By Doug Porter
It was quite the day yesterday.
Three, count ‘em, three press conferences about [insert your favorite ‘-gate’ adjective about Bob Fiber’s alleged behavior here]. I’ll review them in chronological order, which also mirror (I think) the impact each will have on San Diego in long run. And we’ll take a look at the virtual vigilantes running amok on the interwebs.
Council members Todd Gloria and Kevin Faulconer held a noon presser, as former Assemblywoman Lori Saldaña put it on Twitter, “complaining the scandal takes time away from doing city work by taking time away from city work to complain about scandal.”
(See Andy Cohen’s coverage here)
What struck me about this bi-partisan whinefest wasn’t in the accompanying press release, which promised that the Earth would continue to orbit the sun, despite the presence of the monster living on the 11th floor of city hall.
The inferences that made this press conference important came in the choice of city policies they talked about “reviewing”. I wasn’t the only one who read between the lines when they were talking about Balboa Park. Or complaining about Filner’s decision to dump the city’s lobbyists and their Sanderesque agenda, which included pushing for a nice big new shiny Manchester developed building to house the Navy’s offices.
It certainly seemed like Todd Gloria was dropping the big hint towards Irwin Jacobs that the mayoral crisis presents an opportunity to reinstate the grand scheme to build a paid parking facility and bypass in Balboa Park.
After all, the few hundred thousand the city authorized to be spent on Mayor Filner’s Plaza de Panama program couldn’t hold a candle to the $45 million proposed in Irwin’s discarded idea.
In short, what we were hearing here was that, once the Monster Mayor was deposed all his hated policies could be undone by a get-it-done City Council.
To their credit, Gloria and Faulconer did NOT go so far as to promise to airbrush Bob Filner from all city photographs. But it was close.
The Big Time Announcement
I know, I know. Most ‘responsible’ media led with the news that former mayoral Communications Director Irene McCormack appeared with high profile lawyer Gloria Allred to announce a lawsuit.
The press conference was gut-wrenching to watch. The Mayor now formally stands accused of a lot of disgusting behavior.
Ms. McCormack is a brave woman to step forward and share all those horrible things she says happened to her. I have seen no reason to question her veracity, even after viewing the comments made by conspiracy theorists at the SD Reader and other places. Let the lawsuit proceed. I hope she wins. (Really!)
And this doesn’t help with my opinion of Mayor Filner as a person, which wasn’t that high to start with. Ugh.
Here’s a copy of the lawsuit, which my trusted legal-beagle-poker-buddy says does not rise to the level of something that should force someone to resign from this type of office. I don’t know. Lawsuits come and go all the time. I say let it play out in court.
Here’s Rachel Maddow’s coverage, which is about as harsh as it gets:
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Pretty disgusting, huh?
The City Attorney Speaks
By the time City Attorney Jan Goldsmith got around to holding his press conference, the media focus was still on endless replays of the dramatic statements made by Allred and McCormack. (after all, how do you top that press conference?). And the royal baby.
Goldsmith announced that the Mayor’s office has agreed to conditions that prohibit him from meeting with women alone at city facilities.
The City Attorney’s office will stand in for the City, with the Mayor being represented by private attorney Harvey Berger as the lawsuit moves forward. Goldsmith addressed the questions arising about the process for removing a mayor for misconduct, saying the city charter should be revisited, since Filner can only be removed from office through recall.
When Did I Stop Beating My Wife?
The pressure for all opionistas/public persons to join the call for Mayor Filner’s resignation is continual and unrelenting. But can you equate this pressure (figuratively) to an old fashioned lynch mob?
Upon reflection I’ve come to the conclusion that ‘vigilante’ is a better term.
It’s more in keeping with San Diego’s long history of tar and feathering/ running people out of town on a rail/or dumping them in the desert to waste away. In more recent history we’ve had threats and actions taken against college professors Herbert Marcuse and Peter Bohmer, the actions of pro and anti animal rights groups, and the rebirth of the Minutemen as a an anti-immigrant group.
