Travie J. Westlund of Eureka believes that Eureka City Council Member Chris Kerrigan is on the take, or so he says in a letter to the ER. The proof? He was seen wearing a Pierson’s hat as he was helping to clean up the vandalism at Sequoia Park. No kidding! That’s why he’s fighting Arkley on the balloon tract/track. See Pierson supported Kerrigan’s election. Kerrigan opposes Home Depot on the waterfront. Ergo, Pierson has bought Kerrigan, because Kerrigan would have no other rational reason to oppose the Arkley plan.
There are a few other reasons cited here.
…..
Another letter to the ER backs Ann Coulter up in calling the 911 widows (or “Jersey Girls”) whiney wimps because they take issue with people other than the terrorists themselves or Clinton.
Again, can you imagine the fire and brimstone if someone against the war made light of suffering of the war supporting contingent of Gold Star families?
…..
Well, we saw a little of it following the NY Times Op-ed piece claiming that progressive anti-war demonstrators were protesting at military funerals and hospitals. FAIR did some groundwork to prove the Times irresponsibly erroneous, leading to the following retraction published in the Times on June 17:
An Op-Ed article on Monday, about demonstrations at military funerals, hospitals and memorial services, incorrectly described the protesters at the military funerals discussed in the article. In some cases, the protesters were members of an anti-gay group, not people opposed to the Iraq war; in others, the families of the dead service members were unable to determine the affiliation of the protesters.
The “anti-gay group” referenced is of course Fred Phelps and company (hopefully no relationship to the medical family of SoHum).
12 comments
Comments feed for this article
June 30, 2006 at 8:33 pm
Nick Bravo
Sometimes a hat is just a hat.
July 1, 2006 at 6:23 am
Eric V. Kirk
As long as it’s not a cigar. We’ve been through enough of that!
July 1, 2006 at 11:15 pm
Anonymous
Just a reminder, Eric … Chris K took $12,000 from Pierson, his family and business during the 2004 re-election campaign, which was approx 18% of the total cash raised. I and many others think that not only gives a strong impression of undue influence and vote buying, but it may border on criminal. Did Debi August do any less to warrant criminal prosecution? Why he isn’t recusing himself on these votes is puzzling to me.
Chris Crawford
July 1, 2006 at 11:46 pm
Eric V. Kirk
Well, a good point, except that pols never recuse themselves from issues pertaining to campaign donations, or special interests wouldn’t make them. Your $500 suggestion would nip the problem in the bud if it’s upheld.
Thing is, Kerrigan would be opposing the balloon track/tract proposal regardless of the Pierson donation. We both know that. And this isn’t an issue that directly effects Pierson. Personally, I think Piersons would continue to flourish with a Home Depot in town. They’ve earned a great deal of customer loyalty. Home Depot in Santa Rosa sure hasn’t put Friedman’s out of business.
July 2, 2006 at 6:57 am
Anonymous
Chris Crawford isnt very good at what he does, that is the bottom line.
July 2, 2006 at 9:45 pm
Anonymous
I have more to say about this thread at http://fairchance.us/.
July 3, 2006 at 3:19 am
Anonymous
i cant tell the difference between michael smith and shawn warford since their stalking patterns are so similar.
July 3, 2006 at 7:42 am
Eric V. Kirk
anon 2:45 p.m. – I skimmed your link, and I’ll go back and read it more carefully later. I can probably come up with the ISP of the Crawford post, though the visit meter only goes back so far – as far as I can tell. I suppose I could also simply call Chris Crawford and ask if he posted it.
But is there an intrinsic reason I should assume it’s a false attribution? And did Kerrigan in fact get 12,000 from Pierson’s? I don’t agree with the alleged Crawford that it necessarily creates a conflict of interest, but large campaign donations are fair game for questioning political motives.
July 3, 2006 at 7:31 pm
Anonymous
Crawford probably the author of post according to reply now posted on fairchance.
I was pointing out the continued history of Crawford calling for civil discussion on local issues while at the same time continually using scorched earth politics.
He has a history of this behavior in his NOT campaign. Also in last DA race, notice the tone of race before Crawford’s letter writing campaign and then the tone after. Remember his role in Kerrigan vs. Bohn?
FairChance advocates for disenfranchised voices, especially students from all walks of life, to join the political process.
People like Chris Crawford have an enormous amount of access to media and political power structures, thus they have a greater responsibility to be fair and transparent or be subject to greater scrutiny.
That is the way life in 2006 goes.
Crawfords circle is losing power because of their backroom dealings, thus they are attacking the people who are shining the light on their behavior.
I have nothing against crawford personally, but politically I think he is a jerk.
So, if the people that support Crawford and Companys conduct want to see their power base continue to erode as well, then so be it, let them continue their distortion
campaigns.
He is not very good at what he does though, which makes me wonder why he continues his web, maybe he is trying to protect financial interest rather than further political interest.
People in Humboldt County are not addressing education and poverty concerns at a policy level, two major fairchance concerns, every effort is derailed by business as usual interest.
People like Crawford need to make room at the table, because we are fast building our own table, and right about now, not a whole lot of people I know want to have dinner with them.
July 3, 2006 at 8:45 pm
Bitxxx
Amen.
July 3, 2006 at 9:17 pm
Anonymous
fairchance advocates for michael smith and michael smith alone because nobody else is in it but michael smith. your front groups dont fool us michael so tell us another tall tale about how chris crawford is out to get you.
July 5, 2006 at 6:07 pm
Anonymous
2:17 pm
same old tired stuff