Larry Larsen’s Laughable J’Accuse

Larry Larsen is a member of the Anaheim Citizen’s Advisory Committee, to which he was appointed last year by Councilwoman Lorri Galloway (not by Tom Tait, as Gabriel San Roman of the OC Weekly erroneously reported).

I’ve attended most of the CAC meetings, which he usually sits through, sphinx-like, with the exception of using the beginning of the meeting to state how much it has cost the city to fight the ACLU litigation.

I missed last week’s CAC meeting, but watched on video as Mr. Larsen went on a noteworthy diatribe (go to the 2:02:04 mark on the video)

“There are special interests people on this committee, that do belong to special interests, and they know who they are and I know who some of them are.”

Who’s The Special Interest?
I have to imagine that one of the “special interest people” Larry Larsen was referring to was himself. Otherwise, it would be ludicrous for Mr. Larsen to wag his finger about “special interests.”  Larsen is a loyal minion of former Lorri Galloway who can be relied upon to tow the line, and a part of the special-interest coalition pushing for carving the city into eight single-member districts.

Here’s Mr. Larsen on a campaign mailer sent out last year by one of the biggest special interests aroound, the Orange County Employees Association:

Larry Larsen OCEA mailer

And here’s Mr. Larsen recording a robocall for the OCEA.

And here he is speaking at a rally for the “Take Back Anaheim” initiative, which was funded by the aforementioned special interest, the OCEA, and actively supported by other special interests such as UNITE-HERE Local 11 and OCCORD:


The point being, Mr. Larsen isn’t in much of a position to accuse his fellow CAC members of being “special interest people” when he works hand in glove with a collection of them, and has been single-minded in favor of a particular outcome throughout the CAC process.

Mr. Larsen continued his diatribe:

“Now, let’s not forget why we’re here folks…We’re here because Los Amigos partnered with the ACLU to sue the City of Anaheim on behalf of the majority of the people of the city of Anaheim. That’s why we’re here.”

What an utterly fatuous statement. On what evidential basis has Mr. Larsen divined the ACLU and three radicals represent a majority of Anaheim residents? The implication of his assertion is this majority asked the ACLU et al to file suit “on their behalf” — which, of course, isn’t true.

By “majority,” does Mr. Larsen mean Latinos? It’s pretty obvious that he does, which serves as further proof that the Tait/Galloway bloc on the CAC view governmental representation as a function of race — a profoundly radical view that runs counter to the principles of the American Founding.

It’s an interesting, if unintentional admission, on Mr. Larsen’s part, but symptomatic of the double-talk coming from the left-winger coalition pushing single-member districts. They claim districts are necessary to increase the number of Latinos on the Anaheim City Council, but when someone points out that’s a race-based stance, they deny it and say it’s not about the ethnicity of councilmembers but about neighborhood representation.


  1. Hmmm… just checking out old things… and it looks like Larry was right in retrospect about districting being on the behalf of a majority, given that it passed by nearly 70% a year later.

    • Matthew Cunningham

      “…given that it passed by nearly 70% a year later.”

      And the “Yes on L & M” campaign spent about half-a-million dollars (all from out-of-town special interests), while the No on L & M campaign spent…well, nothing – since there really was no anti-Measure L & M campaign. The “Yes on L & M” campaign was the only one having a conversation with voters, promising their streets would get paved if they passed L & M.

      You’re the same Vern Nelson who routinely uses large campaign spending disparities to try and de-legitimize victories by council candidates you oppose. You’re also the same Vern Nelson who uses “out-of-town” descriptors as de-legitimation tools.

      So which is it, Vern?

    • “Mark NEVER said that”……..

      Oh and Paul Lucas isn’t making fun of Jordan’s Yamaka……..

      You lying hypocrite.

      • I’m confused. I’ve never seen Paul Lucas making fun of Jordan’s yarmulke (sp.) Could you please post a link to that?

      • Thank you for posting that link on the Anaheim Blog, friend! I never would have been allowed to.

        1. As anyone can see, Paul Lucas wasn’t making fun of Jordan’s yarmulke, just asking when he started wearing one. And neither Paul nor Mark Daniels has ever been heard to say anything anti-Semitic, about Jordan or anyone else.

        2. Enjoy your libeling days while you can, you’ve got a boatload of legal surprises coming your way. Cheers!

  2. Has Vern denied those obscene OJB tweets? No.

    What about his wife’s voicemail apologizing for those tweets and asking for understanding because his drinking was really bad? Has Vern denied their authenticity? No.

    Last week, Vern made fun of Jose Diaz’ accent, laughed about how he and his little pals call Diaz “Ricky R.” How racist! Using an ethnic caricature to demean Diaz because of how he talks. And then telling him to get over having grown up under Communist oppression?

    Can Vern be anymore of an idiot? Don’t expect Vern to respond to any of this. Mr. 5 DUIs (among his many other moral failings) thinks he’s in a position to judge others.

    Vern is a big baby. He loves to dish it out but he can’t take it, and won’t take ownership of his transgressions.

  3. Vern is plain and simple: A liar.

    Three times now he has made fun of Jordan Brandmans sexuality and faith.

    He has accosted SEVERAL woman, as EVIDENCED, yet claims moral superiority.

    Clearly, he is sick. I hope he gets the help he desperately needs. With his ENABLERS on the blog and his FAR LEFT PROGRESSIVE activist friends ignoring this potentially deadly behavior ignoring his antics, I am left to wonder:


    • Apart from none of that being true…

      I would appear to be hitting some nerves!

      Carry on…

      • What isn’t true? That your wife left that voicemail about your drinking? Are you saying the obscene OJB tweets are fake?

        That you make fun of Diaz accent and call him Ricky Ricardo?

        Your silence says a lot, Vern.

        • It’s true I made fun of Jose Diaz. The guy is ridiculous.

          • Vern, you ridiculed him for his accent. That is racist.

            You called him “Ricky Retardo.” That’s vile.

            And you send weird, gross, intrusive and offensive sexual messages to women.

            Do you deny ANY of the above?

            Where do you get off judging ANYONE? WTF is wrong with you?

  4. Vern, you ridiculed him for his accent. That is racist.

    You called him “Ricky Retardo.” That’s vile.

    And you send weird, gross, intrusive and offensive sexual messages to women.

    Do you deny ANY of the above?

    Where do you get off judging ANYONE? WTF is wrong with you?

    • 1. Unlike some people I’ve never pretended to be polite or “politically correct.” It’s a rough world I cover. There was a lot of justification for everything I wrote about Diaz, but I didn’t make fun of his accent. He was trying to pontificate on a street at the other end of the city from where he allegedly lives, a street he’d never heard of, and making the REALLY bad point that since the traffic there was famously bad, it didn’t matter if it got even worse. So then, when he couldn’t even figure out how to pronounce Sunkist, but called it “Sun Skid,” THAT was funny AND illustrative of his ignorance and indifference. The guy doesn’t even know his OWN district, doesn’t even know anyone who lives there that could be a Planning Commissioner. Someone told him “just pick Lucille Kring,” and he said “okay.”

      If he does something good next week, or next year, I will praise him for it, because I’m that kinda guy.

      2. No I did not send those messages to women. Anybody with a shred of honesty and brains knows that’s not what happened. Even Dan, in a few of his 100 comments on the matter, has admitted he knows that’s not what happened, which puts all his OTHER comments in a defamatory light.

      Furthermore, nothing I’ve said or wrote, and even nothing I’m ALLEGED to have said or written, is within light years as bad as what Jordan’s been BUSTED writing. (There are some who make the point that I’m also not an elected, public representative, but speaking for myself I don’t ask to be graded on a curve.)

      Meanwhile, in regard to your 6:07 comment, prepare to be impressed. (You want intermittent blogging, look at Matt. You want drunken intermittent blogging, look at Dan.)

      • Vern, come on. Be honest for a change.

        Diaz has a thick accent. He mispronounced Sunkist and you make fun of him for it, and call him “Ricky R” to boot. That’s racist. You know it’s racist. Your “I’m not politically correct” excuse doesn’t fly.

        Diaz has lived in West Anaheim for many years. He moved to Anaheim many years before you started flopping at your now-wife’s apartment. He’s actually overcome incredible adversity through risk and hard work. He’s come up from nothing and risked his life to build a btter life.

        You, on the other hand, have thrown away opportunities, squandered your life, and endangered the lives of others with your foolish, self-centered life choices. You should try humility, instead of ridiculing your betters.