Today’s vigilantes live in the world of social media. It’s not a problem unique to the debate about Mayor Filner or San Diego.
Here in San Diego the position has emerged that, if you’re not willing to call for Mayor Bob’s resignation, you’re fair game. Thus one line gets lifted out of context from an analysis posted at the Site That Can NOT Be Named (that’s us) yesterday (before the press conference) and gets broadcast via the Voice of San Diego Morning Report implying that Jim Miller is somehow the enemy of women and friend of groping politicians.
I asked Jim Miller for a comeback. He wasn’t too thrilled about the idea, saying
The sophomoric twitter ad hominem attacks speak for themselves. Remember these folks are bastions of journalistic integrity and objectivity, right?”
Jim Miller ultimately did respond:
“Either Dotinga didn’t read or understand the full piece and the way I tried to situate this scandal in the history of the ideology about women and feminism or he purposely sought to mischaracterize my argument and hopes that readers would not follow the link. Here is the full quote:
“To say that you are doing this to protect the victims is a kind of faux feminism that sounds a lot more like the patronizing patriarchal ideology of the cult of true womanhood in the 19th century than a genuine call for justice. I believe that you think you are on the side of the angels but justice requires that the women stand up for themselves.
“Women and their allies fought hard to establish the laws that make sexual harassment a crime. To claim that women are too frail to stand up for themselves in 2013 betrays an unconscious condescension and paternalism however noble your motives. Yes, it will be hard and some people will be uncharitable, but others will stand with them and insist they get a fair hearing and due process.
“It’s time to stop holding press conferences and make the case with fewer dramatics and more professionalism and dignity. The women deserve due process and Filner deserves due process. This is the only way justice rather than political gamesmanship will be served.”
In contrast to the first two press conferences which I think did it the wrong way, in the press conference yesterday McCormack and Allred had fewer dramatics and more professionalism and dignity. I think McCormack deserves to be taken seriously and respected as my piece notes. By standing up, she delivered a political death blow to Filner. Taking me to task for calling on her to do precisely what she showed herself capable of doing betrays the same paternalistic attitude towards women that I discuss in the piece. She could and DID stand up.
The larger gender issue I tried to address here is where we are now in terms of women standing up for themselves and being respected for doing so. Apparently my insistence that women CAN (one just did) and should stand up for themselves in confronting their harassers is beyond Randy Dotinga’s grasp.
It’s Getting Stupider
On the other hand if you ARE calling for the mayor to quit, you’re also fair game. Hizzoner’s defenders are out of hand. So much I won’t even offer up a link. I’ve seen the posts attacking Irene McCormack and Gloria Allred. Those people need to take their meds…or meditate…or something.
Individuals in both groups seem to lack the mental acumen to understand nuance. In their world it’s “For or Against”. That’s all there is…An inability to discern between the causes and implications also seems to be a shared trait.
The mayor’s alleged actions caused this crisis in San Diego, not some rightwing/secret/racist downtown cabal. But his removal has consequences that need to be considered. There are NOT just two sides here. I refuse to be placed in either of those boxes.
It’s those consequences that I (we) keep talking about. I won’t be cajoled into joining the Filner should resign crowd. I know ultimately he’s finished as an elected official, a fate he’s earned in a big time and disgusting way. But I see no benefit from standing on the virtual street corners of the city demanding that he quit.
The world won’t end if the mayor goes through the legal processes that got underway yesterday. All the puffery about negative effects for the city should he stay in office is just that, puffery.
On This Day: 1904 – The ice cream cone was invented by Charles E. Menches during the Louisiana Purchase Exposition in St. Louis. 1962 – The “Telstar” communications satellite sent the first live TV broadcast to Europe. 1977 – Foreigner’s “Cold As Ice” was released.
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to DougPorter@
Check us out on Facebook and Twitter. AND ! You can now follow SDFP on Instagram.
Laura E. says
This doesn’t pertain directly to the Filner articles, but did anyone see Kevin Acee’s column in the U-T (read it online) about why Beth Burns was fired and his defense of his behavior? It’s not an exact parallel, but I kept substituting “Filner” for “Burns” and the similarities struck me. Except that the U-T wouldn’t write the same article for Filner.
