About Last Week …and Some About This Week

Politics, politics, politics, politics.  Well, let’s let Mel Brooks say it better:

On Tuesday, voters will go to the polls in California to pick some folks who get to be on the November ballot to maybe get picked again.

All of the contests are important, but two are standing out in the field – U.S. Senate and Los Angeles DA.  Let’s start with the latter.

First, you will not find a “vote for this person” endorsement here.  What you will find is a megaphone of begging to not vote for some of the candidates.

Lloyd “Bobcat” Masson of course not, no matter how oddly (not really odd – they want to dilute the non-George Gascon vote) much ink the Los Angeles Times is giving him.

And Dan Kapelovitz is only an option if you happen to think Gascon is too tough on crime (note – he does have one saving grace; he’s a free speech absolutist and that’s a good thing, though tangential to the DA’s race…I hope.)

Jeff Chemerinsky is another no.  Mini-Gascon, Gascon-lite, whatever you want to call him, he is the presentable face (and that’s because he took after his mother and not dad Erwin) of the national progressive DA movement when compared to Gascon.  It does not appear that he has yet been slathered in George Soros money, but if he gets through to the run-off he will undoubtedly be.

And, of course, there is George himself.  Not going to even bother to list the reasons he cannot remain in his job, but there is an interesting/appalling side note to be found in his campaign.

In writing the recent story on the finances of the LA DA race, I came across an interesting tidbit.

If you recall, there are four women who have been bankrolling a big chunk of the woke/justice reform/whatever the hell it is effort in California: The very progressive Smart Justice PAC and the very very rich women behind it – Quinn Delaney, wife of a San Francisco developer (note – I’d start saving your money, Quinn), Kaitlyn Krieger, wife of the guy who co-founded Instagram, Patty Quillin, wife of the guy who started Netflix, and Elizabeth Simons, daughter of a hedge fund billionaire…

I wish I could marry money and therefore automatically be taken seriously…at least to my face.

Their PAC has given money to a trio of Los Angeles City Council members –  Nithya Raman, Hugo Soto-Martinez, and Eunisses Hernandez recently.  All three are members of the Democratic Socialists of America and are so far to the left they would make a Berkeley sociology professor blanche.

In other words, just another normal day for the Four Horsewomen of the Apocalypse.

But there was another donation that may strike one as curious: $125,000 to Reggie Jones-Sawyer.  Remember that name? He’s the guy who infamously blocked the child sex trafficking bill in his legislative committee.  The bill eventually became law but the mere fact that Jones-Sawyer saw fit to try to kill a bill that made sex trafficking a minor a “serious felony” eligible for “three strikes” consideration is astonishing.

Yeah – Jones-Sawyer opposed tougher sentences for monsters who sell children for sex –  and not just opposed but actively fought the bill.

He’s termed out of the Legislature so, like almost every other termed out pol, he is playing political musical chairs and running for the Los Angeles City Council in District 10.

And if that’s district sounds familiar, that’s because it was once represented by Mark Ridley-Thomas, convicted federal felon. After Ridley-Thomas (what is it with hyphenated evil politicians?) was bounced by the council, Heather Hutt was appointed to take his place and that’s who Jones-Sawyer is running against in the March 5 primary.

With the help of many, many local unions and, of course, the Four Horsewomen.

There’s progressive, there’s woke, and then there’s batshit evil and opposing tougher sentences for CHILD SEX SLAVE TRAFFICKERS  falls into that last category.

Know what else falls into that batshit evil category?  Giving people who oppose tougher sentences for CHILD SEX  SLAVE TRAFFICKERS money to keep them in elected office.

Between the four ladies they have at least five children.

Thanks, mom.

Speaking of mothers (stop it – you have a dirty mind,) Rep. Katie Porter (she plays up the whole minivan thing) is one of three (two, really) senate candidates who have a chance to make it to November.  The problem is that she is now in a noticeably third spot looking up at Rep. Adam “I am literally incapable of telling the truth” Schiff and, improbably, former Dodger Steve Garvey.

As noted in this space often before, one of Schiff’s main primary campaign objectives has been to make sure Garvey would be his opponent in November.  That strategy seems to be working as Garvey is polling in first place.  Now it is quite possible Californians are finally beginning to notice that the state is going to hell and considering other elected options like Garvey, but this could be yet another Lucy/football situation.

Either way, Porter – not known for her calm demeanor – is miffed at both Garvey and Schiff.  She shouldn’t worry too much – after her third place finish she can always get a job at some progressive think tank or a gig teaching; she’s pretty much set for life.

But she has begun running “anti” Eric Early, another Republican in the race and far more inherently conservative than Garvey –  ads on the radio.  The ads SHOUT that Early is MAGA, MAGA, MAGA!!!!! and that Garvey hasn’t even said if he will vote for Donald Trump in the fall.

So the ad is in fact pro-Early by reminding every conservative voter that Garvey is a moderate, thereby driving down Garvey’s vote amongst Republicans.

Again, follow this:  Porter runs scary ad against Early that mentions Garvey is not as MAGA as Early in order to get conservatives to vote for Early rather than Garvey thereby giving her a better chance to come in second.

Here’s the ad:

Now that’s some political jiu jitsu worthy of the Gavinator himself.

Speaking of the governor, it seems he likes to do favors for rich friends even if they aren’t named Getty.  In the fast food wage hike bill there is a tiny bit that says if your restaurant bakes (and sells) its own bread, it’s exempt.  And he’s good friends – and erstwhile business partners –  with a guy who owns a slew of Panera Bread franchises.

Gavin’s PR flack said no, no, no, to be exempt they have to mix the dough on-site which he apparently believes Panera doesn’t do.

Sure, yeah, whatever.

But this development is not only irritating because of the blatant unfairness to Panera employees (can you only believe that a “living wage” is only deserved by people without flour on their hands?) and the amazingly blatant corruption involved (many campaign dollars for Gavin) but also because it came out after I wrote the hypothetical conversation between Gavin and his socks story.

I mean it came out so immediately after it actually probably came out during the writing.  And that ticks me off because Gavin talking to his sandwich would have been a whole bunch of fun. Does the pickle agree with the mustard that Gavin has to watch his language? is having mayonnaise on the sandwich racist? did the bacon come from out-of-state? and on and on.

Oh well, I’m sure Gavin’s grifting will produce another potential inanimate object for him to talk to – maybe Joe Biden?

Thanks for reading the Globe!