Geller vs. Gunzburger: Round Two
It’s official. There are people who don’t like Broward County Commissioner Sue Gunzburger.
And they are willing to put their money on the line to defeat her.
Gunzburger during the 2000 presidential recount
More than two dozen anti-Gunzburger political types piled into the east Hollywood home of political consultant David Brown yesterday.
It was round two in one of the most anticipated campaign in Broward next year.
Round one was when Gunzburger’s opponent Steve Geller released of a poll last year showing him in a commanding position.
Round two was the Brown reception. It was the first fund raiser for Geller, the former state Senate Democratic Leader.
I have no idea how much money Geller collected. That isn’t the point.
The goal of this fund raiser was to show Gunzburger has enemies in the Broward political establishment.
There was long-time fire union activist Joe Benavides.
“Sue was never there for the fire fighters, Benavides said.
There were development industry types. A woman from the dog track. An activist from Century Village of Pembroke Pines. A Jewish community representative. Other grass roots political folks.
All of them had one thing in common: A deep dislike of Gunzburger.
The common threat running through their conversation is that she is vengeful, vindictive and ineffective.
Ineffective? That’s a strong word. I do know she hasn’t been a leader on the commission, for sure.
Vengeful and vindictive. I’ve never seen that side of her.
She jumped started her last competitive campaign in 1992 with $100,000 of her own money. This year the market is down and the economy is bad. She kicked it off Oct. 3 with $10,000.
Since then she has launched a feverish effort to rope in every campaign dollar she can corral. She has been putting the arm on lobbyists with the help of her familiar, lobbyist Bernie Friedman.
This race must put Friedman in a jam.
He’s a long time friend of Geller. But he needs Gunzburger’s vote on the county commission.
And commission votes are what it is all about for lobbyists at the Government Center.
No matter what Geller collected at yesterday’s fund raiser, he will have a six-figure campaign account by Primary Election Day 2010. He will be competitive.
So far, Gunzburger has a big lead over Geller in the hunt for money. She raised $72,104, compared to his $17,022 at the end of last year. But he didn’t start raising money in a big way until this week.
This race is going to be all elbows. There is plenty in both the Gunzburger and Geller closets to dig out and thrown around.
I await the next move from Sue. or her son, political consultant Ron Gunzburger.
March 27th, 2009 at 9:10 am
wow – 25 years of public service and they found a few people who Gunzburger has pissed off! And yeah, it does matter how much money they raised.
March 27th, 2009 at 9:12 am
David — your century village so-called “activist”… be careful how you pay her, isn’t that what your boy Shak is wanted for?
March 27th, 2009 at 10:48 am
The goal of this fundraiser was to show that Gunzburger has enemies??? Funny, I always thought that fundraisers (especially those held at the end of the quarter) had the goal of raising money!
FROM BUDDY: Usually I would agree with you. Traditionally a candidate would raise money as fast as he can. Geller seems to believe that his fund raising will methodically build momentum, cresting right near the end of the campaign. Who knows if he is right? I know of at least one major donor he let get away from him because he didn’t strike fast enough. Of course, Gunzburger has a big fund raising advantage because she has a vote on the county commission. She can do favors for lobbyists who donate to her campaign.
Geller no longer has a vote in the state Senate. He can only pay back lobbyists if he wins.
March 27th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Face it, Steve Geller is running for County Commission because he was term limited out of the Senate and without a high visibility elected office his law practice suffers. Once you’ve served in Tallahassee you don’t want to be in the rough and tumble, loud political environment at the county level unless you have to. In addition he gets to suppliment his state pension this way. So for Geller this is about him much more than it is about the county. Geller has many skeletons in his closet because he’s been too cozy with insurance companies, developers, the gambling industry among others.
In Sue’s case, she doesn’t have to be an elected official to do well financially because she’s already a millionaire. Those that are angry with Sue didn’t like her votes on development issues, or on a given union issue, or something like that. Yes, she wants her last term in office for personal reasons also. But in her case she has better motives for wanting the job than Geller does. It is a source of worry when people run for office in order to bolster their business. Sue has some personal quirks but she has been an independent and reliable vote for what’s best for the county.
March 27th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
As you said about judicial races, lots of soft money will be used in this campaign. Developers and the race tracks will write big checks to Geller. Gunzburger will get money from the artsy fartsy folks.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
Isn’t it a shame with 1 in 50 children homeless in the United States that this kind of money goes to buy the bull crap ads that people don’t read and just throw in the garbage. AND the one with the most money doesn’t always win…Look at school board race seat 1. Ann Murray won with mostly loaning herself a few thousand dollars.
I will vote for the one who caps his/her spending so most of the collected money goes to charities!!!!!!!
FROM BUDDY: Once again, you make a great deal of sense. Candidates should remember Ann Murray before spending all that money.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
P.S. Gunzberger has no personality I really have never seen Geller speak in public.
March 27th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Let’s see. “More than two-dozen supporters” … that would mean that, what, maybe 25 people were there? Subtract Geller, his brother Joe Geller, Geller’s secretary, the unnamed Century Village activist, and apparently some Republican Bush 2000 supporters (who likely cannot vote in the Sue-Steve Democratic primary) …. and Geller has so far picked up the “almost 20 people” in District 6. Out of over 110,000 registered voters in District 6. Yes indeed, Geller is slowly but steadily gaining momentum. Emphasis on SLOWLY. At this pace, he’ll have enough support to defeat Gunzburger in maybe 2080. Not 2010.
Next thought: Geller hopes to win a Democratic primary next year by emphasizing that Republicans who helped steal the 2000 Prez election support him over Sue????
As for “A.B.”, who secretly took cash from “Shak” Dhanji to endorse him for Sheriff … and now will certainly do so in exchange for cash from Geller: How well did Shak do in Century Village last year?
March 27th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Ohhhh …… any what happened to Geller’s boast in the newspaper back in January that he would out-raise Gunzburger in this quarter?
March 27th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
There is a problem with both these hasbeens. Guzburger has been in office for toooooooo long. Her ideas were formed in the Depression and if you hear her talk, you would get a depression. She talks down to everybody. What makes her so high and mighty? She married a guy who made some money? Big f….en deal. She has been on the county commission since 1992. TIME TO RETIRE, SUE.
Geller is the same….can’t hold a job unless he is in office. He’s a paid lobbyist. He is in controlled by the racing industry. What a dirt bag!
We need a new candidate: Peter Bober or Joy Cooper. A fresh face.
March 27th, 2009 at 7:46 pm
A third candidate would be interesting. Joy Cooper is not in the league or Sue or Geller, County Commission is well beyond her depth. Besides she’s one of Steve Geller’s puppets so he’d never permit her to run. Peter Bober needs to stay put. Joe Gibbons could win if he was so inclined. Ken Gottlieb would be interesting but lacks the courage. Is Tim Ryan in that district?
March 28th, 2009 at 5:12 am
Both of these candidates are washed up. We need somebody new like Hallandale Mayor Joy Cooper. She could beat either Geller or Gunzburger easily because people are ready for a change.
March 28th, 2009 at 6:45 am
Though I am not involved in this race, and can’t vote on it, this is probably the most interesting battle we are going to have. If I wanted to write an investigative book on local politics, this one would be the one I write on. It might sell if I got enough inside information.
Given the clout, money, name recognition and connections behind both of them, I wouldn’t discount anything. I imagine a lot of well known names being dragged through this.
Unfortunately, this combination usually leads to some questionable politics (which is why it will make it so interesting). The candidates could work to head this off. But unless they get together and make the effort (which I don’t expect), I expect a no holds bar fight.
March 28th, 2009 at 6:51 am
Judy Stern is with Geller so Gibbons is not allowed to run for the Seat.
March 28th, 2009 at 7:51 am
Gibbons, Bober, Cooper, Gottlieb aren’t running. Gibbons and Gottlieb are backing Gunzburger. Cooper I’d guess is with Geller (didn’t she have some relative working in Geller’s office?). Bober is neutral, but Gunzburger’s campaign manager is the same woman who was also the manager for Peter Bober (and Bernie Bober), so I’d guess Peter Bober is quietly helping Gunzburger. It also helps Bober to have Gunzburger reelected, as she will be term-limited, she’ll eliminate Geller as a future threat to anyone, and Peter Bober would be the frontrunner for the open seat next time.
March 28th, 2009 at 7:56 am
And speaking of lobbyists, isn’t Geller holding a fundraiser on Tuesday in Tallahassee to squeeze a few more buck out of all the lobbyists he did legislative favors for over the years!! Presumably the lobbyists on behalf of race tracks, viatical ponzi schemes, and insurance companies will be there to kick in a few “pay-back” dollars to Geller.
