I’ve never been in Broward Circuit Judge Peter Weinstein’s courtroom, but I watched him at work for years in another venue – the state Capitol.

I covered Weinstein for many years when he was a state senator.  Or should I say, a great state senator.

Now it’s déjà vu, a flashback to all those past Weinstein campaigns I reported on.

Weinstein is running again for election..as chief judge.

Broward Chief Judge Vic Tobin is stepping down in February.   Weinstein is stepping up.

JAAblog, the courthouse blog, first reported this news. It stated that “the word on the street is he’s already got the votes.”   

Weinstein told me about his prospects: “I have had a good response.”

His opponent appears to be Family Court Judge Susan Greenhawt.

The 90 Broward judges elect their own chief.

Weinstein is a perfect fit for chief judge, which I equate to herding cats.

Being the head of 90 raging egos in black robes is not an easy job.  Neither is accomplishing anything in the state Senate.

Weinstein was remarkably successful in the state senate because he was a consensus builder.  This Jewish kid from Queens made friends in unexpected places, such as among the conservative Pork Choppers of North Florida.

That’s how he passed laws that cracked down on travel agent fraud, increased regulation of adult congregate living facilities and auto repair shops and made it easier to conduct child abuse investigations. That is only four of dozens of bills from the productive Sen. Weinstein.

The same traits that made him successful in the Senate will serve the judiciary well if he is elected chief judge. I found him to be bright and most of all, affable.

Elected in the giant shakeup of 1982* caused by reapportionment, Weinstein never held public office before.  He was a Brooklyn Law School graduate (Class of 1970) and an assistant District Attorney in Queens before moving to Florida in 1977.

Once he took office, Weinstein quickly became a leader in the state Senate.

He was the first member of the Broward Class of 1982 to head a major committee.  He was named chairman of Senate Judiciary-Criminal after only three years in the Senate. 

He was elected by his Democratic colleagues to be Senate Majority Leader in 1990-92.

He left the Senate to run for Congress in 1996, losing to former U. S. Rep. Robert Wexler.   His loss was not surprising since it was largely a Palm Beach seat.

Gov. Lawton Chiles appointed Weinstein a judge a year later, in August, 1997.

“I’m running on my experience,” Weinstein said.  “I have been a judge for 13 years.”

He served about 10 years on the criminal bench.  He has been in civil court for the past three years.

There are a lot of judges with experience, but Weinstein has a big advantage others can’t duplicate:

His political past connects him to the centers of power that are so important to funding the judiciary and building a new courthouse. He is known and liked by the county commission and in the state Capital.

I have nothing against Greenhawt.  I don’t know the woman

On resumes alone, she can’t match Weinstein.  A former nurse who graduated Nova Southeastern law in 1993, Greenhawt had a family law practice when she was appointed by Gov. Jeb Bush in May, 2003.

I don’t have a vote.  Only judges do.

From the outside looking in, the choice appears clear to me – Weinstein.

XXXXX

*Others elected for the first time to the Legislature from Broward in 1982 were state Reps. Tom Armstrong,D-Plantation; Bill Clark,D-Lauderdale Lakes; Peter Deutsch, D-Sunrise; Anne Mackenzie,D-Fort Lauderdale; Debby Sanderson, R-Fort Lauderdale; Bob Shelley, R-Pompano Beach; Joe Titone, D-Coral Springs and Jack Tobin, D-Margate.  Tom McPherson, D-Fort Lauderdale, was elected to a Senate seat in 1982 after 12 years in the House. Weinstein was a Democrat from Coral Springs.

Bud Chiles will quit the governor’s race within hours, according to The Miami Herald.

Chiles was under pressure from Democrats to leave the field to their candidate Alex Sink, said the paper.

This is my earlier post on Chiles:

Bud Chiles should join Kendrick Meek as a former candidate.

I want Chiles to drop out just like I wrote yesterday that Meek should drop out.

Note to those who said I was a bigot for asking Meek, an African-American, to quit his campaign for U. S. Senate:  Chiles is white.

Chiles is running for governor as an independent.

His standing in the polls has dropped as voters learned he was not the reincarnation of his father, Lawton Chiles.

Chiles is confusing the election.  He could steal votes from the Democrat’s best shot for governor in two decades – Alex Sink.

