Loose Lips

Order on the Ballot

The D.C. Board of Elections and Ethics Twitter feed was rocking this morning, with news of the drawing for ballot order for the April 26 special election for an At-Large D.C. Council seat. For the legions of you who are likely to turn out to vote , the candidates will appear in the following order:

  1. Alan Page
  2. Dorothy Douglas
  3. Bryan Weaver
  4. Arkan Haile
  5. Joshua Lopez
  6. Patrick Mara
  7. Sekou Biddle (the incumbent)
  8. Tom Brown
  9. Vincent Orange
  10. "Write-In, if any"

Remember, Washington City Paper, NBC4's Tom Sherwood, and WPFW-FM's D.C. Politics will co-sponsor a candidate forum at the Black Cat on Tuesday, April 12. Candidates who had raised more than $10,000 by March 10 or got more than 10 percent in a public poll were invited, which means Biddle, Haile, Lopez, Mara, Orange, and Weaver got an invitation.

  • Rick Mangus

    You know I will be there!

  • Southeast Ken

    I am not voting for any of these clowns. The Washington Times has another interesting article on Cherita Whiting.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/24/fired-dc-cop-questions-laniers-impartiality/

  • DC4Life

    I read that article. HOT MESS!!! This woman is a real piece of work and Kathy Lanier really needs to get some real business and stop handling the affairs of a woman scorned.

  • Drez

    Glad to see MPD isn't tolerating it's officers maintaining close personal relations with dealers who spread money around to children.

  • Rick Mangus

    The best canidate is Mr/Mrs Write-in!

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    SORRY… RACIST CITY PAPER!!! The CITY PAPER IS DISCRIMINATING!!!

    This “DISCRIMINATION” by the City Paper MUST STOP NOW!

    Once a candidate has acquired the 3,000 signatures to qualify for the ballot..THEY ARE A BONIFIED CANDIDATE…PERIOD.

    WHY DOES THE MEDIA place another qualifying HURDLE for the candidate to be invited?

    The City Paper is using the same racist “1960’s tactic many establishments use to prevent Afro-Americans from entering their business, restaurants, swimming pools, night clubs.

    This is a tactic to prevent any D.C. citizen with their heart and dedication to help fellow citizens to SPEAK TO the ISSUES that affect ALL residents in their communities.

    A candidate may not be connected to developers, big business or corporations that do business in the District.

    THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY [candidate] DO NOT HAVE THE UNDERLYING solution to “ISSUES” THAT AFFECT CITIZENS IN THIS CITY.

    MONEY IS JUST THAT MONEY. CITIZENS want to hear what the candidates have to SAY.

    Did the City Paper place restrictions on the public that they must be in a particular INCOME LEVEL TO ATTEND THEIR FORUM???? Then, why should the candidates have this restriction?

    Is the City Paper running a class forum only for the RICH AND WELL CONNECTED CANDIDATES?

    City paper is racist in placing a financial qualification on who will SPEAK TO PUBLIC citizens.

    All the candidates who were invited should voice to the City Paper that all candidates [regardless of the amount of money in their treasury] should have the opportunity to participate in this PUBLIC forum.

    ORANGE, BIDDLE, LOPEZ, HAILEY, MARA, WEAVER are you just for those citizens who are in the high income level or are you for all - the low income, no income and remaining citizens that live in the District?

    Then you invited CANDIDATES must insist that you will not attend unless ALL CANDIDATES [that are on the Ballot] ARE INVITED to the City Paper forum!!!!

    Calvin H. Gurley

  • DC Politics

    Calvin,

    I fail to see how having a certain requirements for candidate forum is RACIST. Do you even know what racism is? If so, how does it play into this.

    Don't get me wrong, I have no intention of attending the forum and I have an even better mind to stay away from the polls on April 26. However, the fact remains that your argument about racism is wrong.

  • Time2BReal

    Im puzzled as to how this is an act of "racism". If you feel that certain candidates who missed the 100K mark should be included, then perhaps you should throw a fundraiser or donate to a campaign that you believe in next time.

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    Rush job in a hurry. But here is the response.

    Racism is not just a standard one act fits all situations. Ask any EEO counselor that racism/discrimination is a pattern. I was a shop steward with AFGE for 2 years.

    This is the third organization that has limit full participation of a few At-Large candidates.

    First was the forum at One Judiciary Square – D.C. Democracy Group that made their “Pre” selection on who would be in their forum. This group did not include women…especially an Afro-American woman. They left out Dorothy Douglass an honorary officeholder for Ward 7 School Board. However, they allowed Mara an honorary officeholder for Ward 3 School Board to participate IN A PUBLIC FORUM. This forum was organized by all white folks

    Second, the Northwest Current News paper had a similar At-Large Candidates forum for their public in upper Northwest D.C. They too handpicked what At-Large Candidate would participate in their PUBLIC FORUM. Several candidates were left out. News paper majority white personnel…an assumption on my part.

    NOW, it City Paper turn. To restrict candidates on a self made threshold of $10,000.00 that is very convenient for the economic times we all are experiencing. To raise $10,000.00 is very difficult unless you connect to those big businesses, developers, law firms that already have free and influential access to the current incumbents on the Council. Newspaper majority white personnel/white own ….an assumption on my part.

    Ward 7 and Ward 8 Democratic forums did not place self-made restrictions on what candidates would attend their PUBLIC discussion.

    I remembered Dennis Rolark Barnes –Washington Informer Newspaper- did not conjure up self-made restrictions for candidates; all candidates were allowed to participate in her newspaper’s forum that happened in the last D.C. election.

