Whistleblower hotline: (213) 785-6098

Thursday, February 03, 2011

BREAKING NEWS! Los Angeles Times endorses Rudy Martinez for CD 14 City Council Seat

Rudy Martinez rightfully deserves kudos for LA Times Endorsement

 Despite the best efforts of Michael Trujillo and Parke Skelton, the LA Times Editorial Board listen to the concerns of the average CD 14 constituents (not the ones who score 3 for loyalty on lists) and the end result is a major political embarrassment for Councilman Jose Huizar. And one can guess that Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is none too happy with his "political mijo".

The Times nails Huizar for what many of us in CD 14 have been complaining, musing or speaking out in public ceaselessly, Huizar just doesn't care (unless your score is a "3 and 1+").

Where Huizar has disappointed is in the brass tacks of listening to constituents. All across his district, residents complain that he is aloof and out of touch. They feel neglected in Boyle Heights; they say he was slow to recognize the potential of York Boulevard in Eagle Rock. They want blight eradicated and business encouraged. Huizar's remove from the district was exemplified by the recent disclosure of a list his office kept of community leaders, ranking them by influence and the councilman's relationship to each. That's not an indictable offense — most politicians do the same basic thing, in their heads — but that he needs his staff to keep a list suggests how tenuous his ties are.

Meanwhile, as Huizar is driven from one choreograph event to the next in the quest to enhance his public image, the likes of Parke and Trujillo would be well serve to note the Time's summery on why they choose Martinez over Huizar.

Indeed, what Martinez could bring is something that today's council has too little of: representatives who focus on the communities that elect them. That once was the mainstay of Los Angeles city politics, when council members such as John Ferraro, Richard Alatorre and Ruth Galanter understood that the city's needs were paramount but also understood their districts and labored to improve them. Martinez offers a return to that tradition.

Your thoughts.............

Scott Johnson in CD 14

Labels: , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said:


February 03, 2011 8:03 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Congratulations, Rudy Rich. Seriously!

Yes, a major victory.

That'll look VERY nice on the wall.

(I'm still voting for Huizar, as will by far the vast majority of the people in the district, once again). But for having spent a large portion of your own personal fortune on this, you SHOULD have something long-lasting to show for the effort.

A nicely framed LAT endorsement, hung in a prominent place in the bar or restaurant you'll still own and run long after the election is over March 8 - that you can point to and say... "See that. It cost me $200,000." And Jose Huizar will still be your councilmember (unless you move back into the Glendale place just as quickly as you carpet-bagged into CD14 & L.A.).

Buh bye, Rudy Rich.

(A metal frame is probably best. Easier to wipe off the second-hand smoke from the bar's patrons giving themselves lung cancer).

February 03, 2011 8:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:05 Geee! Lighten up a bit. What a sore loser.

February 03, 2011 8:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Funny how these things work out and come full circle at times, with similar players in ironic, different parts.

In 1999, the Times endorsed Victor Griego, a man who moved into the District just to run for the Dist. 14 seat.

And Pacheco won, instead.

February 03, 2011 8:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So, Red Spot, yesterday's "fishwrap" is now what, solid gold?

How you gonna explain that to all the little spots, who look up to you for direction and guidance as to what REALLY matters in a CD14 race?

"NO, no, spotlets, NOW the L.A. Times is VERY important, and NOW they're right, and NOW they matter."

"Forget everything I told you before about that..."

(I wish you could see how hard I'm laughing at your predicament).

Geez, if you had a soul or a conscience, THIS could pose a little problem.

February 03, 2011 8:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Woops there goes another one!

Water board member faces fines of $30,000 for campaign finance violations

Reporting from Sacramento —
A water board member elected to represent Bell, Commerce and other cities faces $30,000 in fines for campaign finance violations that include failure to report contributions from former Bell Mayor George Cole, a casino and several government contractors.

Arturo Chacon is a member of the Central Basin Municipal Water District's board of directors and has admitted to 13 violations of state campaign rules, including failure to disclose payments to family members, according to the state Fair Political Practices Commission. The commission is scheduled to vote on the fines Feb. 10.

The commission's enforcement officers obtained bank records showing the source of tens of thousands of dollars that went into and out of Chacon's campaign fund starting in 2006, when he won a water board seat vacated by Cole.
Chacon, who declined to comment, has agreed to pay fines for failing to report receipt of $37,000 in contributions and $41,600 in expenditures. He also accepted three cash contributions totaling $4,350 that exceeded a $100 limit on non-check donations, according to the commission.

Chacon failed to properly disclose contributions that included $5,000 from the Commerce Casino, $1,500 from Cole and thousands more from engineering, public affairs and law firms that contract with the water district or cities in the area, the commission found.

Cole is one of eight former and current Bell officials who were arrested in September and charged by the L.A. County district attorney with misappropriating more than $5.5 million from the small working-class city.

The report on Chacon said contributions that he failed to disclose properly included $1,000 from Del Terra Real Estate Services, which has a construction management contract with the water district, and $250 from Diverse Strategies for Organizing, which has a public-outreach deal with the water district.

Other unreported donations included $1,000 from the law firm of Pomona City Atty. Arnold Alvarez-Glasman, $99 from Commerce City Atty. Eduardo Olivio and $1,000 from Mayans Development Inc. Mayans has had an agreement with the Commerce Community Development Commission to build homes in that city.

None of the contributors is accused of wrongdoing.

An aggravating factor against Chacon, the commission report said, was that the unreported contributions and expenditures "included substantial payments to/from relatives and close associates,'' including his sister, Leticia Chacon; his brother, Montebello school board Vice President Hector Chacon; and his brother's political consulting business, Quantum Management Services.

Quantum Management received $9,500 from Arturo Chacon's campaign committee in 2006 and 2007 that was not properly reported, according to the commission. The report said Leticia Chacon received $1,000, but it provided no information why.

Leticia and Hector Chacon could not be reached for comment.

A Commerce resident, Arturo Chacon represents a district that includes the cities of Bell, Commerce, Huntington Park, Maywood and Walnut Park and unincorporated East Los Angeles.

February 03, 2011 8:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

ouch, that must of have hurt for Huizar. Pretty mean words there.

I am sure Huizar will announce City Maven's endorsement tommorow.

February 03, 2011 8:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar should be flipping out on his staff within an hour or two.

February 03, 2011 8:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Hi Mike.

February 03, 2011 8:24 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:05. Get a grip. Take a muscle relaxer. There's no smoking in bars, idiot. Jesus. Talk about out of touch!

February 03, 2011 8:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:05 Who ever you are, get a life! It's just a friggin campaign! You are dillusional and derranged!!