Right now polls show Chiles taking votes from both Sink and Republican nominee Rick Scott.

But once voters focus on Chiles positions, watch out!  They are decidedly Democratic.

It is a Democratic position to support gay adoption, like Chiles.  It is usually Democrats who want to reduce the impact of PACs and special interests on politics, as Chiles does.

It is a Democratic position to talk about releasing non-violent offenders to community rehabilitation programs. It is a Democratic position to talk about banning oil drilling off our coast with a constitutional amendment.

Yes, Chiles is against gun control.  That’s a universal position in Florida statewide politics.

Most of his positions are far into the Democratic column, maybe even on the left side of the party.

That’s why he will steal votes from the Ds. That’s why elements of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party are leaning towards Chiles.

You know what a Florida progressive is?   A dewy-eyed liberal who puts policy over pragmatism, which is why I can’t think of one progressive who won statewide office in Florida.

Much as I like most of Chiles’ stands, this is about practical politics. 

Chiles can’t win.   Just like Meek won’t win.

Both complicate their races and make it difficult to stop scary Republicans from winning.

Have you ever looked at Rick Scott’s platform?

Cut taxes, mostly corporate taxes, of course. Cut regulations.  Allow businesses to do what they want.  

“Let’s Get To Work” Scott says.

In Scott’s mouth, the phrase reminds me of something barked by the overseer on a Southern cotton plantation.

Because if Scott has his way, the rest of us slaves will march off to our low paying jobs in the new corporate plutocracy he creates.  

That’s why it is so important to block Scott.  And that’s why Chiles should drop out and not be a spoiler in the race.

*****

Here is Mike Mayo’s take on the same subject.

Congressman Kendrick Meek needs to quit the race for U. S. Senate now.

Not in a week or in a month. 

Now.  Immediately.

Meek can leave on a upswing having beat billionaire Jeff Greene in last week’s primary. 

It is time to end Meek’s failed campaign, which has not caught on after more than a year. 

Either Meek quits, or he will be responsible for handing the U. S. Senate seat over to the Tea Party’s favorite Marco Rubio.

Almost every vote he gets in November will be stolen from Gov. Charlie Crist’s independent campaign.  Thus, every vote for Meek is a vote for Rubio.

Votes for Meek are wasted.  Meek can’t win.  No way.  No how.

Meek has consistently trailed other candidates in this race by at least 10 percentage points.

Even the day after winning the primary when his popularity should be high, Meek was third in the race. Rassmussen’s poll done the day after the primary found Rubio had 40 percent, Crist 30 percent and Meek 21 percent. 

Either Rubio or Crist is our next senator.  

Guest Columnist Sam Fields predicted here months ago that Democrats like him will abandon Meek if they believe he can’t win.  The liberal Fields is considering voting for Charlie Crist for one reason — to block Rubio.

It’s time the Ds start pressuring Meek to leave the field to Crist.

I won’t hold my breath.  Too many Democrats so driven by their own partisanship that they can’t see what’s good for Florida and the nation.

Quit now, Kendrick.

Or go down in Florida history as the candidate who put Tea Party Marco in the U. S. Senate.

Steve Geller’s past caught up with him Tuesday.

Early in his two-year campaign for county commission, Geller told me he knew his career as a lobbyist and his ties to insurance Ponzi scammer Joel Steinger would haunt him in the election.  

What he didn’t realize is how early and how often County Commissioner Sue Gunzburger would pound him with it.  Her campaign eviscerated the former state Senator with his own resume.  

Geller never was able to counter the attacks. He made it worse by stumbling into one of the memorable campaign blunders I have ever witnessed. 

By Election Day, his campaign had collapsed amid mixed messages and poorly conceived ads.

Gunzburger started hitting Geller with clever cable TV ads in mid-May.  The ads never stopped, cementing in the voter’s mind the image of Geller as a lobbyist and influence peddler.  

Most local campaigns couldn’t afford 20 mailed advertisements and seven different cable TV ads in Hollywood, Hallandale Beach and Pembroke Pines.  Gunzburger, a multi-millionaire, had the advantage of being able to pour at least $110,000 into her own campaign when needed.  She also collected well over $300,000 in contributions.

