Would U Keep a Malicious Gossip as Best Pal?

If you are still considering a vote for Donald Trump, please, as you read this, try to think if you know ANYONE who would behave this way and expect you to trust him to fix your roof or make a will for you.

I gather that Mr. Trump does not like Joe Scarborough, a former Republican Congressman who hosts a TV show. 

 

Nine years ago, a young woman working in Congressman Scarborough’s Florida office told friends that she had a heart condition and wasn’t feeling well. Shortly afterward she fainted, hit her head on her desk, and died. An inquest held that the death was accidental. “There is no doubt that the head injury [resulted from] a fall rather than a blow being delivered to the head.”  No one disagreed, let alone presented evidence to the contrary. Congressman Scarborough was in Washington at the time.

Mr. Trump, without the least evidence or reason to believe the death wasn’t accidental, proclaimed to the world recently that “some people think” Scarborough “got away with murder” and suggested the dead woman was cheating on her husband: “A lot of interest in this story about Psycho-Joe Scarborough. So a young marathon runner just happened to faint in his office, hit her head on his desk, & dies? I would think there is a lot more to this story. An affair?”

Diligent searches turn up NO evidence to support Trump’s lies, which were phrased as questions or prefaced with “Some people think” to evade libel laws. 

 

How is this different from a jealous parishioner telling the whole congregation you molested her kid, or a coworker whose girl you stole in high school telling the boss that you’re sleeping with the boss’s wife – solely for spite? Trump has no interest in truth, and no compunction about inflicting pain on strangers. Anything to deflect attention from his embarrassingly incompetent response to the pandemic. 

 

Actually, Trump may no longer be capable of reaching that level of purpose. He seems more than usually scared, and keeps desperately lashing out in nutty ways Joe Biden couldn’t have scripted but must love. Meanwhile Biden’s recent response to the alleged murder of George Floyd was reasoned, thoughtful, and not political in the partisan sense. Beyond a brief statement that stirring things up right now is probably unwise, he didn’t touch on Donald Trump.

The dead girl’s bereaved husband, seeking to protect her reputation, asks Twitter to remove Trump’s tweet, which has no basis in fact. Twitter, obviously loathe to offend the gentleman in the Casa Blanca, refuses, saying it’s “deeply sorry.” The widower points out that a regular citizen would have been banished for acting like Trump. 

 

Twitter won’t remove the tweet but adds to two unrelated tweets a “fact-check” link suggesting they might not be accurate.

Trump, having been dealt with so generously by Twitter, threatens to destroy Twitter. He alleges that social media are discriminating against Republicans. (Does he think all Republicans make proclamations as patently false and downright stupid as his?) As kids we used to define “egotism” as “a naked ant floating down the East River on his back, thinking about his girlfriend, and shouting ‘Open the Drawbridge!’” Sorry, but Trump, who has no power to outlaw social media, reminds me of that ant.

Would you remain friends with such a person? Trust him with $100,000? Give him the button to launch nuclear weapons? Close the drawbridge!

                                         – 30 --

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 31 May in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website, sub nom "Trump's Wild Accusation Stinks of Desperation" and on KRWG's website (sub nom, "Facts Matter, Even on Social Media").  A radio commentary based on it will air during the week on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM (www.lccommunityradio.org) and is also available on demand on KRWG's website. ]

[I understand that Donald Trump did many more significant and equally malicious and dishonest things this week.  Bailing on WHO in the midst of a global pandemic, on the flimsy allegation that it likes China more than it likes him these days, is certainly up there.  So is his response to the apparent murder of George Floyd, and his continued fear that saying anything reasonable regarding that sort of thing would strike his "Core" as wimping out.  His rhetoric and now action regarding WHO is worthy of analysis.  Basically, he'd like to shift our attention from his abysmal treatment of the pandemic, calling it a little flu that wouldn't hurt Americans, to his mockery of health experts, cheerleading for protesters in several states, and refusal to wear a mask (let alone his insistence on gathering cadets for a Trump speech at West Point, which West Point didn't want, and his insistence on another gathering recently in Baltimore, where the mayor urged him not to).  Blame the Chinese.  It's certainly true that local authorities in Wuhan seem to have tried to mislead their superiors initially; and likely China's national government was briefly in denial, as Trump was; but WHO was on the scene pretty quickly, investigating, and sounding alarms that Mr. Trump ignored like the clucking of pigeons, and China (which, of course, has powers Trump does not) did a hell of a job stopping the spread, so far.  Trump failed.  WHO was probably not perfect, but its record is a hell of a lot better than Trumps.  However, it has not acted fast enough for Trump to help Trump's "Blame China," maybe because it supposes that trying to contain and ultimately solve the problem is a better use of its resources.  
Most of the world would say China made some mistakes.  The U.S. made many mistakes.  How 'bout we move on to try to fix things, then analyze relative fault later?
But Mr. Trump has other priorities.

