Fifth in a series
Re “‘You Must Kiss Silbiger’s Ring’ – McVarish”
As a first-time candidate for public office, what has attorney Scott McVarish learned since entering the School Board race late in July?
“I like my opponent.”
Stop right there. Yes, Mr. McVarish is one of three contenders for two open seats in the Nov. 13.
Only Prof. Kelly Kent is considered an opponent, though, because he and Anne Burke are running as a single entry. Therefore they are teammates, not rivals.
“I am shocked,” Mr. McVarish said, “by how little (Dr. Kent’s) supporters care about the issues. I am talking about her supporters, definitely not Kelly herself. Kelly is a good person.
“Her supporters want to attack. They don’t want to talk about the issues.
“There are no letters-to-the-editor saying Kelly’s ideas are better than our ideas,” said Mr. McVarish.
“If you notice, Kelly Kent’s supporters are not supporting her ideas. Nor are they critiquing our ideas. It is all personal attacks.”
The offensive was ignited, he said, by a desire to “gain revenge” for the entirely unexpected defeat of Karlo Silbiger, son of former City Councilman Gary Silbiger, in the last School Board election. The younger Mr. Silbiger had been regarded as a cinch to win a second term.
“Some people,” Mr. McVarish said tartly, “can get easily sucked in and focus on the wrong thing.
“The right things to focus on are, Who has more experience? And how to spend $106 million.
“That clearly is (Anne) Burke and McVarish,” said Mr. McVarish.
(To be continued)
4 Comments on “McVarish Faults Kent’s Backers”
So, Mr. McVarish claims his opponent’s supporters are attacking him, and then writes an attack article in reply? Seems a little odd to me. Also, does Mr. McVarish have any proof? On a par with, say, the detailed investigation into Mr. McVarish’s improprieties while involved in the Long Beach school board?
Ari reached way back for this one. The interview took place last month. Since then some of her supporters have begun talking about the issues, and I applaud them on their constructiveness. Others, regrettably remain focused on trying to attack Anne and I. This has actually hurt their preferred candidate more as I think the Nov 3 results will show.
I agree that it is important to focus on the issues that the Board is going to be weighing on primarily, as a way to consider the candidates. However, many voters don’t know the issues and go by endorsements and experience as a way to determine who to vote for.
The question is how much voters should consider a person’s experience – positive or not so positive – when making a decision on who to vote for. My opinion is that most voters consider both aspects of a candidate, as well they should. One shouldn’t argue that only the positive should be considered, anymore than one should argue that only the negative should be considered.
Ultimately, our School Board members are also leaders in our community, who become models for our younger generations. I know all of us want the most upstanding members of our community to represent us.
Mr. McVarish,
I have to admit that I am somewhat confused by the statements in your interview. Perhaps you could clarify to what you are referring when you mention all of the attacks that have been leveled against you and Ms. Burke. I have seen several attacks leveled against Dr. Kent from a few of your supporters in this and other online newspapers, and we all know how popular it is to have your supporters attack endorsements when they don’t go your way.
The bond monies are being spent in appropriate ways as we speak. I am not sure what you feel may change if you and/or Ms. Burke are elected. I know from attending forums that you and Ms. Burke are not happy with how fast the bond monies are being spent, but realistically, what could actually be done to accelerate the process? I can see that you often reference the “experience” that makes you and Ms. Burke more qualified candidates, but what exactly does that consist of? Supporting the idea of a bond and convincing voters to vote for it does not necessarily give a candidate the “experience” necessary to monitor how monies are spent. Could you please explain?
That said, there are actually far more pressing issues facing our district that you apparently have not considered. I agree that we should be discussing the issues, but perhaps we will have to agree to disagree on what the important issues in this campaign are or should be. When voters point those things out to you, they are not mounting a personal attack, they just want to hear what your thoughts are. The voters are entitled to ask questions….in fact, it is their duty as responsible citizens.
The other thing, quite frankly, that really puzzles me, is why in the last two installments of your interviews with Mr. Noonan, you have unceremoniously dragged the Silbigers into this election. For the life of me, I just can’t figure out what your motivation could be. What do you gain from that? Has it helped your campaign? Is there proof of your “gain revenge” theory or is this just more unfortunate innuendo? I’ve lived in Culver City for 30 years and, quite honestly, no one ever told me that Gary Silbiger wore a ring that he expected anyone to kiss until now.
There is one thing that you mentioned in this interview with which I completely agree. “Some people can get easily sucked in and focus on the wrong thing.” Truer words were never spoken.
Best,
Debbie Hamme