Invitation to Nickie Antonio for public debate on reform

[Tom Bullock]

Given the charges that have been flying around for the past two days, I'd like to clear the air for voters.

First, to be crystal clear, my campaign has not said, and I do not believe, that Councilwoman Antonio is involved in corrupt activity or associated with corrupt people. For those who may have that impression, I am happy to remove it. The mailer sent by my campaign never implied this (note the word "corruption" does not even appear on that side of the mailer), but please consider this a retraction of any such perceived implication.

Second, it is correct that a mailer sent out by my campaign included two statements that were accurately, but not completely, cited to independent sources. The reason: Councilwoman Antonio’s on-the-record statements (at a Plain Dealer endorsement interview) about these issues were never printed in a newspaper story, so those portions of the statements can’t be attributed. They are nevertheless 100 percent true. The facts are the facts, and Councilwoman Antonio hasn't -- and can’t -- deny them.

We have a very different outlook on how critical reform is for the future of our community. Perhaps the most glaring example of this is her continued refusal to join the chorus of public officials calling on Chairman Jimmy Dimora to step down in light of the ongoing corruption scandal.

Elected leaders should do just that—lead. It is our responsibility to stand up clearly and forcefully for change. I am disappointed that Councilwoman Antonio has not done so.

My record on reform is clear. I have fought since 2005 for reforms to change business as usual in politics. I am working now, and I will continue to work energetically in the future, to increase transparency and accountability at all levels of government.

These are serious and substantive differences between the two of us, and voters have a right to hear them. What is not called for is name-calling, as was included in Councilwoman Antonio’s e-mail of last week. I’ve included my response to that e-mail, below.

If Councilwoman Antonio thinks she can win this election by talking about the footnotes on a postcard, she can take that route. I'm going to win this race by delivering on reform. That's why I've invited her to a debate that would allow us to focus on issues that voters care about and to do so in a tone that upholds the dignity this race deserves.

Councilwoman Antonio has not yet accepted my invitation -- attached below -- but I'm hopeful that she'll join me in finding ways to create meaningful reform that can get our region back on track.

If anyone has any questions about the mailer or anything else, I hope they'll contact me directly and let me know. You can reach me at tom@tombullockforohio.com.

Sincerely,
Councilman Tom Bullock

[NOTE: this is the text of a letter sent to Councilwoman Antonio yesterday.]

An open letter to Councilwoman Nickie Antonio

Dear Councilwoman Antonio:

I'd like to respond directly to your recent email, both to correct the record and to invite you to engage in a constructive debate rather than personal attacks.

I'm standing up for change and reform. This election is about growing jobs, strengthening schools, and getting our region back on track. But none of that can happen until we directly address the corruption that has been wasting taxpayer dollars, crippling our government, and damaging our region's reputation. Corruption hurts us all.

It is our responsibility as public servants to directly address corruption and put real people first, even if it means engaging in uncomfortable conversations with powerful elected officials. Corruption can occur in either party. As Democrats, it is our responsibility to clean up any problems we find in our Party - right away.

Because this issue is so important, voters have a right to know the difference between our records on reform. That's why my campaign sent out the mailer that compared our records: it was a factual, substantive comparison on an issue that affects voters.

Making this comparison of our records does not constitute a personal attack. In fact, your email attacking my character was personal and baseless. I appreciate that feelings can run high in campaigns, but we owe it to the voters not to engage in name-calling and negative personal language. We should keep the debate about issues important to the residents of District 13.

Since you did not include my campaign's mailer in your message, many who received your email were confused about what the mailer said. You also neglected to specifically refute any of the facts presented in the mailer. I am campaigning on a platform of improved ethics and transparency, and I believe in the right of voters to make their own decision. As such, I have made my original mailer available (click here), so people can evaluate it themselves.

Rather than let this campaign devolve into personal attacks, I invite you to join me in a public debate on reform so that voters can make an informed choice in the coming election. The debate should be moderated be a neutral third party and should provide voters a chance to hear from us directly on this important issue. Will you join me?

