Really? Can Nothing Be Done About This Kind of Behavior?

William Fitzgerald is at it again, as Dan Chmielewski points out in a post today over at TheLiberalOC.com:

At this week’s council meeting, Fitzgerald was in rare form. Go to the 36:31 mark of this link to watch him in action. And after watching, please note the chamber there were a number of children, ages 6-10, making what’s likely their first visit to city hall and a city council meeting. The kids and their parents were there to commemorate the council’s unanimous approval of the High Ground Youth and Family Services agreement. In fact, the kids presented the colors at the beginning of the meeting for the Pledge of Allegiance, so Mr. Fitzgerald had to know those kids were there. Mayor Tait certainly knew.

Now, we certainly disagree on policy matters with most things the three Republican women on the Anaheim City Council stand for. And Fitzgerald’s MO is not a secret. Fitzgerald, in front of a number of kids, singles out the women on the council and calls them “whores,” “bitches” and “sluts” which had to be a joy for the parents of those kids to hear.

I find it impossible to believe nothing can be done in the face of Fitzgerald’s obscene rants, or that the presiding officer in helpless to act. And it keep in mind the gaggle of critics continually haranguing the council majority consider Fitzgerald to be one of them, more or less, and include him in their online information transmission belt.

No comments

  1. Fitzgerald’s comments were reprehensible. Yet Mayor Tait remained silent and passive, demonstrating only the behavior of a feckless leader. The least he should do is silence the microphone of disgusting, disrespectful, or despicable speakers. There is no need or tenable basis for the city to air the rants and hate speech of any political wacko.

    • Matt, this is why reporting this article is reckless. It lends validity to comments like this.

      Turning the microphone off is NOT LEGAL. You do it and you get the city of Anaheim to cut Fitzgerald a nice juicy check for being an ass.

      Dan offers some suggestions on what the mayor may or may not do. Let’s take a moment and reflect on the last time this blog, the council majority, and Dan C had something to say about the Mayor stomping on the public’s right to speak:

      http://www.voiceofoc.org/county/article_ab170428-5d88-11e3-a8e0-001a4bcf887a.html

      “While Tait’s council colleagues criticized him at the time as part of an organized attack campaign against the mayor, the experts gathered Wednesday night at the North Orange County Community College District Board Room agreed he pretty much got it right”

      Oh, right. Ya’ll were wrong. Now you want round two? Dan’s suggestions are tools to be used when a speaker is factually being disruptive– not because children are in the room. The former is legal, the later is reckless . . . and the further the gavel drifts from stopping disruptive (not hateful) speech, the more liability the city assumes.

      So Dan wants the city to risk its general fund because kids are in the room. Nice thought and I empathize, but reckless nonetheless.

      Acting like the mayor (or any presiding officer in a public meeting) can just throw down at will and interrupt or silence a speaker violates state law. If you don’t like it, take it up with Sacramento and the CA Supreme Court.

      Trying to score political points with it, again, is just cheap political posturing– not because it’s right, but because it’s easy. I expect that from Dan. I don’t expect that from you, Matt.

      You ought to be clear that you’re frustrated with the state legislature and its courts . . . not the mayor.

      • I knew I shouldn’t have put the link in. Stuck in purgatory again.

        • Are you the only member of the Orange Juice’s blog team without a felony on your record? Does your employer know you write blog comments all day while you should be working?

          • Ah, look at you. You’re a brave one. Does your employer know you’re a coward? How about your kids? I’m sure they’d love to know their parent runs around pretending to be a condiment for lamb.

            The sins of others don’t really concern me, Mint. Enjoy Christ’s blessings on this fantastic first Friday of Lent. If Christ found it acceptable to die a death surrounded by murders, thieves, and whores– a little light blogging in the same space as a few felons is the least I can do. They’re only trying to make the world a more peaceful place for you and I to live. I don’t see any persuasion to debauchery in anything they write.

            At the very least, we don’t allow comments like yours. Anymore at least. How bout it, Matt?

            I happen to have today off. Not that it’s any of your business– but I appreciate the not so veiled threat to attack my livelihood and how I feed my children each day.

            • Actually you do allow those sort of comments.

            • Are you serious with this statement: “At the very least, we don’t allow comments like yours. Anymore at least. How bout it, Matt?”

              You don’t read the comments there do you?

            • Matthew Cunningham

              Last I checked, character assassination is still on the menu at Orange Juice Blog.

              • Check again.

