.
.
.
Dana Rohrabacher in native headgear down South-a A-si-an Way with escorts from the Taliban. About 98% of this photo is real. (Update: Correction per Gabriel San Roman -- "PROTO-Taliban.")
(For the original of the photo at right, in which Rep. Rohrabacher is not equipped with a Carmen Miranda headdress — which, you have to admit, he makes work — visit, for example this post, and you might as well read the article there while you’re at it. And if you don’t like long posts, even if entertaining, just stop reading now.)
I’m returning for a moment to the “other Orange County bloggers calling politicians gay” beat, which last I visited when in my second post as a blogger here I took former Juice Head Art Pedroza to task for a post in which he published a photo of Anaheim School Board member Jordan Brandman with arms akimbo in a apron, under which he asked where Brandman’s girlfriend was, and generally did everything to insinuate that Brandman was gay but post a video of himself pointing at Brandman and flopping a limp wrist while cocking an eyebrow and leering at the camera.
(That episode led to a falling out between myself and Pedroza and several other Pedrozaphiles. Art squawked loudly when I Photoshopped his face onto that of Matt Drudge’s mother and deleted some material in exchange for Vern placing my nuclear photo back in the armory. I didn’t know that one wasn’t supposed to do that to Pedroza. Live and learn.)
So it is with that experience in mind that I try to process R. Scott Moxley’s article (I’ll leave aside the clever nickname I proposed for him in the interest of comity) about Dana Rohrabacher on Bill Maher’s show in which he offers the following chewy nuggets (emphasis removed and moved around):
- “As expected, Dana Rohrabacher–Orange County’s senior career politician–embarrassed the county during a Jan. 27 appearance on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher and then got into a Twitter fight with a viewer who called him ‘a pathetic old queen.’ ‘I’m happy, not gay,’ Rohrabacher felt the need to declare after the show.”
- “During his appearance as a panelist with MSNBC’s Martin Bashir, ex-Florida Congressman Mark Foley and Reason TV’s Kennedy, Rohrabacher–who married a campaign staffer after being outed as a closet gay man–angrily asserted that Republican hostility to Barack Obama is based largely on their perception that the president has a secret desire: “gut the military.”
- Rohrabacher also used his HBO appearance to challenge Obama’s commitment to honest government, but he forgot to mention his own history of surrounding himself with con artists and a relentless pedophile who targeted middle school boys for sex and romance. [This is followed by a photo of a dropping-lidded young man with the caption “Rohrabacher took Jeffrey Ray Nielsen (above) from OC to DC, where his aide targeted 12-year-old boys for sex.”]
Uhhhhhhhhh … whut?
All right, I’ll admit that I was out of Orange County (except when visiting relatives) for 25 years or so, so I may have been slow to get some of the news, but — well, not only is this all true, but is this openly discussed?
If it were Pedroza’s writing, I might dismiss it as a fever dream, but Moxley has a serious reputation to uphold, and this took me somewhat aback. Does everyone know this but me? If everyone doesn’t know it, is that because some or all of it — and I’m mostly interested here in OC’s seniorest Rep having been outed and in this alleged 12-year-old-boy targeting aide — isn’t true? And if it is true, then — well, uh, um, uhhhhhhhhhh … whut? Is Orange County politics really some cross between Polanski’s Chinatown, Wisteria Lane, and Faulkner’s Yoknapatawpha County?
I’m not doing a Google search, but I have seen the “Dana with Taliban” photo published dozens of times and I’ve never noticed anyone tying it to tie it to assertions of certain cultural predilictions towards homosexual pedophilia notoriously predominant among the Pashtun people, who predominate among the Taliban, of which Westerns are warned to be aware. This guy palled around with possibly pedarastic terrorists and had an aide targeting 12-year-old boys and people don’t bring it up constantly? They bring up the Taliban connction, sure, but not in this obvious context. (And speaking of “obvious” — Maher has Dana appearing on a panel with disgraced GOP page-hound former Rep. Mark Foley? Was this some sort of wink at the audience, if Moxley’s report is true? Seriously, does Dana even have staffers smart enough to ask who else will be on the panel? “Oh, David Duke and Noam Chomsky? Fine, then! What could go wrong?”)
If it weren’t a journalist/blogger of Moxley’s high reputation (at least where Orange Juice Blog isn’t directly involved) who was lobbing these stinkballs, I’d dismiss them out of hand. But if they’re true, then can someone please explain to me — how does politics work here? Are we just all that nice to each other?
(If so — I’m surprised.)
I was starting to try to work up a lather at Moxley for treading the same path that Pedroza did, but I got sidetracked. First, the notion that Brandman has any anti-gay attitudes or significant behaviors that show him (if he is gay, something about which I neither know or care) to be a hypocrite is awfully attenuated. And, second, if Rohrabacher is a closeted gay man, one might fairly argue that his day job during the advent of the AIDS crisis, during which time President Reagan famously refused to even utter the words “AIDS” or “HIV,” makes it a little bit more relevant to a possible hypocrisy charge:
Rohrabacher served as assistant press secretary to the 1976 and 1980 presidential campaigns of Ronald Reagan. From 1981 to 1988, he was one of President Reagan’s senior speech writers. During his tenure at the White House, Rohrabacher played a leading role in the formulation of the Reagan Doctrine. He also helped formulate President Reagan’s Economic Bill of Rights, which was a series of policy proposals that Reagan introduced in a speech at the Jefferson Memorial.
So, I don’t know — maybe in this case it is a story. All I can say from my personal experience is that while I’ve never much worried about gay men who acknowledge their sexuality openly being around little kids, it’s the closet cases I’ve known that have made me want to warn my nephews and younger male cousins not to “go anywhere secluded with that guy.” What I’d suggest is that, if Moxley really thinks he has the goods, then report on the story. This news — if it is news — is either fit to print or it isn’t. It’s not fit to insinuate — even if you include links. Dana’s moving to a new district with a lot of new voters — if Moxley really thinks it’s worth their knowing then I guess that now it the time that he should think it should be known.
My interest, though, is on the political side of things. Dana Rohrabacher is running virtually unopposed so far in the new CA-48 — unless you know Alan Schlar, Robert Johnson, and Bruce Smith to be serious threats to him, and all I know about them is that they’ve taken out papers against him — and he seems to be viewed as invincible. If this is all common knowledge that people just forgot to tell me when I returned home five years ago — how can that be?
This is just not a garden-variety “ho-hum, the Republican officeholder is secretly gay” issue. There are ties to pedarasty here — which I suspect still polls poorly down by the coast — that I would expect to have been fashioned into relentless attacks over the years. (It sure would have happened, I’ll bet, if he were a Democrat. I’d have known all about it.) I was reading stories about Barney Frank last year where commenters still harked back to the unfortunate incident prior to his outing himself where his young live-in lover was running an escort service (without Frank’s knowledge) out of their apartment. (“Bad roommate!”) Frank, innocent as he was, still hasn’t fully lived it down. So how has Rohrabacher lived this down to the point where not only no significant Democrats are running, but none of the enormously ambitious Republicans in his district are even talking about taking him out in a primary?
I really don’t understand. If this were New York or Chicago, there wouldn’t be a single rally where people would fail to hold up signs along the lines of “Dana = bache bazi” (the Pashto phrase for “boy play.”) But not here, in virulently and viciously homophobic OC?
A bunch of you have lived here much longer than I’ve been back, so — can you explain it to me? Can Moxley? Mark Foley? Anyone? Please?
Update, 10:00 a.m. 1/30: Miss the show? Don’t have HBO? The clip in question is embedded here.
I think Dana Rohrabacher opened the door on this sort of speculation by bringing up Obama’s “secret desire”, these back-door allegations have a way of biting one in the ass.
As a tea-bagger, Rohrabacher shouldn’t have opened his mouth unless he was looking for punishment from the big, bad liberal media.
Really a f**king stupid post Diamond – wordy, tiresome nonsense – blah, blah, blah ..
BTW – Rohrabacher is on the far right of the above photo. You got the Carmen Miranda hat on the wrong dude.
Wow, good catch on the photo, but as one of Rohrabacher’s fellow tea-baggers, I would expect you to know the difference between a full, rich black beard and a scraggly, old grey one.
I thought that that was Dana on the right the first several times I saw the photo too, but the one on the left earns Chica Chica Boom Chic honors.
