Wednesday, May 7, 2008

Ridley-Thomas Flip-Flops…Again.




First he flip-flopped on the Police Protective League, then On King/Drew. Now Ridley-Thomas flip-flops on Bernard Parks by falsely attacking the former Chief of Police he once praised for “cracking down on police corruption.”

LOS ANGELES, CA In 2002, as a candidate for State Assembly, Mark Ridley-Thomas put out a direct mail piece to voters slamming the Los Angeles Police Protective League for engaging “in a vicious attack campaign to fire our Police Chief Bernard Parks.”

The letter from Johnny Cochran—written, designed, paid for and mailed by Ridley-Thomas—goes on to say, “Chief Parks has enforced the law, and disciplined abusive police officers. He has adopted tougher policies to crack down on police corruption.”

The letter concludes by saying “Mark Ridley-Thomas has the courage to back Chief Bernard Parks—and he will stand up to the police officers trying to get rid of him.”

Also included in the mail piece was a news article from the Los Angeles Sentinel characterizing the PPL as “the police union vilified by the black community for what most regard as racist actions to remove police Chief Bernard Parks.”

The mailer reprinted the entire Los Angeles Times opinion editorial Ridley-Thomas wrote entitled, Parks Proved His Leadership. Ridley-Thomas says Parks is a “proven leader whose efforts to improve public safety have at the very least been hampered by the overbearing campaign by the Los Angeles Police Protective League to drive him out of office. The league’s ugly attacks on the chief only serve to undermine the very officers it claims to represent.”

In response to Ridley-Thomas’s latest attack, Parks’ campaign consultant, John Shallman said, “Mark Ridley-Thomas is a serial flip flopper. He has three names and two faces and simply can’t keep track of his own campaign rhetoric. We prefer the Mark Ridley-Thomas who enthusiastically endorsed Bernard Parks for Chief and for City Council—not the one who is trying to smear Councilmember Parks for political gain.”


No comments: