Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

H R Status - 10:10 p.m. Election Night

Nowhere near the required 66% to pass!
At this moment, the vote is 55% yes, 45% "hell no!"

So maybe there's more than $2 million worth of common sense in L.A.'s voters' possession! All those "touching" ads apparently worked on the bare majority, but more than a third of the public saw through the smokescreen.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Check for yourself: http://rrccmain.co.la.ca.us/0016_LocalContest_Frame.htm .

That lawsuit is the only thing standing between us and 12-year terms for Clowncil Members. The vote is 60.3% yes, and 39.7% no. Only a majority is needed for this pile of . . . trickery.

H.R. PufNStuff. (Get it? "H" and "R"? It was either that or "H&R Block.") What in the heck was H.R. PufNStuff? Don't ask. Saturday morning programming when I was growing up was . . . different. Let's just say drugs may have been involved by those coming up with the shows. Favorite feature: Lance Link, Secret Chimp.

Did you hear or see the story of our mayor voting? Apparently he couldn't quite figure out how to fill out the ballot correctly, and the machine rejected his first attempt. "Mr. Mayor, you're supposed to vote 'yes' or 'no,' not both." The second time around, however, he managed to do it correctly. Hey, maybe it's time to give that pesky bar exam a fifth try? (Sorry, I just can't let that one go!)



Anonymous Anonymous said:

In every explaination regarding Measure R the expansion of Terms for the Council was clearly identified, yet, it appears to have won.

I guess this is something the voters wanted even if Neighorhood Councils did not.

It seems our Neighborhood Council leaders are out of touch with the voters.

November 08, 2006 5:14 AM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

I respectfully disagree. I think most voters didn't bother to read anything about these ballot measures. Instead, I suspect, they merely read the slanted headings when they get to the voting booth, and fall for the misleading names, e.g., "ethics reform" or "affordable housing."

November 08, 2006 6:47 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"the expansion of Terms for the Council was clearly identified, yet, it appears to have won"

No, it wasn't. A clear identification of the measures intent would have been "Seek to increase the number of terms a councilmember can serve to 3 terms. Council memebers are currently limited to two terms."

November 08, 2006 8:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

5:14, you've hit the nail on the head. City Council members and their staffs actually (believe it!) spend far more time with the voters of the city than the NC leaders do -- and have a far better sense of what they're issues are.

Wacko, however, in full-blown arrogance, presumes again that the rest of us are just too damn dumb to get past the labels and read the first paragraph or so of the measure's description -- not that we might actually DISAGREE with his brilliance.

You would think coming in nearly last in the mayor's race would have led to at least a little soul-searching as to just how out-of-touch he really is. Maybe the voters THAT time just didn't read past the label "Republican"?

Keep playing that "I'm smarter than all the rest (and that's why I keep losing)" game. It suits you, well!

November 08, 2006 9:14 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It isn't that the neighborhood councils are out of touch with the voters, it's that when you get outspent $900,000 to $6,000, you don't even have a chance to touch the voters. If there were public financing of ballot measure campaigns, and it were a level playing field, things would have been different. In every case when a newspaper or community groupl heard both sides of the issue, they decided to opposed Measure R.

November 08, 2006 9:54 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"HIS POLLONESS" has been hanging out with Senator Kerry too much. "I VOTED FOR MEASURE R BEFORE I VOTED AGAINST IT".

November 08, 2006 10:29 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

walter, why lower yourself to ad hominem attacks on the Mayor? Despite the bar exam, he's the mayor and you're a blogger at 50 years of age.

November 08, 2006 1:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


How about the millions unspent by NCs, given to them $50K a year per council, to become the conduit for public trust and opinion?

Unspent, for the most part, year after year, on outreach or developing inroads into their stakeholders hearts and minds.

No, it couldn't have been spent to communicate a specific ballot measure, but it could and SHOULD have been spent creating a receptive AUDIENCE in each of the NC areas -- one that would have actually listened to them, if and when they took a stand like this.

NCs have had the opportunity AND the resources, plus the mandate -- in most cases for 2-3 years -- to do massive outreach into their areas, and in nearly every case have failed, if they've even bothered to try. The "30" NCs on record as opposing Prop R had an outreach tool many times the size of any money raised for Prop R, and it's still sitting in city hall accounts, by multi-millions. Some of these same "adversarial boards" are on year 3 or 4, and haven't spent the first year's budget.

(But, get real. There wasn't a SINGLE solitary NC that presented or heard "both sides" -- just a few NC screamers' misrepresentation of the measure's provisions, routed through their "poor us" angst about being "dissed" by city council.)

November 08, 2006 2:02 PM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

To 1:02: Because how freakin' stupid do you have to be to mess up the inka-dot!?! It's too funny!

Also, you may want to work on your math skills a tad.

To 9:04 (probably the same person):
You know, you're right. The average Angelino is terribly well informed; knows what Council District he lives in, knows who his Councilman is, read all the ballot initiatives, including the arguments pro and con, very carefully. Indeed, most of them probably even know how big the City's budget is, can name the four different housing agencies, etc.

How arrogant of me to think otherwise, simply because I regularly encounter people who don't even know what city they live in. Please accept my sincere apologies. You're right. We live in a Golden Age of Democracy, and Judge O'Brien should never have bothered to enforce the law since our genius population -- what was the percentage of illiterates in this County, again? -- saw through the ruse and realized they were extending the terms of Council Members.

November 08, 2006 2:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

1:02 PM

You wrongly blame Walter for my 10:29 post. Walter is correct in stating that "HIS POLLONESS" failing to peck on his ballot properly, is damn funny. I would recommend for you to mix your cup of KOOL-AID and search the "LA ANTONIA TIMES" today on the story relating to "YOUR POLLONESS".


November 08, 2006 4:52 PM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

To 4:52 p.m.:
Actually, you and I both pointed out that the mayor didn't quite grasp the complexities of "VOTE FOR ONE." In my original posting, I, too, pointed it out.

But you see, you and I are arrogant bastards for pointing out that the man elected to run America's second-biggest city lacks the intellectual horsepower to pass the bar exam or cast a ballot. We're supposed to refrain from mentioning facts like that because . . . well, I don't really understand why, actually. The fact that he's mayor supposedly proves he's smart and capable, notwithstanding all objective evidence to the contrary.

November 08, 2006 5:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

it is not everyday that I have to release the swelling in my "ARROGANT HEAD". Speaking of the lack of intellect of "HIS POLLONESS", that "BIG HEAD" is going to get hit with a head popping when he has to explain to those big time donors why he can't deliever on those building contracts. Further, you are right on about the "CUT IN THE GROWTH OF THE CITY BUDGET". Thanks for the props.


November 08, 2006 7:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How embarrassing it looked on the news when they showed Antonio putting his ballot in the box and then it coming out again. He got red faced and didn't know what to say. Then the camera shows Antonio back at the poll stable re-voting. Now that's too video to make up.

November 09, 2006 7:48 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home