The ads were harsh, but accurate.  They were backed up by a website which cited dozens of newspaper stories and documents as sources for the charges.

But Geller created his biggest problem himself.  He supported the ill-conceived, short-lived sheriff’s investigation in July of Gunzburger. 

Instead of staying in the background, Geller made the clumsiest move of his political life.  He held a news conference justifying the investigation, which foolishly tied him to it.

As I wrote before, Geller left that news conference with the stench of a political dirty trick all over him.

The news conference gave Gunzburger the opportunity to rightfully charge that Geller was involved in a heavy handed smear along with Sheriff Al Lamberti – her longtime political opponent.

It was downhill from there.

Gunzburger’s fervent defense of ethics reforms in July and August against the vocal opposition of other county commissioners helped her.  It  fixed the image of her as a fighter for clean government, which didn’t hurt when running against lobbyist Geller. 

The former state senator also created another one of his campaign problems – the enmity of political media wizard Stan Adkins.

Adkins had a falling out with Geller years ago. He worked for the Gunzburger campaign at cost, fashioning deadly, on-target attack ads which lacerated Geller as pay back, according to Ron Gunzburger,  Sue’s campaign manager and son.

Ron Gunzburger plotted overall strategy and it was dazzling, especially an e-mail campaign against the BSO investigation which resulted in Lamberti dropping it quickly and clearing Sue. 

Fabulous ads, a pitch perfect campaign  and  Sue Gunzburger’s admirable record on the environment and ethics. 

Geller never had a chance.

The Sun-Sentinel gave readers today one more good reason to believe the Broward County Commission is rotten to the core.

Just this paragraph quoting the Chaits, developers who bragged they bribed politicians,  is enough to understand the problems:

“The Chaits told prosecutors they paid a local political consultant more than $100,000 — in cash — in 2006 to perform public relations work and lobby for their project. Bruce Chait said he didn’t think he needed the consultant, Beverly Stracher, but hired her at the strong suggestion of County Commissioner Ilene Lieberman, who lives in Tamarac.”

First question:

Who outside of a drug dealer is paid more than $100,000 in cash?  Being paid in cash should have been an immediate warning to Stracher that something was hinky with the job. 

I’m assuming they thought Stracher would pass some of the money along to politicians.  After all, they have told prosecutors they paid off politicians.

Stracher’s attorney, Eric Schwartzreich, is quoted as saying his client did nothing wrong and would not be charged with a crime. She is cooperating with prosecutors.

I hope he’s right.  Stracher worked at the Sun-Sentinel and I truly like her. I just believe she made a mistake getting involved with the Chaits and taking cash.

Second question:

Why is Lieberman suggesting what lobbyists developers should hire?  Is Lieberman a rainmaker for lobbyists? Is that why she was elected?

If Lieberman was doing this, the relationship between lobbyists and commissioners is way too cozy. 

I can tell you something about the relationship between Stracher and Lieberman. 

I believe Stracher covered Lieberman as a Sun-Sentinel reporter.  After leaving the newspaper, she got elected to the Lauderhill City Council in 1990,  joining Lieberman in city hall.  Lieberman was on the council from 1984-88  and  mayor from 1988-96.

Lieberman  is quoted in the newspaper as saying she didn’t know anything about Stracher’s compensation from the Chaits.  I don’t believe it.

Lieberman is Stracher’s political rabbi, i.e., mentor.  They are thisclose.

When Stracher needed a job recently, Lieberman got her hired as a county commission staffer.  This despite the fact that county workers were threatened with lay offs.

Lieberman is not accused of any crime. 

But if the Chaits are telling the truth, she can’t pass the smell test. 

Thousands in cash to Stracher.  Advise on what lobbyist a developer should hire.  A job handed out to a political friend.

It is just more fun and games with your money at the county commission.

P.S.:  I always thought it was ludicrous that other commissioners listened to the ethics law suggestions from Lieberman, who has been a lobbyist in the past. 

After reading the Sun-Sentinel today, I find it laughable that Lieberman had the guts to say anything publicly about ethics laws.

When does spin become a downright lie?

Read on and you decide. 

While I was on vacation, candidate Steve Geller got the endorsement of the Sun-Sentinel from a reluctant editorial board.

Geller, who is challenging Sue Gunzburger for re-election to the south Broward county commission seat,  immediately put the endorsement on his website. 

