Janet, The Protesters and Pedroza

While awaiting Supervisor Janet Nguyen’s response to my email of earlier today I stumbled across some interesting stuff by Martin Wicksol at the Total Buzz that appears to contradict Art Pedroza’s statement regarding the protesters.  You may recall that Pedroza claimed to have spoken to Janet about the protesters and “she is not supporting them”.  Wicksol’s post from earlier today sure appears to paint a different picture. (Wicksol’s entire interview with Nguyen will appear later today)

According to Wicksol, “Supervisor Janet Nguyen did return my calls — yesterday afternoon — and basically took the same stance as the others in regards to the protesters. That is, the photo was offensive, the protesters have a right to protest, and there’s no conclusive evidence yet that the protesters broke the law.”

Sounds to me like Janet has chosen to take the easy way out and her position is no different from that of Van Tran, Andy Quach, Tri Ta and the rest of the “Trannies”.  It also sounds like either Janet lied to Pedroza or Pedroza lied to us.  Janet looks to be supporting the protesters but is leaving herself enough wiggle room to allow herself to weasel out of any commitment one way or the other.

My next question is, will Art Pedroza now condemn Janet for her position on this?  Here is what Pedroza had to say when Van Tran took the very same position, “The violent protesters are terrorists, plain and simple, and Van Tran ought to condemn them. But he won’t.”  Well Pedroza it looks like your girl Janet won’t either.  Will she be the latest victim to be thrown under the Pedroza bus?

Janet, who appointed Pedroza to a county commission seat, would be best served by being disassociated with he and the Orange Juice blog.  Pedroza, who has acted as her unofficial spokesperson of the blogosphere, has made some inflammatory statements that won’t be well accepted in the Vietnamese community.  I don’t think they will reflect well upon Janet and she should reject them and Pedroza.

“The flag of South Vietnam is extinct now. There is no reason to show those colors”, said Pedroza on the Total Buzz blog. 

Comments like that by someone appointed by Janet to a county commission could be quite poisonous to her campaign.  What do you think Dina Nguyen and Hoa Van Tran might do with comments like that?  They clearly won’t help Janet amongst Vietnamese voters.  All that pandering she has done in the Vietnamese community might all be for naught if it leaks out that one of her supporters and appointees has made comments such as these.

Well I look forward to hearing back from Janet and getting some clarity on her position on the protesters.  Her unofficial spokesman of the blogosphere Pedroza has clearly backed her into a corner and his comments are doing her no good at all.  Maybe after she replies to my email she can give Pedroza a call and tell him to shut up and to stop associating himself with her.

  7 comments for “Janet, The Protesters and Pedroza

  1. Jorge Sanchez
    April 10, 2008 at 5:08 pm

    Janet has a habit of conveying different messages to different crowd. While she will tell people like Art that she is against the demonstrators, she will announce her support of their 1st Amendment right on Vietnamese language radios and newspapers.

    The only ones left drinking Janet’s kool-aid is Art and those South County Country Club Republicans.

  2. April 10, 2008 at 5:47 pm

    Well, and the Lincoln Club. And the OC GOP Endorsement Committee. And Dick Ackerman. And … you get the picture. She’s got a few people hanging on with her….

  3. April 10, 2008 at 5:53 pm

    Sean,

    Martin Wisckol has his web article up about the protests HERE.

    To quote from his article…

    “All defend the protesters right to protest peacefully and sympathize with their concern – but stop short of endorsing the demonstrations.”

    He quoted Janet Nguyen on the matter of local businesses doing business with or in Vietnam; “I/e always suppored a free market, Am I going to tell them how to do business? No.”

    Sean, I do not find the positions of any of the electeds on this issue to be inconsistent. All are saying the same thing.

    Pedroza’s comment about the flag of South Vietnam is another matter. I have no problem with taking him to task for his comments, which ignore the feelings of the vast majority of the Vietnamese community. To discount the importance of the South Vietnamese flag to the hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese immigrants is to discount their history and strggle for freedom.

    Pedroza’s comments are ignorant and insensitive at best.

    I have to with all good conscience support Supervisor Nguyen’s position on the matter of the protesters. She is taking a right and pragmatic stand that recognizes the complexity of this issue.

  4. April 10, 2008 at 8:34 pm

    Chris,

    I love that all these folks have chosen to cloak themselves in the Constitution. Of course everyone has the right to peaceful assembly, but you and I and Janet and Van all know that is not what is happening here. This isn’t about Constitutional rights, it is about threats and intimidation.

