Wednesday, September 27, 2006

Letter to the Editor: "A Whole New Ballgame"

With this new information about Reed, it would seem that the playing field has been repaved. Reed no longer has the moral high ground and the stalemate has returned. There are some who now advocate a write-in for David Pandori, but let's be realistic. A write-in victory is about as likely as catching Michael Moore in bed with George W. For this reason, it is time that we accept that there are two candidates running in this election, Chuck Reed and Cindy Chavez. And for as much criticism as these candidates are receiving, it's becoming increasingly unpopular to say that you're a supporter. However, as a San Jose resident, I am proud to be a supporter of Cindy Chavez.

As you guys pointed out earlier, Cindy Chavez most definitely is down...but not out. News sources are finally reporting the facts, which can only help Cindy. Chuck Reed can play up ethics all he wants but when we look at the track records of both candidates, Cindy Chavez is the only candidate with a vision for San Jose. The ethical conflict of Norcal regarded Cindy's supposed knowledge of the contract prior to the Council vote. However, Grand Jury testimony evinced that Reed knew about the arrangement before Chavez did. Once this news came out, the media hid. No one wanted to admit that they were wrong and crucified Cindy for no reason. Consequently Reed was let off of the hook and was able to maintain his reputation as Mr. Ethics.

Lately people have tried to draw a parallel between Cindy's vote for Norcal and Reed's city reimbursements. Reed supporters justify the reimbursements by saying that they are less than the money spent on Norcal. But there is a difference, and I am furious that Chuck Reed and his underhanded campaign team would have such little respect for me and my ability to discern between right and wrong. So let me explain something to you, Chuck Reed, because I know you and your campaign read this. Cindy Chavez voted with the Council to approve of the Norcal contract. Who voted with you to reimburse your political donations? Cindy fulfilled her duties on the Council, you broke the law. The amount of money spent is irrelevant, the use of the money is what is of significance. The entire city benefits from Cindy's spending, Chuck benefits from his expenditures. Chuck's warped impression of Robin Hood is stealing from the poor and giving to the rich. And he is the frontrunner to be Mayor of the tenth largest city in the nation.

So then what is the answer? How do we prevent this unethical and deceptive coward from taking office? The answer isn't simple, but it is worthy. Chavez is down, but not out. It's never too late for Cindy to win this election. People are ignoring the facts and being spoon fed lies from Chuck Reed. There are those who will keep an open mind and will be willing to change their vote, but the old political generation stands firm in their opinions. It may be too late to change people's minds, but it's not too late to rock the vote. Pick up your Cindy signs and stand out on street corners. Don't let Chuck Reed get away with this injustice, make your voice heard. Don't just sit back and watch this election destroy San Jose, every vote counts. Now is the time for civic activism, every action counts for something. It's time for the youth of San Jose to stand up against political corruption. It's time that we show City Hall that we are not an obsolete group of constituents. It's time that we make a difference for ourselves and future generations of San Jose. If the election is a losing battle, then it is a battle worth losing. I'm picking up my sign...I'll be out there on the street corners this weekend...I hope to see you there.

-Ben Watson


At 6:35 AM, Blogger SanJoseLady said...

Great post Ben, thank you for putting that together.

This campaign for mayor started out on a bad foot when COMPAC decided to send out their unethical mailers. Their attacks on Chavez are now coming back to haunt them as basically they are left without a horse in this race.

My concerns are numerious with Reed, one being he did not support the SNI, and at the time of the vote did not even offer up any changes to cover his concerns, he just voted no and now he says it is a great thing for our city. I cannot imagine having Reed as mayor and never offering up anything other then "no." While "no" is appropriate at times, it is not a way to govern the 10th largest city in the nation.

Further, the article in the Merc today was very disturbing. It seems that Reed got petty cash, about $80 or so, in dollar bills. He then put those dollar bills in red envelopes and handed them out at a festival. How is the world Reed could think his actions served anyone but himself is beyond me, and it is on a deeper level, very troubling.

Again, thanks for a thoughtful post!

At 10:25 AM, Anonymous Phillip S. said...

I have been monitoring some of the comments on SJI and the Mercury News forum.

I cannot believe Chuck's supporters can look at themselves in the mirror and honestly say that this isn't a big deal.

Whether or not this rises to the level of illegality, you should know that you can't use our taxpayer dollars for political gain.

At 10:29 AM, Anonymous concerned dem said...

He got reimbursed for $4 for parking at an airport function!!!

My goodness! Isn't this guy an attorney? Can't he spare $4? I know, I know, he's got to attend these events to serve as a rep for the city, but FOUR dollars??

At 11:26 AM, Anonymous Ben Watson said...

No problem San Jose Lady, thank you guys very much for giving me this opportunity. If you ever need any help with anything, feel free to ask and I'd be more than willing to help out. Thanks again!

-Ben Watson

At 3:16 PM, Anonymous Richard Robinson said...

Cindy is a terrific person who has been much maligned without any evidence. She has been “guilty” by association, even when she can prove there is no “association”.

When she was deliberate before acting, people attacked her for being too close to the Mayor. When she acts and points out that separation, she is being political.

The detractors have it both ways.

To paraphrase Willie Brown, “If Cindy were to stand up and walk across the Bay, the headline the next day would be ‘Cindy Can’t Swim’”

There are people who want her to fail because of some perceived power by the labor council and others have want to link her to wrongdoing--though none exists.

She has handled it all remarkably well, she hasn’t got mad at her opponents, threatened them with exile if elected or thrown a public temper tantrum. She continues to speak to her detractors--witness the debate tonight sponsored by the Chamber and is willing to work with people for the common good.

People will continue to try and attack her--that’s politics--but all evidence suggests she will be a great Mayor.

I, for one, am very proud to support her.

At 4:02 PM, Anonymous alex m. said...

Great point Rich, Cindy has been the victim all along and she refuses to sink down to the level of Vic Ajlouny. I'm happy to hear that people in the know are atleast familiar with the attacks against Chavez. You should start posting some of your stuff on this site, I'm sure everyone would love to hear from you.


Post a Comment

<< Home