Well, now we know why Dave Lopez of KCAL news was at the the Summit house restaurant on Tuesday night. He was there to pin down Ackerwoman campaign fundraiser/organizer Desiree Mouzoon about an alleged relationship with now resigned Assemblyman Mike Duvall for whom she worked in several capacities. Here’s the clip from CBS/KCAL. Enjoy the sight of Lopez trying to chase down Mouzoon and then face off with a Corona swiggin’ Ackerman.
The humorous aspects of the story are manifold. First is the irony. Dick Ackerman is widely regarded as the creator of the slime bucket Duvall in the first place – yes the selfsame Ackerman, Inc. that is now presenting its public face of virtue even though there is hardly a single honest thing about Ackerwoman’s campaign. And now we get to see Ackerman intercepting Lopez to prevent him from speaking to the candidate. Apparently Ackerman does all the talking for Ackerwoman. It’s a team, see, and Dick is team captain.
Creepy image stolen from Orange Juice blog
Naturally the local blogs are enjoying this latest twist: Moxley at the OC Weekly has this. The always ebullient fringer Art Pedroza shared this with his blog followers.
As an aside, Pedroza notes that on her Facebook page Mouzoon indicates a “relationship” with Adam Probolksky – Repug slime blob who was once heard to opine that there was no such thing as a conflict of interest. What a crew!
Maybe the Register’s Martin Wisckol is worried about the impending collapse of his employer and is thinking about future work writing press releases for Dick and Linda Ackerman. Looks like he has already started.
Last Wednesday Wisckol tossed up this powder puff blog post addressing the issue of Linda Ackerman’s “experienced businesswoman” self-applied label. Exercising all the journalistic curiosity of a sea cucumber he coughed up this pearl:
God, I can't believe he bought that. Dick we gotta put that nice boy on the payroll...
Sorry Martin, but it’s not “good enough” just because she said so. To pass along this tripe suggests that you are either stupid, lazy, or are shilling for Ackerman, Inc. Since we assume the Register doesn’t knowingly employ overtly stupid people, the options are narrowed.
We’ll help out by citing our post that pretty effectively dispatches the Ackerman “experienced businesswoman” fable.
Let’s recap. Linda’s on the board of a collection agency, USCB; a job she got by virtue of her husband’s influence and that meets three or four times a year? That may provide a little extra pocket money, but it hardly constitutes what a reasonable person would call business experience.
She’s on the executive committee of the Marian Bergeson blah blah blah. A training ground for female GOP politicians. Another part-time gig base on her political connections. In any case her self proclaimed responsibility (from her own website) is “finance development” not “finance director”, ya chowder head. Development means calling up lobbyists and asking them for money. You know, Martin. The same lobbyists who lobbied her husband.
Likewise she got an appointment to the Board of the MWD – a political, not a professional appointment, Marty. Do you really think she would have gotten that without her husband’s name. So she goes to a government agency meeting once a month to be told how to vote. No business experience there, either.
A committee to restore the historic working spaces of the Capitol. WTF? Are you kidding, Martin? That sounds like business to you? To us that sounds like the bored wife of a legislator or a socialite, or both. There’s probably a real good reason there’s no website.
Well, Martin, we have just covered the sum and substance of Linda Ackerman’s “business” experience over her 45 years of adulthood. And here it is, again:
No real experience in the private sector
Never owned or operated a business
Never employed anybody
Never signed the front of a paycheck.
In fact, Linda Ackerman’s only real experience is raising money from lobbyists, for this or that personal Ackerman benefit, mostly her husband’s campaigns. And for that she was amply recompensed for her part time work. Come to think of it, we’re now pretty sure the woman has never even held a real job of any kind.
So come on Martin, how about a little real work yourself. Quit passing along Ackerman campaign mush gussied up as the truth. Why not try to do something honorable before you get the axe?
We’ve taken a bunch of legitimate shots at Chris Norby’s opponent in the 72nd Assembly District Special Election, Linda Ackerman. You know: she’s doesn’t live in the district; has a fake “residence” with another family on Lindendale; has applied the completely phony “businesswoman” label to herself; has been paid by her husband’s political campaign; and has even cooked up a scheme to get free Hawaiian vacations – compliments of lobbyists. The list of negatives just goes on and on. In fact, there’s hardly anything in her campaign that isn’t fraudulent.
We haven’t taken much time to say why Chris Norby would be good for us, and for California. So now we will.
First, Norby is not part of the slimy and incestuous Sacramento culture of corruption that the Ackermans have immersed themselves in for 15 years, and that’s a pretty big deal. Norby actually has informed opinions about State-wide issues like budget reform, education and Redevelopment; and, unlike Ackerman, Chris doesn’t just shovel out hollow platitudes about being a conservative.
Furthermore, Chris has a real legislative record – standing up for the people of Orange County against the perpetual demands of the public employee unions. He has opposed retroactive pension spikes put in place by some of the same dubious cast of characters that have endorsed Linda Ackerman. Over the years Chris has stuck up for the property rights of small businesses and homeowners against the depredations of government. Linda Ackerman chooses this very record on Redevelopment to draw a distinction between Norby and herself. And of course compared to Norby’s long conservative track record, Mrs. Ackerman has no record at all. Zero. Zilch. Just election slogans put in her mouth by her campaign manager.
We like the idea of Chris in the Legislature; with real ability to work on issues, especially the long-overdue reform of Redevelopment. The lobbyists won’t like the idea of Norby coming up to Sacramento, and that makes the idea really appealing to us.
At local campaign events the contrast between Norby and Linda Ackerman has been stark. Chris has been engaged, knowledgeable, and has spoken authoritatively about real conservatives issues. His opponent hasn’t done any of these things.
Although the Ackermans have tried (and will continue to try) to attack Norby’s morality by innuendo and gossip, it is the Ackermans who gave the disgraced Mike Duvall their support. Voters ought to reflect on that when they consider who is qualified to speak about morality with any authority.
Finally, Chris lives, and has always lived in Fullerton, unlikeLinda Ackerman who moved out ten years ago when greener pastures opened up in Irvine. He has never lived in a “secret, gated community” for “the privileged few.” He didn’t have to fake a residency with another family to evade the requirements of the law.
Yesterday Rogue Elephant posted this over at the Orange Juice blog. The gist of the post is that a loophole in state campaign finance laws permits politicos like Repuglicans Jim Brulte and Dick Ackerman to cook up “putative” campaign committees for future office in order to transfer existing campaign balances, raise tons of money from lobbyists for these supposed campaigns, and then distribute the proceeds to exert influence in other elections across the State.
Rogue Elephant notes that Loophole Linda’s 72nd Assembly power grab has received $3900 from Brulte’s 2014(!) Board of Equalization Committee. What he doesn’t mention is that she also received the same amount (the limit) from her husband Dick’s similar committee, also for the BoE. Ackerman set up his “2010” BoE committee in as far back as 2006 according an article in the Oakland Tribune that describes the practice.
You should see me in my swim trunks...
Why the BoE? Because these useless barnacles have been scraped off the legislature – termed out, but haven’t finished working the system, not by a long shot. They need a plausible office to “run” for, even if they have no intention of actually running. In the meantimeBrulte actually works as a lobbyist for an outfit called California Strategies – a collection of former electeds and appointeds working their contacts.So when he gives Mrs. Ackerman money, he can kill two birds with one stone!
Rogue Elephant sums up his take on this pungent mess:
While Linda Ackerman’s campaign funding smells of Sacramento’s bipartisan Culture of Corruption, it also reeks of a Culture of Creepiness. Voters and taxpayers should find it creepy to see former politicians and lobbyists using political slush funds to pull the strings of candidates like Linda Ackerman.
Just as we reported earlier today about Orange, the Linda Ackerman campaign coughed up some more local endorsements, this time in Redevelopment-friendly Brea – where nobody’s property is safe from the City – if they want it.
Here are the two money “quotes”:
“For over 30 years, Linda has served the people of this community,” said Brea Mayor John Beauman. “I support Linda because she is for people, not politics.”
“I know that Linda will bring a fair, business-minded approach to the state’s budget debacle. The taxpayers of Brea need her in Sacramento to fight for fiscal responsibility and limited government,” said former Mayor of Brea Bev Perry.
More hilarity! We’ve already discounted Ackerman’s so-called business experience so we can dismiss that; what other tools she has in her shed to tackle the state’s “budget debacle” goes unstated by Perry. We’re pretty sure by now that Ackerman will be fair – and give all those Sacramento lobbyists their day at the trough. As far as responsibility and limited government go, we can only say that putting those words in Bev Perry’s mouth attains a new level of political cynicism – even for the Ackermans. Bev Perry was part of the Brea Redevelopment eminent domain machine that ran roughshod all over property owners in what used to be their downtown. Who’s next Lynn “Bulldozer” Daucher?
They're a little shy, so I put my words in their mouths.
The Linda Ackerman campaign issued one of those out-of-a-can press releases the other day bragging about her endorsement by three City of Orange councilmembers – Cavecche, Murphy, and Dumitru.
We thought we would have some fun with this, reciting the baloney that was assigned to a couple of these worthies, meant to appear as genuine quotations.
“Linda Ackerman has always done what is right for the sake of the community, not political gain,” said Mayor Carolyn Cavecche. “She is a proven leader who will help solve California’s budget crisis and bring Orange County values to the State Assembly.”
Well that’s a tissue of lies. C’mon Carolyn, haven’t you heard about the Pacific Policy Research Foundation? And Carolyn, didn’t you know Linda was paid $76,000 by her husband’s own political campaign – as a “consultant”? How selfless!
Well Cavecche, at least, has proven herself a leader – a leader in Orange pension spiking right out of the OC GOP RINO playbook. Here’s her colleague Murphy:
Citing Ackerman’s fiscal conservative credentials as a businesswoman who has spent years balancing budgets, Councilmember Mark A. Murphy said: “Linda is a fiscal watchdog who will help solve the budget debacle.”
More prime grade bullshit. We’ve already documented that Mrs. Ackerman appears to have no business experience at all. Years “balancing budgets”?!! What budgets would those be, Murph? Her own? Her only “experience” appears to be that she’s a board member for a debt collector. Ya know, Mark, those warm people who take away your house because you can’t pay for your cancer treatment anymore. She’s a fiscal watchdog? How would we ever know? She has no record of watching anything – except maybe the Maui sunsets and the lobbyists across the table at Spataro. Murphy – another zero.
At least the bozo Jon Dumitru was lucky enough to avoid having the Ackerman campaign stuff lies into his mouth – although he probably would have enjoyed it. Another public employee union member on a City Council. Another cypher.
“I am honored to receive the support of so many members of my community,” said Ackerman. “I believe this home-grown support will be instrumental in waging a successful campaign in the weeks ahead.”
Rules are made to bend. As far as possible. Unenforceable laws aren't really laws at all.
We’ll say one thing for Mrs. Ackerman. In her years as her husband’s Sacramento helpmeet, Linda has learned well how to game the system to make money by skirting the intent of campaign financing laws.
We have already recounted the Pacific Policy Research Foundation scam – a phony non-profit whose only purpose to to get legislators to Hawaii – and into the clutches of waiting lobbyists posing as “expert” seminar speakers. Because the fraud is made to look like an educational endeavor, the politicians get to use their excess campaign funds to make trip – funds that would be otherwise off limits for personal use. Sweet.
Now, according to a Chris Norby mailer, it emerges that Mrs. Ackerman was on her own husband’s campaign payroll as a “consultant,” and raked in $76,000 for her efforts – whatever they were. Another brazen evasion of laws that are meant to keep politicians from pocketing campaign funds. It seems rules are simply there to be evaded. Art Pedroza at the Orange Juice blog has a post on the mailer here. Mrs. Ackerman is dubbed, appropriately enough, “Loophole Linda.”
Well, Mrs. Ackerman has pretty obviously gotten used to finding the angles and exploiting them for her and hubby Dick’s personal gain. That’s the way things are done in Sacramento; and that, Friends, is really her true experience – gaming government. The rest is just smoke and mirrors – like her phony residency and her fake “self-applied “businesswoman” label.
Yesterday over at the Orange Juice blog on our post about Linda Ackerman’s phony “businesswoman” label, a commenter named “baxter” related how somebody from the Ackerman for Assembly came a knockin’ on his door.
An woman canvassing for Ackerman came to our door this morning. I asked a few questions and she was pro. Knew what she was doing, quick with answers and not shy about slamming Norby. She implied that Norby might have psychological problems Since I’m voting for a Democrat it was all wasted on me.
Hmm. Doesn’t sound like your typical volunteer precinct walker, now does it? Did Mrs. Ackerman hire people to do her walking? That would square with what seems to have been a scripted character assassination of Norby, which is perfectly congruent with the Ackerman campaign strategy.
It could be that baxter just happened to get an experienced volunteer who was really on the ball. But somehow we have trouble believing that. Linda Ackerman has zero “grassroots” support in the 72nd, where she does not live, and except for a few die-hard Republican Women Federated types and a few of Dick’s old Rotarian buddies, she would have trouble scrounging up volunteers to hit the streets.
Why this operative wasted time going to the door of an evident Democrat is a bit puzzling, but maybe they figure they need every voter that they can bamboozle.
If by business you mean monkey business, then yes, I am a business woman.
In the world of politics it is believed that if you just keep saying the same thing over and over again, eventually people will believe it.
Let’s consider Linda Ackerman’s repeated assertion (and the claim in many of her endorser’s statements that were obviously written for them) that she is an “experienced businesswoman.” Well, we would like to know just what that experience entails. Let’s let Linda’s campaign website help us out with a description of her vast business experience:
An experienced businesswoman, Linda serves as the Vice President of Financial Development for the Marian Bergeson Excellence in Public Service Series and a corporate board member of USCB, Inc., a California receivable and management company.
