Same song, different tune

Matt Cunningham posted a skewed story over at The OC Blog and The Flash Report about Loretta Sanchez. Cunningham says that Sanchez “put the kibosh” on a fundraiser that was supposed to be held in Orange County by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to benefit the Democratic Party of Orange County.

From Cunningham’s post:

… Rep. Loretta Sanchez’s ego got in the way.

Sanchez adopted a proprietary view of the dollars the Pelosi/DPOC event would raise. Rather than seeing a stronger, better-funded DPOC as a benefit to her continued representation of the 47th Congressional District, in Loretta’s view the fund raiser would take money away from her.

Cunningham’s “local Democratic insider” source is the worst kept secret in the OC political world right now.  And it’s saddening.

Many people know that the “local Democratic insider” is bitter over a few things in local Democratic politics, and we also know that the “insider” had a friend that was set to make a good profit off of the Pelosi event.

Here’s the story that I was told:

The DPOC (with the help of “local Democratic insider”) solicited Pelosi for this dinner. One of the selling points was that Loretta was already onboard.

After Pelosi accepted the invitation she spoke with Sanchez, who hadn’t heard of the event. Once Loretta looked into the benefit, she noticed that there were some people (like the friend of “local Democratic insider”) that were angling to make some good money off of the event; Sanchez, who was never officially onboard with this benefit, backed out. And so did Pelosi.

Maybe Matt Cunningham was right when he said that “ego” stood in the way of this event, but it wasn’t Loretta’s this time. Perhaps the “local Democratic insider” shouldn’t have guaranteed Loretta’s attendance.

  10 comments for “Same song, different tune

  1. May 31, 2007 at 11:28 pm

    Are you sure we’re talking about the same insider, Mike?

    Any way you slice it, Sanchez killed an event that would have benefited your party.

  2. May 31, 2007 at 11:30 pm

    Cunningham’s “local Democratic insider” source is the worst kept secret in the OC political world right now.

    You think I only have one?

  3. May 31, 2007 at 11:48 pm


    There is a reason why credible news sources rarely run stories based upon unidentified sources.

    They are not very reliable.

    You seem to have fallen for a skewed story from the perspective of one (maybe 2) individual points of view regarding the event you’re speaking of in your “story.”

    From what I have been able to find out, certain representations were made to Pelosi’s office that were simply not true. My understanding is that Pelosi withdrew from the event, until the “insider” got his ducks in a row.”

    When you get your insider(s) to come forward “on the record” then maybe there will be a story.  My guess is that will not happen because it is much easier for them to shoot from the hip while hiding in the shadows than it is to stand behind their statements.

  4. Flowerszzz
    June 1, 2007 at 2:54 am

    Dan – make sure you hold your buddies over at the “juice” to the same standard.

  5. June 1, 2007 at 7:20 am


    Credible new organizations frequently use unidentified sources. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of my unidentified sources.

  6. June 1, 2007 at 7:46 am


    I had heard the same stories back a while ago. My digging discovered that the truth was not what was being communicated.

    I think your sources may have some sort of ax to grind here.

    But then again, not knowing who they are, it is difficult to determine their motives.

    While credible organizations use unidentified sources, they try to find some sort of corroboration.

  7. June 1, 2007 at 7:50 am

    not my post Flowerzz; Matt, you are correct on the use of anonymous sources, but for a story like this I think most editors would want the source named.

  8. June 1, 2007 at 8:39 am


    You may be right, but that’s a big reason blogs like our exist, because we’ll post stories that would never see the light on day in a newspaper.

  9. Dan Chmielewski
    June 1, 2007 at 9:05 am

    Agreed. And I think the blogs have a good track record of publishing corrections to errors and mistakes to original posts which is something you need to hunt for in a newspaper.

  10. Northcountystorm
    June 1, 2007 at 12:12 pm

    From my observation point, Jubal has got some of the facts wrong and of course his spin is Red and Wrong. On the other hand, there’s more to the story then what Mike’s been told but BFD.

    Rather then argue about what “insider” said what and what Loretta might or might not have said to the Speaker, why not move on and try this:

    Start over. Frank, give Loretta a call. Work together to bring the Speaker out. Plug Wylie in. Make some lira.

    If the event comes off and the $$ actually does go for Central OC voter registration and GOTV efforts then all the above will be much ado about nothing.

Comments are closed.