This morning’s Press had an article (though it reads like an opinion piece) about the Dems refusing to support the investigation of our County Election System.Too bad the Democrats can’t see the forest for the trees; Thom George is stuck in attack mode and is unable to grasp the importance of this issue for Democrats as well as everyone else.
What do you think about the Dems’ viewpoint?
Here’s the response I put on the Press web site:
Our voting system is a mess. I’ve seen the poll books and there are all kinds of problems and inconsistencies. Bill McCrory filed sworn legal papers after he examined the Absentee Ballot envelopes, reporting to the court that he (a retired US Secret Service, Technical Division agent) found 877 abnormalities. And there’s clear evidence of illegal voters, purposefully voting from Hayden and elsewhere.
So why should one citizen be burdened with the cost of this kind of investigation?
Down in Boise, a similar election challenge received a totally different reaction. Ada County opened everything up and offered complete cooperation. That investigation was quick, efficient and done. Ours, up here in Kootenai County, is now dragging on to its 10th month! Our County has blocked every access possible. They have made sure that this process is long, drawn-out and EXPENSIVE. They want the investigation to go away.
I applaud the Republican Central Committee for supporting the effort to find the problems in our system. This is not about one candidate or another. It’s about the integrity of our election system, which affects everyone, from every political party, in every election.
Too bad the Democrats can’t see the forest for the trees; Thom George is stuck in attack mode and is unable to grasp the importance of this issue for Democrats as well as everyone else.
Ah Mary, one must consider the source. Thom George is simply a caricature, incapable of rational discourse. One can simply picture his excitement on being asked what the local Dems would do. Bristling with self importance, he replies that the election was carried out in an honest, legal and un-besmirched fashion. His buffonery, if you will, prohibits him from discerning the obvious. Thom, the courts have decided that there is enough reason to go forward with a trial. What part of that do you not comprehend. Apparently, all of it. Now the local Dems have every right to refuse to contribute toward a legal resolution. They are Democrats after all! Logic (and, apparently, integrity) simply never enters in.
That being said, I was not thrilled with the headline in yesterdays Press. Without reading the article, one would believe that the local Republican group was funding the entire cost, when they are only contributing $2500.
Comment by rochereau — July 30, 2010 @ 8:47 am
Thom George and the Press want everyone to believe that the Coeur d’Alene City Council races are nonpartisan. That may be true in spirit but certainly not in fact. Their feigned indignation at the KCRCC’s support for honest elections and specifically the election contest arising from the November 3, 2009 City election is deserving of an award for either (1) great acting or (2) intentional deception.
Take a look at Mike Kennedy’s 30-day post general election campaign finance report. Note that on 10/27/09 the Kennedy campaign paid $538.00 to “Winding Creek Group, 2852 Connecticut, Wash DC 20008. Then again on 11/12/09 the Kennedy campaign paid $242.14 to “Winding Creek Group, 2852 Connecticut, Wash DC 20008.”
Follow this link to learn more about the Winding Creek Group. The opening line caught my attention:
Follow this link to see who some of the Winding Creek Group’s clients are in Idaho. Do the names Mike Kennedy and Sandi Bloem sound familiar?
Comment by Bill — July 30, 2010 @ 4:08 pm
Bloem’s a Democrat? That’s such bold “news” that I’d expect it to be above-the-fold on the CDA Press!
Yet, I don’t understand how you can call yourself a Democrat and support giving property tax dollars to fat cat developers. I thought the Democrats were supportive of the little guy. Apparently not in Coeur d’Alene!
Comment by Dan — July 30, 2010 @ 4:25 pm
Public corruption is not a function of political party affiliation. Corruption respects no party boundaries or rules.
Comment by Bill — July 30, 2010 @ 4:29 pm
So, Bill, I clicked on your link to the Idaho clients of Winding Creek and found BOTH Mike Kennedy and Sandi Bloem! But Mike and Sandi are almost the only LOCAL clients Winding Creek lists for the whole country.
Here are the clients Winding Creek represents in EVERY state of our country:
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
Democratic National Committee
Organizing for America (DNC)
The US Department of Education/University of Washington
Comment by mary — July 30, 2010 @ 4:47 pm
Mary,
That’s an interesting finding. Why would a national polling company take an interest in an obscure mayoral and city council election in Idaho, one of the least influential states in the US? To put it another way, why would two striving-to-achieve-mediocrity small-town, small-potatoes candidates like Kennedy and Bloem and the locals who support them even have contact with Winding Creek? Maybe someone at a national level with substantial funding ought to look more deeply into Winding Creek’s ownership and sources of financial support.
Don’t look for the Coeur d’Alene Press to report anything unless it comes to them in a press release from City Hall or the County Administration Building.
Comment by Bill — July 30, 2010 @ 6:52 pm
It is so frustrating that the CdA Press keeps covering for the mayor, the council and Dan English. Fair elections should not be a partisan issue. Perhaps, they are really covering for the fat cat LCDC gang.
Fair elections should be a Tea Party issue.
Comment by citizen — July 31, 2010 @ 8:34 pm
Pretty pathetic stuff from the Winding Creek CAMPAIGN WAR ROOM.
(my own emphasis added beloq)
Time to take some more screen shots for that effect ‘lest they remove the names pronto from the Campaign War Room!
I also want to state I am not a D or an R, I am just sick of the corruption. The appropriate word is not partisan or non-partisan – it’s called POLITICIAN.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2010 @ 8:58 pm
This from the Vice President of Winding Creek – Maria Weeg
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2010 @ 9:05 pm
Sorry, I forgot this. We should give her a call Monday morning.
