Calling Out The Neighbors

Over at Rumproast, marindenver has some choice words for David Sirota on his Salon article about the his wife Emily's school board race.  The article sparked more than a bit of outrage, but it turns out Sirota was playing fast and loose with the facts about his wife's opponent, Anne Rowe.

The “slickly produced flier” points out the difference between Anne’s extensive experience volunteering both in her/our local school, volunteering for the school district as a whole including serving on advisory boards to the district and her experience as a community volunteer and foundation board member in general.  Emily, she points out, does not have anywhere close to this level of involvement in school and local politics and is, in fact, a relatively recent resident of the area.  Attack?  You decide.  Relevant information to decide which candidate possesses a better skill set for the job?  I think so.

And the Sirotas were naive indeed in believing that running for the DPS board would consist of backyard barbecues and schmoozing their neighbors.  Politics in DPS have been highly rancorous in recent years due to the reform programs that were initiated by former superintendent Michael Bennet (now our Senator) and carried on by his hand-picked successor.  Reform=change and many people fight change tooth and nail.  But it is hard to argue that DPS is badly in need of change with graduation rates only slightly above 50% district wide and thousands of kids lagging several grade levels behind.  Currently the 7 member board is split 4-3 in favor of the reforms which consist of re-designing failing schools to emulate successful models both within and without the district.  As a result of the split many board meetings have been marked with open dissension, fighting and recriminations.  Anyone following DPS politics even moderately closely would be aware of this and recognize that being on the board would be a tough job.

Wait, you may be saying.  How has Anne Rowe been able to rack up all this volunteer and board experience while raising three kids and carving out a career as a “deep-pocketed investment banker”?  Perhaps because she is, in fact, not an investment banker.  This is one of the most glaring lies of all in a piece riddled with lies and insinuations.  Anne’s biography, as listed on her website, is completely accurate.  This is someone that I have known, remember, for the last 15 years.  As far as I can tell he pulled “deep-pocketed investment banker” straight out of his butt.  Or he was misinformed but could not be bothered to check the details on her website in the interests of accurate reporting.  I report, you decide.

It seems to me that Sirota's not exactly a neutral observer here in this race, and looking at the links posted, it also seems to me that marindenver is right and Sirota's at the bare minimum making some pretty outrageous claims in a national forum in order to help his wife's local race.  Sirota also leaves out the fact his wife did score more than $50 grand in donations while intimating that $500 was a major donation for her:

In District 1, Rowe's competitor, Emily Sirota — endorsed by the union — has raised $57,962, $22,500 of which came from the Denver Classroom Teachers Association's small donor committee.

And yes, Anne Rowe has about tripled Sirota's total in that race so far, and it seems that the vast bulk of the money has come from in-state donors.  If anything, Sirota seems to be using his pulpit to raise money from out of state for his wife.  Best case scenario, this is a hell of a hit job Sirota's leveling against his wife's opponent.  Worst case?  Guy has a hell of a lot of questions to answer.

Here's what bothers me the most:  when Sirota ran the piece Friday, I looked it over and found that Sirota had some good points: that there is too much corporate money in local elections these days and that the right really is trying to buy as many school boards and city councils and county commissions as they can across the country.  So I took Sirota at his word and thought nothing of it, it was clearly Sirota's wife (who being not David Sirota deserved the benefit of the doubt) doing exactly what I have been preaching about for three years plus on this blog and getting involved in local politics.  It never occured to me that Emily Sirota's opponent could be anything but another Tea Party goon.

And then I saw marindenver's piece this afternoon. 

Really, Sirota?  You're a self-important asshole.  The "W. coming after my wife" stuff was, I thought, hyperbole.  Turns out you're just another grifter and while you're gotten steadily worse over the months, it now seems you're willing to do just about anything to help win this election.  Your article is a massive conflict of interest even in the most generous light.  I think some sort of apology is in order, yes?

Christ, what an ass.