Why they went after Kevin Shelley and what it means for CA elections

[Amaryllis]

NEWSLETTER #75
November 2, 2005

www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr75.html
(author gives permission to reprint as long as no changes are made and credit is given.)

By a quick show of hands, how many of you know who Kevin Shelley is?

Nobody?! I guess I’m not too surprised. If you remember him at all, it’s probably only for the fact that he was rather quietly run out of office earlier this year with sordid allegations of scandal and corruption. The Los Angeles Times delivered the news on February 5, before quickly moving on to other things: “Secretary of State Kevin Shelley announced his resignation Friday, saying he could no longer adequately run California's elections office ... For months, he had been dogged by federal and state criminal inquiries and scathing audits of his financial management and treatment of employees.” (Tim Reiterman "Secretary of State Shelley Steps Down," Los Angeles Times, February 5, 2005)

No big deal, right? Just another corrupt politician getting what he had coming. No one is going to shed any tears over that. And so it was that no one came to his defense and no one lamented his political passing. No one in Sacramento, no one in the mainstream media, and no one in the alternative/progressive media. No one on the right and no one on the left. Shelley was cast aside without a hint of protest from anyone.

And that, my friends, is simply shameful. As it turns out, you see, Shelley wasn’t the bad guy in this story. The first tip-off, of course, is the fact that, as I may have just mentioned, no one came to his defense and no one lamented his political passing. Because if the entire corrupt media establishment and the entire corrupt political establishment are united against you, then it is a pretty safe bet that it isn’t because you yourself are corrupt.

It is hard to imagine that any level of corruption would cause either the media or the political elite in Washington or Sacramento to turn against one of their own. No, the reality is that when all of official Sacramento and every avenue of the media decide to bring down a formerly well-regarded politician, they haven’t all suddenly decided that it might be a good time to weed out corruption. To the contrary, they have likely decided to weed out those who might pose a challenge to the web of corruption that poses as a form of democratic government.

And how thorough, you may wonder, was Shelley’s abandonment by the political establishment as he suffered through withering right-wing attacks? As the L.A. Times noted, “disclosure reports filed with the state showed a single contribution to his 3-month-old legal defense fund -- $250 from Tony Miller, Shelley's special counsel. Shelley put $100,000 of his own into the fund by borrowing against the mortgage of the San Francisco home where he grew up and lives with his wife and two young children." (Nancy Vogel "Allegations Lead to Rising Star's Fall," Los Angeles Times, February 5, 2005)

Strange that a man mired in political scandal would have but a single personal asset – his relatively modest family home – to draw upon. You would think that such a man would have amassed quite a personal fortune during his fourteen years as an elected official. But I guess not.

For the rest: www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr75.html

(Of course, a lot of us on DU were fully aware of what was going on, and doing what we could to stop the runaway train.)

[xchrom]

1. thank you.

i am to my embarrassment unaware of shelley -- or his plight.

[glitch]

2. Everyone should read this - this is how they work.

They were successful with Shelley, they will do it again and again until we stop them.

This sums it up:
"To the contrary, they have likely decided to weed out those who might pose a challenge to the web of corruption that poses as a form of democratic government."

I hope Shelley isn't too disgusted and decides to stay out of politics. We need people like him in government. I wish I could've contributed to his legal effort.

[Stevepol]

3. I think this shoulld be recommended for greatest and kicked. n/t

[Amaryllis]

4. Too late to recommend for greatest here, but you could do that on GD

politics; I just posted there
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2229726

[EFerrari]

5. Yes -- let's get it rec'd in GD and keep it kicked.

Thanks, Amaryllis.

Reading that old thread just hurts! :(

[Amaryllis]

6. I know...he was a hero, and they took him down. We tried out best...

e

[BamaBecky]

7. I read Dave's article about this! This is awful!

[mirandapriestly]

8. I remember this. Good point about where he would be hiding all of his

Became. This story and others like it make me realize that that they WILL steal again and the more they do it the more systematic it will become. One of the real reasons they brought him down:
"It was Shelley, you see, who “became a national advocate for requiring that electronic voting machines provide a paper record so balloting can be audited.” "

It's hard to keep optimistic with stories like this.