That’s when the spin started.

The county commission candidate cut and pasted the endorsement to take out all the negatives the Sun-Sentinel wrote about him.

Now the endorsement is spinning so fast, I get dizzy reading it.

Is it right to misrepresent the intent of the Sun-Sentinel, which stated it was reluctant to endorse either candidate?

When does spinning become a downright lie? 

As a public service, I have reproduce the endorsement as printed on Geller’s website. 

The ellipses (three dots) are Geller’s punctuation signifying he removed some language.  Boy, did he!  I put the language back in blue type.

The original headline was not used on the Geller website.  Here it is along with the rest of the material Geller removed from the endorsement:

“A RELUCTANT SUGGESTION FOR DISTRICT 6: STEVE GELLER”

“The voters deserve better than the bare-knuckle brawl they’ve had to endure. As such, the Editorial Board…strongly considered breaking with tradition and making no recommendation in this race. Rather than doing so, the board reluctantly…suggests voters choose Geller.

Geller, 51, is an attorney who served in both houses of the Florida Legislature. He’s smart…but too often comes across as bombastic. To succeed in the commission setting, he will need to tone it down and work with his colleagues to develop new strategies in addressing the many challenges facing the commission.

If elected, he vows to seek new jobs in clean energy and in the county’s maritime industry. He’d also support ethics reform and evaluate the county’s budget for individual program cuts. His long career in the Florida Legislature could help the county in Tallahassee, and his support from police unions,…coupled with his warm relations with Sheriff Al Lamberti… gives Geller the chance to serve as a mediator in the commission’s constant budgetary battles with BSO.

Geller did show a glimpse of statesmanship in the spring with an overture to keep the race from becoming the spectacle it has become.

Gunzberger, 71,… has been a steady supporter of the environment, children’s and social services issues during her long tenure on the commission, which…makes her decision to run such a negative race against her opponent all the more perplexing. She has a solid record to be re-elected on, but you wouldn’t know it given her campaign’s focus. She’s run a campaign that stands out more for its name-calling than highlighting her achievements in office. And yet, when she was asked by the Editorial Board whether she’d take the high road going forward, she flatly rejected it. Voters had a right to expect more from someone of her stature, her experience and her longevity on the commission.

You can’t blame the electorate for being at loss in this race. But they have to make a choice, and so do we…Reluctant as we are… we suggest voters choose Geller.”

When you get campaign literature, be skeptical.  Be very skeptical.

Take Circuit Judge Lisa Porter. She has literature which states that 84 percent “of Broward attorneys polled will vote to keep Judge Porter.”

True. Absolutely accurate.

Let’s look deeper. 

The poll was done by political consultant Dan Lewis’ Internet company.  Dan Lewis’ company collected almost $40,000 from Porter’s campaign.

Like I said, be skeptical.  Be very skeptical.

*****

The Broward Democratic Party’s endorsements, e-mailed to the party’s executive committee members, were wrong, wrong, wrong.

The endorsements said County Judge Lee Seidman and his wife, Laura Seidman, were Republicans.

Try again.

The Seidmans are registered independents.

The Democrats were forced to send out a retraction.

Laura Seidman is Porter’s opponent. Lee Seidman is running for the circuit bench against Sandra Perlman.

*****

 Since I’m writing about the Seidmans,  Lee Seidman’s television ad due to begin on Monday when Early Voting starts. View it here.

Although the spot looks and feels cheap, it gets the Seidman name across.  The side benefit for the couple is that it also helps Laura, too, because she is a Seidman. 

*****

There are all kinds of conspiracy theories floating around the legal community about political consultant Judy Stern.

I never realized she was so fascinating.

Some of the talk surrounds a list of candidates she is endorsing that was e-mailed extensively and was reproduced on websites.

She says the e-mail is phony and the work of an opponent also involved in judicial races.

Here is the story: 

According to the whispers, the race between Circuit Judge Ken Gillespie and Oliver Parker was left off the list deliberately by Stern.  It is part of a  bizarre political deal. 

The list was designed to get incumbent judges like Gillespie re-elected. So Parker benefits by leaving race off the endorsement list, which was paid for by others and will be distributed at polls starting this week. 