February 03, 2011 8:37 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

February 03, 2011 8:05 PM,

But if Huizar got the endorsement it would be curtains for Rudy, huh?

Don't worry, you got paid several grand to back a losing horse, again.

What do you really care?

Even if The Times wanted to endorse Huizar, would have been kinda hard when you look at the other stories being printed about him. And no, that is not the LA Times's fault.

But don't take being a loser so hard. You only base your work ethic on a price tag, not the product. So you are usually forced work from a disadvantage. And in this election, you've really been forced to work with an inferior product. Don't blame yourself.

February 03, 2011 8:49 PM  

Blogger Phil Genderbong said:

Red Spot,

Normally I think you're a goober and moron, but I GENUINELY think you had a direct impact on this.

Credit is due to you, regardless of outcome, because I don't think the Times had a fucking clue about this subject before you went at it.

Congratulations! I STILL think you're a moron and an illiterate. But you scored on this.

February 03, 2011 9:11 PM  

Anonymous Retired LAUSD said:

Congrats, Red Snot.

I will give you the rest of the week and weekend off, regarding your hideous grammatical skills.

Enjoy, for I will be back.

February 03, 2011 9:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Wow, all the Red Spot haters are giving the man his props. Props back to both of them.

February 03, 2011 9:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

"...aloof and out of touch...."

Isn't that a nice way of saying "lazy and pompous".

How do you say lazy in Spanish?

February 03, 2011 9:47 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

That's the worst editorial endorsement I've ever read. If they're writing: "Martinez is energetic and engaging, and thoroughly immersed in the civic life of the district" they've obviously not done their homework on Martinez. Similarly, the phrase "A successful restaurateur and house flipper" is a ludicrous qualification — flipping houses for profit is a morally questionable way to make to a living and I don't see big crowds at either Mia Sushi or Marty's. Elect Rudy, and you can kiss goodbye any progress in CD 14 for the next four years. Who's he going to hire for staff (besides his mom)? What does he know about dealing with the huge, complicated political mess that is City Hall? Nothing. He'll get eaten alive in council. The Times embarrassed itself here — and, in the end, it won't matter a bit as Huizar still will be re-elected by a comfortable margin.

February 03, 2011 10:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Times did some thing right, amazing.

February 03, 2011 10:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


February 03, 2011 10:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The reason for the Times endorsement is simple enough to figure out.

The Times knows all the background on the Huizar FBI investigation. They know Huizar is toast and on his way to the big house, it is the smart move knowing what they know.

February 03, 2011 10:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

10:05 Hi Mike. Yawn.

February 03, 2011 10:31 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

February 03, 2011 11:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Time for Trujillo and Huizar to start shopping for leaf blowers.

February 03, 2011 11:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Do you get it, Red Scot?


You get it? (Geez, Parque Esqueleto was right, you do have a LOUSY sense of humor), if you didn't get this.

The Times endorsement is a JOKE. No, no... I don't mean like "Oh he's such a joke," or "Red Spot's literacy is a JOKE."

No, I mean, a "funny" - intentional humor, "RIMSHOT". "Take my wife, please!"

You see, with "jokes" - you have to wait for it. WAIT for it. Because at the very end, there's the PUNCHline.

You won't get this one, you're too caught up in the afterglow of being "serviced" by the Times for once, to see just how well they deliver on this punchline, on schedule, last line.

And, people in CD14 all up and down the gerrymandered atrophied elephant-head-shaped boundary lines, especialy those who were near or past voting age in the 1990s will read this -- and they will get it. And they'll LAUGH all the way to inka-dotting Huizar's spot on the ballot.

The punchline... the one that REALLY splits your sides... is this: "Martinez offers a return to that tradition."

What tradition is that, according to the Times? The tradition of:



HOOOOO, ha, a "return to the Alatorre days of CD14" - exactly what we've been 'missing' here.

For real CD14 people, that's like saying to the great-grandchildren of slaves, "we need to return you all to the plantation - when agrarian society was king, and we ALL looked out for each other."

"Back to Alatorre Days" -- (hee, hee, hee).

WHO writes this comedy for them. Jay Leno really wants to know.

February 04, 2011 12:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I'm not Turd-jillo, I doubt I've ever even met him.

(I can't speak for 10:05)

But you're right, I don't hang out in bars and assumed Rudy still occasionally smoked in his.

The sentiments were sincere, the assessment based on more time spent with actual CD14 that all one of you put together.

Rudy has an endorsement from the City largest daily paper, but no chance to win the election. He will be able to get on with his life, however, while Huizar will continue to be bashed by the posters here for another 4 years (his choice).


No, I've said all along its was "curtains" for Rudy the day he filed his paperwork. The Times nod is a nice consolation prize, for the absolutely assured 2nd place finish he'll muster, but it's still...

BUH-bye Rudy, thanks for playing.

February 04, 2011 12:33 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Fortunately for the Times op-eds, they need no attribution to just "say" things - unlike where they print "news."

It's guaranteed they had no factual basis for this statement, other than Rudy told them it was "true"...

"All across his district, residents complain that he is aloof and out of touch. They feel neglected in Boyle Heights; they say he was slow to recognize the potential of York Boulevard in Eagle Rock. . ."

How many CD14 stakeholdera did the Times really speak to to make these sweeping claims? In Boyle... in ER.... ? What was the statistical sample? Did they run their own, independent poll (now that would have actually been useful).

Nope, nope, nope. Made it up as they went.

February 04, 2011 12:42 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar should start looking for a job at the money laundering, drug dealing prostitution ring dump called El Mercado in Boyle Heights. Huizar is best friends with the "three fingered" bastard Pedro Rosado, owner of El Mercado. Why do you think he is missing 3 fingers? Because he has been shot at several times. (See LA TIMES articles, George Ramos) Huizar's father worked at the El Mercado as a "shoe shiner" and who knows what else...
This just goes to show what type of class Huizar is. Low class!

February 04, 2011 12:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Martinez emphasizes knocking on doors, soliciting votes one at a time.

One at a time...

Someone, anyone, tell me the last time that worked over mass mailing and go someone elected in this district.

Hell, unless I'm expecting company, I don't even answer the door anymore.

Call me, text me, something... you arrive unannounced, I assume you're a mass murderer.

I'm just not that lonely.

February 04, 2011 12:49 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Everyone "loves" an underdog -- on paper, but not on the ballot.

And especially when the underdog has no real history of service to the district -- just someone who made lots of money for himself.

February 04, 2011 12:50 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


That really seemed to have gotten under several skins.

Kool-aid drinkers usually get pissed when they come face to face with a tea-totaller when they're getting that short-burst sugar high.

February 04, 2011 12:53 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

OMG!!! Huizar spinsters on overdrive today. Its a good one for the local paper not to endorse the incumbent. Maybe they're finally listening to the constituents. I hear there's another story coming out soon and it will beat the FBI one of last week. When you treat people with such disdain this is what you get back. SAdly, Huizar is using the death of a young girl to get his photo ops with LAPD. Offering a rewward yesterday in her death to get his face on camera with cops is despicable and doesn't fool anyone. In fact the emails were flying about the insensitivity and will use anyone at all costs. Greast timing LA Times

February 04, 2011 6:43 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I think Rudy is knocking on doors and using mass mail. Huizar, like always, is using mass mail. Want to know why Huizar is perceived as "aloof" and "lazy"? This is why.

February 04, 2011 6:46 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar is using a horrible tragedy to get media attention. He's offering a reward that was 1st offered in 2006. He had a photo op press conf yesterday and will milk it again at Tuesday's council meeting. He will drag the family and pretend to care. The media should be asking why CD14 is offering the reward when this 14 yr old lived in LA COUNTY in Gloria Molina territory.

February 04, 2011 7:22 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Remember Truhello and Uley are tag teams.

February 04, 2011 8:29 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Ok, so Huizar and Rudy are playing dirty. Once were friends and now running against each other?

Question: who will win on March 8?
with all this junk coming out who knows.

February 04, 2011 8:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Larry Gonzalez, of All Access Entertainment, has been raising large sums of money for the Mayor while simulaneously receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars in fee waivers for Fiesta Broadway.

Huizar was there to make sure the permits got issued.

What happens if Huizar gets tossed before the Fiesta Broadway Event?

Will Rudy stand up to the machine?

Will he stand up for the 40,000 people that live downtown? Will he put an end to this wholesale pillaging of downtown?

Stay tuned..

This will be an excellent test of character.

February 04, 2011 9:52 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6:43 OMG!


Maybe they're finally listening to the constituents.

Yes, exactly, little one, that's what great newspapers are supposed to do. Endorse candidates based - not on their qualification, character, history of activism, but by simply "listening" to the few people who have opinions about everything and won't shut up about them.

(BTW, YFN, newspapers don't have "constituents" - they have readers. And the great ones in history have LED, not just followed (in this case the handful of complainers in society).

Mayor Sam's has been right in this instance, for some time. The L.A. Times is good for only wrapping dead fish in (something Rudy M. knows a lot about, as a dead fish salesman).

Maybe that's why hit it off so well -- similar occupations? They wrap stinky stuff; Rudy sells it to the unsuspecting as a "gourmet" item.

February 04, 2011 10:59 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Hmmm, I expected more crowing about this from the basement-bound Huizar haters that post here.

They're either in shock, or they've been re-energized, put down their boxes of Cocoa Puffs, and are out knocking on doors for Rudy.

("Hell, we never REALLY thought he had a chance before. We just needed an alternative to Huizar")

With 32 days left to the election (far less for the thousands that vote absentee), Huizar's approval numbers still way higher than any incumbent who's ever been booted, and Rudy Rich unknown to 90 percent of voters...

What to do?

(BUH-bye Rudy, thanks for playing)!

February 04, 2011 11:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I vote not to vote on March 8?

February 04, 2011 11:05 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Let's hope the Times did endorse on character - Rudy wins hands down.

Let's hope the Times did endorse on qualifications - what are the qualifications for council member? Rudy starts with no money and makes a successful career. Jose starts with no money and has an impressive academic resume. No clear winner.

Let's hope the Times did endorse on history of activism - Rudy wins.

So, based on your criteria (I won't be insulting and call you "little one'), Rudy wins.

February 04, 2011 11:10 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

When does Tony V. start stumping heavy duty for Huizar?

When do the union matching fund mailers start swarming voters mailboxes?

When do their volunteers hit the streets en masse?

When do the other 17 shoes hit re: Rudy's "troubled" not-as-far-past (as supporters like to pretend) "past"?

What's contained in the typical mid- late Feb. "surprise" packages Parke Skelton is known for (you know the "minor details" Rudy withheld even from his handlers, leaving them unprepared to handle the blowback)?


February 04, 2011 11:14 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

In several decades of activism on the Eastside (and often having people ask me "who are you voting for, I'm really undecided"), I have yet to meet a single voter who's said they based their decision on a newspaper endorsement, especially that a citywide paper like the Times.

(The endorsements of local weeklies do sometimes get referenced -- good and bad -- because those editors and publishers are known to be aware of real conditions here).

Maybe it's different around the City. I've heard people from the Valley talk up the Daily News' picks before. . . but not here, not in my part of L.A.

Not the Times, not the Weekly, either. Some business areas around, the Times hardly bothers to stock its own newsracks some days.

February 04, 2011 11:24 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

11:10 a.m.

You insult yourself with your answers.

What evidence of "character" has Rudy Martinez shown? And, please don't give me that silly "pulled himself up by his own bootstraps fairy tale."

Making yourself rich is not evidence of any "character" - its evidence of greed, at best. Especially when one way you do that is to capitalize on the misery of others, buying about-to-be foreclosed homes out from underneath them for pennies on the dollar, preying on their weakness and crises, just to get rich.

If that's "character" - it's BAD character.

There is nothing that's a match between running a business and operating in the confines of City governments bureaucracy. Some of our worst politicians have come from the ranks of business and suddenly realized they didn't know the first step towards accomplishing anything -- and there's really no one there to "guide" you along the way. On-the-job training shouldn't begin with the City's most powerful positions.

And "activism" ? Huh??

I really don't think you can even begin to explain that. Rudy Martinez wasn't even a resident of the City of L.A. a few months ago. He has never stood shoulder to shoulder with anyone currently striving to improve life in CD14, let alone even known what any of our issues are, until the day he filed his election papers.

His first dealings with most community organizations in the district has been when he approaches them to get votes. There's no recognition, he means nothing to them, he's done nothing with, or for them. When he enters the room, he might as well be the Shah of Iran.

This is why 99 percent of the people who populated Huizar's "community leaders" lists wouldn't even give him the time of day when he came calling. He's understood to be what he is: A rich guy, trying to buy an election.

He's not one of us. He hasn't spent 5 minutes dealing with our issues, or dropped one bead of real sweat on our streets (unless it was to change a tire on his own car -- while driving through on the way to somewhere else).

He's not a "political" outsider, as newspapers love to say in order to paint some romantic picture.

He's just an "outsider" -- plain and simple.

Born around here, but left for greener pastures, until he got it in his cap to "try politics." No doubt he though it "might be fun."

I sympathize with men having a midlife crisis, and suddently realizing they've done nothing but selfishly feed their own ego and pocketbook for 40-50 years -- but that sympathy won't get me to vote for them.

