Tiny Tony to Sen. Bonini: “Merry Xmas From Da Godfadda!”
You may remember the undistinguished Bonini pissed (and perhaps ate) away his shot at State Treasurer and, about a month later, flipped his vote to give Tony DeLuca the number needed to hang on to his spot as President Pro-Tempore. You may also remember the undistinguished Bonini as the ‘fiscal watchdog’ who ripped off the state’s taxpayers by not showing up for his job on the Joint Sunset Committee, yet still getting paid for it. Here. And here.
As punishment for Bonini ripping off the taxpayers, noted ‘double-dipper’ Tiny Tony DeLuca, inexplicably the President Pro-Tempore of the Delaware State Senate, has given Colin Bonini a promotion. To the Capital Improvements Committee, or ‘Bond Bill’ Committee. Where Bonini will be able to do DeLuca’s bidding when it comes to mischief-making. Bonini replaces Sen. Liane Sorenson who, needless to say, opposed DeLuca for Pro-Tem and was not about to do DeLuca’s bidding. And where Bonini will only have to show up when it’s time to vote, and won’t even have to think for himself, as the Mayor of Tiny Town will tell him what to do. And he now has access to big campaign bucks from developers and other assorted undesirables. Not to mention Tiny Tony’s construction trades buddies.
This early Christmas gift was actually the second bestowed by Tiny Tony on Bonini. Bonini was in position to be redistricted out of his current district, was terrified about it, and ended up with not only a district, but a more R-friendly district as well, courtesy of the Godfadda.
Let’s now let the lies begin:
DeLuca told Republican senators he was making the change to honor Minority Leader Gary Simpson’s original request to have Bonini and Sen. Joseph Booth on the committee during the two-year 146th General Assembly.
Of course, were that true, DeLuca would have done that at the beginning of the 146th General Assembly. It is a lie.
Bonini repeatedly has denied there was a quid pro quo for his vote for DeLuca over Sen. Michael Katz in last year’s leadership race. “Anybody who knows me for more than five minutes knows that’s just nonsense,” said Bonini, declining further comment on the issue.
That’s a lie. Anyone who knows Bonini for more than five minutes knows that he’s lying. The man is utterly devoid of personal integrity, which is why he and DeLuca are so simpatico.
As Karen Peterson said, it’s just “Tony flexing his muscles again.”
In related news, DeLuca’s digs just got more palatial. You may recall that DeLuca had his office completely redone and made virtually inaccessible to the public ‘for security reasons’. Well, he can now luxuriate in his bunker thanks to the installation of brand new carpet:
In recent weeks, DeLuca got new carpet in his office that was paid for under last year’s renovation contract, said Bert Scoglietti, policy and external affairs director for the Office of Management and Budget.
You remember the $46,000 contract that was never discussed nor approved by Legislative Council? Tiny Tony acting like the law doesn’t apply to him. Which it won’t unless AG Beau Biden decides that the law applies to everybody.
As to the carpet, knowing Tony’s proclivities, only one type of carpet is appropriate: shag.
I’ve got the drill ready, we’ll take down the door and get ethics back into Dover.
If the disease is DeLuca, the cure is certainly not Queitsh. I doubt that there are more than a dozen or so non-Christine O’Donnell republicans who think the Q-ball should take on the tiny one.
Only a fool would think that a fever is the cure for leeches.
We only have to blame ourselves folks we elected these crooks
“Gary Simpson’s original request to have Bonini and Sen. Joseph Booth on the committee during the two-year 146th General Assembly.”
But if Deluca had agreed to Simpson’s request at the beginning of the 146th, right after the pro tem vote, wouldn’t that have been more obviously a payback to Bonini? Maybe Simpson held Deluca to his word and Deluca said it’ll get done but not a month after everyone is saying I have a deal with Bonini. Just a thought.
Also, I heard that Deluca and Bob Gilligan spoke at the PDDs this past week. Any report on how that went? Pretty surprising (yet good, I guess) that Deluca would agree to speak to a group that has been at times critical of him.
It was a payback either way. The only question is, “Which would have had the greater appearance of quid pro quo and/or impropriety?”
If DeLuca was merely ‘honoring’ Simpson’s stated wish, he would have had plenty of cover doing it in January of this year, especially since there were no senators from Kent County serving on the committee. Even Simpson would have signed off on it.
