Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098
mayorsam@mayorsam.org

Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Open Thread for Wednesday

"When lip service to some mysterious deity permits bestiality on Wednesday and absolution on Sunday, cash me out." -- Frank Sinatra

64 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said:

NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH UPDATE.

Right now I have found over 84 neighborhood watches, i need to know how many were in the district before Tony Villar became a Councilmember.

I am finding most of the Neighborhood watches by calling Hollenbeck and Northeast pretending to live in different neighborhoods, it's working. I don't want to call the Villaraistas mainly because i think they will feed me biased info.

(Chief "Parker" April 15, 2005)


To help them (the Hahnwatch blog) -- I plan on releasing my Neighborhood Watch report on their blog -- it's a one time guest spot. So don't get used to it!

(Chief "Parker" April 26, 2005)


And my Neighborhood Watch investigation has reached over 100 neighborhood watches...

(Chief "Parker" April 29, 2005)



GOTCHA!

August 31, 2005 6:52 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hey Parque Escolito - This is why Steve is so busy...

The Mark Ridley-Thomas for SD 26 campaign says a “just completed” poll by the The Feldman Group shows Ridley-Thomas with a “commanding lead” over his primary opponent, former Asm. Rod Wright. According to the campaign, in a “district-wide head-to-head match up,” Ridley-Thomas leads Wright 44% to 13%. Both seek to replace termed out Sen. Kevin Murray. Contact: Steve Barkan 626 535 9616 X2.

You know, an actual campaign to hel ppay your bills

August 31, 2005 7:23 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Dr. Mary Jo Ford, a Republican running in the 53rd AD, reports an endorsement from the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. “Dr. Ford believes – like we do – that you don’t raise taxes to solve the state budget deficit, but instead, cut wasteful spending,” said HJTA Pres. Jon Coupal. Contact: Paul Hegyi 310 546 8138.

August 31, 2005 7:40 AM  

Anonymous Love that Watcho said:

"Gotcha?" Whatcha got, Watcho?

We love hearing you tell us our favorite stories over and over again late at night.

In the morning, reading you is better than the funnies with our Cheerios!
www.cheerios.ca

In fact, you're right up there with Dilbert! www.dilbert.com

August 31, 2005 7:41 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"Gotcha" = another day Chief Faker is exposed as a rabid, useless liar!

Gotch-him!

August 31, 2005 8:51 AM  

Anonymous Watcho fan said:

Oh, Watcho! You have such a way with words!

August 31, 2005 9:30 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

you dont!

August 31, 2005 9:39 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You can stop hiding behind the anonymous "watcho" slammer mask, Parker. You're the only one who has anything to lose by his postings on your past lies.

August 31, 2005 9:43 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

except AV, but he don't care if he's caught telling lies.

August 31, 2005 9:48 AM  

Anonymous watcho fans anon said:

Watcho fans unite! We're getting t-shirts made.

August 31, 2005 10:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The T-shirts will appear the same day as Chief Faker's list of fake 80 NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH ORGANIZATIONS.

The same day AV returns his embezzled two years of CM paychecks.

The same day Parke Skelton confesses to making up campaign lies against Pacheco, Hahn, etc, etc, etc.

That day is ni. . . never!

August 31, 2005 10:34 AM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

They pay me a lot, but not enough to confess. If anyone ever digs that deep, I can just say, "oops, HONEST mistake! It LOOKED like there was a connection there, I just left it up to the lazy reporters to prove me wrong. A couple did. You should see the WHOOPERS I made up that never saw the light of day at the Times. Now I just have Chief Parker float them out here on the blog, so they stick in feeble minds.

It helps to make sure the hits are so late in the campaign that no one has time to thoroughly debunk them until weeks after the election.

If it ain't broke. . .

August 31, 2005 10:45 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Democrats such as Huizar contribute and will continue to partake in the neglect of North East Los Angeles.

