Sex, lies, and videotape

Readers take note:  Sex, lies, and videotape is a 3-part commentary.  If you’re short on time, consider reading PART I today and PART II and III tomorrow. 

PART I

Lies and Videotape 

Does anyone out there remember the doomsday cult called Heaven’s Gate -- UFO-believers led by Marshall Applewhite and Bonnie Nettles, aka “The Two,” aka “Te and Do,” aka “Bo and Peep”?  Heaven's Gate cult members were ascetic “vehicles” on a journey to the “next level.”  Their shared delusions and willing submission to authoritarian leaders came to a shocking end in a tragic group suicide.  This happened in 1996.  Only videotapes remain, documenting their stay in and departure from San Diego. 

Yes, truth can be stranger than fiction.  But if you think it can’t get even stranger, consider this: we’ve got another Hale Bopp scenario on our hands.  This time it involves billionaire corporate investors with an anointed “vehicle” who happens to be running for mayor of San Diego.  This could be the plot for a 3rd rate horror film but I'm afraid it's real.  Here's what's going on: 

A group of of multi-million/billionaires -- well-known for their anti-tax, anti-government, anti-labor, anti-regulation, anti-pension, anti-public, anti-environmental, pro-privatization proclivities -- have targeted the city of San Diego for political takeover.  Their goal is not greater efficiency or raising the standard of living.  Their goal is to transfer the control, ownership, and wealth embedded in the city's valuable public assets straight into private corporate hands.  Their goal is a new world order.  Their goal is to use San Diego as a launching pad. 

This radical group includes familiar names in the national news -- Grover Norquist, the Koch brothers, Newt Gringrich, Virginia Thomas (wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas), Karl Rove, Dick Armey, the Heritage Foundation, Reason Foundation, CATO Institute, and Americans for Prosperity.  Bringing up the rear is our very own Doug Manchester. 

Their shared philosophy is part anarchist, part Machiavellian, part domino-theory, and weirdly-Maoist: conquer the countryside (San Diego) and watch cities across the nations tumble.  To echo Carl DeMaio, “If we can show ‘reform’ in San Diego, it becomes a model nationwide." 

That, in a nutshell, is what’s at stake in the Carl DeMaio / Bob Filner race for mayor. 

Sex and Videotape

San Diego leaders are a conservative but non-radical group of entrepreneurs (I’m referring to the tightly-held inbred consortium of bankers, real-estate developers, hoteliers, law firms, lobbyists, and other political intimates who have historically ruled the city’s roost).  They’re sophisticated when it comes to running home town politics, but when it comes to the tantalizing, reckless, greed-fulfilling bag of tricks offered by big-time billionaire investors, they’re goners.  

Even the bunch of up-and-coming San Diegans who swear they’ve seen the light and moved to the middle (the next level?) swoon when they get a glimpse of billionaire fantasy videos with titles like: Private control over public property. New ways to screw city employees.  Corporate dominance.  Voter submission.  Retooled performance standards.  Hands in the public pocket.  Pay to play… 

 Lies

About ten years ago Carl DeMaio was sent to San Diego to implement a right-wing takeover.  A stand-in for Bo, he was programmed early in his career to believe that government is the enemy and should be shrunk small enough to “drown it in a bathtub.”  Under the guise of cleaning up city government he went to work dismantling San Diego employees’ labor unions and privatizing city government services.  He called his plan Roadmap to Recovery.

Carl DeMaio is relentless and talented at capturing public attention.  His ambitions and abilities must have looked like promising qualities to his Washington D.C. and radical right-wing mentors.  Even his personality quirks (robotic demeanor, evasive responses, dexterity at conflating truth and fiction, bullying threats to people who cross him, volatile temper) may once have been considered ammunition to speed along his takeover assignment.  Financial backing from superPAC funders, on top of his considerable personal wealth (by the age of thirty DeMaio could boast, "Don't people know I'm a man of means now? I drive a BMW!") have been greasing the skids in his run for mayor of the nation’s 8th biggest city.

But the fickle finger of fate, aka mischievous cupid, pointed its arrow in the direction of Carl DeMaio.  And here’s where the story takes a sharp downward turn.  Here’s where the sex, lies, and videotape get personal.

 PART II

 Sex, Lies, and Videotape 

For the past few years the man who would be San Diego’s highest elected official has been leading a bifurcated life.  