That’s it. No history, no resume. You’d think if there were any real accomplishments she’d be only too happy to share it with her would-be constituents. Hmm.
The Marian Bergeson blah-blah-blah isn’t a business. It’s a training program to promote female Republican politicians by having them learn the ins and outs of Repuglicanism. According to the Bergeson website, Ackerman is a member of an executive committee (it says nothing about her being a “Vice President” of anything). And in any case, “Development” is a polite way of saying “fundraising from corporate donors.” No prizes offered for guessing who the targets of any fundraising are: corporate lobbyists!
USCB is a sort of glorified “Check into Cash” for corporations who have extended credit to people like Ackerman’s would-be constituents. It’s a real business, all right, but being on its board hardly qualifies her as a businesswoman. And of course she got that part-time gig based entirely on who her husband was. The links on the USCB site take you to major health care trade associations, etc. Hmm. More lobbyists.
Of course we have already shared another of Mrs. Ackerman’s board positions, on The Pacific Policy Research Foundation, a completely bogus 501(c)(3), whose sole reason for existing is to get state legislators and lobbyists holed up together in a five- star Maui hotel for a week. Funny, the Pacific Policy Research Foundation fails to appear in her biography. Come on, Linda, are you suddenly ashamed of the noble goals of the “public purpose” Foundation you created? What’s that? You’re afraid the public might not understand? Bet you’re right!
What is it about Linda Ackerman and lobbyists?
Finally, we have to ask:
Mrs. Ackerman do you have any real business experience at all? Have you ever run your own business? Have you ever signed the front of a paycheck? Have you ever paid business taxes or fees, or worker’s comp?
Or could it be your claim to be a “businesswoman” is as hollow as your empty claim to live in the 72nd? Is this claim just more campaign pabulum meant to be sucked up by a careless electorate?
The Fullerton Harpoon did a post yesterday about an article that the Register’s Frank Mickadeit did about the Ackerman/Norby feud. Frank didn’t bother to tell his readers that he pals around with the Ackermans socially – just like he did with Mike Carona. But we know. Mickadeit proceeded to pass along a truck load of horseshit peddled by Dick Ackerman, including 25 year-old recollections about Norby as a sexual harasser that he suddenly just remembers. Of course his corroborating witness is dead as a doornail.
Well, yesterday afternoon the Harpoon re-read the Mickadeit piece and a light bulb snapped on. As the helpful Frank tells it:
Ackerman says the two had a friendly beer at Elmer’s after Norby won. “I said, ‘Hey, things are going to be good. We’ve got five conservatives.’ But the votes kept coming out 4-1,” with Norby dissenting.
In a post update the Harpoon unloads:
PROOF THAT ACKERMAN IS A LIAR – OR HAS A REAL, REAL BAD MEMORY. MOLLY McCLANAHAN WAS ON THE CITY COUNCIL THEN. THERE WERE NEVER 5 CONSERVATIVES. C’MON DICK. YOU REMEMBER MOLLY DON’T YOU? YOU KEPT HER FROM BEING MAYOR FOR 6 YEARS. YOU OUGHT TO. MAYBE LINDA LEQUIRE CAN HELP. HER MEMORY IS AT LEAST AS GOOD AS YOURS.
So what are we left with? A man whose honesty or memory is rotten. His whole interview with Mickadeit is discredited, and is just typical of everything else in the Linda Ackerman 72nd Assembly campaign: her fake residency, her phony self-description as a business woman, and her contention that people in the 72nd asked her to run. It’s all a tissue of falsehoods – as bogus as her staged photos.
An woman canvassing for Ackerman came to our door this morning. I asked a few questions and she was pro. Knew what she was doing, quick with answers and not shy about slamming Norby. She implied that Norby might have psychological problems Since I’m voting for a Democrat it was all wasted on me.
Hmm. Doesn’t sound like your typical volunteer precinct walker, now does it? Did Mrs. Ackerman hire people to do her walking? That would square with what seems to have been a scripted character assassination of Norby, which is perfectly congruent with the Ackerman campaign strategy.
It could be that baxter just happened to get an experienced volunteer who was really on the ball. But somehow we have trouble believing that. Linda Ackerman has zero “grassroots” support in the 72nd, where she does not live, and except for a few die-hard Republican Women Federated types and a few of Dick’s old Rotarian buddies, she would have trouble scrounging up volunteers to hit the streets.
Why this operative wasted time going to the door of an evident Democrat is a bit puzzling, but maybe they figure they need every voter that they can bamboozle.