And, this is rare, something that is usually done only when a member dies or resigns. While he has the discretion to make this change, it is almost never exercised in the middle of a session. Which raises the question, why now?
Plus, he’d already given Bonini one payback, a Republican district in which to run.
My completely uninformed guess is that perhaps another R is making noises about primarying Bonini, and DeLuca wants to make sure that Bonini comes back. What better way than to help him spread some millions of dollars around Kent County?
I seriously didn’t think this could get any worse than when Thurman Adams was in charge. Seriously.
At least we could blame Adams’s age for his general stubborness and aversion to transparency. DeLuca is just a royal PITA.
Both DeLuca and Gilligan were at Wednesday’s PDD meeting. It was insightful.
I found that both legislators spend a lot of time discussing the jobs-focused actions in the past few years. They also spent some time talking about the differences between the House and the Senate rules. Nancy Willing gave Gilligan kudos for good minutes on hearings and sessions, but giving DeLuca a request for improvement on the Senate side.
DeLuca did briefly mention that day’s WNJ story on the FOIA requests.
I must say that I was surprised that DeLuca accepted my invitation to speak before PDD.
They were asked to justify the corporate bribery that state governments use to entice companies to locate in their state (and stiff the state that they last took a bribe from). Their responses can be summarized as ‘everyone does it–if we stop, then we will lose jobs.’
“a Republican district in which to run.”
I didn’t think Bonini’s district could get more R! It’s part of Tealand. In fact, I’m surprised Evan doesn’t live there. Word was that John Sigler was going to run for State Senate if Bonini won Treasurer. Dudn’t get more conservative than that.
Thanks for the update, Paul. Maybe the election year will allow for more in-person questioning of Deluca and other incumbents.
Pick a place on the map for DeLuca = http://i.imgur.com/Pwnf4.jpg
Betweena: It wasn’t an issue of a more Republican district, it was Bonini’s need to have a district w/o another R incumbent. Bonini could have easily been drawn in with either Lawson or Simpson. Which is what one would have expected in a Democratic-dominated Senate, and was, in fact what Bonini had expected and feared.
Instead, DeLuca put Sokola and Sorenson (both DeLuca opponents) in the same district, and Katz in an even more vulnerable district.
R Cathy Cloutier, who ‘no-showed’ the vote, got a more hospitable district. And the three D senators from Wilmington, all of whom backed DeLuca, each got their own district despite the fact that Wilmington’s population can only justify two districts.
Paul, why did PDD block TNJ from attending the meeting? Was it at the request of DeLuca?
I just can’t see how shutting out the media makes any sense for a party that’s supposed to be working for openness and transparency.
“a party that’s supposed to be working for openness and transparency.”
Where did you get that idea?
Uh, from the party platform?
The Delaware Democratic Party believes every Delawarean should be confident in the stewardship of government. The Delaware Democratic Party supports:
• Government that is well managed, open, transparent, accountable, efficient and responsive …
http://www.deldems.org/about-us/platform/#government
“Uh, from the party platform?”
Oh, my. Don’t do that. I just laughed coffee out my nose. The party platform. Jesus, that’s rich.
Are you some kind of party hack or something? Because if you’re not that’s the funniest thing I’ve read on any blog other than Charlie Pierce’s for weeks.
No, I’m not. Far from it.
I do, however, believe that the platform should be used to hold officeholders accountable.
anon–good question. I posted a reply on the WNJ comment section, and Chad’s FB page where he raised the issue.
We (I) decided that keeping this off the record would result in more candid information from Gilligan and DeLuca. I believe that both guests would have accepted with or without the press, however without the press we had a different conversation.
I have been at two meetings at deldems HQ with Chris Coons–one with and one without the press. Both were very worthwhile, however I found the one without the press to be much more informative.
That said, PDD’s steering committee is discussing a policy of when and how a decision should be made to exclude the press. We may decide to never again exclude the press. This is an open question.
“I do, however, believe that the platform should be used to hold officeholders accountable.”
OK, so you’re naive. Our political parties are 19th-century relics unfit for 21st-century politics. One of their charming anachronisms is the “party platform,” one of the few remaining pretenses of giving rank-and-file party members some voice in how the party is run.
