Blowing money out their patoot, Part II

18 Feb

I am a woman of many moods. People who’ve known me a long time say they’ve watched me turn from a liberal to a conservative. I hate labels – those feelings have been mixed up inside of me for years, and I’ve followed one party or another because I thought they were expressing the same feelings. Over the years, I’ve realized, you can’t trust any big political party, and the bigger politics get, the less effect the common person will have.

So when Planning Commissioner and long-time gadfly Jon Luvass brought forward a “discussion” of “corporate personhood,” I was conflicted. Yes, I think “corporate personhood,” as explained to me by Ralph Nader about 1993, is bad.

“Corporate personhood” came from a legislative decision made decades ago – about 100 years ago? –  that gave corporations “human rights.”  Boiled down, this means, they can scream “harrassment” if you go after them for say, coloring the stream that runs through your town with toxic waste, or turning the air over your city into soot soup. It gives them all kinds of protections they don’t deserve, and it’s caused us a lot of problems in holding them to the laws that you and I must obey.

If you want a better explanation about this, go to www.nader.org/ – Ralph has been hashing issues like this for years, that’s why I have voted for him in every presidential election ever since 1992. 

Meanwhile, Jon Luvass has supported MoveOn.org and the Democratic Party. Hmmmm.

What Luvass, prodded forward by Ann Schwab and Linda Furr and who knows who else,  brought to the Internal Affairs Committee last week was not a discussion about “corporate personhood” but their own hypocritical diatribe on campaign spending

Our election process, he says, are being “swung” by “big big money.”

This is where I find Luvass disingenuous. This is a guy who has supported MoveOn.org since it was created, going to the first MoveOn convention and then holding a party at his co-housing community to spread the word. Luvass has also long been one of the stinking heads of the Esplanade League stinking fish, the Super PAC of the liberals. He’s closely connected to Dave Guzzetti’s “Chico Democrats,” which by the way, has nothing to do with Democracy.

Luvass had the nerve to ramble on about how these evil PACS – not his, see – are ruining Democracy. “This is a matter of money speaking louder than the mouths of human beings…” but, “I’m not talking about corporations in general (like the Esplanade League), but ‘MAJOR’ corporations…”

Well, that’s real pretty Jon, but it doesn’t carry much weight coming from a guy who bought his way onto the Planning Commission with the single largest donation allowed in a Chico City Council race.  Yep, Luvass gave Maureen Kirk $950, just short of the $1000 maximum, in the campaign directly leading to her appointing him as Planning Commissioner. 

Yes Jon, that looks really bad, especially given the fact that you had no qualifications whatsoever and didn’t even read the city code until I pointed that out to you a good eight months into the job.

Luvass acts as though butter wouldn’t melt in his mouth, but he and his friends are also quick to call in their big guns when they really need money  – the California nurses union and the SEIU were the biggest contributors to the campaign against Measure A, and they both waited until the last quarter to donate so they wouldn’t have to disclose until AFTER THE ELECTION. Same with the Esplanade League, which also refuses to disclose just  exactly where it’s money comes from.

I saw Nancy Pelosi on PBS’s MacNeil Report the other night, railing about how the Republicans’ Super PACS are just ruining life as we know it. Reporter Judy Woodruff pointed out that Obama will be going with a Super PAC. Pelosi, looking like one of those apple-head puppets, croaked back that Obama’s money is DIFFERENT!  He discloses! Yeah, just like the Chico Democrats and the Esplanade League – we won’t find out whose fist is up Obama’s ass until he’s already made his inaugural address.

So, Jon, Ann, Linda – you can save your bullshit for those ignoramuses who would listen to you.  Nobody believes you are sincere in limiting campaign money, and this “corporate personhood” discussion is just more of your whitewash.

Meanwhile, council turns a deaf ear to my request to agendize a discussion of how a tax increase measure can get on the ballot WITHOUT one shred of support from the community.  Yes, five of them can contrive to shove it on the ballot without a petition. 

Please write to council and ask them to agendize my request for a public discussion of how a tax increase measure gets on our local ballot. I’ve written a formal request to the clerk’s office, and already one member of council has answered back that he won’t discuss it until Lando comes forward with his proposal. I told this council member, I’M NOT ASKING FOR A DISCUSSION OF LANDO’S PROPOSAL. I’m asking for a discussion of HOW ANY TAX INCREASE PROPOSAL CAN GET ON THE LOCAL BALLOT. 

If they can sit around for two hours masturbating themselves with this kind of crap, they can agendize my request.

Advertisements

One Response to “Blowing money out their patoot, Part II”

  1. Joseph February 18, 2012 at 11:37 am #

    Luvass is a hypocrtie and rapscallion, no doubt.

    I’ve written those on the council like Schwab and Holcombe who cause these problems. At first they would respond but when I requested details they stopped responding and no longer respond at all.

    I no longer look at politics or those in government from a left – right perspective. I think this is a more usefull way to view these topics:

    http://epautos.com/2012/02/16/lets-start-here/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: