Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Wednesday, January 05, 2011

Los Angeles Politics Hotsheet for Wednesday: The Bad Day for Jose Huizar Edition

It could not get worse, Tuesday, for Councilman Jose Huizar. How could such awful things happen to a Princeton educated nice guy?

It started off as a good day with Huziar Campaign Flacker and former Mayor Sam blogger, Mike "MEAT" Trujillo rushing to his laptop "I gotta email Mayor Sam! I gotta email Mayor Sam!" to send us results of a poll showing the Councilman, who friends more affectionately call "The Godfather," was far and away ahead of his opponent, Rudy Martinez. Problem is, however, the poll was paid for by the Huizar camp; blogger Tony Butka had previously noted how the polling effort was bunk.

In the meantime however Weezy got somewhat of a boost, not from the 80 FAKE NEIGHBORHOOD WATCHES but from none other than the purveyor of Street Hasslin' Democratic agitprop who was all over how great Jose is doing and somehow figured that was worth a shot at this blog as well as the LA Weekly. Huh?

But it does go bad for Jose and gets even more entertaining for Mayor Sam readers. The ever sharp, sometimes snarky and always honest Latino Politics Blog was all over Huizar for his "Godfather" photo noting "Huizar likes to play fantasy, first dressing up as a charro, and now displaying this Godfather image in his office."

But it gets more fun for bloggin' dum dums. Huizar, so upset at being made fun of, apparently posts a comment himself on the blog claiming none of it is true and that LPB failed to take any phone calls from him or his staff. (We know about those phone calls. This post here got us one of those "Jose wants to talk to you" text messages. Go away. Do your job.) The brains behind LPB respectfully tells Huizar to pound sand but does offer him a forum to discuss his role in the CLARTS scandal. Hello? Weezy?

Final note for Huizar: Staff turnover in his Council Office is higher than that of McDonalds. Maybe they wanted fries with that?

In other fun stuff...

Tutor Perini, the company that employs the lady love of Councilman Dennis Zine saw itself lose once again the opportunity for a major construction contract at LAX. Even though Zine opted out of the discussion for ethical reasons, usual suspects Jan Perry, Ed Reyes, Tony Cardenas and Richard Alarcon (who has received a sizable contribution to his stay out of jail fund from the owner of Tutor Perini) were amongst those who voted against airport staff who said Tutor's bid was simply inadequate and cost more than winning bidder, Clark/McCarthy. To his credit, Councilmember Tom LaBonge voted against Zine's sweetheart saying the Council should "have faith in our departments that do the work." In this case, looks like the process, worked. Kudos to the Council.

Bad news for school board member Tamar Galatzan. The Democratic Party of the San Fernando Valley has endorsed good guy, Louis Pugliese, for her seat in this spring's election. Maybe Tamar regrets running for CD2 now?

Citywatch says that LA's "Golden days are gone." Why? LA is last in education.

All six candidates for the 12th District Council seat being vacated by Greig Smith will debate before the Chatsworth Neighborhood Council tonight at 7pm.

An Italian immigrant who lives in City Hall is so fed up with potholes in America's Finest City he's doing something about it. Primo Vannicelli takes his own bucket of cement and fills them in with the hope at least a few axles will be saved.

Candidate for Los Angeles District Attorney Alan Jackson announced he has already raised over $100,000 for his race in 2012. This puts Jackson well ahead of any other candidates and should scare off a few comers.

And finally this is a good day in America: ousted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi turns over the gavel to Speaker John Boehner. No word on if she has to give back the giant gavel and her feces eating grin she wielded the day she rammed through Obamacare.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:

In the 14th District, we have a choice between the Devil we know (lazy does-not-apply-himself, ill-tempered) Jose Huizar, and the Devil we do not know (money grubbing, short-on-ethics, real estate whore)Rudy Martinez.

Why can't we have an intelligent, qualified candidate who actually gets out often to meet with constituents, like Paul Krekorian?

January 05, 2011 5:45 AM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

If you did, Phil would be calling him a Socialist.

January 05, 2011 8:27 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Is Huizar this much of a dumbass? He's playing right into Red Spots feeding frenzy. Did he actually say that the "Godfather" pic came from the Italian Hall. Would they put out a pic that portrays Italian Culture so negatively? - unless you fancy yourself a Corleone.

Red Spot, are you ready? Is your tail wagging in anticipation? Herein lies the tie between Huizar and Gatto! A match made in heaven for your vitriol appetite. Gatto's sister was behind this award.