In public, Carl DeMaio remains a populist avatar of fiscal rectitude and righteous tea-party values.   In private, DeMaio is now the live-in mate of the publisher of San Diego Gay and Lesbian News and SD Pix magazine.  This partner is a controversial and successful videographer and photo cataloguer of social and party events in the gay community, a go-to man. 

This is not a casual relationship.  Carl DeMaio and his partner have shared ‘promise rings.’  They share DeMaio’s home in Rancho Bernardo.

It’s fair to ask whether the domestic details, background, and activities of a candidate and his/her live-in mate should be revealed to voters.  If they are public figures the answer is clearly Yes.  History tells us that domestic partners of politicians often have significant influence over their mates’ decisions and careers.  Consider Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver.  Mindy and Nathan Fletcher.  George W and Laura Bush.  The Clintons.  Ike and Mamie Eisenhower.  Nancy Reagan and Ronald.  Standards apply to gay and straight couples alike, in national, state, or local office.

In a Facebook photo, DeMaio’s partner is shown lounging in a city council office while the council member is upstairs at a council meeting.  The LGBT Weekly asks an important question: “In addition to what role Johnathan Hale would play as San Diego’s first “first gentleman” to a gay mayor, is the question of how sound are Councilman DeMaio’s powers of judgment?"  The article points out that the "photo...depicts Hale seated at a table in the councilman’s conference room. On the table is a folder labeled ‘confidential.’ It’s impossible to know what the envelope contains. But it is possible to ask how appropriate it is for a husband, wife, boyfriend or girlfriend of an elected official to have easy access to sensitive information in the official’s office.”

A May 24th article in the LGBT Weekly discloses other equivocal information about the checkered past of DeMaio’s live-in partner: “As LGBT Weekly has confirmed, it is a story that includes alleged violence, admitted theft, burglary, as well as multiple name changes and restraining orders against Hale (filed against him by former “roommates” for domestic violence).”

If his troubled past were cleanly behind him, that might be the end of it.  But current public accounts tell a different story of  DeMaio’s partner, who has been called out by Nicole Murray-Ramirez, a well-known leader in the gay community, as a “pit bull of negativity, ugliness and pettiness…a snake.” 

PART III

6 Lessons of Heaven’s Gate 

• Becoming a follower of Carl DeMaio is akin to political suicide.  It is not an acceptable option.  Billionaire puppeteers on the national scene groomed  DeMaio to be their "vehicle," their instrument for a right-wing takeover of San Diego.  The Koch brothers are alter egos of Te and Do...Bo and Peep...The Two.... As they say in my birthplace, fuggedaboudit.
• There are big-business/ downtown San Diego interests who believe they can keep Carl DeMaio in check... reined in... serving their interests... doing their bidding.  It’s a delusional fantasy.  He’s got richer, more powerful masters to please.
• There are sincere and good people in San Diego who cry out for meaningful pension reform and mistakenly believe that Carl DeMaio can take them to the “next level.”  His message is untrue.  His true agenda is not reforming but dismantling public institutions of government.  It's a new-age form of anarchy.
• There are voters throughout our city who understand that city government is in deep financial trouble but have no wish to dismantle San Diego by outsourcing city services and privatizing city resources.  They don’t share the dog-eat-dog mentality promoted by DeMaio and his mentors.
• Judging from unprecedented boos and shouts of “liar” hurled at him at a mayoral debate in Hillcrest earlier this year, as well as from mounting opposition among people who have known and worked alongside Carl DeMaio in the gay community, it’s apparent that DeMaio’s reputation and standing have diminished considerably among people who know him best. How much excess baggage are we willing to tolerate in City Hall? 
• I'll say it again.  Political suicide is not an acceptable option.  This is no ordinary election.  What happens in San Diego in this mayoral election will be either a deathblow to our city or the start of a difficult but exciting era of rebuilding.   Whichever way it goes, it will be the handwriting on the wall for other major cities around the nation.

Forget Heaven’s Gate.  Never mind Hale Bopp.  Real history is in the making with this year’s mayoral election in the city of San Diego.  

Cats, birds, and bridges

I don’t know how the City Council hearing on the Balboa Park/Jacobs bypass bridge, scheduled for Monday afternoon, will end up.

I don’t know how many people will show up to support the Jacobs plan and how many will be there to condemn it.

I don’t know what the final vote will be if, indeed, there is a final vote.

But this I do know.  We’re getting exactly what we should expect to get when private business is brought in to solve a public problem.

Irwin Jacobs has been at the receiving end of criticism, potshots, and denunciation since he stepped in to take care of traffic and parking problems at the Laurel Street entrance to Balboa Park.  But it’s misplaced fury.