Republican Voter in NELA
"Yes, we are growing in #'s"

August 31, 2005 12:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I heard from a friend that a Kinko's in Monrovia got an order for "rally cards" like those they give out at games, which were supposed to read "El Chueco" on one side and "Pachueco" on the other. There was discussion at the shop about whether Pachueco was a typo, but they couldn't work it out with whoever was ordering and the order was withdrawn. This was all by email.

I would expect some people with cards like that might show up sometime at Nick's events.

August 31, 2005 12:26 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ha! That would be way cheaper than a billboard, for sure.

August 31, 2005 12:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That's a great contrast, 12:26 p.m., to what Pacheco's volunteers have been told repeatedly in open meetings lately. . . not to engage in name calling, not to make personal attacks of any kind against Huizar (his family, etc.), to concentrate on Nick's record of service to CD14, and only deal with Huizar's record as a public servant -- if at all.

Also good to know Huizar's supporters are shopping locally to help the L.A. City economy. . . in Monrovia.

Villaraigosa's field staff always seemed to have problems with what and where CD14 was, as well (speaking of their record of service only, of course).

August 31, 2005 1:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Winners and losers for the week.

Winners

Steve Afriat- Turning the Pacheco campaign around.

Nick Pahceco- Putting an effective campaign team together.

Chief Bratton- Keeping his diginity under pressure.

Losers

Parke Skelton- Lies about Pacheco not working this time.

AV- His Cops beating up ministers.

Eric Hacopian- Finnanical ties to Meruelo exposed.

Jose Huizar- Campaign falling apart.

August 31, 2005 1:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Who are Villaraigosa's closest staff members from CD 14 area?

Is it Laura and Alvin

August 31, 2005 1:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Has the Huizar campaign looked for new people to help out. The current staff is an awful representation of this community.

Huizar can do much better with more help from passionate voters and this will help his candidacy.

August 31, 2005 1:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1:15 - You can't assume a campaign behind Pachueco signs. I know lots of peeps who don't like Nick. Honestly, lots.

August 31, 2005 1:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Does anyone know who the hell the new Eastside Area Director from mayor's office is? They never tell the community anything.

Chief Bratton- Keeping his diginity under pressure.
Losers
AV- His Cops beating up ministers.

You got it! Officers aren't going to risk their career or pension for some loser racist minister who advocates violence. Antonio needs to come out in support of the officers. He's acting like a chicken shit hiding.

August 31, 2005 1:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1:25 p.m.

That's funny, I said the same thing about Villaraigosa, '03 AND '05, and people still (to this day), blame everything that has ever happened that might be "unfriendly," on the Pacheco campaign directly, or Nick himself -- EVEN when it was AV vs. Hahn, sometimes.

Didn't Pacheco disavow Torres' mailings? Then didn't Villaraigosa's CAMPAIGN-paid flyers blame HIM for what Torres did weeks later? (Yes, they did, I got one in the mail about every 5 days in 2003).

You can't have it both ways, now can you? If it's attacking Pacheco personally, we can assume by the very same measure it's coming out of Huizar campaign central.

August 31, 2005 1:44 PM  

Anonymous bring back pachueco! said:

You can't compare a Pachueco sign with the Torres mailers. And Nick's "disavowal" was lame and less than credible.

August 31, 2005 1:56 PM  

Anonymous pachueco power! said:

Actually, you can have it two ways, if it's a two-way sign!

August 31, 2005 2:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'll await Huizar's "disavowal" of any further use of "chueco" or "Pachueco" from his followers before I decide if he really is against "dirty campaigns."

None will be forthcoming, "lame" or otherwise, now will it?

NOPE!

August 31, 2005 2:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Seems to me the ORIGIN or the "Pachueco" sign and nasty nickname started back with the false claim that Nick was behind the Torres' mailings -- which he EMPHATICALLY denied, MANY times.

He actually went to far as to say something like this to many people "If I REALLY thought Villaraigosa was making a mistake with his choice of ("gringo") advisers, why the hell would I tell him."

Hey Vijay, it's me, Tiger, I REALLY think you'd have a better chance beating me if you moved your thumb a bit further down on the right side. . .

