Lacy's face disfigured on Dem/Labor doorhanger

|
(31)

With only three weeks to go until the election. the dirty campaign tricks get stickier.

Top of the list of dirty tricks this week is the person(s) who pasted “Vote Malia Cohen” stickers atop the image of D10 candidate Dewitt Lacy on door hangers that the SF Democratic Party and the SF Labor Council produced  jointly for the November 2010 election. According to Lacy supporters, the offending stickers cropped up primarily on door hangers distributed on Potrero Hill, where Lacy lives, works and has a strong following.

The door hanger features a photo of Jerry Brown for Governor on one side—and thumbnails of the Dem/Council’s local picks on the other. These local picks include Newsom for Lt. Governor, Kamala Harris for Attorney General, Janet Reilly for D2 Supervisor, Carmen Chu for D4 supervisor, Debra Walker for D6 supervisor, Rafael Mandelman for D8 Supervisor and Dewitt Lacy and Malia Cohen for D10--except you can't see Lacy's face on the doorhangers that have been disfigured by Cohen stickers.

Historically, the SF Democratic Party only includes the picture of its top ranked candidate on door hangers, and this fall, the DCCC (the endorsing body of the local Dem Party) endorsed Lacy as its first-ranked candidate, Cohen as its second ranked candidate and Eric Smith as its third ranked candidate.

“But we included both Dewitt and Malia on this door hanger because we are doing it with the Labor Council and we have two different first-ranked candidates,” former Board President and current DCCC chair Aaron Peskin told the Guardian, noting that the Labor Council endorsed Cohen as top-ranked and Chris Jackson as its second-ranked candidate.

Cohen’s campaign manager Megan Hamilton told the Guardian that the Cohen campaign was "aware" of the stickers.
“But we did not put the stickers there,” Hamilton said.

Lacy, who dropped by the Guardian with dozens of defaced door hangers in hand, said a stream of supporters have complained about this latest dirty trick.

‘It’s misleading,” Lacy said. ‘If folks haven’t been paying attention, they won’t understand that I have been endorsed as the Democratic Party’s top choice.”

Lacy said the door hangers were distributed a couple of weeks ago at the DCCC’s election season kick-off event to people who were going to walk precincts.
”Of course, at that time, the door hangers weren’t terribly disfigured by someone sticking a 'vote for Malia Cohen' sticker over my smiling face,” Lacy added. “But it shows that these folks are nervous about the inroads my campaign has been making in this race. After each forum we have had folks come up to us and say they are excited by our campaign because they are looking for hope and leadership that really represents them.”

So what does Lacy, the top choice of the Democratic Party, look like when he doesn't have a sticker over his face?

All smiles, after he completed his interview with the Guardian, which gave him its second-ranked endorsement in the D10 race, with Tony Kelly in top place and Chris Jackson in third.

Comments

That ranks right up there with the abuse the Debra Walker folks are foisting on anyone who dares to support Jane Kim as Second Choice.

With such abuse, Debra is anti-democratic and doesn't deserve to win.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 5:44 pm

We at the Guardian endorsed Walker first and Kim second and got no abuse from the Walker campaign. In fact, it's the Kim campaign and her taxpayer-supported propagandists over at Beyond Chron who seem to be waging the most divisive campaign in that race.

STJ, BG City Editor

Posted by steven on Oct. 12, 2010 @ 12:19 pm

If I had to rank-choice electoral fraud, Jane Kim would win. Using intimidation tactics on poor people in Tenderloin Housing Clinic SROs is dirty politics of the worst kind. Some of the smears her supporters have leveled against James Keyes disqualifies hers. It shows she's not a true progressive.

And when I see a supervisorial candidate with enough cash to advertise on both ESPN *and* CNN, (on primetime no less) I know that's a candidate who doesn't represent my interests.

JAMES KEYES FOR D6.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 7:51 pm

Looks like Lacy was completely disappeared, not just disfigured...

Why am I not surprised that the candidate of the corrupt, pro-Lennar, SF Labor Council, was the beneficiary of this outrageous criminal interference; with a sticker that was clearly specifically designed to fit perfectly on top of the Lacy endorsement and securely direct the voter to the Cohen endorsement.

I've had it up to the bridge of my nose with the Labor Council's bullshit.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 7:59 pm

No abuse from Walker or Kim for me endorsing both of them after Anna Conda.