March 28th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Richard Kaplan:
I ignore much of what I read in any blog because the anonymous nature of them permits your opponent or their supporters to make things up with impunity. You have identified yourself, and I presume you are who you say you are.
If you read Buddy’s Blog on a regular basis, you’ll see that I’ve repeatedly tried to head off mudslinging. My opponent and I both have long records for us each to run on. Neither of us is an evil person. I’m tired of telling the voters to pick between the lesser of 2 evils.
Do you have any bright ideas how we can make this race about our visions for the future of Broward, where my opponent and I each talk about ourselves, and not try and tear down the other?
Steve Geller
March 28th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Yes I am, and yes I can throw out a few ideas, and since I don’t have a position on either candidate in any of this, I guess I can objectively put in my two cents. I don’t think you or Sue will think I am trying to favor one over the other, cause I will stay out of such matters, and keep the relationships professional.
Do everything you can to have a sit down with Sue to set ground rules. You are both responsible adults, and if you can’t, that says something.
Include both of your managers and top workers so that any agreements are clearly known to apply to all. The meeting can be private, public, or semi-public, I don’t care. If a challenge to meet is needed, then issue one. Utilize any public or private intermediators, mediators or ethic panels to solitic their help to get this meeting. Depending upon how it is handled, the Public will reflect on the responses, or lack thereof, by the candidates.
If you get a meeting, use independent third parties to reduce to writing and sign an agreement or code of campaign ethics. I believe there is a Broward County Board that has some positions on this and can provide guidance. I wrote such a code of campaign ethics that applies in Lauderhill. When you run for Lauderhill office you are required to sign it under oath to qualify to run.
Agree to discourage use independent committees that attack candidates, and if one does, agree to jointly and publicly denounce such claims and activities in order to neutralize the advantage created. In other words, support each other on this.
Agree to never send attack ads. Try to show the public that you are above it. Your ads should concentrate only on issues, which can include being critical on votes each of you may have made. That’s fair game as to each sides position. But make sure the vote clearly reflects a position, and is not just misrepresentation of the issue and vote. Of course you can respond to defend yourself, but avoid confusing the issues.
Be aware that both side probably have some baggage, so if someone takes an unfair advantage, don’t be surprised if the favors returned. That’s how the problem starts.
Also, as the campaign goes on, keep the lines of communication open. Publicly meet and greet each other like you are friends, or at least friendly to each other. You don’t have to like each other, but don’t show to the public that you don’t. THIS APPLIES TO YOUR WORKERS TOO. Be professional always.
You may be surprised how well the public will respond to this. Recently, in a race I knew nothing about, I was ask by a voter who knew me who I would recommend. I couldn’t since I didn’t know anyone. However, later a negative piece came out from one candidate, and the voter decided that alone cause them to not vote for the candidate that sent out the negative piece. The ad backfired.
I am not saying this is perfect, or all problems are avoidable. But it would be refreshing and new if the parties could try something new. Agree to run on the issues up front and head off what both sides would like to avoid. Have some honor about how you accomplish what you do.
So, too naive, or will you give it a shot?
March 28th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
As for A.B., the Century Village activist who takes money to promote candidates, her time is up. She doesn’t produce votes for her candidates and there are people who vote against her just because they don’t like her.
David Brown needs to smarten up a little
March 28th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
Its a disgrace there are not other choices in the Democratic primary. Given the choice, I would pick Geller. He is a straight up guy. You know where he comes from and he has a solid record of achievements in the state Senate. Has Gunzburger done anything except be on the losing end of almost every vote?
March 28th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Richard:
Almost exactly what I’ve been saying. Where do I sign?
Steve Geller
FROM BUDDY: Kaplan has a great idea….you should make it happen. Buddy
March 28th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Then make the call. Send the letter or email directly to her. If that doesn’t get an answer, ask your contacts to do the same.
I don’t know who is managing each sides campaigns, I probably can guess. But strangely they do talk to each other (can’t guarantee how nicely). Tell your person to talk to their counterpart.
Start out doing it quietly and directly. If she agrees, announce it together. Both will look good then, and start it out on the right foot.
