October 30, 2008
Mac Zilber
Note: The following article is an opinion piece, as are all posts in “The Muse.” If you wish to criticize the content of the article, be my guest, but please maintain civility in the comments board. You are dealing with other people, after all.
Politics or Libel?
“Citizens For the Albany Shoreline” has sent out a leaflet that has three interesting surprises. The first is that Ellen Toomey is apparently no longer a member of Robert Lieber’s slate, which I had been told by friends of hers, but hadn’t seen confirmed in leaflets until now (she is still endorsed by him, but is not part of his bloc). The second is that, according to the leaflet, “Albany Kids First,” the “Albany Journal,” and myself are “using smear tactics similar to Karl Rove and the Republican party” by reporting the facts and fighting for transparency. The third surprise was that the “Citizens For the Albany Shoreline,” whose positions I support and whose candidates I once supported, would send out a piece of campaign literature filled with falsehoods, deception, and attacks, before then accusing their opponents of having “brought the level of public discussion to new lows.” There’s an old saying about a pot and a kettle that would probably fit here.
The back side of the pamphlet is of bigger issue than the front, however, as it makes deceptive claims about all three of the candidates that it opposes. It implies that Farid Javandel supports the unpopular propositions 4 and 8, whereas there is no evidence that is the case. On the contrary, the reason that he abstained when voting on the resolutions by the city council to oppose propositions 4 and 8 was because he believes that the city council should not tell people how to vote, nor should it voice positions on issues that it has no jurisdiction over. He has this wacky idea that the purpose of the city council should be to address issues concerning Albany, not to issue edicts as to how its citizens should vote.
On Peggy Thomsen, the leaflet says that she “Opposed universal health care.” This is a flat out lie. Looking at the minutes of the Social and Economic Justice Committee when the issue was discussed, the following was recorded as to Thomsen’s position: “Thomsen asked what the political feasibility of [the statewide universal health care bill] was, and how it differed from other legislation. She stated her desire to read the actual bill language prior to approval of a motion.” Thomsen ultimately abstained from the vote, not wanting to vote on something that the committee hadn’t gotten a chance to read. Even if she had voted against the resolution, however, that would not necessarily indicate that she opposed universal health care. The bill in question would triple California’s already enormous budget deficit, and was going to be vetoed regardless. The other major lie about Thomsen’s record in the leaflet was twofold. It first said that she opposed climate change legislation, and then said that she voted against a resolution to endorse HR1590 (Barbara Lee’s climate change legislation). Thomsen never voiced opposition to the legislation, she voiced opposition to a city council making meaningless resolutions on federal issues (believing it was better for citizens to write letters to their representatives instead), and she didn’t vote ‘no’ on the motion, she abstained from it. The whole issue was a moot point, especially considering that our representative is Barbara Lee, who was going to be voting for her own bill from the get-go.
Finally, their indictment of Nick Pilch is a short three-sentence paragraph, which, unlike the rest of the leaflet, cites no sources and makes few accusations. They claim on the front side of the leaflet that “it’s easy” to get endorsed by the Sierra Club and that all you have to do is “Just stand up for the environment and progressive issues.” The problem with their argument there is that Pilch, who has been a member of the Sierra Club for 20 years and has worked for them on occasion as well, has repeatedly championed green and progressive causes, yet could not get the time of day from the Sierra Club when it came to an endorsement. If he hadn’t “stood up for the environment and progressive issues,” would he be endorsed by the Green Party? Why would he be a member of over a dozen environmental organizations including the NRDC and the Environmental Defense Fund if he was “Dead set against [...] progressives,” as the leaflet implies. Pilch is arguably the most green candidate running, so the fact that he isn’t endorsed by the Sierra Club throws a wrench in the argument that being green is an “easy” way to get their endorsement. Finally, the leaflet claims that Pilch “failed to fight the [Caruso] mall,” when, in fact, Pilch’s own website says “Caruso’s mall plan [...] was the wrong approach.” Similar mischaracterizations of other candidates’ positions on the mall are made frequently throughout the leaflet.
This leaflet exemplifies everything that is wrong with the polarization of Albany politics that has been led by Robert Lieber and his allies. I make my biases clear, but I would write the same article if such a false and inflammatory leaflet came to my doorstep from any other candidates, and if anybody has such evidence in their possession, I will report on it similarly. In an ironic twist of fate, while accusing their opponents of “using smear tactics similar to Karl Rove,” Robert Lieber’s allies did the exact same thing. I guess they assumed the voters wouldn’t fact-check them and wouldn’t read up on the issues. Prove them wrong in the ballot-box on November fourth.
UPDATE: I have learned that the officers of the group behind this attack leaflet are in fact allies of Robert Lieber, as had been assumed. The four individuals whom the CAS website lists as chairs or other officers of their organization are Councilwoman Marge Atkinson, former council candidate Brian Parker, Waterfront Committee member Bill Dann, and Lieber ally Robert Cheasty. Their website has not been updated in two years, but these are the people who are listed as running the organization, and these are the individuals who each bear a share of the responsibility for this leaflet.
I answer all emails I receive at themuse [at] albanyhighcougar [dot] com.
Max, to be fair I think it is too early to say Lieber is behind this.
As of 2006 the leaders of Citizens for Albany Shoreline were as follows: Bill Dann Co-Chair, Marge Atkinson Co-Chair, Robert Cheasty (Chair Emeritus), and Brian Parker Treasurer.
Now I am a member of Albany Kids First and I do support Peggy, Nick, and Farid.
To set the record straight I have never engaged in a whisper campaign against Mr. Lieber, Mr. Panian, or Ms. Toomey. That was never my intention and frankly I would not want to be involved in an organization that did so.
Do I disagree with Mr. Lieber on a lot of issues? You bet. The difference is when I do I’m willing to put my name to it. Whether it’s in the Journal, the Albany Today Blog, on my face book page, or here on your site, I won’t hide behind a cute moniker or be anonymous.
The names of the endorsers of Albany Kids First are on our website. We have filed with the city as a Political Action Committee and our campaign financial statements are available on the City of Albany website (to date unlike CAS).
Our group is not only comprised of Albany citizens, former mayors, city council members, sports group volunteers but members of the Sierra Club as well.
It’s unfortunate that a group like CAS would hide in the shadows and wait until the waning days of the campaign spread lies and misrepresentations about these candidates.
But I guess that is why they call it the October surprise.
Brian Parsley
Albany Kids First
Hello Mac, thanks for your commitment to facts and for your prompt attention to the “Sour Grapes” doc distributed around town today. I am impressed that you consulted minutes of Albany committee meetings to expose falsehoods in Sour Grapes. One additional falsehood to explode is that Albany’s Charter REview committee did NOT support putting the elected mayor charter amendment (Measure Y) onto this ballot. Jerri Holan’s letter to the Journal editor last week makes the point that Charter REview voted three times against placing this on the ballot due to its flaws. (Jerri is a Charter REview member, and that committee’s minutes of its recent meeting are STILL not online.) But Lieber and the two Council members who vote with him 99% of the time (Wile and Atkinson) ignored Charter REview’s recommendation and list of its flaws, and placed it on the ballot. Ironically, if they had given Charter REview the time to continue work to fix the flaws, a flawless version of the measure could have gone to the voters at the 2010 election and if passed still been effective on the same date: 2012. Which is a point made by FArid Javandel several Council meetings earlier, when Lieber was urging placing the amendment on the ballot, so they all knew the timeline. Caryl
As a memeber of Albany Kids First, I stll see no mention of kids in this handout. Shows you where their sympathies lie. Not with kids.
Second, would you want your town governed by who wrote this?
Third, my compliments to Mr. Silber for looking up this info. I knew the things they talked about were untrue but didn’t have the energy in my old age to look them up.
Rex
Mac,
On a much lighter note I want to commend you for your writing and your willingness to tackle some very diverse subject matter.
When I was on the Albany High School newspaper, then called the Informer, we seemed to be more concerned with what people were wearing and what music they were listening t
Sorry about that, my son hit the submit button. My point was Mac that I couldn’t disagree with Mr. Parker more when he said you do a disservice to high school newspapers.
While we may not always agree with with each other I do appreciate your enthusiasm for writing.
Any journalism program should consider themselves lucky to enroll a student like you.
Keep up the good work and good luck on your future endeavors.
Brian Parsley
I find it astonishing that the people who run this town are so rash, emotional and vicious in their responses while a 16 year old young man like yourself is so calm, measured and rational. Your earlier post did not stop me from thinking Leiber was our best choice for mayor but your latest post makes me realize that I can no longer support him. His tactics are wrong and he “pals around” with the loose cannon Brian Parker.
You are a very impressive young man. Your parents and teacher must be busting up with pride.