Sacramento Bee helping with Brown campaign

MAY 31, 2010

Katy Grimes: The Sacramento Bee has been very critical of the Poizner/Whitman Republican primary gubernatorial race. That’s expected, but now it appears that The Bee editorial board is not only falling all over themselves to write about Jerry Brown, but they are tipping their hand toward the unopposed Brown. Brown does not have a primary opponent, yet the Bee has run several recent in-depth stories about Brown’s entire career including his previous two terms as governor.

The Bee has been blowing their teeth out about Jerry in another liberal love-fest.

Brown is responsible for creating the public employee unions in California, and signed the legislation that unionized the state’s government employees. Brown devastated  I-5 by cutting lanes and killing on and off ramps already in progress.

He then he set his sites on Oakland. Crime was at an all time high in the state during Brown’s governorship, and Oakland fell into the abyss again under his mayoral charm.

For The Sacramento Bee to start promoting Jerry Brown even before the primary election shows that they are once again trying to manipulate instead of reporting. The comments left by readers are telling. My favorite – “I remember the train wreck of the Brown Administration. I remember Mario Obledo and Rose Bird, Cruz Reynoso just to name a few. The one Court of Appeals Justice he appointed who got busted for having a grow operation in his Berkeley house. We had a far better legislature back then to keep things in check, unlike the freak show we have voted in at this time. He did nothing for the city of Oakland but bring the murder rate up and then tried to allow his unappointed wife run our Attorney General’s Office. It does not matter who wins, California will lose and generations will continue to suffer from the result.”

Ballotpedia writes, “Brown often proposed unorthodox ideas, including the establishment of a state space academy and the purchasing of a satellite that would be launched into orbit to provide emergency communications for the state—a proposal similar to one that would indeed be adopted by the state. In 1978, Chicago Tribune columnist Mike Royko nicknamed Brown “Governor Moonbeam” because of the latter idea.”

Brown ran three times for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States, and he attempted a run for Senate.

Brown’s two terms as Oakland Mayor was less than impressive. Ballotpedia writes that the murder rate in Oakland in the first two months of 2006 was triple what it was during the same time period the year before. [19] Two years later, the CQ Press annual report ranked Oakland the fifth-highest crime rate among U.S. cities in 2007. [20] These statistics have led critics to suggest that Brown had failed as mayor to make the city safer.

Brown appears to be seeking yet another government office in spite of his failed runs.

Already endorsed by the SEIU, the state teachers union, Democrat Brown, instead of being The People’s Governor, is really the SEIU and public employee Governor. Remember his appeal to labor unions to do the dirty work for him, and let him be the good guy during the campaign? Jerry Brown urges unions to ‘attack’| PolitiCal | Los Angeles Times. The Los Angeles Times reported that Brown said, “We’re going to attack whenever we can, but I’d rather have you attack,” Brown said at a gathering of the California delegation of the Laborers’ International Union of North America in Sacramento. “I’d rather be the nice guy in this race. We’ll leave [the attacks] to … the Democratic Party and others.”

The election will get really interesting once the primary is over.

Jerry Brown – Ballotpedia


7 comments

Write a comment
  1. John Seiler
    John Seiler 1 June, 2010, 06:38

    “Oakland fell into the abyss again under his Mayoral charm.” Great phrase.

    Looks like we’re cursed to have Brown again as governor. Whitman’s campaign won’t take off because she’s a clone of Jerry. So what’s the difference?

    Reply this comment
  2. David
    David 1 June, 2010, 07:02

    Your article appears to criticize Brown for having signed legislation, several decades ago, that allowed public employees to form unions. So what is your position on that? Do you actually believe that public employee unions should be prohibited from existing? Why? Don’t people have a right to form groups and act together, even if you disagree with them? This criticism of Brown is really weak.

    Reply this comment
  3. StevefromSacto
    StevefromSacto 1 June, 2010, 10:32

    For CalWatchdog to start promoting Whitrman/Poizner even before the primary election shows that they are once again trying to manipulate instead of reporting.