He should buy a bright red sports car, instead. He'll stay interested in that longer...

February 04, 2011 11:51 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The commenters at the LAT site (usually not that busy) are beating the editorial board to death over the endorsement.

Apparently when they determined that people were unhappy, district-wide, with Huizar's performance, they didn't talk to any of the ones now defending Huizar.

Maybe they only asked David Z. what he'd heard at the Glassell Park forum from the hecklers.

That'd be my guess. Extensive research.

February 04, 2011 11:58 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This is GREAT to see Huizar groupies going crazy today. The more they post against Martinez and make fun of Red Spot and this blog, its obvious they are in desperate mode. The Times endorsement is a slap in the face to incumbent and as of today is being posted on many BLOGS. Paul Krekorian won by people using the internet and getting the word out. Martinez is having help citywide and from over the hill. If you really want to fire up Huizar all you have to do is call him LAZY. He goes crazy

February 04, 2011 12:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

32 days isn't enough time for Rudy to really work this up into something that can derail Huizar's inevitable re-election, but it is enough time for voters to start asking more detailed questions about some of the unfounded rumors his campaign is spreading.

- Like, what ever happened to the big bad FBI "investigation"?

- Where's any evidence Huizar's lists were used to "discriminate" for city services (with hundreds of names, and some of them people who had negative numbers by their names -- why weeks later is there still no one saying, "I got stiffed")?

- And, why did the Martinez campaign keep and cash checks for what was oh-so-very obviously a money-funnelling campaign ethics violation. (So obvious, in fact, that anonymous posters here called it out weeks before Ethics sent a letter raising the issue).

February 04, 2011 12:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How much do the spinholes get paid to sit here all day and talk to themselves?

I'd love to know if it's worth it.

February 04, 2011 12:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

So what I'm getting out of all these posts is that the Huizar supporters are stressing what's needed to win (mail over door-knocking, money over spirit) and the Times is stressing what it takes to be a good Councilman.

February 04, 2011 12:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Yes, yes, we've heard that silly song before... "Support for Huizar here is evidence he's desperate."

Folks like you just keep saying it, but repeating something that's just plain DUMB doesn't make it true in any way.

Support for someone is SUPPORT, something Rudy Rich has NONE of, even here, in the Land of Huizar Hate. Huizar had support when he was elected this first time, because of his work on the LAUSD board. He gained more support two years later because of his work in the district. And he has even more support now, because of the 6 years he's put in trying to improve life in CD14 (and putting up with kvetchers and contrarians, who only know how to say "NO!")

There's no more "pro" Huizar or "anti" Rudy Rich posting here today than there was before the L.A. Times endorsement. No one's "desperate" and hoardes aren't flocking to support Rudy.

The more he appears in public, the less concrete he seems -- with the same "bumper sticker" slogans and "I'll fix it" (don't know how, don't even know what's broken, but...)

Your comment makes no sense, your thinking is illogical, and that helps explain your choice of candidates.

February 04, 2011 12:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


If by "good councilman" you mean Richard Alatorre?

That is a HUGE joke. That is insane. That is revisionist history.

More people over 35-40 in the district actually miss ART SNYDER (and he was a pure, corrupt, machine politician), than ever pine for Alatorre.

Alatorre could teach Mayor Tony a thing or two about politics-by-photo opportunity. He made Villar look "substantive" by comparison.

And you know what I remember most about the Alatorre era? Some of the WORST crime waves in the history of the Eastside. People didn't feel safe walking out to get their mail after work, let alone being in the streets.

"Good councilman" ?? Not in the real universe.

February 04, 2011 12:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I post here for free - so even with my limited knowledge, it's a HUGE deal for Huizar.

But whatever they're paying you to deflect, change the subject, post non-answers to questions regarding Rudy Rich's actual qualifications, and just generally pretend pro-Huizar posting is just campaign work, is a huge ripoff.

No one's buying it; even if someone's PAYING for it.

The real cost to your side is that it's obvious to anyone reading that the main reason any of you might favor Rudy Rich is simply, "he's not Huizar" -- aka, the most shallow and self-destructive approach to electing political leaders that any voting bloc can adopt.

(It works out something like this... "I don't like the direction the current leader is headed in -- or maybe just don't like HIM -- so I'll follow the guy who doesn't know where to go, has never been anywhere, and is too arrogant to ever ask directions - and just HOPE he finally figures it out.")

February 04, 2011 12:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Everything you've said against Rudy could have been said about Huizar prior to his becoming a CM. No one ever saw him involved in community activism. So what is your point?

February 04, 2011 12:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Not true. He was on the LAUSD board and was very active in other community endeavors. He also had supported other candidates for public office before him (incluiding, ironically, Nick Pacheco's re-election bid against Villaraigosa).

He also LIVED in the district more than a couple weeks before becoming a candidate (a carpetbagging trait Rudy shares with ANOTHER Times endorsement winner - Victor Griego -the last to not be elected, despite that nod).

Rudy will repeat Griego's pattern. carpet-bag in, get LAT endorsement, lose the election.

February 04, 2011 12:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Explain the logic of these "conclusions"...

Huizar, who got twice as many votes as better known challengers - twice before (66 percent last time), now has to PAY someone to blog support for him here.

While Martinez, who is unknown in the district, can't raise more than $50-100 bucks a week from actual constituents, and is having to PAY for his entire campaign himself due to that lack of recognition and verifiable support, doesn't?

Someone would have failed logic classes with that.

That hypothosis goes something like...

If A equals B, and B equals scotch tape, then scotch tape is not equal to prairie dogs.

(Ergo, sleazy bar owners should be able to remove City street trees from in front of their businesses under cover of darkness and cement over the tree wells).


February 04, 2011 12:57 PM  

Anonymous g said:


February 04, 2011 12:59 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

in away im glad all of this is coming out, but in the out come Huizar lost. the fbi should had did this investgation a lon=g time ago. who the top dog "Rudy".

Jose i tried telling you not to trust anyone(Henry) but you didnt listen.

February 04, 2011 1:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

When Huizar was president of the LAUSD Board, he pushed the "A-G" track, making a mandatory college track for high school students. The electives that were included in decades past were out and physical ed. was cut to two years. Drop outs increased. Some of the classes that enticed students to stay for the rest of the curriculum were no longer present, classes that many found as successful and productive activities. Take this away, and you have many with nothing to look forward to in school each day in terms of success and engagement.

Supt. Cortines stated that one size does not fit all, regarding the A-G track. Among all who begin college, we still don't have much follow-up on the "finishing" part, as many do not complete a degree program for any number of reasons. But Huizar takes credit for the A-G change. Not good.