                No anonymous rock throwing. Particularly on anything I write.

                Anyway, way to chime in, Matt. Not exactly the response from you I was hoping for.

                • Dan Chmielewski

                  Then who’s “Nameless” Ryan? Someone who protects their identity very well and is always allowed to comment. I have to laugh at the stuff about me he gets wrong.

                • Matthew Cunningham

                  I’m sorry Ryan, but OJB has been a cesspool for years and years. And that hasn’t really changed because the tone is set from the top.

            • Ryan, regarding the comment to MintJelly on the not so veiled threat to attack your livelihood, I will remind you of a comment you left on my blog where you were going to go through my client list to see who supported Prop 8 (none of them actually). Practice what you preach and stay out of my livelihood.

              • Holy crap. Good gravy, Dan-o!

                a) Non sequitur
                b) I was illustrating a point that your outrage was rather selective
                c) Assuming I did do that, which I wouldn’t, it would only be for the purposes of labeling you a hypocrite– not to detract from your business. How you got from that to this is beyond me. That takes a special kind of mind.

                I don’t understand why you’ve got such a bee up your bonnet, but I suppose if it makes you happy– keep raging against the machine, sir.

  2. When something happens that isn’t in Montgomery’s prepared talking points for Tait, we again and again see him flounder. Supporters of the mayor, I encourage you to cut out the middleman and call it like it is: Montgomery 2014!

  3. Kids hear a lot worse language on the street
    among gang members.

  4. Proposal: speakers at the Anaheim CA city council podium will show more respect for the family members present at the meetings as soon as Anaheim police officers show more respect for the spouses, children and other family members of the Latino men that they deliberately, with premeditation and malice of forethought harm while hiding behind the color of authority.

  5. I guess I missed the part where Dan C and Matt finished law school. Online course? Two degrees for the price of one blogging contract? I missed why you two suddenly claim to know more about the law than..well frankly the Mayor who IS a lawyer, and the City Attorney, who IS a lawyer. Did you miss Tait’s repeated requests to the City Attorney? Did you miss the answers given to the Mayor and Council by that City Attorney? Yes, I suppose the Mayor could kill the microphone (do they even have the equipment rigged in a way that would do that?) but any one of the City Council members (or their aides who are often in Chambers) could also run up and kick the bastard in the shins, it would be about as legal. None of us like the guy’s behavior, it is despicable in the extreme. Sadly by reacting to it like Kring does, she lets him know it is getting to her, and does nothing but dump gasoline on the fire.

    So here is a scenario that could make this work for everyone. On Tuesday evening, Dan C. Matt C (no relation) and Curt Pringle can all come to Council. You guys are probably having dinner together anyway, hop in Curt’s car and come on down to City Hall. And when Curt is done sharing with us how HE managed to keep Fitzgerald under control, Dan and Matt can then hand over to the City Clerk the bond they purchased, using their homes and businesses as collateral, ensuring payout for the legal claim Fitzgerald is certain to file after the Mayor implements your plans to stop the political speech of one U.S. Citizen, and military veteran (the media is going to eat that up.) I detest Fitzgerald’s horrid rants as badly as the next person, but the question has been asked and answered, by a mayor who has done more to try finding a solution in his first term than Pringle ever attempted in his two terms combined. I also think that if we seek ways to stop hate speech it should apply to ALL ignorant, racist, sexist bigotry, which includes the illustrious James Robert Reade, whose words find a welcome home here in the cesspool. Why is it you only object to leaders being insulted? The general public, sitting out in Chambers, endures racist rants from bat-guano-crazy Reade, week after week, and you say nothing, your beloved leaders say nothing. It is only when one of their own are targeted that suddenly the speech is inappropriate.

    Gentlemen, I look forward to seeing you at the podium Tuesday. I’m sure Curt can recall how to get there, seeing as how he still runs the place.

  6. First of all, the next meeting is a week from Tuesday, not this Tuesday. And yes, the equipment does exist to mute the microphone. I have been looking for any reference in the Brown Act that makes it illegal to cut off someone’s mic.

    So if Fitzgerald comes to the mic next meeting and starts calling Tait’s wife “bitch, whore or slut” do you really think Tait will sit there passively?

    And I have asked Mr. Reade, on this blog, to take back his bonobo comments and he refuses which makes him a complete POS if you ask me. I have said plenty of things about Mr. Reade, Cynthia….you only pay attention when Tait gets criticized.

Leave a Reply

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

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>