I look forward to your reply,

Tom Bullock

[Erica Masters]

Honestly, I'm just glad to see someone is doing something to move on from this pointless sniping about the mailer. There are probably some more important issues we could be dealing with.

[sharon kinsella]

What is up with you and the change and reform song.

It's done, the change happened, the reform happened.

What are you changing now Tom, how about your behavior. How about your casting your opposition in a bad light with innuendo and lies.

Prove your allegations, back up your claims. Explain how you led Lakewood out of financial ruin. Tell us how you stood up for reform. Did you personally march into Dimora's office and demand he resign? Did you push the FBI and Bill Mason, little you?

Protected retirees with better access to services. What did you do that no one else on coucil did? What services do we seniors have better access to, that you personally provided?

Did you not say on this forum that you would serve out your full term?

How many proposals did you put in front of council that were prepared in a way that they could be acted on immediately?

Have you learned Roberts Rules yet?

Why should Nickie waste any more time on you? I certainly don't think you're worth the time. I've seen your dog and pony
show and I'm not buying it.

Set the record straight here. Here's your opportunity.

Put up or shut up like the old saying goes.

[Stephen Eisel]

Will you invite Jeremy Caldwell?

http://www.caldwell2010.com/

[John Farina]

Good grief Tom, you can't be for real? Where do you get such chutzpah?

(Before I respond to Tom - Erica, this campaign was about the many important issues facing District 13 and the candidates sharing their ideas. It is Mr. Bullock who chose to degrade the election with his mailing.)

Making this comparison of our records does not constitute a personal attack. In fact, your email attacking my character was personal and baseless. I appreciate that feelings can run high in campaigns, but we owe it to the voters not to engage in name-calling and negative personal language. We should keep the debate about issues important to the residents of District 13.

Tom, a comparison of records would involve factual information. Yes, if it were a true comparison of your experience versus Nickie's or your ideas versus Nickie's, it would have been an fair way to show each of your differences and perhaps allow you an chance to demonstrate where you think you might be a better choice. (I ultimately think an honest comparison would show that Nickie Antonio is the superior choice in this primary, but I digress.)

You chose to compare yourself to Nickie in a way that was baseless. You cited sources that don't exist. You cited an article that doesn't even reference Nickie. You said she was supported by those against reform and claim the source and the Board of Elections - are you saying that none of her campaign supporters have ever supported any type of reform? Once again, a baseless claim. This campaign was quite thoughtful before YOU launched the first attack and now you claim to be the victim? You launch the negative attack and then have the nerve to say you oppose this as a tactic? Nickie Antonio has run a fair and honest campaign and has done nothing but discuss the issues that are important to District 13. You say your are campaigning on ethics, yet you misstate the facts and create distortions of the truth. You even fabricate things to try and make your false point. You brought the level of discourse down with your smear piece.

As far as your charges, I think Nickie is smart to ignore them. Why give them any credibility? Nickie Antonio is a woman with integrity and has a long, strong record of accomplishment in Lakewood and in Northeast Ohio. It is exemplary and I would hold it up as a clear example of true leadership. Nickie has worked hard as a public servant and has fought for what is right. This is why she is endorsed by nearly every major elected official and organization in the area. I've known Nickie Antonio for years and have never heard her stand in defense of Jimmy Dimora or any other allegedly corrupt official. Nickie Antonio is a class act and the voters of District 13 would do well to have her as their representative.

As far as reform goes, I was there for the effort to reform county government and don't recall your supposed leadership in that effort. It seems obvious to me that your involvement in the Democrats for Principled Leadership was a thinly veiled attempt to further your own agenda. In my honest opinion, you are working to benefit Tom Bullock and if the voters gain, well that's just a nice benefit.

Nickie Antonio would be wise to ignore your request and not get involved in your game. The voters in District 13 would be wise to ignore it as well. You want to focus on issues, then go out and campaign on issues. I'm sure Nickie will do the same. May the best candidate win on May 4.

[Erica Masters]

@John: I guess it was about issues, but they agree on all the issues. Jobs, environment, taxes, crime, transit, budget. Have they ever voted different on council? Dog parks, maybe. Or was it dogs in parks? Either way, not exactly a huge difference.