It reminds me of the first time the cat deposited a dead bird on my kitchen floor.  The kids yelled at poor pussy, berated her, told her she was bad.  

But I picked up little puss (after I got rid of the feathered remains) and explained to my appalled kids that our cat was just being a cat.  That’s what cats do.  They catch birds.  They’re so proud of themselves when they catch a bird.  Our puss was being true to her nature.  She was a cat.

So it is with businessmen.  The successful ones (and who can question the business acumen of Irwin Jacobs?) are good at solving problems.  They solve problems not your way, not my way.  They do it their way.  Nothing wrong with that.

Do you want to know what’s wrong?  The mayor, or some big kahuna in the mayor’s office, took a public problem and put it in the hands of a private businessman.  The mayor, or whichever kahuna it was, had no right to do that. 

The mayor is a publicly-elected official who has the responsibility and obligation to take care of public issues through well-established public processes.  That’s what the city charter, the municipal code, and state law say.  That’s what regularly-scheduled official public meetings are for.  That’s why we call elected officials public officials...public representatives.  

Private businessmen don’t have to ask the public how to solve their problems.  They should not be asked to solve our (the public's) problems.

Mayor Sanders and whichever underling had the temerity to invent a last-minute legacy project to memorialize the mayor's wasted terms in office are the ones who deserve a hearty round of catcalls and hisses.  

They bear sole responsibility for privatizing what should have been kept in the public realm and resolved through a public process. 

The moral of this story?  Public is public and private is private.  Don’t get them mixed up.  Government belongs in public hands.  Business belongs in private hands.  It works best when we stay true to our natures.

A painless civics lesson

Take a break, friends and fellow voters.  We could all use a brief respite from campaign-season frenzy.  Soon enough San Diego's two heavyweight contenders for mayor will be climbing back into the ring for what’s guaranteed to be a nationally-publicized, brutal battle for the heart and destiny the 8^th largest city in the USA.  Our town.

So sniff the flowers while you can and begin preparing yourself for the Filner-DeMaio race for mayor.  It's no ordinary contest.  The stakes are at an all-time high, not just for San Diego but for cities across the nation.  If this sounds dramatic, you can bet it is.

That's why we ought to use this short time-out to reflect on how our city got to this political point.  To provide some context and fill in some of the blanks about San Diego’s quixotic and freighted mayorship history, here’s a quick and painless civics lesson.

We can start with a few questions: What’s the basic purpose of city government? The answer is simple: to provide services and protection to city residents.  Is there a magic formula, a best way to run a city?  The answer is, No.  What if our goal is to foster livable communities, good jobs, and a healthy quality of life?  Then we should choose politicians who (we hope and pray) place high value on public accountability, openness, and accessibility.  

Now for some history: Step back to 1930, when San Diego reformers focused on a very specific objective: to prevent the bossism and corruption plaguing many eastern and midwestern cities from spreading to our western shores.  Local voters agreed to create a new city charter and adopt a "progressive" city manager form of government for San Diego.

Over the ensuing 75 years the city was run and managed by an appointed, professionally-trained city manager -- think COO (chief operating officer) or CAO (chief administrative officer).   

Here’s how I recently described the job of San Diego city manager: he (it has always been a he) was responsible for organizing, coordinating, and overseeing city affairs.  Also for executing the policies, legislation, regulations, and directives of the mayor and council members.  Also for hiring and firing department directors.  Also for creating and managing the city budget.  Not a job description for amateurs or the faint of heart.

Under our city manager system, elected council members and the mayor were city legislators, sitting side by side at regularly-scheduled public meetings to establish city policies and laws.  Yet despite the numerous benefits of a well-run city under a competent city manager, the lure of a “strong mayor” system proved to be an irresistible siren call to San Diego's elected officials.  

Back in the old days, Mayor Frank Curran (who perspicaciously commented on a proposal to bring the 1972 Republican Party national convention to San Diego, “We need this like a hole in the head”) attempted to increase the clout of the mayor’s position but the public resisted.  

Four years later Mayor Pete Wilson attempted a switch to a “strong mayor” government and was also voted down.  

Mayor Maureen O’Connor’s subsequent attempts to strengthen the mayor’s office were thwarted by the city council.  

Then there was a petition drive in the early days of Mayor Susan Golding’s tenure to place a "strong mayor" charter change on the ballot.  It fizzled.  But come the millennium (2000) a familiar group of heavy-duty development, financial, and lobbying interests (mainly the major promoters of the downtown ballpark project -- Malin Burnham, Peter Q. Davis, John Moores, Scott Barnett, Scott Peters, George Mitrovich, Kris Michell, Richard Ledford…you get the picture) rallied once again in the cause of a “strong mayor” government.  Still, no one was biting…until…

Mayor Dick Murphy bit.  In 2004, public disclosure of gross financial malpractice by the city of San Diego hit the fan.  Fingers were pointed at a wide swath of past and present city officials.  Around the same time, three city councilmembers were indicted in legal action involving exotic dancers and the city's "no-touch" laws.  The chaotic confluence of humiliating notoriety, public resentment, and citizen consternation were artfully transformed into voter support for a change in San Diego’s form of government to a “strong mayor” system.  Mayor Murphy took the lead.

Here's the funny (as in ironic) part: the switch to a "strong mayor" system was triggered through the actions of a  politically strong mayor.  Mayor Golding was never hesitant to put her personal ambitions ahead of the public good by depleting public funds on politically-loaded projects (Convention Center expansion, downtown baseball stadium, Republican Party national convention, Naval Training Center giveaway, Charger’s ticket guarantee) and balancing the budget by underfunding the city pension system.  The witch's brew she and subsequent city leaders created by simultaneously hiking pension benefits for union leaders, city employees, and elected officials has brought San Diego to its financial knees.  And you oughtn't let our present lame-duck mayor fool you with happy-talk.  We are still in the throes of a severe budgetary and ethical crisis. 

Here’s another irony: Mayor Dick Murphy, after leading the successful charge for a “strong mayor” government, bit the dust before he could assume the "strong mayor" post.  

His replacement as San Diego’s first “strong mayor” was ex-police chief Jerry Sanders, a particularly weak and uninspired leader who spent close to eight years in office withholding vital public information from the city council, the city’s independent budget analyst, and the public at large, sweeping the truth under the rug, and neglecting to install a competent, experienced, well-trained, professional city manager to keep the city running efficiently, effectively, and in the public interest.

Which brings us to the battle for our next mayor.  Believe it or not, the story gets much more complex and convoluted.  So try to enjoy sniffing the flowers for just a little while longer.  While we can.

Parable of the little buggers

Confession: I get a daily dose of viruses, bacteria, parasites, protozoa, ticks... little buggers that like to lurk in raw milk, sexual escapades, other people’s sneezes.... Okay, I don’t get these infections, I get to talk about them (mostly with my infectious disease-expert husband).

But even he was stumped when I described a mysterious epidemic sweeping through San Diego.  I said it was targeting unsuspecting voters.  Very unusual...he said.

To me the diagnosis is clear: San Diegans have been exposed to a politically-motivated disease, spread along the campaign trail by a pair of genetically-modified-look-alike-mosquito-bots.  They're zeroing in for the big bite come the June 5 mayoral primary.

Who are these twin buggers? none other than candidates Nathan Fletcher and Carl DeMaio. They're the active agents transmitting perilous pathology, namely intimidation… manipulation… political sociopathy…

If you're concerned about the health and well-being of your loved ones, here’s what you need to watch out for:

The Peril of Intimidation

* Nathan Fletcher's bullying threats to city workers: "I interrogated al-Qaeda…I can negotiate a labor deal" are overkill.  His contempt for ordinary civilians who live what he calls a "climate-controlled life" is way out of line.

Skills in the martial arts have little to do with the qualities and qualifications citizens deserve in their elected officials.  You might remember that Fletcher’s former employer Duke Cunningham also used his military record as a weapon to win election -- then the Duke engaged in bribery and fraud and ended up in prison for abusing the public trust.

* Carl DeMaio is no novice when it comes to bullying and aggressive behavior but here’s the difference: DeMaio doesn't glad hand.  He's not a chameleon.  What you see is what you get...whatever that's worth.  

  

The Peril of Manipulation

* Nathan Fletcher is no shirker when it comes to manipulating the public.  He delivers feel-good declarations of political independence but marches in lockstep with conservative mentors like Newt Gingrich, Pete Wilson, and Karl Rove.  

To advance his political career he maneuvers behind the backs of the public at the behest of downtown redevelopers.  He aggrandizes himself in public appearances as a lion in combat.  He capitalizes on the brutal deaths of two north county girls -- a callous exploitation of the grief and misfortune of others.