March 29th, 2009 at 6:21 am
Steve Geller:
I love Richard Kaplan’s idea.
Have some independent attorney — Sam Fields? — draw up the fair campaigning pledge and present it to Sue.
Steve has a track record with these type of documents. He was a founder of the Broward Fair Campaign Committee.
Once the document is done, I’ll publish it here.
Sue Gunzburger should be part of the effort to write the pledge.
If the document is signed, I’ll keep an eye on the race and point out if any candidate breaks the pledge.
Buddy Nevins
March 29th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
Buddy:
With the exception of thye fact that I’ve been discussing this for many months now, so it’s not strictly Richard Kaplan’s idea, I’ll take you up on your offer.
It’s a little early now. The election’s in August/Sepember 2010. The campaigning will start 2-3 months before that, say no earlier than June 1. But we’ll both need time to plan our media and campaigns.
I’d say Jan of 2010 is a good target date. You should have noticed that I’ve never said a bad word about my opponent. I’ll certainly continue doing that, at least until it’s clear that we have or don’t have an agreement.
No one believes in unilateral disarmament.
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again. My ads should be about me, and her ads should be about her. We should be appealing to the best in people, not the worst. We should give the voters a choice between 2 qualified candidates, not have them choose between the lesser of 2 evils.
Steve Geller
FROM BUDDY: You are absolutely right.
March 29th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Candidly, I don’t agree with the “can’t we all just get along” idea. We agree Steve isn’t evil, either. But this race is about competing visions AND records.
This “be nice” proposal would sugggest the campaign should be entirely about future promises — but without the right to point out what the candidate (Sue or Steve) has actually done in elective office and how they used (or mis-used) their elective offices over the years. The records Sue and Steve built for the past 20+ years is equally relevant to their competing “vision” for the next four years.
Richard and Steve are proposing a campaign anchored upon “Trust me, I’m a politician. Would I lie to you?” That’s a campaign of meaningless pablum — and the real loser in the deal would be the voters, deprived of the right to cast a fully informed vote.
Sue says “Trust you? Okay … but does your rhetoric mesh with your record?” Sue supports a campaign grounded in TRUTH — the vision for the future paired with solid verifiable facts (votes cast, ethical issues, etc). And it’s a two-way street: Steve can and should point out to the voters where he thinks Sue falls short of her promises, or items in her record he believes are questionable.
So, that said, here’s a realistic counter-offer: Let’s agree that each side limits itself to using the undistorted truth. If either side crosses that line, Buddy (and others, if we still have newspapers in 18 months) can call out the distortions, if any.
Ask yourself this: If Dubya had been eligible to run for a third Prez term in 2008, does anyone really believe that Bush’s dismal record (the war, the economy, the trampling of constitutional rights, the sweetheart Halliburton deals, etc) should have been out-of-bounds? I think not.
March 29th, 2009 at 6:50 pm
Ron:
We may not be able to reach an agreement. I acknowledge that. We still have time to try. That’s why I said that I think that we have at least 8 months or more to do so.
I don’t think that your counter-offer is much of a counter offer. You say that we’ll each only tell the truth? I believe that there’s a New Testament quote (John 18) where a Roman Governor (Pilate) asks “What is truth”. I think that you and I may have different views.
There have been some blog articles that have told lies about my activities in Tallahassee. You may have written them; other people may have written them. You may believe them to be true, I believe them to be distorted and untrue. There are things that I can say that I believe are accurate. You and your mom would believe them to be distorted.
What is the difference between this and a normal campaign where the mud is thrown by both sides, with each side maintaining that their attacks are accurate, while the attacks against them are false?
I believe that I’ll win this election. I’m certain that your Mom believes that she’ll win. We will both continue to live in this community. Do we really want the election to be as nasty as most people are predicting?
I think that our records are absolutely relevant. I’ll campaign on mine; your Mom should campaign on hers. We don’t have to go after each other.
I’ve avoided saying anything about you or your Mom. We’ve all supported each other in past campaigns. We don’t need to reach a decision now, but you and your Mom should seriously consider what we’ve been talking about.
Steve Geller
March 29th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Well, they are talking. It’s a matter of working out the terms. A written agreement is best to avoid misunderstandings. It is never too soon to start, and it probably will take some time to do.
I said act friendly, and to treat each other professionally. There is nothing wrong about that. Can both agree in writing to this?