I chose this incident because it sums Trump up so neatly and doesn't depend on studying the record of WHO or understanding science or deciding who said what first in some debate.  Trump didn't like somebody.  He made up with no evidence at all (or repeated with no evidence at all, knowing he had no evidence at all) a stupid and malicious lie that that person had been having an affair with a young, married, employee and caused her to be killed.  He didn't give a shit that her family and husband were publicly humiliated and hurt (and her reputation sullied for no reason).  He didn't worry about truth, because he and truth are rarely in the same zip code.  His behavior was not only spiteful, stupid, and dishonest, it likely was ineffective.  Could anyone previously unaware of this sad event not come away with more sympathy for the victims of Trump's barely lawful defamation than for Trump?
And we can all understand it.  We've all seen it happen, in high school or in our social or professional lives, at church or workplace.  Mostly by people who, like Mr. Trump, are deeply hungry for more respect and love than they feel they get, perhaps more than they can ever get. ]

Drive-by "Celebrations" Mark End of High School

Thursday morning I did something new: Walt Rubel and I were the commentators as hundreds of Mayfield High seniors experienced the first drive-by Senior Celebration [not “graduation,”], pulling up in beautifully decorated vehicles to get certificates [not “diplomas”] from Principal Eric Flass. 

 

A first for all of us, with plenty of good energy. An arduous but pleasant way to serve the community. Many beautiful, happy kids. Two stretch limousines, a lot of jeeps, and a big yellow Hummer. Very cute little dogs in laps. Us reading graduates’ words about their fondest memories and their plans. It all moved at a challenging pace, two hours of kids’ smiles, parents’ pride, and loving words about friends who’ll be missed – and then it was over.

In the ensuing quiet, I wondered how it felt to graduate and enter “the real world” wearing masks and worrying about a virus. Does that mute the delight (large groups sure aren’t getting as drunk as we did in 1964), or make everything more precious, and dramatic? Or all of the above?

I remembered my graduation. Spring of 1964 was the last moment of calm before the storm. Within months, three civil rights workers would be killed in Mississippi, Lyndon Johnson would eviscerate Barry Goldwater in an election, and the Vietnamese resistance to the powerful U.S. military would begin forcing that undeclared war into the public consciousness.

I contemplated the decades since. I wanted to apologize to these beautiful young kids for the highly defective government and society we elders are bequeathing them. (What marvelous leaders Johnson and Goldwater were, compared to Donald Trump!) Since 1964 we have made some long overdue improvements, notably in the status of ethnic minorities, women, and folks whose sexual preferences are unconventional, as well as the physically challenged and the mentally/emotionally challenged. But we have encouraged economic inequality to grow rather than diminish, civility and decency in politics have declined, and we have spurned chances to confront climate-change, despite decades of dire warnings. 

 

When I’ve spoken, I think I’ve spoken on the right side; but I apologize for spending so much of the years since 1964 doing things that didn’t advance the ball. Any ball. We are not Nazi Germany; but we have lived in a time when we could have stood up and made a difference and mostly did not. 

 

I wondered what I would say to high school graduates. Maybe urge them to read and listen critically, and keep in mind that though Mayfield-Cruces rivalry games were fun, there’s a significant difference between running a country or business and rooting fervently for a team. I would babble about time, that as Dogen said, there is only the present moment, because the past is a bunch of fallen leaves floating away, and the future is not guaranteed. I would urge them to recall the past and learn from it, but never dwell there; and to contemplate the future, and perhaps make plans – but not to dwell in dreams, either. I would say, cherish each moment, and wring out of it all the fun, love, and learning you can. Sustainably, if possible.