You have Huizar, now a career politician, latching onto the Villaraigosa crew for his political growth, a very fortunate situation for him. So his loyalty is to that group. His zeal for learning what all the residents of his district experience from a first-hand level never materialized, and it didn’t have to with his alliance with Antonio Villaraigosa. The tradition carries on with LAUSD President Monica Garcia, former Huizar chief of staff and a staunch Villaraigosa ally.

Huizar is part of what's wrong with L.A. politics, with political patronage one essential component for his operations.

Huizar's so-called management of city affairs is "going along for the ride" with votes being 99.9% unanimous. His own Medical Marijuana Dispensary handling was late to begin, and then it became part of the cause of hundreds more MMDs springing up.

And still, that MMD ordinance needs re-working to be enforceable.

Jose's same-day demand on the 11 o'clock news for an independent investigation of a Ramona Gardens LAPD officer-involved shooting was his "no confidence" vote for the LAPD and District Attorney people who had only a few hours at that time with the case. Not much faith shown here by Jose Huizar.

February 04, 2011 1:11 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

second hand smoke does kill Rudy Martinez, you should be care.

February 04, 2011 1:11 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Uh oh, L.A. TIMES own bloggers are already noticing blowback to their half-assed, factless endorsment, from readers:

Their blog says:

"Based on an informal count of lawn signs around the 14th District by a fellow staffer, you'd think that the neighborhood would agree with our endorsement. But a quick trip to Twitter and our comments board* shows some resistance to our stance."

First... Some resistance? Just wait.

But probably more telling... they've assessed community support based on LAWN SIGNS?

Are you f*cking kidding me?

The last person to "assess" support that way (and LOSE big time), was when Tricky Nicky Pacheco paid Cypress Park thug Art Pulido to run around CD14 putting HIS lawn signs in people's lawns that didn't ASK for them -- and IF they complained, he'd THREATEN them in that inimitable "I spent time in prison for killing someone, do you really want to mess with me" way of Art's -- if they removed them.

Number of LAWN signs?

Jesus H. Christ. Now I wouldn't even offend my stinky fish by introducing it's skin to the Times printed pages.

February 04, 2011 1:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Carpetbagging Rudy Rich from Glendale is the new Victor Griego (from South Pasadena), now being intensely supported by Pacheco (who's main defense against Griego 12 years ago was that Griego WAS a carpetbagger).

We've come full circle (jerk).

February 04, 2011 1:19 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Does Martinez have a legal address in the district?

If so, he is one step ahead of either the Mayor or Huizar when they were running.

Does everybody here know, that the City council simply redrew the CD14Council boundary around Villaraigosa's house because they wanted to reduce the amount of stress that he and his family would endure, having to fake a second address?

Believe it or not, the motion is public record at the City's website.

February 04, 2011 1:20 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Rudy did give some money to past election campaigns, I believe it was:

Luis Cetina

Nick Pacheco

Rocky Delgadillo

(All together about about 1/100th of what he's spending on his own).

February 04, 2011 1:21 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

11:51, your reply is simply moronic.

Our best Mayor, Richard Riordan, came from a business, non political background.

Building a business from scratch, making real money, is no easy task. Yes, it takes character.

Comparing him to the Shah of Iran? What a silly comment. Clearly, you have had your nose up the ass of Villaraigosa and Huizar and not seen the unpaid, unsung work of others in CD14. "Our" issues, as you put it, are also "my" issues and I have known Rudy Martinez to help many non-profits and other charities behind the scenes (without the billboards and stickers that Huizar loves so much).

And your finishing sentence, "the red car"...oh, my goodness. Feel free to insult yourself.

February 04, 2011 1:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar's campaign really doesn't have to sling much mud from here on out. Just keep telling the simple truth, and doors will close in Rudy.

Repeat it numerous times, in mailers, interviews, community meetings.

"GLENDALE REPUBLICAN Rudy Martinez wants to be the next councilmember for L.A.'s Eastside."

BUH-bye Rudy. Don't let the blue L.A. City limits signs hit you in the rear on your way back to (your REAL) home.

This is a city where the most active and knowledgable - the most engaged regular voters, are still pissed and grousing about being told they have to allow non-residents who have a "stake" vote and run in their lowly neighborhood councils. And in many cases, these are people that actually live in nearby L.A. City neighborhoods - just outside that NC's boundaries.

L.A. residents, just not from THEIR part of L.A.

And, this is a district where everytime the CM lives in Eagle Rock, people in Boyle Heights bitch that he doesn't understand "their" part of the district -- and vice-versa.

You think they're going to elect an inexperienced just-in-time (actual) GLENDALE resident to the full City Council, once they know?

Who conned Martinez into thinking that would ever fly here?

February 04, 2011 2:05 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Huizar was put on the schoolboard, and the planning commission before that.

He was "paid for" before his first day of school.

You really want to look at his history, go back to El Pueblo...

February 04, 2011 2:07 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

How did the bribery thing at LAUSD turn out for Huizar?

I guess that investigation was fabricated too..

February 04, 2011 2:10 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Here's a short video of Rudy M. telling Highland Park NC last night that he just won the L.A. Times endorsement.


Some obvious takes from viewing:

- The very tiny crowd seems bored and inattentive (not one "clap" when he announced that huge piece of news . . . that's amazing!)

- People are reading while he's talking, walking around -- almost as if he's not there.

- In his comments (once again), as he did at an earlier forum, he seems to be scolding some of that community's hardest workers for not "filling the room." (HP contains about 1-in-6 of CD14's voters - the largest community yet to hold a forum for this election).

The NC had been promoting for weeks that Martinez would be there... so, why no crowd? It's usually the case that if there's "something to see" - then the room will be filled, right?
The obvious contrast will be in seeing what attendance there is like when Huizar speaks, at their next meeting. I'm estimating it'll be 50-100 percent higher.

(Is there any doubt why Martinez has no support from the districts' most influencial volunteers? Never once been a part of them, never active in CD14 struggles before -- YET, he's quick to scold, lecture, and find blame.)

- That same blog's account of the NC meeting that followed records that one NC board member "stormed" out afterwards, angry that the challenger had only been asked softball questions by the NC president -- a Huizar endorser, himself.

February 04, 2011 2:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Gee, g, where to begin.

If you include CD14 as being up for grabs (which I don't), hardly any f the 7 districts have viable challengers.

The same "BOZOS" are going back, regardless.

There will only be one new CM this time, because the last one isn't running.

This isn't really an election, it's a 7th inning stretch between real electoral contests.

Wait and get all hot and bothered about the mayor's race in 2 years. That'll be the only real "election" for a long time here.

