SFist: Fiona v. Janet: Bring It On!

DGR

Fri, 26 May 2006 18:30:17 -0800

So, here in District 12 in S.F., we get to choose between 2 "Republican Lite" candidates to represent us in Sacramento? Both Ma and Reilly have links to the right-wing anti-abortion folks, apparently. Reilly is closely linked with the Catholic Arch-Diocese-- you know, the world's largest anti- women's rights machine, Ma helping the scumbag in S.D. ....and both of them doing their damnedest to mislead voters and buy the election! Other than Pelosi sucking up to Bush and selling out her constituents by promising to oppose impeachment hearings, what better picture can be painted of how the Democratic Party just does NOT "get it"? Bring on the Green Party candidates!!!

andy

Sun, 30 Apr 2006 17:11:45 -0800

why are folks harping on how janet reilly looks? isnt's this a bit passe. I'm more interested in their platforms and endorsements. as for south dakota, who knows! some of ma's political positions were as republican as one can get in this town (esp her anti-tenant stuff) but overall she's clearly a democrat.

prospecter

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 21:38:16 -0800

I found this posting on the controversy on a South Dakota political blog. Who knew they'd be talking about Fiona Ma in South Dakota? http://www.sdprogressive.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=317&Itemid=2

sfmike

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:19:53 -0800

Seamus, I like "Ma vs. Ja." It sounds like a perfectly Obscure Japanese Monster Movie. And Janet Reilly doesn't look so much like Tori Spelling as she does the actress playing the fabulous coke-snorting murderess Tanya in the BBC soap opera "Footballer's Wives." As for Fiona working for a Republican in South Dakota, let's face it, anything's possible with Monster Ma. If you've watched her tenure at the Board of Supervisors, this woman is practically the definition of "Shrewd, Dumb, Ambitious Reactionary." Sadly, who knows if Monster Ja is any better? If somebody does know, please clue us all in.

Partyhack

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:55:10 -0800

Wow, that is interesting stuff. I just pointing out that South Dakota makes sense to work/campaign in because is a hotbed for politics, and it would have made sense if Fiona worked for Johnson or any Democrat in SD, but I concede it doesn't make any sense to work for a Republican period. Very strange that the IRS doc disappeared.

prospecter

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:45:08 -0800

I take it back. She was there this morning but now she's gone. What's up with that?

prospecter

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:37:25 -0800

I checked this out. Political tax documents are available from the IRS website. If you want to see for yourself, go to this site: http://forms.irs.gov/politicalOrgsSearch/search/basicSearch.jsp Then click on Form 8871 and search under Rounds. You'll see that Fiona Ma is listed as his campaign treasurer in 2002. The thing is, Mike Rounds is a right wing REPUBLICAN, not a Democrat as partyhack seems to believe. And he's the same guy who is leading the charge to overturn the right to choose by passing an abortion ban in South Dakota. I think we need a better explanation from Fiona Ma than just saying she's being smeared.

Seamus Furr

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:35:11 -0800

I propose "Ma vs. Ja".

Partyhack

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 13:03:06 -0800

From what I understand (and that is very little) South Dakota, 2002 or any other year where it was still Daschle's state, has a very contested seats. Contested seats get first priority in money, stafers and consultants from the Party. If Ma worked for Tim Johnson, 2002, this would make a lot of sense. Johnson's reelection race was the DSCC "top priority" race in 2002 and he won by a very narrow margin. With Fiona's ties to DNC machinery, South Dakota is a good place to be seen, and to be helping out in part because it was a hot bed for the DNC. Further, it is always good to pay tribute to a party leader's state.