Tuesday, August 07, 2007

Diving Back Into The Ooze

After spending a wonderful, relaxing, fun-filled long weekend out of town celebrating the aforementioned anniversary, I returned home late Monday to find a mountain of emails and some very interesting blog entries.


I was amused by Jim Righeimer's column in Saturday's Daily Pilot, here, in which he, once again,
took our neighbors in Newport Beach to task about their plans for a City Hall. He's trying to use logic on that issue and, from a guy who has been beating that drum for a couple years now, I can tell you that it doesn't work. The sides are polarized on the issue based on pure emotion - you just cannot have a rational discussion with a group that is devoted to the perpetuation of a weed patch in the name of environmentalism. I wish old Riggy well as he keeps chucking those stones over the border, but I doubt he's going to have any influence on the decision, however it's made.

Then I fo
und myself chuckling at our young jailer/mayor's latest contribution to the municipal enlightenment in the form of a letter to the editor in the Daily Pilot, here, also on Saturday. Didn't the mayor swear off contributing to the Daily Pilot not too long ago? That's what I thought. Guess he changed his mind.

The mayor's first sentence expressed "disappointment in the double standard put forward by the Daily Pilot." This, of course, is a real joke. In it's news articles the Daily Pilot has consistently presented a balanced view of the issues. I think the mayor just doesn't like the editorial position taken by the newspaper on issues that are near and dear to him. He and his cohorts gripe when the editors chose to publish a viewpoint from residents that differ from theirs, yet ignore the many times when the mayor, or Eric Bever or Wendy Leece or others among the outspoken so called "improvers", like Christian and Kathleen Eric and Judi and Mike Berry, have their views published.

In this particular epistle our young jailer/mayor chose to put spin on the subject of the Paularino Park debate at a recent council meeting - that he didn't attend, by the way. His suggestion that Linda Dixon's question to the City Attorney about what other types of activities would be forbidden by the proposed designation of the park as a "passive" park was "over-the-top antics" misrepresents the facts. Dixon asked the question. Kim Barlow answered it by indicating that tossing baseballs would, indeed, violate the rules.

Mansoor criticized the Daily Pilot editors for their opinion expressed here that the motivation regarding Paularino Park might be race-based. Again, the mayor ignores the facts. This was a non-issue until o
ne resident - a man well known for his racist essays and books and an outspoken critic of the immigrants among us - first raised the issue a couple years ago. Until he fabricated this issue there was no outcry by the Mesa North community. He's used this issue to fan the flames of intolerance in that part of town and the current council majority have been more than willing accomplices. The mayor can deny it all he wants, but facts are facts.

I was pleased to see columnist Steve Smith - a man with whom I've had more than a few disagreements - decided to point out many of the mayor's errors in his letter, here. Then, in a commentary of his own, Tony Dodero, the Daily Pilot's Director of News and Online, signed in with a response to the mayor in Wednesday's Pilot, here.


The man mentioned above, predictably, was all over Smith in his blog posting Tuesday. Without a doubt, he'll rip Dodero's piece, too. I've decided to stop providing links to his stuff because it leaves a stench here on the blog. You'll just have to find it yourself.

I suggest the mayor simply stop reading the Daily Pilot, as he threatened to do so many months ago. Until he does, he should be grateful that the editors and publisher provide him a forum to berate them on their own pages... it's much more than he would do if the shoe was on the other foot.

Labels: , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

After I posted my latest entry to the Bizzaro toliP I checked Martin's and your blogs and it seem we all wrote the same thing.

8/08/2007 08:48:00 AM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

not foolya, same subjects, but the level of vitriol was different.

8/08/2007 09:20:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I wasn't surprised to see DerMayor's rambling on that issue, I really thought Tony Dodero hit the ball out of the park in his response today. Of course, as a paid journalist, he should be expected to know how to write. But his comments were so spot on. Pointing out the irony that while conservative politics are supposed to stand for less government while the current troika keeps imposing more - what a great thought.

8/08/2007 10:12:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well Mike local governments create local ordinance to stay in line with current issues going on within the city, happens everyday in every city. Creating a safety ordinance is not anti-conservative and neither is government building. Adding additional government services are counter to conservative principals, regulating someone’s personal space is counter conservative. Tweaking or adding an ordinance of a city owned space to mirror residence concerns is exactly what we elect people to do. Look at this, here is an excerpt off a Foley website – Focus on Parks “Please remember Costa Mesa ordinances prohibit alcohol in city parks, and dogs must be kept on a leash at all times.” Humm wonder why these ordinance were put in place, did the city hate dogs and people who drink, or did they add something to meet the needs of the city and its residents safety.

8/08/2007 11:12:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree that Tony Dodero's commentary was fantastic! It will be interesting to see whether the "concerned citizens" of Costa Mesa will move to ban soccer in the nascent Shalimar Park. I mean really, its all about public safety, right?

If the City really wants to provide services for its citizens, $3million should not be wasted on another pocket park. that area is full of kids who need sports fields. The City should spend more and get more, instead of half measure parks that may see 20 people a day.

While I couldn't possibly disgaree more with Smith on the job center issue, and I think Mansoor & Co. were spot on with closing it, I find it disturbing and disappointing that the Mayor would actually put in print the fact that park rules will be selectively enforced. Was that a typo, or was he shooting from the hip again...?

Welcome back, Geoff, and thanks for the great posts regarding your happy marriage! I hope that I may be as fortunate.

8/08/2007 11:48:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home