If You're on the Gottstein-Gamble Fence . . .
This has been the most awful race of the year, but, despite many friends who support Gamble, I have to stick with my initial choice of Gottstein. It seems many, many people have their minds made up so strongly in this race that they are beginning to lose those minds.
If you're on the fence, though, let me offer one last piece of persuasion. The blogs are full of frothing Gamble supporters whining about a third-party piece exaggerating the extent to which he benefitted from his TIF tax give-away. They ignore the fact it was a third party piece, and that the Gottstein campaign BY LAW could not control it.
Contrast that with the piece below that comes DIRECTLY FROM THE GAMBLE CAMPAIGN. It highlights Beth's Jewishness, and relies on the ugliest photo they could doctor up.
I understand that the desire to win runs strong in a political campaign, but this is a direct call for the KKK vote, and it comes from Gamble. Maybe that kind of thing was okay in the Pendergast era, but I don't like it. If you're on the fence, I hope you'll look at the level to which the Gamble campaign has sunk, and ask yourself if you want people like that around City Hall.
(For a larger, more readable version, click on the picture.)
Sadly, this is not the race I care about the most. I hate to get distracted from the race I truly am passionate about - FUNK for MAYOR! But my sense of right and wrong just can't sit in silence when I see things like this.
Labels: council, election, gamble, gottstein, kansas city
posted by Dan at 3/27/2007 05:54:00 AM
38 Comments:
OK, I'll admit it. I don't see the Antisemitism. Please enlighten me. Is just quoting the Jewish Chronicle
Also, which allegations are untrue? There is a difference between strong words and lies. At least Gamble put his name on this one.
Technically Beth has no control of third-party pieces, but we all know that it's a convenient way to go negative without getting blamed for it. This particular third party has strong ties to Pat Gray and it's biggest contributors are also some of Beth's biggest contributors. Follow the money.
If you don't see the message behind pulling a quotation from the Jewish Chronicle talking about how Beth is not afraid of seeking money, I'm not certain I can enlighten you. And I'm not saying it's untrue that Beth is Jewish - it's just a shame that the Gamble campaign is running on that fact.
The wall between third-parties and campaigns is not a convenience - it's the law. If you have any evidence whatsoever that the Gottstein campaign has broken the law and made this piece, please bring it forward.
For those that have been around campaigns, third party pieces are a standard tactic. Campaigns often actually hire or associate with people that run third party negative campaigns.
If you think Beth and her campaign didn't know about it, much less orchestrate it, you're naive (not wrong, but simnply naive).
Diane Kander is despicable (she's one of the paid Gamble political operatives)but at least they did not print lies, and they did it under their own name. Note I'm not defending Kander at all.
The Gottstein campaign printed lies. I think there is a difference, and unfortunately we all lose. Someone needs to clamp down on this type of campaigning - both campaigns are guilty.
But Dan, I hope you will at least admit it wasn't the poor (and guilty)Gottstein that was wronged.
It was us voters.
Sorry, anonymous, I'm trying my best to be agreeable, but I can't agree with what you've written.
First, I'm not particularly naive about the 3rd party thing. Those people must have some autonomy, and I will bet as much as you like that the TIF piece was not orchestrated by the Gottstein campaign. I hope that if it had it would have been more effective.
I also must quarrel a little bit about Diane Kander. I've not met her, but she was completely straightforward when we spoke on the phone, and I really want to like her, because her husband, Jason, is a hell of a guy who will be my next state representative. So, you might be right, but I hope not.
Gottstein is not guilty, and she was certainly wronged here. But, yes, Kansas City as a whole has suffered in this race.
Come on, Dan, you're seeing the KKK in your shadows.
I'm as sensitive as the next guy; I don't see a hint of anti-Semitism there. And your desire to "point it out" speaks volumes about you.
He quoted a Jewish paper. So? Was the quote accurate? Was such a quote in such a paper? She says she's uncomfortable raising money; I don't doubt it. As a person strongly considering my own run for office in 2008, I'm DEEPLY uncomfortable with raising money.
C'mon Dan, this is the equivalent of accusing you of being in the KKK because you have white sheets on your bed.
Sorry, just read it again. NOT uncomfortable raising money.
I would be.
Though I misread her quote, it doesn't change my conclusion. This is playing a race card (or here, a "racist" card) that exists, on the basis of this evidence, only in your head.
And please don't give me the "if you don't see it . . . " BS. If it has to be explained to be seen, it's not there.
You've created a boogyman here, Dan.
Anonymous me - that would be a false charge against me. It's red satin all the time, baby.
Again, I have not called the piece false, I have called it anti-Semitic. Why else would they have the Jewish Chronicle at the top of their piece talking about money? Strange coincidence?
It's not over-sensitive to see anti-Semitism without swastikas.
If you can't even see "a hint" of anti-Semitism, well, okay then.
And thank you for saying that pointing out anti-Semitism where I see it says volumes about me. That is a cherished compliment, and one I'll strive to live up to. Too many people turn the other way.
