The windows are steaming up faster as Election Day nears in Mark Ridley-Thomas’s latest campaign.
The state senator who represents Culver City’s interests in Sacramento has accumulated not only power but bitter opponents during the last two decades in public life.
He merely has to awaken each morning to set off a firecracker beneath the people who don’t want him to win the June 3 County Board of Supervisors race against Bernie Parks.
Last weekend, the Los Angeles Sentinel, pro-Parks, jabbed hard at Sen. Ridley-Thomas in its lead story.
In a piece published yesterday at flashreport.org, Shawn Steel, the former chair of the California Republican Party, launched into a name-calling tirade against the senator. Here is the essay, headlined “The Battle for Los Angeles,” and Sen. Ridley-Thomas’s response follows.
By Shawn Steel
“Every 12 years, Los Angeles County voters get to choose a new Supervisor.
“Under the racially compliant redistricting rules, District Two is the “black” seat. Although the district is vigorously trending Latino.
“There are two competitors for a job most politicians believe is better than Congress. An L.A. County Supervisor has 2,000,000 constituents, a huge staff, multiple offices, an easy commute, great salary, amazing benefits, a giant personal slush fund and the best tickets to the Hollywood Bowl.
“Plus, the 5 regents control billions and billions of tax dollars.
“Former LAPD Chief and current L.A. City “Councilman Bernard Parks is resisting efforts by controversial state Sen. Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Culver City) for the seat.
“
The differences between them are stark.
“Chief Parks is primarily for vigorous law enforcement, skeptical of endless government union demands and pro- business.
“And yet he has the enthusiastic support of a large coalition extending from Congressman Maxine Waters to Supervisor Mike Antonovich.
“On the other hand, Mark Ridley-Thomas is trouble. He is the union’s guy. He is a racist. And he is permanently angry against America. He is a hateful person. Over the weekend, the L.A. Times reported that the unions have extorted $2.5 million from their members for Ridley-Thomas. Parks is out raising Ridley-Thomas the old fashioned way, person-to-person, limited to $1000 each.
“The unions demand full control over L.A. County’s budget.
“The unions have raised six times the money Ridley-Thomas has raised. Of course, the unions are using this money for an “independent” committee.
“Now the real question: Does the business community stand tall and talk on the unions?
“Let’s see what’s at stake.
1) “With the economic downturn, all government budgets are bleeding red. With total union control, the County will accelerate into wanton spending, at the same time pilfering the productive classes out of L.A.
2) “The Cost of Doing Business survey, published by the Kosmont-Rose Institute, shows L.A. City is the second most expensive city for business. The County is not far behind. Urban expert Joel Kotkin believes that the only productive engines for growth, the middle and small businesses, will be squeezed out unless there is immediate tax and regulatory relief.
3) “Although many of the major corporations have left L.A. County, the efforts promoting new businesses by legal immigrants are growing rapidly.
4) “In the stifling politics of union- controlled Ridley-Thomas, the Board of Supervisors will have three militant liberals, handing Angelenos’ future to avaricious government unions.
5) “L.A. County already has the largest concentration of illegal, harder-to-employ immigrants, a school system that cannot graduate 50 percent of its students and well-organized gangs that vastly outnumber the police.
6) “Ridley-Thomas would accelerate the deterioration of the quality of life, encourage the growing exodus of middle-class families, creating a huge gap between a few rich Westside liberals and millions of people who cannot get a good job unless they belong to the government union.
7) “In other words, a South American government.
8) “With business leaders like Carol Schatz, president of the Central City Assn., a downtown business “advocacy” group, helping Parks, he’s in for real trouble.
9) “Schatz told the Times, when responding to the $2.5 million union fund, that “I don’t think any special interest should attempt to control an election.”
10) “Hey, Carol, this ain’t beanball.
11) “I hope she would find supporting a pro-business candidate might inspire her Association to get “specially interested” in saving their businesses.
12) “Will the Greater Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, business leaders such as Eli Broad and developers “man up” to the union challenge?
13) “This is a 12-year race. The consequences will be felt at least until 2020.
14) “As Lenin reminded his followers: The capitalists will sell you the rope to hang themselves with. Let’s hope that not true today.”
Fred MacFarlane, Sen. Ridley-Thomas’s campaign spokesman, said:
Shawn Steel believes he is providing his readers with a conservative pro-business perspective on L.A. County and the race for Supervisor.
What Mr. Steel accomplished instead was to offer his far-right, hate-fueled, xenophobic viewpoints in a slanderous diatribe. All the while, Mr. Steel expresses warm support for the Second District Supervisorial candidate he favors in the race: L.A. City Councilmember Bernard Parks.
Mr. Steel is entitled, under the U.S. Constitution, to freely express his opinions. He has done so on a conservative political blog that is widely read in L.A. County, statewide and elsewhere around the country. Councilmember Parks may wish to post a blog comment commending Mr. Steel for sharing his incisive thoughts and analysis on the key issues facing L.A. County and the Supervisor's race.
Mr. Parks may also wish to send Mr. Steel a thank you note for his endorsement and kind words, and add Shawn Steele’s name (and opinions) to the list of illustrious individuals, contributors and groups supporting the “Parks for Supervisor” campaign.
