Speaking With Nick Pacheco
Downtown Central City East Blogger has the opportunity to go one-on-one with Nick Pacheco about certain aspects of the Central City East community at a bbq at his headquarters.Here's his intro:
One one one with Nick PachecoIt's a good read.
I had the opportunity tonite to speak with Nick Pacheco about certain aspects of the Central City east community at a bar-b q at his headquarters. Although I do not reside in the 14th Council District , I am affected by what happens there , since I live literally across the street from the 14th Council District. Here in Central City East we call that area the bottoms. Our problems here are of course related to homelessness and businesses getting along. I asked some very important questions I think I would like to have answered since he wants to be the 14th Council District councilman again.
The LA Downtown News also runs an update story entitled Freaky Friday In the 14th
This is another good read for all things Pacheco/Huizar
Posted by Anonymous @ 8/15/2005 06:32:00 AM
39 Comments:
All anyone has to do is read the way Pacheco answers with his experience and knows what's going on. Then listen to how poorly Sleazy Huizy answers questions at the debates. There's no comparison. I'm sure Sleazy is right now studying up on issues and doing some homework.
When is the debate, anyone know?
How to speak with Nick Pacheco, if you really have to".
Great title for a book.
You won't like it if he's elected; he's a nasty officeholder, and is an equal opportunity abuser (unless of course, you are Ricardo Torres, III, or Eliseo Villanueva).
That is why he will not be elected.
10:28
A "nasty office holder" that brought crime down in his district, increased opportunities for youth, cleaned up some of the dirtiest areas in L.A. and brought in more money into his district than Villariagosa and Alatorre combined - this is why he'll be elected again.
I cant believe that Pacheco is still pitching his poll from two months ago. An early b.s. poll is typical of Pacheco operative Eric Hacopian (aka Rick Caruso's hatchetman).
Where is the poll results from Huizar's poll. I know I got a call, I guess Parke didn't like the results.
I think people defend Nick because they see Villraigosa supporting a school board candidate who did nothing to improve the District. If you are interested in seeing problems in your District addressed and solved, and the only two viable choices are Jose and Nick, then any person interested in their community should support the person who has SHOWN he can deliver.
Accordingly, it makes no sense to support Huizar. His only track record is the school district and that track record is abominable. Nick, as much as I loathe him, did produce at some level (a level, incidentially, that far outweights Jose's dearth of accomplishements).
Polly's Ticks!
Do you get paid to ABUSE Pacheco on blogs? YOU always counter anything POSITIVE that's said about the guy.
As far as the cute, but inaccurate "nick" name several of you paid bloggers have adopted (that suggests he's "crooked" in some way). You should give THAT up, or offer some proof (that hasn't already been refuted here repeatedly. You can get away with it anonymously, of course, but PLEASE, do help me out by posting the "La Colectiva" and "Madres of East L.A." vicious lies created out of someone's evil imagination, again.
This isn't the late-hit period from 2003, and all the facts to refute them are public knowledge, so PLEASE back up your libel and slander with something that proves the slime label of "crooked" is in any way deserved!
Hell, Antonio Villaraigosa has more proven LIES on the books in just 6 weeks as mayor than Pacheco has ever had in all his years of public service.
And shall we discuss Huizar's marvelous campaign, just weeks ago, to run for school board again - when he never intended to serve?
To anonymous 11:41 AM
You lying sack of shit. You received no such call! No one has yet...
12:21
Someone called me, and it wasn't from Pacheco's campaign. One of the questions was, "Would I support someone backed by Mayor Villaraigosa?" And I wasn't the only one to get this call. I bet those results weren't to your liking, otherwise your post wouldn't have been so "vitriol" using one of Tony's hand fed words.
Rick Caruso Hatchetman? what the hell is that. There are lots better reasons than that to attack Eric Hacopian. Like how he went from being one of Antonio's consultants to being Nick Pacheco's.
Eric Hacopian was Av's consultant, when? During which election?
Thanks
The poll is being conducted by someone really close to the school bond issue.
They used AV's name for name identity – they’re testing to see if he would be a good spokesperson and/or if his coattails are still long enough to carry a candidate and a measure.
They also tested Molina, UTLA, CTA, and Riordan among many others. Their push was good, but their operators are not well trained.
The poll I received tested AV's take over proposal as well as CD 14 and the bond.
-Hollenbeck
Why attack someone just because they believe in a candidate? That's the Antonio way, discredit, distract and cover up. Sleazy Huizy has nothing to offer. His endorsements is all he speaks of when he's in front of people. They don't care. They should care however, that he has no experience, used taxpayer money for a nice big office at LAUSD, helped by school land from a corrupt developer and bad mouthed Antonio to no end now he's kissing his butt.
12:01 - When the Times called for Pachueco's ouster in 2003, they ran an editorial full of undisputed facts. You have danced and shucked and jived around that editorial, but you have never even disputed the facts, with one exception (their reference to yet another investigation)!
Full of undisputed facts? Is that why Nick and and his buddies are in jail or have been fined. If this were in fact facts, that is exactly what would have happened. The Times just listened to Parke and didn't even bother investigating the actual facts.
The anybody-but-Nick campaign (although appealing) does not tell me why I ought to support Huizar. This appears to be the proverbial choice b/w the two evils: one candidate who gets things done but is a jerk and another who doesn't get things done but is a good guy. Hmmm....what to do?
Eric Hacopian worked for AV during the 2003 race against Pacheco.
2:31 -- the Times editorial was NOT full of facts, and it was written before ANY of Porke Skelton's lies were investigated and turned out for the rat droppings they were.
The Times would not/could not/will not run anything like that same article today, because EVERY fake story Skelton planted HAS been debunked, several times over.
If that had been a news story, they would have been forced to print a retraction, but the little yellow men downtown hid behind an "editorial" which protected them from needing "facts."
Even if they come out and endorse Huizar this time (which they probably will do, to KISS up to ADV), you WON'T see them repeat the slime Parke invented for them, late, when there was no time for a clear rebuttal or any fair investigations.
That's all the proof anyone should need. If those lazy rip and rewrite slags at the Times are NOT repeating the same claims today, it means they were NOT true then (they just lucked out, on a short deadline). They're a newspaper... they ONLY have to be "right" for 24 hours.
With the L.A. Times, that a stretch, too.
Parke's out of luck with the "late hit" this time, the news media has been warned about his one-trick-pony routine of inventing last-minute slime. They've seen the "act" too many times now. AV even knew it wouldn't work the same way twice, that's why he brought in a "pro" to oversee Skelton this time, so he didn't get himself "aced" out.
Back to the sliming board, little boy.
This is a note to all the Pacheco supporters:
If you guys are so worried about sleazy campaigns then why did you hire Eric Hacopian as your consultant. I saw his work on the Caruso (ABC) campaigns in Glendale last year, it was gutter level stuff. The guy has not shame, he will do any thing to win.
Love him or hate him, Hacopian is the only bright light in that dim light house, better known as the Pacheco campaign. The rest of the Pacheco staff (ie; John Edwards, Ricardo) are a bunch of goat fuckers.
I second the motion - Eric H. is pretty darn bright. He did some amazing things in Ventura County...
John Edwards = argumentative, divisive troll.
Hagopian has a great deal of political experience, making him thus far an anomaly on the Pacheco team.
The rest of the people surrounding Pacheco: they're less "experienced" than a Orthodox bride.
hehehe or those bloggers who think Jen F. in CD3 is a babe
I just got home from the Mt. Washington Home Alliance debate between Huizy and Nicky Poo. First, let me get this off my chest, Nick, you must of said "Boyle Heights" more than a hundred times, even when questions were about Mt. Washington and Glassel Park. Second of all, Nick, you're fucking boring! Shit, you put my wife to sleep with your lame ass answers, "in Boyle Heights... I did... BLAH, BLAH...."
Third, after listening to you for more than a hour and a half, I still don't know what you did in CD 14 or what you plan on doing if you are reelected. Oh yeah, you'll defer to the mayor (direct quote follows: "the one with the biggest bat..") on any Southwest Museum-related items. Not only did you sound like a complete idiot, but you basically compared MAV to Tommy Lee and his monster 15 inch cock.