February 04, 2011 2:32 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:07 p.m.

As opposed to what, electing now the "best politician Rudy Rich's money can buy"?

How's that a "good" thing?

Seriosuly... based on criticisms against Huizar in the recent past, we'd be exchanging a guy who "only pays attention to us at election time" for one who doesn't even NEED to do that.

Yeah, no! Self-made, self-indulgent millionares who become "servants" of the people, overnight?

Sorry, I gave up fairy tales shortly after I lost my first few baby teeth.

February 04, 2011 2:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:10 p.m.

I guess it was.

February 04, 2011 2:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:28 p.m.

Highland Park is also where one local blog reported that the people listed on Huizar's Northeast list were more amused by it than angry -- laughing at it being made such a big deal.

It's Eagle Rock's neighbor and home to Martinez's bar - seems like that would make Rudy more of a "hometown boy" and a favorite, than El Sereno- then Boyle Heights-based Huizar.

Apparently he hasn't made much of an impression there in the 25-30 weeks since he moved over from Glendale.

February 04, 2011 2:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Man, residency requirements for running for office in L.A. really are a huge joke.

This will be third time in 12 years - which is really just three full terms worth - that one of the final two contenders has made his home somewhere other than CD14 for most of the year leading up to the actual election.

Twice now they've come from completely outside the City of L.A.

It does seem like district people see through the sham most of the time. The candidates who moved in just to run have only held the position for a little over two of those years (and, didn't someone once explain that "villaraigosa" is Spanglish for "just passing through" - ha!).

The other 10 years the actual district residents, Pacheco and Huizar, prevailed.

I think the previous commentor is right. They will again.

February 04, 2011 3:04 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parke may have to be careful who he mails a "Glendale Republican" slick to in CD14, though.

To the few like Red Spot, that's probably a plus.

February 04, 2011 3:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

2:38, but Huizar DOESN'T pay attention to us at election time, either. Huizar supporter Brady Westwater (?) says Huizar is doing a mailer campaign and not wasting time going door to door. I think Huizar said something similar.

So, the choice is clear, Rudy Martinez for CD14

February 04, 2011 3:25 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Do you count call the illegal voters in CD14 as Democrats or just anti-Republicans?

February 04, 2011 3:27 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

If they couldn't even verify that Villaraigosa, Huizar, or Alarcon lived in their districts, how can they keep people from voting illegally?

It's a fair question. A lot is at stake.

I think the LA Times should do a feature.

February 04, 2011 3:36 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Your choice is clear. You have "daddy" issues and want an elected official who'll hold you when life gets REAL rough and tell you he'll solve all your big bad pwoblems.

I'll choose someone with the experience and intellect to handle one of the more complicated jobs in the city. Someone who's saved the City money repeatedly, had to make tough decisions involving thousands of city employees and billions in tax revenue, and who's actually BEEN in CD14 for more than the last few (convenient) weeks.

Frankly. I don't care if I never see him "at my door" in four years. With nearly 100,000 constituents homes in the district, coming by for a "visit" with each and every one of us is a pretty damn dumb thing to run a campaign on.

February 04, 2011 3:44 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:36 p.m.

Nice try, but Huizar's residency in the district as never been in question. Even when he was on the LAUSD school board 4 years before running for city Council he lived within CD14. (So, he's lived here about, um, 25-TIMES as long as Rudy Rich).

February 04, 2011 3:47 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Can you furnish proof; REAL proof that there are any "illegal" voters?

Or are just pulling stuff out of your backside?

And, if there are "illegal" voters in the district - considering how few people actually do vote - that's even more telling as to the level of apathy.

(People who consistently make up stories about how the "dead" vote, here or there, are usually just trying to come to grips with the fact that the candidates they support always lose. They're unwilling to admit they are out of step with most others around them - and so if the "others" always get more votes - then there's something illegal going on. It can't just be that someone else deserved to win).

Wouldn't just be easier to admin you don't really belong?

February 04, 2011 3:53 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Holding the door open so his mob friends can pillage the district is hardly a plus.

February 04, 2011 4:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I can understand, a bit, the frustration in that video, about the poor turnout in HP.

The Glendale Republican must be very disappointed, after all those door-to-door visits, each to get (maybe) one vote, to then go to the far fewer candidate forums in the district this time around (one every other week, at best)and have to give up a full night just to speak to maybe 50-60 people at a time.

Then, looking at the room, he has to realize that 1/4 of the crowd are his own entourage following him around (ALREADY voting for the Glendale Republican), 1/4 are Huizar's spies (ALREADY voting against the Glendale Republican), 1/4 are the same district-roaming hardcore committed who attend all the forums (already decided for/against), and the balance of a dozen or so is a mish-mash of the people who always attend NC meetings to get the free food, and people who think there are FIVE candidates on the ballot, and they intend to wait and hear from Carrillo, Yanez, and Butka as well - before they ACTUALLY decide ("just out of fairness, you know!").

That's just not a "net" winning campaign approach, is it?

Oh well, maybe the GLENDALE REPUBLICAN will fare better when he goes to ask for the endorsement of the Northeast DEMOCRaaa . . . (oh, never mind!)

February 04, 2011 4:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

@ Red Spot - Are you now on the editorial team at the LA Times? The sloopy writing and omission of facts in today's editorial is totally your writing style. They did use spell check so maybe not.

February 04, 2011 4:23 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

3:47, you don't know what you are talking about. Huizar had a tiny, dirty little apartment listed as his address on his candidacy papers for his LAUSD seat when he didn't live there.

I think many Huizar supporters just took him on face value as Villaraigosa's boy and didn't look beyond his resume. That's why they think he is so squeaky clean.

We, who have known him for many years, know the other side of Huizar.

February 04, 2011 4:34 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I'm going to start off with saying that I am a Huizar supporter, my family members also support him, and he is going to have our votes come March 8.

Having said that, there's NO DOUBT that this endorsement stings really bad for him because every major candidate (especially an incumbent) wants to have the endorsements of the major LA Area newspapers. In this case, the LA Times and La Opinion are the ones that he'd want (LA Daily News carries weight when it comes to Valley endorsements and citywide elections).

The fact that Martinez got the LA Times endorsement, along with the LA Times describing Huizar as a mediocre achiever and bringing up the issue about the lists, it speaks to what others are saying and what I am hearing too out in the community.

Some of you said it and I'm sure it's true - he's probably going nuts on his team (probably more so on his city office's field staff than his campaign staff, since they are the ones that created the community's feelings about his work, while the campaign team is responsible for spinning the work).

So it'll make for an interesting few weeks leading up to the election. Having said that, if Martinez is able to beat Huizar, it'll probably go down as one of the biggest political upsets in LA History.