Damn, what you AV toadies will bite into even when it stinks to high heaven with silliness!

August 31, 2005 2:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

You're all missing the point:

80 FAKE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH ORGANIZATIONS

Truth is where you find it..

August 31, 2005 2:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

In his "emphatic denial," Pachueco denied any personal involvement with the Torres mailers but added that they were "factually correct." That was both lame and damaging to his cred, and he paid for it.

August 31, 2005 2:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Watcho! Where ya been, dude?

August 31, 2005 2:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So "one night stand" with CD14 wasn't true? (Then why is CD14 is still waiting at the altar. We've been screwed, but that's all).

And which part of "gringo" ain't Parke Skelton?

Fault Pacheco for being TOO honest, or call him crooked, but make up your damn mind. My heads spinning from the psycho-babble.

August 31, 2005 2:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:41 p.m.

Skelton "ain't" the "go" part of gringo - he just won't GO away!

August 31, 2005 2:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Shoot the messenger, "watcho"-slammer, the lie it still the BIG lie.

What's AV going to claim when he runs for Gov. next year, he started 80 fake citywide bucket brigades?

August 31, 2005 2:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:27 - That's an idea...Huizar should publicly state that he has never and will never refer to his opponent as PACHUECO, and that he is ordering his campaign not to repeat the nickname PACHUECO, unless of course his opponent actually decides to change his name to PACHUECO.

Then he could add in his emphatic denial that the nickname otherwise strikes him as factually accurate...

August 31, 2005 2:46 PM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

I don't appreciate being "outed" as a gringo in any way shape or form. I've been passing myself off as an Icelandic aborigine for years.

August 31, 2005 2:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:46 p.m.

But then, of course, being a lawyer he knows he wold need to have "facts" to back that up, which neither he nor his handlers nor AV's spin doctors ever had or will have.

So you've got a little problem there. . .

Your circular logic is horrendous. You believe you can call Pacheco "crooked" because of a "crooked" claim that he was behind things he wasn't behind, because his denial wasn't what? As conciliatory (on behalf of something someone else did, that Pacheco has NO reason to be sorry for... and ON and ON it spins back).

August 31, 2005 3:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

MAYBE you need to get this long-awaited "apology" over the mailers, from the PERSON WHO MADE THEM!

August 31, 2005 3:04 PM  

Anonymous why pachueco? said:

3:03 and others:

What makes Pachueco Pachueco?

Go right to the classic LA Times editorial,

Perfectly Forgetful Pachueco

August 31, 2005 3:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Try to keep up 3:18 p.m. I know you don't want to because it destroys your whole personae, but everything in the LA Times editorial from 3 years ago was PLANTED by Parke Skelton and crew, has been DEBUNKED repeatedly AND declared false by legal authorities in the city to the POINT that EVEN the lazy, read-it-all-back-to-me LA Times won't print this stuff anymore.

The newspaper was able to hide behind the "well it LOOKED like smoke" for awhile, story, back then - to avoid lawsuits, but CAN'T ANYMORE. Now they know it was AV's campaign hacks blowing the SMOKE, and just where they were blowing it. (Where the sun don't shine at the L.A. Times).

15-20 times in recent months, some nimnod on this blog has linked that OLD old debunked Times piece (editorial, NOT news), and 20-25 times posters have pointed out POINT by point all of the above showing it's ALL CAMPAIGN LIES from AV's people. (I know, how in the name of 80 fake neighborhood watches could it be possible for them to LIE like that, and not have enybody demand proof!?)

But you just CAN'T give up on a good fable that allows you to defame an honest, productive public servant (who's on the OTHER team), it's just more fun to keep linking bogus material.

Maybe next time you should post a link to the WORLD IS FLAT story from some 12th century newspaper. That was "true" then, as well.

August 31, 2005 3:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Maybe there oughta be a law where newspapers have to print updates to their archives when they're reporting turns out to be this shoddy.