But mostly I felt real curious to ask them how they see all this. Some were pretty impressive kids. All had their different interesting vantage points. I know too well what I have to say, so that’s boring. I want to hear from them. It’s their time.

                                     -- 30 -- 

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 24 May 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and on KRWG's website.  A radio commentary based on it will air during the week on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM (www.lccommunityradio.org) and will be available on demand on KRWG's site.]

 [The drive-by celebrations were simulcast, too, on www.lcps.tv, and broadcast over KTAL, 101.5 FM.  The moment the school folks approached us, it seemed absolutely the right thing for a community radio station to do.  What was delightful was how well everyone from both LCPS and the station, particularly people whose voices you didn't necessarily hear, did a quick and competent job in making this wholly unfamiliar event work about as well as it could.  Folks also tried to maintain virus-avoidance protocols as best we could.  (I ended up doing three of the four traditional high schools, Mayfield, Centennial, and Onate -- with Walt at the first and last, and with Rich Kadzis (the Buzzman) for Centennial Friday morning.)]

[And I do hope to have several of the students as phone guests the second half of our "Speak Up, Las Cruces!" show Wednesday morning on 101.5 FM.  Durikng the firat hour (8-9 a.m.), we'll have two or three of the three surviving candidates for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate.  (Two have accepted at this point.  Waiting to hear back from Mark Ronchetti, after emails and phone calls to his campaign.  If anyone reading this knows him, and he might be interested in joining his opponents on Cruces Community radio, let him know.)  Then from 9-10, students.  I've only spoken to one so far, but I'm hopeful we'll have several.]

[It was a neat event in ways I probably lacked time or energy to process while we were working so fast.  Reflecting on how many of the students recalled so vividly their first day of high school, and the nervous uncertainty they felt, and on how many articulated some version of "I actually made it!" in their comments or in signs on their car, and on the faces of parents and graduates, with joy and even tears -- illustrates how big the high school graduation was for many, and what a struggle it was in different ways.  I think folks forget that part long afterward.  Too, one wrote in his comments, "I did this for my sister, mother, and father, who never had the chance," adding (as several did), "I'm proud to be Mexican!"  Several of these kids struggled with poverty, learning and writing in a second-language, separation from family, and other hurdles many of us did not.  Makes graduating high school pretty sweet!]

[And I couldn't have done my part without a breakfast burrito (to-go) from Nessa's each morning, on my way to the Field of Dreams.] 

Graduation Photo w poppies

Science-based Reopening

Gov. Michelle Lujan-Grisham - screenshot

While watching Governor Lujan-Grisham’s two-hour press conference discussing science-based efforts to reopen New Mexico safely, I felt this weird dissonance.

On one screen, the administration discussed opening New Mexico without a disastrous increase in COVID-19 cases, by working carefully to balance science, economics, and human nature. They were working out details most of us would miss. 

 

On another screen, FB friends and strangers insisted that the pandemic is grossly exaggerated, even that unspecified elites have ginned this up to control us better. I don’t agree, but hope to talk to those folks further. (Meanwhile the comment-thread during the Governor’s presser was pretty wild. See my blog for samples.)

I keep trying to tell folks in that Facebook world what I see and hear in the reporting world. Friends say, “Why bother? They’re the same folks who deny climate-change.” Three reasons: since I don’t know everything, I might learn something; I too have held highly unpopular views most folks maligned; and if I’m right about this pandemic, COVID-19-deniers who spurn masks could endanger someone they care about. So communication matters. 

 

Dr. David Scrase - Human Svs. Sec.

What I wanted the FB folks to see in the Governor, Kathleen Kunkel, and Dr. David Scrase (New Mexico’s Fauci) is their seriousness and concern; their reliance on evidence; and their willingness to admit what they don’t know. They could be wrong; but they’re damn sure trying, as reasonably as possible, to get it right.

They understand everyone’s frustration, and the very real and serious pain a busted economy causes.

There’s just something about the COVID-deniers I don’t quite get.

I know everything has to be partisan now, and we must root for our team with absolute loyalty. We’re all at least somewhat guilty of that. I understand that people don’t like to be told what to do. My whole life has been a fight against being told what to do or think. I gather that Donald Trump’s cavalier dismissal of anything scientific appeals to some. (I don’t understand that.) 

