Opinion L.A.

Observations and provocations
from The Times' Opinion staff

« Previous Post | Opinion L.A. Home | Next Post »

Villaraigosa is golden

The gods and goddesses of political fortune have a wicked sense of humor and an undying love for Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as evidenced by this week's mayoral blog/news cycle. Start with blogger Luke Ford's outrage that no one at this paper, or anywhere else, had weighed in on the excruciatingly important fact that L.A.'s mayor has been spotted without his wedding ring. That's an open invitation to unbury the already well-documented and (we had assumed) distant past marital problems of the first couple. The mayor's staff answers that the boss had lost some weight and the ring was slipping off. Uh, OK. Guys, you're making things worse. Can anyone else help out here?

Why, yes. San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom to the rescue. For all the details check in with our friends at Political Muscle or the original story in the San Francisco Chronicle, but here's the gist: Newsom was forced to admit he had an affair with an aide...who just happened to be the wife of Newsom's good friend and campaign manager. The affair is almost beside the point, even though it was with an underling. The SF mayor--who until this week was being talked about as Villaraigosa's chief rival for governor in four years--betrayed his friend and political adviser, lying to him for months. We should trust this guy?

Meanwhile, Villaraigosa's ring is back on and he looks, in comparison to the randy mayor of Baghdad by the Bay, like a Boy Scout. He also looks more and more like the next governor of California. For some insurance, though, those gods and goddesses of political fortune might want to lure John Garamendi into some kind of scandal.


Comments () | Archives (2)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Tim Cavanaugh

Here's a comment Luke Ford says he was unable to post:

What’s excruciatingly important is that your newspaper is lazy and that it treats minorities, be they black, latino, gay, etc, to a different standard than it holds majority white folks. If Villaraigosa had been white, your paper would’ve given him a far harder time about his sexual pecadillos. Remember what you did to the white Governor when he was first running. I have no problem with your stories on Arnold. I have a problem with your double-standards. So why don’t you take on my major point instead of isolating some minor detail?


The Los Angeles Times has been so biased in favor of Villaraigosa on everything from his budget disaster, to his cheating, to things that David Zahniser has known about but didn't publish.

If you're wondering why your circulation has diminished in recent years, it's not ONLY about the changing way people receive the news. It is about mistrust in the Times.



In Case You Missed It...



Recent Posts
Reading Supreme Court tea leaves on 'Obamacare' |  March 27, 2012, 5:47 pm »
Candidates go PG-13 on the press |  March 27, 2012, 5:45 am »
Santorum's faulty premise on healthcare reform |  March 26, 2012, 5:20 pm »


About the Bloggers
The Opinion L.A. blog is the work of Los Angeles Times Editorial Board membersNicholas Goldberg, Robert Greene, Carla Hall, Jon Healey, Sandra Hernandez, Karin Klein, Michael McGough, Jim Newton and Dan Turner. Columnists Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus also write for the blog, as do Letters editor Paul Thornton, copy chief Paul Whitefield and senior web producer Alexandra Le Tellier.

In Case You Missed It...