You can pay all the attention to it you like. You will be very close to alone.
The reason I wondered where you got the notion in the first place is that neither party is truly interested in transparency, and a nearly universal rule of thumb is that whichever party is in power has the most to lose by imposing transparency. That’s why, in Delaware, you have the odd situation of Republicans pretending to be for transparency, thereby pressuring Bob Gilligan into endorsing it.
Tiny Tony hasn’t because 1) He has a lot more to hide and 2) To quote a political philosopher from long, long ago and far, far away, “He is as clumsy as he is stupid.”
How ironic and disappointing that a group of progressives blocks the media from meetings with public servants. Maybe you should hire some of O’Donnell’s enforcers for your next meeting.
“You’re doing it wrong.” From OWS, to Congress, to PDD. If there is one thing that liberals are experts on, it is the lackluster, defective ways other liberals are working to bring about change.
I’d love to see anonone do something so I could tell him how he is doing it wrong. The wait continues.
Oh, Jason, you tell me how I am doing things wrong all the time. If there is one thing that is consistent about you and me, it is that.
Telling people that they are commenting on blogs wrong doesn’t count because commenting on blogs does not rise to the level of doing something. Neither does writing blog posts, for that matter.
Think how it would look if/when the TPers do/did it with conservative office-holders, with nobody else invited. Apply topically as often as needed. Call your doctor if symptoms persist.
To Jason’s point: If there has been one consistent criticism of Occupiers, it’s that they’re doing it wrong. They must be doing it wrong, because it’s working, and that never happened for all those who were doing it right.
One thing I think I’ve learned: Politicians are like bacteria — they mutate quickly and soon become immune to previously effective methods. Calls, emails, letters all mean nothing anymore, except in enormous numbers, because opposition has become professionalized.
One thing nobody can dispute that TP and OWS have in common: Lots of people in the streets, in public, making a ruckus, attracting the media. That’s now the base level needed to get the attention of politicians.
“Progressive Democrat” is becoming an oxymoron.
Telling people that they are commenting on blogs wrong doesn’t count because commenting on blogs does not rise to the level of doing something. Neither does writing blog posts, for that matter.
Jason is too modest.
anonone writes “How ironic and disappointing that a group of progressives blocks the media from meetings with public servants. Maybe you should hire some of O’Donnell’s enforcers for your next meeting.”
I’ll say (what I thought was pretty darn obvious) once, and then let you go off.
PDD is not government. We are not paid by tax dollars. We are not doing ‘the people’s business.’ Our goals, which are listed on our website http://www.progressivedemsdelaware.com/what-we-believe/, is to move the party to the left, to promote more and better Democrats as elected officials. “Our goal is a more progressive Delaware and nation.”.
We can VERY CONSISTENTLY work hard to bring transparency to Dover, insisting that our elected officials, when doing the people’s business, do so under the light of day. PDD was amongst those in the front of the successful opening of our general assembly, aided, by the way, by Speaker Gilligan. Where were you?
This goal can at times be furthered by discussions with elected officials without the media. At times we will be discussing election strategy, and candidacies, discussions that should under no circumstances be broadcast.
I serve on the Newark Housing Authority. It oversees the spending of federal dollars. Our meetings are open to the public and the press, as they should be (with the proper exception of executive sessions, when appropriate).
I am hopeful that you hadn’t given this much thought in advance, and with this additional information shared, you now understand the reason why we did not invite the media last Wednesday.
My fear, however, is that you didn’t want to know, that you wanted to through around a sound bite “PDD shuts out the media” regardless of the reasons behind this step. Have at it.
If PDD, by shutting out the media in some of our activities, including our upcoming endorsement process, is able to get better candidates elected next year, I’d be happy to let you whine about PDD shutting out the media, for in the process, we will have been able to get our government to better serve the people.
There is NO inconsistency of PDD holding political strategy sessions without media access, and also PDD championing better transparency in Dover (indeed we did so at our meeting on Wednesday, requesting better minutes from state senate meetings).
Remember, PDD is not government. We are volunteers aiming to improve our government. Different groups, different rules. vive la différence!
Thanks, Paul, but it is sorta ironic that there is all of this call for transparency from a non-public group from people hiding behind anons, you know?