Bolsavik.com

Turns out people don’t need the Bolsavik after all. While the Bolsavik was at orchestra practice, polls closed in San Jose and Councilwoman Madison Nguyen handily won 55-45, according to numbers with all precincts reported here. This blog’s readers were already leaving comments here about the election result, even before the Bolsavik ever made it past his front door.

In another sign that the traditional polling booth may be becoming obsolete day by day, this special election was decided most by mail ballots, with 9,502 people voting by mail and only 2,247 showing up at the precincts.

That’s more than 4-to-1 voting by mail.

One election is barely over, and a new campaign already gets started.

In San Jose, the conclusion of the November general election is the signal for City Councilmember Madison Nguyen to start fighting the campaign to recall her, set for a special election on March 3.

She’s starting the campaign by a press conference in which she gives away DVDs touting her contributions to the community, as a Councilmember. Madison Nguyen’s fight against recall is benefiting from a war chest that’s several times the size of her nemesis’.

The first Vietnamese-American elected to public office in the Bay Area, Nguyen has been under attacks by certain segments of the community in the city because she did not support giving the name “Little Saigon” to a stretch of Story Road in San Jose. That portion of Story Road contains a good concentration of Viet businesses.

The reasons given for trying to recall Madison Nguyen vary greatly, depending on who’s doing the talking and to whom they’re talking. One version, stated on the Recall Madison Nguyen web site, is based on claims of favoritism. That claim is sometimes enhanced by an assertion, but no evidence at all, of bribery. Also stated on the web site, but somehow only on the Vietnamese text, is the accusation that Madison’s actions in the naming controversy went against the wishes of the majority. That accusation is apparently based on an online poll by the San Jose Mercury News that resulted in a whopping 90% of clicks voted for the “Little Saigon” name.

Outside of that web site, however, the passion lies with people who claim that Nguyen is a communist. The claim is often stated explicitly, but sometimes is suggested with a wink and nod, as in the Bolsavik’s interview with recall supporter Dr. Phu Le here.

That was what made Madison’s father, who had stayed out of the food fight, to step in.

(more…)

by Thanh Ngo

.

I have been “married” three times.

Each time, to the same person.

The first time Andrew and I got “married,” we were in a mortgage office where Andrew’s cousin worked. It was March 2003 and we were there to get our domestic partnership notarized and take Andrew’s cousin to lunch. The notary checked our identification, and placed a red stamp on a document that both bound and protected our relationship. The paperwork took just a few minutes to complete. We mailed in the document that same afternoon. A few weeks later, another piece of paper arrived notifying us that we were “registered domestic partners.”

That simple act gave legal significance to our relationship. We didn’t exchange rings. There were no flowers girls or ring bearers. We were in shorts and t-shirts; totally unromantic. His cousin, Julie, was not even in the same room. She was finishing a business call when we filled out the one-page document.

We registered ourselves as domestic partners as a way to protect our rights and give legal recognition to our relationship. Both being attorneys, we were very aware of the lack of protection and recognition of our relationship. Despite being together, then for 7 years, I would have been treated as a complete stranger in the eyes of the law if anything terrible happened to Andrew. His family could have kicked me out of the house we bought together or even prevented me from visiting him in the hospital. His brother, who called us faggots during a family argument, would have had a right to our house. I don’t think my “in-laws” would stoop to that level, but it is all very possible within the limits of the law. And, it has happened to too many lesbians and gays in the past.

The second time we got “married” was on Valentine’s Day 2004. Again, the big Chinese banquet or tea ceremony was lacking. We drove to San Francisco’s City Hall to get married after Mayor Gavin Newsom declared that San Francisco would no longer discriminate against gays and lesbians with regard to marriage rights. We waited for four hours along with other couples for the right to have our relationship legally recognized. It was powerful to hear a Judge declare us “spouses.” Then, several months later, the Supreme Court annulled our marriage citing that Mayor Newsome exceeded his power to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples. So, we settled for the best thing the law afforded us at the time, a separate and unequal domestic partnership. Andrew became my “domestic partner” with some limited rights.

More recently, this summer, we got married yet again. And, again, it was a simple event.

There was no ceremony. My parents were not there. My siblings were not present. My adorable 6-year-old nephew was not able to be the ring bearer.

Like the second time, we drove up to San Francisco. We went to the Hall of Justice, which is the criminal court building. As attorneys we have appeared many times in those courtrooms arguing for justice and fairness for victims. It was only fitting that we came there to find justice for ourselves. My ability and right to legally marry Andrew came a few weeks earlier from the California Supreme Court. It was that court that saw the inequity of denying marriage rights to gays and lesbians. The Court, in recognizing the importance of the institution of marriage to society, struck down laws that denied those fundamental rights to gay men and lesbian women. In choosing to get married this way, we gave up the chance to have a formal wedding ceremony because we wanted to get married before that right is overturned by Proposition 8. Proposition 8 on the November ballot would eliminate the rights of gays and lesbian to be married in California.

As I stood there before the Judge in a black robe, exchanging vows with Andrew, it finally hit me. My dad always told me that they sacrified everything so that we can have “tu do,” freedom. I always understood that our family had to flee from Vietnam in 1975. We left Vietnam in order to survive instead of a desire to be in the United States. Given our family involvement in the war, we would have been killed or at the very least been sent to “re-education” camp for many years if we did not escape. Coming to the United States had more to do with getting out of Vietnam alive. Growing up, I never thought about the freedom and liberty protected by the highest law of the land, the Constitution.

(more…)

A few months ago, the L.A. Times noted that the Vietnamese-American community is shifting to a shade that’s more and more blue, in a story with the provocative head, “Vietnamese voters go left.”