And there's a nice picture of Mike on there website:

January 05, 2011 8:33 AM  

Blogger Phil Genderbong said:

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

January 05, 2011 8:33 AM  

Anonymous Retired LAUSD said:

Pelosi is DOOOOONE! I hope you liberals think it was worth sacrificing the Obama presidency over.

I'll remind you of her worst comment ever, one of many. "We have to vote for the healthcare bill so we can find out what's in it."

And now she is just another Congressman.

January 05, 2011 9:04 AM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

Hey hey hey: Princeton GRAD school, not Princeton per se.

January 05, 2011 9:11 AM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

Plus, he actually hired Trujillo to run his campaign? How brain-dead is that? Trujillo's play book has exactly two plays in it:
1. Call the other guy racist.
2. Call the other guy sexist.

Rudy is going to kick his ass.

January 05, 2011 9:14 AM  

Anonymous Teacher Too said:

Too bad for the teacher's union UTLA now that they passed on support for Pugliese, who stands a good chance of winning the school board seat.

I bet he won't forget that they threw him under the bus- again.

Those buffoons just make it worse and worse for themselves.

January 05, 2011 9:21 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Let's not foget, it's "Dr. Huizar" courtesy of the UCLA Law School.

That trumps any snooty Ivy league connection.

January 05, 2011 10:04 AM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

Walter you forgot Trujillo's track record.

Hillary Clinton - LOST
Measure B - LOST
Janice Hahn - LOST
Tamar Galtzan - Clowncil, LOST
Tamar Galatzan - School Board, WON, but he can't even get her a UTLA or DPSFV endorsement for re-election in a liberal district against a non-union, pro-reform guy

January 05, 2011 10:29 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


January 05, 2011 10:30 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


We're taking who will "KICK" whose ass predictions now from Wacko Walter Moore? Really?

(Okay, well maybe it takes someone whose ass has been kicked repeatedly in local politics to know that -- from the "kickee" side of the equation).

But I'd be curious to know, other than just "cheerleading" for anyone who's not an incumbent (i.e., someone who actually CAN win a race in L.A.), what Wacko's predictions are based on.

Dismiss yesterday;s Huizar self-poll all you want, but on the flip side, there's certainly nothing concrete on record anywhere that shows Huizar to be the slightest bit vulnerable in the district -- no "scandals" in 5 years (other than these last minute ones opponents are trying to gin up). Meanwhile, Rudy Martinez is a total unknown in the district - other than to fans of house-flipping TV shows (a couple million or so viewers, nationwide -- maybe a few thousand people in CD14), who also happen to get basic cable. And, that may actually be bad for his chances.

This isn't someone who has any kind of track record of Eastside service or support for local causes that would give him even a tiny public profile. He's never run for or served on any neighborhood councils, served as a city commissioner, on any task forces, or actually worked in any grass roots civic organizations (attending Chamber of Commerce mixers to generate new business really doesn't count).

Dig back, Google... whatever. Before he plopped part of his personal wealth down to buy a ticket to the dance, no one's ever seen him "dance" before, period, anywhere.

He's almost like the candidate from "witness protection" - you kind of wonder if he wasn't someone else, somewhere else until the middle of last year. Even most of his supporters had never heard of him in CD14 before 60-90 days ago -- including many of his restaurant customers... "oh, he owns THAT restaurant?"

For all we know, he was returned from an alien space ship last fall after being abducted decades ago.

At the same time, Huizar has numerous endorsements from nearly every neighborhood council in the district -- including, in most cases, the president of those NCs, and in several cases (like LA32, where a minority of its board generates a lot of anti-Huizak flack), most of the members -- past and present. Even El Sereno's Michael Carreon, the guy who regularly rails at Huizar and the Council on Ch. 35 during public comment - about police parking in the red and posters on telephone polls - HE'S endorsing Huizar.

Plus grass roots endorsements from nearly every other type of civic group in each local community.

Root for whichever candidate you favor (but put down the pom-poms for a minute and maybe explain "why" they'd be better??) Meanwhile, in terms of Rudy's actual chances, the "predictions" on this blog are about as bad as I've ever seen posted here.

January 05, 2011 10:32 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Okay, now do you want to do that same kind of "win-loss" list with Parke Skelton's track record?

I believe it also includes the only time in recent history when a council incumbent (Pacheco) was unseated, also in CD14. OH, and when Jimmy Hahn got his "ass kicked" more recently - to coin a Walter Moore phrase.