* Carl DeMaio has a knack for turning ordinary words inside-out.  He zeroes in on commonplace democratic (as in small d democracy) snags and hitches and attributes them to “out of control government bureaucracy.”  He twists the word reform to try to crush city unions and eliminate living wage protections.

Out of his mouth, reform means outsourcing government services to private monopolies.  His mission is to “shrink government to the size where we can drown  it in the bathtub,” in lockstep with the ideals of his guru, Grover Norquist.

The Peril of Political Sociopathy

* Nathan Fletcher and Carl DeMaio are running neck and neck in this category.  The two of them share a common history.  Both, at a young age, were scooped up, tutored, and polished by powerful upper-echelon masters in the conservative wing of the Republican Party.


Both have a knack for manipulating public discontent to promote ideological, political, and personal agendas. They exemplify a brave new world of millennial confidence men masquerading as populists.

Both candidates exhibit strikingly similar idiosyncracies: repetitive, tightly-drilled speech patterns...oddly-robotic responses…unblinking, vacant eye contact.... It's possible that San Diego will go down in history as the first American city where not one but two manchurian candidates ran against one another for the office of mayor.

****************************

The moral of this parable? Physician, heal thyself.  It means that the cure must come from our own actions.  It's as simple as that.  Don't forget to vote on June 5.  

Two things I need to clarify

First thing: Some regular readers of NumbersRunner questioned last week's harsh assessment of how San Diego is faring under our ‘strong mayor’ system.  Actually, I understated the problems -- they're much worse than you think.

While it’s not unheard of for city leaders to sweep messy problems under the rug, the lack of professional management inside City Hall and the disintegration of public accountability and honest disclosure under our current mayor are -- without a doubt -- San Diego's most closely guarded secrets since Diann Shipione (former board trustee of the San Diego City Employees Retirement System) spilled the beans about gross mismanagement, lack of disclosure, and deceptive practices shrouding our pension system.  

Honestly, I went much easier on our mayor than he deserves.  After seven years of  inverse leadership, his legacy to the people of San Diego consists of a dismantled, hollowed-out city...ripe for the picking by wily political and corporate opportunists.

So woe to the public -- UNLESS our next mayor surrounds himself with experienced people, skilled at managing a big city.  And woe to the public -- UNLESS he surrounds himself with people of integrity who value our neighborhoods and communities and can be counted on to reestablish more public right-of-ways into his office at City Hall.  

Second thing to clarify: A few other readers said they didn’t get last week's Sigma Chi allusion -- especially the sweetheart part.  What, they asked, does a golden-oldie college fraternity song have to do with the San Diego mayor’s race?

Look at it this way.  We already know what a tight-knit town San Diego is, manipulated by a shadow government of bankers, developers, lobbyists, and tourism folk.  A kind of home-grown fraternity.

Turns out that an influential contingent of San Diego's men-about-town really are bonded and united...by a fraternity pledge.  “Once initiated, Sigma Chi is for life.”  

Here's a sampling of local movers and shakers bonded in the brotherhood of Sigma Chi (with apologies to the brothers I left out): 

• Doug Manchester, hotel developer and owner of the Union-Tribune  
• Bob White, senior advisor to Pete Wilson and Arnold Schwarzenegger  
• Jim Schmidt, executive VP of San Diego Federal Savings Bank
• Ben Clay, founder of San Diego’s preeminent lobbying firm Carpi and Clay
• Bob Page, CEO of San Diego Ranch & Coast newspaper group
• Mike Morton, owner of the Brigantine restaurants
• Harry Summers, residential, commercial & industrial real estate developer...you get the picture... 

As for the sweetheart ritual -- in much the same way they anointed their fraternity sweetheart in the days of old, the now-grown-up, big-men-on-campus get to handpick their very own political candidate for mayor (and anything else that runs).

This year something went awry.  The designated winner on Doug Manchester's dance card is Carl DeMaio.  But on Bob White’s it's Nathan Fletcher. (What about Bonnie Dumanis, you ask?  It looks like whoever brought her to the dance has  unchivalrously retreated.)  

Obviously, the voters will have the final word on this beauty pageant.  But despite differing styles as they strut their stuff on stage and TV, it's not so easy to distinguish candidate Fletcher from DeMaio from Dumanis. 