Having an actual accusation is definitely troubling. I just wish Allred weren’t involved–fairly or not, I have always thought less of women who use her as their lawyer because she’s so in love with the spotlight.
Andy Cohen says
“I just wish Allred weren’t involved–fairly or not, I have always thought less of women who use her as their lawyer because she’s so in love with the spotlight.”
I might feel similarly if McCormack hadn’t taken to the microphone and spoken for herself. The fact that she did is pretty powerful stuff, and speaks to the voracity of the accusations.
Laura E. says
True. But isn’t there any other lawyer out there besides Allred?
Andy Cohen says
Well, if you’re going to hire a lawyer, she’s a pretty good one to get. She’s also very selective about the cases she takes.
michael-leonard says
So, her accusations are voracious, eh (joke ;-)
Bruce Fett says
I put on my Gonzo thinking cap and here’s what’s up:
Bob Filner is an “Off Their Rocker” prankster. Betty White will be outing herself soon at a press conference near you.
Or maybe not. But it’s really the only explanation that makes any sense, isn’t it?
Catherine says
I think it’s fairly obvious there’s a lot of folks jumping on the bandwagon because, politically, that’s what they feel they need to do. I would hope they wouldn’t exploit such an ugly situation for their own agendas, but I’m not naive enough to believe that they wouldn’t. I understand the concerns about the process here and, for what it’s worth, I thought Jim Miller’s piece was thoughtful and the twiticism of his comments less so. But I don’t see how the mayor can effectively manage the city in this situation and that would be true whether the process began with a formal complaint or a series of disturbing press conferences. The solution thus far is to prohibit women from meeting with him privately. Is this really okay with people?
He has been accused of sexually harassing his staff and his own words in self-defense have not helped his case . Who, when accused of confining staff in headlocks and making lewd, unwanted sexual advances to staff, and continuing them once rejected (though not okay to do it in the first place), would reply, “I don’t believe these claims are valid” ?? What is there to believe? He was there. Either it’s true or it is false.
Given this statement and his prior statements on the accusations, I can only conclude that he has done exactly what he is accused of having done and, somehow out of ego and/or a stunning lack of self-awareness, has deluded himself into thinking that this behavior is somehow acceptable or defensible. I’ve been appalled by how many people in 2013 are willing to dismiss Filner’s alleged behavior to “who hasn’t made mistakes” and “give him a chance to improve.”
Andy Cohen says
His own defense is that he doesn’t believe that his actions, inappropriate and reprehensible as they may be, rise to the level of sexual harassment.
Laura E. says
He probably thinks that because he’s been in an environment in the U.S. Congress where that kind of behavior was probably the norm for a long time, especially when women were even more of a minority. It’s interesting that the stories we’ve heard (McCormack, the 72-year-old woman from last week) have involved older women. I think age plays a huge role in this–what he thinks is OK might have been brushed aside 30 or 40 years ago, or accepted by women because they had no other choice. I am now very curious about what kind of sexual harassment training they get in Congress.
Catherine says
I agree that’s his defense, but it’s kind of astonishing. I can only guess that he’s clinging to his power and self-delusion at this point. His actions, as they have been alleged and which he hasn’t actually denied, do constitute sexual harassment. I find the that’s-how-they-did-it-in-old-days defense pretty weak too. He’s 70? or thereabouts. He’s young enough to know better. Inexcusable.
Jim Bliesner says
All of this circus makes one point clear. The strong mayor form of government is cracking and showing why it needs to be the subject of recall. The Mayor is supposed to be a politician and not a City manager. It is bad organizational design to completely change management staff of a gigantic corporation (the City) every four years. It leads to weak government and mistakes and is easily subject to “vigilante” public process.It easily lends it self for sensationalism disguised as ethical or responsive government. It would just be wonderful one day to wake up and find all the finger wagging pointed at feeding the poor or housing the homeless or cleaning the streets, or greening the parks, or staffing the library or on and on. And if we are to assume that the shop is covered by Mssrs Gloria and Faulkner then that is an other mistake because the “strong mayor” form of government gives them zero authority to say they are in charge.