Now that same trend has been spotted in Northern California, in a story in the San Jose Mercury News here.

Entitled “Young Vietnamese-Americans turn away from GOP,” the story tells how older Vietnamese-Americans are overwhelmingly Republican, but younger Viets are flocking to the Democratic party in droves. 

(more…)

The petition for a special election to recall San Jose City Council member Madison Nguyen (pictured left, from the 2008 Tet Festival) has been approved, and the special election will be held March 3 next year, reports the San Jose Mercury News here.

According to the paper, the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters found that at least 4,775 of the 5,180 signatures submitted (read here) were valid. Only 3,162 valid signatures are required.

(more…)

Even though there has been no verification from the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters that there would be any recall election at all, the Recall Madison team is already all riled up over the potential shape and form of the recall ballot.

San Jose City Councilwoman Madison Nguyen (pictured) is facing efforts to recall her over the City’s decision to name a stretch of Story Road. The chosen name, “Saigon Business District,” is somehow seen as communist, as opposed to “Little Saigon.” So now the City’s taken back its decision and there’s no official name for the area. The City did give permits for privatedly funded banners proclaiming “Welcome to Little Saigon.” But apparently whatever name is not even the point any more.

More than three weeks ago (here), the group supporting the recall submitted 5,181 signatures asking for a recall election. The petition is impressive because it includes more than 2000 extra signatures (only 3,162 were needed) and it was submitted two whole weeks before the deadline.

The signatures are now being verified by the Registrar of Voters. The verification process will take 30 days.

Until then, there is no guarantee that there’s even any recall election at all.

But already the Recall Madison side is acting up over what the recall ballot may look like.

Someone leaked to them the idea that the recall ballot will be just that — “yes” or “no” on recall only. Allegedly, any replacement candidates will not run on the same election.

That made the recall side angry, and here’s why.

(more…)

The controversy over Ly Tong’s supposed attempt to drop leaflets over North Korea and subsequent arrest just refuses to abate.

The story was (read here for more details) that Ly Tong (pictured top) tried to leaflet the Beijing Olympics opening ceremony but couldn’t, so he went to the second floor of the Taipei 101 tower in Taiwan and littered the sidewalk below. For good measure, when Ly Tong got back Stateside he emailed out the above image of the souvenir “certificate” that he’d been to the top of the world’s tallest building.

Then he allegedly rented a plane and instructor from a flight school in Seoul to leaflet the city during the Chinese-Korean summit, but when he attempted to retrieve his backpack with all the papers in it, the instructor thought he was getting a bomb, grabbed him and forced the plane to land in a military air field. Supposedly, Supposedly, MP’s detained Ly Tong and interrogated him, but then concluded that he’s a “great man” (Ly Tong’s words) and let him go.

That’s the story. When it first came out, the Bolsavik attempted to verify with the Korean Consulate General in L.A. They didn’t know anything about it. They said they’d get back, but didn’t, and the Bolsavik never called again either, having moved on to other things.

Apparently the San Jose Mercury News ran into the same problem. As the paper says here, “The South Korean Embassy in Washington, D.C., hadn’t heard the story, and Tong’s recollection of the names of people involved was a bit spotty.”

Other people have noticed the lack of verification too.

(more…)

The Bolsavik was forwarded the email that follows, purportedly from the San Jose City Clerk Lee Price, detailing the next steps after people seeking the recall of Councilwoman Madison Nguyen (pictured) turned in more than 5000 signatures. The Bolsavik hasn’t verified it, but it seems legitimate enough.

Anyway, according to this letter, it’s now too late for Madison Nguyen’s camp to try to get people to retract; apparently the deadline to retract was 5pm the day the petition was turned in.

Also, it seems that if the City Clerk’s Office certifies the petition as insufficient, that decision cannot be challenged — but the email says nothing about appealing a certification of the petition as sufficient.

Full text of the email follows after the jump. The “ROV” in the letter is short for Registrar of Voters. The verification must be done by the ROV because the signatures must be of registered voters in Madison Nguyen’s district.

(more…)

The people seeking to recall San Jose City Councilwoman Madison Nguyen, needing to get 3,162 petition signatures by September 12, last Friday turned in two-thirds more than that number, submitting 5,181 signatures two weeks early.

Read the San Jose Mercury News story here. Read more on the Little Saigon Inside blog here.

According to the Little Saigon Inside blog, the recall team said they actually gathered 7,000 signatures, but didn’t want to have to verify them all so submitted only the 5,181.

Supporters of the recall efforts (not themselves on the committee) gave the Bolsavik various explanations as to why the committee submitted the signatures two weeks early. One said they wanted to show up the people who were badmouthing that they didn’t even have 1000 signatures. Other thought they were tired and just wanted to get it done and over with and move on.

Well, whatever the reason, it struck the Bolsavik that the recall camp may not have thought it through and may have handed Madison Nguyen an advantage.

(more…)

It’s been several weeks since the Bolsavik sent his emails to Ly Tong seeking clarification on his claim of jumping out the cockpit window of an Airbus 320-200.

The question first came up in one of the email listservs. A person named Hatien asked, based on a feature story on Ly Tong on the Philadelphia City Paper, which cockpit window Tong could have jumped from.

Read Bolsavik’s posting here about that magazine story and the alleged jump.

Now, the original email by Hatien included a number of photos of Airbus planes, inside and outside. Some were of different models (Airbus 319, Airbus 400, etc.). There was one photo of a SwissAir Airbuss 320-200. An image of that part of Hatien’s email is to the left.

That photo of the SwissAir plane was what Ly Tong used in his response.
(more…)