    Reply this comment
  4. John Seiler
    John Seiler 1 June, 2010, 14:42

    StevefromSacto:

    The other, main part of CalWatchDog.com is for reporting. This part, the Blog, is for other stuff, including added comments, sharp observations, editorials, my attempts at humor, etc.

    Reply this comment
  5. Ron Kilmartin
    Ron Kilmartin 2 June, 2010, 23:47

    Public employee unions and their political supporters are the problem that is bringing the state, counties, and cities to a condition of economic collapse. They have cooked up salary and pension plans that far exceed private sector salaries and pensions. It is not reasonable that average taxpayers are paying higher – much higher – wages and better pensions to public employees than they themselves get in the private sector. Some of these plans have retirement at age 50! Give me a break! This is not France or Greece, not yet anyway. The public employee unions are squeezing all the juice out of the turnip.

    Public sector employees do not contribute to the economy through creation of products or productive services; they provide needed public services that the public pays for with taxes. Better to renegotiate excessive contracts and make benefits comparable with the private sector, rather than force bankruptcy on the cities, counties and possibly the state. If the goose is killed that lays the golden egg, who will pay the public employees? This is the problem Greece has right now.

    There was a time when government employees were called public servants, not in the sense of servility, but in the sense of an overriding individual desire to serve the people in government service. Unionization unfortunately suppresses the desire to serve, and substitutes a desire for more and more benefits. Unionization in the public sector has taken on a mantra of screw the public. Brown will undoubtedly demand the public bend over even farther.

    Reply this comment
  6. StevefromSacto
    StevefromSacto 7 June, 2010, 10:12

    “Unionization suppresses the desire to serve?” Why, Ron, because you say so?
    That is an unproven smear against thousands of dedicated public workers.

    If public employees had to rely on the likes of you for their salary and benefits, they’d be at the level of Wal-Mart workers. And that would be just fine with you, right?

    Reply this comment
  7. Tyler
    Tyler 7 June, 2010, 17:04

    There is absolutely nothing wrong with most union workers. It is not the workers that cause the problems, it is the corrupt heads of the unions.

    It is the greedy scumbags that they entrust with their members retirement money, which ends up getting funneled to the person who gives the biggest bribe, who then loses 80% of the investment. If the union members had to suffer the consequences of the greed & incompetence of their union bosses, there would be a complete overhaul of the union organization in no time flat, but since the union bosses just go ahead and help themselves to tax dollars to make up for their bad/corrupt investments, the union member have no idea how much they are getting screwed. If the members could see the dollar amounts that their unions spend for political reasons (AKA, bribes), it would make them sick, especially since the members benefits often get worse (I.e. increased medical co-pays, higher healthcare premiums, raised retirement age, lowered retirement payouts, etc.)even though the unions are taking more of their money.

    The workers just want to make sure that they are paid a fair wage, have job secutity, and benefits that allows them to care for their families, and nobody has a problem with that. However, we do have a problem with corrupt union bosses abusing both their own union members and the employers, all for the sake of fattening their pockets and funneling money to their friends.

    The union bosses have no problem collapsing an entire state because they got an unrealistic contract from a politician who they bribed. They do not care that an economic collapse will result in a majority of their members being unemployed, because the bosses have already skimmed enough off the top in order to live comfortabely for the rest of their lives.

    Most reasonable people do not blame the individual union workers for the problems, we blame the scumbags who run the unions.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply


Related Articles

Jerry Brown Lore

A visit to the California Automobile Museum in Sacramento takes some people back in time to a happier era where

Voters send Darrell Issa back to Congress

Darrell Issa is projected to win a ninth term in Congress, according to the Associated Press, despite an unexpectedly strong

First Meg mailer

John Seiler: I just got my first mailer of the November campaign season. It’s from Meg’s Millions. I’d scan it