AD72 Special Election Watch: Norby Outraising Ackerman Last Few Days

Author's Latest Posts |

AD72 Special Election Watch: Norby Outraising Ackerman Last Few Days

By Matthew Cunningham | 11/01/09 | 07:02 PM EDT | 6 Comments

Latest posts from your county...

For a campaign entering its home stretch, the fundraising doesn't stop -- even for Halloween.

Let's take a look at where the money has been flowing the last couple of days.

On October 30, Sup. Chris Norby had a banner day, hauling in $11,600. This included $3,900 from Howard Ahmanson. Will this provoke a finger-wagging from Norby supporter Steve Greenhut, for whom religious conservatives have become a favorite whipping boy? There's also this $1,000 from the Laborers International Union of North America PAC. Will there by any fretting about union influence?

Norby also took in $1,700 from Judy Ware -- the second contribution he's received from the Ware family. How long will fringy Art Pedroza, self-proclaimed tribune of the people, sometime friend of Norby and enemy of the Wares, continue to look the other way?

Also in the mix were donations from the Third House and county vendors (any burbles of protest from the crusaders at FFFF?), and another $1,000 from Yehezkel Neches.

Let me say here that I don't think there is anything wrong with Norby accepting these donations, nor do they cast any suspicion on his politicfal motives. Chris is an ideologue in the best sense of the word. He's motivated by ideas and principles. The California Teachers Association could max out to his campaign and drop $500,000 on pro-Norby independent expenditures, and he would respond by saying "Thank you" and supporting a school voucher program.

The point of my foregoing sarcasm is the illuminate the double standard evinced by some Norby's supporters.

Linda Ackerman didn't bring in anything on October 30, but took in $5,400 on Halloween. $3,900 came from Altria, the parent of Philip Morris and other companies. $1,500 from was BIZ PAC, the political action arm of the OC Business Council. That balances out the $1,500 BIZ PAC gave to Norby a few days ago. I suppose that's like contribution an equal supply of guns and ammo to the Hatfields and the McCoys.

Today, $1,0000 from Vintage Marina landed in Norby's campaign account.

On the IE front, while donations to the "Alliance for California's Tomorrow" have slowed significantly from a torrent to something more than a tirickle, they're still coming. On Oct. 30, Intuit -- attention all you Turbo Tax users! -- put in $10,000. $4,000 was paid in consulting fees (presumably to committee consultant Jim Nygren) and more intriguingly, $6,000 was spent on a survey. My guess is the committee trying to determine how far -- of even if -- all its exertions have moved the needle for Linda Ackerman -- and then make a decision on whether to keep spending money on her behalf.

TAGS: Chris Norby, Linda Ackerman, AD72

6 Comments | Related Topics »Orange County (CA)

Comments

RINOS are losing

Like her fellow RINO Dede Scozzafava, Linda Ackerman's campaign is running out of steam. Her money is drying up. Her poll numbers are dwindling. Norby's lead among Absentee voters is becoming insurmountable. Even Ackerman's friendly IE committee is running out of money.

Submitted by NOLIBERALS on Sun, 11/01/09 - 07:17 PM »

So it would seem that Norby

So it would seem that Norby has nothing better to do than comment on this blog under different names. He should quit harassing conservative women!

Submitted by Reagan Republican on Tue, 11/03/09 - 08:32 PM »

Another one of Chris Norby's

Another one of Chris Norby's donors on the 30th was Delta Partners, which is the business name of lobbyist Dave Ellis, one of the OC Fair Board members Art loves to crap on.

If it were Ackerman that Ellis and the Wares were donating money to, Art Pedroza would be screaming bloody murder. But he's a hypocritical suck-up, so he won;t criticize his BFF Tony Bushala's friend, no matter what Norby does.

Art is too much of a coward to come here and admit it.

Submitted by Art Pedroza, hypocrite on Sun, 11/01/09 - 08:15 PM »

doh

You answered your own question, Matt. Fringers don't have to scream about contributions to Norby because they know that these donors won't able to buy themselves any favors.

Donations to the Ackermans, on the other hand, will pay off. If you know what I mean.

Submitted by Fringer on Mon, 11/02/09 - 12:34 AM »

Fringers get nailed

"Donations to the Ackermans, on the other hand, will pay off."

The benefit of being a fringer is you can accuse people of being on the take, and never have to prove it!

The FFFFers figure if they say it over and over again, then it's true!

People like Greenhut go on and on about people who looked the other way at Carona's personal behavior, but he looks the other way at Norby's. Can you imagine how he and pedroza would go ballistic if someone minimized Carona's womanizing as a "harmless quirk"?

You nailed these hypocrites, Matt. Keep it up!

Submitted by The Oracle on Mon, 11/02/09 - 11:12 AM »

Wait a minute!

I thought we were electing the person who would best represent the interests of the 72nd AD's constituents. Or is this an election for someone who puts on a great smile and is "a nice person"? I thought we, O.C. conservatives, were looking to send one of our own to Sacramento to stop throwing good money after bad. Based on Ackerman's limited record, she would make a poor representative. Looking at Norby's record, there is no question that he is a fiscal conservative who believes in doing more with less.

And I don't give a rat’s ass what our elected officials do off the clock so long as their votes represent my views. I'm not having them over for dinner. They aren't climbing in my bed. These aren't people who I share hobbies with. The ONLY reason to choose a candidate is to represent YOU on the Assembly floor.

Carona wasn't convicted of adultery, even though you might have wanted him to be. His sex-capades were kept fairly quiet and I have yet to hear anyone announce that they had sex with him so that he would do them a favor. Of course there were a ton of rotten decisions he made but none of them, so far as I have seen, made crime worse. On the contrary, he did some fantastic things that will be forgotten.

Duvall quit because he was screwing lobbyists, not because he was committing adultery. His voting record was pretty average for a conservative.

Hell, Clinton didn't get in trouble because he was messing around with Monica, he was impeached because he lied about it to investigators and then tried to cover it up.

Let's be realistic. I have never seen a politician who I thought of as a hero. So, why try to make them out to be one or to fail to be one? The same thing happens in pro sports. A big name gets photographed by media doing something he shouldn't (drugs, sex, you name it). But on the field or court he is still that "hero". Where is the correct perspective?

Submitted by Greg on Wed, 11/04/09 - 01:19 AM »