Did you read Moxley’s column? Didn’t it surprise you — either that is was true or that he said it if it wasn’t? And doesn’t it surprise you that it seems to be far less discussed than one would expect in our not-that-reticent-about-vicious-attacks county?
Yeah, I was a little surprised, but there’s been a lot of shit (and I guess, a little santorem) over the years associated with Dana.
Another sophmoric post – much of it reads like a Jr. High age kid who is getting his jollies kibitizing about sex. What has this blog become?
“What has this blog become” — did you ever read it in years past, fer Gawrsh sakes?
This is the story of “the dog that didn’t bark.” If I’m the only one who wasn’t aware of this alleged history, despite being active in OC politics for five years since my return — well, that’s interesting. If I’m not the only one who wasn’t aware of it — well, that’s interesting too. And sophomore year can be pretty rewarding if you go to classes.
COULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE
Damning with faint praise!
*Acusations of wrong doing…..like those that convicted Jeff Hubbard in the OC, Speaker Wright and even Newt Zoot…..in Congress actually had bonafide evidence. We like that when folks are accused, because Lord knows there are plenty of wrong doers out there. Talking about the penaties? Unverified or admitted “Name Calling” isn’t much of an indictment. Little doubt that Dana’s appearance on Bill Mahr was contenscious….and wasn’t one of Dans’s most logical outings. Interesting though that both Darrell Issa and Dana, who actually make sense at times appear on Real Time and folks like David Drier and John Campbell….never are willing to get out there.
When you said “folks like David Dreier and John Campbell,” what do you mean? Is this going to be something I don’t want to know?
Dana was embarrassingly condescending to Bill Maher, scolding and taking Maher to task about educating kids, since hasn’t any kids, I wondered why he was on the panel, since he didn’t make any references to smoking pot, for which he’s famous for, like Bill. When I lived in HB, Dana was rumored to have frequently gone on Mexican surfing junkets to prey on brown boys. Now he just preys on all brown people. Puka shells are really annoying to look at too….Orange county sure needs to retire this prissy, asteroid-obessed douche!
As one who was raised in Huntington Beach, I think that the puka shells are fine. They’re a marker of our cultural pride, sort of like our version of kente cloth. I must admit that I too occasionally dabbled in the puka in my youth. (That’s not a metaphor. I’m talking about wearing the shells.)
OK, since you seem to know a lot about this, tell me: why did he bother with the quick marriage to Rohnda Rhorabacher? (Just kidding about the spelling — but seriously, shouldn’t she have changed her first name too? “Rhonda Rohrabacher” is a name that I’d only expect to find in fiction.) If he’s safe from people talking about this, except for OC Weekly columnists and those of us who are startled by them, then why not just gut it out?
Oh Greg…..where have you been????
From 2008 lots of Moxley links…..sorry it’s from the Liberal OC but thats where you sometimes find the real story…..His aide was a child rapist.
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2008/03/26/taliban-dana-the-party-chairman-and-the-child-rapist/
Then you have to go back to Rhonda Carmony , now Rohrabacher, when she was his aide. She was indicted and convicted in a messy scandal with Baugh and Righeimer as main players……
http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/rhonda-carmony
Then you have Rohrabacher with his very good buddy Jack Abramhoff.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/abramoff-and-rohrabacher-_b_13580.html
and I haven’t even mentioned, “dinosaur farts”, “ungrateful Iraqis”, or solving the RFK assasination…..
He’s our congressman.
I’m not even clicking the links yet — mind can’t handle it right now. I’m too busy trying to figure out why no one of any stature is running against him. Hell, Moxley lives there, he can run against him. I’d send him a few bucks.
Just to note: When Dana posed with Afghan fighters, there was no Taliban. Islamic extremists elements within the mujahideen later became the Taliban. The United States supported them back then and wrote fat checks for them when they gained power after an awful civil war that the world ignored.
Thanks for the correction. Posing with the proto-Taliban, then.
The things you learn when you’re willing to ask!
The Bacha Bazi angle of this post is also problematic from that premise. Not to say it doesn’t exist, but to paint with the brushstrokes as you do is to ignore important nuances. Warlords and others who have gained influence in the wake of U.S. occupation have proliferated the practice — including areas where the Taliban has been driven out. The UN report is more credible than the one cited in your link.