In return, Parker will work for Stern’s daughter Barbra Stern in her Florida House race.

“You’ve known me a long time,” Stern said.  “Can you imagine me helping Oliver Parker?”

No, I can’t.  

I also find it hard to believe Parker, a long-time Republican activist, would help a Democrat in a House race.    

But if this fantastic story is true — Again, Stern denies it. – Parker could be in serious trouble.  The Judicial Qualification Commission tends to frown on  judicial candidates who make political deals.

Amendment 4 is giving developers conniptions. Isn’t that reason enough to vote for it?

The amendment would require the voters approval for land use change.  Politicians would have to listen to neighborhoods rather than just the lobbyists who raise them campaign cash.  

Hometown Democracy’s latest ad is here.  You decide.

Before he was a School Board candidate, Nick Sakhnovsky was head of the Facilities Task Force demanding change in how the school’s business was done.

He was no diplomat, according to this e-mail from the late Michael Garretson, deputy superintendent for facilities.

I personally know how frustrating the school system can be when asked to produce public records.  About the only thing school system bureaucrats have perfected are ways to hide information. 

That is no excuse for abusing clerks and secretaries. 

After reading this e-mail, I’ve got a message for Nick:

You’ve got to pick your targets, pal.  Clerks and secretaries are just following orders. 

By all means,  yell at the higher ups. If elected, you’ll have plenty of opportunity. Maybe that is what school system needs.  

Readers can decide for themselves whether Sakhnovsky has the temperament to be a School Board member.  Here is the e-mail:

Message Nov 3, 2009 11:24 AM
From:           Michael Garretson
To:             James F. Notter Board Members 11/7/08
Cc:             Board Members’ Secs 1/8 Vicki Horton    Juanita L. Pringle
Subject:        Nick Sakhnovsky

This morning Nick Sakhnovsky, chairman of the FTF, appeared unannounced at the HORTT facility and demanded documents from the clerical staff.  When informed of the proper procedures for requesting information, he became loud and abusive to staff.  I escorted him off campus and said that I would call security if he returned.

Michael C. Garretson
Deputy Superintendent
Facilities & Construction Management
1700 SW 14th Court
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33312
(754) 321-1510
(754) 321-1681 (FAX)

If the Broward Teachers Union is for ‘em, vote against ‘em.

That’s my motto.

It is unfortunate, because some of the candidates the BTU is backing are good candidates.  It’s just that I am very suspicious of the motives behind their endorsement.

Were deals made?  If so, how much will those deals cost taxpayers?

The teachers union has recommended voters oppose every incumbent running with the exception of Phyllis Hope.  And they didn’t exactly give a resounding support to Hope, giving her a co-endorsement with Laurie Rich Levinson.

Why the co-endorsement?  

Maybe because of Levinson’s middle name “Rich” as in state Sen. Nan Rich, the future Democratic leader of the Senate.  The union needs Rich’s help every day in Tallahassee.

The union rejected incumbents but they have stood up to the BTU’s ridiculous request for a pay raise.  The union wants more pay at the same time teachers are being laid off and the system has a $140 million deficit.

Don’t get me wrong.  There is a lot of problems with the School Board.  A lot of problems.

There are good reasons to reject every incumbent. Reason number one: The Board has been a cesspool of corruption for years.

The union now is talking a lot about cleaning up the School Board.  They are suddenly Born Again corruption fighters.

Where was union boss Pat Santeramo and his cronies for the past decade? 

Oh, I remember. While teachers were home correcting tests and preparing for class, the bosses were out drinking and paling around with Board members.

The BTU was part of the cozy little club at the School Board.  They didn’t challenge the status quo until the recent economic downturn put them on the defensive.  

Remember that the biggest school expense is personnel.  A union endorses a candidate for only one reason – it believes it will get more in salary and benefits from them.

That money will come out of your pocket.

If the BTU is for ‘em, vote against ‘em.

BTU Endorsements:

District 1: No endorsement

District 2: Patti Good

District 4: No primary endorsement.

District 6: Hope and Levinson

District 7: Nora Rupert, a teacher at Piper High.

District 8: Nick Sakhnovsky, who has been a tough critic of the district’s business practices.  He is a great candidate.  I believe Sakhnovsky should reject this endorsement and cut all his ties to special interests.