Take a look at their voting records, campaign promises, stump speeches. What picture emerges?  A threesome, joined at the hip by identical political agendas, goals, objectives, plans, proposals, philosophies, and political persuasion.  And each of the three wants you to know he/she'd be one TOUGH sweetheart:

-- the one who hammers city workers the hardest  

-- the one who interrogates foreign enemies the fiercest  

-- the one who targets child molesters and sexually-violent predators the severest

-- the one who says what he means, even when you don’t like what he says 

-- the one who tells you whatever you want to hear, even when it isn't true

-- the one who packs the meanest pistol  

Psst... I know a mayoral candidate who doesn't choose to terrorize, strut, swagger, bully, double-talk, or self-aggrandize.  He's getting my vote.  Final hint: he's not one of the above.

Sweetheart of Sigma Chi

Suppose a pollster called you on the phone and asked your opinion about whether a “strong mayor” form of government is a better deal for San Diego than a “city manager” system?  Would your answer be: uh…well…hmmm…?? 

Okay, let’s admit it -- most of us don’t pay that much attention to City Hall.  And for sure, most of us don’t have a clue about how the switch to a “strong mayor” government (which we voters agreed to seven years ago) has affected daily life in San Diego.  

Given that our first strong mayor will soon be replaced by our city’s second strong mayor (Bob Filner? Bonnie Dumanis? Nathan Fletcher? Carl DeMaio?) a few clues about how city government has been faring these last few years might prove helpful when choosing our next mayor.  A quick reminder of how we got here might also come in handy.  So read on.

How We Got Here

Under our old “city manager” system San Diego's mayor and council members -- a total of nine -- sat together, side by side, at open public hearings, at weekly council sessions, and at committee meetings, listening and responding to public testimony and then casting their votes…one vote each...majority ruled.  

The mayor was always a key political player but the mayor didn’t run the city.  That was the job of the appointed city manager.  He (it’s always been a ‘he’) was responsible for organizing, coordinating, and overseeing city affairs.  Also for executing the policies, legislation, regulations, and directives of the mayor and council members.  Also for hiring and firing department directors.  Also for creating and managing the city budget.  Not a job description for the faint of heart.  Not a job for amateurs!

Curious to know how the switch to “strong mayor” came about?  It was the longed-for baby of San Diego bankers, developers, real estate establishment, lobbyists, hoteliers, and other old-guard wheelers and dealers intent on gaining easier access to city officials.  A switchover would increase their clout and undercut the sometimes-recalcitrant city council.  

There were other supporters who felt the time had come for San Diego to slough off its image as a ‘well-managed town’ and take it's place among big-league cities.

When the news hit the fan about ethical and financial malfeasance by city officials, municipal union chiefs, and retirement board members (remember Enron-by-the-Sea?) San Diego voters became easy prey to the pitch that a switch to a strong mayor form of government would usher in public accountability, greater efficiency, and open government.  The buck stops here sort of thing.  So we switched.

So How's the City Been Faring?

 The picture is murky…very murky.  So far our “strong mayor” system has resulted in:

• less professional management of city departments and city services
• less community/neighborhood access to city officials, notably the mayor
• less independent action and advocacy by city councilmembers 
• less access to city information
• less responsiveness to public inquiries, complaints, and problems
• less oversight of city departments and city contracts
• more political manipulation of city data and financial accounting
• more control by private interests
• more back-room political maneuvering
• more passing the buck by all elected officials

Is the strong mayor system at fault for the bad news?  Or could much of the backsliding be attributed to the person occupying the “strong mayor” seat?  

Perhaps I should tread lightly here because Mayor Jerry Sanders may well go down in history as the most genial, endearing, charming, and upstanding leader the city has seen in...I don’t know how long (ex-mayor Murphy, move over).  The sweetheart of Sigma Chi.

Our termed-out mayor is not merely nice but also very magnanimous.  Get this -- he's making a jaw-dropping parting gift to our financially bankrupt city of a generous budget SURPLUS!  The audacity of this legacy-polishing duplicity kind of takes my breath away.

But wait -- maybe this is really good news in disguise.  If the system isn't entirely at fault we've got a fighting chance that a competent and trustworthy person sitting in the mayor's seat -- beholden to the San Diego public and not to ideology, upward mobility, or the status quo -- might turn things around.

Which brings us back to the June 5 primary and our choice for mayor.  Bob Filner? Bonnie Dumanis? Nathan Fletcher? Carl DeMaio?  

Here’s where things get personal: I’ve been around city government for a long time. I have high standards for our city. I know and love San Diego politics.  I’m a realist.  I’ve done serious homework on all four candidates.  I’m no dope.  I know 'em when I seem 'em.

I’m choosing Bob Filner for mayor.  He's competent, trustworthy, consistent, and public-spirited.  He's not buddy-buddy with San Diego's old-boys club.  He'll never be the sweetheart of Sigma Chi.  To me, that's a really good thing.   

eeny, meeny, miney, moe

Still can’t decide who to vote for in the upcoming mayoral primary?  One thing’s for sure – this race should not be decided by the eeny-meeny method.  

Why not? because this is not merely a titillating race among mayoral candidates with a range of personal values, lifestyles, and world-views.  It's a particularly pivotal one, given the wide span of political perspectives among our four choices.

So to take some of the guesswork out of making your choice for our next mayor I’m providing the following list of observations.  I hope they will be food for thought.  

1) It’s not just you who are confused about who and what our city needs to get the potholes fixed, resolve our pension debt, restore community clout, and so on.  Hardly anyone has digested the effects and repercussions of the city’s switch several years ago to a ‘strong mayor’ government (more about that in my next commentary). 

And almost everyone remains in the dark about what voters can and should expect from a first-class, full-blown, chief-executive mayor.   It does not help that our current mayor has set the bar very low for his successor. 

 2) The mayor's race is further complicated by the fact that politics in San Diego have gone crazy in this political season.  At the start of the campaign season the lineup included one life-long Democrat (Bob Filner) toward the left end of the spectrum and three mutually-antagonistic long-time Republicans (Bonnie Dumanis, Nathan Fletcher, and Carl DeMaio) clustered at the right.

But the ground recently shifted under our eenie, meeny, miney, and moe candidates, prompting them to reconfigure their seating arrangements.

3) The kink that set off the rumblings.  Nathan Fletcher was spurned by his Republican Party teammates, his fervent declarations of party faithfulness and loyalty notwithstanding.  Barely pausing to lick his wounds, he emerged from the closet as a political indeterminate…independent…decline to state candidate, raising the question: did miney become meeny?   

4) Hold on!  It gets even weirder.  In a town like ours -- historically under the thumb of a good-old-boys-network of not-always-upstanding-but traditionally MODERATE Republican bankers, hoteliers, newspaper and sports team owners, land developers, and downtown boosters -- the San Diego Republican Party went ape and endorsed the most right-leaning, polarizing, ideological, off-putting candidate of all, Carl DeMaio.  People are scratching their heads.  How come they picked moe and not meeney or miney?

5) Could it be because of money? LOTS of money?  Unlike the other candidates, DeMaio has the capability of pulling in untold piles of cash from ultra-wealthy, super-conservative billionaires and political groups from all over the country.  He’s the ticket for the San Diego Republican Party’s once in a lifetime opportunity to enrich their coffers and catapult party chairman Tony Krvaric into the big-shots league!

6) Now here’s the funny part of this story.  San Diego’s aforementioned good-old-boys-network (of bankers, hoteliers, newspaper and sports team owners, land developers, and downtown boosters) got themselves all tangled up right from the start of the mayor’s race.  Which Republican should they choose to be an utterly compliant, suitably compatible stand-in for the current mayor?   Their first choice was Bonnie Dumanis.  She got the endorsement of Mayor Sanders, Councilmember Faulconer, Sheriff Bill Gore, County officials, former city attorney Casey Gwinn, and a long list of other old friends.

Why not DeMaio? because most San Diego king-makers understood that DeMaio was a separate breed of Republican who answered to much different drummers.

7) OK, now for the punch line.  San Diego’s good-old-boys-network of bankers, hoteliers, king-makers, etc. got tripped up by none other than former mayor Pete Wilson -- who may be getting on in years but still has a healthy appetite for state and national politics.  And a sharp eye for malleable talent. 

 Pete Wilson adopted Nathan Fletcher as his protégée, plucking him from an already well-padded and protected position as a staffer to Duke Cunningham (of course no one in that office smelled the blatant corruption …certainly not Fletcher…) and Wilson anointed Fletcher as the next mayor of San Diego. 

8) Whoops! Now you know why you’re confused?  DeMaio’s got the US Mint backing him up, fortified by the iron fist of Doug Manchester.  Dumanis has the usual old-time-cronies shuffling nervously in her corner and stripping off the petals: will she or won’t she? will she pull the plug? should she throw in the towel? in whose direction?  what’s her consolation prize for getting everyone out of this jam? state attorney general?

9) Meantime, the band plays on. Along with his strawberry blond, Fletcher is now waltzing with wily mentors and consultants, who have turned this military team-player into an independent matinee idol. 