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2010/02/22/the-warlords-tune-afghanistans-war-on-children.phtml
In case I wasn’t clear: my interest here is in the politics of the situation. I don’t know what Dana has done with whom, how often, where, or with what implements. I do know something about politics, though — and when you have a guy who is associated with (1) an aide who was apparently a pedophile and (2) a group from the company with the the most notorious cultural history of pedophilia involving young boys of any that I know of, then the fact that it stays this will hidden from popular discourse is one honking huge Dog That Didn’t Bark.
I’m not promoting this connection because I’m asserting it’s true, but because it’s obviously the sort of thing that political assassins would latch onto. It would be as if Dana had a “666” shaped birthmark on his forehead and someone hardly anyone ever discussed it publicly. That non-story itself if a story.
I enjoyed your link — especially these lines regarding the topic of Bachi Bazi, with which some of the comments above made me sympathize:
Orange County may have more in common with Afghanistan than commonly supposed.
This could explain why Dana and Mansoor are so close.
I’m not a big fan of insinuations. Are you encouraging us to believe based on some unpresented evidence that Mansoor is gay, or are you just talking smack to take advantage of homophobia in his district?
Just ask Mrs. Mansoor.
Mr.Diamond, it appears you assume that I – and perhaps other readers – are up to speed on your life over the last 5 years or more. I am not. So, where were you and why;’ when did you come back and why? Thanks. Also, for the record, the rumors about Rhorbacher’s sexual orientation go way back, prior to his getting married for the first time about when he was in his 40’s. To my knowledge theywere just that, rumors, and seemed to die down after he got married and became a father. The media coverage about his trek(s) into Afghanistan when the U.S. was backing the locals in the fight against Russian forces was pretty widely known – in part because Rhorbacher seemed to relish the publicity. What I have always wondered is what was a Congressman doing treking around a combat zone like that, and from a historical perspective did he by chance meet Osama back then when Osama was fighting the Russians too? We’ll probably never know.
If they’re just rumors, then Moxley was out of line. Many people seem to think that he wasn’t, though.
Osama was something like 6′ 6″, wasn’t he, and was the money guy. I would imagine that he’d have been a guy to see and would have been hard to miss.
(As for me: I left OC for Long Beach in 1981, then went to Michigan for grad school. I taught mostly in Illinois, but also in Indiana and Pennsylvania, where my ex-wife has tenure. I then left academia and went to law school (and later large-firm practice) in New York, then came here (with a stop to help manage a campaign in Nevada) in 2006 mostly because I preferred the West Coast. Then I fell in love with my wife and put down roots in Brea. There’s more, of course; I left out Arkansas, Maryland, and Seattle. As the Dead said, “a long strange trip.”)
“If they’re just rumors, then Moxley was out of line. Many people seem to think that he wasn’t, though.”
Oh, … “many people seem to think” … and you are an attorney??
Drivel.
Yes, many people seem to think that Moxley was not out of line. They may or may not be right, but that seems to be the predominant sense.
I think you may have interpreted my statement to read “many people think that they aren’t (just rumors),” which is not what I wrote.
I assume that the point of your reminding me that I’m an attorney is to note that what “many people seem to think” isn’t evidence. Agreed. I have no personal knowledge of whom or what Rohrabacher has sexual contact. I do, by contrast, have knowledge of people’s reactions as I read them here and on OC Weekly, which is what I needed to write a piece on how OC media and politics treats this sort of matter. Sorry if this distinction is too subtle for you.
Yeah, take advantage of my busy morning. I have my own reaction to Dana’s Maher outing in the works. But it sounds like you need to do some reading up. On the Gay thing… well, I don’t traffic much in unprovable rumors, I’ve heard the same as everyone else, but this story, Gay Dana Tales, is mostly about how bad he’s been on gay rights. He said not too long ago that there “are no gay people in his district” (which included part of Long Beach) reminding me of similar statements from Mahmoud Ahmedinehad:
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2008/05/gay-dana-tales/
But the most important of the many Dana articles I wrote in 2008, when I was trying to help Debbie Cook beat him, were these two:
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2008/06/rohrabacher-portrait-of-the-torture-apologist-in-the-twilight-of-his-career-panties-on-head/
and this fanciful but fact-filled and link-heavy theater piece between him and then-candidate John McCain:
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2008/08/mirror-mirror-on-the-wall-whos-the-biggest/
I should add, the other big thing that year, besides Debbie Cook and Barack Obama, was Proposition 8, and Dana was on the wrong side of that.
