Dana, what irks us with Mayor Pulido is his lack of accessibility and what seems to be a lack of willingness to lead. The LA Times did an article about three years ago which discussed his nickname “The Invisible Mayor.” Gustavo “The Mexican” Arellano has nicknamed him the “Howard Hughes of Orange County.” All this goes back to his lack of accessibility. Until this last election cycle, virtually the only times we ever saw Mayor Pulido was every first and third Monday of the month. He was often a no show at dozens of community events, it is almost like he is bored of his duties as Mayor. When Santa Ana was being taken over by unruly protests in March of 2006, he was nowhere to be found. His job that day was to be a leader and once again he was MIA. None of it involved marching or protesting. The topic of the protests was immigration, but when the city is on the verge of a riot, it is not a federal issue, it is a local one. Exactly how is that “behind the the scenes” leadership?

That’s Claudio Gallegos in today’s Orange Juice, responding to Dana Parson’s recent profile of Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido in The LA Times. I guess he’s taking issue with Dana Parsons’ assertion that those of us who decry Pulido’s lack of leadership are doing so just because Pulido isn’t “Latino enough”. No, it’s much more than that. It’s the crappy state of our roads, closing libraries, lack of parks, and much, much more.

Follow me after the flip as we examine why people in Santa Ana really are irritated with the Mayor…

So why are we angry with Miguel Pulido? It isn’t because he doesn’t give awesome speeches at immigrants’ rights rallies. It isn’t because he doesn’t declare allegiance to Aztlan. Basically, it isn’t because he isn’t some firebrand for radical causes. It’s because he just doesn’t seem to care about the people in the City of Santa Ana.

I like how Claudio says it…

During his “invisible years”, our streets began to crumble, many playgrounds and park equipment fell into disrepair, after years of a lowered crime rate, crime and grafitti have returned with a vengeance, and a nationally recognized organization labeled Santa Ana one of the hardest places to raise a family financially. Fixing these problems did not require marching or carrying signs. People want leadership.

Or as I said it earlier this week…

Here are some more reasons why Pulido is so controversial here. He hasn’t done anything about the recent spat of gang violence in Santa Ana. He hasn’t done anything about opening more parks in a city that’s in such dire need of open space. He hasn’t done a good job of keeping our roads in good working condition, as some parts of town look like third-world countries due to the crappy state of their streets. He hasn’t improved our libraries… Oh wait, that’s right, HE’S CLOSED THEM! In his twenty years on the City Council and twelve years as Mayor, I’m struggling just to find good things that Pulido has done in this city.

So have we made that clear now? It’s not about “how Latino” Miguel Pulido is. It’s not about how much “Chicano Pride” he displays. It’s not about the color of Miguel Pulido’s skin.

It’s about how the Mayor is doing his job. It’s about our decrepit roads. It’s about the dearth of green in this town. It’s about the gangs that roam the decrepit roads at night. It’s about where the kids have to go when there’s such a dearth of nice, green open spaces. It’s about the dire state of the lives of way too many working people in this city.

And does this Mayor care? Does he care about the people in this city? I think Dana Parsons missed that point when he spoke with Miguel Pulido. Pulido’s not controversial here because he’s not “Latino enough”. He’s controversial because he doesn’t care enough about this city.

Arnold Schwarzenegger sure had a lot of success in the past year and a half, governing like a moderate.  Rudy Giuliani is doing well in blue states.  Will the GO be the Schwarzenegger-Giuliani party Peter Schrag asks.  Quick answer: No.

Moderates like Schwarzenegger and Giuliani will do well in traditional Democratic strongholds, but face strident opposition from the party’s core conservative base.  That split is perfectly encapsulated in the immigration debate.  Tom Schaller has an excellent column in today’s Salon on that point.  Rush Limbaugh is calling the immigration reform bill the “Comprehensive Destroy the Republican Party Act.”  Schaller argues that Limbaugh is right.

For the past three decades, Republicans have carefully sidestepped the kinds of issues that could divide a party’s followers from its Beltway elites — and expertly deployed the same wedge issues against the Democrats. Now the party’s 2008 front-runners are in trouble, one of Karl Rove’s long-term strategic goals is in doubt, and the foot soldiers are close to open revolt, all thanks to one uniquely radioactive wedge issue. Could Limbaugh’s warning about a great unraveling be true?

“The Republican strategy on immigration has been one of the great failures of modern politics,” says Simon Rosenberg, president of the New Democrat Network, which has organized a systematic outreach campaign to Hispanic voters. “What’s going on in the Republican Party is a debate between the strategists who want to win and a part of their base that is extremely xenophobic.”

Immigration is especially perilous for the GOP because it is what might be called a “double-edged” wedge issue. It not only pits the party’s base against a large and quickly growing pool of potential new Republicans — 41 million Hispanics — but also pits two key parts of the existing base against each other. The Wall Street wing of the GOP, which finances the party, wants to keep open the spigot of pliant and cheap Spanish-speaking labor. It finds itself opposed by much of the Main Street wing, which provides millions of crucial primary and general election votes and would like to build a fence along the Mexican border as high as Lou Dobbs’ ratings or the pitch of Pat Buchanan’s voice. And it’s simply impossible for any political party to win if it has to choose between money and votes.

Giuliani is with the majority of the Republican base on the immigration bill, saying it would make things worse, by legalizing those here without papers.  However, he would support the legalization of workers if there were better ID cards and a tracking database.  That nuance will not work too well with the Limbaughs of the world.  Arnold is probably likely to support this legislation, and tends to be more moderate on non-social issues than Giuliani.

The Wall Street Wing, which Arnold and Giuliani represent does not encapsulate the activist base.  Giuliani is hoping to win the nomination by running hard in the big progressive states like California and New York that come with a wealth of delegates, rather than pour everything into the earliest caucus states like Iowa and New Hampshire.  He is actively promoting the electability argument, hoping to overcome his moderate stances that the primary electorate abhors.  The Republican Party might have a brighter future in the country, if they embrace candidates who match up better ideologically with the majority of the country.  But those 30% who still support Bush will be doing the voting in the primaries.

Schrag:

For Giuliani, with his personal and political background, going left (again) on abortion, the paradigmatic issue for the religious right, wasn’t going to lose him a lot of conservative votes that he might have won otherwise. Family values were never going to be his strong suit.

Still, his pro-choice declaration and his gay-rights and gun control background haven’t kept him from gaining a comfortable lead in polls of Republican voters. That hardly means he’s got it locked up. But it does raise the question of whether social issues aren’t nearly as much of a defining element as they were a generation ago, even for GOP conservatives.

The influence of conservative religious figures is waning a little bit, partially due to the collapse of the Bush Administration.  The issues of guns and abortion are not nearly as high profile as they once were.  Gay marriage is no longer at the forefront, especially here in California.  That does make Giuliani’s chances relatively better, but it’s all a matter of scale.  He may have the Wall Street money, but the engine of Republican activism, aka the Bush Machine, is not set to promote a moderate candidate.  There will not be much church based organizing going on for Giuliani in the primary.

Giuliani leading in the polls is more about the lack of a first tier true Conservative, rather than a statement about the future of the GOP.  He is aided by the fact that Romney and McCain are busy attacking each other, rather than engaging Giuliani.  He may be ideologically closer to the country than the rest of the Republican field, but I am skeptical that his lead will hold up over the long haul.  Republicans will dig into the minutia of the immigration bill like the Democrats are doing with their candidates on Iraq.  Giuliani can win the primary with an electability argument, but I simply have a hard time seeing him as the face of a new GOP.

When I was filling in the tags, I realized that there really is nothing this story is missing. First, it has Dan Noyes:

But, from reading the twelve hundred page final report from the internal affairs investigation into the video and the officers behind it, it turns out [San Francisco Police Officers Association President Gary] Delagnes was the one who blew the whistle on the officers involved in the video.

Noyes has been all over the $20 lawsuit from the cops who took the fall:

Waukeen McCoy wants to depose the mayor about his admitted alcohol abuse that came to light in January during the City Hall sex scandal. The attorney says he also wants to question Newsom under oath and on camera about cocaine use, and release the tapes to the public.

When the cops dropped their youtube attack ad I figured this might get interesting, but the more that comes out the crazier the whole thing gets. In other news, in conjunction with Chris Daly’s Convention, there will be an entire Film Festival for youtube hit jobs against the mayor.

(There are actually 2 DFA Training Sessions, in OC July 21-22 as mentioned in this post and also in Sacramento on July 14-15. – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

In case you forgot, DFA is doing its training academy this July. And this year, we’re having it here in Orange County! Yes, we have some great campaign training planned for you in Irvine. And yes, we’re already planning to show all of you fantastic Democratic activists who will be coming from throughout Southern California (from Oxnard to Palm Springs to Imperial Beach) how we REALLY do it in the OC! : )

So have you signed up for this yet? Do you still need to be signed up for this? Do you still need to learn more about this? Follow me after the flip for more on this great opportunity to learn how YOU can be a part of the big Democratic victory of 2008…

I’m sure you know about what happened last year. Now do you want to learn to make the magic happen again next year? Perhaps this is what you’re looking for:

The 2008 Presidential race is already beginning to take shape. You and I both know that the grassroots are more than just a passive audience in this race. The DFA Training Academy will prepare you to become an asset to whichever candidate you end up supporting.