The campaign can, and I would expect it to be about different visions and records. Its how you handle this that is the difference. That is something you both also should agree upon.
I never expected a campaign that is “Trust me I’m politican.” If you do, it would be one of the worse campaigns. The public doesn’t like “politicians.” They do like “statemen” and like to see effort and accomplishments.
Unlike the stock market, past history is an indicator of future expectations.
I don’t know if Sam is the right person or not. Give him a try. But if not, I am sure there is someone that can craft something you both can agree upon. Even on a basic level.
Make the attempt. Both of you realize that someone has to lose, but no matter who that is, life does go on. Don’t make this a campaign that the world will come to an end if you are not successful. So that justifies anything goes. Then you resort to desperation, and then someone has a book to write. Help avoid anyone from writing that book.
By the way, Steve and Sue are both seasoned elected officials. I doubt that many of the constitutents are uninformed voters.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:04 am
What is truth Geller asks? He asks this question, as it to make the point that nobody knows what “truth” is, when in fact this is the only question, the one and only one that any elected official has to get a grip over, yet he wants to run for office? Again? He wants to cut a deal (cop a plea) with his opponent’s camp because he is afraid of the truth. Yet still he wants to run for local elective office? And to top it all off he’s going to negotiate all this on a blog?
I’ve seen everything I need to see about Geller. Sue Gunzburger can’t possibly be that bad.
March 30th, 2009 at 6:08 am
You’ve been so helpful with your advice, thank you. I thought to ask — I have this annoying hemoroid and just can’t decide. Which over the counter topical cream would you recommend?
March 30th, 2009 at 7:38 am
The blue one.
March 30th, 2009 at 8:25 am
You say the blue one –is that the one with the perforated nozzle or the one you smear with your index finger?
March 30th, 2009 at 8:57 am
“Hey Richard Kaplan” and “What is Truth?” are the same person.
March 30th, 2009 at 10:56 am
First of all, I have been and am in Muenchen, Bayern and I did not know that the best political reporter in Florida was not working at the “Sun-Sentinel”. That’s outrageous! However, I found this blogg. I guess I should say something as I do live in Ft.Lauderdale half the year and am a native Floridan. The Gellers seems to be lawyers like the Gelbers, Steinbergs, Dubbins, Dermers, who are always running for office and/or practicing law. They have the same liberal positions as everyone else and you can’t tell one from another. I think Commissioner Gunzenburger may not be the most agressive person in the world, but she has apparently done a better than average job in the minds of the people I know. I don’t necessarily agree with her, but why throw her years of experience away? The Gellers on the other hand are another story. Joe Geller lost a race to Richard Steinberg and promptly had his local city attorney fired so he could get the job via the behind the scenes scemes of a political consultant working illegally out of a sub-let residential unit in Miami Beach. I am sorry I don’t trust the Gellers, and the person who said he’s only running because he was term-limited is right, but forgot he and his brother make their money not really as lawyers but as LOBBYISTS for public bodies! Talk about a conflict of interest! No, I see nothing beneficial in outsting Commissioner Gunzenburger for a Geller – any Geller! But, more importantly, GOOD LUCK MR: NEVINS!!!!
March 30th, 2009 at 11:19 am
I’m tired of politicians who think that pointing out things from their past elected experience is “negative” campaigning.
As a voter, I want to know not only what a candidate says they are going to do, but also what they have done.
Talking about what they are going to do is often just so much hot air. Their voting record often speaks must more loudly.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
This election is all about Ron Gunzburger. His mother wouldn’t be running again if Ron didn’t need a job. He has only worked at political jobs obtained because his mother was a Hollywood commissioner and then a county commissioner. He worked for the State Attorney, George Platt’s law firm and now Lori Parrish, good friend of Gunzburger. Get a real job, Ronnie, and maybe your mother can retire.
March 30th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Polly Wog:
I worked as a leg asst on Capitol Hill for Congressman Dick Gephardt (who I don’t believe Mom ever met). I was also COO of a dot-com in DC for two years, and had my own communications consulting business for over 15 years. Plus, I still publish the Politics1 website, which is an income-generating business. You also left out that I was a law firm litigation partner with the late Henry Latimer (when George Platt was at a competing law firm).
