Satire
By Wayne Lusvardi
When it comes to the rough and tumble of a local school board race, Americans have come to expect a certain amount of negativity. “Politics ain’t beanbag,” as the old proverb says. But it has become obvious to many observers – including the Sierra Madre Tattler – that the recent escalation of mud slinging and sniping in the race for a seat on the P.U. school board threatens to spiral out of control and land back in the mud throwers face.
In fact, the mud slinger, incumbent Tom Selinske (or is it Slinginski?), who happens to also be President of the School Board, probably wishes by now he hadn’t started throwing mud because a giant ball of nuclear mud hit him back by surprise all the way from Sendai, Japan after he raised the issue of lies by his opponent, Sean Baggett. Now the whole city of Pasadena is in a smear radiation zone. Geiger counters register off the charts anywhere near the vicinity of the PUSD Hudson Avenue Headquarters.
Sure, all the polling research proves negative campaigning is quick, inexpensive, and devastatingly effective. That is, unless your dumb enough to raise an issue where your own institutional lying is so much greater that it is like trying to hide a Giant Smelly Dirt Clod riding atop a bed of roses on a float in the Rose Parade sponsored by the PUSD.
For example, I am sure that many people in the Pasadena Unified School District have read by now the recent “news” article in the Pasadena Star News about Mr. Baggett’s non-payment of a fine related to his 2008 DUI incident plea bargained down to a reckless driving charge.
Truth is funnier than fiction. Lt. Phlunte Riddle of the Pasadena P.D. was quoted in the newspaper that Baggett had to turn himself in to clear up this “riddle” (no aspersions intended on Lt. Riddle and “Pasadena’s Finest”). Reportedly, Mr. Baggett ran down to the courthouse and paid the fine as soon as he was made aware of it.
No doubt the source of this information was the Selinske gang: Peter Dreier, Ed Honowitz, Larry O’Brien, et al who were ready at Topix online to pile on the dirt once the article was published.
To disconfirm a vicious rumor, Selinske, does take baths even though he likes throwing dirt clods and has a record of smearing poop on his baby brother when they were infants.
Or then, there is the smear campaign over at the Pasadena Weekly that alleges that a Baggett campaigner had been accused of making hate threats to a gay couple. No doubt Mr. Baggett has, shall we say, some legal baggage. But consider the alleged perpetrator of this so-called hate crime: a juvenile in a County continuation school in Highland Park apparently run by Mr. Baggett. The so-called perpetrator would make a real good witness in a court of law, despite he’s underage, legally dependent, incorrigible, a borderline dropout, possibly a pathological liar, and doesn’t even live in the School District. And the witnesses were apparently “motivated” to smear Baggett being County employees threatened with possible layoffs due to budget cutbacks.. I can’t wait for a prosecutor to get such a hate crime perpetrator and such credible witnesses on a witness stand in a court of law. But, of course, it was newsworthy to the Pasadena Weekly.
As per the usual drill at campaign time in Pasadena, referrals to the Public Integrity Division of the District Attorney’s Office, the Pasadena Civil Rights Commission, and the City Attorney will all be dropped after the election for insufficient evidence. But for now, it’s mud. And mud makes the political world go round and sells newspapers.
What, you hadn’t heard that one, Selinske? Really!? Oh, come on, man, it’s all over town. Baggett is a scofflaw who hired a gay-bashing juvenile delinquent in a Highland Park Continuation School he runs to be a campaign phone bank caller for him!! Soon, Bagget will be found a racist, a Tea Bagger, and an Evangelical Christian! That will cook his goose for sure.
Frankly, this barrage of continuous, negative, and way overblown accusations does nothing to help Pasadena voters understand the real issues that confront us or Mr. Baggett’s record as a school administrator. As the blogger Iowahawk writes:
“Worse, it contributes to the corrosion of our civic discourse, because it also shows just how easy it is to sway voters with scurrilous charges against one's opponent. And trust me, it's incredibly easy; and, sadly, almost impossible for the target to refute. Or trace back to the originator, if they were, say, faxed out from Kinkos, or emailed from a library internet terminal (or from South Hudson Avenue).”
What’s next, that Baggett is connected with Jared Lee Loughner?
As good parents are prone to say when children start fights or call each other names, “who started it?” It is apparent that the Selinske gang started this. It is also apparent that Mr. Baggett is not throwing mud back; even if he does raise legitimate questions about Selinske’s role, if any, in getting a PUSD contract for his campaign manager. That’s fair game, not smearing.
So we have a choice between an administrator of County juvenile continuation schools who didn’t pay a fine and an incumbent school board member who allegedly paid off his campaign manager with a PUSD payola contract. Which one would you choose? I think I know which one I would choose.
But all this mud slinging is a great diversion from the real issues at hand in the School District.
THE PLEDGE
Mr. Selinske: Will you, or won’t you support continued elimination or phasing out of political earmarks for “categorical” non-teaching school jobs and programs as recommended by the California Legislative Analyst and authorized under AB-4-X-2, that could save local taxpayers in the PUSD up to $22,492, 328 in tax increases without having to layoff any core teachers, in lieu of a $381 Parcel Tax per household per year? Will you lobby the State Legislature for additional flexibility of state education funds originally authorized under Assembly Bill AB-4-X-2 and as recommended by the LAO that would make a local Parcel Tax unnecessary? Or will you continue to throw mud and smears on your opponent who has some past failings that are not directly related to the main issues facing PUSD? Take the pledge, Mr. Selinske or your opponent will.
So PUSD parents remember: the next time you learn that an incumbent school board member is spreading stories about a challenging candidate's court record don’t ignore it, but consider it’s relevancy. But if the incumbent is spreading incredible stories about his opponent using a juvenile delinquent in a continuation school he runs to make phone calls to solicit votes, you better ask yourself who is smoking dope?
And to what end does such a smear campaign serve? It can only serve to divert voters from the real issues. Remember what happened with PUSD’s Measure Y (or was it Measure WHY?). There was abuse of funds, bid rigging, overcharging, and mismanagement. Do you think the incumbent wants an outsider on the School Board who might look into the use of Measure TT funds?
Then there was the PasadenaLEARNs scandal back in late 2007(PasadenaLEARNS -- a PUSD nonprofit after-school program.) The staff were issued credit cards and it was eventually discovered that they misused the cards to buy $80,000 worth of electronics and other personal goodies for themselves at Target? Nothing at all came of it as I recall. PPD was alerted too late but no one was ever arrested or prosecuted. And it was AFTER Selinske was voted onto the Board in March 2007. I guess PUSD didn't "learn" anything from that fiasco.
But as the incumbent might say: “you can’t accomplish any good without getting your hands dirty?” If this is so then why smear Mr. Baggett’s admittedly questionable legal record? Baggett’s hands aren’t dirty with public money.
I guess it gets down to the American sense of fair play. Do Americans like sports teams to win by playing dirty even if one of the opposing players has a criminal record for which he has made his amends? Does the opposing player’s record justify the other team playing dirty? Do Americans like the referees (the newspapers) allowing the other team to play dirty and not reporting it? Typically, Americans of both political persuasions don’t like a system of unfair play and will root for the underdog. And despite whatever flaws Mr. Baggett may have, that is what he is: the underdog.
Actually, this is a battle between secularism and religion. The Secularists are running a campaign based on their motto: “the survival of the fittest.” And the Pariahs adhere to the maxim: “render unto Caesar what is Caesars, but unto the People what is the People’s.”
The smear campaign and yellow journalism should end. By smearing I mean those charges that there was a warrant out to arrest Mr. Baggett as if he was a criminal who had fled punishment or broke out of jail and, in any event, all this is irrelevant to the difficult financial situation PUSD faces.
But then there are all those rumors of misuse of Measure TT funds at PUSD after all the scandal with Measure Y. What? You hadn’t heard that? I’m just telling you what I heard just like you want to tell everyone what you’ve heard about your opponent.
I think having a more transparent "criminal" on the school board would be a step in the right direction --- so I'm voting for Baggett even if all the mud-slinging accusations turn out to be true.
Posted by: Nick M. | March 29, 2011 at 10:17 AM
What a piece to wake up to! I've been savoring it this morning. It's fun and serious all at once.
This is the stuff of satire, all right: comical snobby elites who can't get enough of mud-wrestling in their fancy clothes...... meanwhile the sweaty rabble is demanding the high road! Not that the rabble is off the hook. For one thing, unconditionally embracing the underdog is not a good idea. All of the pitfalls are covered here, not just the sins of the bad guys.
Sub Rosa ALONE routinely puts the newspapers to shame --- so it's double the trouble when you tag team with the Tattler!
Posted by: Big Steve | March 29, 2011 at 11:55 AM
Hey, I like this idea of taking a pledge. How about it?
Posted by: Blas | March 29, 2011 at 01:27 PM