I can see your point re: the appearance of citing the Jewish chronicle. The problem is that at the time of its creation, there was no other source for quotes from Ms. Gottstein because she had not interviewed with any other publications. Google her and you will come up with the same article. There were articles written about her, but there were barely any quotes to rely on. We purposefully made the citation as small as possible so that it wouldn't stand out.
The thing about the TIF pieces is that Beth repeated the language they used verbatim at forums, especially in the last two weeks. If you look at the campaign finance reports for the entities that sent out the pieces, you will see that they made no expenditures in any race but ours, and roughly 24 hours before they paid for the mail piece, they received funds from some of Beth's strongest supporters.
Its clear to me that Beth's campaign believes that Doug's strongest weakness is his involvement with TIF. It is their job to communicate this to voters. The problem is that what the third party mailings and the robo calls are saying is just totally false. He has never received a dime from the City. Yael wrote about it in today's Star.
From our end, there were some things we could have done better with the piece, like citing the star quote on the opposite side and there was a typo with the number of candidates Yael was talking about in the column we cited. However, there is nothing false or inaccurate in the piece. I think the Jewish Chronicle reference and the photo stand out because there is not much else to argue with.
I'm not from KC so I've got no emotional attachment to this in any direction. I gotta tell ya Dan that I don't really see the antisemitism in the flyer. I see where you see it, but I think it might be a bit of a stretch (I can see the same quote being thrown in the face of a non-Jewish politician).
The quote that actually almost me laugh was the one from the KC Buzz Blog. Where she "all-but-implied" her opponent was a hypocrite. What is "all-but-implied?" From my reading, it means she said nothing that would even imply he was a hypocrite. That's a really clever way for them to put words in someone's mouth without actually lying.
I just read the post again and I think you all-but-implied the moon was made out of cheese!! ;-)
Dan,
What's wrong with being Jewish? You say it like it's a bad thing. I hear Doug Gamble is one of those Catholics but he doesn't seem to try and hide it.
You describe associating Beth with her Jewish supporters as a bad thing. Who's the real anti-semite Dan?
Dan, you seem conflicted, which is a sign of intelligence. That means there is hope for you.
Do you really believe that some mean, nasty third party just went and printed those lies about Gamble on Beth's behalf?
Poowah poohwah Beth. I bet she just tossed and turned last night she was so upset about that.
Right. And there is an Easter Bunny.
Diana -
Thanks for the response. I'm looking forward to working with you on your husband's campaign. And thanks for the explanation of the campaign's perspective.
I'll be glad when this is all over, as, I am sure, you will.
I'm from Kansas so I don't have a horse in this race either, but I gotta agree with Dolphin, Dan. You need to have your offense-o-meter recalibrated.
There's plenty to be pissed off about, and antisemitism does exist. But not in this piece.
Hell, I wouldn't have known from reading the flier that she was Jewish, not that it matters if she is. The only mention of such a thing is the attribution (and your post).
You're a little off the rails on this one, Dan.
"And thank you for saying that pointing out anti-Semitism where I see it says volumes about me. That is a cherished compliment, and one I'll strive to live up to. Too many people turn the other way."
I know you know this, Dan, but I'll say it anyway. You're throwing incindiary labels. Racism (or anti-semitism) is a serious charge; it takes serious evidence to support same. You have offered none.
The above statement wasn't a compliment. And I'd have expected better from you.
I'm sorry that some of you guys are blind to it, but it's there. Even in her defense of the piece, Diana Kander (from the campaign) acknowledges, "I can see your point re: the appearance of citing the Jewish chronicle".
At least she has the integrity to accept that, rather than turning a blind eye . . .
Dan; read the rest of her explanation. If you're gonna cut and paste to make your point, cut and paste it all. Here - I'll do it for you: "The problem is that at the time of its creation, there was no other source for quotes from Ms. Gottstein because she had not interviewed with any other publications. Google her and you will come up with the same article."
Changes the tenor a bit, doesn't it?
Kander spoke of understanding your perception (she's being kind) But you wrote of "a direct call for the KKK vote, and it comes from Gamble."
Those are strong words. You made the charge, Dan, you carry the burden to provide strong evidence for the strong words. You've utterly failed to do so.
Why does this matter? Because constantly crying wolf undercuts how seriously people take REAL racism/anti-semitism, which is still very much with us. And doing so for personal political purposes, no less.
Who's doing the hit piece here? Shame on you.
Dan - you're just as shallow as Gottstein, and just as pathetic. Keep lying and race-baiting.
You're playing the race card because there's nothing else to say about Beth - she's accomplished nothing, and is trying to buy the city council seat.
Keep saying "anti-semite" to yourself, maybe you'll start believing it. No one else does.
So let me get this straight Dan, you can't have the words "Jewish" and "money" in the same paragraph without it being anti-Semetic?