March 30th, 2009 at 8:09 pm
People think Geller is any better? Neither Gunzburger or Geller need to run be. Please, get someone up there with brains and common sense. Gunzburger and Geller only want to be there because of Power and Publicity, get someone up there who knows what they’re doing for a CHANGE and get this County back where it’s supposed to be, PLEASE?
March 31st, 2009 at 5:10 am
Ron,
Funny how your resume — with the exception of the dot.com business which your Mommy and Daddy funded — was connected to politics.
March 31st, 2009 at 6:32 am
1. My parents had nothing to do with funding the dot-com, didn’t put a penny into it, and didn’t know any of the funding sources. The financing came almost entirely from overseas sources and from Inman Ventures/Gefinor. And, FYI, I was already involved in designing brochures and developing “message” for the late Hollywood Commissioner Stan Goldman and others well before my mother ever ran for office for the first time in 1982.
2. I’m an experienced trial attorney with over 60 jury trials in state and federal courts. I’ve also argued over 100 bench trials and conducted well over 1,000 depositions. I also clerked for a Vermont Supreme Court Justice (whom my folks probably couldn’t even name). And all this legal work has nothing to do with politics. Although my folks were gracious enough to pay for my law school tuition at Vermont — so they did help out to some extent.
3. And, unlike you Polly, I’m not afraid to sign my real name to my postings (and, before you ask: I’m out of the office using some leave days right now).
April 2nd, 2009 at 7:47 am
Let’s wait until the Federal Grand Jury finishes the indictments from
the Mutual Benefits case. Let’s see who in Tallahasse sold out. it’s right around the corner. By the way I’m with Sue as she is an incredible woman and honest. The 12 people are the special interests she voted against.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:08 am
What I love about this blog is that it gives people that know the opportunity to say things we might not otherwise say. That is refreshing and important that there not be so much in our county that goes unsaid. Every insider knows that Geller’s motivation in running for the County is all about personal income and due to term limits. He is just another lawyer with hat in hand unless he holds an elected office with power. He is a pompous and frankly otherwise unimpressive lawyer at that, a laughable figure without elected office. Only as an elected official can he command all kinds of payola. That plus his state pension grows. These are his motivations as he has no interest otherwise and despises the idea of being in local politics. Once in the Senate you have no interest in anything as “low class” as the county commission. He’s doing this because he must. Now there’s Mutual Benefits and as Bob Norman said in his blog “this bares Geller open” something like that and reveals exactly what this man is all about (dirty). Sue Gunzburger has never been the easiest person in the world to work with and she can be difficult on many levels. But she’s 100 times more trustworthy, her motives are 100 times more honorable, and despite the fact that she can be a political cut-throat, her record on development and the environment, on parks and libraries, on kids and seniors and housing and social services, frankly just about everything she has voted on has been good over the years. She is far from perfect but certainly a much better choice than Geller.
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 am
As an “outsider” who would probably donate her time to one or the other is there anybody out there knowledgable about either of these Democrats past history when it comes to working class issues? Geller seems a little above us but I don’t know about sue.
FROM BUDDY: They both have above average wealth.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:23 am
Thanks buddy but I was really talking about their support/opposition to and votes on stuff like public transportation, affordable housing , living wage and stuff like that.
FROM BUDDY:
Sue Gunzburger has a strong, liberal record on the subjects you mentioned. She has supported all three issues you mentioned.
Steve Geller was the Democrat’s leader in the Senate and has strongly backed Democratic positions in the Legislature against a blizzard of opposition from the GOP members. I don’t know his voting record on the issues you mentioned, but I would bet he supports all three.
April 3rd, 2009 at 11:55 am
Honest:
The lies which are told on Blogs are astounding. There’s nothing that elected officials can do to counteract these anonymous attacks. Blogger/quasi reporters know that they’re immune, and can say almost anything that they want.
If you’d like to call me at my law office, I’ll be happy to discuss those matters with you. 954-491-1120.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:06 pm
I’m sorry to see that Steve Geller is forced to confront the lies on this blog. Steve Geller is a dedicated public servant who has spent his life representing south Florida’s best interests in the Legislature. When I had a problem with the DOT, Geller went to work and solved it. He would be a great county commissioner.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Thanks Old Ghost.
BUDDY:
Have we now set a record for # of replies? Do we get some type of award?
Steve
FROM BUDDY:
It has been a lot of replies. Who would get the award? I guess I can give myself an award 🙂