Sunday, December 02, 2007

Mansoor Endorses Ron Paul

My Google Aler
t system coughed up another political hairball this weekend. This time it was an entry by Irvine commodities broker and self-styled political pundit Allan Bartlett in his Powder Blue Report blog. You can read the entry here.

Bartlett's entry - a fawning little essay about our young jailer/mayor, Allan
Mansoor, that really tested my gag reflex - tells us that Mansoor has confided in him that he's endorsing Texas Republican Ron Paul for president - Big Whoop!


It sure looks to me as though our young jailer/mayor assumes that his position on the tip of the lance being used to force immigrants from our country has made his opinion valuable to a broader audienc
e. Puhleeze!

Mansoor rode to re-electon last year on the backs of the latinos in Costa Mesa, dragging his running mate Wendy Leece along for the ride - using the flames of intolerance fueled by a few Neanderthal "activists" in our city and fanned by out-of-town interl
opers like Minuteman Grand Pooba Jim Gilchrist and his frothing followers.

Anyone who has watched Mansoor during his reign on the City Council knows that the p
oor young man has great difficulty putting two un-scripted words together. His "aw-shucks" act got old very early. Here is a man who is an under-educated, under-achieving deputy sheriff who spends his work day in the bowels of the county jail system, dodging effluent and dealing with the very worst in our society.

Mansoor has talked out of both sides of his mouth, making it impossible to believe him on many issues. For example, he tou
ts the advantages of increasing the level of home ownership in Costa Mesa, yet he sold his own Westside home, took his profit and now rents an apartment.

He talks about being a strong advocate for law enforcement - something that shouldn't
surprise us, since he's a deputy sheriff - yet he consistently and frequently overtly ignores the wise counsel of his top law enforcement officers. The most recent three past chiefs of police in our city who represented more than 100 years of law enforcement command experience between them.

He's demonstrated that he is easily manipulated by his small cadre of Costa Mesa "improver" ma
lcontents and Orange County GOP mucky-mucks. He's also shown that he places his own political future ahead of the well-being of Costa Mesa residents by appointing carpetbagging GOP activist Jim Righeimer to the Planning Commission as political pay back, ignoring freshly coiffed and snappily dressed loyal foot-soldier Paul Bunney - who appeared to be prepared to accept that seat - in the process.

Why anyone would want Allan Mansoor's opinion anything, much less care about who he is
supporting for president, is beyond me.

Labels: , , ,


Blogger Unknown said...

Thanks for the mention Pot Stirer

12/03/2007 09:22:00 AM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

My pleasure. I guess any pub is good pub, huh? By the way, I'm with you regarding the UCLA coaching situation. Sad times for the "gutty little Bruins". They'd better have a good recruiter on staff, because they need a qb in the worst way!

12/03/2007 10:34:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to admit you are showing tremendous courage challenging the Ron Paul folks. You may never hear the end of it.

12/03/2007 11:21:00 AM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

Not Foolya, old pal, I'm not challenging the "Ron Paul folks". The point of my piece is "Who the heck cares who Allan Mansoor supports for President?!". Every American voter has the right to waste his or her vote any way he or she chooses - even on Ron Paul.

By the way, it's good to hear from you again. I thought you may have gone into an early hibernation since there's been no recent activity on your two blogs. Welcome back.

12/03/2007 01:13:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


I know that you are against illegal immigration and I don't want to waste everyone's time discussing that issue again.

However, I think you seriously misrepresent what happened in the last election. Mansoor won conclusively, and he beat Bruce Garlich soundly. Bruce is a great guy and was a very strong candidate, and his loss was NOT on the "backs of the latinos in Costa Mesa" or due to "flames of intolerance fueled by a few Neanderthal "activists" in our city and fanned by out-of-town interlopers like Minuteman Grand Pooba Jim Gilchrist and his frothing followers."

RtR tried to sell Costa Mesa on the idea that the status quo was just fine, and that the decades of actions by the City that gradually turned us into a virtual illegal alien sanctuary city were, in fact, "reasonable."

That was a gut-check moment for many, myself included, simply because it is completely unreasonable to tolerate the widespread criminality that is the reality in areas that have high populations of illegal aliens.

Tolerance of the myriad illegal activities illegal aliens must engage in to simply exist here breeds a culture of impunity - where the law is an inconvenience and there are no consequences.

