As the accompanying progressive-inspired City Council election mailer circulates through the community today, those who agree with its acerbic comments will question why anyone would be upset over long-absent truth-telling.
Perhaps a larger segment of residents will react with disgust.
A third dimension, educators, will wonder what needy, underprivileged school the sensitive authors attended, and why they dropped out before reaching middle school.
Demonstrating again that negativism is a main source of oxygen for leftists. Committed to an eternal search for villains, they decline to banner-talk their own candidates. The goal is to inflict damage by smearing the main opposition threats.
In an era when diversity reigns daily on the sacred altar of intensely subjective social justice, the sensitive authors of the mailer, obviously devoted disciples dedicated to lasting regional peace, sought to serve a hot political dish to every reasonable taste.
The sensitive authors suggested that special interests – code for not their interests – fiendishly took over the City Council when residents were not looking. Applying the logic of the sensitive authors, by definition their interests would not be special. Then why pay attention to them?
As loyal apostles of the Church of Climate Change, the sensitive authors are to be commended for exercising enviable self-control. They only listed the environment as their third-ranked special interest.
This is an admirable concession to normal thinking since the leaders of the church have been wrong on every wink-wink panic-motivated prediction since 1971.
In savaging Göran Eriksson and Scott Wyant for dastardly embarrassing themselves by associating with the odious Chamber of Commerce, the needlessly secretive Love Living in Culver City crowd scored 75 percent. They spelled correctly three of the four words in the two names.
The sensitive authors might have spelled Mr. Eriksson’s first name right if only their proofreader hadn’t been busy elsewhere, robbing a toy store at the Braille Institute.
The sensitive authors succeeded in 50 percent of their war. Third-place Mr. Eriksson won the final Council seat while Mr. Wyant finished fifth.
Ari, your commentary above regarding this flier (and the people presumably behind it) is far more vituperative and vicious than anything that can be found in the flier itself. And it’s not even close. One wonders why “negativism” and “an eternal search for villains” is, apparently, a-okay for Ari Noonan, but wrong and evil for anyone not named Ari Noonan.
A piece of paper with some words on it that about 10 people originally saw. I’m not sure that I’d be happy about this if I was either of the two gentlemen named, now its distribution has been increased x 100. As my eight year old would say; ‘Derp!’
Marketing 101 makes it a certainty that this creative anonymous flyer is the tip of a information iceberg that was carefully orchestrated ensure victory for specific candidates. By the next election, it is my hope that someone will out this idiot and ask that they not participate in anyone’s campaign and resign from the democratic club since they do not play well with others.
P Beale: This flyer was dropped throughout Carlson Park , Vets Park, Sunkist Park, West Culver City, the Crest, Blair Hills and Fox Hills. I got one, and many people I know did to throughout the City. It was probably distributed to 5000+ homes. This was not a random or small distribution by a couple of people. I agree with Molly – it was carefully orchestrated.
How do you know the distribution on this?
P Beale: People all over the City were calling the candidates and saying they received this dropped on their doorsteps. It was no secret and it wasn’t dropped on just a few people’s doorsteps. And, many people said they saw it being dropped on their steps. Sunkist Park – 1000 homes, Vets Park – 500+, etc. It adds up. I was probably being conservative with the 5000 number.
Right on Laura. Garbage like this is not in keeping with any fair campaign practice. I didn’t know about or see the Fox Hills flyer until it was published, but it was also disturbing in it’s manipulation of facts. All elections in Culver City should have a website that is dedicated to fact checking and post any fliers like these. It would be good if it was also posted immediately in the local papers and online media.
So Ms Wasserman so expertly claims “Marketing 101 makes it a certainty that this ‘creative’ anonymous flyer is the tip of a information iceberg that was carefully orchestrated ensure victory for specific candidates.”
And over 5000 people received this earth-shattering piece of paper, wouldn’t some of those people also have sniffed out the rest of the ‘information iceberg’?
Where did the ‘iceberg’ go? Did it melt? I think it’s more of an ‘information’ ice cube isn’t it really?
If we have over 5000 members (‘conservative estimate’) of the Culver City ‘Stasi’ rooting out these ‘carefully organized’ plotters and calling candidates, where is the rest of the so-called ‘carefully organized’ anti-chamber candidate campaign.
Whatever plot you’re all imagining doesn’t seen ‘carefully organized’ to me at all. I think it’s just some angry dude with access to a Xerox machine. And frankly if some person wants to spent their time and money at Office Max and print this stuff out, no ‘fact-checking website’ is going to stop them.
And whoever it is is probably quite happy that you are giving he or she this amount of publicity.
P.Beale, despite your marketing credentials you seem awfully certain that anyone in the city who does not agree with you is a “Stasi” or some other derogatory term. I’d like to suggest since you do not agree, it is time to let it go. For the record, as a long term resident who has seen this all before, I regard these “anonymous” flyers which are beautifully scripted to sway people’s opinons as cowardly. Had the author(s) had the strength of character to own what they wrote and sign their name it would be a non-issue. I can see that these flyers are crafted using techniques that have been effective in marketing political candidates/issues. They bear the hallmark of a certain unethical person who has been involved in the city’s politics for a long time. I have heard that you are now very involved on one side of the political fence so I will take your opinions with a grain of salt and continue to add my own without resorting to name calling insults like Stasi. The only secret police who seem to be out there are the ones distributing anonymous flyers.
Thank you Molly. Well said.
Firstly ‘ladies’, it’s you and your confidante Ari who won’t let this go. Which is why it keeps cropping up on this racist blog. I’m just trying to make you realize that it’s a storm in a teacup. The election is over. Let it go.
Next, please tell me how am I ‘very involved on one side of the political fence’? I helped out a little with Facebook on Kelly Kent’s campaign. And shot some film for the Coalition when candidates were answering questions. I didn’t even ask the questions. Ask your buddy Goran. He was there. I have footage of him talking about storm drains. It was exciting stuff.
That’s the full extent of my involvement. I am not a member of any group here in Culver City. Despite your ill informed ‘gaggle’ of acquaintances’ assumptions about me. So stop making things up. Or as most people would call it… lying. Or why don’t you post here what group I am a member of. You choose. Go on…share your theories. How dare you make any assumptions about me. You know nothing about me.
I am disgusted at Ari’s constant misogyny and blatant and unashamed racism, and the fact that your ‘group’ get more upset by a random piece of paper than a hate filled ‘blog’ that’s commonly used by candidates and council members to promote themselves, is both sickening and very telling. Ari Noonan spreads racial hatred. And despite my so called of oft called-out ‘newbie’ status here in Culver I am well aware of the racist reputation that this City has. But that doesn’t seem to bother you does it? That’s not part of your agenda is it?
So would you like to tell me how I am involved? And in what? It would be great for me to know how I spend my time. And if this kind of accusation and gossip is how you people formulate your opinions, it’s no wonder they are often so wrong.
You are always very quick to make any of your comments personal aren’t you? How else would you know about my ‘marketing credentials’. So you are creepily stalking people who may dare to have differing opinions than you and yet you get it very wrong don’t you? Dear god and some of you sit on Commissions. Frightening!
Finally your ‘group’ seems often at great pains to take a rather patronizing and frankly sneering tone to those of us who haven’t lived here all our lives. I’m sorry to break it to you that there ARE some foreigners who walk the streets of Culver City. Oh the HORROR! And just maybe we are the reason that this City is so vibrant. And here’s something you may want to think about. You don’t necessarily know everything because you never left Culver City. In fact I would suggest the opposite is true.
So stop spreading ill-informed malicious gossip and conspiracy theories and maybe focus on doing some good for this city like ..um.. let me think…maybe trying to sort of the lack of ‘harmony’ displayed by some people who are involved in local politics and on Commissions.
Get over it Polly. Your intense interest in having the last word says much more than you realize. You name call, and and jump to conclusions at every opportunity. I am aware of your “marketing” cred because of the internet. I usually care enough to fact check when someone starts slinging epithets about everyone who disagrees with her. Culver City is a small town and you would be surprised how many of us are progressive and have been since before you chose to arrive and enlighten everyone with your version of the truth. It is immature to suggest that there is any conspiracy of people who all harbor what you call racist views of Ari Noonen. I may not always agree with what he says, writes or opines but he is who is he is, and he never hides behind an anonymous flyer. As far as anything else, I suggest you get over yourself and back away from the ledge of ; or risk being the very thing you claim to despise. An opinionated letter writer who knows little but writes much .