He’s lately been seen waltzing with another chorus line of San Diego business executives, who were also blinded by political affiliations in their past lives but are now free at last to be middle-of-the-roaders, beholden only to moderation and the public good. 

 10) There’s a French moral to this story: plus ca change... Translated it means: The more things change, the more they stay the same. 

 Think about it this way: the same old guys who have traditionally run our city suddenly find themselves screwed by their own Republican Party.  They’ll do what they have to do to stay in control.  If it means calling yourself by some other name, that’s okay.   Labels don’t matter.  Control matters.  So will it be meeny, miny, or mo?  Which team player will step aside for the good of the good-old-guys?  

Let's be honest. Let's be truthful. And let's be direct.

Nathan Fletcher comes across as an attractive, appealing, handsome candidate who -- after a bruising and losing fight for the endorsement of the local Republican Party -- made a calculated decision to rebrand himself as a political “independent.”  

His switch in party affiliation has led a number of Democratic and other voters to ask themselves whether they should consider supporting Fletcher for mayor.  Perhaps the following information will help you decide.

The most heated exchanges in recent mayoral debates have been between Fletcher and his Republican rival Carl DeMaio.  The friction between them is clearly a personality duel, since their views and political perspectives on city issues, proposals, and problems are practically identical. 

In fact, Fletcher and DeMaio can be called two peas in a pod.   Aside from the differential in charm and sex appeal, San Diegans will find little to distinguish one from the other, should either of them become our next mayor.  

Here’s a shorthand way to think about it: if you would feel comfortable voting for Carl DeMaio, you should have no trouble whatsoever voting for Nathan Fletcher.  Or vice versa.  

As I said, two peas in a pod...with one notable difference.  

Fletcher has what appears to be an uncontrolled compulsion to cite his military experience at the drop of a hat.  It is uncharacteristic for veterans of combat to repeatedly broadcast their wartime record as a campaign tool to enhance their manliness and voter appeal.  Can you even imagine wartime hero President Dwight D. Eisenhower trying to seduce Americans with his combat prowess?  Enough said.

  To read a superb analysis of Nathan Fletcher’s political persona, I implore you to click onto Jim Miller’s article in today’s OB Rag newspaper: http://obrag.org/?p=58914 . It will be well worth your time.

  To hear Fletcher in action as he solicits the Republican Party for their endorsement, click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsFZkNmm2v8&feature=youtu.be

  To read the full text of Fletcher’s letter in which he makes the statements listed below, click here: http://sdrostra.com/?p=25657

*  Family values are very important to me…I take very seriously my commitment to my wife and children.  As a Christian of strong faith, I take seriously my commitment to God… 

*  I have never voted for a tax increase

*  I have consistently stood up to labor — I have one of the lowest labor scorecards

*  I have been endorsed by Governor Pete Wilson, Joel Anderson, Mark Wyland, Martin Garrick, and the California Small Business Administration

* I…have taken the no tax pledge (aka “Taxpayer Protection Pledge”…authored by Grover Norquist, President of Americans for Tax Reform.)

  To learn more about Fletcher family politics read the following autobiographical account about Fletcher’s wife Mindy.  For additional details click here: http://www.flashreport.org/blog/author/mindy-fletcher/

*  Mindy Fletcher is a veteran of Republican political campaigns at the national and state level having been a spokesman for Governor George W. Bush, the Bush 2000 and 2004 presidential campaigns, Attorney General John Ashcroft, the Republican National Committee, the National Republican Congressional Committee as well as Deputy Chief of Staff and Deputy Campaign Manager for Governor Schwarzenegger… 

*  In 1999, she became Press Secretary for the Bush-Cheney 2000 effort, where she worked closely with national and regional media, managed the day-to-day operations of the communications division and appeared regularly on national television and radio programs.

*  During the Florida Recount she served as the senior spokesperson for the recount effort. After President Bush took office in 2001, she became the first woman appointed Director of Public Affairs at the United States Department of Justice...In January of 2002, she became the Party’s chief spokesperson as Director of Communications for the Republican National Committee before she moved to San Diego in 2003…

  To see Nathan Fletcher’s decidedly conservative voting record click here: http://www.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/104432/nathan-fletcher

To sum up: I recommend we all heed the immortal words uttered by poor little Buttercup (courtesy of  Gilbert and Sullivan) to help us evaluate Nathan Fletcher's mayoral bid:

Things are seldom what they seem / Skim milk masquerades as cream… 

Black sheep dwell in every fold / All that glitters is not gold…