The one major difference is on reform. I doubt she remembers me, but I've met Nickie a few times and she was really nice and definitely wants to do good things. She's obviously not in bed with Jimmy Dimora, but to me, it really does say something that she isn't willing to call this guy a bum and tell him that he doesn't have any business pretending to represent people like me.

Everyone on these boards seems pretty angry about the mailer, so I'm guessing you're a lot closer to Nickie than me. I'd be mad, too, if someone sent out some negative mail about one of my friends.

I'd love it if these two would sit down for a debate and talk like grown-ups about this issue, because it's what I'm going to be thinking about when I cast my vote. We all know Nickie's not on the take, so she'd help herself out and help me out if she'd just say, look, here's where I stand on this and why. Once we've got that out of the way, she can tell us what she's planning on doing about reform.

It sounds like I'm the only one one here who feels this way, but this stuff with Dimora is actually really important to me, because no one's going to get anything done around here until we clean house.

[sharon kinsella]

Erica - I think your Tom's friend. No biggie, your choice.

Here's the deal, no one needs to be talking about county issues, this is not a country race. This is a race for a state seat.

When you are a public figure, you pick and choose your issues. You spend your time trying to make things better for everyone. There were people doing the reform thing, that's nice. Other people were doing other things. This was a county issue, not a Lakewood issue. Nickie was busy fulfilling her duties as a City Councilperson, as well she should.

This is not about being and Everyman or Everywoman, this is a job for someone with experience, integrity and knowledge of this region. Nickie has those things. I don't feel that Tom does.

Reform is Tom's issue, I say let him have at it and let's send Nickie to the statehouse where she knows how to do legislation and the knowledge of District 13 and what's best for all of us.

[Erica Masters]

@Sharon: I see where you're coming from, I guess I just see corruption as a broader issue.

If you're looking at the elected officials who represent us personally, the only place where corruption seems to be a problem right now is at the county level, but the same problems exist at every level (Sinagra, Dimora, Tom Noe, Bob Ney, George Bush) and whoever we elect to any office, they're going to be sitting next to some criminals.

I get that politicians have to choose their issues -- I wouldn't have wanted Obama responding to every debate request from Bob Barr -- but it's not like this is an irrelevant issue right now.

I know you're not trying to say you don't care about this stuff, but saying that someone representing Cleveland and Lakewood shouldn't care or or have opinions on what's going on at the county level doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. If we had a corrupt mayor in Gates Mills, sure, that'd be irrelevant, but the commissioners have as much influence on Cleveland proper as Frank Jackson.

But really, the whole point when I chimed in here to begin with was sort of to agree with the point that I think you're trying to make anyway. I don't want this to be Nickie's issue, either. I just want to know what she has to say about it. Then everyone can move on.

[Stan Austin]

I guess I just see corruption as a broader issue

Corruption can present itself in many forms - an office holder taking bribes, or a candidate who deliberately distorts the process of political debate.
Each of those in its own way is equally injurious to our democratic process and our government.

Stan Austin

[John Farina]

Erica - Nickie has made a decision to stay out of the troubles with Dimora. While I too would like to see him go, I also understand that there aren't many officials who have called for his removal. How many Lakewood officials have called for him to step down? How many in the county? Even Tom's quote in the Scene story is hardly a direct call for Dimora's removal (you need a new king or something or other). Perhaps no one has called for Dimora's removal because they believe he hasn't been charged with anything yet? I don't agree with that, but it is a reality.

I attended some of the early meetings of the Democrats for Principled Leadership and there was a resistance to specifically asking for Dimora to step down as party chair. I even said at one of those meetings that the group would have less credibility if they didn't call for it. (They may have done so recently, I haven't been able to remain active in the group.)

Tom's throwing around this reform issue is a red herring. Since he and Nickie apparently agree on many issues, he doesn't have a lot to throw at her. So he's using reform as a way to drive a wedge between him and Nickie. This race is about many things and reform, quite frankly, is low on the list. Jobs, strong education and a good quality of life for all residents are far more important. Nickie is talking about those issues. Tom has done nothing to prove to me that he is looking for true reform except talk. Nickie Antonio has done her work in the open - honestly and with integrity. There is no reason to raise this issue with her.

