More Fun and Games At The Fullerton Observer

The hey, and the hey, and the hey, hey, hey!
Professor Frink speaks: with the insinuating and the smearing, and the hey, hey, hey!

Our dear pals at the Fullerton Observer are at it again. In their latest (August) edition someone named Kevin Frink used the “Council Shorts” feature to take a shot at one of Fullerton’s Friends –  Jack Dean check out page 4. The topic was the hearing on the Redevelopment expansion scam, and here’s what Mr. Frink had to say:

Several residents spoke in opposition

of the proposed action before the council/

redevelopment agency including Mr.

Kiker, Mr. DeWitt and Mr. Dean, the

later representing the Fullerton

Association of Concerned Taxpayers

(FACT), (a group responsible for

extremely dirty and misleading campaign

tactics in past city council and school board campaigns).

We suspect that Frink had coaching from his editor to insinuate a completely gratuitous and unsubstantiated claim about FACT’s political activities. The fact that this parenthetical attack had absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand and is based on on the Observer’s notion that to oppose any statist, pro-government union candidate is tantamount to a crime, just backs up our previous criticisms of the Observer as a hack-run shill for City Hall. Those who have defended the Observer as some sort of journalistic paragon take heed. This is the type of stoogery you are defending.

Meanwhile the Yellowing Sub sinks deeper.

Down periscope! Dive! Dive!
Down periscope! Dive! Dive!

P.S. Could Mr. “Kiker” have been our very own Travis Kiger? If so we have a celebrity in our midst. Travis was that you?

8 Replies to “More Fun and Games At The Fullerton Observer”

  1. I dont get where the Observer is coming from. They and the Friends should be on the same page. NUFF seems to have a good relationship with the editor and I see NUFF’s desires to be very similar to FFFF.

    What is the disconnect here? Why is Kennedy not helping in the effort to expose hypocrisy in city government?

    1. Willis, I’m not sure where you see points of congruence between us and NUFF, but there may be similarities that I am unaware of. I am not familiar with NUFFs positions on any issues such as Redevelopment expansion or staff accountability.Feel free to expound on your statement.

  2. What about all those anti-Haluza smear pieces put out by the Observer-endorsed Jones campaign?

    The whole Jones campaign was based on slamming Haluza–yet the Observer endorsed him and will never criticize him.

    It’s all personal–Kennedey is still trying to repeal the results of the ’94 recal campaign.

    1. Not quite correct, Jay, but close. The OC GOP did the dirty work on Haluza so that Jones could keep his hands clear. Ed Royce was behind this because he would rather have a loud mouthed, incompetent GOP cretin on the City Council than a Democrat.

      That promotion of Jones is why Royce has taken so muc heat on this blog, and will continue to do so until he performs a self cranial retraction.

      1. Prediction: When the 2010 election starts rolling around, this blog will find it necessary to create an Ed Royce section.

  3. “Observer’s notion that to oppose any statist, pro-government union candidate is tantamount to a crime,” fullerton harpoon, the observer doesnt oppose statist pro-gigantic nanny government, it fears biting the hand that promises to feed it. Again and again, I challenge sharon kennedy, editor of the observer, to post her work and education resume anywhere in her paper. Her readers should know who she is to better understand the philosophy and mission of her paper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *