Anaheim Mayor Pro Tem Kris Murray was featured on this ABC-7 Eyewitness News story from yesterday:
End of the day, this story hurts, rather than helps, Tait. To the extent news coverage of Angels negotiations has focused on the mayor, it has been on his vocal criticism of what has been represented (inaccurately) to an Angels demand for the right to develop part of the stadium district for a $1 annual lease payment. After a year of that, the coverage has now shifted to the Angels responding by terminating negotiations and looking to move to Tustin or elsewhere.
The most single most powerful re-election tool Tom Tait has is his ballot title: “Mayor of Anaheim.” Most voters think of the mayor as a sort of chief executive, rather than what the post really is: presiding officer at council meetings, primary city spokesman and primus inter pares. Consequently, voters will tend to credit whoever is mayor when there is good news about Anaheim city government – regardless of whether or not such credit is deserved. By the same token, they will tend to blame the mayor for bad news – like the breakdown of negotiations with the Angels and the correspondingly increased likelihood they will leave Anaheim.
I notice the “Arte will spend $150,000,000” line is still being pitched even though it was not in the MOU and the stadium (deferred) maintenance is his responsibility.
The three Commenters at OJB (Cantnor, Zenger and Diamond) tell a different story. Then again that’s two more humans than belong to CATER!
“I’m literally going to fight like hell . . .” — Kris Murray
No, you’ll figuratively fight like hell, but thanks.
Well done.
Petty.
Petty?
If Anaheim’s Mayor Pro Tem finds it necessary to get out on television to express a point, she ought to do so without embarrassing the English language.
But hey, if that’s how you literally want the city represented, then like, you know, that’s cool or whatever.
Ryan Cantor, attack dog for the mayor who has difficulty speaking in complete sentences, is criticizing how Kris Murray speaks?
LOL!
I’m literally not the mayor’s attack dog. Sorry.
figuratively. Skadoosh….
I doubt Cantor has ever taken a moment to talk with Kris Murray or get any perspective that wasn’t fed to him by Tait and his supporters. He attacks her for petty things and makes outrageous allegations without a shred of facts to back up his allegations. The best he can do is go after her word choice? At least she’s fighting to keep our team. Tait has been driving them out for a year and violating his own financial conflicts along the way. Get a life Cantor – you’ve endorsed Tait and in classic Tait fashion he’s using you to attack her so his finger prints are not involved. He gets to be Mayor Kindness while his attack dogs go after his colleagues. This formula will only be effective for so long – people are catching on that he is the one behind the curtain.
I love you PC. You’re a treasure. Literally.
Hey, speaking of conflicts, has Kris Murray accepted any campaign contributions from the Angels while she’s been negotiating for the city’s largest asset with them?
while she’s been negotiating for the city’s largest asset with them?
That is a lie. She is not negotiating for the city.
Dishonesty is becoming a pattern here for you, Ryan. For example, yesterday you claimed you watched Kris Murray call Tom Tait an anti-Semitic misogynist, and you still haven’t shown us where she did that.
Well, which is it? Is she literally fighting like hell or isn’t she? Was she not the decider on approving a deal? Make up your mind, Matt.
Concerning the video, I told you I’d happy debate, but you needed to level the playing field first. You refused then called me some rather nasty names.
Offer still stands. Don’t complain when you get your way.
Well, which is it?
This point, which you’re obsessing on, is beyond insignificant. It has about as much debate value as discussing how you should part your hair.
Concerning the video, I told you I’d happy debate…
You’re not going to back up your claim. Gosh, I’m stunned.
You refused then called me some rather nasty names.
I’ve endeavored to refer to your behavior, rather than you as a person.
I’m happy to back it up, Matt, but if you want to change the entire function of this blog into an actual exchange of facts, well, then you need to start with your own behavior. If I were you, I wouldn’t . . . Because you’ll lose, which won’t exactly make your business partners thrilled.
I can really care less what you’ve endeavored for. Names I’ve called you? ZERO.
I’ll guess it was the KOCE spot from last year; after Tait allowed Fitzgerald to call Jordan Brandman a faggot and the women on the council “Disney whores.” Tom didn’t see fit to gavel it. Maybe if Fitzgerald called Julie Tait such a name, the mayor might actually react…