There you go. A logical comment based on information and not foolish rhetoric. I'm sure this blog isnt' used to seeing that very often.

February 04, 2011 4:41 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Drop the dime, rat him out, get him arrested.

(Or just keep up the decades of unfounded rumors - with no proof. We know that's what you'll do, because it's easier, and lasts longer.)

Cowardly. . .

The polticians put themselves out there, deal with all the crap,
try to fix what's broken for us, and get dynamited with B.S. slime everyday in hell holes like this - just as a "thank you!"

February 04, 2011 4:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

4:41, I fully agree with you (although, for the record, I am a Martinez supporter)

February 04, 2011 5:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


"Huizar supporter"

Well, you almost had me there, but (like that scene in "Inglorious Basterds" where the English spy gives himself away by counting to "three" with the wrong fingers... well...

You held up the "wrong fingers" you obvous Rudy rooter. You did it when you repeated the Times absolutely unfounded, nonsensical B.S. about the community's "feeling about his work" as if it's bad, and as if anyone much beyond this blog is saying that.

They're not.

If you're hearing that, you're only hearing it from the tiny midget squad of Huizar haters that also post here, and you're most likely some part of that group, pretending to be otherwise.

It just isn't true, the Times didn't "hear it" from the community, and they did zero research beyond buying Rudy's spin on that.

I've spent time all over the district in recent years, and I never divulge where I stand on the councilperson/staff, other than to let people know I have to deal with them sometime.

The ONLY people whining about CD14 and Huizar are the SAME people who opposed him last time, and also "pretended" along with Alvin Parra that he was on vacation more than at work, before that he hunkered down behind Pacheco's last lousy effort.

(If you really were a "wartime" spy, right about now you'd be pushing up daisies).

Bad attempt.

February 04, 2011 5:09 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


The look on the face of Rudy Rich's counterpoint to Turd-jillo (George Gonzalez?), neer the back middle, is priceless.

He obviously realizes just as soon as the announcement is made, that the board of one of the larger neighborhood councils in the district is not only not really paying attention to Martinez, but is just so completely unimpressed by the endorsement news, and there are just "crickets" going off in the room.

I'm sure they were thinking that would just be greeted with cheers and applause, and back-slapping, and "Gee, wow, Rudy can I get a YARD sign; NO, make it TWO!"

"OH, Rudy, we're SO thankful you're here to RESCUE us from the aloof, oppressive, vindictive Jose - who we're ALL so unhappy with ALL over the district."

YAAAAWN! ("Any pizza left? Who's this guy? Do we have a quorum. Anyone have a public comment card for my brother to fill out?)

Nope, nada, and he's presenting just a few blocks from one of his businesses.

February 04, 2011 5:54 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

It's the weekend. Martinez has about 30 hours of working time to do that "door-to-door" thing with supporters, on one of his 3-4 remaining weekends. (Well, 25 is he lays off during Super Bowl... I'd advise that).

15-20 minutes at each house to convince them the guy most of them voted for the last two times is evil and corrupt - AND that the L.A. Times ENDORSED him; that's maybe 70-75 houses each weekend -- if he doesn't stop for meals of water.

Maybe he's got 12-13 people doing this, in earnest. So they can all work straight through and "door-to-door" 800-900 homes. (Times that over 4 weeks...)

IF ALL the voters at ALL those homes agree to change their votes, and ALL of them actually DO vote, and NONE of them get contacted by Huizar's people - and flipped BACK later (or read his mailers). . .

Well, heck.

He CAN do it. He's a very MIGHTY "small" businessman.

It will work. He's going to come in a VERY, very impressive second place with several THOUSAND actual votes.

Maybe even as much as one-third of all votes cast - FAR more than either Pacheco or Parra got (both below 30 percent).

February 04, 2011 6:08 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

The last time the Times endorsed the challenger in CD14 (Pacheco v. Villaraigosa), the challenger won!

February 04, 2011 6:38 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

6.08 why do you assume every home is for Huizar? Same old arrogance from a Huizar supporter - with advice for Martinez, too - how nice.

I get the impression the arrogance, the know-it-all demeanor of the Huizar supporters, is just a mask similar to whistling in the dark.

Huizar supporters, any great advice you have, keep it for your boy. He needs it.

February 04, 2011 6:51 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Could somebody remind us exactly how many people voted for Huizar last time?

That was 66% of ...what was it?.... 12 people....

I heard 8 of them thought they were voting for Villaraigosa...

Maybe Huizar should try using Acorn this time...

February 04, 2011 7:22 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Interesting point, 6:39. The surprise for me wasn't that Martinez was endorsed, it was that Huizar wasn't!

Another surprise. Why isn't Parke Skelton (or Michael Trujillo) trashing the venerable newspaper for it's obvious backstabbing? (as surely Parke see it). I mean, the Times and Parke have enjoyed a symbiotic relationship for years. Working together to trash countless candidates taking on the (Eastside) establishment.

And the Times still wouldn't endorse Jose Huizar!

It's the FBI story. The Times knows more than their recent article on the FBI investigation allegations - and they don't want to get egg on their face or endorse somebody who is not going to be around too much longer.

Or Rudy Martinez is clearly the better of the two candidates and simply deserves to be CD14s next councilman.

February 04, 2011 7:28 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Uh, huh.

Who ran that canmpaign?

February 04, 2011 7:42 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Parke Skelton

February 04, 2011 7:47 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

What does CD14 have in common with Bell?

For starters, both voting districts have huge numbers of illegal immigrants. (I know somebody is going to say prove it)

This FACT makes CD14 very vulnerable to political manipulation by organized crime.

Take a look at the network of sleazeballs feeding off the City of Bell and you will see MANY of Huizar's associates.

While you are at it, take a look at Lynwood, Southgate, and Huntington Park.... don't forget to look to see who is controlling the school district construction programs.


Larry Gonzales

Cordoba Construction
De La Rosa Bonds

And once again... I'd like to know how these elections are safeguarded.

I think every voter should know. Let's SHOW the voters how secure and above board the whole process is.

In fact, I think every polling place should have a visible police presence.

February 04, 2011 7:49 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I'm no longer surprised at the Times endorsement. One of their bloggers just today explained how the editorial staff (VERY scientifically) determined that Huizar's support had fallen in the district and that people from "Boyle Heights to Eagle Rock" were unhappy with home, and considered him aloof...

The sent one of their staffers out to count lawn signs.

A frickin' straw poll sampling of LAWN SIGNS!

(NO "ooh, ooh" we know what the FBI is telling no one; or WE (The Times) LIED when we said the FBI said "no comment" - they REALLY told us Huizar's going down... we're just SAVING that for a slower news day).


(But hey, if the Times thought Rudy Rich was the "better candidate" - maybe they should have said that, but THEY DIDN'T.

They said they picked him because he's:

"energetic and engaging" (so are the Laker Girls).

"thoroughly immersed in the civic life of the district" (REALLY, a guy who just moved here 6-7 months ago, had never attended a SINGLE community gathering before last fall, and who in candidate forums so far this year has had to PUNT on every serious "issue" question asked?)

OH, and because he's:

"knocking on doors" (but, so are Jehovah's Witnesses and Girl Scouts), "soliciting votes one at a time" (now less than 5 weeks of "one at a time").

Better? GEEEEZ!

February 04, 2011 7:58 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

This pretty much sums up the "opposition's" core for Mayor Sammies.


What a powerful "true American" platform.

You should be proud.

February 04, 2011 8:00 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

I think 7:28 is right.

Given the previous relationship between the LATimes and The Villaraigosa camp, they wouldn't pull the endorsement unless they strongly suspected Huizar was going down.

The information that was given to the Times was probably too sensitive to publish while the investigation was being conducted.

The snide remark about Alatorre in the Martinez endorsement implies to me, that they had no choice but to pull support from Huizar. It reads like an inside joke.

February 04, 2011 8:01 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Isn't it about time for the "truthers" and "birthers" to pop in and demand to see Huizar's citizenship papers?

Maybe his Princeton diploma, too?

That could be forged right?

The MOB can do that for you!

"Tony V." could UHrange it, youse know?

February 04, 2011 8:02 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

7:58, you are a very angry man, obviously.

I have no idea what the FBI told the Times. I am just trying to figure out why they didn't endorse Huizar, - they have on two previous occasions. And probably, it was the same Times guy who authored all three endorsements and, who knows, he might live in the neighborhood.

So, what has changed? I can't believe it's the number of yard signs. In my opinion, it's either they see Rudy Martinez being the better councilman or - who knows what the FBI told them!!!!

February 04, 2011 8:13 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Who says PFAAAH...it looks like somebody texting a fart!

February 04, 2011 8:15 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Wasn't assuming they were all for Huizar.

Was assuming (VERY accurately), that almost none are FOR Rudy Rich, an absolute unknown who just carpetbagged into the District, who's only lived here a few week, and can't even get neighborhood council people - some of the most politically engaged folks in a community that he owns a business in - to look up from their agenda's and pay attention, for the BIGGEST announcement he's gonna be able to make until, well - his concession speach very early in the evening of March 8.

I've said here before, just by NOT being Huizar, "Rudy Rich" (or Alvin Parra, or Nick Pacheco, or ELMER FUDD, even), can get 15-25 percent of the votes, just by having their names on the ballot.

Most of those are from the hardcore GOP old-timers, who just on principal, will always vote for "the other guy."

This time, that other guy is Rudy. (AND, just by coincidence, HE'S ACTUALLY A REPUBLICAN).

But it's a sloggin' uphill, fight for anything much beyond that.

Because -- (now DON'T believe the L.A. Times HIGHLY ACCURATE "lawn sign" poll...) Huizar IS still very well-liked and respectec all around the district.

As much as ever.

Anything else said is just a "fact" made up by people who want to believe otherwise (to feel better about his guaranteed next 4 year term) -- but can't prove their "fact" to save their bacon, or Rudy's riches.

February 04, 2011 8:16 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


And, HERE'S your pointy tinfoil hat.

Wear it in good health, until the MOTHER SHIP returns to pick you up.

February 04, 2011 8:18 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

They SAID what the FBI told them... can't you read?


And then Huizar people said, (many times), that there IS NO investigation.

Only Rudy Rich is prentending there is.

February 04, 2011 8:24 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

There are all kinds of things that lead people to fake an address in LA.
1. They are in the country illegally.
2. They want their kids to go to a better school.
3. political organizations like Acorn recruit people to vote in elections, telling them they can vote when they can't.
4. Many times having a legal residence in the district is a requirement to run for office......usually not an obstacle.
5. and my favorite.... the voter won't be needing his identity anymore because he is dead or in a long term care facility.....one more for Huizar.

February 04, 2011 8:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

Kool aid drinkers believe what they want to believe, and even when it's denied multiple times, when ther timelines don't work, and no on but the person who has everything to gain by lying is still saying it -- they start developing conspiracy theories about how it's a "cover up" so they can cling to their orginal psychological life rafts.

February 04, 2011 8:33 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


You OBVIOUSLY haven't looked at Rudy Rich's list of campaign "endorsments" on his website.

Every third person is on a respirator at some nursing home, and probably thought Rudy was collecting signatures to get more jello for lunches.

BUT, the GLENDALE REPUBLICAN, appreciates your hard work trying to slime Huizar, anyway...

February 04, 2011 8:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


I just want to make sure that people participating in our elections are voting legally.

If you can't trust the election process all of this bragging about winning doesn't mean much does it?

Who can throw the most money at an election?
Who has the biggest network of Special Interests?
Who can afford the most expensive professional Liar in Los Angeles?
Who can hire a stable of slick attorneys to keep them out of jail?

That really sums up what this election has been reduced to, am I wrong Mr. Skelton?

I guess Huizar wins....

Why should an honest person from the community even try to run for City Council?

They'd be an inexperienced loser, with no connections right out of the gate.

You and your cronies are a disgrace Mr Skelton.

February 04, 2011 9:39 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

8:40 PM- This "Glendale" stuff is getting old. Rudy owns two two businesses in CD 14, one in Highland Park and one in Eagle Rock. That's two addresses right there. How many do you have?

(And residency isn't a big deal if a homeless person can run for mayor)

February 04, 2011 9:43 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:


Rudy Martinez campaign is officially over, courtesy of David Zahniser. This story just posted over at the Times.

February 04, 2011 10:06 PM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

At least someone who listens might do something... Someone who is aloof and doesn't listen won't do anything... CD14 residents are tired of having representation by those only using the position as a stepping board, and or to make a living. And a good one at that with a salary of over 178,000.00 a year, not including benefits. Jose never earned that much in his life. Rudy made a good living. It's time we have an elected official represent the district who understands and cares about residents and business owners. Who will work to make our lives in each of the communites better. Not just look to see who has donated to his campaign! In this financial crisis, many of us can barely hold on to our homes and feed our families. The last thing we need to worry about is where we are on a list, because that will mean if staff will help us when calling the CD14 office ... It's time to get more givers in office, and throw out the takers...

February 05, 2011 10:41 AM  

Anonymous Anonymous said:

nice, except york blvd. isn't in eagle rock.

February 05, 2011 6:08 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home