(Or would that be too depressing to the anti-Huizar people?)

Skelton's a snake (and I wouldn't walk across the street to spit in his face if it was on fire), but he does win races on this side of town, ad involving eastside politicians.

He can easily phone in making someone as unknown as Rudy M. lose by huge double digits.

January 05, 2011 10:38 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I got called for this poll and couldn't tell which side they were calling from. They asked about negative things about Huizar and Martinez as well as positive things about Huizar and Martinez and asked how convincing each statement was. They also asked my feelings regarding overall city problems and some other elected officials.

- Supports businesses, police & fire
- Is honest
- Gets things done
- Too close to special interests
- Doesn't support small business
- Is part of the problem at City Hall
- Supports kids and education
- Supports protection of open space
- Supports downtown revitalization
- Brings new projects to the community
- Missed a lot of votes and has a high absentee rate
- Does too much downtown because of developers
- Votes with the Mayor, we ned our own man
- Has one of the biggest staffs
- Voted in increase garbage rates
- Fought against DWP reform
- Experienced Councilman

- Successful small businessman who has created jobs in CD14
- Not who he says he is
- City doesn't work for us, we need fiscal responsibility and he will bring it
- Spent a lifetime serving LAPD explorers and army reserves
- Is a true pubic servant
- Not who he says he is
- Worked for big tobacco / Phillip Morris
- Does not have the character to be an elected official
- Was arrested for assault and battery
- Earned millions profiting on the foreclosure crisis
- Lived in Glendale until running for CD14
- Will support small business and job creation
- Is not a City Hall insider and so will bring reform to city hall
- Was in possession of an LAPD badge without permission / impersonating an officer

January 05, 2011 10:59 AM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

Michael -- Exactly. Even with an unlimited budget and unfunded opposition, Trujillo consistently snatches defeat from the jaws of victory. Hiring him to run a campaign is like hiring Captain Hazlewood to pilot your super tanker.

The numbers from the last election, moreover, show Huizar and Cardenas are almost certainly going to lose. Each squeeked into office by the narrowest of margins, and that was BEFORE they took the City to Chapter 9-ville.

See the numbers for yourself:

January 05, 2011 12:11 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I clicked on that link about the Huizar staff turnover and found this printed at the bottom of the letter:

"Computer Generadated"

January 05, 2011 1:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


You must know shorthand.

January 05, 2011 1:50 PM  

Blogger Michael Higby said:

Huizar getting his money's worth for bloggin' dum dums here at MS.

Lots of MEAT being served up!

January 05, 2011 3:55 PM  

Anonymous g said:


January 05, 2011 4:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

12:11 p.m.

FOLKS, if you didn't already understand it before, this should be ample proof of what a M-O-R-O-N, Walter Moore, really is.

He says Huizar (among others) "squeeked by" in 2007.

Huizar got almost 66 percent of the votes cast in his last election -- 2 out of every 3. His closest opponent (someone much better known than Rudy Martinez) got LESS THAN 30 percent of the votes cast. And a third candidate - someone understood by most people who've met him to be certifiable for the booby hatch - got 4 percent.

In others words, Huizar "squeeked" by on a margin of 36 PERCENT over his main opponent.

That means Huizar's margin of victory was 10 TIMES that of Obama over McCain in 2008.

Not anywhere else but in Wacko-world, where Walter exists, is this "squeeking" by. For 308 million other Americans, that's called a LANDSLIDE!

(And, Moore is someone who, I believe, considers himself an "economist"? Don't they have to be able to do SIMPLE MATH??)


January 05, 2011 5:30 PM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

Trujillo and his sock-puppet spin assistant are really hurting here! This is hilarious!

"Huizar got nearly 66% of the vote."

As the French say, "BFD!" In a city of 4 million people, with over 1.2 million registered voters, Huizar squeaked by with a margin of less than 2,100 votes.

He got a TOTAL of 8,795 votes.

But by all means, spin away, Mikey, spin away. I'm sure you'll convince. . . yourself?

January 05, 2011 7:22 PM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

I'm still shaking my head at this one: "Huizar's margin of victory was 10 TIMES that of Obama over McCain in 2008."

Yeah, Huizar is clearly much more popular than Obama was -- on Planet Trujillo.

January 05, 2011 7:40 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar won, 5:30 P.M., because hardly anyone bothered to vote. It'll be the same again. CD 14 is screwed. Neither candidate is worth bothering to go to the polling station for. So sad.