    Anh Do, Nguoi Viet’s Editor, said it best, “The protesters threatened they will dig up my father’s grave and ‘kill’ him all over again. This is so shocking. It leads us to believe that their aim is to destroy the newspaper’s voice and the voice of Vietnamese Americans.”

    “Our purpose in involving the court system is to protect and strengthen the paper’s freedom of editorial content,” she said. ”When our employees are personally assaulted, they are afraid to say and do what they think. So the effect of the protesters’ personal assault has been to chill editorial content.”

    They are trying to control the message that the Vietnamese community hears. They only want their political agenda to be put to the forefront. They only want their voice to be heard. What next? Book burnings?

    This protest isn’t about freedom. This protest is about stifling freedom. Freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom of the press. We cannot allow mob rule to dictate what the people hear. I’ll be damned if I let them use the Constitution to take away rights from others.

  5. Joey
    April 10, 2008 at 9:18 pm

    It seems Chris believes that politicians are allowed to be in support of too opposing positions when the issue appears to be complex and/or sensitive.

    Maybe for serious international issue, when different nation-states are on the verge of annihilating each other. However, is this exceptable when the issue is freedom of speech and the place is where freedom is supposed to ring the loudest and clearest.

    I wonder if this position was consistent when Catholics were pissed off when Seana O’Connor riped up the Holy Bible in front of millions of Catholics? How about when the Dixie Chicks went up against George Bush? We can support the Iranian government call for the assasination of Salme Rushdie at the same we support him.

    These people utilized their freedom of speech(Press) and despite the insensitive nature of their speech I, as a practicing true American, would never call for a retraction or a limit to their future speech, insitive or not. It’s un-American!!

    Yes, this is America, not Vietnam, and if we allow people who want to limit another person free speech, we are not following what defines to world the freedom that America offers.

    Moreover, we should not allow our politicians a selective opportunity to take positions based on the possibility that it might effect their standing amongst a particular electoral group. The positions taken by these Vietnamese politicians are pure political opportunistic stances.
    There is absolutely nothing ‘right” or “pragmatic” about letting our politicians support everybody’s position when the positions are so obviously opposed to each other.

    Can we imagine politicians wanting to play both sides of the equal protection marriage Amendment and using the excuse that includes complex, sensitive and historical implications?

    If one allows politicians to straddle the fence in a sensitive/complex issue for others, we have no consistent standing in requesting he/her take a position on a more personal issue.

    Not making a choice is making a choice and all these politicians are knowingly fighting against freedom of speech.Not cool and not American.

  6. April 11, 2008 at 11:12 am

    Chris,

    “Pedroza’s comments are ignorant and insensitive at best.”

    No. They are realistic. When are these people going to get over the fact that they lost a war? It is time to move on.

    If anyone has a right to be pissed off it is the Mexicans who saw the US steal the entire Southwest from them. And illegally invade their country! Even Abe Lincoln spoke out against that invasion.

    The fact is, the Vietnamese lost a war. A war in which OUR country spent a fortune in money and lives. Now they have a chance to live the good live here in the US. It is time to move on.

    I would say the same thing to the Cubanos. These grudges do no one any good.

    History has also proven over time that the best way to bring positive changes to commie countries like Vietnam and Cuba is to TRADE with them. I think we ought to be free to trade with both of these countries, with the obvious exception of military goods or sensitive technology.

    We cannot change the past. We can only change the future, by letting go of the past and moving on. The ultimate irony is that the terrorist protesters in Little Saigon are ATTACKING people who believe differently. They are no different from the commie thugs that won in Vietnam.

  7. April 11, 2008 at 11:16 am

    Sean,

    I don’t represent Janet in ANY way. I quit the commission post she tried to give me before I attended any meetings. I realized it would be a mistake for her to put me on a commission because I don’t like to be muzzled and I won’t bow to anyone just for a stupid appointment.

    I reserve the right to say and write whatever I want. Please don’t try to hold my editorial comments against Janet. That is just plain BS.

    Janet is obviously being careful, as are all the Vietnamese politicians in the OC. They have no choice.

    Is that any different from your boys Sal and Miguel refusing to acknowledge that Santa Ana has a gang problem? It’s called politics.

    Stop grousing about Janet and pay more heed to the awful state of the city YOU live in. You cannot blame Janet for the actions of Pulido and his Clowncil.

Comments are closed.