Get over it Molly. You made accusations about me. Now defend them instead of resorting to insults. Or apologize.
Pbeale, First, please don’t call me a lady. Secondly, Laura and I are card carrying members of the Progressives who love Ari Club, and we do not intend to back away from the ledge of being that which we despise.
I do not know who chose to use my name on this post, but it just figures. Note to the FPOL editor, Ari Noonen, will you please remove this post – it would be nice to know what coward thought to use my name in an obvious ploy to create additional conflict and drama. The real Molly Wasserman
So you’re a non-gender specific racist.
Duly noted.
PBeale: I am copying your paragraph: “So stop spreading ill-informed malicious gossip and conspiracy theories and maybe focus on doing some good for this city like ..um.. let me think…maybe trying to sort of the lack of ‘harmony’ displayed by some people who are involved in local politics and on Commissions.”
You are probably referring to the LoveLivingInCulverCity blog being written by Nadine Province. Nadine Province is and was completely incorrect in her analysis of the PRCS agenda item. This was an agenda item and was there to allow for discussion by the Commission to determine who was going to be on the Ad Hoc Committee, and how we were going to approach the topic(s).
IF that evening had been scheduled as a Community Conversation, we would have invited the entire community, by sending out flyers, Email blasts and posted on Facebook. The evening program would have consisted of a panel discussion/presentation (in which we, as Commissioners do not participate, but facilitate with experts and community leaders).
We were not talking about “harmony in culver city” (which is the working title for the upcoming Community Conversation) but the format and specific audience. This topic for a Community Conversation evolved out of the racial incident at CCHS that happened a few months ago. However, we were asked, and agreed, that the particular incident should not be addressed in this Conversation because CCUSD had handled it within their realm. Hence, the need to decide how refocus and to create a meaningful event. (Which you might had known had you watched previous PRCS Commission meetings).
The actual Community Discussion is scheduled for September, when the Commission will be bringing in experts in the field and community leaders. At the recent PRCS commission meeting I suggested that the topics and audiences are so and diverse and broad, that we may think about having a series of Conversations, rather than one single Community Conversation. I do admit I was not as articulate as usual that evening due to the fact I was suffering for a bad case of the flu, for which I am apparently being criticized as not understanding the topic. I understand the topic and I understood the agenda item. Please get your facts straight before spewing your opinions. As to your hate for Ari Noonan, my suggestion is you just stop reading this website.
P.S. Polly – if you want to have a real discussion I would be happy to meet with you anytime I am not at work.
Well said Laura.
@ Molly – I thought that post was rather confusing and over the top angry (the one someone posted as you) as you and I have not met and know virtually nothing about each other. It was mean and vicious and whoever said it should be banned from this page. Ari needs to vet these comments better because to allow someone to post that obvious viciousness is just wrong. Why did someone do that? Because they are nuts. Plain nuts. I have my suspicions who it is and to that person I am a firm believer in Karma and Karma will bite you in the ass – hard!
Who is in charge of the upcoming Community Conversation? Who is running it?
The Ad Hoc Committee is comprised of Commissioner Scott Garland and Commissioner William Rickards. They are currently working on the format, target topics and presenters. They will bring back their ideas to the entire Commission at our June meeting for discussion and consensus. As with anything in government, it moves slow because we must comply with the Brown Act.
Literally two older white dudes.
Does it occur to any of you EVER to actually reach out to the real community?
#whitesplaining
Laura Stuart. Thank you for immediately recognizing that there was a spoof post using my name and your idea about checking to see who is who when posting. The intention of the mean spirited person who did it runs a close second to Polly Beale’s chortling about racists, and is a good reminder for all readers that anonymous attacks or fake posts are done by cowardly bullies. From my experiences in the 60’s when I first became a voter, and worked on progressive causes I saw first hand that racism often hid behind cowardly deeds and bullying people into submission. Polly Beale’s comments and the actions of the person who chose to impersonate me are showing similar behavior while claiming the moral high ground in a local election that proved ugly behavior should be called out by those who see it. The only silver lining is that they have shown their bad behavior to the online world and cannot erase it no matter how many times they claim they are good people or want to persuade others of their truthfulness.
