Angry Poodle
Angry Poodle
OCCUPY THIS: Even in beatific Santa Barbara, where the rich are uncommonly generous and “class struggle” is typically reserved for the pissing matches between billionaires and millionaires over rearranging the furniture at the Coral Casino, reverberations from the Occupy Wall Street movement are thankfully being felt. This past weekend, hundreds of protestors took to the streets throughout downtown Santa Barbara. City Hall is still scratching its collective head about how to respond to the handful of Occupy S.B. campers seeking to pitch their tents out front in De la Guerra Plaza. My daughter was camping out there last week when the police moved in to arrest people. Around 2 a.m., my wife’s cell phone rang. “Tell Dad to get down here,” my daughter ordered. “The police are trampling our constitutional rights.” I rolled over to go back to sleep but not before issuing her instructions not to call if she got arrested. Any response was obliterated by the foghorn created by City Council candidate Cruzito Cruz blowing — yet again — on his conch, broadcast sonically via a corporate cell-phone conglomerate from De la Guerra Plaza into our bedroom. When my daughter didn’t pick up the next morning, I called a city cop well-known for his uncanny habit of always being everywhere to see if he might have arrested her. He hadn’t. He attended a Journey concert instead. His own daughter, it turns out, had been at De la Guerra Plaza that night, also protesting the obscene concentration of unrequited wealth that’s taken place the past 20 years. That’s Santa Barbara.
While the whole Occupy Thing has not animated the City Council election like a Red Bull-Monster Drink cocktail, it has managed to infiltrate some of the debate, however subliminally. In some ways, the council race is like a long shaggy-dog story — 10 candidates, 20 forums — with no apparent punch line. To the extent there’s any narrative, it’s that the fractured slate of candidates backed by the liberals, Democrats, and unions want to “take back” the council majority that they lost last year, though to do what exactly remains unclear. By contrast, the conservatives — who gained ascendancy for the first time in 35 years last year — are blasting away at the public-employee unions bankrolling the Democratic slate, contending such unions bankrupted the state with their extravagant salaries and bloated retirement plans and buried the California Dream. While pension reform is absolutely necessary, people would do well to remember that it was the financial meltdown triggered by Wall Street’s suicidally reckless and short-sighted investment schemes — not the unions — that pushed many local governments to the brink of bankruptcy. And when anti-union crusaders, like Santa Barbara’s peripatetic minister-without-portfolio Lanny Ebenstein, trot out lists of retired government workers who make six figures to not work, it’s worth noting the vast majority are former executives and senior managers. Despite efforts by Ebenstein — now pushing a statewide ballot initiative to bar public employees from negotiating wages and benefits — to misdirect our class resentments, Wall Street remains a far more worthy target than public-employee unions, no matter how egregious their faults.
At a candidates’ forum last week at the Vista del Monte retirement home, City Councilmember Dale Francisco — leader of the council’s conservative majority — blistered as “corrupt” the system that allows public-employee unions to donate to City Council candidates. Conservative Councilmember Michael Self put it less stringently, expressing concern about the conflict of interest. While I get the point, I also wonder why Self did not make it in 2009, when she ran with the endorsement and financial support from the Police Officers Association (POA). The POA, for the record, is not endorsing Self in this election, in part because of her habit of showing up at press conferences with Ebenstein.
In a related but different vein, Deborah Schwartz, the putative frontrunner among the Democratic challengers, is availing herself of an “Occupy This” explanation for the $34,000 lien secured against her for a loan she defaulted on. The News-Press broke the story — clearly the fruit of opposition research conducted by a competing campaign — of Schwartz’s financial troubles Tuesday morning, and the timing could not have been worse. Ballots had just been mailed out the week before.
Voters will forgive candidates with messy financial pasts — Councilmember Grant House was the top vote getter in 2009 despite a blitzkrieg of hit pieces exposing his previous troubles. But it’s hard when City Hall is confronting a structural deficit of $2.5 million. It’s even harder for a candidate like Schwartz, who has made a big deal of her corporate savvy gleaned from working for a “Fortune 500 company” — AT&T — on the campaign trail. Schwartz contends that she got in trouble on the loan — taken out to tide her over as she moved from her job to start her own business — when the Bank of America, with whom she’d banked for 20 years, unilaterally doubled her monthly payments. No, she was never late making payments, she insisted, and no, the bank would absolutely not negotiate with her. When the B of A — now infamous for its harsh and unforgiving refusal to negotiate with foreclosed homeowners throughout the state — passed her on to collections, Schwartz said the collection agency proved as nonnegotiable as B of A. While the posture of the bank and the collection agency in Schwartz’s recitation definitely seems more than a little incongruous, it’s also entirely possible. Who hasn’t found themselves on the short end of a very greased stick when dealing with banks or credit-card companies? And the banks’ collective refusal to come to the table with foreclosees has sparked a desperate call to action uniting Tea Party agitators on the right and iPod revolutionaries Occupying the left.