-marc

Posted by marcos on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 8:09 pm

Word on the street is that Dewitt got the door hanger handed to him while he was at home watching college football when every legitimate candidate was walking that morning. Who won that morning, Lacy?
I mean, who want's to be San Francisco's Oakland? Shouldn't our Peskin candidate be out and about talking to voters?
Knock on doors and get your fair share of votes.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 8:20 pm

Obviously this person is a Malia Supporter. The story is about how a campaign disfigured official campaign literature. Where is the outrage with that? instead this person attacks the victim in this story.

Malia Is just a dishonest politician who should know better. She should be ashamed of herself.

Posted by Malia just cant cut it on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 8:46 pm

As much I mock this Lacy sticker-gate, Tony Kelly is the only one that is going to deliver for this district. Tony doesn't believe that District 10 is "San Francisco's Oakland". What does that mean anyway? Malia isn't going to win anyway and Dewitt needs to get up early and start knocking on doors to get voters. Victim? There are no victims when it comes to politicians. Lacy can't rest on his laurels. If he does, he needs to step back and make room for the big boys that are willing to fight Moss.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 9:09 pm

I'm glad something got Dewitt off his couch and moving for his campaign. One cannot be watching Saturday morning football games with less than three weeks out of D-Day! You cannot be resting on any endorsements...it's about getting out there and talking to the voters!!

Politics is ONLY going to get dirtier from here on out, let the mudslinging start!

Posted by Guest on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 9:43 pm

After time and Time again, Malia Cohen proves she can't be trusted. Why would you want to vote for a dirty politician?

What a sad and dirty trick.

Boo this woman!

Posted by Malia just cant cut it on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 8:25 pm

what else is malia cohen and her camp gona cover up?

Posted by roger craig on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 8:48 pm

Both Cohen and Sweet are unqualified to represent District 10.

and its a shame because Im voting for Kristin Enea even though it might mean that there will be no one of color representing District 10.

Posted by Cohen and Sweet are Bad for D10 on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 8:58 pm

What makes this article and the comments funny, is that there are people who are really taking this seriously.

WE ARE BEING PLAYED.

The real victims, contrary to "Malia just can't cut it"'s comment, are the people who live in the community. There are 22 candidates. 22 fighting to take on the hardest supervisor seat in SF.

The article about Peskin, Shaw, Kelly, and the Guardian is hilarious. No machine? Come on. How many people is Peskin endorsing in D10? Lacy, Cohen, Kelly.

Lacy , Smith, Jackson, and Cohen to take away votes away from each other, which puts Kelly on top to take on Moss. And who's else is supporting Kelly?

I think Chris Daly sucks, but I agree with him when he refer's to SFBG's great white out. And if you're gunning for the best person for the job, then it sure isn't Kelly. For a big lefty, he's sure as hell taking a lot of "support" from a big ass republican named Joe Boss.

How did Kelly receive community benefits from certain developers? Did Joe Boss call in to troops at the final hour to hussle some money? I'm sure his SLAM supporters would just love that.

If the nurses were worth a damn, the would have gotten behind a candidate that actually has a base that doesn't come from the pot smoking lazy arm of the Harvey Milk club. Good thing Jackson's covered that massive base in D10. Moss is going to screw not just 10, but 11 and 9 with his CPMC/Sutter contributions. Which sucks for the community, fuck the nurses.

And Sweet is just a train wreck.

Why call ourselves progressive when we sure aren't destined for progress the longer we stand divided and rip each other to shreds.

Malia and Lacy fighting each other? You're both being used by the Peskin Machine.The "other" candidates below the top are just waiting to be paid off to drop out of the race.

Like I said, the only victims here is the community. D10 residents are getting screwed but isn't it great that there's dialouge on the SFBG that isn't censored?

Posted by Guest1 on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 11:10 pm

Guest1, your prediction that Lacy, Smith, Jackson and Cohen will take votes 'away from each other' is highly dubious. Ranked choice makes such an outcome very unlikely.

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 12, 2010 @ 12:18 am

Once again, Eric Brooks is out in far left field picking his nose and staring at birds.

