “hang ‘em high” judge, as Smyrnos purports to be, really fix the alleged problems that you and your group list as systemic and long-term?
Michael A.
Good Morning Michael, In the Job Description of the Presiding Judge he is responsable for the whole operation. He sets policy and directs the courts entire staff. That these issues have been brought to his attention repeatedly is part of sworn statements by court staff and part of the public record. Is it really acceptable for the Boss to go along to get along? That practice has not served us well in congress and is failing us now in the courts here. The only way voters can make a good choice is to be well informed of the real issues. Not the issues his professional political hacks would have us focus on like the meritless claim this is an R vs D election. The facts are the facts. He is the Boss and the Buck Stops with HIM. No one made him say at the League forum that he thought that it was an accomplishment of his to push to save court staff time by increasing mediation in things like ‘small claims, family member restraining orders and neighbor disputes.’ Really?!!? He thinks its better to force a victim of Domestic Violence to have to sit in a small room and negotiate with her abuser? He could not even bring himself to say domestic violence. People ask why are we taking this stand against him and I am providing exact details of policies that harm our community to help inform the voters of the real issues to consider. Have a good Mothers Day, Ellen
Ellen, thanks for your reply. It was helpful.
Your comparison of the Nevada County court system to our gridlocked Congress seems a bit overwrought. I can’t imagine how they are on the same scale.
Your use of the term “professional political hacks” is also more inflammatory than expository.
And since I am a big fan of mediation over the adversarial court system–only when it’s appropriate, of course–I will have to do some more reading in order to determine for myself if Anderson really “thinks its better to force a victim of Domestic Violence to have to sit in a small room and negotiate with her abuser.” This characterization seems completely out of sync with the Judge Anderson with whom I am familiar.
Thanks again, Ellen. I hope you have a good Mother’s Day as well.
Michael A.
The League forum was broadcast live I believe, so I am sure the recoding is out there. Its toward the end. I was there as were many advocates for victims.
Hi, a friend who is fearful of posting made a wonderful comment. It does not matter if Tom Anderson THINKS it’s better to force a victim of Domestic Violence to have to sit in a small room and negotiate with her abuser. THAT IS WHAT HIS POLICY HAS DONE TO US. Caps to reflect her emotion. I am pleased you know no one who has to suffer like this. I would also remind you of the incident recently where the rent a cop in family court could not stop a major assault.That is all the protection in the court and the hallway and the mediation rooms. Would you want your daughter who had a DV restraining order to have to live this over and over?
“Would you want your daughter who had a DV restraining order to have to live this over and over?”
Obviously a rhetorical question.
So let me ask you a question. If you were a member of the Byrnes family, would you want a candidate for judge to drag your name into his campaign for a couple of months, using the grim details of that case to make his point?
Another rhetorical question.
Here’s an additional question. Since Mr. Smyrnos apparently has no experience with civil law, how can he be expected to be competent in those cases as a Superior Court judge?
Michael: Your question is not a rhetorical question as the answer is not obvious. The Rules of Evidence are the same for both civil law and criminal law. For this reason, a criminal trial and a civil trial are the same. If you have twenty plus years litigating, criminal versus civil is completely irrelevent. Your question demonstrates a talking point that has no basis in the law. By why of example, when Anderson got on the bench, his civil experience was nominal at best. You assertion in the question which you posed is a non sequitur in logic.
Barry,
The rhetorical question I was referring to was about whether it was appropriate for Smyrnos (and his supporters, such as yourself) to use the grim details of the Byrnes case to bolster his campaign. Did you ask the Byrnes family if that was OK?
The additional question I asked was about Smyrnos’ civil law experience, and I have to disagree with you that being solely a prosecuting attorney in criminal cases gives you the background necessary to handle civil cases with an extraordinary degree of competence, such as Judge Anderson exhibits.
Sure, the rules of evidence are the same, but that’s about it. We’re talking about more than just how to conduct cases. The modern courtroom and the cases brought therein deal in legal positivism and realism, natural law, and critical legal studies, which are opposing theories on how we deal with the vagaries of justice.
So I guess we’re back to whether we want therapeutic jurisprudence, restorative justice, or more rigid interpretations of the law. From what I’ve read so far, Smyrnos is a one-trick pony, which will not serve Nevada County very well at all.
Michael A.
You posture as if you fret about using the name of the family yet you are the only one using their name.
Smyrnos’ entire campaign is centered upon that case. Disingenuous baloney, Ellen.
Legal positivism and natural law have nothing to do with the Rules of Evidence. Judges conduct trials. Rules of Evidence govern how trials are conducted. Background in criminal versus civil is a ridiculous argument. The experience necessary is triale or appellate experience. It does not matter if such experience is civil or criminal. They are exactly the same except that there is far less procedure in civil court. Your argument (which is a talkling point) has no basis in the courtroom. You are grasping at straws Michael.
Barry,
Sorry for not being more clear. I am not talking about just what happens in the courtroom, I am talking about the whole job of being a Superior Court Judge in Nevada County.
As you well know, Judge Anderson was a leader in implementing Laura’s Law, helped to start the Drug and Juvenile Peer courts, and is also a leader in family law mediation and alternative dispute resolution. This is not grasping as straws, and it’s not just a bunch of talking points.
Sure, it can be argued that Anderson’s civil experience in 2007 was not comprehensive, but it certainly is now. So why would we want to hire Smyrnos and lose all of that comprehensive experience?
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Michael A.
I commented before that the Byrnes case will become a major issue in this upcoming election, and am more convinced than ever than the case will take primacy over Judge Anderson’s ‘Body of Work.” A couple of contributors have differed with me, citing a closer contact with Judge Anderson in forming their opinion, in rebuttal to my general approach of, to use an analogy, standing back and viewing a Monet painting in its entirity, ratther than moving so close my eye lashes brush against the oil, and what is within my field of vision is out of focus due to the mere fact of the distortion created by that closeness.
That said. I’ll be more blunt this time around. I was told I did not understand, and was missing the point. In fact, child molestation has happened in my family and domestic violence, broken bones, blood oozing from an unconcscious mother laying on the floor, deep gouges, four on each cheeck, red and deep, adorning my old man’s face, and having myself been battered in the face so many times I can’t remember, I knoweth of what I speak. For years, I had a ladder outside my bedroom window. I’d take those old fashioned door knobs out, and during the night–many nights–when it got too crazy, I’d escape by climbing down that ladder and go sleep in the woods, or an old shed way at the back of our property. When one parent died, this ended. Then soon, off to Nam. And when my sister hinted to me, her divorce from first husband was partly due to DV, I knew she wouldn’t tell me for sure because I was just back from Nam and I would gone after him for sure, though he was a whole lot bigger. And I definitely would have kicked that Ivy league QB’s as-. Maybe gone to jail.
So, this time around, please no rebuttal about if I only understood . . .
The point I want to raise now is simple. Ambition plays a role in most inustrious peoples lives. This includes prosecutors, politicians, etc. and I’ve wondered for many years, what motivates D.A.s and their assisstants to so zealously pursue convictions in cases involving clearly unjust laws. A sense of justice? Or personal ambition? ( Now those questions, Mr. Pruett, are rhetorical, as I expect no answer, not because, as you state, the answer is obvious. And since law is not my profession, I searched several legal and non legal dictionaries and none defined a rhetorical question other than I eplained it. Even if obscurely used at times before the bench, we are not before the bench.) And ambition can be a tool used for good, not so good, or evil. Nixon was memorable for his pretense of virtue and hard core message of being ‘Tough on Crime.’
I’ll bet that as the election nears, and the polls are close, maybe if the campaign hasn’t turned negative, it will, and we’ll not hear about what Smyrnos has done right, only about what Anderson has done wrong, with emphasis on the case in question.
And didn’t I read that Byrnes in fact was in prison for 16 months?
I can understand Andersons running away from his record, I would too were I in his position. A challenger HAS to address the issues that need to be fixed. I know how uncomfortable it makes the powers that be when the people tell too much truth.
Twenty-five percent of all the world’s inmates are in the United States, and yet we have only 5% of the world population. Our prisons are a tragedy and a travesty, they are basically crime factories.
We have the highest incarceration rate on the planet (743 per 100K); the average of countries other than Russia and South Africa, who are still well under the USA, is around 100 per 100K.
Judge Anderson understands and is engaged in the complexities of our system of justice. He is not the reason it is broken.
Mr. Smyrnos, on the other hand, has decided to leverage the partisanship in our county, as well as the anger of a select few, to secure a legacy position. At least, that’s how it seems to me.
Happy Mothers Day! Are you related to tom?
Sorry to say you missed the point, demonstrating the power of false, but emotional hot buttons. Nixon and Agnew were the first presentindtial slate I have a stong memory of stressing the law and order, tough on crime approch, particularly for perceived cultural and political opposites. Look what their policies achieved and where they ended up. What did I say about ambition; it might be evil? So far, from what I’ve seen of Smyrnos is that he says hes going to be a tough guy. What does that mean? Demanding whatever the maximum penalty allows each time. Juries make mistakes, as we find out, it seems nearly every week. That seems like a pre-determined sentence for anyone found quilty; then twenty years later, when DNA proves the prisoner innocent, where’s justice and the tough guy. Like the current opposition in Congress that knows only how to say NO, forgeting what the founding fathers, despite their many vast differences–knew was essential to forming a reasonably just and workable society and Governmant–flexibility and compromise,not dogmatic rigidity–particularly from an untested leader. What Smyrnos says may be his convenient truth, and your truth; maybe its my truth. I don’t know the make-up of the local Bar Assn.: D.A.s.; A.D.A.s.; or just Defence Attys., but it seems their overwhelming truth is that Judge Anderson is better suited to handle the duties of this position.
Ellen wrote: “Happy Mothers Day! Are you related to Tom?”
Nope. And as a matter of fact, I’ve never even met him! I am listed on his endorsement page, but I did that of my own free will. No nepotism, I assure you.
Tom Anderson is running from his record? From that comment, it’s obvious you know little or nothing of the truth!
Just a quick comment on the political ad I rec’d from Smyrnos. I’m sure you rec’d it too. Judges preside while prosecuters try to prove guilt and defence attys. try to prove reasonable doubt–basically.
A picture says a 1,000 words: Gavel in motion, handcuffed arms, scales of justice unbalanced heavily to the right, two small children, a cop.
All comments below photos can and were–I believe–written to remind voters of one case only.
Flip over to other side. Legal Background–emphasises convictions related to Byrnes case. Who says Gaines is prominent? Court room philosophy, Duh. For Anderson, as predicted-exploiting one case, not body of work.
And his assertion about detering petty crime is debatable at best. Just as a previous assertions about harsh penalties by tough on crime people claim they deter others from such crimes. Yet prison populations keep growing.
Politics of course, but the exploitation of the case is beginning, in the very first mailing I’ve rec’d.