 

This virus is a serious problem, more communicable than the flu but far less than measles was before vaccines. We keep learning more about how one gets infected. Early projections weren’t lies, or tricks to control us better, but (a) involved a new virus few scientists had encountered and (b) assumed we wouldn’t take such extreme protective measures. 

 

Cloth masks, though imperfect, can help keep me from spreading the virus if I get infected. I might not know I was infected until too late, because I’d actually be most dangerous during the last few days before symptoms appear. Wearing the mask minimizes the odds I’d spread the virus, and the more people who don’t infect others, the better chance that your 90-year-old grandfather – and our economy – will survive. (New York studies show that 80% of people wearing masks cut the daily death toll considerably.)

The enemy is this virus (which isn’t alive), not Michelle or Donald. As with World War II’s rationing, shortages, and draft, it’s time to suck it up and try to do the right thing for our community and country. 

 

I get that when we’re bickering about Donald and Joe, a flashy Facebook meme that trashes “the enemy” is exciting, and we reach for “Share”; but this virus warrants a more thoughtful approach, like critically reading facts (not someone’s ideological spin) with an open mind. 

Sorry to ruin the party, but someone’s life might depend on you.

                                              – 30 --

[The column above appeared this morning, Sunday, 17 May 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website (sub nom A Tightrope of Science, Economics, and Human Nature) and on KRWG's website, sub nom Science, Not Politics, Must Drive Covid-19 Policy.  A radio-commentary based on it will air during the week both on KRWG and on KTAL, 101.5 FM -- streaming at www.lccommunityradio.org. The commentary will also be available on-demand on KRWG's website.]

[Of course, it's not possible to keep politics entirely out of discussions of coronavirus.  For one thing, given the testimony and other information about  Mr. Trump's sluggish response to the pandemic, it's understandable that Trump minions would wish to minimize the problem he was ignoring and Trump antagonists would tend to stress its importance.  However, in the real world there are some facts. For example, we know how pre-symptomatic people can spread the disease, we know the "R-naught" of COVID-19 (fortunately smaller than the one for measles, say) and that the kinds of conduct outlined in the public health order can keep the spread rate significantly lower.  However, all the science is important information that decision-makers need to factor in with economic, psychological, societal, political, and other sorts of information in trying to chart (and continually re-chart based on experience and new information) our best course.]

[A useful explanation of the science is one by Erin Brundage, Ph.D., who points out in KNOW THE RISKS":
“Based on infectious dose studies with MERS and SARS, some estimate that as few as 1000 SARS-CoV2 viral particles are needed for an infection to take hold. Please note, this still needs to be determined experimentally, but [using that number to demonstrate the principle:] Infection could occur, through 1000 viral particles you receive in one breath or from one eye-rub, or 100 viral particles inhaled with each breath over 10 breaths, or 10 viral particles with 100 breaths.
A breath: A single breath releases 50 - 5000 droplets. Most of these droplets are low velocity and fall to the ground quickly. There are even fewer droplets released through nose-breathing. Importantly, due to the lack of exhalation force with a breath, viral particles from the lower respiratory areas are not expelled.
A Cough: A single cough releases about 3,000 droplets and droplets travels at 50 miles per hour. Most droplets are large, and fall quickly (gravity), but many do stay in the air and can travel across a room in a few seconds.
A Sneeze: A single sneeze releases about 30,000 droplets, with droplets traveling at up to 200 miles per hour. Most droplets are small and travel great distances (easily across a room).
If a person is infected, the droplets in a single cough or sneeze may contain as many as 200,000,000 (two hundred million) virus particles which can all be dispersed into the environment around them.]

[This morning I noticed a Washington Post article on how some epidemilogists approach the question of maximixing safety when going out more during these times. Though they said they'd try to stay in until cases decline in their communities, they offered some guidance for folks going out.  Most of those, most of us would already contemplate; but they had a couple I'd not have thought to mention.  They say, in part:  

In general, aside from how necessary the excursion is, they’ll consider: will they be indoors or outdoors; can they stay six feet from others; and how long will the outing be? Outdoors and shorter outings are safer. “I won’t linger in places,” one said. At businesses, they’ll note whether all staff members are wearing masks, employees are observing the six-foot principle, whether or not there’s hand sanitizer or some other easy way to clean/disinfect hands, and are there few enough customers that everyone can keep the six-foot distance. They’ll also carry hand-sanitizer, and use it before and after being in public spaces, focus on not touching their faces, use the bathroom before leaving home to avoid using public restrooms, and carry water to avoid using drinking fountains.]