    Using these examples why do White organized forums place additional restrictive qualifications for public office candidates and Black organized forums welcome all candidates – no campaign money restrictions?

    Racism can be witnessed in a group just satisfying a cap, or reaching/allowing a qualifying number of minorities to satisfy a requirement. This may be called tokenism. However, a group may allow only one minority into its group to satisfy a requirement or to quell any concept that racism does not exist in that group. Where, normally several minorities who have greater qualifications [than the minority that was the token] could have increase the presence of a minority in that group.

    Money is the great divider in racism.

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    Revision;

    However, a group may allow only one minority into its group to satisfy a requirement or to quell any concept that racism DOES exist in that group. Where, normally several minorities who have greater qualifications [than the minority that was the token] could have increase the presence of a minority in that group.

  • Rick Mangus

    They should put a choice on the ballot, 'NONE OF THE ABOVE'!

  • Southeast Ken

    LOL@Rick

  • Southeast Ken

    I am not voting for any of these clowns. I will write in Rick Mangus on NOODLEZ names on the ballot. Oops,I can write in Charlie Sheen name. LOL

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    "... If you feel that certain candidates who missed the 100K mark should be included, then perhaps you should throw a fundraiser or donate to a campaign that you believe in next ..."

    Gurley's response.

    You don’t see the unfairness…the abrupt , conniving, unjustified, self-made $10,000. City Paper ‘s Restriction on At-Large candidates.

    1) Unfair…in that City Paper waited until now [not during candidates petition time Dec. 24, 2010] TO INFORM candidates that on March 10th they must meet a $10,000.00 campaign treasury amount in order to PARTICIPATE in their April 12th Forum. A sudden surprised qualifying amount.

    City Paper -Tell the candidate upfront , at least give them [candidates] time to reach your required limit to be invited to the April 12rh forum.

    2) What if. That on March 10 all At-Large candidates had surpassed $10,000.00 in their campaign treasury. What; “out of the hat” amount would the City Paper –now- use to restrict “unwanted” candidates? Perhaps, $20,000?

    3) How did the City Paper conveniently come up with this threshold amount?
    Or, did City Paper first review campaign finance reports to structure the amount needed in order to restrict unwanted candidates? If it [$10,000 restriction] would have been announced at the start of the race s Dec. 23, 2010 then suspensions would not surface.

    4) Who has researched and/or made scientific findings that $10,000. Is the amount any candidate needs to be a bonified candidate in a D.C. election?

    Even Adrian Fenty’s multi-Million dollar campaign did not ensure his re-election.

  • Southeast Ken

    Calvin H. Gurley, you need to take a chill pill before you end up in Saint Elizabeths by brother. I've seen several of your responsed in the Washington Post in the past and you seem to be losing it a times.

    Don't let politics or politicians get to you. Enjoy and live what life you have left on this earth because we are living in perilous times in the United States.

  • Southeast Ken

    Calvin H. Gurley, you need to take a chill pill before you end up in Saint Elizabeths, my brother. I've seen several of your responses in the Washington Post in the past and you seem to be losing it a times.

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    Southeast Ken...thank you for your medical advice.

    That facts are just the facts. I really don't understand on your 'term' that I am losing it at times?

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    Southeast Ken...thank you for your medical advice.

    That facts are just the facts. I really don't understand on your 'term' that I am losing it at times?

    It is not the politicians or politics...if you carefully read my responses. It is the media who is manipulating our minds, favoring their selected picks to run for public office and attempting to change the history of D.C. that I bring to light.

    I have done my research and homework...and all I have written has support. If you don't agree but accept what the media tells you then I have no ill feelings towards you...my brother.

    You have made your choice to accept in what "has been revealed" to you.

  • Southeast Ken

    Ok Calvin, I am not mad at you brother. I just to want to see you getting worked up regarding these clowns.

  • noodlez

    @SEKen-IF I WIN SPECIAL ELECTION AS WRITE-IN CANDIDATE I WILL PROPOSE LEGISLATION FOR A CLOWN FREE DAY IN WDC

  • Billy

    Southeat Ken, the article you posted seems to read that Cherita saved us you included some tax dollars from paying a salary of a bad cop. Thanks to Cherita cause I pay to much in taxes already. As for DC4Life you should get a life this article mentioned nothing about a woman scorned the article stated a bad cop was fired after a hearing revealed the officer Bishop broke the law isn't that what should happen. DUH!

  • http://deleted Etta

    I think the community needs to vote for the person who is not backed by money intrest then they will work for the taxpayers of DC not special interests groups.

  • Calvin H. Gurley

    Amen...Etta.

    Etta gladly stated with much wisdom;

    "...I think the community needs to vote for the person who is not backed by money intrest then they will work for the taxpayers of DC not special interests groups..."

    This another reason City Paper's $10,000.00 is unfair to candidates with their hearts and dedication to improve the life of residents...should have their VOICES HEARD.

  • Time2BReal

    @Etta I totally agree, Ward 8 endorsed Vincent Orange even while Marion Barry (a Biddle Supporter) was present at the forum. That proves that the people are not with the establishment and are voicing their opinion on who they feel can tackle the city's problems.

    Now that this issue with Rhee & the principals cheating on test scores, how true is Biddle's credibility on making educational advancements through the School Board. Not saying he didnt accomplish anything but anyone who was involved in the Rhee years could have been sugarcoating their achievements.

    Is there any source that a person can check to see exactly what Biddles accomplishments during that time were, and if they truly made the impact on the Educational System he boasts so proudly of?

...