Comment by Stebbijo — July 31, 2010 @ 9:09 pm
‘Dems don’t Care’.
Why should the Democrats care about fair elections? They’re the ones in power in CDA. They have no incentive to help with any investigation. Only the recession is keeping the democrats spending in check right now.
Comment by kageman — August 1, 2010 @ 8:59 am
Kennedy and his democrat quislings are under the illusion that he can become the next Frank Church of Idaho. Thanks to his bumbling friends at CDA City, and other places, that idea is fast becoming a pipe dream. Kennedy’s will morph into more of the Vaughn Ward style of Idaho politics.
Comment by WannaBe JD — August 2, 2010 @ 11:46 am
Was Frank Church that much of an ass?
Comment by Dan — August 2, 2010 @ 4:19 pm
WannabeJD, No way. Mike Kennedy is more like Charlie Rangle.
Comment by mary — August 2, 2010 @ 4:48 pm
I beg to differ Mary, Rangle was good at what he did at least.
Comment by WannaBe JD — August 2, 2010 @ 5:43 pm
Because what he did was what? How would you describe Rangle’s talents, WannaBe JD, compared to our City Councilman Mike Kennedy’s?
Comment by mary — August 2, 2010 @ 7:08 pm
Please indulge me with a little fantasy.
Imagine Coeur d’Alene has a very powerful, “hooked-up” mayor who is thought to be supported by powerful business interests. Lets call him Mayor Daly. Lets imagine that a grass-roots candidate challenges him and has support of many “little people.” We will call her Jane Doe. Lets imagine that Jane’s supporters work their hearts out, dig deep in their pockets to support her, and by sheer hard work and determination she wins.
Now lets imagine Mayor Daly decides to contest the election. He says he is interested in looking at the election process. He doesn’t really trust the “little people” and thinks that there may be some “illegal votes.” He has strong support from somewhere, and deep, deep pockets. He can and does bury Jane in legal motions and she just can’t handle the expense. Her supporters have given it their all, and there just isn’t any more to give. She has to fold, walking away from her seat. Wa-Lah, Mayor Daly back in power.
I am sure we all agree that Mayor Daly had the right to contest the election and actually sue Jane. But wouldn’t you want to know who was backing Mayor Daly in his election contest? Wouldn’t that be significant information? Would you be suspicious that this could present an opportunity for some hidden interest to “buy” the mayor, someone who couldn’t openly support him in the initial campaign?
I follow your blog somewhat and the comments made by some of you on different forums, and a few things are clear: You present yourselves as being interested in openness, fairness, equality, and the opposition opinions of the “little people.” I am amazed at your inconsistency on this issue. We need laws applied equally, to the weak and the powerful. What is the problem with accepting the “candidate” status for Brannon and just expecting he will follow the campaign finance laws as they exist?
I, too am a voter, resident of the county, woman of independent thought, and, yes, DOTC’s wife.
Comment by Cory English — August 2, 2010 @ 7:25 pm
Cory,
Your premise that Jim Brannon is still a candidate for some office is not supported by Idaho law. You profess to want the laws applied equally to the weak and powerful, and that is exactly what the election contest is about — ensuring that Idaho’s laws are applied equally as written. The November 3, 2009, City election ended on November 9, 2009, when the Coeur d’Alene Mayor and City Council rubber-stamped the election canvass and certified the “winners.” As if to reinforce the November 9th end of the November 3, 2009, election, on January 5, 2010, Judge Benjamin Simpson authorized the Mayor and City Council to be seated and sworn into office over Jim Brannon’s objections. So tell me, for what office in what election is Jim Brannon a candidate? There is no election scheduled for which Jim Brannon is a candidate.
If Jim Brannon prevails in the election contest lawsuit and if the court orders a new election for Coeur d’Alene city council seat 2 or an entirely new election for all the council positions on the November 3 ballot, it would be just that — a new election. If that happens and if Jim Brannon decides to become a candidate in that new election, then I’m sure he will fully comply with all applicable Idaho campaign finance laws.
Comment by Bill — August 3, 2010 @ 6:46 am
Cory,
Clearly you are a woman of independent thought and I applaud your loyalty. But you miss on at least two points. As Bill pointed out, Jim is not a candidate, he is a litigant. I am a bit confused by your “example”. You apparently portray Kennedy as your Jane Doe and Jim as Mayor Daly. That is a bit backwards. Kennedy is the candidate with the “machine” and Jim is the grass roots candidate of the little people. If you are going to look for a “machine” backing anybody, look to Kennedy not Jim Brannon. Jims job dismissal and its timing are prime examples of the CDA machine at work. There is no way I am gullible enough to believe that Kennedy is footing his legal bills without help (or at all). I’m sure the checks are drawn on his account (should anybody ask for proof). I am, shall we say, dubious as to where the money has originated. And I am completely in the dark about your comment regarding compaign finance laws. What do they have to do with the lawsuit? This lawsuit is brought by an ex-candidate questioning the legality of this particular election. I ask you these questions respectfully, mindful of your right to an opinion.
Comment by rochereau — August 3, 2010 @ 7:43 am
Who was Frank Church? Mary, Charlie Rangle is a crook. As bent as they come. I think the comment above meant that he was a talented crook!
Comment by rochereau — August 3, 2010 @ 7:45 am