I remember from his 2008 debate – with Debbie, a Green and a Libertarian – he was the only one who came out against gays’ right to marry. I wasn’t 100% sure he would do that – he likes to pretend to be a little libertarian, a little pro-freedom, a little hip. But that’s becoming a fainter and fainter memory, especially with Friday’s pathetic performance (which I’m still getting around to writing about.)
The weird thing though, at that 2008 debate – he has the time of his life when he’s bitching about immigrants, when he’s ridiculing the very idea of global warming, when he’s fantasizing about his special space projects – his voice goes up and down, he gesticulates, his goofy eyebrows raise to the roof. But when he was tying to explain why he opposed gay marriage his voice got lower and it seemed like he was reciting GOP talking points from rote. Like he really knew he was wrong about this one, but still required to hand out the koolaid.
Not even a hint of anything approaching evidence – only rumor mongering. Shameful Vern – you guys are supposed to at least pretend to be journalists. I guess you do qualify as yellow journalists.
Yellow journalism is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news. Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism.
From wiki …
Huh? My stories aren’t anything like what you describe. Did you click on any of the three?
And even Diamond, he is only asking questions, and practically calling Moxley out for unfounded rumor-mongering. Can you read, pal?
Well, I started out intending to call out Moxley for rumor-mongering. The more I thought about it, though, the more that the sheer improbability of the (lack of) political reaction to this sort of salacious rumors — to the point where even someone like me who tends to follow local politics hadn’t heard half of this stuff — struck me as the really interesting aspect.
I suppose that skally is answering my question for me, though, by showing how even asking why rumors aren’t more pronounced — not even asserting that they’re true, but just asking why the hair-trigger on the famed OC homophobia-hurling machine seems to be malfunctioning in this instance and what that says about our political society and culture — gets one labeled as a “yellow journalist.” Maybe that’s why people don’t ask!
Well, I was going to give you grief for complaining to me and not to Moxley, but I see that you did so, so I’ll give you credit for that. You asked a good question and I’ll be interested to see if there is an answer. Either way, though, the question in my title stands (although you obviously answer it differently than the OCW crew.)
Don’t you think, though, that if Dana were a Dem, this story would not have been lying inert in OC’s political garden for so long? I think it would come up constantly.
It seems to me Rohrabacher makes statements, then and behaves counter to the stated beliefs and principles, he is therefore a hypocrite.
*”The reports of Scott Moxley being God……are greatly exaggerated.” We will say that Scott has had his share of dirt digging, some fairly good investigative reporter pieces regarding “The friends of Mike Corona”….come to mind as a good example. Sadly Dr.
“D”….you are no Scott Moxley to begin with. If you have the photos …post them. If you have a bonifide reliable source you are willing to out…..do so. If you yourself have had relations with those you accuse…..feel free to let it go!
Our point is that lots of rumour and innuendo are carped about in our society. As we attempted to point out initially….there are many viable down right disgusting stories that are true about electeds and others in our society. Let’s stick to verifiable accusations, substantiated by evidence….. You know….you are in the Profession…which trots that thought out on occasion.
Who are you people talking to, and what are you trying to say? Who is “Dr. D?” Are you actually ragging on our own Greg Diamond who is NOT making accusations and sticking up for Moxley who IS? I can’t see what else you’re doing. You make me feel like I’m on crazy pills.
Read a little more carefully, think a tiny bit, and please write more clearly.
Vern,
At times I have difficulty connecting the dots of the Winships brand of logic/reasoning. Not in this case – pretty clear.
Okay then. Can YOU explain them?
Moxley has called Dana secretly gay for years, and did again yesterday. Diamond is saying “WTF? Is this actually true? And if so how come I didn’t know about it, and why isn’t it a big deal with his voting base?”
And the Winships are all, “Moxley is great. Dr. Diamond, you’re no Moxley. Give us your proof.”
Translate that please, skallywag! It sounds to me like bird offal.