A City-funded job center facilitating widespread employment, payroll, worker's compensation, and health care fraud sends a dangerous message to everyone - that breaking the law is absolutely fine in Costa Mesa.

Mansoor correctly gauged the mood of the average Costa Mesa voter - ordinary folks who ARE NOT racists or intolerant - who were fed up with the city's tacit approval of illegal immigration.

The vast majority of Americans feel the same way, as evidenced by numerous polls. The dramatic failure of NY Gov. Spitzer's drivers-license for illegals plan is another strong indicator of the national mood - even his Democratic allies told him that the plan was a complete non-starter.

So, please - do not misrepresent the average Costa Mesa voter as some frothing Gilchrest-acolyte. I truly think that you know better.

12/03/2007 02:52:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Rob,

I will take a little bit of issue with you on the tolerance for Latinos in our community. Geoff's assertion that Mansoor and company climbed the backs of brown skinned people to win election may be hyperbole, but you must admit there is a measurable percentage of our city's population that is openly anti-Latino, legal or not. The rhetoric I hear seems to equate those that are "Mexican's" with illegal immigrants; even though anyone with a brain recognizes that we have people in our community with a wide range of heritages.

You and I both know that it is certainly easy enough to hide racial motives behind a “Law-and-Order” stance on immigration. That to me is the insidiousness of this whole issue. It gives safe harbor and even encouragement to people that are morally reprehensible. It also puts some people like me who want to see responsible immigration reform enacted in collusion, on at least some level, with people I despise.

In a perfect world we would be to disassociate racial hatred from immigration policy. Unfortunately both sides seem to be unwilling to allow that.

12/04/2007 10:29:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Right on - you distill an issue quite well. Geoff and I have disagreed on this point before, and I hope to clarify what I mean.

Certainly, there is an element in town that has unabashed hatred of Latinos. One of the chief "Improver" proponents has openly chronicled his theories on race and has gone so far as to call Latinos in Costa Mesa "alligators" and swamp creatures. He bemoans the "tan everyman" and cites intermarriage and breeeding as the cause of our impending downfall.

He is free to his opinions, but I HIGHLY doubt that many others share them.

That is my point. I strongly oppose illegal immigration from a law-and-order standpoint, and I am sick and tired of good people - my brother and sister included - equating my opposition to illegal immigration with racism.

The assumption is automatic and reflexive. If you fight strongly against illegal immigration you MUST be a racist. You can deny it until you are blue in the face, heck, you can even have a Latima girfriend, but these ignorant fools could care less. THEY claim to know what is in YOUR heart, and opposing illegal immigration must mean that you hate brown people.

If you are a Democrat, your DUTY is to support illegal immigrants, it seems. If you are a Republican, you either support illegal immigrants because they make you rich or you hate them because that wins you votes. What pure, unadulterated horsecrap.

What happened to fairness and the rule of law? We welcome millions of legal immigrants each year, yet we are demonized for wanting those who want to come here to follow the law?

I bet most people calling me a racist for opposing illegal immigration would want someone who stole from them to be fully prosecuted. They'd probably want the book thrown at someone who mowed down a pedestrian while driving without a license or insurance and little or know formal training.

But try and talk up the extremely serious impacts of illegal immigration - identity theft, illegal driving, etc. and you get shouted down. Costa Mesa's monthly DUI checkpoint on the Eastside is applauded, but try and set one up on the Westside! Those damn racist cops!

That double standard is a direct result of good people like Geoff automatically and systemically equating people's opposition to illegal immigration with racism and a disdain for brown people. I think that perpetuating that myth keeps the distrust and rancor alive - I know that I will fight back if I am called a racist.

I don't think that everyone who voted for Mansoor has hatred or racism in their hearts.

Sorry for the long-winded response!

12/04/2007 02:48:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Rob,

You and I stand on very similar ground. You may feel more strongly about some aspects of the issue and perhaps I on others, but on the whole we both are looking for a reasonable, humane solution.

You liken illegal immigration to someone stealing from you. I agree that illegal immigration is not a zero sum problem, but I would be inclined to equate it to someone stealing your car, and then bringing it back with a full tank of gas. Sure, I feel a bit violated and I can't get back the miles driven, but the perpetrator at least contributed something to me in the process. Am I happy about it? no, but I am not entirely outraged either.

12/06/2007 10:41:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home