(by the way, Walter Moore is not the one who considers himself to be an "economist". Walter is an attorney. The "economist" is a jobless guy who lives off your tax dollars)

January 05, 2011 7:59 PM  

Blogger Walter Moore said:

7:59 -- LOL and you're absolutely right about voter turnout. I'm hoping and expecting, however, that Rudy, with his war chest and telegenic / public speaker qualities, will be able to scare up the very few voters needed to win.

Plus, bear in mind that between now and March 3, or 8, or whenever, you can bet that the City's teetering on bankruptcy will be back in the news. That should help.

January 05, 2011 9:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Who's the spinner here?

I am not Trujillo, but a longtime Mayor Sam's poster. Trujillo's a steaming turd, and I spent much of 2005 bashing his idiot spin here over Antonio's campaign 6 years ago.

And, I getting pretty damn tired of being told I am Trujillo every damn time I make a pretty decent point here about someone's anti-Huizar's faulty logic (or math).

From what I recall of 2005, Trujillo isn't bright enough to rebut some of the sh*tty spin you launch here.

That said, I'm guessing he (and most other posters here) are about 36 times as good with numbers as you are.

A 36+ percent margin of victory is HUGE, by any definition -- and I recall you used that same bogus logic (about low turnout) to suggest YOU had a a chance again Tony V.

How'd that work out?

36 percent is also quite a bit more than the margin that Villaraigosa had when he handed you your shorts 2 years ago.

And, to be clear, we are (trying) to compare apples with apples, right. Obama's 2008 margin of victory was less than 6 percent and it was declared by media to be a "blowout" (isn't 36 percent a BUNCH more than 6 percent?)

Describing a 66 to 30 percent election as "squeeking by" is something too lame for even a Trujillo to try, were the tables turned.

As much as I hate Tony V. myself, I was never convinced by a couple friends to vote for you -- and these are just the kind of reasons why. You lack the depth to "really" figure out how to fix things, and so you make up see-through bogus solutions to get attention.

There is no way an unknown, non-participant in public activities before a few months ago like Martinez could create a swing of high double-digits away from an incumbent in two months, regardless of how much personal wealth he throws at it. The saturation level for mailers, ads, etc. will be used up before he gets into his second quarter-million dollars. His message will be turned off weeks before the election.

He's already lost.

Spin away, but it won't change the fact that Huizar is very popular in his district, has been elected twice -- each time by a larger margin, and before that was elected twice to the school board in the same basic area.

"CLARTSgate" is a bomb-thrower's house of cards that too few people will ever care about to matter.

Maybe Huizar's margin off victory this March will only be half that, of last time -- 18-20 percent (Still a landslide by any definition).

But then, by YOUR lousy math, that should mean he "technically lost?"

January 06, 2011 8:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Looking at this differently, I believe we also have a choice of going with a CM (Huizar), along with the rest of the CMs, who brought the city to the current state, a large part being a direct result of their actions, compared to a candidate (Martinze) who has different plans for what needs to be done.

To save words, I will just say that the CMs have had at least one, often two, terms and still cannot break away from approaches to management style that dooms the city- and on the way, helps their selected special interests, be they unions or business interests.

A different direction from the same people is not likely to be made by electing incumbents or any of their office staffers.

The council's 99.9% "Unanimous votes" record shows that it's already succumbed to no real representation of the people- why continue this certainty? (And the Ed Reyes mode of thought: "It creates jobs" is not working on this particular item.

in cd-14

January 06, 2011 11:15 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

In cd-14

Assuming for the sake of argument that what you say about Rudy M. is true -- that he "has different plans" (which is not in evidence anywhere, but..)

Just how much better is the situation going to be for CD14 people if the next Council voted 14-1, or even 13-2, instead of 15-0?

I'll answer that A "rebel" holdout CM from CD14 will be able to accomplish even less for CD14 constituents, because he won't have any cooperation from the other CMs - who view him only as a holdout.

Obstructionism is a waste of all of their time.

The City will not change, and CD14 will be slighted at every turn.

I'd call that a "lose-lose" by all definitions. And then 4 years from now, having been unable to accomplish anything for CD14 that required the support of other CMs, Rudy (again, assuming his election - for the sake of argument) will be booted out by the voters, and we'll start all over again, with another newbie who knows nothing about the system.

January 06, 2011 12:59 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home