It’s OK. I actually do get to be called “Dr.” if I want to by virtue of my Ph.D., but I don’t sweat it since I left academia. As for the rest, you explained it correctly in the comment just above this one (as I post), so I’m sure that they’ll understand.
It concerns me that skally says that he did understand it clearly, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt in presuming that he’s fibbing.
I don’t care if Crazy Dana is Gay…….I do know he’s been screwing his districts voters for 25 years……
Where is Newt Zoot….now that we need him? Oh fudge, it’s really Vern in drag! We don’t care who is GRAY, STRAY or born in the merry month of MAY!
If you use someone as your “source” in a news piece, the veracity of that person’s work and associations can be challenged by either side or both. Dr. “D” was using Scotty Moxley as his source….for the Rohrabacher supposed news. We challenge
both then….to come up with the identified facts and the so-called eye witnesses.
Our attempt to insulate Scott Moxley…was simply that. Scott has had a very long
track record of Investigative Reporting. .Some very good….some off the mark. Dr.
“D” on the other hand is a realitive “newbee” and does not have the positive track record or IR credentials required for Character Assasination or Accusations….that
is….without the facts and documented eye witness accounts.
NO, Ron and Anna. NO, Skallywag.
Diamond is NOT saying Dana is gay. Moxley says that.
Diamond is wondering if it is true, and if it’s provable, and why nobody seems to care.
I still don’t think you get the distinction.
I also heard all those rumors, years ago, when I was fighting Dana a lot. I could never find proof it was true, it’s kind of a colorful maybe. Moxley loves to repeat it, but I need more than just Moxley before I repeat stuff like that. There’s so much other good horribleness about Dana that’s TRUUUUE.
And when you pick on our assistant editor, be sure you understand what he’s saying at least.
Am I Assistant Editor now? I thought that I was still Copy Boy!
“Our attempt to insulate Scott Moxley…was simply that. Scott has had a very long track record of Investigative Reporting. .Some very good….some off the mark. Dr. “D” on the other hand is a realitive “newbee” and does not have the positive track record or IR credentials…”
And, you know, I suppose I do the opposite. Since Scott Moxley has such a great record and reputation, I give him an extra hard time when he gets things wrong. That only seems fair, except it seems to have made us enemies.
“Diamond is wondering if it is true, and if it’s provable, and why nobody seems to care.”
Why would Mr. D consider, even for a moment, that these wild baseless allegations are true? He is an attorney – right? Let’s apply some critical thinking here.
What’s so “wild” about the prospect of Rohrabacher being gay? He’s an anti-Prop 8 Republican officeholder; the odds aren’t that bad.
As far as their being “baseless” — that’s begging the question.
But my interest is this: plenty of baseless allegations get made in politics all the time, and the more prurient they are the more likely they are to stick. And yet this one seems to be buried. Why?
And, if it truly is wild and baseless, why aren’t more people slamming Moxley?
“.. if it truly is wild and baseless, why aren’t more people slamming Moxley?”
Are you sure that you are an attorney?
con·jec·ture; noun
1. the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof
2. an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation
Alternate definition: bullshit
I could be a butterfly dreaming that I am an attorney, or however that koan goes.
You have no idea what’s true here, agreed? Moxley may or may not have any idea. All you’re trying to do is stifle embarrassing discussion for your own political purposes, so get off your high horse.
That your political party has turned this sort of Rovian assault into an art form simply makes your high dudgeon now all the more absurd.
“All you’re trying to do is stifle embarrassing discussion for your own political purposes ..”
The embarassment should fall on those who proffer unsubstantiated speculative garbage.
There is similar such garbage floating around out there on Loretta Sanchez – are you going to give that baseless conjecture the same blog space?
I’ve never heard that garbage about Sanchez. If it is presented in another local blog, I expect to write the same story asking where they get this from, minus the hypocrisy angle, although I wouldn’t be as likely to wonder why her own party has never used it against her. (I may use the Carmen Miranda hat again, but Loretta would probably look good in it.)
Now are you going to start answering for the sins of your own party?
Speaking of the Carmen Miranda hat, people keep asking me, when are you going to fix that Photoshop? Dana’s on the RIGHT!!!
