There is much debate going on about the role of newspapers endorsing candidates and therefore there is not much I can add to the debate. Besides, the restructuring the news industry as a result of how individuals are demanding unbiased, timely, and efficient news not to mention that the Internet continues to change the face of how news is disseminated the appropriateness of newspaper candidate endorsements will soon be settled.
Obviously, the most important thing about an election is voting for the candidate that meet the needs of the voter. There are many reasons why voters engage and how they choose to cast a vote. Some of them base it on friendships, others on ideology and some on public policy. The truth is that there is no right or wrong way to cast a vote as long as it is freely cast without interference or subterfuge, or bribery.
Ultimately, the individual casting the vote will cast it based on his or her own unique circumstances. This should be applauded even though I may not agree with their reasoning. However, and as you can already probably tell by the graphic accompanying this post, there are two individuals that I see no reason why anyone would believe that they have earned the right to your vote. This has nothing to do with public policy or political postures and everything to do with their individual ethics.
In the 243rd District Court election one candidate, Luis Aguilar, has no business, as an elected official and most definitely should not be sitting on a judicial bench, therefore he is the first person on my do not elect list. To write that Luis Aguilar is a disgrace is an understatement.
Luis Aguilar gave up the right to sit on a judicial bench after an investigation by his peers resulted in a public reprimand for his reprehensible actions as the judge on the 120th District Court. The investigation determined that Aguilar disrespected women to the point that the Texas Commission on Judicial Conduct had to issue Public Sanction against Luis Aguilar.
You can read the entire sordid details on “In a Normal City Luis Aguilar Wouldn’t Be Elected”.
Notwithstanding the local paper’s endorsement in 2012 of Luis Aguilar his actions against women demeans not only himself but those of El Paso as well. El Paso likes to proclaim itself how tolerant and friendly it is; well here is an opportunity to prove that the verbal abuse of women from an elected official is not acceptable.
Naomi R. Gonzalez
Although individuals make mistakes, there are mistakes and then there are examples of a lack of character. Mistakes are lapses of judgment that when identified are rectified and the penalties are dealt with in order to fix the problem. In the case of Naomi Gonzalez her actions immediately after her arrest for driving under the influence are extremely questionable at best.
You can read the details here: “Naomi Gonzalez: Another El Paso Useful Idiot”.
Some in the community may not be bothered by her arrest photo plastered all over Austin and I’m sure in some politician walls or computers. But the fact remains that her arrest mug shot is one of the first things to popup in a Google search. This should be a sufficient reason to not elect her as that mug shot clearly represents what the El Paso electorate values in their elected officials, if they were to return her to office.
If that is not enough of a concern for you consider, her actions immediately after her arrest. These are questionable at best. Her attitude clearly show that her concern is about her personal needs rather than the needs of the community she purports to serve. Some may see this as a temporary lapse in judgment, a mistake even; however, the problem lies in how she has handled herself after her arrest.
Gonzalez is an attorney and she clearly understands the ramifications of her pending criminal case. She is a lawyer and as such, it is my opinion that the delay in her adjudicating her case before the court is just simple lawyering by her to keep the results of a possible conviction out of the electoral debate.
Either Naomi Gonzalez accepts responsibility for her actions or she continues to worry about her personal needs, over those of the community she purports to represent and plays the lawyering game to make her indiscretion quietly go away.
I understand some of you would argue that lawyering her way out of the mess she got herself into is the just part of the US system. Those that would argue that may be right; however, Naomi Gonzalez should be playing the lawyering game as an unelected official, not as a representative of El Paso.
In the four-way race for the State Representative District 76 office, the incumbent has forfeited any right to ask the voters to vote for her.
However you feel about my commentary there is one thing we can all agree on, you need to go out and vote.