When is a joke not a joke?
As we pointed out in an earlier post, Christian Berthelsen political reporter for the LA Times related in an article on Thursday comments made by Republican Santa Ana City Councilman Carlos Bustamante regarding the appointment of Sandra Hutchens as the new OC Sheriff. Apparently, Bustamante walks up to a prominent conservative blogger and says “I kept telling the Chief (Walters) maybe we should get you some implants, or a water bra.”
Where do I begin?
First, this is a highly offensive and sexist comment. It is derogatory towards Chief Hutchens in that it implies that the ONLY REASON she received the appointment as Sheriff is because of her gender. It is derogatory towards women in general and the millions of women who have risen to great levels of accomplishment based upon their own merits, hard work, and skill in their professions.
Second, this comment is offensive to the residents of the City of Santa Ana, in particular Ward 3, who have the distinct pleasure of being represented on the City Council by the “Honorable” Mr. Bustamante. To be represented by someone who has the audacity to make such comments in a public setting, and who lacks the judgment necessary to prevent himself from making them at all, is beyond intolerable.
Third, Bustamante’s comments are offensive to his employer, the County of Orange Public Works department. Bustamante, is the Director of Administration for OC Public Works. In his role as an executive manager, he supervises the Human Resources Department for that agency. One of his responsibilities is to uphold the County Equal Employment Opportunity Ordinance which states: The County of Orange will not tolerate harassing conduct that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment.
Fourth, Bustamante’s comments are reflective of the good old boy attitudes prevalent among many executive and senior managers in the county. There is a culture of denial that has grown within the ranks of county executive management. The culture is one that makes it clear; “there are no consequences your actions; anything goes.” Whenever something goes wrong under an executive manager’s watch, the response is to simply point the finger down the chain of command. Usually, the fingers stop pointing once they get to low-level managers, supervisors or line staff. The “little guys or gals” always take the fall.
CEO Tom Mauk is currently on vacation, which explains why the LiberalOC’s request for comment from the CEO’s office went unanswered today. We wanted to know if Carlos Bustamante’s remarks were consistent with county policy regarding equal employment opportunities for women and if such comments would be tolerated coming from a senior executive in the workplace?
Mr. Bustamante was in the Board Hearing Room Tuesday morning by virtue of his position as an executive manager for OC Public Works and was arguably there on County time when he made his comments. So I have an additional question that only the CEO can answer. Since Bustamante made his comments while in his professional capacity as a county manager, what will Tom Mauk do about it? Will he demonstrate tolerance for such behavior? Will he uphold the standards that prohibit such conduct, or will he perpetuate the culture of denial, accept such deplorable behavior, and give Bustamante a pass? Now I would love to be proven wrong, but I doubt it anything will happen.
One additional and final point. Carlos Bustamante is a member of the Santa Ana City Council. With his title comes the prefix “Honorable.” What is honorable about his statement on Tuesday? Will the Council demand an apology from Mr. Bustamante? Will they introduce a resolution for censure? Or will the City Council give Carlos a pass?
And you are trying to provide cover by making it seem that because you and some of the females in your household don’t think it’s a big deal, that neither should anyone else, and therefore us that pile on him are wrong and subject to name-calling.
That’s not cover, Gustavo. That’s my opinion about the comment and the reaction from you and other commenters here.
Just like it is your opinion — conveyed as fact, and untethered from reality — that Carlos made the remark “to curry favor with the county’s good-ol’-boy GOP”
But that’s a convenient standard you’ve concocted: any Republican who disagrees with you on this subject is “covering for Carlos.”
Odd thing to say nobody was within earshot, Jubal.
I think my meaning was obvious, Christy. But to satisfy your hair-splitting, I’;; amend my statement: “nobody was within earshot except the two people Carlos was talking to.”
He should really hold in the harassment-type comments/jokes until he’s away from work, if he wants to keep his job.
You know, my 20-year old daughter — a very intelligent, accomplished, independent young woman — told me this morning that she was reading the comments this post. Her judgment off attitudes like yours: “Those people are crazy.”
Maybe someone ought to liberate her from her unconscious brainwashing by the Patriarchy and re-educate her in how a woman is supposed to react.
Gustavo – You have more first-hand knowledge of this than I.
SMS: Gustavo has no first hand knowledge of this. Three people do: me, Christian Berthelson and Carlos Bustamante.
Whether not he wants too apologize — which would be the political correct and expedient path — he ought to own up to it. To deny saying it is dishonest.
But I thought you were so proper that you didn’t engage in name-calling?
Different blog, different rules. if you think that’s name-calling, I suggest reading your Navel Gazing posts.
You know, my 20-year old daughter  a very intelligent, accomplished, independent young woman  told me this morning that she was reading the comments this post. Her judgment off attitudes like yours: “Those people are crazy.â€Â
Maybe someone ought to liberate her from her unconscious brainwashing by the Patriarchy and re-educate her in how a woman is supposed to react.
Jubal: Frankly, I can see how some people are offended and I can see how some people (including some women) are not. This is quite obviously one of those issues on which intelligent people of good will can disagree. However, I think your comment that “someone ought to liberate her” etc. is simply a cheap shot.
I don’t think it was a cheap shot, but sarcasm aimed at the attitude that there is only a single, correct response for women to that comment..
I agree with the rest of your comment. Women aren’t a monolith, and each individual is going to respond differently.
I know Sheriff Hutchens has heard MUCH worse in her law enforcement career and by now, is probably immensely bored by the claims of gender/affirmative-action/blah-blah-blah to justify her well-deserved success. What people may not be contemplating is that law enforcement people have a wonderful sense of humor.
@jubal:
“Different blog, different rules.”
How precious. So first, you try to portray OC Blog as above the fray of the county’s wild, profane blogosphere by not engaging in name-calling. Then, when I pointed out Scott Graves and you refer to 241 Toll Road opponents as hippies or mouse lovers (“uber-alles” or something?) some time ago, you made an excuse that the two of you were insulting issues, not people. Now, you say your decorum exists only on your blog? Weak, Matt. Weak. You’re slipping into Carlos territory there. I’ve never said I don’t name-call, so mentioning Navel Gazing adds nothing to this.
Actually, I don’t hear any other Republican covering for Carlos except you, so my comment applies just to you. And, yes: Carlos cracked his joke for an explicitly political purpose–read Jokes and their Relationship to the Unconscious, and you’ll see what I mean.
Finally, I don’t understand why you keep polling your family for the purposes of this discussion. Hugh should’ve taught you better logic than that!
At the end of the day the better candidate was selected sheriff. By any measure Hutchens was the superior pick over Walters. I applaud the Supes for picking a candidate far outside the OC GOP and “boys club” clubs.
So first, you try to portray OC Blog as above the fray of the county’s wild, profane blogosphere by not engaging in name-calling.
Same old straw man tactics, Gustavo. That’s your rationale for the rules at OC Blog, not ours.
Consider our distinctions weak, Gustavo. I really could care less coming from a guy who thinks calling Hugh Hewitt “Baby Hewie” is cutting discourse.
Actually, I don’t hear any other Republican covering for Carlos except you, so my comment applies just to you. And, yes: Carlos cracked his joke for an explicitly political purpose
Got it: if Gustavo says it is so, then it must be so! Thank you for the remote diagnosis, Dr. Arellano — a remarkable feat considering you weren’t there and only know what you read in the LA Times article.
Finally, I asked my wife and eldest daughter about their reaction because I was interested in their reaction. They’re smart, independent women, and I considered maybe they’d see it completely differently than me.
It’s not a question of logic, but keep up those Gustavo cracks!