Lacy, Smith, Jackson, Cohen are all dividing the same vote of the following:

1. The progressive white D10 voters who would hopefully disagree with the Guardians terrible choice for the Kelly/Joe Boss endorsement and instead go with one of the four highly qualified African American Candidates running for District 10. (Shame on the Guardian for their top choice going to Kelly, a nod that Bayview, Visitacion Valley and Portola don't matter).

2. The remaining D10 African American community has nearly a dozen Black Candidates dividing up a voter base and is in need of a clear front runner who will represent and work to bring together their community. Smith, Jackson and Cohen are out every day talking to Bayview and Visitacion Valley voters as well as Sweet, Diane W-Smith, Joshua, and Norman. So many people running further divides up the vote and Moss wins. Everyone is watering down the AA vote.

From these posts, the story is less about poor, hurt "naive" (as the chronicle stated) Lacy but more about what Guest 1 has said in the earlier post. The only victim here is the D10 community. Too bad the Guardian can't write about that. Instead, their "Lacys Face Disfigured" article only creates more division, but that is what the left does, divides and eats itself.

Seems like Smith, Jackson and Cohen are working 24/7 out moving their positive message to improve the district. Rather than collecting up fliers from Lacy's supporters (i didn't even think Claude Eberhardt, Aaron Peskin, Gabriel Holland, and John Avalos even live in D10), talking negatively about Oakland/D10 comparisions with his own campaign literature, and hanging out and expecting the "machine" to do something for him, Dewitt should get off his couch and Do It!!

Posted by LM on Oct. 12, 2010 @ 5:13 am

@ LM,

As long as all of the progressive voters (who you are claiming will have their votes split) rank at least one candidate with a high likelihood of beating Moss and Cohen then those votes are not wasted; and this especially true if we get these voters to only choose one candidate as their conscience vote and then the two others as strategic progressive votes.

The question is which two progressive candidates to try to get them all to rank beside their heart of hearts choice.

My personal call on this would be Tony Kelly and DeWitt Lacy.

If I were a D-10 voter my ranking would be:

1) Nyese Joshua

2) Tony Kelly

3) DeWitt Lacy

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 12, 2010 @ 9:04 pm

Mr Brooks,

Your insistence to be relevant in politics that 1) you are too irrelevant to weigh in on and 2) you are too unskilled as an organizer, pretend and real, to understand is admirable.

Even your admittance to not being a District 10 voter yet offering your suggestion of who you would vote for, with an air of faux authority, is another example of your inability to understand issues that do not affect you and demonstrates you lack of connection, on every level, to the people in District 10.

I am impressed by you obvious hypocrisy over Tony Kelly. You didn't comment on the Joe Boss/Tony Kelly connection to developer hustle money. Doesn't your 2nd choice need to be defended? Or do you simply not know about how Joe Boss works with developers, calls Tony Kelly at the last minute to protest, and how both hustle the developer for community benefit agreements? What do you think funds Mr. Kelly's theatre?

I guess it's because you think there's no Peskin machine? That he's not hedging his bets so that he can be interum mayor with the right votes? Or that he is simply using all of the people he endorsed to pave way for his own personal power?

But, here I am, asking you rhetorical questions. Of course you don't know any of these things. You're not an organizer.

Just in case you forgot, I have decided to include my last comment about you and your irrelevancy.

Last comment below:

Mr. Brooks, we have gone over your relevance in progressive politics and, based on your inability to organize, develop leaders, or have concrete winnable demand, it is overwhelmingly apparent that you are irrelevant.

Your public support for candidates such as Nyese Josuha and Tony Kelly only do them a disservice because they then become connected to you. Your faux political authority and online "organizing" (constant presences on the SFBG comments) are obvious rantings of a contrived individual grasping at relevancy in a district that you 1) do not live in 2) have no base in 3) and therefore have no right to speak on behalf of.

Your public statements that connect you to SLAM also do SLAM a disservice. It gives the illusion that you were somehow instrumental in any success or traction they were able to make in their campaign. However, as you spend more time here making comments than learning to organize in the community (as I have suggested before), I doubt you were useful or influential in anyway. You probably just attended meetings, turned no one out to events, and said things that you thought were smart but were gently disregarded.

Your opposition of ACORN makes me want to revive them and side on whatever position they take. Having followed the BVHP Lennar project closely, as well as the obvious players (and, unfortunately, the more corrupt and back ground players), I know your claims are yet again another grasp at relevance through shock value and name dropping.

