Boulanger endorses Times endorsement not endorsing Boulanger

— by Jeffrey Wisniewski — 25 September 2012 — 4 comments below »

You cannot make this stuff up.1

Councilman Gerard Boulanger thinks very highly of the endorsements made by the Contra Costa Times — so highly it is the only endorsement worth endorsing. That is what he wrote to voters in his original run for council last year (emphasis added; screencap at bottom):

The Contra Costa Times endorsed me May 4th in their Editorial and I am proud of it. I am strongly against any other endorsement. I believe they are either not a real endorsement per se or based on a cultural/spiritual philosophy which I consider as a potential division in our community.

Strongly against.

Of course, the Times eventually and famously rescinded that endorsement after the details of the very strange case of Boulanger’s fraud came to light. Boulanger had repeatedly lied about his education and political service history, although he referred to it merely as “recent confusion” in his mea culpa.2

And the Times has made good on their previous mistake by officially not endorsing Boulanger in his surpising and audacious run for re-election this year, in fact going out of their way to implore voters to “right the wrong”:

We decline to endorse the third incumbent, Gerard Boulanger. He won his seat in the recall election in part by lying about his past political experience and his education in his native France. We learned of his deceit just before the recall election. As we said then, he should have resigned once elected. He refused. So now voters should right the wrong.

Now that is an endorsement you take to the bank.

Boulanger endorsements

  1. I find myself thinking this a lot.
  2. Apparently inartful was not in his lexicon.

4 comments already …

  1. # GC commented on 26-Sep-12 @ 5:09am

    Thanks for the laugh, JW. I almost spit my coffee on my computer screen! By the way, very good words last night. What I would like to see is a list of action items regarding the Planning Commission and Council. You seemed to have in mind some specific document requests that have not yet been made? Is this from reviewing the PC meeting minutes? If they are inactive, this is not good at all! Remind them daily if you have to, JW. Thanks for keeping on top of things. One does not have to be elected or appointed to anything to make a difference. Thanks for what you are doing, JW.


  2. # Susan Keeffe commented on 26-Sep-12 @ 8:42am

    And just look at how the Times did their endorsement! Zero vetting! Unlike the County Democratic Party and local Democratic Club, they weren’t even asked to provide proof of their qualifications, residencies, etc.etc.! One person asking questions – the author of the editorial – Borenstein. One observer. One cameraman for a film we will never get to see. Instead of preparing thoughtful questions to ask each candidate, providing them adequate time to respond, each candidate was reportedly treated differently. Candidate Rubio was apparently interrupted so many times by an aggressive Borenstein he really didn’t have an opportunity for a fair response. And I understand Boulanger’s responses were so limited and non-responsive he kept getting asked to explain! I have lost all respect for the Times endosement. I had no idea this was the way it was done. One editor, doing what he wanted, and then labelling his results as what the entire paper supports. And no vetting.

  3. # Jeffrey Boore commented on 26-Sep-12 @ 12:20pm

    Mr. Borenstein has made clear repeatedly that he does not understand what is happening in our community, or is too lazy or apathetic to do thorough investigations, or else does not care about our well being.

  4. # selina commented on 26-Sep-12 @ 3:52pm

    This is funny and sadly indicative of the state of affairs in American Politics. Its no wonder a large portion of the “would be” voting citizens are apathetic.

    We need to have a debate of the candidates so people can understand their policy (or lack of) positions.

Trackbacks so far …