Laura, I have not met you, but I will make certain to attend your meeting about racism and look forward to hearing what you have to say in an open forum. Thank you for having the courage to stand up to people who violate ethical standards, manipulate the truth for their own ends and make a mockery of our city’s community values. I hope to introduce myself and in the event that Polly chooses to attend the meeting as well, will enjoy seeing who this person is when she is not hiding behind her computer screen and spewing hate.
Letters to the editor are an opportunity to voice an opinion, not attack others with wild claims and derogatory insults. They are also an opportunity to learn that not all people know how to play well with others.
PBeale: In response to “Literally two older white dudes. Does it occur to any of you EVER to actually reach out to the real community? #whitesplaining” Did it ever occur to you that legally only Commissioners can form and be members of official Ad Hoc Committees? Apparently not. They are tasked with reaching out to the “real community” to find speakers and groups that will be able to present this topic in a meaningful way. If you want to add real value to this discussion, please email these 2 Commissioners with any suggestions you may have regarding who these “real community” members are and how they can add value to this event.
To all concerned. Make a difference.
Applications for Culver City Commission, Committee, and Board appointments are being accepted by the City Clerk’s Office through Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 5:00PM.
Openings are available on the new Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee, Civil Service Commission, Committee on Homelessness, Cultural Affairs Commission, Disability Advisory Committee, Finance Advisory Committee, Fiesta La Ballona Committee, Landlord Tenant Mediation Board, Planning Commission, LAX Area Advisory Committee, West Los Angeles Vector Control Board, and Parks, Recreation and Community Services Commission.
The City Council plans to interview applicants at a special meeting on Tuesday, May 31, 2016. Appointments for these openings, are tentatively scheduled to be considered by the City Council on Monday, June 13, 2016.
I think that the problem could be solved easily. All someone needs to do is knock on the front door of the flyer distributors and ask them why they didn’t put their names to them. They surely must be very proud of their work, or they wouldn’t have taken the time to write, copy and distribute them, correct?
Since two of people who delivered them told neighbors their first names, it wouldn’t be too hard to find out how to contact them.
“Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights, and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation–and their ideas from suppression–at the hand of an intolerant society. . . . [O]ur society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.” McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Comm’n, 514 U.S. 334, 357 (1995) (Stevens, J.) (holding that prohibition of anonymous campaign literature in local election abridged freedom of speech).
Understanding that our local pamphleteer acted within his/her/their rights adds some focus to this “debate.” What’s left is criticism that seems to assume that Culver City voters are too ignorant or stupid to assess the merits of campaign literature. I hope that most people do not share that view and that we can now move on.
Thank you Alex, for reminding us of what a critical role free speech plays in a democracy. I, like you, trust that our Culver City voters are intelligent.
I am wondering one thing though. Is the Laura Stuart that seems so offended about this effort, the same Laura Stuart who not too long ago posted in the Democratic Club pages the famous words of Voltaire: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death, your right to say it”, and from George Washington: ““If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
She was insisting at the time that even if the Club had not endorsed Goran Eriksson, Voltaire’s words supported her ability to post on the FB page for readers. And yet, here, she seems to have forgotten these thoughtful words.
Or maybe for her, freedom of speech only applies to her ability to support her candidates.
Oh, I seemed to have missed a few other gems that she shared on the Culver City Democratic Club Facebook page:
* Better a thousandfold abuse of free speech than denial of free speech.
*If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
* If we don’t believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don’t believe in it at all.
And my all time favorite in this context:
“Everyone is in favor of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people’s idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.”
Free speech is fine. Hate speech that spreads easily verifiable falsehoods under the cover of anonymity is a travesty of the system. Yes voters are intelligent, but I have found that rumors, innuendo and falsehood are immune to intelligence. That is why newpapers have fact checkers and we revile people who are outed in their lies. If you choose to believe that the flyer made no difference, you might consider how many saw the flyer and voted for Erickson and/or Wyantt because of it. Culver City elections are not white hats versus black hats, they are citizens who ware asking their fellow residents for a chance to make a difference. Please respect that not everyone has the same opinion and let’s move on. The only reason this topic engendered so much interest is because it is an emotional issue – not one of reasoned dialogue and measured deliberation of facts.