[I'd intended to include some of the comments on the thread that kept moving up the screen to the right of the video throughout the Governor's press conference; but that's too arduous a task for such a beautiful Sunday morning!  I'll post it soon.  However, several took the Governor to task for not wearing a mask throughout her talk.   However, she did have one, and was wearing it at the start (and, later, even showed folks how to make one from a bandanna), she quite naturally took it off to speak into a microphone, and was quite safe because the cabinet members to her right and left were at least about 20 feet away.]

Photographs  © 2020 Peter Goodman

"Petroleum Strong" Backs John Arthur Smith -- Strongly

Chevron Oil is putting its heavy finger on the scales in some of our state senate races – to protect Chevron’s bottom line, not us or our environment. 

 

A conservative Super PAC that spent big on Republicans in 2018 is misleading Democratic primary voters with progressive-sounding communications that give the false impression that our Governor is endorsing state senate candidates it favors. “Stand with Michelle and Candidate X.”

Even the name “New Mexico Strong” is misleading. It should be “Petroleum Strong.” Top 2018 donors were Chevron ($2.5 million+), Occidental Petroleum ($100K), Mack Energy ($50K), and Devon, Marathon, and Hillcorp Energy. 

 

In 2018, “Petroleum Strong” gave $25,177 to Clarkson, a former Trump minion, toward his failed bid for the Republican nomination for the House of Representatives, and spent heavily to attack Land Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard.

Chevron ponied up $350,000 in February. That money is buying mailers and TV Spots for a few state senators, including John Arthur Smith and Mary Kay Papen. Former State Democratic Party Vice-Chair Neomi Martinez-Parra, a teacher from Lordsburg, is challenging Smith.

To size it, “Petroleum Strong” has $350K of Chevron’s money, and is spending bucks on Smith’s primary contest. Smith’s first primary report listed $61,700 in contributions. Martinez-Parra reported $24,707. 

 

The sources of these funds tell an important story. For October 16^th, 2019 through March 27, Smith’s reported $61,700 in contributions came largely from oil and gas ($18,750) and large health corporations / Big Pharma ($15,000). Small companies like Exxon Mobile. Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson, plus General Motors, Comcast, and Union Pacific, all of which must have southern New Mexicans’ best interests uppermost in their minds. Contributors included two ranchers and three other individuals among the plethora of lobbyists and businesses.

Martinez-Parra in October 2019 reported $9,000+ in contributions, ranging from $5 (an unemployed person) to $2,000 from a guy named Parra. Ignoring family, $5 to $250, all from individuals. No IBM or U.S. Steel. People. Professors, caseworkers, insurance underwriters, nurses, engineers, a physicist, a student working in a bookstore.. Martinez-Parra pledged not to accept corporate PAC money.

I’ve rarely seen such a stark contrast in funding.

Smith is smart, well-spoken, and experienced; and I’m all for fiscal prudence and common sense; but who is his top priority in applying his experience to our affairs? Nurses, engineers, and retired people – or “Petroleum Strong?” 

 

I hear this election is surprisingly close, perhaps because Smith seems somewhat out of step with increasing numbers of his constituents. For example, most New Mexicans wouldn’t put a woman in jail for getting an abortion. Smith played a key role in killing a bill to erase an old New Mexico statute criminalizing abortion. He says that he’s steadfastly “pro-life,” has thought that way for 35 years, and isn’t going to change to satisfy the latest fad. I respect convictions; but we should all keep growing as we age, and changing views when new information warrants that. If he’s saying he doesn’t care to learn and change, that’s sad.

Constituents also care about the environment. There’s a reason that Chevron wants Smith in office, a reason his contributors’ list is so overloaded with oil and gas and big pharma, and a reason the Sierra Club, in its endorsement of Martinez-Parra, said Smith “repeatedly . . . sided with Republicans to  block important environmental legislation.” 

 

Is Mitch McConnell right – that the three things that matter in U.S. politics are money, money, and money? 

