More On Dann
Submitted by Jerid on Fri, 11/30/2007 - 6:16pm.
OK.
I'm still getting a lot of conjecture (and concern) about this whole Dann thing. I don't know what to say.
A name has been passed on to me. I sure as hell wouldn't post that name and make unsubstantiated claims because that wouldn't be fair to the person in question, or to Marc Dann. I'm hearing little bits of juicy rumors, but little more than that. Honestly, I'm just trying to make sense of this whole thing.
Marc Dann by far is the Democratic Party's most vulnerable statewide office holder. He'll be one of the top targets, if not the top target in '10. He's done plenty to screw up in his first year in office. However, his office is accomplishing important stuff, and it's great to have an AG back in office working for all of Ohio. Rumor mongering like this one, if false, is exactly the sort of tactic his political opponents could use to pry his AG seat from him. But then on the other hand, I don't know.
The thing is, I can't sort out what's true here. I've got nothing more than rumor, and that sure as hell is the sort of thing that folks opposed to Dann, or maybe even folks who don't like this person in question, would like to circulate.
My biggest question is why are these rumors out there? Is there truth to them? Or is it garbage? This certainly could be gutter politics at its worst.
So that's what I'm digging on right now. Anyone out there that wants to pass on more on how these rumors got started, or what they've heard about the rumor, give me a shout at jerid@buckeyestateblog.com. As always, anonymity guaranteed.
I'm not going after the AG. If this stuff is false or a smear, I'll certainly be one of his biggest defenders on this shit. I just want to know why it's out there, where it's coming from, and how anyone would even have this sort of knowledge. And I don't plan on publishing anything unless I'm comfortable with it. So for now, that's that.
UPDATE: With typical class, the GOPers have put the name of the girl in question out there and are hounding her via her personal phone. They're also trying to make a big deal out of the fact she doesn't want to comment on this one. I'm curious if Naugle would like to comment on the rumors I've heard he's dating his cousin. Like I said earlier, I don't know what's true here or not...but if you're going to make allegations of this nature you need to put some proof out there before you expect folks to laud you for your journalistic integrity.
"My biggest question is why
Submitted by Anonymous on Sat, 12/01/2007 - 7:50pm.
"My biggest question is why are these rumors out there? Is there truth to them? Or is it garbage? This certainly could be gutter politics at its worst." The reason for the rumors? Anytime a competent, young female has a good relationship with her political boss, someone's bound to start a rumor. This staffer's been targeted before b/c she's sweet, funny, smart, easy to get along with, and is friends with a wide variety of politicians. She didn't do this, but Republicans don't care about smearing a smart, dedicated young woman if they can get a good sex scandal in the news without an (R) behind the name. It takes the heat off of their pathetic excuse for policy.
Ughhh...
Submitted by mvirenicus on Sat, 12/01/2007 - 10:32pm.
Why should anybody care where Dann might or might not like to dip his wick? Is he doing his job? That's all I care about. Just as I cared far more about Billy Clinton's choice to bomb Yugo for no damned good reason than I did about his lubricities with an intern, why should any of this sexual ballyhoo be an issue to anybody? The only time I want to hear about pols and sex is when it exemplifies the hypocrisy of the Repug Christofascists. Aside from that, America needs to get over its Infantile Personality Disorder.
To answer your question...no
Submitted by Anonymous on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 9:28am.
To answer your question...no he isn't doing job.
affairs with staff matter, in corporations or government
Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 12/02/2007 - 1:43am.
I have no comment on the particular Dann situation. But I disagree with the comment that these things never matter -- that all affairs are private and only "job performance" matters. That may be true when it's just an affair, but not when it's sex with a staffer. In corporate America, that's lawsuit material under Title VII and other laws. Just because some moralists care too much about personal lives doesn't mean we should take the opposite extreme and sell out our beliefs about workplace sex with the boss, just because it's our political friends being attacked. Having affairs with the staff is a legitimate public concern, as we pay their salaries. If an underling is coerced because of job vulnerability, that matters. Or if a paramour or ex- is put on the public payroll, that's our concern, too. So if this turns out BS, then fine, it's BS. But if it turns out true, it's a legitimate concern for citizens, voters, taxpayers, whatever.
Friends?
Submitted by mvirenicus on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 3:58am.
This isn't a matter to me of defending a political friend. From my perspective Dann was damned when he apparently cleared the way for his former senate seat to be covered by cappy sylvester's rich corinthian leather. I haven't paid much attention to his office since. I've heard good things. I've heard bad things. My overall impression of the man is completely lackluster.
I'm just sick and flippin tired of all the "sex scandals" where no scandal exists. People are people. They aren't by nature monogamous. They aren't created in the image of the Easter Bunny. They do things, sometimes just based on the thing in question being fun and in accord with the dictates of nature. If Dann had campaigned on the "god speaks to me" and "I hate faggots" platform, then that would make this subject matter relevant to him. He didn't. It's not.
Why this matters...
Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 12/02/2007 - 8:08pm.
This matters because scandal or the perception of scandal doesn't only affect the AG. It could hurt the whole ticket in 2010!
Still waiting
Submitted by mvirenicus on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 11:27am.
Am I missing something here? What scandal? Because a staff member might enjoy some slap and tickle with someone to whom such relations are verboten? By whom? By what? Somebody throw me a clue here. Maybe the whole concept is beyong my comprehension because I don't believe Santa Claus or the Tooth Faerie are keeping score. This is a personal matter, if any matter exists at all. I don't remember Dann running on a holier-than-thou platform like some members of another party I could name.
Naugle is not "the GOP"
Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 12/02/2007 - 10:36pm.
Jerid, do you have evidence of any GOP operatives spreading this story, or of calling the woman allegedly involved? Or are you relying solely in Naugle's post, and his phone call, to support your statement that "the GOP" did that? If so, that's not fair. One loudmouth, with no role in the party and no job for any officeholder, can't fairly be considered a spokesperson for the whole gang. So point to evidence of more GOP people, or please acknowledge that you've painted with too broad a brush.
Naugle not GOP?
Submitted by Jerid on Mon, 12/03/2007 - 11:55am.
Naugle is the headman in the Republican blogosphere. Check out that tagline on his site "Ohio's 'most popular and influential Republican website.'"
As soon as GOPers start seriously showing Naugle doesn't speak for them, and someone takes the reigns from Naugle as the GOP's top dawg blogger, I'll start referring to those guys as the GOP. So go get on it. Challenge your party. hoorah hoorah.
I hate to be picky about spelling...