It would be nice if there was at least some disclaimer. Every journalist knows the old adage, "we only have to be right for 24 hours" - but now, thanks to the Internet, the incorrect news, the plants, the rumors live on forever - and any unscrupulous person can keep linking it to try and convince neophytes in the most dishonest way. The paper knows its wrong, the person linking it probably does, too, but they can continue to use it to try and trick the lazy and weak-minded.

August 31, 2005 3:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Attention Lazy and Weak-minded, you know who you are. Don't bother raising your hands

August 31, 2005 3:42 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

.
Hey boldface! Which of the following points of fact were debunked? Please hold the spin, and just address points of fact. (From the LA Times editorial, numbered for mutual convenience):

(1) Pachueco claims he did not even know of the connection between the nonprofit group and the campaign committee.

(2-5) Between Dec. 30 and Jan. 21, Pacheco gave $36,500 -- on top of $30,000 in recent years -- to Madres del Este de Los Angeles-Santa Isabel, an Eastside nonprofit organization headed by Juana Gutierrez.

(6-10) Mothers for Nick, the political committee that shares Gutierrez's Boyle Heights address, reported to the City Ethics Commission in late January that it was spending $36,085 to campaign independently for Pacheco.

(11- 14) According to the California secretary of state's Web site, Mothers for Nick took over the name La Colectiva, a now-disbanded group that was run by Gutierrez's son, Martin GutieRuiz, a college friend of Pacheco's.

La Colectiva's claim to shame was its role in the 2001 mayoral race, in which (15) Pacheco backed James K. Hahn over Villaraigosa.

(16-18) A woman impersonating county Supervisor Gloria Molina placed recorded phone calls to voters slamming Villaraigosa.

(19-23) The district attorney's office investigated and found that La Colectiva used a phone bank owned by CAL Inc., a nonprofit group formed by Pacheco -- who said he knew nothing about the calls.

(24-26) In November, when Villaraigosa announced that he would run against Pacheco, district voters received particularly nasty mailers attacking him.

(27-29) La Colectiva's former attorney, Ricardo Torres, another college pal of Pacheco's, claimed responsibility.

(30) Pacheco -- you guessed it -- said he knew nothing about the mailers.

These tactics are one reason (31) The Times endorsed Villaraigosa over Pacheco in the City Council race.

Taxpayers... deserve an explanation of the (32-34) $250,000 "discretionary" account that Pacheco tapped for the Madres -- in $5,000 dribs and drabs so as not to have to follow city contracting guidelines.

(35) City Controller Laura Chick...adamantly denies Pacheco's contention that she authorized his expenditures...

.

August 31, 2005 4:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

guess the Pacheco guys have too much time on their hands again.

losers for the week?

Losers

Parke Skelton- What lies are you talking about?

AV- He is the loser when the LAT is talking about him running for Governor?

Eric Hacopian- What evidence do you have of a "Meruelo" connection?

Jose Huizar- County Fed Endorsement. Any questions?

August 31, 2005 4:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Marty & Co. -- don't strain your brains. This ain't an Ivy League final exam. Take the facts one at a time and enlighten us. It'll make for easier reading, too.

August 31, 2005 4:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:07 p.m.

All of them, that's why you'll never see this horrid reporting repeated in the Times again.

August 31, 2005 5:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What a cop out!

August 31, 2005 5:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

ALL that stuff has been explained 65 times in recent weeks, PLEASE do your own homework.

Just because you can count to double digits don't mean we have to go back and dig out ALL the dozens and dozens of postings for weeks now that put all that crap down (should have been for good).

Scroll back -- and stop posting three year old EDITORIALS!

You know why they call them EDITORIALS and not NEWS. Look that up too, while you're it, and stop wasting people's time here with tired old lies.

No one funneled, no one moved anything anywhere it wasn't supposed to be, no one paid a DIME of city money into ANYONE'S account (unless you want to count the $300,000 AV took in salary for two years while he OPENLY AND BLATANTLY SPENT MORE CITY TIME on his own campaign than ANY kind of district work.)

You LOVE skipping over the MANY Times stories SINCE then that say "INVESTIGATION FOUND NO WRONG DOING."