                                            - 30-

[The above column appoeared this morning, Sunday, 10 May 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website (sub nom "Funders Big and Small Tell Story of State Senate Race") and KRWG's website ( sub nom "Oil and Gas Interests Are Big Spenders in New Mexico Politics.  A spoken version will air during the week on KRWG and be available on-demand Monday at the station's website. ]

 

[I recommend -- both to fact-check what I've said above and for general reference in future -- searching on-line candidates and PACs' contributions and expenditures.  You can also check by "Contributor" -- and, for example, if Joe Mule gave someone $2,000, you might want to see whom else Mr. Mule has supported over time.  One way you can search, for elections in New Mexico, is through the New Mexico Secretary of State's office.  The page where you do so is https://www.cfis.state.nm.us/media/ -- but I'm not sure this link will take you there directly.
If it doesn't, here's how to get there -- which can be a little unclear if you haven't done it before:

Go to the New Mexico Secretary of State's website:  https://www.sos.state.nm.us/

You'll see: 

Click on "MENU" in the upper left of the screen.
On the Menu Page, click on "GO" under "Candidates and Campaigns" -- which should be the second choice in the upper row.
On the Candidates and Campaigns" page, you'll find four black boxes: scroll down if you need to so that you see the one on the lower right, "Public Information."
That'll bring up a page headed "Search Public Information."  On the left, there's a list of choices, of which you'll usually want the second,  "Candidate & Political Committee Contributions & Expenditures." 

That takes you to this screen, where you'll want to click on "Public Reports," which will bring up  a screen on which you can search by candidate, election, PAC, contributor, etc. 

[I do NOT want to make it sound as if Smith is a bad guy or a Steve Pearce type.  I noticed under "Expenditures" he contributed $1,000 to Xochitl Torres-Small.  He is a conservative Democrat.  On many issues, we'd likely agree.  Where we wouldn't, we'd likely find each others' vies "in the ballpark."  However, the situation is what it is.  Particularly with climate change among us, we need new and agile thinking -- and a real appreciation of the depth of the danger and its imminence.  I fear that having ones bills paid by oil and gas and other large national and international corporations has an unhealthy affect on one's thinking and voting.  ]

[Regarding Smith's role in killing the bill this year that would have erased an old New Mexico statute criminalizing abortion. I believe that if the Supreme Court eliminates the U.S. Constitutional right to privacy (Roe v. Wade), New Mexicans should be free to make a reasoned decision in 2021 or 2025  regarding regulating or restricting abortion – not have girls and doctors suddenly facing jail today for something that was legal yesterday.

Smith says he's steadfastly “pro life.” I loathe that phrase, because I'm incredibly pro-life. I enjoy my life, plant and nurture vegetables, strongly advocate conservation and healthier environment for human and other life, and favor trying the best we can to help kids grow up toward healthy/happy lives.  My love of life includes not wanting to sentence girls who get raped or have careless sex, or women who simply have too many kids already to raise properly, to jail -- or to what could be death from botched back-street abortions. I take Smith at his word that he's pro-life.  So am I; but I do kind of resent the implication, by calling a movement against abortion "pro-life," that the rest of us are maybe "pro-death" or something.  If I get a chance some time, I'll see if he can explain that one to me. I''d also ask him about his explanation on this vote that morals had decayed during his lifetime.  I think morals have changed, in some ways that are good and healthy and some that probably aren't.  But a lot of it is recognizing and accommodating our human differences.  For example, people slept around, including acts of adultery, in prior ages, too, but just kept it quieter.  Should we go back to stoning adulteresses?  People were gay or bisexual -- but forced to be closeted.  Articulating and ceasing to punish folks with different sexual needs and desires seems like progress to me. (I celebrate our differences, our human variety, so long as it's between -- or among -- consenting adults.) Articulating, better understanding, and dealing appropriately with pederasty and incest seems like progress too.  Those problems started last year, or in the 1960's, and recognizing them seems a positive step.]

Two Easy Voting Choices

Two 2020 local primaries shouldn’t be close.

I had hoped the County Commission would appoint Lindsey Bachmann County Clerk when Scott Krahling left. The Commission appointed Ms. Askin. I’ve found her professional, careful, responsive, and thoughtful, and she appears to be an effective leader. She ran the 2019 election well, despite limited preparation time and resources. Some Yvette Harrell supporters place her just this side of Satan in their cosmos; but they provide no evidence.