Home foreclosures in California jumped 26 percent this August, fueled in large measure by the B of A. As to whether this revelation will sink Schwartz’s boat — and that of the Democratic slate — we’ll have to wait and see. I wouldn’t expect to see Schwartz camping out in front of City Hall — or handcuffing herself to the flagpole — in solidarity with Occupy S.B. anytime soon, but I’d be surprised if she’s not humming from their hymnal.
In the meantime, the real question isn’t when will the Occupy movement go away and life get back to normal; it’s what took us so long in the first place. And no, my daughter didn’t get arrested. She just wasn’t answering.
An annual display of Master’s and Doctoral student work in ... Read More
Comments
CONFLICT THIS:
Michael Self and Randy Rowse eagerly pursued the endorsement this year by the police and fire public employee labor unions. When they failed to receive those endorsements and the fat financial contributions that come with them, Self and Rowse then flip-flopped and blasted the other candidates who did get endorsed.
Any hypocrisy there by Self and Rowse?
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 4:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
When there is a party at the plaza there is a closing time. When you exercise your first amendment right the plaza is open 24/7/365. You may have to fight the corporatist coalitions that own our government to exercise your rights, from city hall all the way to the supreme court.
As for Francisco, Self and Rowse they represent the status quo that got us to this point. They are 'The Machine.' Mature enough to know better, they have been there for the self and other superficial reasons. These conservatives chant, 'The Government must operate like a business' and when it does by competing for executive "talent" by offering high pay, perks and benefits, like businesses do, then they blame the government again. These conservatives operate with short-sighted selfish and twisted logic and that is detrimental to us all. DO NOT VOTE FOR THESE THREE.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 6:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Whoever raises the most $$$$$ usually wins, unless they make a really dumb blunder. Schwartz has the most cash so she'll most likely win. Her new salary will enable her to get out of debt while we pay for the debts she'll pass on to her donors.
Using this Occupy wall street sentiment to help her while she takes more money than anyone from special interests is brilliant politicking if she can fool enough people and pull it off. I'm betting she does.
Georgy (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 7:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
From the comments entered here, we can only conclude that jfklbh agrees that Rowse and Self are big hypocrites, but just does not care.
He also has no clue why or why not the POA dumped Self in exchange for the latest flavor of the year.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 8:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Truly delusional comment #1 (courtesy of Nick): “class struggle” is typically reserved for the pissing matches between billionaires and millionaires ". Nick, do ya ever read the comments in the Indy. Lots of pissing matches between the socialists and the centrists.
Truly delusional comment #2 (courtesy of McD): "Francisco, Self and Rowse they represent the status quo that got us to this point. They are 'The Machine.'" This guy's ability to view rewrite history and restate reality is astounding. The status quo until 2 years ago was the Democrat/"Progressive"(Socialist) machine led by Taxin Jackson, along with Das Williams and her other acolytesi.e. the monolithic Council who transferred almost $10 million in city reserves to the greedy govemployeeunionworkers? Francisco, Self, and Rowse have saved SB from financial self-immolation.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So, Deadbeat Deborah Schwartz lives beyond her means, takes out a loan, doesn't pay it back (to the tune of $34,000), and now it's the bank's fault then the collection agency's fault. She doesn't pay her taxes and now it's someone elses fault.
Santa Barbara's financial problems were created by a city council that lived beyond their means and left the citizens to hold the bag. The last thing that we need to do is elect another person who has no concept of the value of money or personal responsibity.
Gordo (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
McD, meet Gordo. Another refugee from your reality distortion zone.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 1:44 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually if you reread my comments I'm about as far removed from McD's thinking as possible.
Gordo (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 4:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, that's my point. McD needs to understand that he's not the giver all wisdom that he thinks he is. Sorry for the misunderstanding (I did say refugee from 'your (i.e. McD's) reality distortion zone'), Gordo, you and I seem to be on the same page.
JohnLocke (anonymous profile)
October 20, 2011 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"McD needs to understand that he's not the giver all wisdom that he thinks he is."
-- JohnLocke
Here, JohnLocke, this mirror should be very useful.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 2:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe we should paint a blue line around Santa Barbara showing where the homeless tide will rise due to lame policies.
ramoncramon (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 6:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, the local commenting here and at other local websites has its own local equivalency Godwin's Law, in that enough nutty comment entries eventually will morph any discussion into some imagined relevancy to the Light Blue Line public art project once proposed years ago.
Nonetheless, no one is trying to rebut my first comment that Self and Rowse are huge hypocrites for eagerly seeking out the endorsements and contributions from the police and fire public employee labor unions. And then when they failed to receive those endorsements and contributions Self and Rowse complain tirelessly and condemn those labor unions and complain about their competing candidates who were endorsed. Anyone want to argue that Rowse and Self are not hypocrites? I am sure JohnLocke could try.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"John Adams: You're problem is that you always want to discuss incidentals, not what's important to the voters in Santa Barbara."
-- jfklbj
I don't remember you being appointed spokesperson for SB voters.
SezMe (anonymous profile)
October 21, 2011 at 1:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Notice that Francisco's campaign portrait is heavily airbrushed!
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 23, 2011 at 10:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Filling in the cracks of the aged facade.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
October 23, 2011 at 8:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
While in SB we have political prisoners, back East: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/10/24...
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 24, 2011 at 8:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Just a question. Who is responsible for cleaning up after the Occupy SB group? The trash? etc? Oh yeah, the underfunded Parks and Rec Department.
Just another group that in this instance is like the Tea Party. Those "misinformed citizens" were holding rally's in public parks and open spaces while deriding government. The same government that maintained these spaces and cleaned up after they left.
BeachFan (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2011 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Actually since the majority of the Occupy SB (and all the other Occupy groups) are highly environmentally conscious, you'll find little if any litter left in their wake.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 25, 2011 at 6:08 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"While pension reform is absolutely necessary, people would do well to remember that it was the financial meltdown triggered by Wall Street’s suicidally reckless and short-sighted investment schemes — not the unions — that pushed many local governments to the brink of bankruptcy."
Bull! What's pushing local governments to the brink of bankruptcy is not only the fact that we have to pay for the extravagant salaries and bloated retirement plans for public sector employees (a significant part of the problem), but all of the other garbage that we as Californians seem to tolerate all too readily. First, California is only 12% percent of the U.S. population, yet has 30% of all welfare cases in the United States. Second, the illegal alien population is growing rapidly while we just sit on our cans and watch. They're systematically destroying what's left of our public school system. They flood emergency rooms at our hospitals because they use the ER physicians as there own family practitioners, and they never pay the bill. They game every financial welfare program they can get their hands on (a large part of the first problem I mentioned). They don't pay any of the taxes that pay for those welfare programs. They drive without driver's licenses and insurance, get into accidents, and stick legal licenced drivers and insurers with the bill. They are a large part of the prison population that is guarded by some of those public employees with the extravagant salaries and bloated retirement plans. The list goes on and on, but we just sit here and watch our local politicians do nothing about it. In some cases, they even write idiotic laws like The Dream Act that encourage these things to continue and to even grow. Wall Street's to blame for all of this? I don't think so.
"And when anti-union crusaders, like Santa Barbara’s peripatetic minister-without-portfolio Lanny Ebenstein, trot out lists of retired government workers who make six figures to not work, it’s worth noting the vast majority are former executives and senior managers."
Isn't one of the things that the "Occupy Whatever" simpletons are protesting is the large salaries that executives are making? What's the difference between a private sector executive making a large salary, and a public sector executive making a large salary? Oh, wait. I know. We're the one's paying for the public sector's large salaries. The funny thing is, I don't hear one mention of any of that from the "Occupy Whatever" morons.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2011 at 9:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Just another group that in this instance is like the Tea Party. Those "misinformed citizens" were holding rally's in public parks and open spaces while deriding government. The same government that maintained these spaces and cleaned up after they left."
- BeachFan
Actually, the Tea Party is known for leaving a place even cleaner than when they first got there. And, they didn't need port-a-potties because they didn't camp illegally. Just sayin'.
waz (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2011 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
They may be camping illegally but I doubt they were the type to remind the teacher to assign homework as well. Tea Party events at best tend to be nerd central unlike before the movement got hijacked.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2011 at 10:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What? You have to stop commenting so late. It's making you incoherent (that is, more than usual).
waz (anonymous profile)
October 27, 2011 at 7:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
One reiteration for the record:Our lil' town was run by free spending lefties for an awfully long time, how can anyone blame the current council for our mess? We've had two years of fiscal sanity out of two decades of giving away the farm...
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
October 28, 2011 at 8:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
If she can't balance her budget, why should we trust her to balance ours? Just asking.
blackpoodles (anonymous profile)
October 28, 2011 at 10:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If Michael Self is unable to maneuver her car around a bulb-out, why is she licensed to drive? Just asking.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
October 30, 2011 at 10:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'll bet if she was an illegal alien you would be defending her right to drive...
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
November 1, 2011 at 10:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Be careful about assumptions Italiansurg, I think you know the rest of the quote. I wish Self were an illegal alien then we could have her deported like she would have done to the middle/working class of Santa Barbara. Let's ask for her birth certificate, just on the off chance!
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
November 1, 2011 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
“ 'class struggle' ” is typically reserved for the pissing matches between billionaires and millionaires over rearranging the furniture at the Coral Casino"
This pretty much sums it up: Rich people rearrainging deck chairs on the Titantic.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 1, 2011 at 7:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"I wish Self were an illegal alien then we could have her deported"
- Ken_Volok
We deport illegal aliens?! Great! It's about time!
waz (anonymous profile)
November 2, 2011 at 9:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Assumption? I have made zero assumptions, to wit:
Progressives claim that Constitutionally vetted procedures for traffic stops that allow for the confiscation of cars for drivers that are not licensed are racial profiling.
However:
Apparently we agree that public safety is paramount.
Apparently we agree that unsafe and unlicensed drivers, whether illegal aliens or legal citizens, should have their driving privileges taken away in the name of public safety.
Apparently we agree that illegal aliens should be deported.
Apparently we agree that members of the local middle and lower class should not be deported unless they are illegal aliens.
See, I'm a uniter not a divider...
italiansurg (anonymous profile)
November 2, 2011 at 12:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)