NICK DIDN'T OWN.

NICK DIDN'T OWE.

NICK DIDN'T yadda yadda yadda.

DAMN, isn't there ANYTHING like double, triple quadruple jeopardy, or can these same CLEARED fake leaked charges from Skelton's backside keep re-surfacing FOREVER?

LOOK IT UP, you can FIND the Times editorial SO easy (what, do you AV-groupies all have autographed copies of it from Parke?), But you CAN"T find the reports and investigation stories that check them ALL off as BOGUS!?

How convenient.

There's obvious no interest in the truth, just pre-packaged false accusations.

No one in city government, not EVEN the emperor Villaraigosa, would be walking free today it any of that was true of them. Period.

August 31, 2005 5:29 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yeah, the L.A. Times said AV spent more time last year campaigning than working for the city, but he still took his $150,000 annual paycheck.

What's with that.

There's not "smoke" there, that's a raging fire that nobody else in the real world could get away with.

"Hey boss, I'm going to run some personal errands -- from noon to 5 every day for the rest of the year, one the clock -- but I still expect my full paycheck. Okay with you?"

August 31, 2005 5:32 PM  

Blogger Parque Esqueleto said:

Works for me. How else is Antonio gonna pay my bills!

August 31, 2005 5:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I think the AV/Huizar-ists want to keep Pacheco supporters fingers busy re-answering the same questions, every day, forever, to take the heat off the real question for those in city government (and this blog, which supported it).

WHERE ARE THE FAKE 80 NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH ORGANIZATIONS that were the only substantive CD-14 specific accomplishment of the so-called "Villaraigosa" era on City Council.

That's not a 3-year-old question, that's an ongoing (but not Icelandic) saga.

August 31, 2005 5:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

And speaking of "cop-outs" how come at those "Nights Out" Villaraigosa didn't hand out any of those bulky certificates he gives to everyone that breathes when they do good community work -- specifially to the people heading up some of the FAKE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHES -- he had his chance, he could have PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGED all the fine work local citizens in CD14 have done, working with his staff, to set up this record number of new NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHES last year (80 percent of the TOTAL started in the whole city, last year... RIGHT HERE, in CD14). DAMN, this should be the SAFEST district in the city, by now.

When was the last time ANYONE saw AV at a public event, like the "night out" when he wasn't handing out awards like that?

No one to hand them out to, AV? Not 8,000 inidividual watch volunteers? Not 800 block captains? Not even 80 Neighborhood Watch Organization founders in CD14?

18?

8?

1/8th?

August 31, 2005 5:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

No CM would miss making a HUGE deal of a milestone, record-setting year like that, especially AV.

Unless. . . they don't exist!?

August 31, 2005 5:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Marty & the Pachuecos claim to have debunked EVERYTHING in the Times editorial. Here are over 30 facts, not a one challenged on a factual basis. Just overheated generalities. They can cut and paste on everything, but they can't go point by point and deliver on a cogent debunking. Suddenly they have better things to do, or are lazy -- or they just can't do it! They've posted tons of verbiage, but no straightforward engagement with these facts. The above responses refer to allegations never made in the editorial -- that makes them red herrings.

August 31, 2005 5:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This exact editorial HAS been debunked many times here. Do you have to have it reprinted in every thread in which Pacheco is discussed, or could you possibly SCROLL BACK.

You seem to be of the impression that IF you keep repeating the accusation (and ignoring the responses DAY after DAY, with some kind of tired circle-jerk of anti-Pacheco volunteers who keep pretended "you never answered this" -- that that will somehow make the lies true. "Nick Pacheco is crooked, Pacheco is crooked, there's no place like home, Toto, click, click"

Sorry. Bottom line is, no matter how often the facts about these lies (and the MAIN fact should be WHY NEVER PROSECUTED if there's ANY TRUTH!), are put forward, you've drunk the vile koolaid Skelton and crew dishes out just like the Times did (once, but never again).