        And for the record, you are standing by your “Ricky Retardo slur. Maybe advocates for the intellectually disabled can weigh in on that one.

      • Re those OJB tweets: then who sent them, Vern? If it wasn’t you, then who was it? You know who has access to that Twitter account. Who sent them?

        You also have not denied that your wife called that woman in HB apologizing for your grossness and admitting your drinking was “bad.” What did you do that Donna was apologizing for?

        Why the silence? Why the lies, Vern?

        • Now you’re playing dumb again, like Dan.

          • Au contraire. You’re being evasive. You claim you didn’t send those messages. Then who did?

            And you have refused to address the matter of what your wife said about you in her voicemail to the HB activist about your behavior. Why are you silent?

            • Dan Chmielewski

              from that post written by Vern’s former blogger whom Greg says they don’t know who it is:

              While Nelson is the sole owner of the account, he and his wife, Anaheim activist Donna Acevedo-Nelson, confirmed that they both accessed the OJ Blog’s Twitter that evening. At first glance, the messages to @Autre_Vierge appear to be written by two different authors, but it’s impossible to say with absolute certainty who said what, or even who started it. One of the final messages she received was, “He is masturbating to women’s pictures in the bathroom.” Her profile picture was posted on the OJ Blog’s Twitter an hour later.

              When asked for an explanation, Nelson said his wife “went crazy” because she thought he was “flirting” with @Autre_Vierge when he replied to a thread, “You are certainly my guide to the Twitterverse.” @Autre_Vierge did not respond to the tweet, tag him anywhere in the thread, or reply to any of his direct messages.

              One of the blog’s followers confronted Nelson in a message the next morning, and received an emotional voicemail from Acevedo-Nelson on the afternoon of Easter Sunday. In it, she said she didn’t know who had posted the picture because “we’re not Twitter people” and added, “I don’t want [Vern] to feel bad, that he’s a bad person or anything. It’s just his drinking that’s bad.” There was a deeper voice in the background during the call, which seemed to prompt her when she paused.

              So to be clear, Vern is saying Donna sent all of the Tweets that were offensive.

        • I’m not really sure why I’m responding to another anonymous dick, except that the music to “Perry Mason” was great.

          But for one, you get all your info about me from other anonymous dicks online (I didn’t “flop” into Donna’s place, I paid for it.) And for another, are you the slightest bit aware that you’re part of a distraction from the real news, Anaheim Councilman Jordan Brandman’s obscene and violent texts?

          Meanwhile I awake this morning to the overriding reason we’re after Jordan, and the five other crooks on this Council:

          • Thing is, you haven’t really answered anything, Vern. In fact, you’re stonewalling and trying to change the subject.

            I read Greg Diamond’s post. Is he correct that it was your wife sending those obscene tweets to that woman in order to sabotage what she feared was a potential affair with you? That seems pretty far-fetched.

            And you haven’t answered my questions about your wife’s voice mail message.

            These and your other behaviors (making fun of Diaz’s accent, calling him a “retard,” your silence on Mark Daniel’s obscene comments, etc.,) go to the matter of your credibility, and whether you are any position to judge anyone else’s bad behavior.

            The fact that you won’t discuss it speaks volumes.

            • I have to confess, I didn’t read to the end of this last comment. I am waiting to see what any of you anonymous apologists have to say about ELECTED ANAHEIM COUNCILMAN JORDAN BRANDMAN’s violent and misogynist texts.

              Do I hear a big “Bueller?”

              • I haven’t apologized for Brandman. Brandman’s comments were gross. He made them in a private text conversation, but now that they’ve surfaced he should apologize to Denise Barnes (assuming that’s who he was talking about. Barnes isn’t mentioned in the screen shots).

                Now why don’t you stop stonewalling on the questions you’re being asked.

      • Dan Chmielewski

        “drunk intermittent blogging, look at Dan” and you want to talk about libel. Oooooooo

  5. The Man On Anna Drive

    Vern Patrick Nelson, why not come clean? Your managing editor claims your wife sent the stranger a message to stave off your making sexual prowess on this woman.

    Diamond goes on to explain that “slut shaming” a married mother (COMPLETE STRANGER WHO NEITHER DRUNK VERN OR DONNA HAVE EVER MET) was a quite effective way of “Taming Vern”.

    Are you dudes for real? A whole new meaning to racist hypocrites.

Leave a Reply

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