They both look like Dana, but I think he’s the guy on the left. Check the nose! I have seen the one on the right represented as being Dana, but I think that that’s a mistake. It would also make sense that the one of the three in front who doesn’t have a gun. After all, he was just visiting and “fact-finding.”
Could someone who is in touch with Dana get the definitive word on this — see if he can pick himself out of a crowd?
Guy on the right. Remember, Dana was in his twenties, or maybe 30. And he had a gun just because he borrowed one to look tough while posing for the picture.
Probably borrowed the old Arab guy on the left’s gun.
He’s now 64. The picture was apparently from the late 80s — about 24 years ago. So he would have been 40 at the time. I think that the one on the left looks more 40 than the younger looking one on the right.
*OK, OK…enough already! How about starting another baseless rumor: Newt Zoot is actually a transvestite biker babe, wife swapper that runs hare and hound racing in the back woods of Macon, Georgia on week-ends! he also has a dog fighting ring!
(The above is an attempt at cynical, non factual investigative reporting!)
Our point: Why did Jeff Hubbard get 5 months pay from the NB-NM School Dist. to prepare his defense against allegations that he ripped off the Beverly Hills School District? And when he got convicted; why is there not an ongoing inquiry into virtually everything the now departed OC District Supervisor did while he was in office right here in the OC? Or better yet, why was there no investigation before his recent conviction?
Thank goodness we are back to substantive issues….at long last.
Well, you two better give that story to Moxley, it’s his type of thing. Greg and I are more serious than that.
because we have no District Attorney……we have a Consigliere for the OCGOP.
“.. I think he’s the guy on the left ..”
Wrong, this photo is 20-25 years old – do the math
Do you really think that you will get a response from anyone close to Dana?
I”m pretty sure it’s the guy on the right, but there’s lotsa folks I know who know Dana. Fact, I could ask Dana. Oh shit – I hope he didn’t read my story from today! Nah … he never reads my stories. Not like John Williams or Allan Mansoor…
I have known Dana for years – had lunch with him in the Capitol Member’s dining room. He is a nice guy – not all full of himself like some others. That is Dana on the right with the AK.
Then who’s the older doppelganger on the left with Dana’s features?
Even Art Pedroza knows that the dude on the right is Dana.
http://newsantaana.com/2011/06/12/rohrabacher-will-no-longer-represent-santa-ana-in-new-district-map/
Give up Greg, you’ve got more important issues to argue about!
If you want to Photoshop an additional Carmen Miranda hat on the guy on the right, I’ll understand.
I will continue to believe in the possibility that this is all A GIANT CONSPIRACY!
(By the way: then who was the guy on the left?)
They were some fuckin .. i dunno, they were Afghan fighters! Muhahideen! I probably shouldn’t have said Arab in a previous comment, but there were Arab fighters around there too, and one of them was the young Osama. Dana claims to have never met him.
C’mon you guys…Rohrabacher is the guy on the right, verified by this photo;
http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/03/dana-rohrabacher-afghanistan-war
Okay, okay. So who *was* the Rohrabacheresque-looking guy on the left?
I’ll crank up Photoshop when I have time.
WHO CARES GREG??? HE IS SOME FUCKIN MUJAHIDEEN! HE PROBABLY DIED THE NEXT YEAR! NOBODY KNOWS!!!!!
You don’t think this is some little gaggle of American Congressional aides do you?
“.. Now are you going to start answering for the sins of your own party?”
WTF? Don’t go with the off topic subject changing quip – that is Pedrozaesque.
Hang on. You’re accusing me of trafficking in innuendo that you think all reasonable people must dismiss without even considering that it might be true. But this information just appeared in a larger and more prominent publication than this one, which is why I wrote about it, asking “WTF, can this be true?”
Now you can (and did) judge that as being objectionable — and I question your sincerity, because I don’t think you’re likely to do the same when Republican spokespeople do that and worse all the time. That’s why it’s not off-topic.
(I give you credit, though, for a closing insult that truly cuts me to the quick.)