They learned there lesson -- not ONE DAMN WORD about any of this slime since the council campaign began again -- but you never will. It means Pacheco didn't deserve to be unseated, and you CAN'T HANDLE that truth. Because that means AV was always unworthy, just another empty suit, happy handshake and six lines of bumper sticker pablum.

Pacheco will be back in CD14 making things happen, and that the WORST thing that can happen to the AV legacy there, because more and more people will be saying, but AV's staff said this couldn't be done??? How did you do it, Nick?

Because AV lied through it all -- to slime Nick, to destroy the dreams and momentum of CD14's progress, and to jump ship before accomplishing anything.

Them's facts NO ON has ever disputed here, there, anywhere.

August 31, 2005 6:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hell, if there was any proof of the Times drivel, I would be pushing to have the guy locked up, and I voted for him in '03 and will again.

And then I'd want to know why we have such criminally lousy investigators, if there's ALL this (Skelton-induced) smoke, and STILL no fire.

August 31, 2005 6:17 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There you have it, ladies and germs. Talk about yadda yadda yadda. They can't be bothered to refute a single fact. Claim they've done it point by point many times. Certainly, they have made many points many times, but they have not refuted these facts that almost everyone reading this blog knows to be facts.

You can spin, but you can't hide.

August 31, 2005 6:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:33 p.m.

Keep trying, you're getting weaker and weaker.

Did you forget a basic fact of life in these here UNITED STATES. The innocent don't have to PROVE they're INNOCENT.

Someone else has to PROVE they're guilty.

You want someone scrambling around answering slimed up charges from a political hack who get paid a FORTUNE to dream this crap up? Don't work that way -- YOU prove guilt, and that does not mean re-re-re-repeating a three year old (dare I say it again) OPINION PIECE by editors who are not even at the Times anyone?

What gulag were you spawned from... "PROVE YOUR INNOCENCE!"

Damn, there are socialists under every same Villaraiogosa bush!

August 31, 2005 6:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I charge the anti-Pacheco poster with being an asshole.

Now "prove your not" (asshole!)

If you can't you get to be called that forever.

August 31, 2005 6:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Nobody asked you to "prove" anything. Just plausibly dispute the facts as stated, if you can. Any of them.

You haven't punched a hole -- or even a pinprick -- in the LA Times' editorial's cred. As anyone can see - 35 enumerated facts none of you have laid a glove on. Not a one!

August 31, 2005 7:04 PM  

Anonymous lou cypher said:

wow - an asshole, all because they broke down the accusations into facts.

facts that not one of you can actually refute.

seem familiar? yeah, just like everytime the public serpent gets cornered, he has to lash out.

come on folks, enlighten me, pretend i haven't seen the tinfoil hat screeches and cut'n'pastes of the nickwraithes before, and post a fact-by-fact rebuttal of 4;07's post.

or can't you?

screech away, nickwraithes. maybe here is the time to level some baseless charges against AV or parke. funny how your twisted conspiracy theories only apply to others - maybe that's why you can't face up to facts. they're too REAL for you.

August 31, 2005 7:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Right on anon 10:34 am. Its about time someone acknowledges the lies about Hahn. It was lame that such a great man got shafted by people that believed that AV was for real. Now we're all paying the price. Hind sight's 20/20...

August 31, 2005 9:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Yes I agree. I loved Hahn.

Who is the tall blonde he is dating? Is this the same blonde he was with at last year's marathon? Anyone know?

How does one get a chance to date Hahn?

August 31, 2005 11:48 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

To 1:17PM -

Why are Laura and Alvin Antonio Villaraigosa's closest staff members from CD 14? I always thought his closest staff members were Jimmy Blackman and Jim Bickhart.

September 01, 2005 12:27 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

close to his comadre,commissioner Cynthia Ruiz. Nothing she would not do for that vato.Very close.
Sancho

September 01, 2005 2:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Lucifer...

People who pump Villaraigosa should NEVER discuss others perceived lies and hypocrisy. Hiz-dizzoner wrote the book (well, Parke wrote the book for him - AV's barely literate).

September 01, 2005 2:38 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home

Advertisement

Advertisement