You vote for Tom and I'll vote for Nickie. Hopefully whoever wins will get to the important work of the district and represent us well.

[sharon kinsella]

Erica why should she say anything? It's a done deal, other did that work. Do you also want he to talk about Obama's recent nuclear agreements? Sara Palin and her new duties as the Queen of the Tea Party.

It's a non-issue now. Just because Tom is trying to create whirlpools where there is no water, why does she have to dive into his muck.

Be pleased that the issue, for the meantime, has been solved and move on.

[Dan Slife]

Both Tom and Nicki are looking to take their dedication to civic leadership to the next level. They're both to be commended for entering the game. It's tough to put one's self-worth on the line, in the public arena.

The game of politics can be a blood bath. The wise politician doesn't take themselves, their flavor-of-the-campaign message, the words/framing of their opponents, or the shifting weather of public perception too seriously. They act and react to these inputs/outputs, no doubt.

In this blood bath, Nicki and Tom are deploying viral marketing schemes that push buttons. Politicians are always pushing buttons. In doing so, their not so different from any interest group or ideology looking to build its base. They're playing the game. Building brands.

Unfortunately, American politics is not unlike sports or product competition. Two teams. Two colas. Visceral, gut-level tactics for gaining and keeping fan support is the order of the day.

It's a structural issue.

We're better served by cutting to the source and speaking to the person. Only at the face-to-face level can you cut through the hype of campaign marketing strategy and take a true measure of the human; if they measure up to our expectations as political leaders.

Too often campaign literature reveals only what the politician "thinks people want to hear." It's this reality that sets the dualistic structure, or, is a pragmatic response to a pre-existing reality.

So what do Nicki and Tom think people want to hear? Consider this in light of the dialogue between their agents on this thread.

What are the fundamental differences between Tom and Nicki?

What interests do Nicki and Tom serve?

How do they differ at the level of values?

What are the power/political networks to which each are connected?

Who will best serve the district based upon their track record in Lakewood: who initiates responses to constituent demands and follows-through?

Who do they serve?

[sharon kinsella]

I truly am on board with what you are saying Dan. Believe me, I wish the discourse could be framed in this manner.

Unfortunately, the tone was set with Tom's innuendos and his wanting to "frame" the "debate" around his ridiculous issue.

The reform issue is now a dead horse. It's been killed and one side has won.

The constant harping he has done is irrational. One of the things I learned about when going through addiction recovery is that you cannot get rational behavior out of an irrational person. Their is no debate or conversation with someone like this. There is only ranting and raving - which is a sign of someone who has nothing.

Most debates are about the issues. He wants to debate about what is now a non-issue.

Nope, nope and nope, if it was my choice.

Hi my friend and welcome back to the rodeo!

[sharon kinsella]

Bullock claims, on his website to be the highest fundraiser for District 13 Rep race, yet more than 3/4 of his funding came from himself.

[Erica Masters]

@John: The thing that disappoints me here is that people seem so one-sided on this. Neither of these two have been 100 percent accurate with everything they've told the voters. I don't hear anyone who's shocked at Nickie's "chutzpah" for telling me and plenty of other people during her council race that she wasn't going to run for state rep.

Did she lie to me? I guess so, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go online and write a 500-word screed about it. She's a politician and she's doing what politicians do -- trying to get elected. It's sad to hear everyone on this board acting like Tom is some kind of villain for doing the same thing. I haven't talked to anyone who supports Nickie that's taking this nearly as hard as everyone over here seems to be. Maybe we're all just enjoying the safety of sitting at our computers, but it's gotten pretty out-of-control uncivilized, starting with the e-mail Nickie herself sent out.

@Sharon: To my mind, the issue is still outstanding. It sounds like you may know her a little better, so I'm guessing you already have some understanding of her thinking on this. But my question (Shouldn't we be doing everything we can to chase Dimora out of town?) still hasn't been answered, not by Nickie, at least.