All in all, Pacheco got his ass handed to him tonight by a well versed Huizy. I was impressed with Huizy's fresh passion and his knowledge of CD 14.
As for Nick, "in Boyle Heights..." FUCKER, it's not all about Boyle Heights, asshole!
Wow, I went to the same debate and I came away with a completely different impression as did the people I spoke with afterward.
Jose solidified his position as the empty suit. Yes, Jose we know AV handed you all your endorsements but your lack of accomplishments on the Board speak for themselves. Jose, bottom line, you came off uneducated about the issues that confront CD 14.
Nick: you still need much improvement. You lack all charisma and you stumble over your words repeatedly. Don't let the poor delivery hide some solid accomplishments and good ideas.
9:04 your stole my thunder. I agree. I can't believe both are attorneys. Obviously, neither had much trial experience.
Jose: I think you just got SERVED. But, no matter, these debates mean nothing and you are still outraising Nick. Get some lessons from Jim Hahn (he kicked AV ass in all the debates and it did him no good).
I think of all you supporting Pacheco were served too much alcohol because he definitely had a very bad showing tonight. He made some points, but for the most part his delivery couldn't wake up a cemetary full of dead folks. I'm not sure how he got elected the first time, and I'm not sure who would hire him as a lawyer. But, then again, Citrus Court doesn't count!
Woo-Hoo! Tricky Nick had no mojo tonight. We went over every exchange at Arco Iris. He looks doomed! DOOMED!!
Jose - great first outing. You'll only get better. Then the sky's the limit.
25 most influential news...
Angelina Jolie Pregnant?
LAUSD-Mysterious School Financing Disclosed
LA leaders name panel to examine SWAT killing of toddler
Redistricting Measure Will Appear on California Special Election ...
Gay marriage among bills facing lawmakers as election looms
Officials Consider Transforming Jefferson Into Smaller Schools
Ditto those answers. I had never seen Pacheco speak, and boy did he seem terrible tonight. Unversed and uneducated. Who the hell is advising this guy? I'm originally a Chicago native, and I thought City Council campaigns in this city were supposed to be big time affairs!
10:34 PM YOUR OBSERVATIONS WERE CORRECT. VILLARAIGOSA COMES FROM THE SAME TYPE OF POLITICIANS "CLUELESS ONES."
Nick PAcheco was good . It was the questions that put us to sleep.
Interesting that Jose HUiizar supports splitting proposition 13. Shows his ignorance. Spliting Prop 13 would help the LAUSD , but It sure would destroy the tax increment that would be created in redevelopment project areas.
ANother thing that I thought odd was the question about Gentrification which was asked and neither candidate spoke on the subject only about traffice.
NIck was right onwhen it came to VAriances after community inout for projects and EIRS , for the LAnd USe Lawyer JOse , he knows how this works ., but he doesnt't want the folkls to know it, cause this is how he and his buddies get around the Zoning .
Previous poster can you tell us more about EIRS and what Huizar doesn't want us to know. Thanks.
let me put it to you this way.
No LAnd USe attorneyy wants the public to be aware of the process of getting a development constructed., and approved by the city. As a Land use attorney , Jose Huizar will not be able to represent teh constituents of the city , only his clients as a land use attorney.
QUestions should be asked such as who has he represented as a land use attorney ? And how doese he stand to benefit from these clients and their actions.
EIRS are environemntal impact reports that telll how a project will affect the environement and after public input if any mitigations should be included. UNfortunbeatly folks give input and then the developers can hire attorneys such as Jose to get variances aftewards after appealing to the Plum of the City.
WE should be asking ourselves if Jose has any conflicts of interest when it comes to his job as a land use attorney and his becoming a CIty Council Member.
So let's elaborate ,as a land use attorney , do I want the Consitutents of the CIty know there are ways for developers to get around these mitigations in an EIR?
Informative post and appreciate your input on the EIRS...makes me think twice on council agendas.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home