I suggest again, rather than creating the self illusion of relevancy, you actually learn and practice organizing skills.

Original Post below
Eric Brooks is Irrelevant

I have re-posted an earlier post. For those that are reading this, it will give you context

Eric Brooks,

Your claims and positions on matters in a district that you are not a part of are disingenuous.

You claim you're a community organizer, yet have no base or have any visible developed leadership. You represent yourself. You are not an organizer.

You insert yourself into arguments and issues only to create an illusion of your own relevance. By insulting, discrediting through conspiracy theory style "proof", and name dropping, I sure you actually believe that you are relevant. And that's fine. However, it's misleading to readers. You are doing SF Guardian readers a disservice.

Your claims against Lennar, Bayview Hunters Point, groups that have supported the project....

You have no interest in pushing working class family issues nor respect for the process that working class families undergo to come to a solution.
Your politics are a position of privilege and a not a necessity and that's why you have a blatant disregard for people who actually have put the effort, developed the talent, and reached the people to push an issue. You are bitter because you have none of these abilities.

I see that you have repeatedly posted comments in the Guardian. Your time would be better spent learning to organize and learning the impacts of policies on people and not just your lofty ideology.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 11:59 am

Ok 'Guest' since you finally managed to make a cogent point in your latest rant, I'll actually respond to you for once.

I'm fully aware of the Joe Boss factor.

Let me describe my experience, which shows me that Tony Kelly will remain independent of Joe's little real estate games.

A couple of years ago, when I was leading (yes leading - and very successfully) the grassroots organizing to stop a new polluting power plant from being built in the Bayview, Tony Kelly stepped up to the plate against Joe Boss' agenda and did the right thing.

Boss badly wanted the new plant built in the Bayview so that he and his real estate cronies could get rid of the existing Potrero Hill Mirant Power Plant as quickly as possible and thereby rapidly double real estate values in the Pier 70 area (this was right at the beginning of the global real estate collapse and they sought fast action so they could make some quick money before the collapse fully hit).

Both Boss and Kelly at that time were on the SF Power Plant Taskforce, and indeed Boss had done a very clever, cynical job of convincing most of those taskforce members that the new Bayview plant was the only way to get rid of the old plant.

However I, and a colleague, did the solid groundwork and grassroots organizing necessary to show City officials and the Taskforce, that Boss' contention that the new plant was needed was completely false.

The night we made that case to the Power Plant Taskforce, Tony Kelly and a majority of that taskforce reversed their position.

When the meeting was over, Joe Boss stormed out of the meeting fuming (throwing even more empty epithets at me than you have) and the rest is history.

The Bayview was saved from being stuck with yet another polluting power plant, and the Potrero Hill Mirant Plant will still be closing by next year at the latest.

How's that for successful organizing 'Guest'?

Posted by Eric Brooks on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 3:14 pm

Mr Brooks,

Wow. When you tell a story, you tell a story.

First, your inability to describe what the "groundwork and grassroots organizing" was just proves you don't even know what organizing is. Did you develop leaders in the process? Build a base of activist that are geared to systemic change for environmental justice? Are they card board cut outs that you keep at your home and call your friends?

Well, as much as I find your truthiness suspect, I believe your colleague(s) [my insert] did the "solid groundwork and grassroots organizing". They are: Greenaction, SAGE/LEJ, Mothers of Hunters Point, Marie Franklin, Espinola Jackson, and residents of District 10. I would venture to say that it was Marie Franklin and Ms. Jackson that started the fight. But I'm sure you went to some organizing meetings. You just didn't "organize" them.

That's actually intriguing that you would refer to yourself and your unnamed colleague as the saviors. One article by josh arce with you quoted in it does not translate as the person (with unnamed colleague) to single handedly convince city officials and the task force, that has no power to enforce anything merely advise, to not build the plant.

Did you have a cape do go with your superhero "organizing"? It's a wonder why the residents of the bayview haven't erected a statue of you on 3rd and Palou. I know why!!! It's because you're not an organizer and you are also irrelevant to the politics of D10 and the city.

If your version of the "truth" here is any indication of the other "truths" that you have and will describe, insert your role in and claim victory over, I am on the edge of my seat to see what else we'll be reading.

Sincerely,

Eric Brooks is an Idiot Fan Club President

Posted by Eric Brooks is an Idiot Fan Club President on Oct. 14, 2010 @ 1:09 pm

Mr Brooks,

If you're anything like me when it comes to reading stuff I wrote (and I'm positive that you are), I'm excited to inform you I will be starting an Eric Brooks is an Idiot Fan Club and Watch. I'm really excited about this. Your irrelevant contributions to SFBG comments section, and I'm really hoping on FB because I'm going to befriend you the moment I have some time, have inspired me to start an online club. Your insipid comments, conspiracy theories and hypocrisy are a hoot and it believe that the progressives need a laugh during these difficult political times.

I can't wait. I'm so excited. And I'll be watching!!!!

Eric Brooks is and Idiot Fan Club/Watch President and founder

Posted by Guest on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 1:41 pm

Would this be considered a violation of ethics in the campaign world? I think that answer is clear YES!! (and yes, there are ethics in the campaign world) While the Malia camp may play ignorant, and may try to mask this outright sabotage by talking about what other candidates are or are not doing, the fact remains that this was a scandalous act. Unacceptable and disappointing.

Posted by Guest: District 10 Neighbor on Oct. 12, 2010 @ 6:55 am

Don't let the mudslinging stop the positive message you are trying to get out to the community. It is truly time that our district get the skilled advocacy it needs, and you are the person to do that! Say positive!! Go DeWitt!!!

Posted by Guest: on Oct. 12, 2010 @ 7:18 am

I believe that what I've heard is the real story: The DCCC itself, at the insistence of the Labor Council, put the stickers on. This is because the Labor Council paid for those door hangers, and didn't want DeWitt's face on there because they have not endorsed him. The Democratic Party eating its young!

Posted by Guest on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 2:16 pm

Peskin told me there is no way in hell that the DCCC would have done that--and no way that anyone could do that in their office without being busted.

He did say it was possible that supporters could pick up a bag of door hangers (each bag contains about 300 door hangers) and make off to the nearest private spot and afix the stickers there.

Whatever the real story, it was a stupid move.

Posted by sarah on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 2:44 pm

Its all politics!

Get over it

Posted by Guest on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 3:10 pm
Posted by vidan on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 7:59 pm

I understand why folks would be offended and how this move could back fire. Research shows that walking precincts and shaking hands makes a big impact in an election--much bigger than volunteers distributing door hangers. It's why money alone can't always buy an election. And negative campaigning against other candidates can backfire, especially in SF, where candidates need to come up with strategies to get a second or third place vote from the supporters of other candidates if a race is close.

Posted by sarah on Oct. 13, 2010 @ 5:01 pm

This is District 10 and we can't be having dirty tricks like this in our neighborhoods. With over 21 people running for supervisor we are already a joke. Its too bad that some candidates ,who clearly will not win, are not openly supporting another candidate. Not only are we not supporting one another but we are disgracing the spirit of this election season by attacking one another in the streets instead of in the town halls and forums.

Its time people start to endorse one another of else Moss or Sweet will run away with this election and leave the hard working class folks with out the best advocate for our neighborhoods.

Posted by Lets come together on Oct. 21, 2010 @ 1:39 pm

yes!

"Its time people start to endorse one another of else Moss or Sweet will run away with this election and leave the hard working class folks with out the best advocate for our neighborhoods. "

Posted by vidan on Oct. 27, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

Malia will not do this. Honestly, many people been taking g her flyers down that she posted in the restaurant.
I volunteer for her at her campaign and I never seen these stickers before. It must be some people who is bored with themselves and is hurting Malia. It could be Dewitt Lacy doing this because he knows he is not a stronger candidate.

Trust me, people been taking down each other flyers. I walked around san bruno ave and her flyers been taken down. She told me that her flyers been taking down right from the start so she has to always walk up to the dry cleaners place to put it back up. She came to my class and told us about her campaign. Our Asian American class thinks she is very resourceful and know what she is talking about. She been working with the African and Chinese American so they can learn to share and know about each other cultures. her flyers are in chinese while some of the candidates didn't have flyers in chinese or spanish.

And one more thing, she does not have a lot of volunteers either as other stronger candidates.

Posted by Guest on Nov. 03, 2010 @ 9:37 pm

What does Malia ACTUALLY stand for? Or is she just a fashion plate?

Posted by George on Nov. 10, 2010 @ 8:29 am