Anna Daniels says
“It would just be wonderful one day to wake up and find all the finger wagging pointed at feeding the poor or housing the homeless or cleaning the streets, or greening the parks, or staffing the library or on and on.” Jim, that says it all.
Cynthia says
Anna, I agree.
michael-leonard says
“Here’s Rachel Maddow’s coverage, which is about as harsh as it gets”.
But it was also fair and balanced reportage.
Frances O'Neill Zimmerman says
Not when your source of information is U-T watchdog Trent Siebert who just got hired by Doug Manchester and used to be funded at his now-folded Texas newspaper by the right-wing Koch Brothers.
michael-leonard says
Even a right-wing shill can occasionally be a source of accurate information. Anyway, this second report of Maddow’s did not include Seibert.
rak says
Fair, possibly, but balanced? Balancing is a delicate act, and I think in this case what’s missing is the context for the entire affair: an attack on the city’s first Democratic mayor in a long time becoming an opportunity to return the city to the Same Old Same Old (i.e. control by a small group of essentially corporate “special interests” that pay only lip service to the needs of the vast majority of the city’s residents). As sleazy as the alleged behavior is, is the demand for immediate resignation the response that best benefits the citizenry? Such an action has consequences that go far beyond resolving issues of harassment in the workplace. When we’re already seeing media circus acts such as the recent “Hans und Franz” show by Faulconer & Gloria promising to revisit some of the mayor’s recent achievements, I get a sinking feeling in my gut about the prospects for genuine concern on the part of city officials for the needs of the citizenry at large.
Cynthia says
Well yes, rlk, one would hope that opinions on the veracity of the statements by any of the parties should await trial. Gossip and inference from few data are just part of human nature, I fear.
Context is relevant in political and historical analysis, but is it so important in a trial? I should think not. I don’t really know. Then, we are not the jurors and do not have the responsibility of actually deciding the facts. We can just use a few facts and a lot of claims and string them together to fit any of our contextual templates.
Cynthia says
Sorry, I meant rak, not rlk.
rak says
Hi Cynthia,
My comment on balance was intended to be in regard to the media coverage (which I think would qualify as a form of political and historical analysis), rather than an attempt to weigh in on the merits of the case or decide facts, but I can see where it may have been vague. My concern is that I suspect viewers unfamiliar with San Diego are not even aware that locally there’s a controversy regarding the issue of resignation, nor the reasons why there might be such a controversy. So I’m not lamenting that anything presented was untrue, just that “there’s more to the story”, so to speak, that hasn’t been presented — that “should he stay or should he go” is more than just a question of “guilty or not guilty”. And sometimes the issue of omission can be just as significant as the issue of veracity.
Cynthia says
Hi rak
Thanks for your clarification. In that case, I agree:). In regard to out of town information, one relative of mine sent me a link to a seriously and surprisingly uninformed NYT article last week, but yesterday a friend gave me the July 20 LA Times, whose article was chock-full of pertinent information like procedural rules, conducting their own interviews with persons I had not heard of, and discussing precedent. Like a real news story. Refreshing:)
rak says
No worry. Guess it makes sense that an outfit closer to home (LA Times) would be more sensitive to the big picture. Thanks for the tip on the July 20 article. I may need to track down a print copy of that back issue, though. Couldn’t find anything from that date in the online version of the LA Times. There were a number of articles by Tony Perry around that time which did discuss the issue a bit more in depth than a lot of other coverage, but I didn’t see one that discussed precedent (and indeed, there have been other scandals!) or procedural rules. Do recall whether it was one of Perry’s pieces or have a name that I can search? Thanks!
Wren Osborn says
This statement in Doug Porter’s article, “I know ultimately he’s finished as an elected official, a fate he’s earned in a big time and disgusting way” disturbs me. Sounds like a pronouncement of guilt before a legal judgment has been made. This is not the first such statement in a sensible, reasonable, recent article that has disturbed me.