Challenger Andrew Ostic is a disgruntled former employee seeking revenge. He was terminated in December 2019, after 18 years with the County Clerk’s Office. He appealed, and his termination was upheld. He apparently has not filed a lawsuit challenging it. 

 

When we talked, Ostic alleged Askin violated county policies and procedures and state ethics laws; but he refused to provide details, or even identify rules he thought broken, repeating, "it's a personnel matter." Personnel rules would keep Askin from commenting on his shortcomings or termination; but he can speak freely. He apparently had some beef with his supervisor, and perhaps her supervisor; I’m guessing he had little contact with Askin; but Askin is the one he can attack. I hate to say it, but accusing her of unspecified legal wrongs and refusing to say anything more lies somewhere between idiocy and character assassination. It hardly suggests competence. 

 

County Treasurer Eric Rodriguez won election to the post four years ago. I didn’t support him in the primary or general election. He had worked under David Gutierrez. Gutierrez’s sexual misconduct was flat wrong, and embarrassed us all. Gutierrez was helping Rodriguez get elected. I wanted Rodriguez to promise publicly that he absolutely would not hire Gutierrez as deputy. Rodriguez assured me that he wouldn’t hire Gutierrez, and I believed him; but without an unambiguous public statement, I couldn’t support him.

We’re four years down the road. Rodriguez didn’t hire Gutierrez. He seems to have handled the job professionally and prudently, though we sometimes disagree. A year ago Easter Weekend, on Saturday night, while visiting the many asylum-seekers housed at LCHS, I saw Rodriguez behind a table handing out water bottles. I thought it a good sign. 

 

Rodriguez’s primary opponent is Gina Montoya Ortega. In 2015, Ortega ran for mayor, finishing 3^rd in a 3-way race. In last year’s mayoral race, she finished fifth. She ran Fiesta Bakery for many years. 

 

Ortega says we should elect her because Rodriguez got his start under Gutierrez, who was a disgrace to party and county. She told us she wanted to make the Treasurer’s Office more transparent. Rodriguez pointed out that he’d done just that; and that since many citizens don’t read county financial reports on the website, he added a helpful newsletter. Ortega accused Rodriguez of starting the newsletter as a political ploy, in response to her challenge. I asked when he’d started it. Three years ago. She also cited something she’d read by an Albuquerque county treasurer saying clean audits were important. Rodriguez noted that the County has had clean audits. Ortega seems to lack financial qualifications; and she landed no blows on Rodriguez.

In each case we have someone in office who seems competent and honest. Neither was my first choice for the position; but they’ve both impressed me. Their challengers’ efforts to attack them not only have failed but have tended to embarrass the attackers. Voting for these two incumbents should be easy choice.

                                                  – 30 --

[The above column appeared this morning, Sunday, 3 April 2020, in the Las Cruces Sun-News, as well as on the newspaper's website and KRWG's website.  A radio commentary version will air during the week both on KRWG and on KTAL (101.5 FM -- Las Cruces Community Radio), and will be available on demand on KRWG's site.]

[Nothing against the challengers in these races.  But when folks in office seem to be doing a relatively good job, and challengers can't muster serious allegations to the contrary or show superior credentials, why are they running?]

[PLEASE DO contact the County Clerk's Office and request an absentee ballot, so that if you choose to vote by mail (or drop your ballot off at a designated location), you'll be able to do so.
Call 647-7428.  You can also register to vote -- or, if you've moved, change your registration address, on-line https://www.donaanacounty.org/elections.]

[After this column appeared in the paper this morning, someone I know and respect added personal observations of Mr. Ostic's poll-worker training sessions: "From my limited perspective, it was a wise decision to remove Andrew Ostic from his position at the County Clerk’s office. . . . It’s my understanding that he had been in charge of training [poll-workers] for many years.  While some poll workers are quite good, some are not and his training sessions could be a significant reason why.  He was rigid, relatively disorganized, and uncreative . . . lacked good interpersonal skills, lacked imagination, and seemed mainly focused on certain procedural steps.  . . .  It was also clear that Andrew took a dim view of poll challengers." ]