And based on this half-baked inference that you somehow made, you link Gamble to the "KKK"? Sorry, but compared to your attack against him, the Gamble mailer is absolutely above board, respectable and well reasoned.
You owe Gamble an apology. But of course you're not man enough to admit you overreacted, are you?
I agree, Dan.
Accusing the Gamble campaign of being anti-semitic is downright wrong.
gonemild.com?
gone pathetic is more like it.
Take your race-baiting tactics elsewhere, Dan.
Dan,
Are you still glad you supported Beth over Deth and Rita?
To me, the worst two candidates made it to the finals. Beth used Pat Gray who has NO problem making fun of people that have downs syndrome. (remember this http://www.pitch.com/2003-05-01/news/photo-finish/ )
That says a lot about Beth's character. As much as I don't want to vote for Gamble, I won't vote for anyone that uses Pat Gray.
My brother has downs syndrome and I can't understand how those types of pictures would be used in a campaign back in 2003 and I can't see what type of person would ever hire a campainer that would use those tactics.
Over-reacted, Anonymous Me? Maybe, but, again, I don't think that being vigilant for anti-Semitism is something that I need to be ashamed of, especially in a crowd that is as blind to the implications as this one. As the 11:36 Anonymous makes crystal clear, there are some in this town who won't believe in anti-Semitism until they see a swastika. Nitwits like that person need to be awakened.
But, yeah, the KKK comment was probably too harsh, in light of Diana's explanation.
But, really, Anonymous Me, you need to take a deep breath, too. Do you honestly think I was trying to misrepresent Diana's words by quoting those that were relevant to the point I made - a mere few paragraphs under the words themselves? I think most people here, Anonymous 11:36 perhaps aside, can retain knowledge that long.
Anonymous 12:50:
Did you really just come on to my site and tell me to take my opinions elsewhere?
Thanks for the chuckle.
Anonymous 12:53 - I'm not defending Pat Gray here - I don't like him either, but I don't see where in that article he makes fun of people with Down's Syndrome. Maybe you put up the wrong link, but, if he did, that would be reprehensible.
This is anonymous at 12:50. Keep chucking, Dan.
Your accusations of racism in order to promote Gottstein really seem to be working. Oh, and they're helping your credibility.
Have another one of those 75th Street brews -- and keep on chuckling.
So I'm a "nitwit," Dan? Now that's rich. I'm not the one who is playing the hyper-PC card and embarrassing myself on my own blog. You see anti-Semitism everywhere because you're looking for it, not because it's always there.
It's like when African Americans complain about their waiter being racist because he didn't pay enough attention to them. Sometimes it might be true, but sometimes bad service is just bad service.
And saying your "KKK" comment was "probably too harsh" is far short of the apology you should make to Gamble. It was a nasty smear, and beneath the level of analysis you should offer your readers. Seriously, your remark is no better than the smear that you claim to see in Gamble's mailer. Step up, Dan, and apologize.
Don't hold your breath for Dan to apologize. The guy, just like Beth Gottstein, has absolutely no class.
Sure I'll apologize - no problem. I think it was anti-Semitic, and it will certainly play well to the KKK crowd, but I believe Diana's statement that the anti-Semitism was unintentional. Besides, as someone else pointed out, if someone's truly anti-Semitic, they probably didn't need the mailer to convince them not to vote for Gottstein.
It was a stupid thing for them to put on the mailer, but I over-reacted. Sorry, Doug.
lol, so you're contending that the flier was
"unintentionally anti-semitic"
This is quite entertaining.
I think I'll stick around here and catch some more of this chit-chat.
Other anons - lighten up on Dan. I believe his comments were unintentionally anti-semantic.
That was intentionally very funny.
Agreed.
Thanks - it's nice to see Dan and Anonymous agree on something!
but I don't see where in that article he makes fun of people with Down's Syndrome
Ok, you see anti semitism in Gamble's flyer, but not Pat Gray's lampooning people with downs syndrome in the pitch article. Look at the doctered pictures that Pat made. The flattened face, the upwards slanting eyes. Those are all characteristics of people with downs syndrome.
Pat Gray was trying to imply that those candidates where mentally challenged and unfit for office. Beth hired Pat and that says a lot about her character. She must on some level think that style of political attack is ok.
I thought he was just making them look unattractive, but I'm no expert on the facial characteristics of Down's Syndrome. Perhaps I would have caught the Down's Syndrome reference if I knew more - it wasn't mentioned anywhere in the article.
Please correct me but isn't Gamble's campaign manager Jewish?
Let me get this straight. A Jewish African-American waiter is in trouble for inciting the KKK to seek money from an anonymous guy with down's syndrome who has been chucking the Jewish Chronicle and the Pitch at the unapologetic boogeyman and the Easter Bunny.
At least, that's how I read it.
Jim:
Beautiful. You've captured the essence quite well. ;-)
I'd note that your interpretation makes at least as much sense as Dan's.
Post a Comment
<< Home