But this is more than just a presidential race. This past November Democrats across the country were successful in races from the U.S. Senate to local city councils. In addition to the standard campaign curriculum, we also will focus on strategies geared toward retaining the seats won last year and building Democratic majorities in 2008 and beyond.

Wow! Doesn’t that sound great? Well, there’s more! Only $60 (or $30 for low income people and students) can get you all of this:

At the DFA Training Academy, experienced campaign professionals will cover practical strategies and tactics including communications, fundraising, voter targeting, online organizing, and building a sustainable grassroots movement. We design the program so you can go out and use the skills you learn right away. Then, we follow up with you to make sure you have the support you need to organize your community.

Maybe you want to learn how to be more effective activist. Maybe you want to prepare yourself for the Presidential Election next year. Maybe you want to learn how to begin changing things for the better at the local level. Or maybe you just want to network with fellow activists. This will be the place for all of that and more!

Now my friends at DFA-Orange County have been working their fannies off organizing this for the past several months. They’ve been scouring all over the county for the perfect location, just for you. They’ve been working so hard on arranging for sleeping accommodations for those of you that will making quite a long drive to join us for the weekend. They are busy planning some fun social activities for after class, just for you. Basically, we’ve been making this an absolutely fantastic event just for you!

Don’t you want to show my friends how much you appreciate their hard work by signing up for DFA training academy?

Event Date: Saturday, July 21, and Sunday, July 22, 2007
Event Time: 9:00 AM to 6:00 PM

Venue Name: USC Orange County Center
Address: 2300 Michelson Drive 
City: Irvine
State: CA
Zip Code: 92612
Handicapped Accessible: Yes
Google Maps

We got bad news this week. Looks like Mike Hennessy’s running for Sheriff again.

Now, most of you are wondering what the hell I am on about. Hennessy’s a uniquely San Francisco figure–someone who’s got a job that brings to mind racist rednecks and  bumbling morons but has managed to carve out a way to make the job a powerful vehicle for progressive change. From drug treatment to gardening projects, the Sheriff’s department runs some seriously innovative projects.  There have even been model protocols developed on how to treat transgender folks in county jails (PDF).

So why is it bad news that Hennessy’s running for a record eighth term for Sheriff? Find out after the flip.

Well, mainly because his name was one of those floated to run against Gavin Newsom for mayor. Since Gavin’s proved unable to stand up to the police–carrying their water against foot patrols, as well as proving unable to respond with any authority to the racist and sexist videos published by the SFPD–it would have been a rare case of the progressive candidate being the law and order candidate. And since the violence plaguing our neighborhoods is such a huge issue for many folks, the idea of a mayor with an understanding of how to change the culture of law enforcement is an appealing one.

Unfortunately, it looks like we’ll have another candidate. I hope that whoever it ends up being looks to the Sheriff for advice on how to handle violence and crime.

crossposted from left in sf

All sorts of one-off goodies for you tonight, and go ahead and get your hip hop juices flowing cause that’s what’s coming at the end.

The City of San Diego must pay nearly $1 million in legal expenses for athiest who sued over the Mt. Soledad cross.  First Jerry Falwell and now this? Not a good week for the soldiers of the Lord.

San Diego County, in a a stroke of exceptional forethought, will now require all landscaping at new county facilities to be “drought-tolerant” and fire resistant…whatever “drought-tolerant” means (apparently, no plants that want water).  There were still a few cows in the barn, so slamming the door might accomplish something.  Cynicism aside though, at least it’s something.

Most exciting though is Carol Goodhue alerting us that the Union Tribune is now accepting unedited and anonymous comments on the website.  Ms. Goodhue, for her part thinks “it’s loony to allow readers to post these comments anonymously. Considering readers’ interest in interactivity, I also think we’d be crazy not to give this a whirl.”  And with that, we’re off into a brave new world.  What’s the over/under on this turning into a flame war you ask? Depends on how much time I have to comment.

Now, to mark the end of one of hip hop’s all-time greats.  Jurassic Five (1994-2007) – Concrete Schoolyard

“Cause we’re protected by the covenant of words and beats.”