Greg,
You make several excellent points. Insinuations are dangerous and obviously diabolical things, and it’s become a pervasive and unfortunate tactic. It’s disheartening how easily people run their mouths about that which they know nothing. Were there proof that Dana chased underage boys, girls, turtles, brown ones, white ones, purple ones — there is no doubt it would be boldly advertised by his adversaries. Not to mention that liberty he holds so dear being markedly restricted … a la imprisonment. I also doubt it would be tolerated by the majority of his supporters, unless they were afflicted with pathologic cases of denial.
I thought Dana was opposed by a candidate of stature in 2008. A candidate who was bright, innovative and refreshingly new. I was so disappointed about Debbie Cook’s loss. Retrospectively, I think Dana has become such an institution that no one goes into a campaign truly believing they will win. Having volunteered for a couple of campaigns for folks opposing Dana, I got the sense that although the candidates’ intentions were honorable, they really didn’t visualize themselves winning.
The victory to me in 2008, if one could be found, was that the Republican party actually had to spend some money for the first time in too long. The Democratic party needs to spend some MORE money and take its candidate seriously and envision winning from twelve months before the candidate announces until election day. I also think some serious research needs to be done to establish, specifically, what it is about the odd little man that causes people to vote for him time and again.
Thanks, ‘elle. So do people just not read Moxley or attend to what he says, then? I’m still surprised that that piece could be met by such resounding … silence.
Yes, Debbie Cook was a great opponent for Dana in 2008 — and that’s probably the saddest loss in OC that I’ve seen in the last five years.
The OC Democratic Party just isn’t raising enough money to cover that sort of spending. Maybe the Dem Foundation of OC is. Could they field someone?
“I’m still surprised that that piece could be met by such resounding … silence.”
Not much of surprise there Mr. D – when you consider the audience of the Weekly and the general ambivalence of the public toward DR – which he has earned.
I was not so much standing up for DR as attempting to hold Moxley to a very low journalistic standard.
I don’t think the people who would be offended by what Moxley wrote read what he writes. As for the people who generally abide by or attend to Moxley’s writings, I honestly don’t think they care. They know Dana’s a goof. They don’t care if he’s gay, but if he is, they are saddened that he has to live a lie and denigrate other human beings, no matter their situation or station in life. As for the company he keeps, I supposed some would attach guilt by association. All I can say with certainty at this point is that Dana is a horrifying judge of character.
As for a viable Democratic win in the 48th, it is frustrating to watch the OC Democratic party. Were Debbie to receive adequate backing from it and any other reputable Democratic entity, and were her heart truly into the idea of going to Washington, I think of all the candidates we’ve seen since Dana began his occupation, she could pull it off. It would just take one or two more campaigns at the most and a coalition of brains among OC Democrats. Debbie, however, being normal, seems to bristle at the thought of the real-less-ness and insincerity of campaign life. Not only is she bright, she is genuine. And she is a perfect study of the state of American politics. Good, talented people cannot be coaxed into running for office, at least at that level, because you have to sell your soul, reputation, dignity and principles, to succeed.
Okay Diamond – apparently your game is to try and get some attention from someone close to Dana in order to verify that that is he on the right with the AK. Well, that is not going to happen. I am as close as you are going to get – I have known Dana for over 20 years. That is Dana on the right of the photo with the dark beard and the AK.
skally – out!
anon
Posted February 2, 2012 at 9:29 AM
C’mon you guys…Rohrabacher is the guy on the right, verified by this photo;
http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/03/dana-rohrabacher-afghanistan-war
Thank you anon – excellent article btw.
GD: “Okay, okay. So who *was* the Rohrabacheresque-looking guy on the left? I’ll crank up Photoshop when I have time.”
naw … never mind – don’t bother yourself.
The guy on the left is Carmen’s younger brother, Carmine Miranda.
No matter a man’s political affiliation, accusing him of being gay is the OC equivalent of Godwin’s Law. When used without substantiation it renders an argument void.
Being gay isn’t shameful, but I think using homosexuality as negative innuendo is.
“.. I think using homosexuality as negative innuendo is (shameful).”
Mr. Diamond – You have been slammed by Ms. Ruby Lee
No, you big dummy – it is R SCOTT MOXLEY who has just been slammed by Ruby Lee. When are you ever gonna get your head on straight?
This thread is getting boring, shall we close comments, Greg?
yeah …. boring – close it.
Wait, wait — I have an 8000 word screed of a reply to post here first, so just give me a cha [SLAM!]