May 16, 2017 · 7:11 pm
↓ Jump to Comments

Compare and contrast

 

 

 

(Click on the image to see what we had representing us 45 years ago. Then think who we’re lucky enough to have now.)
 

11 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

11 responses to “Compare and contrast”

  1. S.J.
    May 16, 2017 at 10:27 pm

    I wish we had Morehead. You hate him because his first name is Carlos and that’s Latino ? Now we have white guy Shiff right, of course you like that better.

    Reply
  2. P.R.
    May 17, 2017 at 3:22 pm

    Latinos are caucasian ? Spoken like the true conservative that you obviously are. They are trying to deport caucasians according to you ? What a joke you conservatives are.

    Reply
  3. Peter
    May 19, 2017 at 8:32 am

    In the 1990s, I worked in the non-political, constituent-service-focused, district office of Carlos J. Moorhead…for seven years. I knew him well. He was, without a doubt, the most decent person I have ever known. And, for a politician, that is saying a lot. [BTW, he was not Latino]. His mother simply liked the name. So, in 1922, she gave us the Scandinavian-American Carlos John Moorhead, who lived in Glendale from 1933 until his death in 2011, with a partial pit stop in McLean, Virginia from 1973 to 1997. Carlos attended UCLA, USC Law, served in the U.S. Army during WWII, and almost never said a negative thing about anyone. He did dislike Newt Gingrich. Forget about politics. He was a great guy.

    Reply
    • semichorus
      May 19, 2017 at 10:54 am

      Yes, he was one of those old line Republicans. They were ok. But he did stick with Nixon for way too long. He also didn’t have much of a legislative history when it came to accomplishments, especially considering how long he’d been there.

      I remember when David Bayer ran against him in 1990, the first opponent he had of any note. The BUSD school board fired him on the spot as soon as soon as he announced his candidacy.

      Reply
  4. Peter
    May 20, 2017 at 2:33 pm

    Great memory on the David Bayer stuff. You & I might be the only people on Earth to remember it in that much detail. And, yes, Carlos did stick with his fellow Californian — Richard Nixon — all they way to the end. But that was probably part loyalty and part a reflection of his then-conservative district.

    As far as legislation, I have pointed out [for years] how this district has had a Member of Congress [in the minority] for far too many years. Carlos was there from ’73 to ’97, with only his last two years in the majority, after the 1994 election switched some 52 seats from Dem to GOP: The first GOP House majority in 40 years. Newt relegated Carlos to the chairmanship of some crappy subcommittee, when he was actually in line for two major committee chairmanships. “You’re just not mean enough,” Newt told Carlos.

    Same in-the-minority problem with Schiff, today. He has everything it takes to be in the U.S. Senate or higher. It could happen, but the planets have to line-up for him. In the meantime, he makes headlines and has incredible respect on all sides…but he is stuck in the minority. Hard to pass meaningful legislation from that vantage point. He is one of the best overall DC politicians to come along from our generation. His adult disposition, buttressed by Stanford and Harvard Law degrees, solid U.S. Attorney’s Office experience…serves him well. His potential was apparent from his first election victory in 2000, against Paula Boland, for the California State Senate. It has been a pleasure watching him in action.

    Reply
    • semichorus
      May 20, 2017 at 5:33 pm

      Interesting about the minority status. It never occurred to me.

      You know, Pat Nixon’s brother lived in Glendale for years, up on Thompson. Nixon used to hang out there often.

      I actually worked for Bayer at the time. He was treated very badly.

      The day after he sued the district in fact, the superintendent personally came down and warned the office ladies not to get involved. Talk about witness tampering. His case revolved around the question of whether or not he was the actual “principal” of the school. If so, his dismissal was illegal.

      They were all prepared to testify that he’d been referred as that many times by management.

      I’d also seen earlier corrective write-ups on his desk from Board Member Abbey for some alleged transgression or another. I knew them to be blatantly illegal, because in California a school board member can NOT personally threaten or discipline a school employee. Only management can.

      Unbelievable behavior from the BUSD and its attorneys. As I recall, Abbey in one specific case was reprimanding David for complaining to the board about some educational or discriminatory matter, and then threatening him with termination if he did it again.

      Reply
  5. Peter
    May 20, 2017 at 11:23 pm

    Very interesting summation on David Bayer’s Burbank days. As you stir my memory, I do recall the controversy. What I remember vividly, is that Bayer was a serious, articulate guy…with very good credentials. A Google search proves as much, with voter information from 1990:
    “David Bayer, 46, was a Peace Corps volunteer and professor in Peru before becoming a teacher. He is endorsed by the California Democratic Party. Raised in New York, he received a BA degree from Bowdoin College, a master’s degree in science from Cornell University and a doctorate from the University of San Francisco. He and his wife, Rosa, a special education teacher, live in Burbank and have a grown son who serves in the U.S. Navy.”
    I guess, if alive, he’d be 73 today. Such a long time ago.

    Reply

Leave a reply to Anonymous Cancel reply