Doug Porter says
Filner’s guilt or innocence in a legal sense is, of course, up to a jury. That’s MY take on his political career. I was wrong once, I think.
Frances O'Neill Zimmerman says
Filner’s also done a lot of things that are NOT big-time offensive and disgusting and I am choosing the good over the bad, the hopeful over the hopeless, the possibility of change over the certainty of doomed repetition. His enemies will do the job of shredding and discrediting: they need no assistance. Political idols often have clay feet.
John Lawrence says
If Filner put women in a headlock and dragged them down the hall, they would have some serious neck injuries, n’est-pas? I find Filner’s request that women not wear underwear to work more hilarious than sinister. Is it possible he was joking or that they were taking him too seriously? And sticking his tongue down a woman’s throat is not actually considered a form of rape, I don’t think, or is it?
Catherine says
I’m torn between thinking you’re just a big joker or that you may actually be serious. In case it’s the latter and yours is a serious question, yes, forcing your tongue down someone’s throat without consent is assault under the law. And making sexual jokes of any kind with your coworkers or staff is no longer considered acceptable, not even remotely, in the workplace in 2013. Actually, it hasn’t been acceptable for many years. It’s called sexual harassment and, particularly when perpetrated by people in charge, it creates an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. I’m just flabbergasted that people think we ought to tolerate this behavior because the mayor found a way to get the cars out of the Plaza without spending a lot of money. If Filner were a city employee accused of doing these things, he would have been put on administrative leave already while the investigation was completed because it’s a liability to put people in the path of someone accused of this kind of abuse. Instead, we now have a mayor who women can’t meet privately without a chaperone because he can’t be trusted not to paw at them. Yes, it will be so much better for the citizenry to let him finish his term. He’s just so great at being in charge.
Andy Cohen says
I’m entirely certain he was joking, but it was a crude and completely inappropriate joke. By now he should know better. But that’s just his personality–although it’s no excuse.
bob dorn says
Enough tweeting; the snarky little boys at VoSD live off it.
I don’t know how to say it, but I know I’ve read one or two too many I’man-
outragedfeminist but Ibelieveindueprocess thought pieces.
I think the LA Times’ Tony Perry had it right, and people are just sort of
shrugging their shoulders and regarding this as a pissing contest among
writers in a town without serious journalism.
Let the politicians compete for air time ‘cuz most look foolish so far, and
that state or condition is going to take them down along with Filner. Their
outrage is manufactured, their acting unconvincing.
Even the SD-UT’s letters letters to (editors?) online are wonderfully skeptical
of both sides.
It’s time for good jokes, like the Hans and Franz act El Falcon and Todd the
Inglorious put together.
Susan says
I take Zimmerman’s point. The lily pond was in full and glorious bloom this morning. The Plaza de Panama was so open and uncluttered that the fountain looked as though it had just landed from somewhere else! The vista is now filled with people milling around, children playing and cycling with each other – the reclaimed space without any tables or chairs or landscaping is stunning – and it didn’t cost $45M. It’s a low cost experiment that already transforms the space. McCormack’s claims are very sad but before the lynching is complete let’s have the conversation in court. I, too, remain hopeful better times ahead for all.
Cynthia says
Susan, the plaza is just wonderful, isn’t? Such a quick and inexpensive solution. I’m must say, I was impressed and surprised.
Let us hope that paid parking within the park is never revisited, no matter who is on the Council or in the Mayor’s office. Long live Balboa Park!
Tom Hunter says
Filner, among other things, is a savvy politician. What I’m wondering is how long can he hang on to the mayor’s office. Law suits of this nature rarely come in under two or three years?
Lorraine says
Todd Gloria was interviewed by Chris Hayes last night on “All in with Chris Hayes”:
Coincidentally, former US Congressman and NYC mayoral candidate, Anthony Wiener, revealed a different type of sex-related issue. And he resigned from Congress when his behavior became public. What are these Congressmen eating/drinking/smoking in Washington???